Ash-Shu'ara

See ayat 6 for tafseer.

See ayat 6 for tafseer.

See ayat 6 for tafseer.

See ayat 6 for tafseer.

See ayat 6 for tafseer.

We are once again observing another type of Quranic disjointed letters. These are: (طٰسم). We have already discussed the interpretation of these types of disjointed letters in detail and separately at the beginning of Surah Al-Baqarah, Surah Aal-Imran, and Surah Al-A'raf, so there is no need to repeat it here. What is being added here is that numerous narrations have been transmitted from the Prophet of Islam and his companions regarding "طٰسم," all of which indicate that these are symbols of the names of Allah, the Glorious Quran, sacred places, or the trees of Paradise, etc. These narrations support the interpretation recorded at the beginning of Surah Al-A'raf in the sixth volume of Tafseer Namunah and do not contradict the interpretation mentioned at the beginning of Surah Al-Baqarah, which states that these letters signify the greatness of the Quran and its miraculous nature—that such a magnificent speech is composed of such simple and small letters. The subsequent verse expresses the greatness of the Holy Quran in these words: "These are the verses of the clear Book" (تِلْکَ آیَاتُ الْکِتَابِ الْمُبِینِ). However, according to Arabic literary rules, "تلک" is used to refer to something distant, meaning "that"; yet as we have previously indicated, in Arabic rhetoric and sometimes also in Persian, the demonstrative pronoun of distance is employed to express the greatness of something—meaning the subject is so important and elevated that it seems beyond our reach and situated in the heights of the heavens. It is also noteworthy that the exact same verse has appeared at the beginning of Surah Yusuf and Surah Al-Qasas, and in every instance, it follows the disjointed letters, which clearly shows that these letters have a deep connection with the greatness of the Glorious Quran. The description of the "Quran" with "مبین" (clear) derives from the root meaning "to declare" or "to make clear," indicating the clear and manifest nature of the greatness and miracle of the Glorious Quran—that the more a person contemplates its meanings, the more he becomes acquainted with the Quran’s miraculous character. Moreover, the Glorious Quran is the distinguisher between truth and falsehood and separates the path of felicity, success, and salvation from the path of misguidance. Then, for the comfort and reassurance of the Holy Prophet, the Quran states: "It is as if you will perish in grief that they do not believe" (لَعَلَّکَ بَاخِعٌ نَفْسَکَ اَلاَّ یَکُونُوا مُؤْمِنِینَ). The form "باخع" is derived from the root "بخع" (pronounced like "bakhsh"), meaning to kill oneself due to intense grief. From this, one can gauge how deeply the Prophet of Islam sympathized with the people and how diligently he strove to fulfill his prophetic duty. When he saw that those standing thirsty at the spring of the Quran and Islam did not quench their thirst from it, how much sorrow it caused him! He was saddened that in the presence of the Quran and Islam—such a luminous lamp—why those endowed with reason would fall prey to misguidance and perish in the depths of error. All the Prophets of God were similarly compassionate, sympathetic, and caring, but the Great Prophet of Islam was exceedingly grieved by such occurrences. Hence, this sentiment is indicated at various places in the Quran concerning him. Some commentators say that this verse was revealed because the Prophet repeatedly invited the people of Makkah to Islam, but they did not listen or believe. He became so deeply sorrowful and distressed that this was reflected on his noble face, at which moment this verse was revealed to comfort and console him. [Tafseer Abu al-Futuh Razi, Vol. 8, under the same verse]. The following verse states to prove the fact that the Lord of the worlds is capable of all things, even compelling people to believe: "If We wished, We could send down to them from the sky a sign, and their necks would remain humbled to it" (إِنْ نَشَاْ نُنَزِّلْ عَلَیْہِمْ مِنْ السَّمَاءِ آیَةً فَظَلَّتْ اَعْنَاقُھُمْ لَھَا خَاضِعِینَ). This indicates that We possess such power that We could send upon them a blinding miracle or a terrible and fearful punishment, so that all would involuntarily bow their heads before it and believe. However, such belief has no value; what is important is that they consciously reflect, voluntarily submit their will, and bow their necks in truth. It goes without saying that "bowing necks" means the bending of those who possess necks because in Persian, "گردن" (neck) pertains in Arabic to "raqaba" and "‘unuq," which refer to one of the most important body parts of man and, by metaphor, also to the person himself. For example, a rebellious and stubborn person is called "گردن کش" (neck-stretcher), a tyrannical oppressor is "گردن کلفت" (big-necked), and a weak person is "گردن شکستہ" (neck-bent). However, in this context, several other interpretations could arise regarding "اعناق" (plural of ‘unuq), but all of them are weak.One of the meanings of "اعناق" is either "chiefs and leaders" or a group of people. Later, the response of the disbelievers and polytheists to the Quran is described in these words: "Whatever new reminder comes to them from the Most Merciful, they turn away from it" (وَمَا یَاْتِیہِمْ مِنْ ذِکْرٍ مِنْ الرَّحْمٰنِ مُحْدَثٍ إِلاَّ کَا نُوا عَنْہُ مُعْرِضِینَ). Referring to the Quran as "ذکر" points to the fact that this sacred book, with all its verses and chapters, is awakening and enlightening, but this group flees away from awakening and awareness. The word "رحمن" indicates that these verses were revealed by the God whose mercy is universal and who, without exception, invites all of humankind to happiness and perfection. It is also possible that this is to awaken the sense of gratitude in humans, that these verses are from the God whose blessings cover you from head to foot; why then do you turn away from your Benefactor? If He does not hasten to punish you, that too is because of His mercy. The term "محدّث" (new, fresh) indicates that these verses are revealed one after another and each one contains some new content. But what can be done when they do not conform to these new truths, as if they are stuck on the superstitions of their ancestors and are unwilling to say farewell to ignorance, error, and superstition at any cost. Indeed, new things, no matter how much they lead to guidance, are opposed by the ignorant, bigoted, and stubborn people. In verse 68 of Surah Al-Mu’minun it is said: أَفَلَمْ یَدَّبَّرُوا الْقَوْلَ أَمْ جَاءَهُمْ مَا لَمْ یَأْتِ أَبَاءَهُمُ الْأَوَّلِینَ Have they not pondered over the statement, or has there come to them that which did not come to their forefathers? (And by calling it new, they start preparing opposition to it). The Quran further states that they do not stop at mere avoidance but go to the extent of "denial" and even "mockery." It is said: They denied it, but they will soon receive news of that which they used to mock, and they will come to know the painful punishment for their deeds (فَقَدْ کَذَّبُوا فَسَیَأْتِیهِمْ أَنبَاءُ مَا کَانُوا بِہِ یَسْتَهْزِئُونَ). "انباء" is the plural of "نباٴ," meaning important news; here it refers to a severe punishment that will befall them in this world and the Hereafter. Although some exegetes, such as Sheikh Tusi in his Tafseer Al-Tibyan, have confined this punishment to the Hereafter alone, most commentators consider it an absolute punishment encompassing both worlds. In fact, this is true because the verse is general, and besides this, the rejection of disbelief and denial of divine signs has a great and dreadful reaction throughout a person’s life, so it cannot be overlooked. Reflecting upon this verse and the preceding one indicates that when a person chooses the path of deviation and error, the distance keeps increasing day by day, and he moves further away from truth and reality. First comes the stage of negligence and turning away from the truth. Then comes the stage of denial and rejection. Finally, the stage of mocking the truth arrives, the consequence of which is that the divine punishment envelops the person, thus bringing him to the due recompense for his deeds (a similar expression has been passed earlier in the commentary on verses 4 and 5 at the beginning of Surah Al-An’am).

In a well‑known sermon of Nahj al‑Balāghah, ʿAlī (ʿalayhi al‑salām) points to the principle that God sent the prophets in such a manner that people might exercise free choice in accepting faith; otherwise, faith imposed by compulsion would have no true value. He states: If God so willed at the time of sending the prophets, He could have opened for them the treasures and mines of gold, and could have made the gates of lush gardens available to them. He could also have surrounded them with flocks of birds of the sky and herds of wild animals of the earth. However, in such a case, the purpose of trial and testing would have been nullified, and the very concept of reward and punishment would have lost its meaning (Nahj al‑Balāghah, Khutbah Qāṣiʿah, no. 192). Similarly, in al‑Kāfī, under the explanation of the relevant verse, it is stated that if God had willed, He could have sent down a sign from the heavens such that people would involuntarily bow their heads in submission; however, in that case, the very notion of testing and trial would have been entirely eliminated (Tafsīr Nūr al‑Thaqalayn, under the verse, citing al‑Kāfī). It is also noteworthy that in several well‑known works—such as al‑Irshād by Shaykh Mufīd, Rawḍat al‑Kāfī, Kamal al‑Dīn by Shaykh Ṣadūq, and Tafsīr Qummī—there is a narration from Imām Jaʿfar al‑Ṣādiq (ʿalayhi al‑salām) interpreting the verse “اِن نَّشَاْ نُنَزِّلْ…” as referring to the tyrannical elements of Banū Umayyah. According to this report, when they witness the heavenly signs at the time of the ظهور of Imām al‑Mahdī in the end times, they will be compelled to submit (Tafsīr al‑Mīzān; Tafsīr Nūr al‑Thaqalayn, under the same verses). It is clear that such narrations are intended to illustrate a particular instance encompassed within the broader meaning of the verse. In this sense, they indicate that at the time of the ظهور of Imām al‑Mahdī (ʿalayhi al‑salām), the systems of oppression and injustice—modeled upon the policies of Banū Umayyah—will ultimately come to an end. Due to the power of Imām al‑Mahdī and the Divine support granted to him, these forces will be compelled to submit.

We know that, in the early centuries of Islam, a prolonged and extensive debate arose concerning whether the Kalām Allāh (Divine speech) is created (ḥādith) or eternal (qadīm). The echoes of this discussion found their way into works of tafsīr, and a number of exegetes attempted to infer the createdness of the Qur’an from the word “محدث” occurring in the above verse. However, as has been previously indicated, this debate does not appear to rest on a sound logical foundation. Rather, it seems that the political rulers of the Banū Umayyah and Banū ʿAbbās deliberately fostered such controversies in order to divert the intellectual energies of Muslims away from essential Islamic issues. By engaging scholars in abstract and contentious debates, they sought to ensure that attention would not be directed toward governance and their own absolutist rule. In this way, scholars became occupied with disputations, while the rulers were able to prolong their authority. If by Kalām Allāh one means its meanings and contents, then it is evident that these have always existed within Divine knowledge (ʿilm ilāhī), and in this sense they are eternal (qadīm). Conversely, if the expression refers to the act of revelation, or to the letters and words of the Qur’an as articulated and received, then it is clear that these are created in time (ḥādith). Accordingly, Kalām Allāh may be regarded as eternal in the first sense and created in the second. In this distinction, there is neither confusion nor a genuine point of dispute. For this reason, the Muslim community—particularly its scholars and intellectuals—should remain vigilant and avoid becoming entangled in such artificial controversies that may be instigated by authoritarian regimes.

See ayat 9 for tafseer.

See ayat 9 for tafseer.

In the preceding verses, reference was made to the disbelievers’ aversion to the tashrīʿī signs—namely, the Qur’ān—whereas in these verses their neglect of takwīnī signs (the signs of God present within the cosmos) is emphasized. They not only closed their ears to the words of the Prophet but also deprived their eyes of perceiving the evident signs of truth surrounding them. It is stated: “اَوَلَمْ یَرَوْا إِلَی الْاَرْضِ کَمْ اَنْبَتْنَا فِیہَا مِنْ کُلِّ زَوْجٍ کَرِیمٍ” — have they not looked toward the earth and observed how many kinds of noble growth We have produced therein? The use of “إِلَی” indicates not mere seeing, but reflective observation involving contemplation. The term “زوج” has attracted particular attention. While many exegetes interpret it as referring to categories and varieties (i.e., different types of plants), there is no impediment to understanding it in its commonly recognized sense of pairing, which suggests the existence of male and female elements within plant life. Although earlier societies had limited awareness of plant reproduction—recognizing, for instance, the fertilization of date palms—systematic scientific recognition of plant sexuality emerged much later. Yet the Qur’ān repeatedly alludes to such pairing in vegetation (cf. Sūrat al‑Raʿd 13:4, Sūrat Luqmān 31:10, Sūrat Qāf 50:7), which is regarded as one of its remarkable features. The word “کَرِیمٍ” denotes that which is valuable and beneficial. It applies both to human beings and to natural phenomena. In the context of vegetation, it refers to plants that are beneficial, although in reality all vegetation possesses forms of utility, often becoming more apparent with the advancement of knowledge. The subsequent verse reinforces this observation: “إِنَّ فِی ذَلِکَ لَآیَةً” — in this there is certainly a sign. Consider how soil, apparently insignificant in itself, when combined in a particular composition and exposed to water and sunlight, becomes the source of diverse and beautiful forms of life: flowers, fruits, and vegetation with distinct properties. Yet, despite such evident signs, many remain indifferent: “وَمَا کَانَ اَکْثَرُھُمْ مُؤْمِنِینَ” — most of them do not believe. Their disbelief is thus portrayed as a deeply ingrained disposition, rendering them unresponsive to these signs. The passage concludes with a dual attribute of God: “وَإِنَّ رَبَّکَ لَھُوَ الْعَزِیزُ الرَّحِیمُ”. The term “العزیز” denotes invincible power, indicating that God is fully capable of demonstrating His signs and, if He wills, of punishing those who deny them. However, this is immediately followed by “الرحیم”, indicating His encompassing mercy. The juxtaposition of these attributes conveys that, despite possessing absolute power, God extends mercy and allows opportunities for repentance. The precedence of “العزیز” over “الرحیم” underscores that this mercy proceeds not from weakness but from strength, reflecting a balance between authority and compassion.

See ayat 15 for tafseer.

See ayat 15 for tafseer.

See ayat 15 for tafseer.

See ayat 15 for tafseer.

See ayat 15 for tafseer.

The Beginning of the Prophethood of Prophet Musa (Moses) عليه السلام: We have already stated that this Surah mentions seven great Prophets of God, which serves as a lesson for all Muslims, especially the early Muslims of the time of Islam. The story of Prophet Musa عليه السلام is narrated first. This narrative highlights various aspects of his life, his struggle with Pharaoh and the Pharaoh’s people, and the events up to the drowning of Pharaoh. So far, in the Quran, in Surahs such as Al-Baqarah, Al-Ma'idah, Al-A'raf, Yunus, Bani Isra'il, and Taha, there has been discussion about the Children of Israel, Prophet Musa عليه السلام, and Pharaoh, and this mention will continue in some other Surahs. Although these discussions are repetitive and reiterated many times, careful reflection will show that each discussion emphasizes a particular part of the story and is presented with a specific purpose in mind. For example, these verses were revealed when Muslims were very few in number, and their opponents and enemies were extremely powerful and dominant, against whom they could by no means compete. Therefore, it was necessary for the Almighty God to present incidents from past nations that would give them courage and make them understand that the great power of their enemy and their seeming weakness could never cause their defeat. In this way, their morale would be uplifted and their resilience and steadfastness increased. Interestingly, after each account of the seven Prophets mentioned, the phrase وَمَا كَانَ أَكْثَرُهُمْ مُؤْمِنِينَ وَإِنَّ رَبَّكَ لَهُ الْعَزِيزُ الرَّحِيمُ (Most of them were not believers, but your Lord is the Mighty, the Merciful) is repeated. This is exactly the same expression we encountered at the beginning of the Surah referring to the Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم. Such harmony bears living testimony to the fact that this portion of the stories of the Prophets was revealed in view of the collective and psychological state of the Muslims of that particular age, and that their period was very much similar to the eras of these Prophets. It was first stated: Remember the time when your Lord called Musa, saying: “Go to the people of the wrongdoers” (وَإِذْ نَادَى رَبُّكَ مُوسَىٰ أَنِ ٱئْتِ ٱلْقَوْمَ ٱلظَّـٰلِمِينَ). To this very nation of Pharaoh, who do not fear oppression and disobedience to the command of the Lord of the Worlds (قَوْمَ فِرْعَوْنَ أَلَا يَتَّقُونَ). It is also worth noting that the characteristic emphasized in the evil nature of Pharaoh’s people is oppression (ظلم). It is known that oppression has a broad meaning, and shirk (polytheism) is one of its apparent forms. إِنَّ ٱلشِّرْكَ لَظُلْمٌ عَظِيمٌ (Luqman: 13) Thus, the plundering and subjugation of the Children of Israel, their enslavement, their being seized in various forms of torture and subjected to violence, is another evident example. Besides, by violating the divine commandments, they used to wrong themselves even before others. In this respect, the mission and exhortation of the noble Prophets can be summarized as a struggle against oppression. During this period, Prophet Musa عليه السلام presented his great difficulties before God and sought strength and power from Him, so that he might be able to bear the heavy responsibility of prophethood. “O my Lord! I fear that they will reject me” (قَالَ رَبِّ إِنِّي أَخَافُ أَنْ يُكَذِّبُونِ). Before I undertake the duty of delivering the message, they may create chaos and noise, reject me, block my way, and thus the objective might not be achieved. In saying this, Musa عليه السلام was undoubtedly right, because Pharaoh and his henchmen had so dominantly ruled over the land of Egypt that no one dared to oppose them, and wherever any voice of opposition arose, it was severely suppressed and people were cruelly crushed. Moreover, “My chest is not roomy enough for the task of prophethood” (وَيَضِيقُ صَدْرِي). Then, “My tongue is not eloquent” (وَلَا يَنْطَلِقُ لِسَانِي). Therefore, my request is that “(My brother) Harun be appointed as a Messenger too, so that he may assist me in this duty” (فَأَرْسِلْ إِلَىٰ هَارُونَ). [In fact, this phrase is destined as: “So Gabriel was sent to Harun.”] So that, by assisting one another, we may convey Your great command to these rebellious oppressors. Besides all these matters, (according to their belief) these people have a charge against me (وَلَهُمْ عَلَيَّ ذَنبٌ). I had killed a wicked Egyptian at a time when he was fighting with an oppressed Israelite. Therefore, I fear that for retaliatory purposes they will kill me, and then this great duty will not be fulfilled (فَأَخَافُ أَنْ يَقْتُلُونِ). In reality, four major difficulties were confronting Prophet Musa عليه السلام in fulfilling this great task, for the resolution of which he prayed to his Lord: (the difficulty of denial, the difficulty of a confined heart, the difficulty of lack of eloquence, and the difficulty of retaliation). From here…It also becomes clear that Prophet Musa (Moses), peace be upon him, was not afraid for his own self but feared that the purpose might be lost before reaching the intended destination. Therefore, for this battle, he requested from Allah the utmost strength and power. The kind of means he sought from the Lord of the worlds was the request of the "Speaking Witness." He requested "Sharh Sadr" (an expanded and broad chest, i.e., a calm and confident spirit). Similarly, he asked for the loosening of every knot of the tongue and requested that his brother Harun (Aaron), peace be upon him, be granted the office of prophethood so that he could assist him in this task. The details of this final request are mentioned in greater detail in Surah Ta-Ha. Musa (peace be upon him) said: رَبِّ اشْرَحْ لِي صَدْرِي وَيَسِّرْ لِي أَمْرِي وَاحْلُلْ عُقْدَةً مِّن لِّسَانِي يَفْقَهُوا قَوْلِي وَاجْعَل لِّي وَزِيرًا مِّنْ أَهْلِي هَارُونَ أَخِي اشْدُدْ بِهِ أَزْرِي وَاشْرَكْهُ فِي أَمْرِي My Lord, expand for me my breast [with assurance]; and ease for me my task; and untie the knot from my tongue, that they may understand my speech. And appoint for me a minister from my family, Aaron, my brother, strengthen through him my back, and share in my task that we may glorify You much and remember You much. (Ta-Ha 25–34) The Lord of the worlds accepted the sincere request of Musa (peace be upon him) and said: “It is not possible that they kill you or that your chest becomes constricted or that a knot remains in your tongue, so that you cannot speak” (He said, “No!”). Concerning your brother, your prayer has been answered, and he has also been commanded, “Both of you bring Our signs” (Invite his misguided people towards Me) (So go both of you with Our signs). And do not think that I am far from you and unaware of your matter. Rather, “Indeed, We are with you, listening” (Truly We are with you, listeners). We will not abandon you alone and will aid you even in the most difficult trials. Proceed with full reassurance and continue moving forward. Thus, the Lord of the worlds reassured Musa (peace be upon him) with three statements and fulfilled his request practically. With the word “No!” (Kalla), He assured him that those people would never be able to kill him. Neither would he suffer constriction of the chest nor difficulty in speech. With the phrase “So go both of you with Our signs,” his brother Harun was sent to assist him. Similarly, with the words “Indeed, We are with you, listening,” divine support was guaranteed. It is also noteworthy that in the last sentence, the pronoun is in the plural form, and Allah said: “Indeed, We are with you” (in the plural). This might be to express that wherever and in whatever arena you two brothers face the oppressive and tyrannical groups, We will be there present and hearing everything. By helping you two brothers, We will grant you success. At this point, some people had doubts, thinking that since the word “ma‘a” (with) implies support and assistance, this could not be for Pharaoh and his people. This is a misunderstanding. Because the meaning of “ma‘a” signifies the Lord of the worlds being present and observing at every moment and place, so it applies even to the sinners, including inanimate things, since He is everywhere and nothing is absent from Him. The meaning of “listening” (Istima‘) is to hear attentively, and this word also emphasizes this reality.

See ayat 22 for tafseer.

See ayat 22 for tafseer.

See ayat 22 for tafseer.

See ayat 22 for tafseer.

See ayat 22 for tafseer.

See ayat 22 for tafseer.

In the preceding verses, the first phase of the mission of Mūsā (ʿalayhi al‑salām) was described, namely the reception of revelation and the request for means to accomplish the prophetic task. In the present verses, the second phase is discussed: his approach to Pharaoh and the ensuing dialogue. It is stated: “فَأْتِیَا فِرْعَوْنَ فَقُولَا إِنَّا رَسُولُ رَبِّ الْعَالَمِینَ” — go to Pharaoh and say: we are the messengers of the Lord of the worlds. The use of the singular “رسول” despite the presence of two individuals indicates the unity of their mission, as though they were one in purpose, program, and objective. After declaring their mission, they were instructed to demand the release of Banī Isrāʾīl: “أَنْ أَرْسِلْ مَعَنَا بَنِی إِسْرَائِیلَ”. The aim was to liberate them from bondage and take them away from Pharaoh’s oppression. Pharaoh responded with calculated and manipulative rhetoric intended to undermine the credibility of Mūsā (ʿalayhi al‑salām). He said: “أَلَمْ نُرَبِّکَ فِینَا وَلِیدًا” — did we not raise you among us as a child? He reminded him of the care he had received, including being saved from the Nile, raised in comfort, and exempted from the policy of killing the male infants of Banī Isrāʾīl. He added: “وَلَبِثْتَ فِینَا مِنْ عُمُرِکَ سِنِینَ” — you spent many years among us. He then referred to the incident in which Mūsā unintentionally caused the death of a Copt: “وَفَعَلْتَ فَعْلَتَکَ الَّتِی فَعَلْتَ”, concluding with the accusation: “وَأَنْتَ مِنَ الْکَافِرِینَ”. Mūsā (ʿalayhi al‑salām) responded by addressing Pharaoh’s most significant objection first, stating: “فَعَلْتُهَا إِذًا وَأَنَا مِنَ الضَّالِّینَ”. The term “الضَّالِّینَ” has been interpreted in various ways. Some exegetes understand it to mean an unintended error, indicating that the act was not deliberate but occurred in defense of the oppressed, without knowledge that it would result in death. Others interpret it as lack of awareness of the consequences, rather than wrongdoing. Another interpretation suggests the use of tawriya, whereby the apparent sense suggests unfamiliarity with the truth, while the intended meaning is that he was unaware of the extent of the consequences that would follow. Mūsā continued: “فَفَرَرْتُ مِنْکُمْ لَمَّا خِفْتُکُمْ فَوَهَبَ لِی رَبِّی حُکْمًا وَجَعَلَنِی مِنَ الْمُرْسَلِینَ”. Here, “حُکْمًا” is understood to refer to wisdom, judgment, or knowledge, distinct from prophethood, as it is mentioned alongside “المرسلین”, indicating a separate grant. He then addressed Pharaoh’s claim of favor: “وَتِلْکَ نِعْمَةٌ تَمُنُّهَا عَلَیَّ أَنْ عَبَّدْتَ بَنِی إِسْرَائِیلَ”. The intended meaning is that whatever apparent favor Pharaoh claims is overshadowed by his oppression of Banī Isrāʾīl. It was precisely this oppression that led to the circumstances under which Mūsā was raised in Pharaoh’s household. Thus, the so‑called favor cannot be separated from the injustice that necessitated it. Alternative interpretations reinforce this response: even if Pharaoh’s upbringing of Mūsā is considered a favor, it is negligible in comparison to his extensive ظلم. Moreover, the very luxuries of Pharaoh’s palace were produced through the labor of the enslaved Banī Isrāʾīl, making his claim of beneficence untenable. Finally, the expression “مِنَ الْمُرْسَلِینَ” indicates that Mūsā (ʿalayhi al‑salām) is not unique in his mission but continues the line of previous prophets, all of whom called toward the same truth.

See ayat 29 for tafseer.

See ayat 29 for tafseer.

See ayat 29 for tafseer.

See ayat 29 for tafseer.

See ayat 29 for tafseer.

See ayat 29 for tafseer.

When Musa (Moses), peace be upon him, gave a firm and decisive answer to Pharaoh, which left him speechless and helpless, Pharaoh changed the topic of conversation. He focused on the statement made by Musa (peace be upon him), "I am the Messenger of the Lord of the worlds," and made that the center of his question by saying, "فَرْعَوْنُ وَمَا رَبُّ الْعَالَمِینَ" (Pharaoh said, 'And what is the Lord of the worlds?'). It is highly unlikely that Pharaoh genuinely asked this question to understand the meaning; rather, it seems more that he feigned ignorance and asked the question mockingly and contemptuously. However, Musa (peace be upon him), like an awakened and understanding person, saw no other way but to steer the conversation towards seriousness and to respond solemnly. Since the essence of the Lord of the worlds is beyond the grasp of human intellect, he judged it appropriate to establish proof through its signs. Hence, relying on the cosmic verses, he said: "قَالَ رَبُّ السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالْأَرْضِ وَمَا بَيْنَهُمَا إِنْ كُنتُمْ مُوقِنِینَ" ("He said, 'The Lord of the heavens and the earth and whatever is between them, if you should be convinced.'"). The vast, magnificent heavens and earth and the multicolored creatures of the universe, before which you and your followers and believers are nothing more than insignificant particles, are the creation of my Lord. He is the Creator, Manager, and Organizer of these things, and He alone is worthy of worship—not a weak and insignificant creature like you. Attention must also be given to the reality that the idolaters believed each existing thing in the universe had a separate lord, and they considered the universe to be a collection of different systems. But Musa (peace be upon him) alluded to the reality that only one system governs the whole universe, which proves that there is only one Lord of the entire universe. The phrase "إن كنتم موقنین" ("if you should be convinced") perhaps indicates that Musa (peace be upon him) wanted to make Pharaoh and his companions understand that he knew well that their question was not aimed at understanding the truth. But if they sought the truth and had intellect and awareness, then the evidence he presented was sufficient. He urged them to open their eyes and observe momentarily the heavens, the earth, and their signs so that they might discover the truth and correct their worldview. Yet, despite the firm and strong discourse of the great heavenly teacher, Pharaoh did not wake up from the sleep of heedlessness. He continued his ridicule and mockery, adopting the old tactics of the arrogant and proud. Turning to those seated around him, he said, "قَالَ لِمَنْ حَوْلَهُ أَلَا تَسْتَمِعُونَ" ("He said to those around him, 'Do you not hear?'"). It is known that those who sat around Pharaoh were of the same kind: people of power and wealth or supporters of the oppressor and tyrant. Abdullah ibn Abbas says: There were five hundred people around Pharaoh, considered among his close associates. [Tafseer Al-Futooh Razavi, under the same verse]. With such speech, Pharaoh wanted to ensure that Musa’s (peace be upon him) logical and compelling words would not affect even the smallest bit in the dark hearts of that group and wanted to convince the people that his sayings were incoherent and unintelligible. But Musa (peace be upon him) continued his logical and tested discourse without fear or hesitation and said: "قَالَ رَبُّكُمْ وَرَبُّ آبَائِكُمُ الْأَوَّلِینَ" ("He said, 'Your Lord and the Lord of your forefathers.'"). In truth, first Musa (peace be upon him) argued with reference to the cosmic signs, and now here, he is pointing towards the "signs within the self" and the mysteries of the Creator evident in the very existence of man, showing the signs of the Lordship of God manifested in the human soul and body, so that at least this short-sighted, proud man might think of himself, recognize himself, and then come to know his God. But Pharaoh, with his stubbornness, did not relent. Moving a step further from mockery and derision, he accused Musa (peace be upon him) of madness and said: "قَالَ إِنَّ رَسُولَكُمُ الَّذِي أُرْسِلَ إِلَيْكُمْ لَمَجْنُونٌ" ("He said, 'Indeed, your messenger who has been sent to you is mad.'"). This is the same accusation that the oppressors and tyrants of history have repeatedly leveled against the God-sent reformers. It is also noteworthy that this arrogant deceiver was not even tolerant enough to say "Our messenger" or "Sent to us," but rather said "Your prophet" and "Sent to you," because in "Your prophet" there is mockery and derision, along with a clear aspect of pride and arrogance—implying that he is above and beyond being invited by any prophet. By branding Musa (peace be upon him) as mad, Pharaoh aimed to render Musa’s compelling arguments ineffective in the minds of those present. However, this unjust accusation did not diminish Musa’s (peace be upon him) high spirits, and he continued pointing towards the creations of the world…He continued to present his arguments regarding the divine signs and the universe and the self, and said: He is the Lord of the East and the West and all that lies between them, if you use your reason and understanding (قَالَ رَبُّ الْمَشْرِقِ وَالْمَغْرِبِ وَمَا بَیْنَھُمَا إِنْ کُنْتُمْ تَعْقِلُونَ). If you possess a small, apparent dominion limited to a place called Egypt, what difference does it make? The true dominion of my Lord extends over the East, the West, and all the regions in between, and His signs shine brightly on the foreheads of all creation. Fundamentally, the rising and setting of the sun in the East and West, and the governing solar system over the universe itself, are the manifestations of His greatness. But the defect lies within yourselves because you do not employ reason; indeed, you do not have the habit of thinking (note that the phrase "if you use your reason" also implies that if in your past and present lives you had practiced deliberation, you would have certainly embraced this truth). In reality, here Musa (peace be upon him) has very skillfully replied to the accusation of madness directed at him; he essentially says that he is not mad, but the truly mad and irrational person is the one who does not perceive the various signs and evidences of his Lord. Such remarkable and strange marks of the Divine Presence exist on every wall and corner of the cosmos. Yet, whoever does not reflect on the Lord’s essence deserves to be on the wall itself as a mere image. It is true that Musa (peace be upon him) first pointed to the heavens and the earth—because the heavens are exalted and the earth is deeply mysterious—but in conclusion, he pointed to a fact no one can deny, which is encountered by every person daily: the systematic program of the sun's regular rising and setting, about which no one dares claim to be the organizer. The phrase "ما بینھما" (what is between them) indicates the unity and mutual connection between the East and West, just as the connection between the heavens and the earth has already been signified. The same can be said about "Rabukum wa Rab Abaikum al-Awwaleen" (your Lord and the Lord of your forefathers)—there is a unity and harmony between the present and former generations. These powerful proofs unsettled Pharaoh, who then resorted to the very tactic used by every unreasonable and powerful person when faced with strong arguments: when he fails in evidence, he tries to intimidate. Pharaoh said, "If you take a god other than me, I will surely throw you among the prisoners" (قَالَ لَئِنْ اتَّخَذْتَ إِلَھَا غَیْرِی لَاَجْعَلَنَّکَ مِنْ الْمَسْجُونِینَ). "I do not want to hear anything else from you. I only acknowledge one great god and deity, and that is myself. If anyone says otherwise, he should understand that his punishment will be either death or lifelong imprisonment, which ends life itself." Some commentators say that "الْمَسْجُونِینَ" refers to a specific prison, the name of which has become a symbol for a place from which no one who enters ever returns alive. [See "Tafsir al-Mizan," "Tafsir Razi," and "Tafsir Ruh al-Ma’ani" under this verse.] In truth, Pharaoh wanted by such harsh and vehement speech to harass Musa (peace be upon him) so that he would fear and remain silent, because if the debate continued, people would awaken. Nothing is more dangerous for the oppressors and tyrants than the awakening and consciousness of the masses.

See ayat 37 for tafseer.

See ayat 37 for tafseer.

See ayat 37 for tafseer.

See ayat 37 for tafseer.

See ayat 37 for tafseer.

See ayat 37 for tafseer.

See ayat 37 for tafseer.

Confrontation with Pharaoh: In the preceding verses, it has been observed how Mūsā (ʿalayhi al‑salām), through logical argument and reasoned discourse, established his superiority over Pharaoh and demonstrated before the audience the rational and coherent nature of the Divine religion, while exposing the baselessness and irrationality of Pharaoh’s claim to divinity. Pharaoh at times resorted to mockery, at times accused him of madness, and ultimately, intoxicated by power, threatened imprisonment and death. At this stage, the direction of the discourse shifts. It became necessary for Mūsā (ʿalayhi al‑salām) to adopt a mode of demonstration that would manifest Pharaoh’s incapacity. He required support from a higher, Divine power—one expressed through manifest miracles. Thus, he addressed Pharaoh, saying: “قَالَ اَوَلَوْ جِئْتُکَ بِشَیْءٍ مُبِینٍ” — even if I bring to you a clear sign, would you still imprison me? Pharaoh found himself in a difficult predicament. Mūsā (ʿalayhi al‑salām) had drawn the attention of those present to the possibility of a remarkable sign. If Pharaoh were to dismiss the claim outright, the assembly might demand that Mūsā be allowed to demonstrate it; and if the claim were true, it would be undeniable, while if it proved false, his claim would be exposed. Ultimately, Pharaoh, having no alternative, responded: “قَالَ فَاْتِ بِهِ إِنْ کُنْتَ مِنَ الصَّادِقِینَ” — bring it forth, if you are truthful. At once, Mūsā cast down his staff, and by Divine command it became “ثُعْبَانٌ مُبِینٌ” — a manifest great serpent. Then he drew out his hand, and it appeared radiant and luminous to those who beheld it: “وَنَزَعَ یَدَهُ فَإِذَا ہِیَ بَیْضَاءُ لِلنَّاظِرِینَ”. These constituted two great miracles: one inspiring awe and fear, the other hope and illumination; one a sign of warning, the other of mercy. The term “ثُعْبَان” denotes a large serpent, indicating the magnitude of the transformation, while “مُبِینٌ” suggests that the phenomenon was real and not the product of illusion or trickery. The variation in Qur’ānic expressions—“ثُعْبَان”, “جَانّ”, and “حَیَّة”—may be understood either as referring to different stages of the transformation or to different characteristics of the same entity: its magnitude, its swift movement, and its living vitality. Upon witnessing this, Pharaoh was deeply shaken, yet, in order to preserve his authority, he sought to reinterpret the event. Turning to his chiefs, he declared: “إِنَّ ہَذَا لَسَاحِرٌ عَلِیمٌ” — this is indeed a skilled magician. Notably, the same individual whom he had earlier described as insane is now acknowledged as “عَلِیم”, reflecting the inconsistency characteristic of tyrannical rulers. Pharaoh then attempted to incite fear among the people, claiming: “یُرِیدُ أَنْ یُخْرِجَکُمْ مِنْ أَرْضِکُمْ بِسِحْرِهِ” — he intends, through his magic, to expel you from your land. He further asked: “فَمَاذَا تَأْمُرُونَ” — what do you advise? Ironically, the same ruler who earlier proclaimed absolute ownership—“أَلَیْسَ لِی مُلْکُ مِصْرَ”—now appealed to collective opinion, revealing his اضطراب in the face of a challenge to his authority. His courtiers, after consultation, proposed: “أَرْجِهْ وَاَخَاهُ وَابْعَثْ فِی الْمَدَائِنِ حَاشِرِینَ” — postpone their matter and send emissaries to gather specialists from the cities, “یَأْتُوکَ بِکُلِّ سَحَّارٍ عَلِیمٍ” — so that all skilled magicians may be brought. The strategy was to confront Mūsā (ʿalayhi al‑salām) with highly accomplished practitioners of magic, assuming that his signs were of a similar nature. The term “حَاشِرِینَ” conveys the sense of gathering and mobilizing individuals for a decisive confrontation. Thus, Pharaoh’s response shifted from denial to organized resistance, attempting to counter the Divine signs through human means, thereby setting the stage for a decisive demonstration between truth and falsehood.

See ayat 42 for tafseer.

See ayat 42 for tafseer.

See ayat 42 for tafseer.

See ayat 42 for tafseer.

In these verses, another dimension of this remarkable narrative is presented. Following the suggestion of Pharaoh’s courtiers, messengers were dispatched throughout the various cities of Egypt, and a systematic effort was undertaken to recruit skilled magicians. Ultimately, a group of magicians was assembled for an appointed time: “فَجُمِعَ السَّحَرَةُ لِمِیقَاتِ یَوْمٍ مَعْلُومٍ”. In other words, they were prepared in advance so that they might gather on a designated day for the confrontation. The expression “یَوْمٍ مَعْلُومٍ” appears, in light of other Qur’ānic passages, to refer to a well‑known festival day among the Egyptians. Mūsā (ʿalayhi al‑salām) selected this occasion deliberately, so that the maximum number of people could attend. Confident of Divine support, he intended that the truth be manifest before a large audience and that the قوة الٰہی and the weakness of Pharaoh’s claim become evident, thereby illuminating as many hearts as possible with faith. The general public was also invited: “وَقِیلَ لِلنَّاسِ ھَلْ أَنْتُمْ مُجْتَمِعُونَ” — will you gather? This formulation suggests a deliberate strategy; rather than coercing attendance, the authorities framed participation as voluntary, thereby encouraging broader attendance and avoiding resistance. The proclaimed objective was: “لَعَلَّنَا نَتَّبِعُ السَّحَرَةَ إِنْ کَانُوا ھُمُ الْغَالِبِینَ” — so that, if the magicians prevail, we may follow them. This approach was intended to generate enthusiasm among the spectators, strengthen the morale of the magicians, and create an atmosphere in which public reaction would amplify the outcome. At the same time, a large audience would exert psychological pressure upon the opposing side and contribute to an environment of spectacle. Pharaoh’s officials were thus keen to ensure maximum participation. Conversely, Mūsā (ʿalayhi al‑salām) also desired a broad audience so that the message of truth might reach as many people as possible. When the magicians arrived before Pharaoh, recognizing his predicament, they sought advantage by negotiating their reward: “فَلَمَّا جَاءَ السَّحَرَةُ قَالُوا لِفِرْعَوْنَ أَئِنَّ لَنَا لَأَجْرًا إِنْ کُنَّا نَحْنُ الْغَالِبِینَ” — will there be a reward for us if we are the victors? Pharaoh, facing a critical situation, immediately agreed: “قَالَ نَعَمْ وَإِنَّکُمْ إِذًا لَمِنَ الْمُقَرَّبِینَ” — yes, and you will indeed be among those brought near. His promise extended beyond material reward to include proximity to his court, which, within that context, represented a position of high prestige and influence. In effect, Pharaoh offered both wealth and status. This reflects the value placed upon nearness to power within that society. While the misguided regarded proximity to Pharaoh as the pinnacle of honor, the people of faith regarded “قُربِ الٰہی” as the highest attainment. Indeed, in the Qur’ānic perspective, the ultimate reward—particularly for those who sacrifice in the path of God—is expressed through proximity to the Divine, as indicated by expressions such as “عِندَ رَبِّهِم”. Thus, this stage of the narrative presents a contrast between two forms of aspiration: worldly proximity to power and spiritual nearness to God, the latter being the true measure of success.

See ayat 51 for tafseer.

See ayat 51 for tafseer.

See ayat 51 for tafseer.

See ayat 51 for tafseer.

See ayat 51 for tafseer.

See ayat 51 for tafseer.

See ayat 51 for tafseer.

See ayat 51 for tafseer.

In the preceding verses, it was observed that Mūsā (ʿalayhi al‑salām), through argument and rational discourse, had established his superiority over Pharaoh and demonstrated the coherence and intellectual strength of the Divine message, while exposing the weakness of Pharaoh’s claims. Pharaoh resorted successively to mockery, accusations of madness, and finally threats of imprisonment and execution. At this juncture, the nature of the confrontation changed, requiring a decisive manifestation that would expose Pharaoh’s incapacity. Thus, Mūsā (ʿalayhi al‑salām) declared: “قَالَ اَوَلَوْ جِئْتُکَ بِشَیْءٍ مُبِینٍ” — even if I bring a clear sign, would you still imprison me? Pharaoh, unable to dismiss this claim outright before the assembled audience, was compelled to accept the challenge: “قَالَ فَاْتِ بِهِ إِنْ کُنْتَ مِنَ الصَّادِقِینَ”. Thereupon, Mūsā cast down his staff, and it became “ثُعْبَانٌ مُبِینٌ”, a manifest great serpent, and he brought forth his hand, luminous and radiant: “فَإِذَا ھِیَ بَیْضَاءُ لِلنَّاظِرِینَ”. These constituted clear and undeniable signs, distinct from any form of illusion. Faced with this, Pharaoh attempted to reinterpret the event to preserve his authority. He declared Mūsā to be “سَاحِرٌ عَلِیمٌ” and warned the assembly: “یُرِیدُ أَنْ یُخْرِجَکُمْ مِنْ أَرْضِکُمْ بِسِحْرِهِ”. He then consulted his advisers: “فَمَاذَا تَأْمُرُونَ”. The courtiers proposed that the matter be delayed and expert magicians summoned: “أَرْجِهْ وَاَخَاہُ وَابْعَثْ فِی الْمَدَائِنِ حَاشِرِینَ یَأْتُوکَ بِکُلِّ سَحَّارٍ عَلِیمٍ”. Accordingly, messengers were dispatched, and a large number of skilled magicians were gathered at an appointed time: “فَجُمِعَ السَّحَرَةُ لِمِیقَاتِ یَوْمٍ مَعْلُومٍ”. The confrontation was arranged on a public festival day to ensure maximum attendance and visibility. The people were invited: “هَلْ أَنْتُمْ مُجْتَمِعُونَ”, and encouraged with the expectation: “لَعَلَّنَا نَتَّبِعُ السَّحَرَةَ إِنْ کَانُوا ھُمُ الْغَالِبِینَ”. When the magicians arrived, they negotiated their reward: “أَئِنَّ لَنَا لَأَجْرًا إِنْ کُنَّا نَحْنُ الْغَالِبِینَ”. Pharaoh assured them not only of reward but of elevated status: “وَإِنَّکُمْ إِذًا لَمِنَ الْمُقَرَّبِینَ”. Thus motivated, they prepared their instruments and, when the moment arrived, cast down their ropes and staffs, proclaiming: “بِعِزَّةِ فِرْعَوْنَ إِنَّا لَنَحْنُ الْغَالِبُونَ”. Their methods produced the appearance of moving serpents, creating excitement among the spectators. At this critical moment, Mūsā (ʿalayhi al‑salām) cast down his staff, which immediately “تَلْقَفُ مَا یَأْفِکُونَ” — began to swallow all that they had fabricated. The reality of the miracle became undeniable. A profound silence spread across the assembly, followed by astonishment and fear. The magicians, being experts in their craft, immediately recognized that this was not magic but a genuine miracle. Overwhelmed by the truth, “فَأُلْقِیَ السَّحَرَةُ سَاجِدِینَ”, they fell in prostration, declaring: “آمَنَّا بِرَبِّ الْعَالَمِینَ رَبِّ مُوسَى وَهَارُونَ”. This sudden transformation illustrates the decisive impact of clear truth upon those capable of discerning it. Pharaoh, perceiving the threat to his authority, reacted with anger: “آمَنْتُمْ لَهُ قَبْلَ أَنْ آذَنَ لَکُمْ”. He accused them of conspiracy: “إِنَّهُ لَکَبِیرُکُمُ الَّذِی عَلَّمَکُمُ السِّحْرَ”, and issued severe threats: “لَأُقَطِّعَنَّ أَیْدِیَکُمْ وَأَرْجُلَکُمْ مِنْ خِلَافٍ وَلَأُصَلِّبَنَّکُمْ أَجْمَعِینَ”. Despite these threats, the magicians remained steadfast. They replied: “لَا ضَیْرَ إِنَّا إِلَى رَبِّنَا مُنْقَلِبُونَ”. They expressed hope for divine forgiveness: “إِنَّا نَطْمَعُ أَنْ یَغْفِرَ لَنَا رَبُّنَا خَطَایَانَا أَنْ کُنَّا أَوَّلَ الْمُؤْمِنِینَ”. Their response reflects a complete transformation: from adherence to falsehood to unwavering commitment to truth, even in the face of death. This episode exemplifies the power of genuine faith. Once truth becomes clear and is consciously embraced, it can elevate individuals above fear of worldly authority, enabling them to endure even the most severe threats with resolve and conviction.

See ayat 59 for tafseer.

See ayat 59 for tafseer.

See ayat 59 for tafseer.

See ayat 59 for tafseer.

See ayat 59 for tafseer.

See ayat 59 for tafseer.

See ayat 59 for tafseer.

In the preceding verses, it was shown that Mūsā (ʿalayhi al‑salām) emerged victorious in the field of confrontation with Pharaoh, attaining honor and success. Although Pharaoh and his courtiers did not accept faith, several significant consequences followed, each constituting an important achievement. First, the faith of Banī Isrāʾīl in their leader was strengthened, and they gathered around him with greater unity and resolve. Second, Mūsā (ʿalayhi al‑salām) gained a measure of influence among the Egyptians; some inclined toward him, while others, even if not convinced, became cautious in opposing him. His call began to resonate throughout Egypt. Third, Pharaoh himself, in attempting to protect public opinion and his authority, found himself unable to confront openly a figure supported by such evident signs and persuasive speech. These developments prepared the ground for the mission of Mūsā (ʿalayhi al‑salām), enabling him to carry out his preaching openly and establish the argument against his opponents. Over time, he presented both rational proofs and further miracles, and even prolonged hardship such as famine befell Egypt to awaken those capable of reflection. When the distinction between believers and deniers became clear, the next stage commenced. It is stated: “وَاَوْحَیْنَا إِلَی مُوسَی اَنْ اَسْرِ بِعِبَادِی إِنَّکُمْ مُتَّبَعُونَ” — We revealed to Mūsā that he should travel by night with My servants, for you will be pursued. The expression “عبادی” reflects Divine affection toward the believers. In obedience to this command, Mūsā (ʿalayhi al‑salām) gathered Banī Isrāʾīل and departed secretly under the cover of night. However, the movement of such a large group could not remain concealed. Pharaoh was soon informed and responded by dispatching agents throughout the cities to assemble forces: “فَاَرْسَلَ فِرْعَوْنُ فِی الْمَدَائِنِ حَاشِرِینَ”. At the same time, in order to maintain morale, he declared: “إِنَّ ھَؤُلاَءِ لَشِرْذِمَةٌ قَلِیلُونَ” — they are but a small and insignificant group. The term “شرذمة” implies not only smallness in number but also fragmentation and weakness. He further incited his people, stating: “وَإِنَّھُمْ لَنَا لَغَائِظُونَ” — they have provoked us, portraying the situation as a collective threat requiring response. He added: “وَإِنَّا لَجَمِیعٌ حَاذِرُونَ” — we are fully prepared and vigilant. This statement may signify both fear of the situation and preparedness to confront it; these meanings are not mutually exclusive. The Qur’an then summarizes the outcome: “فَاَخْرَجْنَاھُمْ مِنْ جَنَّاتٍ وَعُیُونٍ وَکُنُوزٍ وَمَقَامٍ کَرِیمٍ” — We expelled them from gardens, springs, treasures, and noble dwellings. Thus, Pharaoh and his people were deprived of their prosperity and status, while “وَاَوْرَثْنَاھَا بَنِی إِسْرَائِیلَ” — these were made to pass to Banī Isrāʾīل. The phrase “مَقَامٍ کَرِیمٍ” has been interpreted in various ways, including magnificent palaces, positions of authority, or places of comfort and luxury; all of these together reflect the comprehensive nature of what was taken from them. Accordingly, the narrative illustrates the reversal of fortune: a tyrannical power, once secure in its dominance, is stripped of its resources and authority, while an oppressed community inherits what it once lacked.

In the above verses, it is stated that God made Banī Isrāʾīl the inheritors of the people of Pharaoh. On the basis of this expression, some exegetes have held the view that the Israelites returned to Egypt and assumed control of governance there, exercising authority for an extended period (Tafsīr Majmaʿ al‑Bayān, Tafsīr Qurṭubī, under these verses; al‑Ālūsī in Rūḥ al‑Maʿānī also presents a significant interpretation on this matter). The apparent meaning of the verses is also consistent with this interpretation. In contrast, other exegetes are of the opinion that, after the destruction of Pharaoh and his people, Banī Isrāʾīl departed for the sacred land, and only after some time returned to Egypt and established their governance there (Tafsīr Rūḥ al‑Maʿānī, under the same verses). Certain passages of the present‑day Torah also appear to correspond to this understanding. A third group of exegetes suggest that Banī Isrāʾīl divided into two groups: one remained in Egypt and governed there, while the other accompanied Mūsā (ʿalayhi al‑salām) to the sacred land. Another interpretation proposes that their “inheritance” refers to a later period, after Mūsā (ʿalayhi al‑salām) and during the time of Sulaymān (ʿalayhi al‑salām), when they exercised authority over the extensive lands of Egypt. However, upon reflection, it appears unlikely that Mūsā (ʿalayhi al‑salām), as a major reforming prophet, would completely abandon a region that had effectively come under his authority without making any arrangements for its governance—especially considering that a large population of Banī Isrāʾīل had long resided there and were fully acquainted with its conditions. Accordingly, the situation may be understood in one of two ways: either the Israelites as a whole returned to Egypt and established governance, or a portion of them remained there under the instructions of Mūsā (ʿalayhi al‑salām) and continued to administer affairs. Beyond these possibilities, the expression that Pharaoh and his people were expelled and Banī Isrāʾīل made their inheritors admits of no more evident or coherent explanation.

Order of the Verses: The Holy Quran, in the following verses, describes in detail the drowning of Pharaoh and his companions. This raises the question: what is the reason that the Holy Quran first mentions the expulsion of the Pharaohs from their palaces and properties and the inheritance of these by the Children of Israel, and only afterward discusses the drowning of Pharaoh and his people? Whereas the chronological order is actually the opposite. In this regard, it is possible that after presenting a brief account here, a method of providing further details later has been adopted. It is also possible that the approach is to state the conclusion first and then mention its details. Please consider this carefully.

See ayat 68 for tafseer.

See ayat 68 for tafseer.

See ayat 68 for tafseer.

See ayat 68 for tafseer.

See ayat 68 for tafseer.

See ayat 68 for tafseer.

See ayat 68 for tafseer.

See ayat 68 for tafseer.

In these concluding verses, the final part of the narrative of Mūsā (ʿalayhi al‑salām) and Pharaoh is presented, describing how Pharaoh and his followers were drowned and how Banī Isrāʾīl attained deliverance. As noted earlier, Pharaoh had mobilized forces from across Egypt, assembling a vast army. According to some exegetes, a large advance contingent was sent ahead, followed by an even greater force under Pharaoh himself. They pursued relentlessly and, by sunrise, caught up with Mūsā (ʿalayhi al‑salām) and his people: “فَاَتْبَعُوھُمْ مُشْرِقِینَ”. When the two groups came face to face, the companions of Mūsā exclaimed: “إِنَّا لَمُدْرَکُونَ” — we are overtaken. Before them lay the sea with its surging waves, and behind them the advancing army. In this moment of extreme distress, fear overwhelmed Banī Isrāʾīل, and their confidence faltered. Yet Mūsā (ʿalayhi al‑salām), with complete assurance, declared: “کَلَّا إِنَّ مَعِی رَبِّی سَیَھْدِینِ” — never, my Lord is with me, and He will guide me. His statement reflects absolute trust in the Divine promise and guidance. Then the decisive command was given: “فَاَوْحَیْنَا إِلَی مُوسَی اَنْ اضْرِبْ بِعَصَاکَ الْبَحْرَ”. Mūsā struck the sea with his staff, and the sea parted: “فَانفَلَقَ فَکَانَ کُلُّ فِرْقٍ کَالطَّوْدِ الْعَظِیمِ”. The waters separated into towering masses like great mountains, creating pathways between them. Banī Isrāʾīل passed through these paths, while Pharaoh and his army, still driven by arrogance, followed in pursuit: “وَاَزْلَفْنَا ثَمَّ الْآخَرِینَ”. At the moment when the last of the believers emerged and the pursuing forces had entered the divided sea, the waters returned to their original state: “ثُمَّ اَغْرَقْنَا الْآخَرِینَ”. Thus Pharaoh and his hosts were destroyed, while Mūsā (ʿalayhi al‑salām) and all those with him were saved: “وَاَنْجَیْنَا مُوسَیٰ وَمَنْ مَعَہُ اَجْمَعِینَ”. This event marks a complete reversal: the oppressed became free, and the oppressors perished. A once powerful and dazzling civilization collapsed, and those who had been subjugated inherited what remained. Yet the Qur’an concludes: “إِنَّ فِی ذَلِکَ لَآیَةً وَمَا کَانَ اَکْثَرُھُمْ مُؤْمِنِینَ”. Despite such a manifest sign, most people did not believe, indicating a persistent unwillingness to recognize truth. The passage concludes with the statement: “وَإِنَّ رَبَّکَ لَھُوَ الْعَزِیزُ الرَّحِیمُ”. The attribute “العزیز” reflects God’s absolute and irresistible power, demonstrated in the destruction of tyrannical forces. At the same time, “الرحیم” expresses His encompassing mercy, manifested in the granting of respite, the sending of signs, and the ultimate deliverance of the oppressed. Thus, these verses present a complete narrative arc: confrontation, trial, Divine intervention, and final justice—culminating in a clear demonstration of both Divine power and mercy.

In the Qur’an, it is repeatedly stated that Mūsā (ʿalayhi al‑salām), by Divine command, caused Banī Isrāʾīل to pass through the “بحر” (cf. Yūnus 90; Ṭā Hā 77; al‑Shuʿarāʾ 63; al‑Dukhān 24), and in some instances the term “یم” is also employed (cf. Ṭā Hā 78; al‑Qaṣaṣ 40; al‑Dhāriyāt 40). This raises the question as to what is meant by “بحر” and “یم” in these contexts: whether they refer to a vast river such as the Nile (Nile River), upon which the population of Egypt depended, or to the Red Sea (Baḥr al‑Qulzum). From the presentation of the current Torah and the approaches adopted by some exegetes, it appears that the reference is to the Red Sea. However, there are indications suggesting that the intended referent is the great and expansive Nile. Linguistically, as noted by Rāghib in Mufradāt, the word “بحر” signifies a vast body of water, and “یم” likewise carries a similar meaning. Accordingly, both terms may legitimately apply to the Nile. Several indicators support this interpretation. First, the residence of the Pharaohs, situated in the central inhabited regions of Egypt, must have been located near the Nile. If the present pyramids and their surrounding areas are taken as a reference point, Banī Isrāʾīل would have been required to cross the Nile in order to proceed toward the sacred land, since those regions lie to the west of the Nile, whereas their destination lay to the east. Second, the distance between the populated areas along the Nile and the Red Sea is sufficiently great that Banī Isrāʾīل could not have traversed it within a single night or part of a night. Yet the Qur’anic narrative indicates that their departure from Egypt occurred during the night, and that Pharaoh’s forces reached them early in the morning. Third, it was not necessary, from a geographical standpoint, for Banī Isrāʾīل to cross the Red Sea in order to reach the sacred land, as land routes existed prior to the excavation of the Suez Canal. The assumption that, in ancient times, the Red Sea was directly connected to the Mediterranean without an intervening land passage remains unsubstantiated. Fourth, the Qur’an employs the term “یم” when describing the placing of the infant Mūsā (ʿalayhi al‑salām) into the water (Ṭā Hā 39), and also uses the same term in describing the drowning of Pharaoh and his followers. Since both events are narrated within the same sūrah (Ṭā Hā) and without qualification, it is evident that the term is used consistently. Historical indications suggest that the infant Mūsā (ʿalayhi al‑salām) was placed in the waters of the Nile, not in a sea; consequently, it follows that Pharaoh and his army were likewise drowned in the Nile (this point merits careful consideration).

Some interpreters who do not want to accept miracles insist on interpreting the event mentioned in the previous verses—of the drowning of Pharaoh’s people and the salvation of the Children of Israel—in a way that aligns with ordinary natural causes. Therefore, sometimes they say that this event should be reconciled with a moving and flexible bridge, which is still in use today [Allama Al-Quran, p. 266] (that is, a moving bridge is used for crossing in emergencies). Some others have said that Prophet Musa (peace be upon him) was familiar with the paths and well understood the middle routes in the river "Suf" (the Gulf of Suez), so he succeeded in crossing there and reached the "Peninsula of Sinai," and the verses about the "splitting of the sea" refer to this [Allama Al-Quran, p. 266]. A few other interpreters may have strengthened this possibility and said that Musa (peace be upon him) reached the shore of the sea when the "island" of the sea had ended and the land had appeared, and he succeeded in crossing easily from there. As soon as they crossed and the Pharaoh’s caravan entered, the "tide" began, which caused them to be engulfed in the waves and perish. But the truth is that none of these possibilities align with the apparent meaning of the Quranic verses (even if not explicitly stated). However, if the matter of the miracle is accepted, then such interpretations are not necessary. The issue of miracles has been extensively discussed in the detailed accounts of the Prophets, especially in this story, where the miracle of the staff is mentioned. If we accept this, what harm is there in believing that by the striking of the staff, by God's command, the water of the Nile was divided into several parts and then gathered again? For in the universe, it is the Lord of the worlds who rules over the law of cause and effect. It is possible that this division of water happened under some hidden attraction and that shortly afterwards this attraction ceased and all the water returned to its natural state. Such an exception is not contrary to the law of cause and effect but rather requires acknowledging the effect of extraordinary causes, which is beyond our recognition due to our limited knowledge.

Divine Power Accompanied by Mercy: At the conclusion of this series of verses, which narrate the overall outcome of the struggle between Mūsā (ʿalayhi al‑salām) and Pharaoh—namely, the triumph of the forces of truth and the defeat and destruction of falsehood—two key Divine attributes are highlighted: “العزیز” and “الرحیم”. The first attribute, “العزیز”, signifies invincible power and irresistible authority, indicating that God possesses absolute dominance and cannot be overcome. The second attribute, “الرحیم”, reflects the vastness of His mercy toward His servants. The precedence of “العزیز” over “الرحیم” serves to clarify that this mercy does not arise from ضعف or inability. Rather, it emphasizes that God remains merciful despite possessing complete and unchallenged power. Some exegetes have suggested that the attribution of “العزیز” refers specifically to the defeat of His enemies, while “الرحیم” points to the victory and salvation of His friends. However, even if both attributes are understood as encompassing all groups, such an interpretation presents no difficulty. All individuals, including sinners, benefit from His mercy, while all—including the righteous—remain subject to awe of His majesty, power, and authority. Thus, the juxtaposition of these two attributes conveys a balanced theological perspective: God’s absolute power ensures the establishment of justice, while His encompassing mercy provides opportunities for guidance, forgiveness, and deliverance.

See ayat 82 for tafseer.

See ayat 82 for tafseer.

See ayat 82 for tafseer.

See ayat 82 for tafseer.

See ayat 82 for tafseer.

See ayat 82 for tafseer.

See ayat 82 for tafseer.

See ayat 82 for tafseer.

See ayat 82 for tafseer.

See ayat 82 for tafseer.

See ayat 82 for tafseer.

See ayat 82 for tafseer.

See ayat 82 for tafseer.

As has been explained at the beginning of the sūrah, God has presented in this chapter the detailed accounts of seven great prophets and their confrontations with misguided peoples, in order both to provide solace to the Prophet of Islam (ṣallā Allāh ʿalayhi wa-ālihi wa-sallam) and the small group of believers of that time, and to serve as a warning for the enemies of truth and the arrogant. Thus, immediately after the instructive narrative of Mūsā (ʿalayhi al‑salām) and Pharaoh, the Qur’an introduces the enlightening account of Ibrāhīm (ʿalayhi al‑salām) and his confrontation with the polytheists, beginning with his dialogue with his paternal uncle and his misguided people. It is first stated: “وَاتْلُ عَلَیْهِمْ نَبَأَ إِبْرَاهِیمَ” — recite to them the account of Ibrāhīm. Among the various episodes of his life, emphasis is placed here upon his interaction with his people, when he said: “مَا تَعْبُدُونَ” — what do you worship? Although Ibrāhīm (ʿalayhi al‑salām) was aware of their practices, this question was posed to elicit their admission and, at the same time, the use of “ما” conveys a tone of disparagement. They responded without hesitation: “نَعْبُدُ أَصْنَامًا فَنَظَلُّ لَهَا عَاکِفِینَ”. This indicates not only the absence of shame but even a sense of pride, as they described their continuous devotion. The term “نَظَلُّ” suggests persistence throughout the day, and “عَاکِفِینَ” denotes devoted attendance with respect and focus. In response, Ibrāhīm (ʿalayhi al‑salām) advanced a decisive argument: “هَلْ یَسْمَعُونَکُمْ إِذْ تَدْعُونَ أَوْ یَنْفَعُونَکُمْ أَوْ یَضُرُّونَ”. These questions establish the essential criteria for divinity: the ability to hear, respond, and exercise benefit or harm. Since idols possess none of these attributes, their worship is devoid of rational basis. Unable to provide a logical reply, they resorted to inherited tradition: “بَلْ وَجَدْنَا آبَاءَنَا کَذَلِکَ یَفْعَلُونَ”. This appeal to ancestral practice reflects blind imitation rather than reasoned belief. Ibrāhīm (ʿalayhi al‑salām) then redirected his argument: “أَفَرَأَیْتُمْ مَا کُنْتُمْ تَعْبُدُونَ أَنْتُمْ وَآبَاؤُکُمُ الْأَقْدَمُونَ”. He declared: “فَإِنَّهُمْ عَدُوٌّ لِی إِلَّا رَبَّ الْعَالَمِینَ”. By designating the idols as enemies, he indicated that such worship leads to misguidance, ruin, and ultimate harm. He then presented, in contrast, the attributes of the true Lord: “الَّذِی خَلَقَنِی فَهُوَ یَهْدِینِ وَالَّذِی هُوَ یُطْعِمُنِی وَیَسْقِینِ وَإِذَا مَرِضْتُ فَهُوَ یَشْفِینِ وَالَّذِی یُمِیتُنِی ثُمَّ یُحْیِینِ وَالَّذِی أَطْمَعُ أَنْ یَغْفِرَ لِی خَطِیئَتِی یَوْمَ الدِّینِ”. These statements outline a comprehensive theology: creation, guidance, sustenance, healing, life, death, resurrection, and forgiveness—all attributed solely to God. The sequence reflects the stages of Divine ربوبیت: initial creation and continuous guidance, provision of sustenance, removal of impediments such as illness, and finally the realities of death, resurrection, and accountability in the Hereafter. Even in speaking of illness, it is attributed to himself out of propriety, while healing is attributed to God. Thus, through a concise yet profound argument, Ibrāhīm (ʿalayhi al‑salām) refutes the multiplicity of supposed deities and establishes the exclusive sovereignty of “رَبَّ الْعَالَمِینَ”. His discourse integrates rational inquiry with experiential recognition of Divine نعمت, culminating in complete reliance upon God alone.

See ayat 87 for tafseer.

See ayat 87 for tafseer.

See ayat 87 for tafseer.

See ayat 87 for tafseer.

At this point, the supplications of Ibrāhīm (ʿalayhi al‑salām) begin, expressing his direct обращения to his Lord. After inviting his misguided people toward God and presenting the manifestations of Divine ربوبیت in the universe, he disengages from them and turns wholly toward the Divine Being, seeking from Him alone whatever he desires. In doing so, he implicitly conveys to the idolaters that whatever is sought in this world and the next must be sought from God alone, thereby reinforcing the doctrine of absolute Divine ربوبیت. His first supplication is: “رَبِّ هَبْ لِی حُكْمًا وَأَلْحِقْنِی بِالصَّالِحِینَ” — my Lord, grant me wisdom (ḥukm) and join me with the righteous. The request for “حُكْم” precedes the request for association with the righteous. The concept of “ḥukm” shares its root with “ḥikmah”. As explained by Rāghib in Mufradāt, ḥikmah denotes attaining truth through knowledge and recognition of reality and righteous action. In other words, it refers to those criteria and standards by which truth may be recognized and falsehood discerned regardless of its form. This corresponds to what some philosophers describe as the perfection of the theoretical faculty. It is the same gift referred to in the verse: “وَلَقَدْ آتَیْنَا لُقْمَانَ الْحِكْمَةَ” (Luqmān 12), and described in al‑Baqarah 269 as “خَیْرًا كَثِیرًا”. However, “حُكْم” appears to be broader than “ḥikmah”, representing not only knowledge but also the capacity for application and correct judgment free from error and desire. This explains why Ibrāhīm (ʿalayhi al‑salām) first seeks this comprehensive form of knowledge and discernment, since no practical undertaking can be completed successfully without it. He then requests association with the righteous, which corresponds to the practical dimension—what may be termed practical wisdom—complementing the earlier request. Although Ibrāhīm (ʿalayhi al‑salām) was already endowed with such qualities, his supplication reflects the absence of limits in both knowledge and righteousness. His aim is continuous progression to higher degrees. At the same time, he recognizes that all blessings originate from God and may be withdrawn; thus, his supplication contains both a request for advancement and for permanence, much like the repeated prayer for guidance to the “صراط مستقیم”. He then makes another supplication: “وَاجْعَلْ لِی لِسَانَ صِدْقٍ فِی الْآخِرِینَ” — grant me a truthful remembrance among later generations. This indicates a desire that his message, method, and legacy endure, and that he serve as a model for future communities. This prayer was granted, as reflected in the verse: “وَجَعَلْنَا لَهُمْ لِسَانَ صِدْقٍ عَلِیًّا” (Maryam 50). It may also be connected to his earlier supplication concerning the raising of a messenger among his descendants (al‑Baqarah 129), realized through the mission of the Prophet Muḥammad (ṣallā Allāh ʿalayhi wa-ālihi wa-sallam). He then turns to the Hereafter and supplicates: “وَاجْعَلْنِی مِنْ وَرَثَةِ جَنَّةِ النَّعِیمِ” — make me among the inheritors of the Garden of Bliss. The term “inheritance” suggests either attainment without proportionate effort or the transfer of a destined abode, emphasizing the grace inherent in Divine reward. In his fifth supplication, he seeks forgiveness for his uncle Āzar: “وَاغْفِرْ لِأَبِی إِنَّهُ كَانَ مِنَ الضَّالِّینَ”. This reflects a prior promise made in hope of guiding him. However, when his persistent opposition became clear, Ibrāhīm (ʿalayhi al‑salām) dissociated himself from him, as indicated in Tawbah 114. Finally, he prays: “وَلَا تُخْزِنِی یَوْمَ یُبْعَثُونَ” — do not disgrace me on the Day they are resurrected. The term “خزی” denotes humiliation or inner disgrace, whether arising from oneself or imposed by others. This expression reflects both humility and an acute awareness of Divine accountability, as well as complete reliance upon Divine grace. In summary, the supplications of Ibrāhīm (ʿalayhi al‑salām) trace a comprehensive spiritual trajectory: from knowledge and righteous action (ḥukm and ṣulḥ), to enduring legacy, to eternal reward, to concern for others, and finally to salvation from humiliation in the Hereafter. Through these prayers, the exclusive sovereignty of “رَبَّ الْعَالَمِینَ” is affirmed, and complete reliance upon Him is established.

See ayat 104 for tafseer.

See ayat 104 for tafseer.

See ayat 104 for tafseer.

See ayat 104 for tafseer.

See ayat 104 for tafseer.

See ayat 104 for tafseer.

See ayat 104 for tafseer.

See ayat 104 for tafseer.

See ayat 104 for tafseer.

See ayat 104 for tafseer.

See ayat 104 for tafseer.

See ayat 104 for tafseer.

See ayat 104 for tafseer.

See ayat 104 for tafseer.

See ayat 104 for tafseer.

See ayat 104 for tafseer.

In the last verse of the previous discussion, there was a brief reference to the issue of the Day of Resurrection and the Hereafter, but in the verses under consideration here, a comprehensive depiction of the scene of the Day of Judgment is presented. These verses also mention the most important transaction taking place in that marketplace, along with the mention of the believers, disbelievers, misguided people, and the satanic group. From the apparent meaning of the verses, it is clear that this description and explanation is the continuation and supplement of the prayer of Prophet Abraham (peace be upon him), and most commentators concur with this view. However, some commentators have suggested the possibility that all the verses under consideration are part of God’s speech, which came as a clarification and completion of Prophet Abraham’s prayer immediately afterward; but this possibility is weak. Whatever the situation may be, the Quran first states: The Day of Resurrection is the Day on which neither wealth nor children will avail at all (يَوْمَ لاَیَنْفَعُ مَالٌ وَلاَبَنُونَ). Indeed, when the two main assets of worldly life, namely wealth and manpower, prove utterly useless for their owner, it is obvious that no other worldly asset, ranked below them, will benefit at all. It is clear that here, wealth and children do not mean such wealth and children that are used for gaining the pleasure of God, but their material aspect is being discussed; that is, on that Day material assets will not resolve any difficulty. But if these things, i.e., wealth and children, come to be used in the way of God, then they will no longer be called material capital but will be infused with the Divine color and “صبغة اللہ” (the color of God) and will be counted among “الباقیات الصالحات” (the enduring good deeds). Then the discourse proceeds under the heading of exception: Except for the one who comes to Allah with a sound heart (one whose heart is free from all kinds of polytheism, disbelief, and sins and is pure and intact) (إِلَّا مَنْ أَتَى اللَّهَ بِقَلْبٍ سَلِيمٍ). Thus, it becomes clear that on the Day of Resurrection the capital that will save is the sound heart alone. What a comprehensive and excellent expression this is. It is an expression that contains pure faith, sincere intention, and every kind of righteous deed. For the fruit of such a pure and pristine heart will also be pure and wholesome. In other words, just as a person’s heart and soul affect their deeds, those deeds also have a broad impact on their heart and soul and color them in their own hue. Whether deeds are divine or satanic, they surely affect the heart and soul. Then, explaining Paradise and Hell, the Quran states: At that time, Paradise will be brought near to the righteous (وَأُزْلِفَتِ الْجَنَّةُ لِلْمُتَّقِينَ). [“أُزْلِفَتْ”, “زلفى” (pronounced like “Kubra”) means nearness and proximity.] And Hell will be made apparent for the misguided (وَبُرِزَتِ الْجَحِيمُ لِلْغَاوِينَ). In reality, all this happens before these people enter Paradise or Hell, and each of these two groups will behold the scene of their final abode up close. The believer will be joyful and delighted, and the misguided will be stunned and terrified. This will be the first stage of their reward and punishment. Then, an interesting point is that the Quran does not say that the righteous will be brought near to Paradise but rather that Paradise itself will be brought near to them, which indicates the greatness and exalted ranks of these pious people. It is also noteworthy that the term “الغاوين” (the misguided) is the same expression that appeared in the story of Satan, when Satan was cast out from the Divine presence and God said: لَنْ تَسلِطَ عَلَىٰ عِبَادِيٓ إِلَّا مَنِ اتَّبَعَكَ مِنَ ٱلْغَاوِينَ “You will have no authority over My servants except those who follow you among the misguided.” (Al-Hijr: 42) Then it refers to the discourse through which that misguided group will be rebuked and scolded. It says they will be asked: Where are those gods whom you used to worship (وَقِيلَ لَهُمْ أَيْنَ مَا كُنْتُمْ تَعْبُدُونَ), those gods besides Allah (مِنْ دُونِ اللَّهِ)? Now that you are overwhelmed with severe torment and hardships, do they help you (هَلْ يَنصُرُونَكُمْ)? Do they call to your aid, or do they help themselves (أَوْ يَنصُرُونَ)? [It is possible that “يَنصُرُونَ” refers either to requesting help for themselves or for others, or in both ways, because later verses mention that both the deities and the worshippers will be cast into Hell.] But they will not be able to answer this question, nor will anyone expect such help from them. At this moment, all those gods will be assembled and, along with their misguided worshippers, will be thrown into Hell (فَكُبْكِبُوا فِيهَا هُمْ وَالْغَاوُونَ). According to some commentators, each one of them will be cast headlong upon another. In this way, the entire army of Satan (وَجُنُودُ إِبْلِيسَ أَجْمَعُونَ) will also be gathered. In reality, these three groups—idols, idolaters, and the troops of Satan, who are the promoters of those sins—all will be gathered in Hell; however, they will be cast therein one after another. Since…"Kabkabu" is originally derived from the root "kab," which means to throw something face down into a pit, and to repeat "kab" as "kabkab" signifies rolling them into Hell. This indicates that they will be cast into Hell as one throws a stone—when dropped from a high place, it first falls into one valley, then another, and so on, finally settling into a deep abyss. [In contemporary Persian, "kabkaba" refers to a group of riders or the sound made by horses and people walking together, serving as a metaphor for grandeur and majesty (Farhang Mo'in). It is possible that this word is derived from "kabkabuwa" (with a dammah on both kâfs), which in Arabic means a group of people or a troop of horses, and sometimes in Persian it is also called "dabdaba," meaning the sound of people’s footsteps or drums and musical instruments.] However, the matter does not end here. After this, depicting the mutual quarrels and disputes of the denizens of Hell, the Quran says: They will dispute among themselves in Hell and say (قَالُوا وھُمْ فِیھَا یَخْتَصِمُونَ). Yes, those misguided worshippers will say: By Allah, we were indeed clearly in error (تَاللهِ إِنْ کُنَّا لَفِی ضَلاَلٍ مُبِینٍ). ["In kunna" is used here as a contraction from "anna kunna" (indeed we were).] Yet you used to equal false gods with the Lord of the worlds (إِذْ نُسَوِّیکُمْ بِرَبِّ الْعَالَمِینَ). [It is possible that "idha" here serves as a conditional marker, or it might be a causal/temporal conjunction.] But no one led us astray except the criminals (وَمَا اَضَلَّنَا إِلاَّ الْمُجْرِمُونَ). Those very criminals who were leaders of our society, who for their own interests made us sacrificial victims and brought us to this wretched state. But alas, none are present to intercede for us (فَمَا لَنَا مِنْ شَافِعِینَ). Nor is there a sincere and affectionate friend who could help us (وَلاَصَدِیقٍ حَمِیمٍ). In short, just as we thought in the world that our gods would help us, so it is not; they do not assist us, nor do our friends have any strength to aid us. It is noteworthy that in the previous verse "shafi'een" is in plural while "sadeeq" is singular. This difference may be because the group of misguided will see with their own eyes that those believers who had faltered in the world are now granted the intercession of Prophets, the Imams, angels, and other interceding friends. Hence, they will also wish that they too had someone to intercede or a friend. As for "sadeeq," according to some commentators, "sadeeq" and "aduww" (enemy) can be applied both to singular and plural. But soon they will realize that regret is of no benefit and that no good deeds can compensate for their shortcomings there. Therefore, they will long to return to the world: If only we had a return so that we could be among the believers (فَلَوْ اَنَّ لَنَا کَرَّةً فَنَکُونَ مِنْ الْمُؤْمِنِینَ). It is true that there they will have faith on that Day, but their faith will be compulsion-based faith. Faith is truly effective, constructive, and acceptable only when it is voluntary and in this life, one through which guidance is received and righteous deeds are performed. But this wish will not resolve any difficulty, for the divine way does not allow anyone to return, and they themselves will realize this reality, as evidenced by the word "law." ["Law" is a conditional particle generally used where the condition is impossible.] In the conversation of Prophet Ibrahim (peace be upon him) with his misguided people, after presenting their supplication to the Almighty on the Day of Judgment, God Almighty concludes for all people with the same two verses that were mentioned at the end of the story of Musa (Moses) and Pharaoh, and also appear in the stories of other Prophets in this Surah. It is said: Indeed, in this is a sign, but most of them were not believers (إِنَّ فِی ذَلِکَ لَآیَةً وَمَا کَانَ اَکْثَرھُمْ مُؤْمِنِینَ). And your Lord is the Almighty, the Most Merciful (وَإِنَّ رَبَّکَ لَھُوَ الْعَزِیزُ الرَّحِیمُ). Such phrases are repeated to provide comfort and reassurance for Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) and the small number of believers in his time, and also so that the believers, being in the minority in any era, may not despair of the misguided majority but keep themselves engaged and active through God's honour and mercy. Furthermore, it serves as a kind of warning and indication to the misguided that if some respite is given to them, it is not because the Almighty is weak but because He is Merciful.

In the above verses, during the discourse of Ibrāhīm (ʿalayhi al‑salām), reference has been made to the condition of the Day of Resurrection, where it is stated that nothing will avail except “قلب سلیم”. The word “سلیم” is derived from “سلامة” and denotes a heart that is sound, free from all forms of disease and from moral and doctrinal deviation. The Qur’an describes the hypocrites as: “فِی قُلُوبِہِمْ مَرَضٌ فَزَادَہُمُ اللّٰہُ مَرَضًا” (al‑Baqarah 2:10), indicating that spiritual corruption originates in the condition of the heart. Several traditions provide a precise characterization of the “قلب سلیم”. In one narration attributed to Imām Jaʿfar al‑Ṣādiq (ʿalayhi al‑salām), it is stated: any heart containing شرك or doubt is devoid of value (Majmaʿ al‑Bayān, under the relevant verse). Another narration emphasizes that attachment to material and worldly concerns is a primary source of moral corruption, as reflected in the well‑known expression: حب الدنیا رأس کل خطیئة (Biḥār al‑Anwār, vol. 70, p. 239). Accordingly, a “قلب سلیم” is one that is free from excessive attachment to worldly pursuits; as Imām Jaʿfar al‑Ṣādiq (ʿalayhi al‑salām) states: it is a heart safeguarded from love of the world (Tafsīr Ṣāfī, under the verse). When this is viewed in light of the directive: “فَإِنَّ خَیْرَ الزَّادِ التَّقْوَىٰ” (al‑Baqarah 2:197), it becomes clear that such a heart is characterized by تقویٰ. A further dimension is noted in another tradition, wherein Imām Jaʿfar al‑Ṣādiq (ʿalayhi al‑salām) defines the sound heart as one that meets God while containing none but Him: “القلب السلیم یلقی ربہ و لیس فیہ احد سواہ” (Tafsīر Ṣāفī, citing al‑Kāfī). In this context, the term “heart” refers not to the physical organ but to the human روح and consciousness. Islamic traditions frequently emphasize the centrality of the heart, its سلامت, and the harms that afflict it. These teachings reinforce a fundamental principle within Islamic thought: that intellectual, doctrinal, and ethical foundations are of primary importance, since all human actions ultimately depend upon them. Just as the physical heart, when healthy, ensures the proper functioning of the entire body—while its impairment leads to widespread illness—so too the moral and spiritual condition of the heart determines the soundness or فساد of human life. This comprehensive understanding is further illustrated in a narration attributed to Imām Jaʿfar al‑Ṣādiق (ʿalayھی ال‑salām), which classifies hearts into four types: one that contains both faith and hypocrisy; one that is inverted; one that is sealed and impervious to truth; and one that is luminous and free from all other than God. The luminous heart belongs to the believer, as reflected in the verse: “أَفَمَنْ یَمْشِی مُکِبًّا عَلَىٰ وَجْہِہِ أَہْدَىٰ أَمَّنْ یَمْشِی سَوِیًّا عَلَىٰ صِرَاطٍ مُسْتَقِیمٍ” (al‑Mulk 22). The second type pertains to those who fluctuate between truth and falsehood, aligning themselves with whichever environment they encounter. The sealed heart belongs to the hypocrites (Uṣūl al‑Kāfī, vol. 2, p. 309). Thus, the concept of “قلب سلیم” encapsulates a comprehensive spiritual ideal: a heart purified from shirk, doubt, and attachment to worldly distractions; a heart imbued with تقویٰ; and a heart entirely oriented toward God.

Meaning of the expression “فَكُبْكِبُوا”: Under the verse “فَكُبْكِبُوا فِیهَا هُمْ وَالْغَاوُونَ”, numerous narrations have been reported from Imām Muḥammad al‑Bāqir and Imām Jaʿfar al‑Ṣādiq (ʿalayhimā al‑salām). For instance, it is stated: “ھم قوم وصفوا عدلاً بالسنتھم ثم خالفوہ الیٰ غیرہ” — this verse refers to those people who praise justice verbally but act in opposition to it (Tafsīr Nūr al‑Thaqalayn, citing Uṣūl al‑Kāfī, Tafsīr ʿAlī ibn Ibrāhīm, and Maḥāsin al‑Barqī). From this narration, it becomes evident that speech devoid of corresponding action is highly reprehensible and blameworthy. Such individuals will be cast into the fire of Hell in a painful manner. They are those who are themselves misguided and who mislead others: their words appear to call toward truth, yet their actions lead toward falsehood. Indeed, their conduct demonstrates that they do not truly believe in their own statements. It should also be noted that the term “الغاوون”, derived from the root “غی”, does not signify every form of misguidance. Rather, according to Rāghib in Mufradāt, it refers specifically to a type of misguidance and ignorance whose origin lies in a corrupt belief.

Meaning of the verse “فَمَا لَنَا مِن شَافِعِینَ وَلَا صَدِیقٍ حَمِیمٍ”: The meaning of this verse is that there will be neither any intercessors for us nor any close and affectionate friends. Numerous narrations have been reported in this context. In some of these narrations, it is explicitly stated: “الشافعون الائمة و الصدیق من المؤمنین” The intercessors are the Imams, and the intimate friends are the believers (Maḥāsin al‑Barqī, cited in Tafsīr Nūr al‑Thaqalayn under this verse). In another narration transmitted from Jābir ibn ʿAbd Allāh al‑Anṣārī, he reports that he heard the Messenger of God say: A person in Paradise will say: what has become of my friend so‑and‑so? while his friend is in Hell. God, in order to please that believer, will command that his friend be taken out of Hell and placed into Paradise. At that point, those who remain in the Fire will say: “فَمَا لَنَا مِن شَافِعِینَ وَلَا صَدِیقٍ حَمِیمٍ” — we have neither intercessors nor any devoted friend (Tafsīr Majmaʿ al‑Bayān, under this verse). It is evident that intercession does not occur without criteria, nor is it granted without measure for the sake of companionship alone. Rather, there must exist a form of spiritual and moral connection between the intercessor and the one for whom intercession is made, so that the purpose of intercession may be fulfilled. For a more detailed discussion of intercession, see Tafsīr Namūnah, vol. 1, under Surah al‑Baqarah, verse 48.

See ayat 115 for tafseer.

See ayat 115 for tafseer.

See ayat 115 for tafseer.

See ayat 115 for tafseer.

See ayat 115 for tafseer.

See ayat 115 for tafseer.

See ayat 115 for tafseer.

See ayat 115 for tafseer.

See ayat 115 for tafseer.

See ayat 115 for tafseer.

The Holy Quran, after recounting the story of Prophet Ibrahim (peace be upon him) and his dialogue with his misguided people, mentions the nation of Prophet Nuh (peace be upon him). It presents their story as another instructive lesson and, in a few verses, describes the stubbornness, obstinacy, and shamelessness of that nation along with their painful end. First of all, it says: The people of Nuh rejected the messengers (كَذَّبَتْ قَوْمُ نُوحٍ الْمُرْسَلِینَ). [Explanatory note: The verb "كَذَّبَتْ" (denied) is given in the feminine form because "Qawm" (people) is understood as a group, and the word "Jama'at" (group) is grammatically feminine. Some scholars argue that "Qawm" is personally feminine because its diminutive form “Qawimah” exists (this was noted by Tabarsi in Majma' al-Bayan and Fakhr al-Razi in his Tafseer). However, Alusi in his Tafseer Ruh al-Ma'ani states that the word "Qawm" is used in both masculine and feminine forms.] It is clear that the people of Nuh denied only Nuh himself, but since essentially the message of all prophets (peace be upon them) is one, therefore the denial of Nuh is considered equivalent to the denial of all messengers. Hence, Allah also says that the people of Nuh rejected the "Messengers." It is also possible that the people of Nuh disbelieved in all religions and faiths and that they denied all the Prophets of Allah, whether those who came before Nuh or those who came after him. Then, like Ibrahim and Musa (peace be upon them), the high purpose of his life is expressed, saying: Remember the time when their brother Nuh said to them: "Will you not fear (Allah)?" (إِذْ قَالَ لَھُمْ أَخُوھُمْ نُوحٌ أَلَا تَتَّقُونَ). The term "brother" here indicates a very affectionate relationship based on equality and parity, meaning that Prophet Nuh (peace be upon him) did not show any superiority over them but invited them to piety with great simplicity and heartfelt sincerity. The term "brotherhood" is not used only for Prophet Nuh (peace be upon him) but is also applied to other prophets such as Hud, Salih, and Lut (peace be upon them). This serves as guidance for all leaders of the right path that their invitation must be based on love, affection, firmness, and sincerity, avoiding any form of superiority, so that hearts distant from the truth may be drawn closer without feeling any burden. Since all guidance and complete deliverance depend on piety (taqwa), it is stated thereafter: "Indeed, I am to you a trustworthy messenger" (إِنِّی لَكُمْ رَسُولٌ أَمِینٌ). "Fear Allah, and obey me" (فَاتَّقُوا اللهَ وَأَطِیعُونَ). From this expression, it appears that due to his trustworthiness, Prophet Nuh (peace be upon him) had, for a long time, a respected position among his people, and they recognized him with the distinguished attribute of "trustworthy.” That is why he says: For this reason, I am also trustworthy in fulfilling the divine message, and you will not find any treachery in me. The reason for preferring "piety" over "obedience" is that if there is no complete faith and belief in Allah’s being and no fear of Him in the heart, obedience to His Prophet cannot occur. Once again, Prophet Nuh (peace be upon him) presents a proof for the truth of his prophethood. This proof silences the excuses of those who make excuses. He says: "And I do not ask you for any reward for this; my reward is only from the Lord of the worlds" (وَمَا أَسْأَلُكُمْ عَلَیْهِ مِنْ أَجْرٍ إِنْ أَجْرِی إِلَّا عَلَى رَبِّ الْعَالَمِینَ). It is evident that the acceptance of divine will is generally proof of the sincerity of the claimant of prophethood, whereas material motives clearly indicate that the intention is nothing but self-interest. Especially during that era, the Arabs were well acquainted with priests and similar figures regarding this matter. After this statement, the same phrase is repeated which he said after mentioning his trustworthiness and prophethood: He says, "Fear Allah and obey me" (فَاتَّقُوا اللهَ وَأَطِیعُونَ). However, the stubborn polytheists and arrogant transgressors, when they saw all excuses closed upon them, began to fabricate this excuse: "Should we believe in you when the lowest and most despicable people have followed you?" (قَالُوا أَنُؤْمِنُ لَكَ وَاتَّبَعَكَ الْأَرْذَلُونَ). The status and value of any leader or guide is recognized by his followers, and as per the established term, the owner of a shrine is recognized by his visitors. When we see your followers, all we find are some poor, humble, obscure, and needy people whose livelihood is very modest; so how can you expect that the famous, wealthy, and renowned people will bow before you? We and these people can never walk together; neither have we ever sat at one table, nor gathered under one roof. What unreasonable expectation do you have from us? It is true that in this statement they were sincere that a leader is known by his followers...They are recognized by their actions, but their greatest mistake was that they did not properly understand the meaning and standard of personality. In their view, the standard of personality was wealth, riches, clothing, a house, and beautiful and expensive vehicles, while they were heedless of the high human virtues such as purity, piety, and truthfulness, which are found more among the poor and less among the wealthy. Class distinctions ruled their thoughts in the worst form. That is why they considered poor people as "aradhil." "Aradhil" is the plural of "arzal" (pronounced "ahram"), which is also the plural of "razil," meaning lowly and despicable. Had they thought beyond the prison of a class-based society and looked at the outside world with their own eyes, they would have realized that the faith of such people itself is evidence of the truth of this Prophet’s (peace be upon him) mission and the veracity of his invitation. But Noah (peace be upon him) immediately silenced them by saying: "My duty is only to invite to the truth and to reform society; what do I know about what they were doing?" (قَالَ وَمَا عِلْمِی بِمَا کَانُوا یَعْمَلُونَ). Whatever their past was, it has passed; the criterion is their present state, and today they have answered the call of the Divine guide by saying "Labbaik" (here I am), prepared for self-reformation, and have surrendered their hearts to the power of truth. If they did good or bad deeds in the past, "their reckoning is only with my Lord; if only you were aware" and had the faculty of discernment (إِنْ حِسَابُھُمْ إِلاَّ عَلَی رَبِّی لَوْ تَشْعُرُونَ). From this discourse, it can be implicitly understood that those people wanted to accuse the believers not only of poverty but also of moral and practical crimes, implying their past record was corrupt. However, moral crimes are several degrees more frequent among the prosperous classes because they have every means and resource to commit these crimes. They become arrogant due to their wealth and riches, whereas those who serve God are very few. But Noah (peace be upon him), without getting entangled in this matter, replied that he saw no evil in them, and if indeed what you say is true, then their reckoning is with God. His sole duty was that his invitation is for all seekers of truth. "I will never reject those who believe" (وَمَا اَنَا بِطَارِدِ الْمُؤْمِنِینَ). In fact, this is the response to the implicit request of those arrogant wealthy people who asked Prophet Noah (peace be upon him) to remove these poor people from around him so that they might approach him. My only duty is clearly to warn people (إِنْ اَنَا إِلاَّ نَذِیرٌ مُبِینٌ). Whoever hears my warning and turns from wrongdoing to the straight path, he is my follower, whoever he may be, regardless of his material social status. It is also noteworthy that these people did not object only to Prophet Noah (peace be upon him), the first among the Prophets of strong determination, but also objected to the Seal of the Prophets and many other Prophets in the same way. They viewed those in white garments through their dark lenses and continuously demanded their removal. They did not even want God and those Prophets who had such followers. But the Qur’an states beautifully in Surah Al-Kahf regarding the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him): وَاصْبِرْ نَفْسَکَ مَعَ الَّذِینَ یَدْعُونَ رَبَّهُم بِالْغَدَا وَالْعَشِیِّ یرِیدُونَ وَجْهَهُ وَلَا تَعْدُ عَیْنَاكَ عَنْھُمْ تریدُ زِینَةَ الْحَیَاةِ الدُّنْیَا وَلَا تُطِعْ مَن أَغْفَلْنَا قَلْبَهُ عَن ذِکرِنَا وَاتَّبَعَ ھَوَاهُ وَکَانَ أَمْرُهُ فُرُطًا (الكهف: ٢٨) Be patient with those who call upon their Lord morning and evening, seeking His pleasure. Do not turn your eyes away from them, seeking the adornments of the worldly life, and do not obey the one whose heart We have made heedless of Our remembrance and who follows his own desires, whose affair is excessive. This same objection is made even in our times against the guides and leaders of the path of truth—that most of their followers consist of the weak and the poor. In this way, they intend to highlight their faults, though unconsciously they are praising them and confirming the truth of their mission.

See ayat 122 for tafseer.

See ayat 122 for tafseer.

See ayat 122 for tafseer.

See ayat 122 for tafseer.

See ayat 122 for tafseer.

See ayat 122 for tafseer.

In these verses, the reaction of the misguided and obstinate people before Nūḥ (ʿalayhi al‑salām) is described as identical to that of arrogant groups throughout history: reliance on power, pride, and threats of violence. Thus, the people of Nūḥ declared: “خَالُوا لَئِنْ لَمْ تَنْتَهِ یَا نُوحُ لَتَكُونَنَّ مِنَ الْمَرْجُومِینَ” — if you do not desist, O Nūḥ, you will surely be among those who are stoned. The expression “مِنَ الْمَرْجُومِینَ” indicates that the practice of stoning was an established custom among them. In reality, they intended to convey that if Nūḥ (ʿalayhi al‑salām) continued his دعوت to توحید and persisted in disturbing their social order, his fate would resemble that of others who opposed them—namely, death by stoning, considered one of the harshest forms of execution. When Nūḥ (ʿalayhi al‑salām) observed that, despite prolonged دعوت with clear reasoning and enduring patience, only a small number had responded, he presented his complaint before God. Importantly, his complaint did not concern personal suffering but rather the rejection of the Divine message. He said: “رَبِّ إِنَّ قَوْمِی كَذَّبُونِ” — my Lord, my people have denied me. Although God is fully aware of all things, this statement serves as a prelude to his supplication. He then declared: “فَافْتَحْ بَیْنِی وَبَیْنَهُمْ فَتْحًا” — so decide between me and them with a decisive judgment. The term “فَتْح” here implies both separation and resolution of conflict. He further supplicated: “وَنَجِّنِی وَمَنْ مَعِی مِنَ الْمُؤْمِنِینَ” — save me and those believers who are with me. Thereafter, Divine mercy intervened to deliver Nūḥ (ʿalayhi al‑salām), while punishment overtook the deniers. It is stated: “فَأَنْجَیْنَاهُ وَمَنْ مَعَهُ فِی الْفُلْكِ الْمَشْحُونِ” — We saved him and those with him in the laden Ark; “ثُمَّ أَغْرَقْنَا بَعْدُ الْبَاقِینَ” — then We drowned the remaining people. The term “المشحون” signifies that the Ark was fully laden with people and necessary provisions, indicating that it was completely prepared before the onset of the flood. This, too, reflects a further manifestation of Divine favor, ensuring that the believers were preserved without deficiency. The passage concludes in a manner similar to the narratives of Mūsā (ʿalayhi al‑salām) and Ibrāhīm (ʿalayhi al‑salām): “إِنَّ فِی ذَلِكَ لَآیَةً وَمَا كَانَ أَكْثَرُهُمْ مُؤْمِنِینَ” — in this, there is certainly a sign, yet most of them did not believe. Despite clear evidence, the majority remained devoid of faith, reflecting their persistent heedlessness. Accordingly, the Prophet (ṣallā Allāh ʿalayhi wa‑ālihi wa‑sallam) is instructed not to be distressed by the resistance of his people. The ultimate outcome, as demonstrated in this narrative, affirms that truth prevails and falsehood is destroyed. The verse concludes: “وَإِنَّ رَبَّكَ لَهُوَ الْعَزِیزُ الرَّحِیمُ” — indeed, your Lord is the Mighty, the Merciful. His might ensures the destruction of tyrannical forces, while His mercy grants respite, establishes the proof, and ultimately delivers the oppressed.

See ayat 135 for tafseer.

See ayat 135 for tafseer.

See ayat 135 for tafseer.

See ayat 135 for tafseer.

See ayat 135 for tafseer.

See ayat 135 for tafseer.

See ayat 135 for tafseer.

See ayat 135 for tafseer.

See ayat 135 for tafseer.

See ayat 135 for tafseer.

See ayat 135 for tafseer.

See ayat 135 for tafseer.

Now comes the turn of the people of ’Aad and their Prophet, Hud (peace be upon him). Eighteen verses briefly recount their history, their fate, and the instructive lessons derived from it. As we have mentioned earlier, the people of ’Aad lived in the region of Hadhramaut, around Yemen, in the southern part of the Arabian Peninsula. The rebellious nation, as the Quran states, "Denied the messengers of Allah" (كَذَّبَتْ عَادٌ الْمُرْسَلِینَ). [Explanatory note: Since the people of ’Aad were a group and a tribe, the verb is used in the feminine form, hence "كَذَّبَتْ" (kadhabat) is employed, as both these words are grammatically feminine.] Although they only denied Prophet Hud (peace be upon him), since Hud’s message represented all the prophets, by denying him, they effectively denied all the prophets. After this brief mention, the detailed account is given as follows: While their brother Hud said to them, "Will you not fear (Allah)?" (إِذْ قَالَ لَهُمْ أَخُوهُمْ هُودٌ أَلَا تَتَّقُونَ). Because Prophet Hud invited them to monotheism, righteousness, and truth with great sympathy and kindness, addressing them as a brother, the word "أَخُوهُمْ" (their brother) is used here. Then he said, "Indeed, I am to you a trustworthy messenger" (إِنِّی لَکُمْ رَسُولٌ أَمِينٌ). The record of my life among you testifies to the fact that I have never pursued betrayal or deception; I had nothing but truth and sincerity. Emphasizing this point, he continues: "So fear Allah, and obey me" (فَاتَّقُوا اللّٰهَ وَأَطِیعُونِ), because obedience to me is, in reality, obedience to Allah. If you think I am doing this for worldly gain, that it is a prelude to acquiring wealth, status, or rank, then know that "I do not ask you for any reward for it" (وَمَا أَسْأَلُکُمْ عَلَیْهِ مِنْ أَجْرٍ). "My reward is only with the Lord of the worlds" (إِنْ أَجْرِی إِلَّا عَلَىٰ رَبِّ الْعَالَمِینَ). All blessings and favors come from Him; if I need anything, I ask only Him, for He is the Lord of all. The Holy Quran divides the story of Prophet Hud and the people of ’Aad into four parts. First, it describes the contents of Hud’s invitation which consists of monotheism and righteousness. We have already read this. Then, describing their reprehensible behavior and perversion, it reminds them of three issues. Using rhetorical negation, addressing Prophet Hud, it asks: "Do you build on every high place a sign, playing around?" (أَتَبْنُونَ بِکُلِّ رِیعٍ آيَةً تَعْبُثُونَ). "رِيعٍ" literally means a high place, and "تَعْبُثُونَ" comes from "عبث", meaning to do something useless or without proper purpose. The word "آيَة" (sign) indicates that this wealthy and prosperous nation built structures on the heights of mountains and high mounds (like towers), through which they attracted attention and displayed their power. Some commentators say this refers to their houses and huts built on high places, which they used as places of indulgence and debauchery, similar to the customs among tyrannical people today. However, this interpretation seems unlikely because the phrase "آيَة" and the word "عبث" do not correspond well to this meaning. Another possibility mentioned by some commentators is that the people of ’Aad built such houses along roads and pathways on high places to mock travelers from there. Among these three interpretations, the first appears to be the most accurate. Once again, criticism begins: "And you build palaces, perhaps you will remain forever" (وَتَتَّخِذُونَ مَصَانِعَ لَعَلَّکُمْ تَخْلُدُونَ). "مَصَانِعَ" is the plural of "مَصْنَع," meaning beautiful and solid houses or buildings. Prophet Hud does not object to the fact that they have suitable houses; rather, he means they are so immersed in strengthening this world and adorning it with durable and solid houses and palaces that they have completely forgotten the Hereafter, treating this world not as a transient passage but as an everlasting abode. When this is the case, such heedless and pride-inducing buildings are certainly blameworthy. In a narration of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him), it is mentioned that once while passing by a place, the Prophet’s gaze fell upon a dome and a structure built on the road. He asked, "What is this?" His companions replied, "This is a building of an Ansari." He paused there, and at that moment the owner of the building also arrived. He greeted the Prophet, but the Prophet turned his blessed face away...He narrated this incident to his companions and said: “By God! I do not see the Prophet’s gaze upon me as favorable; I do not know what has happened to me and what I have done?” People informed him that the Prophet was displeased upon seeing your magnificent building. He returned to the Ansari household and demolished the entire building. One day the Prophet passed by there but did not see the building, so he inquired about it. The people related the whole incident, and he said: إِنَّ كُلَّ بِنَاءٍ يُبْنَى وَبَالٌ عَلَى صَاحِبِهِ يَوْمَ الْقِيَامَةِ إِلَّا مِقْدَارَهُ الَّذِي يَلْزَمُهُ الْإِنْسَانُ Every building will become a burden for its owner on the Day of Resurrection, except to the extent that a person needs it. [Jami‘ al-Bayan, under the same verse]. From this narration and other similar reports, the attitude of Islam becomes completely clear that it opposes such buildings which are manifestations of tyranny, distraction, extravagance, and wastefulness, and it does not permit Muslims at all to build lofty buildings like the arrogant and God-unaware people, especially in a society where the number of poor and needy people is greater. However, it is interesting that to achieve this objective, the Prophet did not resort to force nor did he order the demolition of the building; rather, through a subtle moral response, he expressed disregard and disapproval, thereby making his point clear. After this, another criticism of the people of ‘Ād is mentioned, that they used to display cruelty during conflicts. It is stated: وَإِذَا بَطَشْتُم بَطَشْتُمْ جَبَّارِينَ And when you punish, you exceed the limits and act like tyrants and oppressors. It is possible that a person may commit an act deserving of punishment, but the intention can never be to exceed justice and fairness; to inflict severe and harsh penalties for minor offenses, to shed blood in anger, and to chase after people with a sword, because that is the way of the oppressive, tyrannical, and rebellious people of the time. Raghib in “Mufradat” says that “Batsh” (with the pattern “Naqsh”) means to obtain something by power and force. Indeed, Prophet Hud (peace be upon him) is reprimanding these people for three reasons: First, for the signs they built on elevated places out of pride and ostentation to show off to others. Second, for those buildings they made beautiful and strong like the palaces of tyrant rulers, indicating their long-standing ambitions, while they had forgotten that the world is a passage, not an eternal abode. Third, for exceeding limits when punishing others. The common factor in these three matters is the sense of pride over others and the love for survival. This makes clear that the love of the world had so overwhelmed them that they forgot the manner of servitude and became so engrossed in worldly things that they reached the extent of claiming divinity. These facts again confirm the truth that: حب الدنيا رأس كل خطيئة The love of the world is the root of every sin. [Tafsir Fakhr al-Razi under the same verse]. After these three criticisms, they are once again called to piety: فَاتَّقُوا اللهَ وَأَطِيعُونِ So fear Allah and obey me. Now we have reached the third part of Prophet Hud’s statement, in which the blessings bestowed upon the servants of God are mentioned in order to awaken their sense of gratitude so that they may return to God. Both conciseness and elaboration are employed in a manner that makes the discussion deeply engaging. First, addressing them, He says: وَاتَّقُوا الَّذِي أَمَدَّكُم بِمَا تَعْلَمُونَ Fear the One who has supported you with what you know, and He has always provided you with those blessings. [“Amdakum” is derived from the root “amdad” meaning continuous and organized provision. Because Allah grants His blessings to His servants continuously and under a particular system, the term "amd" (support) is used here.] Then, after this brief statement, its explanation and details are provided. He has supported you with livestock and (worthy and honorable) offspring (أمدكم بالأنعام والبنين). God has granted you material capital; in that era, an important part of that capital were animals and livestock. On the other hand, He has given you sufficient manpower to protect and nurture that capital. This expression is repeated many times in the Qur’an: whenever material blessings are enumerated, first “wealth” is mentioned followed by “manpower” that protects and nurtures that wealth. This appears to be a natural sequence, not because wealth is more important. In Surah Bani Isra’il, verse 6, it is said: وَأَمْدَدْنَاكُم بِأَمْوَالٍ وَبَنِينَ و…Ja‘alnā kum aksara nafirā We have supported you through wealth and offspring and made your numbers great. Then He says: And granted you lush, fresh gardens and flowing springs (وَجَنَّاتٍ وَعُیُونٍ). Therefore, We have made you self-sufficient and free from need in terms of manpower, agriculture, horticulture, animal husbandry, and means of transportation, so that you do not feel any deficiency or distress in your life. But why is it that you have forgotten the Lord who bestowed such great blessings upon you and do not recognize Him whose table of favors you benefit from day and night? Then, upon reaching the final stage of His address, He warns them and instills fear of divine punishment, saying: If you deny the favor, indeed I fear for you the punishment of a great Day (إِنِّی اَخَافُ عَلَیْکُمْ عَذَابَ یَوْمٍ عَظِیمٍ). The day when you will all witness with your own eyes the consequences of injustice and oppression, pride and arrogance, lust and desires, and estrangement from the Lord. Generally, in the Holy Quran, the term "Yawm al-‘Azeem" (Great Day) refers to the Day of Resurrection, which is magnificent in every respect; however, at times in the Quranic verses, it also refers to those severe and terrifying days that befell previous nations, as is the case in this same Surah in the story of Prophet Shu‘ayb (peace be upon him), when the Lord of the worlds inflicted a painful punishment upon the people of Shu‘ayb because of their rebellion against the truth (when lightning struck them from a cloud). After this event, that day was mentioned by the name "Yawm al-‘Azeem." فاخذ ھم عذاب یوم الظلةانہ کان عذاب یوم عظیم (Ash-Shu‘arā’: 189) Accordingly, in the present verses under consideration, it is possible that the phrase "Yawm al-‘Azeem" refers to that day when the rebellious and proud people of ‘Ād were afflicted by a devastating and painful storm as their punishment, and this is confirmed by a few verses that follow. It is also possible that it refers to the punishment of the Day of Resurrection or to both days’ punishments, since both days hold great significance in history.

See ayat 140 for tafseer.

See ayat 140 for tafseer.

See ayat 140 for tafseer.

See ayat 140 for tafseer.

In the preceding verses, we observed the reasoned discourse of the merciful Prophet with his rebellious people. In these verses, the irrational and distressing responses of that people are presented. The Qur’an states that they declared: there is no difference for us whether you admonish us or not, it makes no impact upon us whatsoever: “قَالُوا سَوَاءٌ عَلَیْنَا أَوَعَظْتَ أَمْ لَمْ تَكُنْ مِنَ الْوَاعِظِینَ”. They further argued that the objections raised against them were baseless, asserting: “إِنْ هَذَا إِلَّا خُلُقُ الْأَوَّلِینَ” — this is nothing but the customary practice of the people of old. Finally, they declared with certainty: “وَمَا نَحْنُ بِمُعَذَّبِینَ” — we shall never be subjected to punishment, neither in this world nor in any other. The term “خُلُق” (with the vowel u on khāʾ and lām) denotes habit, custom, or moral disposition. In this context, it refers to their established practices, such as idolatry, the construction of magnificent structures for ostentation, pride in elevated dwellings, and severity in punishment. Essentially, they argued that their conduct was not novel but rather followed the precedent of earlier generations, and therefore could not be considered objectionable. Some exegetes have interpreted the term to mean falsehood or fabrication, implying that the Prophet’s statements about God and the Hereafter were merely repetitions of earlier assertions devoid of truth; however, this interpretation corresponds to an alternative reading and is not the predominant one. The Qur’an then describes the consequence of their denial: “فَكَذَّبُوهُ فَأَهْلَكْنَاهُمْ” — they rejected him, so We destroyed them. As in the narratives of Nūḥ (ʿalayhi al‑salām), Ibrāhīm (ʿalayhi al‑salām), and Mūsā (ʿalayhi al‑salām), the account concludes with two instructive and reflective statements: “إِنَّ فِی ذَلِكَ لَآیَةً وَمَا كَانَ أَكْثَرُهُمْ مُؤْمِنِینَ” — in this there is indeed a sign, yet most of them did not believe. Finally, it is stated: “وَإِنَّ رَبَّكَ لَهُوَ الْعَزِیزُ الرَّحِیمُ” — your Lord is surely Mighty and Merciful. He grants ample respite, provides opportunities, and presents clear arguments for the misguided; yet, when the time for punishment arrives, He seizes with a power from which there is no escape.

See ayat 152 for tafseer.

See ayat 152 for tafseer.

See ayat 152 for tafseer.

See ayat 152 for tafseer.

See ayat 152 for tafseer.

See ayat 152 for tafseer.

See ayat 152 for tafseer.

See ayat 152 for tafseer.

See ayat 152 for tafseer.

See ayat 152 for tafseer.

See ayat 152 for tafseer.

This section represents the fifth narrative in the series of prophetic accounts presented in this sūrah, and it concerns the people of Thamūd and their prophet Ṣāliḥ (ʿalayhi al‑salām). They inhabited the region of Wādī al‑Qurā, situated between Madinah and Syria. Although they lived in prosperity and comfort, their rebellion led to their complete eradication from the face of the earth, leaving virtually no trace behind. The structure of this account closely parallels the earlier narratives of the people of ʿĀd and the people of Nūḥ, indicating a recurring historical pattern. The Qur’an introduces the account by stating: “كَذَّبَتْ ثَمُودُ الْمُرْسَلِينَ”. The denial of their own prophet, Ṣāliḥ (ʿalayhi al‑salām), is treated as equivalent to denying all messengers, since the دعوت of all prophets is essentially unified. Elaborating upon this statement, it continues: “إِذْ قَالَ لَهُمْ أَخُوهُمْ صَالِحٌ أَلَا تَتَّقُونَ” — when their brother Ṣāliḥ said to them: will you not be mindful (of God)? The designation “أَخُوهُمْ” reflects his closeness and sincerity; he did not seek superiority or material advantage, but acted out of genuine concern. Like other prophets, Ṣāliḥ (ʿalayhi al‑salām) began his دعوت with an appeal to تقویٰ and a sense of responsibility. He declared: “إِنِّي لَكُمْ رَسُولٌ أَمِينٌ” — I am a trustworthy messenger to you. His past life served as evidence of his truthfulness. He then emphasized obedience and piety: “فَاتَّقُوا اللَّهَ وَأَطِيعُونِ”, and clarified that he sought no worldly compensation: “وَمَا أَسْأَلُكُمْ عَلَيْهِ مِنْ أَجْرٍ إِنْ أَجْرِيَ إِلَّا عَلَى رَبِّ الْعَالَمِينَ”. Having established his message, Ṣāliḥ (ʿalayhi al‑salām) directed attention to aspects of his people’s lifestyle that warranted critique. He asked: “أَتُتْرَكُونَ فِيمَا هَاهُنَا آمِنِينَ” — do you imagine that you will be left in security here indefinitely? This rhetorical question challenges their assumption of permanence and security in worldly prosperity. He elaborated: “فِي جَنَّاتٍ وَعُيُونٍ وَزُرُوعٍ وَنَخْلٍ طَلْعُهَا هَضِيمٌ”. They lived among gardens, springs, cultivated lands, and flourishing date palms. The expression “طَلْعُهَا هَضِيمٌ” may refer either to densely packed clusters of fruit or to fruit that is tender, ripe, and of fine quality. These descriptions highlight the abundance and refinement of their material blessings. Furthermore, he pointed out their architectural achievements: “وَتَنْحِتُونَ مِنَ الْجِبَالِ بُيُوتًا فَارِهِينَ” — you carve dwellings out of mountains with exuberance and pride. The term “فَارِهِينَ” suggests a state of arrogance, indulgence, and pleasure rooted in heedlessness. This reflects a life of luxury combined with moral negligence. When compared with the account of the people of ʿĀd, a contrast emerges: while ʿĀd were characterized by pride and self‑display, Thamūd were marked by indulgence in material comfort and excess. Despite these differences, both shared a fundamental error: rejection of prophetic guidance. Ṣāliḥ (ʿalayhi al‑salām) then concluded with a warning: “فَاتَّقُوا اللَّهَ وَأَطِيعُونِ”. He further cautioned: “وَلَا تُطِيعُوا أَمْرَ الْمُسْرِفِينَ الَّذِينَ يُفْسِدُونَ فِي الْأَرْضِ وَلَا يُصْلِحُونَ”. The “مُسْرِفِينَ” are those who exceed proper limits; their excess leads to فساد rather than reform. Thus, the دعوت calls for ethical restraint, recognition of Divine authority, and rejection of corrupt leadership. Overall, this passage underscores a recurring pattern: material prosperity combined with moral فساد leads to denial of truth and eventual destruction. The account serves as both instruction and admonition, warning against the consequences of arrogance, excess, and disregard for Divine guidance.

We know that extravagance (isrāf) means transgressing the limits set by the laws of creation and legislation, and it is equally well known that in any proper system, any kind of transgression of limits leads to corruption and disorder. In other words, extravagance is the source of corruption, and the consequence of extravagance is corruption. However, attention should also be paid to the fact that extravagance has a broad meaning and significance. Sometimes it occurs in simple and general matters of life such as eating and drinking (as mentioned in Surah Al-A'raf, verse 31). Sometimes it happens in the context of taking excessive retaliation or revenge (as in Surah Bani Isra'il, verse 33). Sometimes it relates to excessive spending (as in Surah Al-Furqan, verse 67). Sometimes the word is used in the sense of making decisions based on falsehood and lying (as "musrif" and "kadhb" are mentioned together in Surah Al-Mu’min, verse 28). Sometimes it occurs in beliefs that reach the level of doubt and suspicion (as "musrif" and "murtab" together appear in Surah Al-Mu’min, verse 34). Sometimes it means superiority over others, arrogance, and colonization, as is said about Pharaoh in Surah Ad-Dukhan, verse 31: اِنَّهُ كَانَ عَالِياً مِنَ الْمُسْرِفِينَ He was arrogant and extravagant. And sometimes it also refers to all kinds of sins (as in Surah Az-Zumar, verse 53): قُلْ عِبَادِيَ ٱلَّذِينَ أَسْرَفُوا عَلَىٰ أَنفُسِهِمْ لَا تَقْنَطُواْ مِن رَّحْمَةِ ٱللَّهِ إِنَّ ٱللَّهَ يَغْفِرُ ٱلذُّنُوبَ جَمِيعًا Say, "O My servants who have transgressed against themselves [by sinning], do not despair of the mercy of Allah. Indeed, Allah forgives all sins." In light of the above explanations, the mutual connection between extravagance and corruption becomes clear. According to the statement of Allama Tabatabai in the Tafseer "Al-Mizan," this universe is a collection of order and rectitude, and even if occasionally some of its components appear contradictory, to a great extent there is harmony and coordination. The system of the universe moves towards righteous goals, and every single part has a designated path on which it proceeds. Now, if any part deviates from its orbit and embarks on the path of corruption, a conflict begins between that part and other components of the universe. If the others succeed in bringing it back to its own path, it is better; otherwise, they destroy it so that this system may continue its journey correctly. Man is also a part of this realm of existence and is not exempt from this general law. If he moves on his orbit based on natural foundations and remains in harmony with the system of existence, he reaches the destined goal of happiness. But if he crosses his limit and embarks on the path of "fasād fī al-arḍ" (corruption on earth), first, God the Almighty warns him and admonishes him through severe and painful events. Thus, in Surah Ar-Rum, verse 41, it is stated: ظَهَرَ ٱلْفَسَادُ فِى ٱلْبَرِّ وَٱلْبَحْرِ بِمَا كَسَبَتْ أَيْدِى ٱلنَّاسِ لِيُذِيقَهُمْ بَعْضَ ٱلَّذِى عَمِلُوا لَعَلَّهُمْ يَرْجِعُونَ Corruption has appeared on land and sea because of [the evil] that the hands of people have earned so He may let them taste part of what they have done that perhaps they will return [to righteousness]. But if this warning also proves ineffective and corruption becomes deeply rooted in their very nature, then God the Almighty removes them from the earth by a decisive punishment. [Al-Mizan, vol. 15, p. 333] From this, it is clear why the Almighty God mentions "extravagance" alongside "corruption on earth" and the lack of reform.

See ayat 159 for tafseer.

See ayat 159 for tafseer.

See ayat 159 for tafseer.

See ayat 159 for tafseer.

See ayat 159 for tafseer.

See ayat 159 for tafseer.

In the preceding verses, the logical and sincere discourse of Ṣāliḥ (ʿalayhi al‑salām) with his misguided people has been presented. Here, the response of that community is described. They declared: “قَالُوا إِنَّمَا أَنْتَ مِنَ الْمُسَحَّرِینَ” — you are merely one who has been bewitched and deprived of reason, and therefore you speak irrationally. They further stated: “مَا أَنْتَ إِلَّا بَشَرٌ مِثْلُنَا” — you are nothing but a human being like ourselves, and reason does not permit us to follow someone like us. They then demanded: “فَأْتِ بِآیَةٍ إِنْ کُنْتَ مِنَ الصَّادِقِینَ” — bring a sign if you are truthful. The term “مُسَحَّرِینَ”, derived from the root “سحر”, refers to one who is under the influence of magic. According to their belief, magicians could deprive a person of reason through sorcery. This accusation was not unique to Ṣāliḥ (ʿalayhi al‑salām); similar accusations were directed against other prophets, including the Prophet of Islam, as indicated in “إِنْ تَتَّبِعُونَ إِلَّا رَجُلًا مَسْحُورًا” (al‑Furqān 8). For such people, a rational individual was one who conformed to prevailing social norms, even if corrupt, whereas a reformer who challenged false beliefs and systems was deemed irrational or bewitched. In any case, their demand for a miracle was not motivated by a genuine search for truth, but rather by obstinacy and pretext. In response, and by Divine command, Ṣāliḥ (ʿalayhi al‑salām) said: “قَالَ هَذِهِ نَاقَةٌ لَهَا شِرْبٌ وَلَکُمْ شِرْبُ یَوْمٍ مَعْلُومٍ” — this is a she‑camel; it has a designated share of water, and you have your share on an appointed day. The word “ناقَة” denotes a she‑camel. The Qur’an mentions this miraculous animal without elaborating upon all of its characteristics, although it is clear that it was not ordinary. Some exegetes state that it emerged from the mountain in a miraculous manner. Among its distinctive features was that it would consume the water of the settlement for a full day, as indicated in this verse and also in al‑Qamar 28. Other details are found in various narrations. Ṣāliḥ (ʿalayhi al‑salām) then warned them not to harm it: “وَلَا تَمَسُّوهَا بِسُوءٍ فَیَأْخُذَكُمْ عَذَابُ یَوْمٍ عَظِیمٍ” — do not harm her, lest a great punishment seize you. However, this rebellious community, concerned that awareness might spread and threaten their interests, conspired to eliminate the camel. Ultimately, they attacked and killed it: “فَعَقَرُوهَا فَأَصْبَحُوا نَادِمِینَ”. The verb “عَقَرُوا” derives from “عقر”, which can denote cutting or crippling an animal, leading to its death. Once the people demonstrated their persistent defiance, Divine decree was enacted: “فَأَخَذَهُمُ الْعَذَابُ” — the punishment seized them. As indicated elsewhere (al‑Aʿrāf 78; Hūd 67), they were struck by a severe earthquake, followed by a devastating blast, which destroyed them entirely. The account concludes with the familiar expression found in other prophetic narratives: “إِنَّ فِی ذَلِكَ لَآیَةً وَمَا کَانَ أَکْثَرُهُمْ مُؤْمِنِینَ”. In this story there is indeed a sign, yet most of them did not believe. It then states: “وَإِنَّ رَبَّکَ لَهُوَ الْعَزِیزُ الرَّحِیمُ”. Your Lord is mighty and merciful. Despite granting respite, providing clear arguments, and establishing proof, when the time for punishment arrives, His grasp is decisive and inescapable.

See ayat 166 for tafseer.

See ayat 166 for tafseer.

See ayat 166 for tafseer.

See ayat 166 for tafseer.

See ayat 166 for tafseer.

See ayat 166 for tafseer.

The sixth prophet, whose own life and that of his misguided people is partially described in this surah, is Prophet Lut (peace be upon him). Although Prophet Lut (peace be upon him) was a contemporary of Prophet Ibrahim (peace be upon him), his story is mentioned after the account of Prophet Ibrahim (peace be upon him) because the Qur’an is not a book of history that narrates events in chronological order; rather, it is concerned with educational and moral lessons that suit different contexts. The life of Prophet Lut and the story of his people align more closely with the accounts of the prophets mentioned earlier. Firstly, it is stated: The people of Lut rejected the messengers (Kadhdhabat qawmul Lutin al-mursaleen). As previously explained, the reason for using the plural form "mursaleen" (messengers) is because the message of the prophets (peace be upon them) is one and the same. Therefore, the rejection of any single prophet counts as rejecting all, or it may indicate that they did not believe in any prophet who came before. Then, reference is made to the invitation of Prophet Lut (peace be upon him), showing that his call was similar to that of previous prophets. Thus it is said: When their brother Lut said to them, "Do you not fear (God)?" (Ith Qāla Lahum Akhuhum Lūṭun Alā Tataqūn). The style of his speech and profound love and sympathy indicate that he spoke to them like a brother. Then it is said: I am indeed a trustworthy messenger to you (Inni Lakum Rasūlun Amīn). Have you ever seen any betrayal in me? I will surely be trustworthy in conveying the divine revelation and the message of your Lord. “Now that the situation is such, you should fear God, be conscious of Him, and obey me” because I am the guide to the path of salvation (Fa-ittaqū Allāha wa-aṭīʿūn). Do not think that this divine invitation is a pastime for me or that I have any material motive; no, I do not ask you for any reward even in the slightest—my reward is only with the Lord of all the worlds (Wa-mā as’alukum ʿalayhi min ajrin in ajrī illā ʿalā rabbil ʿālamīn). Then he mentions their indecent deeds and some aspects of their moral deviation. Since their greatest deviation was sexual immorality and homosexuality, special emphasis is placed on this, stating: Do you approach males among the worlds (Atā-tūna adh-dhik'rāna mina al-ʿālamīn)? That is, despite the fact that the Lord of the worlds has created so many females for you, through whom you can engage in proper marriage and live a pure, peaceful, and satisfying life, you have abandoned this pure and natural blessing of God and polluted yourselves with such vile and shameful acts. One interpretation of this verse is that "mina al-ʿālamīn" (among the worlds) refers specifically to this people, meaning that you alone among all the worlds have adopted this corrupt behavior. This is consistent with some historical sources which state that the people of Lut were the first to widely practice homosexuality. [The reason for the deviation of this shameless people is a story present in history, which we have already mentioned in Tafseer Namuna, Volume 9, under Surah Hud, verse 81.] However, the subsequent verse favors the first interpretation more. Then it is said: You leave what your Lord has created for you of your wives (Wa tadharūna mā khalaqa lakum rabbukum min azwājikum). You are indeed a transgressing people (Bal antum qawmun ʿādūn). Certainly, no natural spiritual or physical necessity drove you to this corruption; rather, it is your rebellion that has defiled you with the filth of this shameful act. Your action is like that of someone who abandons fragrant fruits and nutritious, wholesome food and instead consumes poisonous and deadly substances. This is not a natural desire but rebellion.

The Qur’an, in multiple passages, refers to the conduct of the people of Lūṭ (ʿalayhi al‑salām) and highlights their reprehensible action through varied expressions. Each of these expressions emphasizes a distinct dimension of that immoral behavior, thereby presenting a comprehensive moral and conceptual evaluation of it. For instance, in Sūrat al‑Aʿrāf (8:81), Lūṭ (ʿalayhi al‑salām) addresses them with the statement “بَلْ أَنْتُمْ قَوْمٌ مُسْرِفُونَ”, describing them as a people given to excess (isrāf). This characterization indicates that their conduct represents تجاوز of the natural limits established within the system of creation. The term isrāf here signifies not merely excess, but deviation beyond the bounds ordained by Divine order. In Sūrat al‑Anbiyāʾ (21:84), their actions are described as “الْخَبَائِث”, indicating deeds that are inherently repugnant to sound human nature. The term khabāʾith refers to acts that evoke instinctive aversion in the human disposition. By framing their conduct in this way, the Qur’an underscores its مخالفت to innate moral sensibility. In Sūrat al‑Shuʿarāʾ, the expression “بَلْ أَنْتُمْ قَوْمٌ عَادُونَ” is employed, portraying them as transgressors (ʿādūn). This further reinforces the idea of تجاوز beyond moral and existential boundaries. Similarly, in Sūrat al‑Naml (27:55), the description “بَلْ أَنْتُمْ قَوْمٌ تَجْهَلُونَ” identifies them as a people characterized by ignorance (jahl), not merely in an intellectual sense, but in terms of a lack of awareness of the consequences and implications of their actions for both individual and collective existence. Furthermore, in Sūrat al‑ʿAnkabūt (29:29), the Qur’an states: “إِنَّكُمْ لَتَأْتُونَ الرِّجَالَ وَتَقْطَعُونَ السَّبِيلَ”. This highlights another dimension of their behavior. The phrase “تَقْطَعُونَ السَّبِيلَ” has been interpreted by some exegetes as indicating not only moral deviation but also broader social disruption, including acts such as obstructing social order or even engaging in banditry. More fundamentally, it signifies disruption of the natural continuity of human life and social functioning. Taken together, these terms—isrāf, khabīth, ʿudwān, jahl, and qaṭʿ al‑sabīl—present a multifaceted moral framework. Isrāf points to violation of natural and divinely established limits; khabīth underscores the intrinsic moral repulsiveness of the act; fisq (implied in related passages) denotes خروج from obedience to God and the erosion of moral integrity; jahl reflects ignorance of the serious consequences of such behavior; and “تَقْطَعُونَ السَّبِيلَ” emphasizes its destructive impact on the continuity and order of human life. Thus, the Qur’anic discourse does not confine itself to a single descriptive term but employs multiple conceptual categories to illuminate the various aspects of this conduct—ethical, natural, social, and existential—thereby constructing a comprehensive critique grounded in both rational and moral considerations.

Although we have already provided a detailed discussion on the harms and negative consequences of this shameful act in Tafsīr Namūnah, vol. 5, under the explanation of verses 81–83 of Sūrat Hūd, a few additional points may be mentioned here due to the importance of the subject. A hadith of the Prophet (ṣallā Allāh ʿalayhi wa-ālihi wa-sallam) states: “لا یجد ریح الجنة من یفعل بہ ذلک، وهو المخنث” The one upon whom this act is committed will not perceive the fragrance of Paradise (Biḥār al‑Anwār, new ed., vol. 79, pp. 64, 67). In a statement attributed to ʿAlī (ʿalayhi al‑salām), this act is described as reaching the level of disbelief (Biḥār al‑Anwār, new ed., vol. 79, pp. 64, 67). Imām ʿAlī al‑Riḍā (ʿalayhi al‑salām), explaining the rationale behind its prohibition, stated: “علة تحریم الذکران للذکران والاناث للاناث لما رکب فی الاناث وما طبع علیہ الذکران، ولما فی اتیان الذکران الذکران والاناث للاناث من انقطاع النسل وفساد التدبیر وخراب الدنیا” The reason for prohibiting males with males and females with females lies in the natural constitution placed within each; such conduct contradicts this innate disposition and leads to deviation in both body and psyche. Moreover, such practices result in the قطعِ نسل، فسادِ تدبیر، and eventual destruction of worldly order (Biḥār al‑Anwār, new ed., vol. 79, pp. 64, 67). Within Islamic law, this act is regarded as extremely grave, and severe punishments are prescribed. Even lesser manifestations of such conduct are met with strict penalties. The Prophet (ṣallā Allāh ʿalayhi wa-ālihi wa-sallam) is reported to have said: “من قبّل غلامًا من شهوة الجمہ الله یوم القیامة بلجام من نار” Whoever kisses a boy with desire, God will place a bridle of fire in his mouth on the Day of Resurrection (Biḥār al‑Anwār, vol. 79, p. 72). For acts falling below the gravest form, punishments such as lashes—ranging from thirty to ninety‑nine—are mentioned. In summary, it is evident that sexual deviation is regarded as one of the most dangerous forms of moral corruption. If it spreads within society, it casts its harmful effects over all ethical dimensions, distorts human temperament and emotions, and directs them toward misguidance. For further elaboration, see Tafsīr Namūnah, vol. 5, under Sūrat Hūd.

See ayat 175 for tafseer.

See ayat 175 for tafseer.

See ayat 175 for tafseer.

See ayat 175 for tafseer.

See ayat 175 for tafseer.

See ayat 175 for tafseer.

See ayat 175 for tafseer.

See ayat 175 for tafseer.

In these verses, the reaction of the people of Lūṭ (ʿalayhi al‑salām) is described after his exhortations. Instead of sincerely accepting the guidance of this Divine messenger and seeking to free themselves from their moral corruption, they persisted in opposition. They declared: “قَالُوا لَئِنْ لَمْ تَنْتَهِ یَا لُوطُ لَنَكُونَنَّ مِنَ الْمُخْرَجِینَ” — if you do not desist, O Lūṭ, you will surely be among those who are expelled. This statement reflects not merely rejection but hostility toward moral reform. They regarded his admonitions as a disturbance to their social comfort, and therefore threatened exile. In another passage, their intention is described even more explicitly: “أَخْرِجُوهُمْ مِنْ قَرْیَتِكُمْ إِنَّهُمْ أُنَاسٌ یَتَطَهَّرُونَ” Expel them from your town, for they are people who seek purity. This expression reveals the extent of their moral inversion: purity and chastity had become grounds for condemnation, while immorality had become a source of pride. Such a condition indicates a society in advanced moral decline, where values are inverted and corruption is normalized. Despite these threats, Lūṭ (ʿalayhi al‑salām) remained steadfast and declared: “إِنِّی لِعَمَلِكُمْ مِنَ الْقَالِینَ” — I am indeed among those who detest your actions. Here, the emphasis is on rejection of their deeds rather than personal hostility toward individuals. His opposition is directed at the immoral conduct itself, not at their personhood; thus, the possibility of transformation remains open if the conduct is abandoned. The term “القالین” denotes a deep and intrinsic aversion that penetrates the inner self, indicating the profound moral seriousness with which he regarded their actions. Since the دعوت yielded no effect and their society remained entrenched in corruption, the final phase of responsibility was reached. Lūṭ (ʿalayhi al‑salām) turned toward God in supplication: “رَبِّ نَجِّنِی وَأَهْلِی مِمَّا یَعْمَلُونَ” — my Lord, deliver me and my family from what they do. The term “أهلی” here does not merely signify kinship, but those who share his faith. This is confirmed by the outcome described in the Qur’an: “فَنَجَّیْنَاهُ وَأَهْلَهُ أَجْمَعِینَ إِلَّا عَجُوزًا فِی الْغَابِرِینَ” All were saved except an elderly woman who remained behind. This individual, identified as his wife, shared the beliefs of the corrupt society and thus was included among those who perished. This distinction underscores that salvation is based on faith, not lineage. Thereafter, Divine punishment descended: “ثُمَّ دَمَّرْنَا الْآخَرِینَ وَأَمْطَرْنَا عَلَیْهِمْ مَطَرًا” The reference to “rain” signifies a devastating shower of stones, culminating in total destruction. Unlike ordinary rain, which brings life, this “مطر” represents complete annihilation. Related passages indicate that the cities were first overturned and then subjected to this destructive downpour. The narrative concludes with the familiar Qur’ānic reflection: “إِنَّ فِی ذَلِكَ لَآیَةً وَمَا كَانَ أَكْثَرُهُمْ مُؤْمِنِینَ” In this there is indeed a sign, yet most of them did not believe. This emphasizes that even clear historical events and evident signs do not necessarily lead to ایمان when moral obstinacy prevails. Finally, the statement: “وَإِنَّ رَبَّكَ لَهُوَ الْعَزِیزُ الرَّحِیمُ” encapsulates the theological conclusion. God is “العزیز”, possessing irresistible power to bring about destruction when corruption reaches its extreme, and “الرحیم”, granting prolonged respite, presenting guidance, and saving even a small group of believers amidst a corrupt society. Thus, the account illustrates a consistent pattern: rejection of moral reform, inversion of values, persistence in wrongdoing, and eventual destruction—balanced by Divine mercy toward those who maintain faith and integrity.

See ayat 184 for tafseer.

See ayat 184 for tafseer.

See ayat 184 for tafseer.

See ayat 184 for tafseer.

See ayat 184 for tafseer.

See ayat 184 for tafseer.

See ayat 184 for tafseer.

See ayat 184 for tafseer.

This section presents the seventh and final prophetic account in this sūrah, namely the narrative of Shuʿayb (ʿalayhi al‑salām) and his rebellious people. This prophet was sent to the communities of Madyan and Aykah, regions located along the trade routes between the Ḥijāz and Syria. The people of Aykah lived in a fertile area characterized by abundant vegetation and water, which contributed to their prosperity but also led them toward غرور and غفلت. The Qur’an introduces their condition by stating: “كَذَّبَ أَصْحَابُ الْأَيْكَةِ الْمُرْسَلِينَ” — the people of Aykah denied the messengers. As with other communities, their denial of their own prophet, Shuʿayb (ʿalayhi al‑salām), is equated with rejection of all messengers, due to the unity of their دعوت. It is then said: “إِذْ قَالَ لَهُمْ شُعَيْبٌ أَلَا تَتَّقُونَ” — when Shuʿayb said to them: will you not adopt تقویٰ? Like other prophets, his call begins with a foundation of piety and moral responsibility. He then declared: “إِنِّي لَكُمْ رَسُولٌ أَمِينٌ” — I am a trustworthy messenger, emphasizing his credibility and moral integrity. This is followed by the familiar prophetic statement: “فَاتَّقُوا اللَّهَ وَأَطِيعُونِ” and “وَمَا أَسْأَلُكُمْ عَلَيْهِ مِنْ أَجْرٍ” — he sought no material compensation, indicating that his mission was purely spiritual. After presenting the general دعوت, Shuʿayb (ʿalayhi al‑salām) addressed the specific moral and social فساد prevalent in his community. Unlike some earlier peoples whose corruption was primarily doctrinal, the central flaw of this society was economic injustice. Living along major trade routes, they exploited travelers and vulnerable populations through dishonest commercial practices. He therefore issued a series of directives: - “أَوْفُوا الْكَيْلَ” — give full measure. - “وَلَا تَكُونُوا مِنَ الْمُخْسِرِينَ” — do not diminish the rights of others. - “وَزِنُوا بِالْقِسْطَاسِ الْمُسْتَقِيمِ” — weigh with a just balance. - “وَلَا تَبْخَسُوا النَّاسَ أَشْيَاءَهُمْ” — do not deprive people of their due. - “وَلَا تَعْثَوْا فِي الْأَرْضِ مُفْسِدِينَ” — do not spread corruption in the land. These commands collectively address different forms of economic ظلم: - Manipulation of weights and measures (quantitative injustice) - Fraud, deceit, and misrepresentation (qualitative injustice) - Exploitation of need and vulnerability - Systemic economic imbalance leading to social فساد The distinction between measuring and weighing is deliberate, covering all forms of trade. Similarly, “بَخْس” conveys a broader meaning of unjust reduction of rights, including cheating, deception, and unfair dealings. The final command — “وَلَا تَعْثَوْا فِي الْأَرْضِ مُفْسِدِينَ” — serves as a comprehensive principle. It indicates that economic injustice is not merely a private moral failure but contributes to widespread social disorder and instability. Thus, economic فساد is directly linked to the collapse of social order. Shuʿayb (ʿalayhi al‑salām) concludes his address by returning to a universal principle: “وَاتَّقُوا الَّذِي خَلَقَكُمْ وَالْجِبِلَّةَ الْأَوَّلِينَ” — be mindful of the One who created you and the earlier generations. This statement serves as a reminder of historical continuity and accountability. Human beings are not the first nor the last; previous nations have risen and fallen. Their fate should serve as a lesson. The term “الْجِبِلَّة” also may allude to human فطرت, implying that justice and fairness are intrinsic to human nature, and that the prophet’s message is a restoration of that original moral disposition. Despite this structured, rational, and ethically grounded message, the response of the people remained negative, as will be described in the subsequent verses. Overall, this narrative highlights a recurring theme: prosperity without moral restraint leads to injustice, and persistent injustice ultimately leads to societal collapse.

See ayat 191 for tafseer.

See ayat 191 for tafseer.

See ayat 191 for tafseer.

See ayat 191 for tafseer.

See ayat 191 for tafseer.

See ayat 191 for tafseer.

In these verses, the reaction of the people of Shuʿayb (ʿalayhi al‑salām) is described after they found themselves incapable of responding to his logical and well‑grounded arguments. Instead of addressing his reasoning, they resorted to accusations and hostility in order to justify their استمرار in wrongdoing. They first applied the familiar accusation historically directed at the prophets, declaring: “إِنَّمَا أَنْتَ مِنَ الْمُسَحَّرِينَ” — you are one who has been bewitched. The term “مسحر” denotes a person whose عقل has supposedly been affected by repeated acts of sorcery. Thus, they dismissed his message as irrational and invalid. They further argued: “وَمَا أَنْتَ إِلَّا بَشَرٌ مِثْلُنَا” — you are merely a human like ourselves. In their reasoning, this negated any claim to leadership or authority, as they believed no individual among them could possess a higher مقام warranting obedience. They continued: “وَإِنْ نَظُنُّكَ لَمِنَ الْكَاذِبِينَ” — we consider you to be among the liars. Their statements reveal internal contradiction: at times they labeled him mad, and at others a deliberate deceiver seeking superiority. Their defiance culminated in a bold challenge: “فَأَسْقِطْ عَلَيْنَا كِسَفًا مِنَ السَّمَاءِ إِنْ كُنْتَ مِنَ الصَّادِقِينَ” — if you are truthful, then cause fragments from the sky to fall upon us. The word “كِسَفًا” (plural of “كسفة”) signifies pieces or fragments, here referring to stones descending from the sky. This demand reflects the peak of their audacity and denial. In response, Shuʿayb (ʿalayhi al‑salām) did not engage in polemics but replied succinctly: “رَبِّي أَعْلَمُ بِمَا تَعْمَلُونَ” — my Lord knows best what you do. This indicates that the infliction of punishment is not within prophetic authority; it lies solely within Divine will. The prophet’s role is to convey the message and establish proof, while the timing and nature of punishment are determined by God. When the people persisted in their rejection and fulfilled the conditions for punishment, the Divine decree was enacted: “فَكَذَّبُوهُ فَأَخَذَهُمْ عَذَابُ یَوْمِ الظُّلَّةِ إِنَّهُ كَانَ عَذَابَ یَوْمٍ عَظِیمٍ”. The phrase “عَذَابُ یَوْمِ الظُّلَّةِ” refers to the punishment of the day of overshadowing clouds. According to exegetical reports, extreme heat afflicted them for several days, after which a cloud appeared, drawing them out in expectation of relief. However, from this cloud came a devastating discharge, accompanied by a powerful blast and seismic disturbance that led to their destruction. This composite description aligns with other Qur’anic terms describing the same event, such as “رجفة” (earthquake) and “صیحة” (mighty cry), indicating different dimensions of a single catastrophic occurrence. The narrative concludes with the recurring Qur’anic reflection: “إِنَّ فِی ذَلِكَ لَآیَةً وَمَا كَانَ أَكْثَرُهُمْ مُؤْمِنِینَ”. In this event lies a clear sign, yet most of them did not believe. Despite repeated opportunities, guidance, and warnings, the majority remained entrenched in denial. Finally, it is affirmed: “وَإِنَّ رَبَّكَ لَهُوَ الْعَزِیزُ الرَّحِیمُ”. God is “العزیز”, in that His power is irresistible and His judgment decisive; He can bring complete destruction upon corrupt societies in an instant. At the same time, He is “الرحیم”, granting extended respite, providing guidance, and ensuring that even a small group of believers is saved from collective punishment. Thus, this episode reflects the established pattern throughout these narratives: denial in the face of truth, escalation of hostility, failure to reform, and ultimate destruction—balanced by Divine mercy toward those who remain faithful.

At the conclusion of the incidents of these seven great Prophets, which in fact are different links in a series of educational lessons, it is necessary to draw attention to this point that the stories of these very Prophets have also been narrated in the Qur’an and other Surahs, but not in the manner presented in this Surah, where the beginning is uniform and the ending is harmonized. These stories consist of five parts: the theme of their invitation is piety (تقویٰ), then their trustworthiness is described, followed by mention of not seeking any reward. Next, there is a friendly criticism of the lapses and mistakes prevalent in that era. Afterwards, the harsh reactions and very crude behavior of these misguided people are mentioned, and finally, the painful punishment revealed in due course is described. At the end of each of these seven stories, it is stated that it is a sign and lesson in a verse, along with mention of the majority of those misguided peoples having believed. Then, at the end of all these, the mention of God’s "Power" and "Mercy" is made. This harmony firstly indicates that the invitation of the Prophets (peace be upon them) reflected the concept of "Monotheism" (توحید), that all of them had a unified program whose beginning and end were harmonized. All the Prophets were teachers of the classes of human formation, although with the passage of time and the advancement of human society, the subjects of those classes changed, yet all their principles, foundations, and results were the same. Furthermore, these stories serve as reassurance and consolation not only for Islam and its early few believers but for the believers of every age, so that they do not fear the multitude of opponents and the majority of misguided peoples and may hold complete hope for the results of their efforts. Moreover, these stories provide a strong warning to the oppressors, tyrants, and misguided people of every era that they should never consider the Divine punishment far from themselves, for they can be afflicted at any moment by punishments in the forms of earthquakes, lightning, dreadful storms, volcanic mountains, fissures in the earth, floods, and rains. Today’s humans are as powerless before such punishments as the people of past times, because despite all industrial and technological advancements, the people of the present era remain helpless and powerless against such calamities. The sole purpose of the Qur’an narrating all these stories is that humans traverse the stages of growth and evolution, create light and illumination within their hearts and souls, control their rebellious desires, and confront oppression, tyranny, and all kinds of errors.

It is noteworthy that key portions of these prophetic narratives have also appeared in Sūrat Hūd and Sūrat al‑Aʿrāf. However, in those sūrahs, the discourse generally begins with the invitation to Divine unity and oneness, such as in the statement: “يَا قَوْمِ اعْبُدُوا اللَّهَ مَا لَكُمْ مِنْ إِلَٰهٍ غَيْرُهُ” — O my people, worship God, for you have no deity other than Him. In contrast, as has been observed in this sūrah, the invitation begins with “أَلَا تَتَّقُونَ” — a call to تقویٰ. Upon reflection, however, the outcome of both approaches is fundamentally the same. Unless an individual possesses at least the basic level of تقویٰ—namely, a disposition toward truth‑seeking and a sincere inclination toward recognizing truth—the call to توحید or any other form of guidance cannot exert its influence. Accordingly, at the beginning of Sūrat al‑Baqarah it is stated: “ذَٰلِكَ الْكِتَابُ لَا رَيْبَ فِيهِ هُدًى لِلْمُتَّقِينَ” — this is the Book in which there is no doubt, and it is a guidance for those who are mindful. It is evident that تقویٰ itself possesses multiple درجات, each level serving as the foundation for a higher one. Another distinction can also be observed between the themes of this sūrah and those of Sūrat al‑Aʿrāf and Sūrat Hūd. In those sūrahs, the primary emphasis lies on the struggle of the prophets against idol worship, with other issues treated as subsidiary. In contrast, the present sūrah places significant emphasis on ethical and social dimensions, including pride and arrogance, conceit and self‑exaltation, excess and desire, sexual deviation, economic exploitation, fraud, short‑measurement, and deception. This variation demonstrates that the repetition of such narratives in the Qur’an is purposeful. Each instance serves to highlight a particular aspect of guidance, indicating that every retelling is directed toward a distinct objective rather than constituting mere repetition.

3- It is also noteworthy that the nations mentioned at various points in this Surah had deviated from true monotheism and fell into the curse of polytheism and idolatry, which was a common denominator among all of them. Apart from this, they were also afflicted with specific moral and social evils. This is what distinguished them from each other: Some nations were immersed in arrogance (such as the people of Hud). Some nations were extravagant and indulgent (such as the people of Salih). Some nations were afflicted with sexual immorality (such as the people of Prophet Lut). Some were very materialistic and practiced deceit in their business (such as the people of Shuayb). Some nations took pride in their wealth (such as the people of Noah, peace be upon him). However, the punishment inflicted upon them was almost similar, as: Some were destroyed by thunderbolts and earthquakes (such as the nations of Shuayb, Salih, Lut, and Hud, peace be upon them). Some were wiped out by floods and deluges (such as the nation of Noah, peace be upon him). Indeed, the earth which was the cradle of their luxury and comfort became an affliction for them one day and erased them from existence, and what had guaranteed their life—fire and water—were prepared to execute their death. What a strange condition it is for a human being—that death is at the threshold of life, and life is in the shadow of death—yet he remains heedless and arrogant.

See ayat 197 for tafseer.

See ayat 197 for tafseer.

See ayat 197 for tafseer.

See ayat 197 for tafseer.

See ayat 197 for tafseer.

After presenting the narratives of seven previous prophets and highlighting the lessons of admonition embedded within their histories, the Qur’an returns to the central theme with which this sūrah began—namely, the greatness of the Qur’an and the truth of the Divine revelation. It is stated: “وَإِنَّهُ لَتَنْزِيلُ رَبِّ الْعَالَمِينَ” — this has been sent down from the Lord of the worlds. In essence, the accurate and precise narration of the histories of earlier prophets—free from myth, fabrication, or legendary embellishment, despite being conveyed within a cultural environment rich in storytelling—serves as clear evidence of Divine origin. Moreover, these detailed and authentic accounts are presented by one who had never been instructed by any human teacher. This, in itself, constitutes a sign that this Book is revealed from the Lord of the worlds and represents a dimension of the Qur’an’s miraculous character. Hence, it is further stated: “نَزَلَ بِهِ الرُّوحُ الْأَمِينُ” — the Trustworthy Spirit has brought it down. Were it not delivered by “الرُّوحُ الْأَمِينُ” from God, it could not possess such clarity, brilliance, and purity from baseless tales. It is noteworthy that the angel of revelation is described here by two titles: “رُوح” and “أَمِين”. “رُوح” signifies a source of life, while “أَمِين” denotes trustworthiness, a fundamental condition for guidance and transmission. Thus, it is stated that this revelation was conveyed “عَلَىٰ قَلْبِكَ لِتَكُونَ مِنَ الْمُنذِرِينَ” — upon your heart, so that you may be among the warners. The term “قلب” here signifies the pure spiritual consciousness of the Prophet, indicating that the Qur’an was received with full spiritual awareness and that his قلب is the locus of this Divine miracle. The purpose of this revelation is not merely to recount narratives or entertain audiences, but to warn humanity, awaken a sense of responsibility, and guide them away from the destructive consequences of deviation from توحید. The objective is moral and spiritual formation, such that no excuse remains for those who reject the message. It was revealed “بِلِسَانٍ عَرَبِيٍّ مُبِينٍ” — in a clear Arabic language. The Qur’an employs a language that is both eloquent and free from ambiguity, so that its message may be conveyed with maximum clarity to a people inclined toward objection and denial. The term “عربی” may also denote clarity and eloquence itself, as noted by Rāghib al‑Iṣfahānī in Mufradāt and Ibn Manẓūr in Lisān al‑ʿArab, where “العربي” is defined as speech that is clear and articulated. Thus, the emphasis is not merely on linguistic identity but on precision, coherence, and comprehensibility. The Qur’an then presents another indication of its truth: “وَإِنَّهُ لَفِي زُبُرِ الْأَوَّلِينَ” — its description has already been mentioned in the scriptures of earlier generations. The term “زُبُر” (plural of “زَبُور”) refers to written texts or revealed books. The qualities of this Book and its bearer were known in earlier scriptures, particularly in the Torah of Mūsā (ʿalayhi al‑salām). Scholars of Banī Isrāʾīل were well aware of these descriptions and even anticipated the coming of this Prophet and revelation. Accordingly, it is stated: “أَوَلَمْ یَكُنْ لَهُمْ آیَةً أَنْ یَعْلَمَهُ عُلَمَاءُ بَنِي إِسْرَائِیلَ” — is it not a sufficient sign for them that the scholars of Banī Isrāʾīل recognized it? Given the presence of such scholars within that environment, it would have been impossible for such a claim to remain unchallenged if it were unfounded. Instead, its correctness was evident to such an extent that it could not be denied. A related indication is found in the verse: “وَكَانُوا مِنْ قَبْلُ یَسْتَفْتِحُونَ عَلَى الَّذِینَ كَفَرُوا فَلَمَّا جَاءَهُمْ مَا عَرَفُوا كَفَرُوا بِهِ” (al‑Baqarah 2:89), which states that they had previously sought victory through the coming of this Prophet, yet when he and the Book they recognized appeared, they rejected it. Thus, these elements collectively constitute clear testimony to the truthfulness of the Qur’an and the authenticity of its message.

See ayat 203 for tafseer.

See ayat 203 for tafseer.

See ayat 203 for tafseer.

See ayat 203 for tafseer.

See ayat 203 for tafseer.

In these verses, the Qur’an anticipates and addresses another potential objection of the disbelievers, while also completing the discussion presented earlier regarding the clarity of the Qur’an in the Arabic language. It states: “وَلَوْ نَزَّلْنَاهُ عَلَىٰ بَعْضِ الْأَعْجَمِينَ” — if We had sent down this Qur’an upon a non‑Arab (or one lacking eloquence), and he had recited it before them, they still would not have believed: “فَقَرَأَهُ عَلَيْهِم مَّا كَانُوا بِهِ مُؤْمِنِينَ”. As previously noted, the term “عربي” is used both for those who belong to Arab lineage and for eloquent, clear speech; correspondingly, “عجمی” may denote either non‑Arab origin or lack of eloquence. In this context, the more plausible interpretation is that it refers to non‑Arab origin. That is, the tribal and ethnic prejudice of the Arabs was such that, had the Qur’an been revealed to a non‑Arab individual, their bias would have prevented them from accepting it. Even in the present circumstance—where the revelation has descended upon a noble individual from among themselves, in a most eloquent and articulate form, and whose characteristics had already been foretold in earlier scriptures and recognized by the scholars of Banī Isrāʾīل—many of them still do not believe. It follows that, had these qualities been absent, their rejection would have been even more pronounced. Then, by way of further emphasis, it is stated: “كَذَٰلِكَ سَلَكْنَاهُ فِي قُلُوبِ الْمُجْرِمِينَ” — thus We cause it to pass through the hearts of the guilty. The Qur’an, with all its clarity and through the tongue of one from among them—whose character and mode of expression are well known, and whose message is supported by earlier scriptures—has been presented in such a manner that its acceptance is readily accessible. Yet these diseased hearts reject it, just as a sick body rejects even wholesome and nourishing food. The term “سَلَكْنَاهُ” derives from “سلوك”, meaning to pass along a path or to traverse through it. Consequently, it is said: “لَا يُؤْمِنُونَ بِهِ حَتَّىٰ يَرَوُا الْعَذَابَ الْأَلِيمَ” — they will not believe in it until they witness the painful punishment. Some exegetes have proposed an alternative interpretation, suggesting that “سَلَكْنَاهُ فِي قُلُوبِ الْمُجْرِمِينَ” refers to the embedding of obstinacy and refusal within their hearts due to their own wrongdoing, akin to the concept expressed in “خَتَمَ اللَّهُ عَلَىٰ قُلُوبِهِمْ”. However, the primary interpretation is more consistent with the surrounding verses. It is further stated: “فَيَأْتِيَهُم بَغْتَةً وَهُمْ لَا يَشْعُرُونَ” — the punishment will come upon them suddenly, without their awareness. This unexpected affliction refers to the destructive punishments in this world. In such a moment, they will awaken to their condition, regret their past, and fear their future, and will say: “هَلْ نَحْنُ مُنظَرُونَ” — will we be granted respite? That is, they will seek an opportunity to believe and rectify what they have ruined of their past.

There is no doubt that when a human being is connected to a land, nation, or tribe, he naturally develops a deep attachment to it, often reaching the level of intense affection. Such geographical, national, and tribal affiliation is not inherently blameworthy; rather, it can function as an effective factor in social life. However, this attachment has limits, and when it exceeds those limits, it becomes harmful and may even lead to severe consequences. Thus, when “تعصّب” (prejudicial partisanship) and “عصبّیت” are condemned, the reference is to this excessive and immoderate form of attachment. The terms “تعصّب” and “عصبّیت” are derived from the root “عصب”, which originally refers to the sinews that connect the joints of the body. By extension, any form of connection or alignment came to be described by these terms. However, in common usage, they predominantly carry a negative connotation, indicating excessive and blameworthy attachment. Historically, excessive defense of one’s nation, tribe, race, or homeland has led to numerous conflicts and wars. Under the banner of tribal or ethnic customs, harmful practices have often been transmitted from one group to another. Such exaggerated loyalty sometimes reaches a point where the worst individual of one’s own group is regarded as superior, while the best individual of another group is considered inferior. This reflects a condition in which prejudice becomes a veil of self‑centeredness and ignorance that obscures reason and diminishes the capacity for sound judgment. Certain communities have exhibited particularly intense forms of such bias, including the Arabs, whose historical reputation for tribal and ethnic pride is well documented. As indicated in earlier discussions, the tribal and cultural prejudices of the pre‑Islamic Arabs were of such intensity that they would have refused to accept the Qur’an had it been revealed to a non‑Arab. Islamic traditions also classify such prejudice among reprehensible moral qualities and strongly condemn it. The Prophet (ṣallā Allāh ʿalayhi wa-ālihi wa-sallam) is reported to have said: “من كان في قلبه حبة من خردل من عصبية بعثه الله يوم القيامة مع اعراب الجاهلية” — whoever possesses even a mustard seed’s weight of prejudice in his heart will be resurrected with the Arabs of the age of jāhiliyyah (Uṣūl al‑Kāfī, vol. 2, p. 232, Bāb al‑ʿAṣabiyyah). In another narration, Imām Jaʿfar al‑Ṣādiq (ʿalayhi al‑salām) states: “من تعصب او تعصب له فقد خلع ربقة الايمان من عنقه” — whoever practices prejudice or is the object of such prejudice has removed the bond of faith from his neck (Uṣūl al‑Kāfī, vol. 2, p. 232, Bāb al‑ʿAṣabiyyah). Traditions further indicate that Iblīs was the first to exhibit such prejudice, as stated in Nahj al‑Balāghah (Khutbah Qāṣiʿah, no. 192), where ʿAlī (ʿalayhi al‑salām) describes how Iblīs took pride in his origin and declared: “اَنَا نَارِي وَأَنْتَ طِينِي”. Continuing, he advises that if attachment is unavoidable, it should be directed toward moral excellence and commendable actions: “فَلْيَكُنْ تَعَصُّبُكُمْ لِمَكَارِمِ الْخِصَالِ وَمَحَامِدِ الْأَفْعَالِ”. This distinction is further clarified in a narration from Imām Zayn al‑ʿĀbidīn (ʿalayhi al‑salām), who states: “العصبية التي يأثم عليها صاحبها ان يرى الرجل شرار قومه خیرًا من خیار قوم آخرين… ولكن من العصبية أن يعين قومه على الظلم” — the blameworthy prejudice is that whereby a person considers the worst individuals of his own group superior to the best of others. Love for one’s people is not prejudice; rather, prejudice consists in supporting one’s group in wrongdoing (Uṣūl al‑Kāfī, vol. 2, p. 233, Bāb al‑ʿAṣabiyyah). In Qur’anic and traditional language, prejudice is also described by the term “حمية” or “حمیة الجاهلیة”. Among the narrations illustrating its moral implications is the statement of ʿAlī (ʿalayhi al‑salām): “ان الله يعذب ستة بست…” — God will punish six groups for six traits: the Arabs for their prejudice, the wealthy for their arrogance, rulers for their injustice, jurists for their envy, merchants for their dishonesty, and rural people for their ignorance (Biḥār al‑Anwār, vol. 73, p. 289). It is also reported that the Prophet (ṣallā Allāh ʿalayhi wa-ālihi wa-sallam) regularly sought refuge from six things: “الشک، الشرک، الحمية، الغضب، البغي، الحسد” — doubt, polytheism, prejudice, anger, injustice, and envy (Biḥār al‑Anwār, vol. 73, p. 289). Thus, while natural affiliation and attachment have constructive roles in human life, excessive and unjustified prejudice transforms them into sources of moral and social corruption.

Immediately after death, the period of regret and lamentation begins for the sinful and guilty people, and they develop a desire to return to the world. Then futile sighs, cries, and unacceptable prayers commence. There are many examples of this in the Quranic verses, one of the simplest of which is found in the very verses whose tafseer we are presenting, namely: "هل نحن منظرون" — "Will we be granted respite?" In Surah Al-An'am, verse 27, we read: يا ليتنا نرد ولا يكذب بآيات ربنا "O would that we might return and not deny the signs of our Lord." In Surah Al-Ahzab, verse 66, it states: يا ليتنا أطعنا الله و أطعنا الرسول "O would that we had obeyed Allah and obeyed the Messenger." In Surah Al-Mu’minun, verses 99 to 100, it is mentioned: حتى إذا جاء أحدهم الموت قال رب ارجعون لعلي أعمل صالحًا فيما تركت Until, when death comes to one of them, he says, "My Lord, send me back that I might do righteousness in that which I left behind." The condition of the sinful people will remain so until one of them faces death and then implores, "O Lord! Return me so that I may perform good deeds to compensate for what I left behind." This situation will continue even when the sinful people are brought to the edge of the Hellfire, where they will repeat this same plea. Observe Surah Al-An’am, verse 27 again: ولو ترى إذ وقفوا على النار فقالوا يا ليتنا نرد ولا نكذب بآيات ربنا ونكون من المؤمنين And if you could see when they are made to stand before the Fire and say, "Oh, would that we could be returned and not deny the signs of our Lord and be among the believers." But it is evident that such a return is impossible by the command of Allah, for if an unripe fruit could return to its tree and ripen, or a defective child could return to the womb, then such a return might be conceivable; but this has never happened, and therefore the sinful group will not be returned. Hence, the best way to prevent this regret is to perform righteous deeds and repent from sins while still here, because time is still available; otherwise, everything else is futile.

Under this verse, a statement of Imām Jaʿfar al‑Ṣādiq (ʿalayhi al‑salām) has been reported, which ʿAlī ibn Ibrāhīm has transmitted in his tafsīr: “لو نزل القرآن على العجم ما آمنت به العرب وقد نزل على العرب فآمنت به العجم فهذه فضيلة العجم” If the Qur’an had been revealed to the non‑Arabs (ʿajam), the Arabs would not have believed in it; however, it was revealed to the Arabs, and the non‑Arabs believed in it. This constitutes a virtue of the non‑Arabs (Tafsīr Nūr al‑Thaqalayn, vol. 4, p. 165). In this connection, a related discussion has also been presented in Tafsīr Namūnah, vol. 3, under the explanation of Sūrat al‑Māʾidah, verse 54.

See ayat 212 for tafseer.

See ayat 212 for tafseer.

See ayat 212 for tafseer.

See ayat 212 for tafseer.

See ayat 212 for tafseer.

See ayat 212 for tafseer.

See ayat 212 for tafseer.

See ayat 212 for tafseer.

Since the previous verses concluded with the statement that when the criminals and sinners witness the Divine punishment with their own eyes and descend into the valley of death, they will request to return once again in order to make amends for their sins, the present verses respond to them in two ways. First: Do they hasten Our punishment? (أَفَبِعَذَابِنَا يَسْتَعْجِلُونَ) This points to the fact that on many occasions, they sarcastically demanded the early arrival of this punishment from the Prophet, concerning which he had already given them the forewarning. But now, when they have themselves been caught in that very punishment, they are asking for a respite and deliverance so that they might thereby compensate for their past deeds. One day, they treated it as a mockery, but today they perceive it as a reality even surpassing reality. In any case, whatever may be the matter, the method of the Lord of the worlds is such that He does not subject a nation to punishment until He grants respite and completes the proof. But when the proof is completed, and words worthy of mention have been spoken, and people have been given sufficient respite, yet they do not follow the right path, then Allah subjects them to such punishment from which deliverance becomes impossible. Second: If We grant them enjoyment in this worldly life for a number of years further... (أَفَرَأَيْتَ إِنْ مَتَّعْنَاهُمْ سِنِينَ) Then the punishment which they were promised will overtake them... (ثُمَّ جَاءَهُمْ مَا كَانُوا يُوعَدُونَ) Whatever provision they had enjoyed will not avail them... (مَا أَغْنَىٰ عَنْهُمْ مَا كَانُوا يُمْتَعُونَ) Suppose they are granted respite, though after the completion of proof no respite will be granted, and suppose they remain in this world for many more years and remain immersed in pride and heedlessness, will they then engage in any work other than seeking material benefits in this life? Will they compensate for their past? Certainly not, absolutely not. Then, when the punishment descends, will these worldly possessions resolve any of their difficulties? Or will they bring any change in their end? In the interpretation of the verses under discussion, there is also the possibility that these people will not request to return to the world so that they may turn towards the truth or make amends for their sins, but rather their request will be to return so that they may enjoy the ephemeral blessings of this world and derive the maximum benefit from it. But this will not avail them at all. Sooner or later, they will inevitably depart from this perishable world to the eternal realm and shall certainly bear the consequences of their deeds. Here, one or more questions arise, which the subsequent verses answer, such as: In principle, when the Lord of the worlds has knowledge of every nation’s future, then what is the need for granting respite? And also: When previous nations repeatedly rejected their Prophets, and as stated at the end of the account of many of those Prophets, "وَمَا كَانَ أَكْثَرُهُم مُّؤْمِنِينَ" — that is, the majority of them did not believe — then was the purpose of sending Prophets successively only to frighten people and preach? In response to these very questions, the Quran says that it is a divine method that We do not destroy any city until We send warners to it, and the Prophets are sent for admonition, exhortation, and completion of proof (وَمَا أَهْلَكْنَا مِنْ قَرْيَةٍ إِلَّا لَهَا مُنْذِرُونَ). So that they may receive admonition and awaken, and that the opportunity to turn towards the truth may be available to them (ذِكْرَىٰ). [Explanatory note: Regarding the grammatical status of "ذِكْرَىٰ" here, commentators have mentioned four possibilities: First, it might be the object of "مُنْذِرُونَ" (this interpretation underpins the above commentary). Second, it could be an absolute object (مفعول مطلق) of "مُنْذِرُونَ," since "نذار" and "تذکر" are close in meaning. Third, the pronoun in "مُنْذِرُونَ" might refer to this word and thus, "ذِكْرَىٰ" serves as an adverbial clause. Fourth, it might be that the subject "هذه" with the predicate omitted, meaning "this is a reminder."] And if We were to strike people with punishment without sending messengers and without completing proof, it would be injustice, whereas We are never unjust or oppressive (وَمَا كُنَّا ظَالِمِينَ). It would be injustice to destroy people who are not unjust, or to annihilate the unjust before giving them adequate completion of proof. What has been mentioned in these verses is, in fact, a well-known rational principle called "the rule of the evilness of punishment without declaration." Similarly, in Surah Bani Isra'il, verse 15, it is stated: وَمَا كُنَّا مُعَذِّبِينَ حَتَّىٰ نَبْعَثَ رَسُولًا We never punish a people until We send them a Messenger. Certainly, to punish without sufficiently stating the facts is reprehensible and unjust, and Allah the Wise and Just would never do so. This principle is also termed as "the principle of innocence" in the science of principles of jurisprudence, meaning that when sufficient evidence for a ruling does not exist, it is negated. (For further clarification, refer to Tafseer Namunah, Volume 12, the commentary on Surah Bani Isra'il, verse 15.) Then another excuse...The baseless accusation of the enemies of the Quran has been answered here, for they used to say that Muhammad (Peace and blessings be upon him) had contact with some jinn. They claimed that he was taught these verses by them, whereas the Quran repeatedly states that it is a revelation from the Lord of the Worlds. Here it is stated: The devils and jinn did not reveal these verses (وما تنزلت به الشياطين). Then, in response to this unfounded accusation of the enemies, it is said: It is certainly not appropriate for jinn and devils to bring down such a book (وما ينبغي لهم). This means that the contents of this magnificent book include the path of truth, purity, justice, piety, and the denial of all forms of polytheism. From this, it is clearly understood that this book has no relation whatsoever to satanic thoughts and inspirations, while the work of the devils is nothing but evil and corruption. This book is the embodiment of revival, success, and prosperity. Therefore, just by reflecting on its contents, its true nature becomes evident; moreover, the devils do not have the power to perform such a task (وما يستطيعون). If they were capable of such a task, people like the "soothsayers," who during the time of the Quran’s revelation had close contact with devils, would have produced a similar book (or at least the polytheists who undoubtedly had connections with devils). But all of them failed and by their failure proved that these verses were beyond their power. Furthermore, even the soothsayers admitted that after the blessed birth of the Prophet Muhammad (Peace and blessings be upon him), the devils’ connection with heavenly news, with which they were associated, was cut off, and they were removed and dismissed from hearing such news (انهم عن السمع لمعزولون). Many Quranic verses indicate that before this, devils used to enter among humans and steal information from there, and that communications among the angels took place; sometimes the devils would tell their friends. But with the honored birth and appearance of the great Prophet of Islam (Peace and blessings be upon him), this act of stealing conversations was completely stopped, and the connection for giving news was also severed. The polytheists also knew about this; and even if the polytheists did not know, the Quran certainly informs of it. [For further clarification on how devils were prevented from secretly hearing conversations, see "Sirat Ibn Hisham," Volume 1, after page 217. We have given a detailed exegetical explanation on this subject and on the devils being driven away by "flaming meteors" (شہاب ثاقب) from the heavens when they try to eavesdrop, in Tafsir Namunah, Volume 11, under Surah Al-Hijr, verses 16 to 18.] On this basis, the above verses in the Glorious Quran have stated this as proof. Thus, this accusation is answered in three ways: 1- The contents of the Quran are not compatible with satanic insinuations. 2- The devils cannot perform such a task. 3- The devils have been prevented from stealing human news.

See ayat 220 for tafseer.

See ayat 220 for tafseer.

See ayat 220 for tafseer.

See ayat 220 for tafseer.

See ayat 220 for tafseer.

See ayat 220 for tafseer.

See ayat 220 for tafseer.

After presenting the position of the polytheists regarding Islam and the Qur’an in the preceding verses, the present passage instructs the Prophet (ṣallā Allāh ʿalayhi wa‑ālihi wa‑sallam) to clearly define his policy before them. In this context, five directives are outlined. First, God commands the Prophet to firmly adhere to توحید, as it constitutes the foundational element of the message of all prophets: “فَلَا تَدْعُ مَعَ اللَّهِ إِلَٰهًا آخَرَ فَتَكُونَ مِنَ الْمُعَذَّبِينَ”. Although it is beyond doubt that the Prophet is the standard‑bearer of توحید and cannot deviate from it, he is addressed first due to the supreme importance of the matter, so that others may reflect upon their own condition. It also emphasizes that the training of others begins with self‑cultivation. In the second directive, the circle of دعوت begins from the closest circle: “وَأَنْذِرْ عَشِيرَتَكَ الْأَقْرَبِينَ”. Any comprehensive reform movement necessarily begins from a limited and proximate group. The Prophet is therefore instructed to begin with his close relatives, who are most familiar with his moral character and are more likely, due to ties of kinship, to give serious consideration to his message. This also demonstrates that the prophetic mission does not operate through compromise or selective application, as even one’s own relatives are not exempt from the call to truth and justice. In the third stage, the scope expands further: “وَاخْفِضْ جَنَاحَكَ لِمَنِ اتَّبَعَكَ مِنَ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ”. This expression metaphorically denotes humility, kindness, and affectionate care, akin to a bird spreading its wings over its offspring. The Prophet is thus commanded to show gentleness and compassion toward the believers. The juxtaposition of this instruction immediately after the command to warn reflects a balanced method of تربیت, combining firmness with mercy. The fourth directive addresses continued opposition: “فَإِنْ عَصَوْكَ فَقُلْ إِنِّي بَرِيءٌ مِمَّا تَعْمَلُونَ”. If they persist in disobedience after the message has been conveyed, the Prophet is instructed to declare dissociation from their actions. This clarifies his stance without fear or compromise. Finally, the fifth directive provides the foundation for perseverance: “وَتَوَكَّلْ عَلَى الْعَزِيزِ الرَّحِيمِ”. In the face of opposition, hostility, and limited support, the Prophet is instructed to rely entirely upon God—the one who is all‑powerful and yet infinitely merciful. The same God who destroyed oppressive powers such as Pharaoh, Nūḥ’s people, ʿĀd, and the people of Lūṭ, while rescuing the prophets and the believers, is the ultimate source of support. The passage concludes by reinforcing Divine awareness and care: “الَّذِي يَرَاكَ حِينَ تَقُومُ، وَتَقَلُّبَكَ فِي السَّاجِدِينَ، إِنَّهُ هُوَ السَّمِيعُ الْعَلِيمُ”. God observes the Prophet in all states—his standing, his prostration, and all his movements—and is fully aware of his conditions and needs. Thus, reliance upon such a being becomes both a rational necessity and a source of spiritual reassurance, grounding the entire prophetic mission in Divine support and surveillance.

The expressions “الَّذِي يَرَاكَ حِينَ تَقُومُ” and “وَتَقَلُّبَكَ فِي السَّاجِدِينَ” have been interpreted by exegetes in multiple ways. The apparent meaning of the verses corresponds to what has already been noted—namely, that God observes the Prophet (ṣallā Allāh ʿalayhi wa‑ālihi wa‑sallam) when he stands, and also when he moves among those who are in prostration. The “قيام” may refer to standing for prayer, awakening for worship, or engaging in acts of devotion individually, while “وَتَقَلُّبَكَ فِي السَّاجِدِينَ” may indicate participation in congregational prayer. It is also possible that the term encompasses all of these states collectively. The word “تَقَلُّب” denotes movement, transition, and change from one state to another. It may refer to the Prophet’s participation in prostration alongside others, or to his movement among his companions while observing their state of worship. In general, the verse conveys that none of the Prophet’s conditions or endeavors—whether individual or collective—through which he reforms people and propagates the Divine message, is hidden from God. It is noteworthy that the verbs in this verse are in the present tense, indicating continuity in the present and the future. In addition to this apparent meaning, two further interpretations have been mentioned, which are not directly aligned with the outward sense of the verse but may represent its inner meanings. One interpretation suggests that the Prophet possessed the capacity to observe those behind him in a manner similar to that by which he observed those before him. In a reported statement, he said: “لا ترفعوا قبلي ولا تضعوا قبلي، فإني أراكم من خلفي كما أراكم من أمامي,” and then recited this verse as supporting evidence (Tafsīr Majmaʿ al‑Bayān, under this verse). A second interpretation holds that the phrase refers to the انتقال of the spiritual essence of the Prophet through the lineages of pure and monotheistic prophets—from Ādam (ʿalayhi al‑salām) to ʿAbdullāh—under Divine care. In Tafsīr ʿAlī ibn Ibrāhīm, Imām Muḥammad al‑Bāqir (ʿalayhi al‑salām) is reported to have interpreted “وَتَقَلُّبَكَ فِي السَّاجِدِينَ” as referring to the transmission of this essence through the loins of the prophets (Tafsīr Nūr al‑Thaqalayn, vol. 4, p. 69). Similarly, Tafsīر Majmaʿ al‑Bayān reports from Imām Muḥammad al‑Bāqir and Imām Jaʿfar al‑Ṣādiq (ʿalayhima al‑salām) that this انتقال occurred from one prophet to another, in pure lineage and lawful unions, free from impurity. Apart from these interpretive perspectives, there are also other indications suggesting that the ancestors of the prophets were free from polytheism and that their lineages remained pure. The interpretations mentioned above may thus be regarded as inner or secondary meanings of the verse.

According to historical reports, the Prophet of Islam (ṣallā Allāh ʿalayhi wa‑ālihi wa‑sallam) was commanded in the third year of his mission to openly proclaim his message. Until that time, his دعوت had been conducted in a concealed manner and only a limited number of individuals had embraced Islam. However, with the revelation of the verse “وَأَنْذِرْ عَشِيرَتَكَ الْأَقْرَبِينَ” and also “فَاصْدَعْ بِمَا تُؤْمَرُ وَأَعْرِضْ عَنِ الْمُشْرِكِينَ” (Sūrat al‑Ḥijr 94), he was instructed to declare his mission publicly, beginning with his closest relatives (Sīrat Ibn Hishām, vol. 1, p. 280). The general outline of this دعوت is as follows. The Prophet invited his close relatives to a gathering at the house of Abū Ṭālib, where approximately forty individuals were present, including his uncles Abū Ṭālib, Ḥamzah, and Abū Lahab. After the meal, when the Prophet intended to deliver his message, Abū Lahab intervened and disrupted the assembly, causing it to disperse. The Prophet therefore invited them again for another gathering the following day. On the second occasion, after the meal, the Prophet addressed them, saying: O sons of ʿAbd al‑Muṭṭalib, I do not know of any person among the Arabs who has brought to his people something better than what I have brought to you. I have brought for you the good of this world and the Hereafter. God has commanded me to invite you to this message. So who among you will support me in this matter, such that he may become my brother, my وصی, and my successor? All remained silent except ʿAlī ibn Abī Ṭālib, who, though the youngest, rose and said: O Messenger of God, I will support you in this path. The Prophet then placed his hand on ʿAlī’s neck and said: “إِنَّ هٰذَا أَخِی وَوَصِیِّی وَخَلِیفَتِی فِیکُمْ فَاسْمَعُوا لَهُ وَأَطِیعُوا”. Upon hearing this, the attendees departed with expressions of mockery, telling Abū Ṭālib that he should now listen to and obey his son. This report has been transmitted by numerous Sunni scholars, including Ibn Abī Jarīr, Ibn Abī Ḥātim, Ibn Mardawayh, Abū Nuʿaym, Bayhaqī, Thaʿlabī, and al‑Ṭabarī. The historian Ibn al‑Athīr recorded it in al‑Kāmil, and Abū al‑Fidāʾ included it in his historical work, along with many other historians (al‑Murājaʿāt, p. 130ff; Iḥqāq al‑Ḥaqq, vol. 4, p. 96ff). This narration illustrates the extent of the Prophet’s isolation in those early days and the manner in which his message was met with ridicule and rejection. It also highlights the role of ʿAlī (ʿalayhi al‑salām), who, even in those early stages when the Prophet stood almost alone, supported him and stood by his side. Another narration indicates that the Prophet called each clan of Quraysh by name, warning them of the punishment of Hell. He would say: “يَا بَنِي كَعْبٍ أَنْقِذُوا أَنْفُسَكُمْ مِنَ النَّارِ”, and similarly addressed Banū ʿAbd Shams, Banū ʿAbd Manāf, Banū Hāshim, and Banū ʿAbd al‑Muṭṭalib, urging them to save themselves from the Fire. He emphasized that if they persisted in disbelief, he would not be able to protect them (Tafsīr Qurṭubī, vol. 7, p. 4859, under the verse).

See ayat 227 for tafseer.

See ayat 227 for tafseer.

See ayat 227 for tafseer.

See ayat 227 for tafseer.

See ayat 227 for tafseer.

See ayat 227 for tafseer.

The above verses, which are the final verses of Surah Ash-Shu'ara, once again return to the discussion concerning the accusation made by the enemies of the Messenger that the Qur'an is a collection of Satanic suggestions. Thus, these verses respond to this accusation in a clear and interesting manner. It is stated: "Do you know upon whom the devils descend? (هل انبئکم على من تنزل الشياطين)" They descend upon every sinful liar (تنزل على كل افاك اثيم). ["Afak" is derived from "Afk" (pronounced like "pilk"), meaning "a great lie," therefore "Afak" refers to a person who is a great liar. "Athim" comes from the root "Athm" (pronounced as "ism"), which means an act that delays a person from receiving reward and is generally used to mean sin. Therefore, "Athim" means a sinner.] The devils mix many lies in what they hear and convey them to their companions, and most of them are liars (يلقون السمع واكثرهم كاذبون). In short, the characteristics of Satanic suggestions are very clear, making it very easy to recognize them. Satan is the name of a dangerous, harmful, and destructive entity, whose conveyed matters are based on corruption and mischief. Its followers are also liars and sinners, and none of these matters correspond in the slightest degree to the Qur'an or its bearer, nor do they resemble them even minimally. The people of that era recognized Prophet Muhammad Mustafa PBUH & His Pure Progeny as truthful, trustworthy, and a reformer. The Qur’anic content invites only to monotheism, truth, justice, and reformation in all respects, so on what basis do you accuse him of Satanic suggestions? By "Afak Athim," the same "soothsayers" are meant, who had connections with devils, and the devils used to secretly eavesdrop on angels and listen to the true matters, then mix many lies on their own and tell the soothsayers, who would add further spice, mixing more lies, and then relay them to people — creating numerous falsehoods. When the revelation (Wahi) began, devils were prevented from ascending to the heavens. This stopped the secret eavesdropping. After that, whatever they told the soothsayers was entirely false, fabricated, and slanderous. In such circumstances, how can the Qur’anic teachings be compared with them? And how can a truthful and trustworthy Messenger be compared with false and lying soothsayers? Different interpretations have been given for "يلقون السمع" (yulqoon al-sam‘). The first interpretation is that the pronoun in "yulqoon" refers to the devils, meaning the devils convey what they hear (i.e., heard matters) to their companions, and most of them are liars (many lies are added by them). The second interpretation is that the pronoun in "yulqoon" refers to those sinful liars who attentively listen to the devils or convey to others what they heard from the devils. However, the first interpretation appears more correct. [Because "yulqoon" is derived from the root "ilqa’," and in such contexts, it means the transmission of news and messages, as in Surah Al-Hajj, verse 53: "That He may make what the devil casts [or suggests] a trial for those within whose hearts is disease" Also, the phrase "and most of them are liars" suits the actions of devils specifically; otherwise, all "Afak Athim" are liars, not most of them (please consider this carefully).]In the present fourth verse, a response is given to another allegation made by the disbelievers against the Prophet of Islam (peace be upon him). The disbelievers used to call the Prophet (peace be upon him) a "mad poet," as mentioned in the fifth verse of Surah Al-Anbiya. Sometimes they said, "بل ھو شاعر" (rather, he is a poet), and at times they even called him a "mad poet," as found in Surah As-Saffat, verse 32: و يقولون و انا لتاركوا اٰلھتنا لشاعر مجنون They said, "Shall we leave our gods for a mad poet?" The Glorious Quran, in the present verse, states very logically that the method of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) is entirely different from that of poets. Poets remain lost in the world of imagination and conceptions, whereas the Messenger of Allah lives in the real and actual world and imparts a system to the human world. Poets are generally seekers of pleasure and luxury, and captives of beauty, such as the mole and long hair of a beloved (especially those poets residing in the environment of that era and the Hijaz, as is evident from their poetry). For this reason, "Poets are those whom the misguided follow" (والشعراء يتبعهم الغاوون). Immediately following this phrase, it is added: Have you not seen that "they wander in every valley" (الم تر انهم في كل واد یھیمون)? ["يھيمون" is derived from "هيام" (on the pattern of "قیام") meaning to wander without purpose.] They are immersed in their poetic thoughts and similes to the extent that they follow wherever the rhyme leads them. These people are generally not bound by logic and reasoning. Their poetry is the product of their emotions, and these sentiments and flights of fancy carry them to a new valley in every era. When they are pleased with someone, they turn the earth and sky upside down and elevate the person to the highest heavens, even if he deserves to be beneath the earth, and make him a beautiful angel, even if he is a cursed devil. And when displeased, through their invectives, they cast the person down to the lowest depths, even if he is a sacred heavenly angel. Do the tested and proven subjects of the Quran bear any resemblance to the intellectual domain of poets? Especially the poets of that time whose entire work was nothing but wine, beauty, beloved, the line of the beloved, praise of the favored tribe, and invective against enemies? Moreover, poets are generally lions of the gatherings, not men of the battlefield; they are men of speech, not men of action. Therefore, the next verse states, "Do you not see that they say what they do not do" (وانهم يقولون مالا یفعلون). But the Prophet of Islam is full of action from head to toe, and even his worst enemies praise his firm resolve, tremendous perseverance, and emphasis on practical aspects. How far is the poet from the magnificent Prophet of Islam? Taking the above statements into consideration, the Quran states three signs of poets: First, their followers are misguided people who remain absorbed in imaginary worlds and avoid realities. Second, these people have no specific objective; their intellectual path changes very quickly. They are influenced by emotions and passions and change abruptly. Third, they say things which they themselves do not practice, even regarding the truths they proclaim. None of these signs are found in the Prophet; on the contrary, he is the complete opposite of them. However, since among poets there are righteous and purposeful poets who are men of action and men of realities, who invite towards truth and purity (although such poets were very few in that era), the Glorious Quran, to prevent the rights of such faithful artisans and seekers of truth and sincerity from being lost, distinguishes their ranks from the others by means of an exception. Thus, it says: "Except those who believe and do righteous deeds" (الا الذین آمنوا و عملوا الصالحات). Poets whose purpose is not mere poetry but who seek divine and human objectives beneath the veil of poetry; such poets who do not get lost in their verses forgetting God, rather "they remember Allah much" and their poetry reminds people of God (و ذکروا الله کثيراً). When subjected to oppression and cruelty, they stand in defense of themselves and other believers based on their sense of taste (وانتصروا من بعد ما ظلموا). If they satirize or condemn anyone through their poetry, it is in defense against attacks on the truth. Thus, the Sacred Quran outlines four qualities of such purposeful poets: "Faith" (إيمان), "Righteous deeds" (عمل صالح), "Abundant remembrance of God" (ذكر الله كثيراً), and "Defending themselves and other believers against oppression through poetic strength." Since most of the verses of this Surah were revealed to console the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) and the few early believers of Islam, as they faced a great number of enemies at that time, and because...The verses of this Surah were revealed as a response to the unjust accusations leveled against the Holy Prophet and in his defense. Therefore, these obstinate and stubborn enemies are once again warned at the end of the Surah that those who have wronged will soon come to know where their return leads and what their ultimate fate will be (وَسَيَعْلَمُ الَّذِينَ ظَلَمُوا أَيَّ مُنْقَلَبٍ يَنْقَلِبُونَ). Although some commentators have sought to limit their return and outcome to Hellfire alone, there is no evidence to restrict it thus. Rather, it is possible that the successive defeats they faced in battles such as Badr, and the disgrace and humiliation they suffered in this world, are also encompassed within the meaning of this verse.

As has already been explained, opponents of Islam and adversaries of the Prophet (ṣallā Allāh ʿalayhi wa‑ālihi wa‑sallam) used various accusations against him, including attributing poetry and poetic composition to him. The verses cited above respond to this allegation. They themselves were fully aware that the Qur’an bears no resemblance whatsoever to poetry. There is no similarity either in outward form—such as meter, rhythm, or rhyme—or in content, such as poetic imagination, figurative embellishment, and themes of romantic expression. However, because they observed that the Qur’an had a profound effect upon people’s minds and hearts, and that its captivating style deeply influenced their inner being, they attempted to obscure this Divine light by labeling it sometimes as magic and at other times as poetry. They called it magic because of its strong impact upon intellects, and poetry because of its ability to stir emotions and draw hearts toward itself. In reality, while intending to disparage it, they were inadvertently acknowledging its extraordinary influence, thereby demonstrating that the Qur’an exerts a miraculous effect upon human consciousness. The Qur’an itself states regarding the Prophet: “وَمَا عَلَّمْنَاهُ الشِّعْرَ وَمَا يَنْبَغِي لَهُ إِنْ هُوَ إِلَّا ذِكْرٌ وَقُرْآنٌ مُبِينٌ لِيُنْذِرَ مَنْ كَانَ حَيًّا” (Sūrat Yā Sīn 69–70). This verse makes clear that the Prophet was not taught poetry, nor is poetry befitting to him. Rather, what has been given is a lucid reminder and manifest Qur’an, intended to warn those who possess inner vitality.

There is no doubt that poetic taste and poetic ability, like all other human faculties, become a valuable asset when directed on the right path and utilized for positive and constructive purposes. However, if these are used as a means to destroy and lay waste the foundations of society’s beliefs and morals, to encourage vice and lawlessness in society, to hollow out human society or make it vulgar, to confine it merely to indulging in fanciful fantasies, or to use it as a purposeless pastime, then in such a case it is not only worthless but also harmful and detrimental. With this statement, the answer to the question becomes clear: what should be understood from the above verses—is being a poet good or bad, appropriate or inappropriate? Is Islam in favor of poetry or opposed to it? It should also be remembered that Islam considers the “objectives,” “contexts,” and “results” in this matter. When, one night during the blessed month of Ramadan, some companions of the Commander of the Faithful began a conversation at the time of Iftar about poetry and poets, His Eminence stated: أعلموا أن ملاك أمركم الدين، وعصمتكم التقوى، وزينتكم الادب، وحصون اعراضكم الحلم Know that the criterion of all your affairs is religion, your protector is piety (taqwa), your adornment is good manners (adab), and the strong castles of your honor are knowledge, forbearance, and patience. [Sharh Nahj al-Balagha, Ibn Abi al-Hadid, Vol. 20, p. 461] This statement of the eminent Imam points to the fact that the value of any means depends on its goal and purpose—for what reason the poetry is uttered. But regretfully, it must be said that in the history of world nations’ literature, poetry has been very wrongly exploited, and this God-given exquisite taste was used in such filthy environments for shameful purposes that at times it became the most effective means of corruption and destruction, especially during the Age of Ignorance (Jahiliyyah), which was a period of moral and intellectual decline for the Arab nation. During that era, “poetry,” “wine,” and “plundering” went hand in hand. However, no one can deny the fact that historically constructive and purposeful poetry has also played an important role and demonstrated its effectiveness, so much so that at times it united a nation or an Ummah against a brutal and savage enemy in such a way that it cast aside all else and struck at the enemy with such force that it humbled and compelled it to suffer defeat. We have also witnessed this during our own Salam Revolution movement, where appropriate poems and slogans framed in poetic form kindled zeal and enthusiasm among the people, and the blood of courage began to flow in their veins. These simple and concise verses, which displayed bravery and daring, greatly terrified the enemy and shook the foundations of their seats of power. Moreover, no one can deny that sometimes a moral poem reaches the human heart and soul so deeply that no extensive book can be as effective as it. As it has been transmitted from the Holy Prophet (peace be upon him and his progeny): إن من الشعر لحكمة، وإن من البيان لسحراً Some poetry contains wisdom, and some expression is like magic. [This hadith is narrated by many Shia and Sunni scholars in their respective books; see “Kitab al-Ghadir,” Vol. 2, p. 9] And sometimes, poetry can even cause upheaval and revolution. At times, poetic and well-measured words prove more effective on the enemy’s heart than a sword or an arrow. Regarding such poems, the Holy Prophet (peace be upon him and his progeny) said: والذي نفس محمد بيده فكانما تنضهونهم بالنبل By Him in Whose hand is the soul of Muhammad, it is as if you are shooting arrows at them through these poems. [Musnad Ahmad ibn Hanbal, Vol. 3, p. 420] The Holy Prophet (peace be upon him and his progeny) spoke these words when the enemy was lowering the morale of the Muslims through their satirical poems. The Prophet ordered that poems be recited to condemn the enemy and boost the spirits of the Muslims. Once, regarding a defender of Islam who was a poet, he said: اهجهم فإن جبريل معك Satirize them, for Gabriel is with you. [Musnad Ahmad ibn Hanbal, Vol. 4, p. 299] Especially when the faithful poet Ka‘b ibn Malik was reciting poetry in support of Islam, the Prophet was asked, “O Messenger of Allah! These verses have been revealed about condemnation in poetry; what should I do?” He replied: إن المؤمن يجاهد بنفسه وسيفه ولسانه The believer fights with his soul, his sword, and his tongue. [Tafsir al-Qurtubi, Vol. 7, p. 4869] Purposeful poetry and poets are also highly praised and prayed for by the Imams of Ahl al-Bayt (peace be upon them), and many verses extol them and promise them abundant reward and honor. If we start writing all of these here, the matter would become very lengthy. But it is regrettable that history also knows people who polluted this great faculty and celestial exquisite taste—which is the best manifestation of the creation of the cosmos—and degraded it from the heights of the heavens to the dust under worldly materialism, and they so greatly...False verses have been composed, resulting in the emergence of the following proverb: "احسنه اکذبہ" meaning the poem with the most falsehood is considered the best. Sometimes, through this, oppressive and tyrannical rulers were praised, indulging in such excessive flattery and sycophancy merely for trivial and insignificant rewards that they seemed to have brought down the seven heavens to lay at their feet, only to kiss the feet of Qizil Arslan. At other times, they went so far into indulgence in luxury, wine, disgrace, and immorality that even knowledge feels ashamed to mention them. And sometimes, such poets incited the fires of war through their verses, setting people against each other for plunder, killing, and destruction, staining the pages of the earth with innocent blood. However, in opposition to them, faithful and noble-hearted poets also existed who rejected materialism. They used this heavenly gift for the cause of human freedom, piety, and purity. They confronted robbers, looters, and oppressive and tyrannical rulers and reached the peak of excellence and honor. At times, in defense of the truth, they composed such verses that for every couplet they earned a house in Paradise. [Imam Ja'far al-Sadiq (peace be upon him) says: "Whoever composes a couplet about us, Allah will build his house in Paradise." (Al-Ghadir, Volume 2, page 3)] And at other times, during the reigns of oppressive and tyrannical rulers like the Banu Umayyah and Banu Abbas, when the atmosphere was so suffocating that even breathing was difficult, these poets recited odes such as the "Madaris Ayat," which inspired hearts and tore apart the veils of falsehood and deceit. It was as if these poems were being inspired by the Holy Spirit. [In another tradition, Imam Ja'far al-Sadiq (peace be upon him) states: "No one has recited a couplet about us until it has been confirmed by the Holy Spirit." ("Uyun Akhbar al-Ridha")] They also continued to compose poetry to awaken the submissive, deprived, and downtrodden classes of society, igniting passion and zeal within them. The Holy Qur'an also addresses such people, saying: "Except for those who believe and do righteous deeds and remember Allah often and defend themselves after they have been wronged." Interestingly, such poets often leave behind immortal legacies, so much so that, according to certain verses, the great guides of Islam commanded people to memorize their poetry, as Imam Ja'far al-Sadiq (peace be upon him) says regarding the poetry of "Abdi": "O Shi'ites, teach your children the poetry of Abdi, for he was upon the religion of Allah." (Tafsir Nur al-Thaqalayn, Volume 4, page 71) We conclude our discussion with the famous and well-known verses of "Abdi," which he composed about the Prophet’s succession and caliphate: وقالوا رسول الله ما اختار بعده ____ اماما ولكنا لان سنا اخترنا اقمنا امامًا ان اقام على الهدى ____ اطعنا وان ضل الهدیۃ قومنا فقلنا اذا انتم امام امامكم ____ بحمد من الرحمن تهتم ولاتھنا ولكننا اخترنا الذي اختار ربنا ____ لنا يوم خم ما اعتدينا ولا حلنا ونحن على نور من الله واضح ____ فيا رب زدنا منك نورا و ثبتنا Translation: They said, "The Messenger of Allah did not appoint an Imam after him; we shall choose an Imam ourselves." "How will we choose an Imam when, if he remains on guidance, we obey him, and if he strays from guidance, we correct him?" We said, "Then you yourselves will be the Imams of your own Imam." "By the praise of the Merciful, you are concerned and do not stray." "But we have chosen the one whom our Lord selected for us on the day of Khumm, and we have neither trespassed nor erred." "And we are upon a clear light from Allah, so O Lord, increase us in Your light and keep us steadfast." [Al-Kuniyy wal-Alqab, Volume 2, page 455]

Remembrance of God: In the above verses, it has been observed that one of the defining qualities of purposeful poets is that they engage in frequent remembrance of God. A narration attributed to Imām Jaʿfar al‑Ṣādiq (ʿalayhi al‑salām) states that the meaning of “ذکر کثیر” is the tasbīḥ of Fāṭimah al‑Zahrāʾ, which consists of expressions of glorification (takbīr), praise (ḥamd), and exaltation (tasbīḥ). In another narration, the same Imām says that among the most significant matters made obligatory upon mankind by God is abundant remembrance of Him. He then clarifies that this does not merely refer to uttering phrases such as “سبحان الله والحمد لله ولا اله الا الله والله اكبر”, although these too form a part of it. Rather, “ذکر الله” means that when a person encounters matters of what is lawful and unlawful, he remembers God; if the matter constitutes obedience, he acts upon it, and if it constitutes disobedience, he refrains from it (Uṣūl al‑Kāfī). O Lord, fill our hearts with Your remembrance, so that we may embrace whatever brings Your pleasure and abandon whatever incurs Your displeasure. O God, grant eloquence to our tongues, strength to our pens, and sincerity to our hearts, so that we may dedicate all of these to Your path and Your satisfaction. Ameen yā Rabb al‑ʿālamīn.