Al-Ahzab

See ayat 3 for tafseer.

See ayat 3 for tafseer.

The commentators have reported various occasions of revelation here, all of which pertain to more or less the same subject. Among them, it is mentioned that the verses were revealed concerning "Abu Sufyan" and some other leaders of disbelief and polytheism. They entered Medina after receiving safety from the Prophet PBUH & His Pure Progeny following the Battle of Uhud and, together with Abdullah ibn Ubayy and some other companions, came to the Prophet's presence and said, "O Muhammad! Refrain from disparaging our gods, the idols named Lat, Uzza, and Manat, and say that they will intercede for their worshippers, so that we may also desist from fighting and disputes with you. Then you may praise and glorify your God as you wish; you are free to do so." This proposal grieved the Prophet PBUH & His Pure Progeny. Umar stood up and said, "Allow me to kill them!" The Prophet PBUH & His Pure Progeny said, "I have granted them safety; therefore, this is not possible." However, he ordered that they be expelled from Medina. At this occasion, the above-mentioned verses were revealed, commanding the Prophet PBUH & His Pure Progeny not to pay any attention to such proposals. (Explanatory note: Majma‘ al-Bayan, under the verse under discussion and in the tafseers).

In the name of Allah, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful 1. Ta-Sin-Mim 2. These are the verses of the clear Book. 3. We narrate to you the story of Moses and Pharaoh in truth, for a people who believe. 4. Indeed, Pharaoh exalted himself in the land and made its people into factions, weakening a group among them. He slaughtered their sons and kept their women alive. Indeed, he was of the corrupters. 5. And We intend to bestow favor upon those who were oppressed in the land and make them leaders and make them the inheritors. 6. And establish them firmly in the land, and show Pharaoh, Haman, and their soldiers what they feared. The virtue of reciting Surah Al-Qasas: It is narrated from the honorable Prophet (peace be upon him) in a hadith that we read thus: Whoever recites "Ta-Sin-Mim Al-Qasas," he will be given ten rewards in accordance with the number of those who believed in Moses and those who denied him. And there will be no angel in the heavens or the earth who will testify on the Day of Resurrection against him that he was not truthful. (1) Another hadith is narrated from Imam Ja'far al-Sadiq (peace be upon him): Whoever recites the three Ta-Sin Surahs — namely Surah Al-Qasas, Surah An-Naml, and Surah Ash-Shu'ara — every Thursday night, he will be counted among the friends of the servants of Allah, and he will remain under Divine protection and care. He will never experience insecurity, distress, or poverty in this world. And in the Hereafter, Allah will grant him such rewards that not only will he be satisfied, but his joy will exceed that satisfaction. (2) Translation: 1. Ta-Sin-Mim 2. These are the verses of the clear Book. 3. We narrate to you the story of Moses and Pharaoh in truth for a people who believe. 4. Pharaoh considered himself superior in the land and divided its inhabitants into groups. He weakened one group among them by killing their sons and sparing their daughters (for servitude). Indeed, he was among the corrupters. 5. Our intention is to bestow favor upon those who were rendered weak in the land, establish them firmly (make their rule strong), and show Pharaoh, Haman, and their army what they feared.

See ayat 6 for tafseer.

See ayat 6 for tafseer.

After the previous verses which commanded the Prophet to follow only divine revelation and not the disbelievers and hypocrites, the verses under discussion here describe the consequences of following them. Their following leads a person to a great extent towards superstitions, falsehood, and misguidance. Three such instances have already been mentioned in the first verse under discussion. It begins by stating, "Allah has not made for any man two hearts within his interior": (مَّا جَعَلَ اللَّهُ لِرَجُلٍ مِّن قَلْبَيْنِ فِي جَوْفِهِ). A group of commentators has recorded in the context of this part of the verse’s revelation that, in the time of ignorance, there was a man named Jamil bin Muammar who had an extraordinary memory and claimed that he had "two hearts," each knowing better about Muhammad. Therefore, the Quraish polytheists called him "Dhu al-Qulubayn" (the one with two hearts). On the day of the Battle of Badr, when the polytheists fled, Jamil bin Muammar was among them. Abu Sufyan saw him running with one shoe on his foot and the other in his hand and asked, "What is the matter?" Jamil replied, "The army has fled." Abu Sufyan asked, "Then why are you holding one shoe in your hand and the other on your foot?" He said, "Truly, I was not paying attention to that side. Rather, I thought both shoes were on my feet." (It appears that despite all these claims, he was so confused in that state that he could not comprehend even the capacity of one heart; however, in such contexts, the heart means intellect.) (Explanatory note: Majma‘ al-Bayan, commentary under the verse in question, and Tafsir al-Qurtubi.) In any case, following the disbelievers and hypocrites and abandoning divine revelation invites a person towards such worthless and absurd matters. Apart from this, this statement has a very deep and profound meaning, which is that a person does not have more than one heart, and this heart cannot accommodate anything except the love of one God. The people who call for polytheism and multiple deities must have multiple hearts so that each one can be the center of love for a different deity. Principally, the personality of a human being is one sound and whole individual personality, and his line of thought is also one — whether alone or in a group, outwardly or inwardly, inward or outward, in thought or action; in all respects it is one and should be so. Every kind of division and duplicity is an imposed condition on human existence and entirely contrary to his nature and temperament. Since a human does not have more than one heart, it is necessary that the center of his affection and love also be one and that he submits to one law completely. He should hold the affection of one single beloved. He should continue the journey of life on one appointed path. He should harmonize with one group or community; otherwise, this division, different paths, and scattered objectives will lead him away from the natural path towards absurdity and deviation. This is why, in a hadith, from the Commander of the Faithful, ʿAlī (ʿa), we read an interpretation of this verse. He said: "Our love and the love of our enemy cannot coexist within one person’s heart, for Allah has not made two hearts within a man’s interior. So he must love us with one heart and hate with the same heart; our love is pure like gold purified by fire without any impurity. Whoever wants to know this truth should test his heart. If the love of our enemy shares in his heart along with our love, then he is neither from us nor are we from him." (Reference: Tafsir 'Ali bin Ibrahim,' narrated in Nur al-Thaqalayn, Volume 4, p. 234.) On this basis, one heart is the center of one belief and it also acts according to one program of action, because it is not possible for a person to truly believe in something but to practically behave differently. And those people who in our time claim multiple personalities within themselves and say that I have performed this deed from a practical-political perspective, that from a religious perspective, and that from a communal perspective – in this way justifying their contradictory actions – they are corrupt hypocrites who want to trample the laws of creation and existence. It is true that life has many aspects, but one law must govern them all. After this, the Quran mentions another worthless custom and superstition of the age of ignorance, which is the superstition of "Zihar." When a man became angry with his wife and wanted to express hatred towards her, he said to her, "You are to me like the back of my mother" (أنت علي كظهر أمي). Along with this statement, they started to regard her as their mother and considered this declaration equal to divorce. At the end of this verse, the Quran says, "Allah has not made your wives, whom you declare as Zihar, your mothers, and the rules prescribed for mothers do not apply to them": (وَمَا جَعَلَ أَزْوَاجَكُمُ...).(Those among you who pronounce Zihar—“You are to me like the back of my mother”) Islam has not only rejected the pre-Islamic practice of Zihar but has also prescribed a penalty for it. The person who utters this statement must pay the expiation (kaffarah) and is not allowed to approach his wife. If he neither pays the expiation nor resumes conjugal relations, then the wife, through the authority of the Shariah judge, can compel him to either of two actions: 1) To officially and legally divorce her according to Islamic law and separate from her, or 2) To pay the expiation and resume their marital life as before. (Explanatory Note: Further clarification on issues related to “Zihar” will, God willing, be provided under the pertinent verses of Surah Al-Mujadila.) What is this matter that a man, by saying to his wife “You are like my mother to me,” can place her under the rulings due to a mother? There is a natural connection between a mother and her son that requires no words. Hence, the explicit clarification in Surah Al-Mujadila, verse 2: "إِنْ أُمَّهَاتُهُمْ إِلَّا اللَّائِي وَلَدْنَهُمْ وَإِنَّهُمْ لَيَقُولُونَ مُنكَرًا مِّنَ الْقَوْلِ وَزُورًا" “Their mothers are only those who gave birth to them, and indeed they speak an objectionable and false statement.” If their intention in saying this is to seek separation from the wife—as was the practice in the pre-Islamic era, where this phrase was used to effect divorce—then separation from the woman does not require such a false and improper utterance. Can the issue of separation not be addressed more correctly and properly without this dubious expression? Some commentators say that in the pre-Islamic period, Zihar did not cause actual separation; instead, it rendered the woman a wandering outcast without definite status. If that is the case, then it becomes a vile and painful act—because a meaningless phrase could sever the mutual relationship between husband and wife, and without the woman becoming divorced, the husband unlawfully forbade her to himself. (Reference: Tafsir Fi Zilal Al-Qur’an, Volume 6, p. 534, under the verse in question.) Then, presenting another absurd and futile pre-Islamic custom, it says: “God does not acknowledge your so-called sons as your real sons” (وَمَا جَعَلَ أَدْعِيَاءَكُمْ أَبْنَاءَكُمْ). The explanation is that in the Age of Ignorance, it was customary for some to select certain young boys as children and call them their sons. By doing so, they claimed all the rights that a son has over his father. The adopted (so-called) sons were heirs to their adoptive fathers and vice versa. The wife of such a father became prohibited to the son, and the wife of such a son became forbidden to the father. Islam strictly rejected these illogical and inappropriate customs. As we will see later, the Prophet (peace be upon him) married the divorced wife of his adopted son, Zaid ibn Harithah, to make clear that hollow words cannot alter reality. The relationship between father and son is a natural and innate bond that cannot be established by words, covenants, or slogans. Though later we will mention that the Prophet’s marriage to Zaid’s divorced wife caused great confusion among the enemies of Islam and was used as propaganda against him, all these trials served to eliminate this erroneous custom of the Age of Ignorance. Therefore, the Qur’an after this statement says: “That is your statement from your own mouths” (ذَلِكُمْ قَوْلُكُم بِأَفْوَاهِكُمْ). You say, “Such and such is my son,” although you know in your heart that it certainly is not so. These sounds merely circle in the space of your mouth and come out; by no means are they the voice of the heart. This is nothing but false and frivolous talk. However, God speaks the truth and guides to the straight path. (وَاللَّهُ يَقُولُ الْحَقَّ وَهُوَ يَهْدِي السَّبِيلَ). Truth is what corresponds exactly with reality, or if it is an established matter, is consistent with all its purposes and considerations. It is known that the pre-Islamic practice of Zihar or the so-called adopted son, which severely infringed upon the rights of others’ offspring, neither conformed to reality nor was it an established matter that took public interest into account. Then the Qur’an further stresses and clarifies Islam’s correct and logical ruling: “Call them by [the names of] their fathers; that is more just in the sight of Allah” (ادْعُوهُمْ لِآبَائِهِمْ هُوَ أَقْسَطُ عِندَ اللَّهِ). The term "aqsat" (more just) does not imply that calling them the adopted father is just and calling them their real father is more just. Rather, as we have repeatedly said, the form of “af‘al at-tafdeel” (comparative form) is sometimes used where the opposing party entirely lacks the quality. For example, it is said: “It is better for a person to be cautious and risk his life,” which does not mean that risking one’s life is good, but...It is better and more appropriate to take precaution; indeed, the intended meaning is the comparison and distinction between "good" and "bad." And to remove excuses, it further says: "If you do not know their fathers, then they are your brothers in religion and your Mawali" (فَإِن لَّمْ تَعْلَمُوا آبَاءَهُمْ فَإِخْوَانُكُمْ فِي الدِّينِ وَمَوَالِيكُمْ). That is, not knowing their fathers is not a reason to attribute to the other person the name "father" but rather to address them as brothers in religion or as friends and acquaintances. “Mawali” is the plural of “Mawla,” and commentators have mentioned various meanings for it. Some have taken it here to mean friends, and others have taken it to mean freed slaves (because some acknowledged sons were slaves who were purchased and freed, and since they were the focus of their master’s attention, they were called as their sons). Attention to this point is also necessary that the term “Mawla” in such cases where freed slaves are opposed was because after freedom they maintained a connection with their master, a connection which legally replaced kinship in many respects and is termed as "Wala' Al-‘Itq" (the allegiance of emancipation). Therefore, in Islamic traditions, it is mentioned that even after "Zaid ibn Harithah" was freed by the Holy Prophet (peace be upon him), he was called "Zaid ibn Muhammad." This continued until the Qur’an was revealed and the above-mentioned ruling was brought. After that, the Prophet (peace be upon him) addressed him: "You are Zaid ibn Harithah." Subsequently, people started calling him "Mawla Rasul Allah" (the freed one of the Messenger) (Reference: Ruh al-Ma‘ani, Vol. 21, p. 131 under the verse in question).Please provide the Urdu text you would like translated.Scholars have also stated that Abu Hudhaifa had a slave named Salim, whom he freed and adopted as his son. When the above verse was revealed, he named him "Salim, Mawla Hudhaifa." (Explanatory note: "Ruh al-Bayan," under the verse in question.) However, since a person, due to previous habits, linguistic precedence, or confusion among some individuals, may attribute someone to another person other than their father, and this matter is beyond human control, therefore God is Just and Wise. He will not punish such a person. Hence, the verse adds, "At the time you commit that mistake, there is no guilt upon you": (وَلَيْسَ عَلَيْكُمْ جُنَاحٌ فِيمَا أَخْطَأْتُم بِهِ). But whatever you deliberately say, out of your own will and decision, you will surely be held accountable for that: (وَلَكِن مَّا تَعَمَّدَتْ قُلُوبُكُمْ). (Explanatory note: The commentators have stated that the word "ما" here is relative (موصولہ) and, in terms of grammatical case, is nominative (مبتداء) with the predicate omitted; it is to be understood as "وَلَكِن مَّا تَعَمَّدَتْ قُلُوبُكُمْ فَانْکَرْتُمْ تُؤْخَذُونَ بِهِ" [But whatever your hearts deliberately intend and you deny, you will be taken to task for it]). "And Allah is ever Forgiving and Merciful" (وَكَانَ اللَّهُ غَفُورًا رَّحِيمًا). He will forgive your past sins and overlook errors made out of forgetfulness or inadvertence. But if, after the revelation of this ruling, you willfully oppose it and call individuals without their fathers’ names and continue the custom of "adopted sons" and "adopted fathers," then God will not forgive you. Some commentators have stated that the subject of error also includes instances when a person addresses someone as "my son" out of love or "my father" out of respect. However, although such expressions are not sinful, they are considered as errors not under the category of sin but because these forms of address carry a metaphorical or figurative meaning, and usually the context clarifies this. Thus, the Qur’an here negates the literal expressions, not the figurative ones. The following verse presents another important issue, i.e., the abolition of the system of "Mu’akhah" (brotherhood by pact). Explanation: At that time, Muslims migrated from Mecca to Medina, and Islam completely severed their ties with their polytheist relatives residing in Mecca. The Prophet (peace be upon him), by God’s command, established the system of brotherhood and covenant between them. Thus, “Migrants” and “Ansar” were paired two by two in bonds of brotherhood and fraternity, becoming heirs to each other like real brothers. However, this ruling was temporary and specific to those extremely difficult circumstances. When Islam expanded and earlier relations were gradually restored, there was no longer a need to maintain this system. The above verse was revealed to abolish the "Mu’akhah" system, which had replaced blood relations, and limited inheritance and other rulings to real relatives only. Hence, although the system of brotherhood and fraternity was Islamic (in contrast to the system of “adopted sons,” which was a pre-Islamic ignorant practice), it was necessary for it to be abrogated after the extremely difficult circumstances ended—and so it was. Before mentioning this point in the verse under discussion, two other rulings were stated as preliminaries: that the Prophet is “closer” to the believers than themselves and that the Prophet’s wives are to be considered as mothers to the believers. It says, “The Prophet is more worthy of the believers than themselves” (النَّبِيُّ أَوْلَى بِالْمُؤْمِنِينَ مِنْ أَنفُسِهِمْ). “And his wives are their mothers” (وَأَزْوَاجُهُ أُمَّهَاتُهُمْ). Despite the Prophet being like a father and his wives like mothers, they never inherit from them, so how can it be expected that adopted sons would become legal heirs? Then it further states that relatives have precedence over one another, among the believers and migrants, according to what Allah has ordained: (وَأُوْلُوا الْأَرْحَامِ بَعْضُهُمْ أَوْلَى بِبَعْضٍ فِي كِتَابِ اللَّهِ مِنَ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ وَالْمُهَاجِرِينَ). Nonetheless, this does not close the way entirely for Muslims nor prevent them from leaving inheritance to their friends or those to whom they are attached in any way, although by the method of will, and only up to one-third of the estate; at the end of the verse, it adds, “Except that you do good [to others] for your relatives” (إِلَّا أَن تَفْعَلُوا إِلَى أَوْلِيَائِكُم مَّعْرُوفًا), so there is no prohibition. And the final phrase emphasizes all previous rulings or the last ruling specifically by stating: “This was written in the Book (i.e., the Preserved Tablet along with the Qur’an)” (كَانَ ذَلِكَ فِي الْكِتَابِ مَسْطُورًا). This was a summary of the tafseer of the above verse. Now we intend to explain each of these four mentioned rulings in detail. A: What is meant by the Prophet’s being more worthy (first in right) concerning the believers? The Qur’an in this verse describes the Prophet’s being more worthy of the believers absolutely, meaning that all powers which a person possesses over himself are superseded by the Prophet himself. Although some commentators have restricted this to “matters of social affairs”...The issue has been interpreted either in terms of "priority of judgment" or "obedience to command," but the reality is that we do not have any evidence limiting it to any one of these three matters. And if we observe that some Islamic traditions connect the issue of priority with matters related to governance, then in fact, the intention is to explain one branch of this priority. (Explanatory note: These traditions are found in "Usul al-Kafi" and the book "Ilal al-Shara’i" (refer to Tafsir Nur al-Thaqalayn, vol. 4, pp. 238-239).) Therefore, it should be said that the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) had priority over every person both in collective and individual matters, in matters related to governance as well as in matters related to judgment and invitation. His intention and desire take precedence over the intention and desire of the individual himself. There is no need to be astonished about this issue because the Prophet is infallible and the representative of God who has no consideration except the good and reformation of society and individuals. He is never subject to whims and desires, and at no time does he prioritize his own interests over those of others. On the contrary, in cases of conflict or contradiction between interests, his program is always self-sacrifice and devotion for the sake of the Ummah. This priority is in reality a branch of the priority of Divine Will because whatever we have is from God. Moreover, a person can reach the heights of faith only when his strongest attachment and love for his own self is made subordinate to God, and likewise his love and devotion to God’s representatives are made subordinate. Hence, we read in a hadith: "لایؤمن احدكم حتٰی یکون هواه تبعًا لماجت به" "None of you truly believes until his desire is subordinate to what I have brought from God." (Reference: Tafsir Fi Zilal, under the relevant verses) Also, in another hadith it is stated: "والذي نفسي بيده لا يؤمن احدكم حتٰی اكون احب اليہ من نفسه وماله وولده والناس اجمين" "By Him in Whose hand is my soul, none of you can reach true faith until I am more beloved to him than himself, his wealth, his children, and all of mankind." (Reference: Tafsir Fi Zilal, under the relevant verses) Likewise, it has also been narrated from the Prophet himself that he said: "ما من مؤمن الا وانا اولی الناس به فی الدنیا والاخرة" "There is no believer until I am the one who holds the greatest right over him in this world and the Hereafter." (Reference: Sahih Bukhari, vol. 9, p. 145; Tafsir 3 Ahzab; Musnad Ahmad ibn Hanbal, vol. 2, p. 234) The Qur’an also states in verse 36 of Surah Al-Ahzab: "وَمَا كَانَ لِمُؤْمِنٍ وَلَا مُؤْمِنَةٍ إِذَا قَضَى اللَّهُ وَرَسُولُهُ أَمْرًا أَن يَكُونَ لَهُمُ الْخِيَرَةُ مِنْ أَمْرِهِمْ" "It is not for a believing man or a believing woman, when Allah and His Messenger have decided a matter, that they should have any choice in their affair." We emphasize again that this does not mean that God has made His servants completely bound by the desires of one person. Rather, given that the Prophet holds the status of infallibility and "وَمَا يَنطِقُ عَنِ الْهَوَى إِنْ هُوَ إِلَّا وَحْيٌ يُوحَى" (An-Najm, 53:3-4) is the verifiable proof, whatever he says is the command of God and comes from Him. He is even more compassionate and merciful than a father. This priority is truly in the interest and for the welfare of the people, both in the administration of governance and Islamic society as well as in individual and personal matters. On this basis, it often happens that this priority places a great responsibility and heavy burden on the shoulders of the Prophet. For this reason, in a famous tradition, which appears both in Shia and Sunni books, the Prophet said: "انا اولى بكل مؤمن من نفسه، ومن ترك مالا فللوارث ومن ترك دینًا او ضیاعًا فالیّ وعلیّ" "I have more right over every believer than himself. Whoever leaves wealth, it belongs to the heirs; and whoever leaves debt or dependents, their care is upon me." (Explanatory note: This tradition was transmitted by Imam Sadiq (peace be upon him) from the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him), and appears in Wasail al-Shia, vol. 17, p. 551. A similar but briefer version is mentioned in Tafsir al-Qurtubi and Ruh al-Ma’ani under the relevant verses, as well as in Sahih Bukhari, vol. 6, p. 45 (Tafsir Surah Al-Ahzab).) (It should be noted that here "ضیاع" means dependents who remain without a guardian, and the term "دین" has already been clearly explained in this sense as meaning to leave debt without wealth.) B: The second ruling concerns the wives of the Prophet, who hold a position analogous to that of a mother for all believers (albeit spiritual and moral mothers, as the Prophet is the spiritual and moral father of the Ummah). This spiritual connection and relationship primarily entails "preserving respect" and the "sanctity of marriage" with the Prophet’s wives. This is why within the same Surah, a clear prohibition was revealed against marrying the wives of the Prophet after his passing. Otherwise, the matter…In terms of inheritance and likewise with regard to other "nasbi" (paternal) and "sababi" (causal) prohibitions, there is not even the slightest trace of a restriction; that is, Muslims have the right to marry the daughters of the Prophet. (Explanatory note: As in the marriage of Hazrat Ali (رضی اللہ عنہ) to the daughter of the Prophet or the marriages of the Prophet’s granddaughters to the sons of Hazrat Ja'far Tayyār.) Whereas, no person can marry the daughter of his own mother, and the issue of mahram relationships and the prohibition of looking towards the Prophet's wives was not permissible for anyone except their mahrams. There is a hadith in which a woman said to Lady Aisha: "Ya Ummah" (O mother). To which she replied, "I am not your mother; I am the mother of your men." (Explanatory note: “Majma’ al-Bayan” and “Ruh al-Ma'ani” under the relevant verses.) This indicates that this expression is meant to show the sanctity of marriage and applies only to the men of the Ummah. However, as we have stated, the issue also involves respect and reverence besides marriage, which is why Muslim women also address the wives of the Prophet with respect by calling them “my mother.” The Quran itself observes this matter, stating: "النَّبِيُّ أَوْلَى بِالْمُؤْمِنِينَ مِنْ أَنفُسِهِمْ" (The Prophet is more worthy of the believers than themselves). The Prophet’s priority is over all men and women, and the pronoun in the latter part of the phrase also returns to this broad concept. For this reason, the phrase reported from "Umm Salama" (one of the Prophet’s wives) states: "أنا أم الرجال منكم والنساء" ("I am the mother of your men and women"). (Reference: “Ruh al-Ma'ani” under the verses in discussion.) Here a question arises as to whether the phrase "وَأَزْوَاجُهُ أُمَّهَاتُهُمْ" ("His wives are considered the mothers of the believers") conflicts with what was stated in the previous verses, where it says: "Those who say to their wives, 'You are to me like the back of my mother,' speak a falsehood. Their mothers are only those who gave birth to them." How can wives, from whom Muslims are not born, be considered mothers in this case? In response to this question, it should be noted that calling a woman “mother” can be either physically or spiritually. Physically, this means only that a person was born from her. This is exactly what the previous verses stated—that one's physical mother is only the one from whom he was born. But spiritually, a mother or father is one who holds a kind of symbolic right, as the Prophet is counted as the spiritual father of the Ummah, and for this reason, his wives carry the respect of mothers. The objection raised by the Arabs of the pre-Islamic period concerning “Zihar” (a form of divorce) was that when a man called his wife “mother,” he did not mean a spiritual mother but rather likened her to his real mother, and thus counted it as a form of separation. We know that merely uttering these words does not make someone a mother physically, as physical motherhood requires childbirth. Therefore, their claim was false and baseless. However, the Prophet’s wives, although not physical mothers, were spiritual mothers because of the respect due to the Prophet, and thus deserved the respect given to mothers. If we observe that the Quran later prohibits marriage to the Prophet’s wives, this also stems from the various forms of respect due to the Prophet, as will be explained in detail later, God willing. It is worth mentioning that Islam recognizes another kind of mother—the foster mother by breastfeeding—indicated in Surah An-Nisa, verse 23: "وَأُمَّهَاتُكُمُ اللَّاتِي أَرْضَعْنَكُمْ..." (and your mothers who breastfed you), which is essentially a form of physical motherhood. C: The third ruling concerns the priority of relatives over one another regarding inheritance because at the inception of Islam, due to migration, Muslims had broken many kinship ties, either through migration or by relinquishing their bonds with kin. Therefore, the law of inheritance was organized on the basis of "Hijrah" (migration) and "Mu’akha" (brotherhood), whereby emigrants inherited from each other or from the Ansar, even though they had severed kinship ties. This was a temporary ruling which became unnecessary as Islam expanded and many prior kinship relationships were restored due to the acceptance of Islam. (You should know that Surah Al-Ahzab was revealed in the fifth year of Hijrah, the year of the Battle of the Confederates.) Therefore, the above verse was revealed to firmly establish the priority of "أُولُوا الأَرْحَامِ" (kinship relatives). However, some evidence indicates that the priority mentioned here is obligatory priority, not merely recommended, as there is consensus among Islamic scholars on this meaning, supported by numerous traditions recorded in Islamic sources. It should also be carefully noted that this verse discusses the priority of relatives over non-relatives, not the relative priority among the three categories of heirs concerning each other. In other words, here "مفضل عليهم" (those preferred) are the believers and emigrants mentioned three times in the Quran (مِنَ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ وَالْمُهَاجِرِينَ). Based on this, the meaning of the verse is...In this way, "some relatives are more entitled to inherit from others than non-relatives." As for how relatives inherit and under what criteria and regulations, the Qur’an remains silent here! Although detailed discussion on this matter is found in several verses of Surah An-Nisa. (Explanatory Note: For this reason, the reasoning of some jurists regarding priority among heirs in the classifications of inheritance does not appear correct. It seems that the preposition "ba" in "awla bi-ba‘ḍ" has led to this misunderstanding. Some scholars have mistakenly assumed that "mufaddal ‘alayhim" (those who are given preference) are certain heirs, whereas the Qur’an clearly states "(mufaddal ‘alayhi) min al-mu’minīn wa al-muhājirīn." However, the phrase "wa al-aulārāḥām" only signifies that kinship is the criterion for inheritance, and the nearer the kinship, the greater the right granted.) (Please reflect on this.) D: However, an exception appears in the above-mentioned verse regarding benefiting friends and related persons from the wealth as a memorial left behind, expressed by the phrase "(illā an taf‘alū ilā awliyā’ikum ma‘rūfan)"—"except that you do good to your friends." Its clear reference is the rule of bequest (wasiyyah), which a person can carry out with regard to one-third of their property to whomever they wish. Thus, when the structure of inheritance is established on the basis of kinship and the place of previous relatives is fixed, a person’s bond is not completely severed from their close friends and Muslim brothers. However, the nature and extent (quantity and number) depend on the individual’s own choice. Still, the condition remains that it does not exceed one-third of the property. If a person does not make a will, then all their property is distributed among the relatives according to the laws of inheritance, and the one-third portion prescribed by the will will not apply to them. (Explanatory Note: A group of exegetes hold the view that the phrase "illā an taf‘alū" in the sentence implying exception is a "disconnected exception" because the injunction of bequest is separate from the law of inheritance. However, our view is that if the exception is connected here, there is no harm, because the phrase "awlā al-arḥām" is proof that relatives have greater right to the wealth left by the deceased than others. But in the case of bequest, the "legatee" has priority over the relatives up to the limit of one-third of the estate. This is effectively a type of exception similar to those which appear in the verses of inheritance following the phrase "min ba‘d waṣiyyah...".)

Numerous traditions transmitted from the Ahl al‑Bayt have interpreted the āyah under discussion with reference to ulū al‑arḥām. In some narrations, the āyah has been explained in connection with the issue of inheritance of property, which is the well‑known interpretation among exegetes. However, in other narrations, it has been interpreted as referring to the inheritance of authority and leadership (wilāyah and khilāfah) within the family of the Prophet and the Imams of the Ahl al‑Bayt عليهم السلام. Among these, a narration from Imām Jaʿfar al‑Ṣādiq عليه السلام states that when he was asked about the meaning of the āyah, he replied: “it was revealed concerning the descendants of al‑Ḥusayn عليه السلام.” When the narrator inquired whether it pertained to inheritance of wealth, the Imām responded: “No; rather, it relates to governance and authority.” (Biḥawālah: Tafsīr al‑Burhān, vol. 3, pp. 292–293). It is evident that such narrations do not negate the application of the āyah to material inheritance; rather, they direct attention to the broader scope of the concept of inheritance. In this wider sense, inheritance includes not only property but also the transmission of authority, leadership, and spiritual legacy. This form of inheritance differs fundamentally from hereditary monarchy. It is not a purely genealogical succession, but one based upon competence, worthiness, and qualification. Accordingly, within the lineage of the Imams, this inheritance pertains only to those individuals who possess the requisite merit. This principle is analogous to the divine response to Ibrāhīm عليه السلام when he sought leadership for his progeny, and it was declared that such مقام does not extend to those among them who are unjust, but is reserved for the righteous. A parallel concept appears in devotional expressions, such as those recited in ziyārah, where the martyrs in the path of Allah—particularly al‑Ḥusayn عليه السلام—are described as heirs of earlier prophets: Adam, Nūḥ, Ibrāhīm, Mūsā, ʿĪسٰى, and Muḥammad صلى الله علیہ و آلہ وسلم. In this context, inheritance signifies the transmission of spiritual, ethical, doctrinal, and moral qualities rather than material possession. It represents continuity in the mission of guidance, embodying the enduring legacy of prophetic truth and divine values across generations.

See ayat 8 for tafseer.

In the preceding verses, the broad authority of the Prophet صلى الله علیہ و آلہ وسلم was established under the expression: النَّبِيُّ أَوْلَىٰ بِالْمُؤْمِنِينَ مِنْ أَنفُسِهِمْ In the present passage, however, the Qurʾān proceeds to expound the immense and weighty responsibilities of the Prophet and the other great prophets. This reflects an essential principle: authority and obligation are inseparably linked. Wherever rights (ḥuqūq) exist, corresponding duties (farāʾiḍ) are also present, as the two cannot be dissociated. Thus, while the Prophet possesses extensive authority, he is simultaneously entrusted with profound responsibilities. The Qurʾān states: وَإِذْ أَخَذْنَا مِنَ النَّبِيِّينَ مِيثَاقَهُمْ وَمِنكَ وَمِن نُّوحٍ وَإِبْرَاهِيمَ وَمُوسَىٰ وَعِيسَى ابْنِ مَرْيَمَ وَأَخَذْنَا مِنْهُم مِّيثَاقًا غَلِيظًا “And [remember] when We took from the prophets their covenant, and from you, and from Nūḥ, Ibrāhīm, Mūsā, and ʿĪsā ibn Maryam; and We took from them a solemn covenant.” The verse first refers generally to all prophets, and then specifies the five ulū al‑ʿazm prophets. The mention of the Prophet Muḥammad صلى الله علیہ و آلہ وسلم precedes the others, indicating his elevated rank. This covenant was universal, encompassing all prophets, though it was emphasized more strongly in the case of these foremost messengers. The expression “مِّيثَاقًا غَلِيظًا” underscores the gravity and intensity of this commitment. The essential nature of this covenant, as indicated by various exegetical perspectives, may be understood as a unified principle manifest in multiple forms. It consisted of the obligation to fulfill the mission of prophethood, to convey divine revelation, to guide humanity, and to uphold Tawḥīd as the central axis of all دعوت. It also included the mutual confirmation of prophetic missions—earlier prophets preparing their communities for later messengers, and later prophets affirming those who preceded them—so that all prophetic دعوت would converge upon a single حقیقت. This concept is corroborated by other Qurʾānic passages, such as: وَإِذْ أَخَذَ اللّهُ مِيثَاقَ النَّبِيِّيْنَ … لَتُؤْمِنُنَّ بِهِ وَلَتَنصُرُنَّهُ which emphasizes both belief in and support for successive messengers. Similarly, the covenant extends to those entrusted with religious knowledge, obligating them to convey truth without concealment. The subsequent āyah clarifies the objective of this covenant: لِّيَسْأَلَ الصَّادِقِينَ عَن صِدْقِهِمْ وَأَعَدَّ لِلْكَافِرِينَ عَذَابًا أَلِيمًا “So that He may question the truthful about their truthfulness, and He has prepared for the disbelievers a painful punishment.” The “صادقین” in this context are best understood as those believers who demonstrate the authenticity of their claim through action—particularly through steadfastness, sacrifice, and commitment in the path of Allah. This interpretation is supported by parallel Qurʾānic usages, such as: مِنَ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ رِجَالٌ صَدَقُوا مَا عَاهَدُوا اللَّهَ عَلَيْهِ and: إِنَّمَا الْمُؤْمِنُونَ … أُولَٰئِكَ هُمُ الصَّادِقُونَ as well as: أُولَٰئِكَ هُمُ الصَّادِقُونَ These references collectively indicate that “صادقین” are those who substantiate their ایمان through action—through striving (jihād), patience in adversity, and adherence to divine commitments. The questioning referred to in the āyah signifies an examination of this sincerity: whether individuals have translated their claims into lived reality. While the ظاهر of the āyah suggests that this questioning will occur on the Day of Judgment, it may also be understood in a practical sense as unfolding within worldly life through divine آزمائش. The mission of the prophets itself constitutes the framework within which this examination occurs, and human conduct serves as its answer. Thus, the passage establishes a profound connection between prophetic responsibility and human accountability: the covenant of the prophets forms the foundation of divine guidance, while the response of the “صادقین” determines the realization of that guidance within human history.

See ayat 11 for tafseer.

See ayat 11 for tafseer.

These āyāt, together with the subsequent passages—amounting collectively to seventeen āyāt—address the rigorous divine trial of the believers (muʾminīn) and the hypocrites (munāfiqīn), examining the truthfulness of their claims through practical testing, a theme already introduced in the preceding verses. They refer specifically to one of the most significant events in early Islamic history: the Battle of al‑Aḥzāb. This event marked a decisive turning point, shifting the balance of power between Islam and disbelief in favor of the المسلمين, and paving the way for subsequent victories. Indeed, after this confrontation, the opposing forces were effectively broken and no longer capable of mounting a comparable challenge. The designation “Aḥzāb” reflects the coalition of multiple hostile groups and forces united against Islam. The conflict was instigated in part by a faction of Banū Naḍīر, who encouraged Quraysh and allied tribes, including Ghatafān, Banū Asad, and others, to launch a comprehensive assault aimed at eradicating Islam entirely—by eliminating the Prophet صلى الله علیہ و آلہ وسلم, suppressing the مسلم community, and destroying Madinah. Faced with a vastly superior force, estimated in the narrative as numbering approximately ten thousand against three thousand Muslims, the believers confronted an अत्यंत perilous situation. Upon consultation, and following the suggestion of Salmān al‑Fāرسī, a trench was dug around Madinah, giving the engagement its alternate designation, the Battle of al‑Khandaq. The circumstances were severe: morale was strained, lives were endangered, and the internal threat posed by hypocrites (munāfiqīn) intensified difficulties. Yet, within this moment of crisis, divine wisdom aimed to achieve multiple purposes: to deliver a decisive blow to the forces of disbelief, to expose elements of hypocrisy, and to refine the believers through آزمائش. Ultimately, the confrontation concluded with the Muslims’ success through divine intervention. A powerful wind and unseen forces—described as divinely sent hosts—disrupted the enemy encampment, instilling fear and disarray. The opposition was compelled to withdraw without achieving their objectives. The extraordinary role of ʿAlī ibn Abī Ṭālib عليه السلام in confronting key adversaries further exemplified the manifestation of divine support. The Qurʾān summarizes this entire event concisely in a single āyah and then elaborates upon its dimensions in subsequent verses: يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا اذْكُرُوا نِعْمَةَ اللَّهِ عَلَيْكُمْ إِذْ جَاءَتْكُمْ جُنُودٌ “O you who believe, remember the blessing of Allah upon you when hosts came against you.” This is followed by the account of divine intervention: فَأَرْسَلْنَا عَلَيْهِمْ رِيحًا وَجُنُودًا لَّمْ تَرَوْهَا “We sent against them a wind and forces that you did not see.” The mention of “جُنُودًا لَّمْ تَرَوْهَا” indicates unseen assistance, emphasizing that the outcome was not solely the result of material circumstances but of divine support. The passage concludes with the assertion: وَكَانَ اللَّهُ بِمَا تَعْمَلُونَ بَصِيرًا “And Allah is ever Seeing of what you do.” This statement underscores a fundamental principle: that divine observation encompasses all human actions—those of the believers, the hypocrites, and the opposing forces alike. The events of al‑Aḥzāب thus serve not merely as a historical account but as a moral and theological framework illustrating divine assistance, human آزمائش, and the ultimate manifestation of truth through steadfastness and ایمان.

1- The interpretation of "اذكروا" indicates that these verses were revealed some time after the battle, meaning that now was the opportunity for the Muslims to analyze what they had witnessed according to their own understanding and perspective so that its deep effect could be realized. 2- The term "جنود" refers to the various tribes and factions of the Jahiliyyah period (for example, Quraysh, Ghatafan, Banu Salim, Banu Asad, Banu Farazah, Banu Ashja', and Banu Murrah), including the Jewish tribe inside Medina. 3- The phrase "جُنُودًا لَّمْ تَرَوْهَا" refers to those who came to support the Messenger صلی اللہ علیہ وسلم, namely the angels whose help for the believers in the Battle of Badr is explicitly mentioned in the Quran. However, as has been explained under verse 9 of Surah Al-Anfal, there is no proof that the visible army of angels formally entered the battlefield or participated in the fighting. Rather, there are evidences indicating that they were revealed solely to raise the morale and strengthen the hearts of the believers. (Explanatory note: For further clarification on this matter, refer to Tafseer Namunah, volume 4, page referenced under the mentioned verse.) The subsequent verse, describing the critical situation of the Battle of the Trench, the great power of the enemies, and the intense distress of many Muslims, states: "Remember the time when they came at you from above you and from below you, and when the eyes grew wild, and the hearts reached the throats, and you began to imagine about Allah various [unfounded] thoughts." (إِذْ جَاؤُوكُم مِّن فَوْقِكُمْ وَمِنْ أَسْفَلَ مِنكُمْ وَإِذْ زَاغَتِ الْأَبْصَارُ وَبَلَغَتِ الْقُلُوبُ الْحَنَاجِرَ وَتَظُنُّونَ بِاللَّهِ الظُّنُونَا) Many commentators understand the word "فوق" in this verse to signify the eastern side of Medina because the tribe of Ghatafan entered from there, while "أَسْفَلَ" (below) is taken to mean the west, as Quraysh and their allies entered from there. However, considering that Makkah is directly south of Medina, the Meccan polytheists’ tribes should have come from the south. Perhaps the paths into the city were such that they initially circled somewhat before entering Medina from the west. Regardless of the exact direction, the phrase points toward the siege of the city by Islam’s various enemies. The phrase "زَاغَتِ الْأَبْصَارُ" derives from the root "زیغ", meaning a deviation or a turning away, indicating a state induced by extreme fear and terror in which a person's gaze fixes rigidly on a single point as the eyes become dazed. The phrase "بَلَغَتِ الْقُلُوبُ الْحَنَاجِرَ" ("the hearts reached the throats") is an eloquent expression. Similar to the Persian idiom meaning "the soul reached the lips," as the heart (which literally refers to the center of blood circulation) does not physically move to the throat. The expression "تَظُنُّونَ بِاللَّهِ الظُّنُونَا" points to a group among the Muslims who began to entertain wrong suspicions about Allah because they had not yet attained complete spiritual maturity. These are the very individuals whom the subsequent verse states were severely shaken. Perhaps some among them thought that ultimately they would be defeated and that the enemy’s army, with its great power and strength, would succeed; that the final days of Islam had arrived; and that the Prophet’s promise of victory would never be fulfilled. However, these thoughts and perspectives did not form a creed but arose in the depths of some hearts in the form of whispers, just as the Quran mentions concerning the Battle of Uhud: "And a faction among them was overcome by their own soul, and they thought about Allah [various] thoughts of ignorance." (Aal Imran 3:154) Nevertheless, the addressees in the verse under discussion are certainly Muslims, as indicated by the phrase "يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُواْ" at the beginning of the preceding verse. Those who interpret this as addressing hypocrites either overlook this point or assume that such suspicion is incompatible with faith and Islam. Yet, such doubts, especially expressed as whispers and under severe crisis, are natural and normal. (Explanatory note: Some scholars have taken the word "ظُنُونَا" here to mean both good and bad suspicions, but the evidences in this and the following verse indicate that bad suspicions are intended.) This was the stage where the furnace of divine testing blazed intensely, as the subsequent verse states: "There the believers were tested and severely shaken." (هُنَالِكَ ابْتُلِيَ الْمُؤْمِنُونَ وَزُل)(They were shaken with a severe shaking). It is natural that when a person is engulfed in intellectual storms, his body cannot remain unaffected by these storms; rather, it also sinks into a sea of restlessness and trembling. We have often observed that when people are mentally distressed, wherever they sit, they remain restless, keep rubbing their hands, and express their anxiety and worries through their movements. One of the evidences of this intense distress, which historians have also recorded, was when five famous Arab warriors, whose chief was Amr ibn Abdud, appeared in battle attire with distinctive pride and arrogance on the field and kept calling out, "هل من مبارز" (Is there anyone to fight?). Especially Amr ibn Abdud recited verses mocking Paradise and the Hereafter, saying, "Do you not say that your slain will go to Paradise? So, is there not one among you eager to see Paradise?" But in response to his slogans, the army remained deeply silent, and no one dared to challenge him except Ali ibn Abi Talib (رضي الله عنه), who stood up for the battle and led the Muslims to a great victory. The details of this will be discussed in the section on points. Indeed! Just as steel is placed in a hot furnace to be refined, similarly, the early Muslims passed through the furnace of battles like the Battle of the Confederates (Ahzab) so that they might emerge as pure gold and display courage and determination when facing calamities.

See ayat 17 for tafseer.

See ayat 17 for tafseer.

See ayat 17 for tafseer.

See ayat 17 for tafseer.

See ayat 17 for tafseer.

As previously stated, the furnace of trial was intensified during the Battle of al‑Aḥzāb, and all individuals were subjected to this great test. It should be noted that in such critical periods, those who outwardly appear to stand in a single line during normal circumstances become divided into multiple ranks. Here as well, the Muslims were divided into different groups: one group consisted of true believers, another comprised obstinate and deeply hypocritical individuals, another group was concerned with their homes, lives, and the thought of fleeing, while some sought to discourage others from engaging in jihād, and yet another group attempted to strengthen their ties with the hypocrites. In summary, every individual disclosed their inner realities in this extraordinary “arena of reckoning” and “day of manifestation.” In the preceding verses, the discussion focused on a group of weak believers and the negative suspicions and anxieties that had arisen within them. In the first āyah under consideration here, the Qurʾān reflects upon the hypocrites and those in whose hearts there was disease, stating: “وَإِذْ يَقُولُ الْمُنَافِقُونَ وَالَّذِينَ فِي قُلُوبِهِم مَرَضٌ مَا وَعَدَنَا اللَّهُ وَرَسُولُهُ إِلَّا غُرُورًا.” In the accounts of the Battle of al‑Aḥzāb, it is reported that while the trench was being dug, the Muslims encountered a large and extremely hard rock which their tools could not break. The Messenger of God صلى الله علیہ و آلہ وسلم was informed, and he personally entered the trench and struck the rock with a pickaxe. With the first blow, a portion broke off, producing a flash of light, upon which he proclaimed “Allāhu Akbar,” and the Muslims did likewise. With a second strike, another portion broke, producing another flash, followed again by takbīr. With a third strike, the remaining rock shattered completely with a brilliant spark, and again takbīr was raised. At this point, Salmān al‑Fārsī asked about the event, and the Prophet explained that during the first flash he was shown the lands of Ḥīrah and the palaces of the Persian kings and was informed by Jibrīl that his community would conquer them. In the second flash, he was shown the palaces of Syria and Byzantium, and again was given glad tidings of their conquest. In the third flash, he saw the palaces of Ṣanʿāʾ and Yemen, and was informed that his community would also triumph over them. The hypocrites, observing this, turned to one another and mocked these statements, considering them baseless. They argued that while the Muslims were besieged and unable even to move safely within their own surroundings, such grand predictions could not be taken seriously. It was in response to this attitude that the āyah declared that these hypocrites and diseased hearts claimed that neither God nor His Messenger had promised them anything except deception. It is evident that “الَّذِينَ فِي قُلُوبِهِم مَّرَضٌ” refers to the hypocrites themselves, for no illness is greater than hypocrisy. A person possessing a sound divine nature has only one face, whereas one with multiple faces is spiritually diseased, living in contradiction and anxiety, as also indicated in “فِي قُلُوبِهِم مَّرَضٌ فَزَادَهُمُ اللّهُ مَرَضًا” (al‑Baqarah, 10). The subsequent āyah elaborates further on this group, stating: “وَإِذْ قَالَت طَّائِفَةٌ مِّنْهُمْ يَا أَهْلَ يَثْرِبَ لَا مُقَامَ لَكُمْ فَارْجِعُوا.” They urged the inhabitants of Madinah to abandon the battlefield, claiming that resistance was futile. At the same time, another group sought permission from the Prophet to return, falsely claiming that their homes were exposed and vulnerable: “وَيَسْتَأْذِنُ فَرِيقٌ مِّنْهُمُ النَّبِيَّ يَقُولُونَ إِنَّ بُيُوتَنَا عَوْرَةٌ وَمَا هِيَ بِعَوْرَةٍ إِن يُرِيدُونَ إِلَّا فِرَارًا.” The term “عورة” refers to something vulnerable or exposed, but here it is used as a pretext. Their true intention was to flee. Reports mention that Banū Ḥārithah requested permission to withdraw on similar grounds, but their excuse was exposed as insincere. The use of “يَثْرِب” instead of Madinah may reflect either a rejection of the Islamic identity of the city or an attempt to revive pre‑Islamic sentiments. The Qurʾān then emphasizes the weakness of their faith: “وَلَوْ دُخِلَتْ عَلَيْهِم مِّنْ أَقْطَارِهَا ثُمَّ سُئِلُوا الْفِتْنَةَ لَآتَوْهَا.” Had the enemy entered from all sides and demanded that they revert to disbelief, they would have complied immediately. Here “الفتنة” refers to disbelief and idolatry. The Qurʾān further reminds them of their prior covenant with God: “وَلَقَدْ كَانُوا عَاهَدُوا اللَّهَ مِن قَبْلُ لَا يُوَلُّونَ الْأَدْبَارَ وَكَانَ عَهْدُ اللَّهِ مَسْؤُولًا.” Whether this refers to pledges made at Uḥud, Badr, or Bayʿat al‑ʿAqabah, the meaning is general: every believer, by accepting faith, enters into a covenant to defend the religion. The Qurʾān refutes their excuses with clear reasoning. First, it states: “قُل لَّن يَنفَعَكُمُ الْفِرَارُ…”—flight from death or killing will not benefit them, for death is inevitable. If their appointed time has come, it will reach them regardless of where they are; if not, they will merely prolong a dishonorable existence. Second, it declares: “قُلْ مَن ذَا الَّذِي يَعْصِمُكُم مِّنَ اللَّهِ…”—who can protect them from God’s will, whether He intends harm or mercy? “وَلَا يَجِدُونَ لَهُم مِّن دُونِ اللَّهِ وَلِيًّا وَلَا نَصِيرًا.” Thus, since all destinies lie in the hand of God, it is necessary to accept His command wholeheartedly, including the command to engage in jihād, which is a source of honor in this world and the next—even if it culminates in martyrdom.

See ayat 20 for tafseer.

See ayat 20 for tafseer.

Following this, the Qurʾān points to a group among the hypocrites who themselves withdrew from the battlefield of al‑Aḥzāb and also attempted to persuade others to withdraw. It states: “قَدْ يَعْلَمُ اللَّهُ الْمُعَوِّقِينَ مِنكُمْ”—God knows well those among you who tried to hinder others from participation. Likewise, He knows those who said to their brothers, “وَالْقَائِلِينَ لِإِخْوَانِهِمْ هَلُمَّ إِلَيْنَا”—come toward us and abandon this dangerous confrontation. These are people who do not come to battle except in very small numbers, and even then only due to compulsion or for ostentation: (وَلَا يَأْتُونَ الْبَأْسَ إِلَّا قَلِيلًا). The term “معوّقين” derives from the root “عوق,” meaning to prevent or obstruct, while “بأس” signifies hardship and here refers to warfare. This āyah may refer to two groups: one consisting of hypocrites present within the ranks of Muslims, attempting to deter weak believers from engaging in battle; and another group of hypocrites or allied elements who remained behind and called others away from the battlefield. It is also possible that the āyah describes two different behaviors of the same group—obstructing others when among them, and inviting them away when separated. A reported incident illustrates this condition: a Companion of the Prophet encountered his brother who was engaged in comfort and leisure while the Prophet and the believers faced danger. When reproached, the brother cynically suggested abandoning the battlefield, expressing despair regarding the Prophet’s survival. This incident, it is reported, occasioned the revelation of the āyah. In such contexts, the term “إِخْوَانِهِمْ” may refer either to literal kinship or to ideological association, similar to the usage in “إِنَّ الْمُبَذِّرِينَ كَانُوا إِخْوَانَ الشَّيَاطِينِ” (al‑Isrāʾ, 27). The next āyah identifies another trait: “أَشِحَّةً عَلَيْكُمْ”—they are miserly toward you. The term “أشحة” (from “شح”) denotes a form of miserliness combined with greed. Their reluctance extended not only to risking their lives but also to providing material or even moral support. Their miserliness increased alongside their self‑interest. After describing their lack of generosity and self‑sacrifice, the Qurʾān highlights another prominent trait common to hypocrites in all periods: their extreme cowardice in times of crisis. It states: “فَإِذَا جَاءَ الْخَوْفُ رَأَيْتَهُمْ يَنظُرُونَ إِلَيْكَ تَدُورُ أَعْيُنُهُمْ”—when fear arises, one sees them looking at you while their eyes roll like those of a person fainting at the approach of death. Lacking genuine faith and inner stability, they lose all composure in difficult situations. However, once danger passes, their behavior changes: “فَإِذَا ذَهَبَ الْخَوْفُ سَلَقُوكُم بِأَلْسِنَةٍ حِدَادٍ أَشِحَّةً عَلَى الْخَيْرِ.” They begin to speak harshly and demand their share of spoils as if they were the true victors. The expression “سلقوكم” conveys aggressive and audacious speech, while “ألسنة حداد” refers to sharp and harsh language. The āyah concludes by identifying the root cause: “أُولَٰئِكَ لَمْ يُؤْمِنُوا.” These individuals do not truly believe. Consequently, “فَأَحْبَطَ اللَّهُ أَعْمَالَهُمْ”—their deeds are rendered void, as they lack sincerity and are not aligned with divine intention. “وَكَانَ ذَٰلِكَ عَلَى اللَّهِ يَسِيرًا”—and this is easy for God. In summary, the “معوّقين” are characterized by the following traits: • They avoid participation in battle except minimally. • They refrain from any form of sacrifice, whether of life or wealth. • They lose composure in times of crisis due to fear. • They claim credit and demand rewards upon success. • Their lack of faith renders their actions devoid of value. Such characteristics are not limited to a specific time but recur among hypocrites in all societies. The Qurʾān presents these traits with precision, enabling their recognition across different contexts. The following āyah further illustrates their cowardice: “يَحْسَبُونَ الْأَحْزَابَ لَمْ يَذْهَبُوا.” Even after the enemy coalition has dispersed, they still imagine that the threat persists, as fear dominates their perception. It continues: “وَإِن يَأْتِ الْأَحْزَابُ يَوَدُّوا لَوْ أَنَّهُم بَادُونَ فِي الْأَعْرَابِ.” Should the confederate forces return, they would prefer to flee into the desert and live among the Bedouins, far from the battlefield, merely inquiring about events from a distance: “يَسْأَلُونَ عَنْ أَنبَائِكُمْ.” Finally, it states: “وَلَوْ كَانُوا فِيكُم مَّا قَاتَلُوا إِلَّا قَلِيلًا.” Even if they remained among you, they would fight only minimally, and even that not out of sincerity but due to fear of reproach or for outward display. Hence, their presence offers no real benefit; indeed, their absence is preferable to their participation.

See ayat 25 for tafseer.

See ayat 25 for tafseer.

See ayat 25 for tafseer.

See ayat 25 for tafseer.

So far, the discussion has been about various groups and their military parties, which include weak-hearted Muslims, hypocrites, the leaders of disbelief and hypocrisy, and those who prevent jihad. At the end of this discussion, the Holy Quran speaks about the "true believers," their high spirits, manliness, courage, and other characteristics in this great jihad. The prelude to this discussion begins with the person of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him), who was the leader, commander, and perfect example for the Muslims. God says: "Indeed, in the Messenger of Allah you have a good example for whoever hopes in Allah and the Last Day and remembers Allah often." (لَقَدْ كَانَ لَكُمْ فِي رَسُولِ اللَّهِ أُسْوَةٌ حَسَنَةٌ لِّمَن كَانَ يَرْجُو اللَّهَ وَالْيَوْمَ الْآخِرَ وَذَكَرَ اللَّهَ كَثِيرًا) The best example and model for you is not only in this battlefield but in the entire life—the personality and attributes of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him). His lofty spirit, patience and perseverance, steadfastness, prudence, wisdom, sincerity, attention towards God, control over events, refusal to bow before difficulties and calamities—each one of these is a perfect model and beautiful example for the Muslims. He is such a great captain that when his ship is caught in the harshest storms, he does not show the slightest weakness, anxiety, or panic. He is both the captain of the ship and its reliable anchor and guiding light. He is a source of comfort and tranquility for those seated on it and a solace for their souls. Together with the other believers, he takes the spade in hand, digs the trench, collects stones with the shovel and throws them outside the trench. To boost the morale of his companions and encourage calm thinking, he jokes with them, recites invigorating and passionate verses that warm their hearts and souls, repeatedly insists on the remembrance of God, and gives them glad tidings of a bright future and magnificent victories. He warns them of the conspiracies of the hypocrites and always commands them to be vigilant against those. He does not neglect the correct military methods and best tactics for even a moment. Nonetheless, he also does not hesitate to breach the enemy's ranks by various means. Yes! He is the best leader of the believers and a beautiful example for them—in this battlefield as well as in all other fields. The word "Uswah" (rooted in "Uruwah") essentially means the state a person adopts when following another; in other words, it is another name for imitation and emulation. Therefore, its meaning is verbal [masdar], so that the phrase "لَقَدْ كَانَ لَكُمْ فِي رَسُولِ اللَّهِ أُسْوَةٌ حَسَنَةٌ" means that in the person of the Messenger of God, you have good emulation and following. By emulating him, you can correct your ways and choose the "straight path." The commonly accepted view is that the Quran, in this verse under discussion, limits this good example to those who have three qualities: they hope in Allah and the Day of Judgment, and they remember Allah abundantly. In reality, faith in the Origin and Return is the cause, and remembrance of God sustains it. For there is no doubt that one whose heart is not filled with such faith cannot follow the footsteps of the Prophet. Moreover, even if he sets out on this path, if he does not constantly remember God and repel the devils from himself, he will not be able to maintain constant imitation and emulation. It is also noteworthy that despite the bravery and courage that Hazrat Ali (peace be upon him) demonstrated on all battlefields—including a vivid example in the Battle of the Confederates (Ahzab), to be mentioned later—he said in a conversation: "When the war intensified, we sought refuge with the Messenger of Allah, and none among us was closer to the enemy than him." (Reference: Nahj al-Balagha, Shortened Words, Chapter on Wonders of Speech) After this introduction and prelude, the Quran describes the condition of the true believers as follows: When the believers saw the armies of the Confederates (Ahzab), not only did they not panic, but they said: "This is what Allah and His Messenger had promised us, and Allah and His Messenger spoke the truth." And this event did not increase them except in faith and submission. (وَلَمَّا رَأَى الْمُؤْمِنُونَ الْأَحْزَابَ قَالُوا هَذَا مَا وَعَدَنَا اللَّهُ وَرَسُولُهُ وَصَدَقَ اللَّهُ وَرَسُولُهُ وَمَا زَادَهُمْ إِلَّا إِيْمَانًا وَتَسْلِيمًا) What promise was this that Allah and the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) made? Some say this refers to the conversation that the Prophet had made earlier, that soon the Arab tribes and your various enemies will join hands and come towards you. But know that in the end, victory will be yours. When the believers saw the multitude of the Confederates, they became convinced that this was the very promise of the Prophet and said that now—Since the first part of the promise has already been fulfilled, the second part—that is, victory and success—will certainly follow. Thus, their faith and spirit of acceptance increased. Secondly, Allah said to the Muslims in Surah Al-Baqarah, verse 214: "Do you think that you will enter Paradise while such [trial] has not yet come to you as came to those who passed on before you? They were touched by poverty and hardship and were shaken until [even their] messenger and those who believed with him said, 'When is the help of Allah?' Unquestionably, the help of Allah is near." In summary, they were told that they would be tested with severe trials, and seeing these events, they were drawn to the truthfulness of Allah and His Messenger’s words, and their faith increased. However, there is no contradiction between these two interpretations, especially when attention is paid to the fact that one is the promise of Allah Himself and the other is the promise of His Prophet, and both matters come together in the verse under discussion. Therefore, combining these two interpretations seems very appropriate. The subsequent verse refers to a specific group of the believers who were the foremost in following the Messenger of Allah PBUH & His Pure Progeny. They remained steadfast in their covenant with Allah that they were ready for sacrifice and devotion until their last breath and last drop of blood. It is stated: "Among the believers are men who have proven true to what they pledged to Allah. Among them is he who has fulfilled his vow [to the death], and among them is he who awaits [his chance]" (مِنَ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ رِجَالٌ صَدَقُوا مَا عَاهَدُوا اللَّهَ عَلَيْهِ فَمِنْهُم مَّن قَضَى نَحْبَهُ وَمِنْهُم مَّن يَنتَظِرُ). "And they did not alter [their commitment] in the least" (وَمَا بَدَّلُوا تَبْدِيلًا). Unlike the hypocrites and weak-hearted people, who are tossed about by the storm of events and who daily hatch new and impure schemes in their weak minds, these steadfast believers are solid and firm like a mountain. They have proven that the covenant they made will never be broken. The word "نحب" (root: "عهد") carries meanings of pledge, vow, and covenant, and sometimes indicates the risk of death, swift movement, or loud crying. (Explanatory note: Mufradat al-Raghib, Majma' al-Bayan, and Lisan al-Arab under "نحب") Among the commentators, there is a difference of opinion regarding the persons to whom this verse refers. The famous Sunni scholar, Hakim Abu al-Qasim al-Hiskani, narrates with a chain of transmission from Imam Ali (عليه السلام) that he said: "The verse 'رِجَالٌ صَدَقُوا مَا عَاهَدُوا اللَّهَ عَلَيْهِ' was revealed about us. By Allah, I am among those who are awaiting [martyrdom] and I have not changed in the least" (وَمَا بَدَّلْتُ تَبْدِيلًا). (Reference: Majma' al-Bayan under the verse discussed) Some other commentators have said that "فَمِنْهُم مَّن قَضَى نَحْبَهُ" refers to the martyrs of the Battles of Badr and Uhud, and "وَمِنْهُم مَّن يَنتَظِرُ" refers to other sincere Muslims who were awaiting victory or martyrdom. It is also narrated from Anas ibn Malik that his uncle Anas ibn Nadr was not present on the day of the Battle of Badr. When he learned of it after the battle, he deeply regretted not participating in the jihad and made a covenant with Allah that if there were another battle, he would certainly participate and remain steadfast in the field as long as he lived. Therefore, he took part in the Battle of Uhud, and when some fled, he stood firm, fought with great bravery, was wounded, and finally attained the rank of martyrdom. (Explanatory note: Tafsir al-Qurtubi, Fi Zilal al-Qur'an, and Majma' al-Bayan (with slight variation)) It is also reported from Ibn Abbas who said that "فَمِنْهُم مَّن قَضَى نَحْبَهُ" refers to Hamza ibn Abd al-Muttalib, the other martyrs of Uhud, Anas ibn Nadr, and his companions. (Explanatory note: Majma' al-Bayan under the verse discussed) There is no contradiction among these interpretations because the verse has a broad meaning encompassing all the martyrs of Islam who had attained martyrdom before the Battle of the Confederates (Ahzab). The "awaiting" also includes all those who lived awaiting victory, success, and martyrdom, with Hamza as the leader of the first group and Ali ibn Abi Talib as the leader of the second. Hence, in Tafsir as-Safi, it is stated: "The companions of Hussain at Karbala—whoever among them wished to go out toward the battlefield would bid farewell to Imam Hussain and say: 'Peace be upon you, O son of the Messenger of Allah!' He would respond, 'And peace be upon you, and we are behind you,' and he would recite: 'Among them is he who has fulfilled his vow, and among them is he who awaits.'" Among the companions of Imam Hussain (عليه السلام), whoever intended to go to the field at Karbala would greet the Imam with peace, and the Imam would answer them in kind.And then he recited this verse, "فَمِنْهُم مَّن قَضَى نَحْبَهُ وَمِنْهُم مَّن يَنتَظِرُ" (Reference: Tafseer Safi under the discussed verse). From the books of Muqatil, it is known that Imam Hussain (عليه السلام) recited this verse near the funeral of other martyrs such as Muslim bin Awsajah, and at the time he received news of the martyrdom of Abdullah bin Yaqtar as well (Reference: Tafseer Noor al-Thaqalayn, Vol. 4, p. 269). From here it becomes clear that the verse has such a broad meaning that it encompasses all true believers of every era—whether they are those who have imbibed the cup of martyrdom or those who, without any wavering, have remained steadfast in their covenant with God and were prepared for jihad and martyrdom. In the following verse, the outcome of the deeds of the believers and hypocrites and their ultimate goal are summarized in a brief sentence: "The purpose is that Allah may reward the truthful for their truthfulness and punish the hypocrites if He wills, or forgive them; indeed, Allah is Forgiving and Merciful." (لِّيَجْزِيَ اللَّهُ الصَّادِقِينَ بِصِدْقِهِمْ وَيُعَذِّبَ الْمُنَافِقِينَ إِن شَاءَ أَوْ يَتُوبَ عَلَيْهِمْ إِنَّ اللَّهَ كَانَ غَفُورًا رَّحِيمًا) Neither will the sincerity and loyalty of the sincere believers remain without a reward of goodness, nor will the weakness and sabotage of the hypocrites go without punishment and chastisement. The Quran keeps open the doors of repentance and return for the hypocrites; therefore, with the phrase "أَوْ يَتُوبَ عَلَيْهِمْ," it opens the doors of repentance for them, and with "غفور رحيم," it describes Himself so that the enthusiasm for faith, sincerity, and adherence to the prescribed duties may be awakened within them. Since this phrase is mentioned as a result of the hypocrites’ wrongful deeds, some eminent commentators have inferred from it that sometimes a deeply sinful heart can become a means for movement, revolution, and return toward truth and reality, and that such evil can become a starting point for good and righteousness. (Explanatory note: Tafseer Al-Mizan under the discussed verse). The last verse under discussion concludes this discourse as a final word regarding the Battle of the Confederates (Ahzab). It succinctly encapsulates the event saying: "Allah turned back those who disbelieved, in their rage, they gained no good." (وَرَدَّ اللَّهُ الَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا بِغَيْظِهِمْ لَمْ يَنَالُوا خَيْرًا) The word "غیظ" means anger, and sometimes it also implies sadness and sorrow; here, both meanings are intended. The army of the Confederates were hopeful of their final victory over the Muslim army, but they failed and returned to their territories in a state of grief and anger. Here, the word "good" (خیر) means success in battle. Although the success of the disbelieving army was never truly good, the Quran expresses it as "good" reflecting their own perspective, indicating that in this arena they were not granted any kind of victory. Some have said that here "good" (خیر) means wealth, since this word has been used in other places in the Quran with such meaning—for example, Surah Al-Baqarah, verse 180 (known as the verse of bequest), which states: "If he leaves behind goodness, [it is] for the parents and close relatives." Because one of the goals of the disbelievers' attack was to seize the spoils of Medina and to plunder the land. However, there is no proof to limit the meaning of "good" here to wealth alone; rather, it includes every kind of success they sought, including wealth, from which they were deprived. In the following phrase, the Quran further says: "And Allah sufficed the believers from fighting." (وَكَفَى اللَّهُ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ الْقِتَالَ). It provided such causes and factors so that the believers did not suffer excessive harm, and the battle ended. On one side, severe storms and cold disintegrated the polytheists, on the other hand, through the manifestation of Allah’s visible army, awe, fear, and terror were instilled in their hearts, and on the third side, the blow of Hazrat Ali ibn Abi Talib (عليه السلام) fell upon the greatest champion of the enemy, Amr ibn Abd Wudd, causing him to meet his end. This shattered their hopes and aspirations, leading them to abandon the siege of Medina and return defeated to their tribes. The last sentence of the verse says: "And Allah is Powerful and Exalted in Might." (وَكَانَ اللَّهُ قَوِيًّا عَزِيزًا). It may be that some are powerful but not "Exalted in Might," meaning irresistible, so a stronger person can overcome them. But the "Irresistible Powerful One" is none other than Allah, whose power and strength are infinite. He is the One who granted the believers such success in this difficult and dangerous battlefield that the fighting did not even reach the stage of life and death.

The Battle of al‑Aḥzāb, as indicated by its name, was an event in which all tribes and various anti‑Islamic forces united for the purpose of suppressing the nascent Muslim community. This confrontation represented the final effort of disbelief, the last arrow in its quiver, and the ultimate demonstration of the power of shirk. It was in this context that when the foremost warrior of the opposing side, ʿAmr ibn ʿAbd Wudd, came forth to challenge the Muslims, and ʿAlī ibn Abī Ṭālib عليه السلام stepped forward to confront him, the Prophet صلى الله علیہ و آلہ وسلم declared: “بَرَزَ الإيمانُ كُلُّهُ إلى الشِّركِ كُلِّهِ” “All of faith has come forth against all of shirk.” (Ref: Bihār al‑Anwār, vol. 20, p. 215). This statement indicates that the outcome of this encounter symbolized a comprehensive victory—either faith over disbelief or disbelief over faith—making it a decisive battle that would determine the future of Islam and shirk. As a result, the backbone of the opposing forces was broken in this confrontation, and thereafter the initiative remained with the Muslims. The fortunes of the enemy declined, and the structural strength of their power collapsed. For this reason, it is reported that at the conclusion of the Battle of al‑Aḥzāb, the Prophet صلى الله علیہ و آلہ وسلم said: “الآن نغزوهم ولا يغزوننا” “Now we shall advance against them, and they will no longer advance against us.” (Ref: al‑Kāmil fī al‑Tārīkh by Ibn al‑Athīr, vol. 2, p. 184).

Some historians have recorded that the number of the confederate forces exceeded ten thousand. Al‑Maqrīzī, in his work al‑Imtāʿ, writes that the Quraysh alone camped at the edge of the trench with four thousand warriors, three hundred horses, and fifteen hundred camels. The tribe of Banū Sulaym joined them in the region of Marr al‑Ẓahrān with seven hundred men. The tribe of Banū Firāz arrived with one thousand combatants, while the tribes of Banū Ashjaʿ and Banū Murrah each contributed approximately four hundred men. Other tribes also dispatched contingents, bringing the total to more than ten thousand. In contrast, the number of Muslims did not exceed three thousand. They established their main encampment at the foothills of a mountain called Salʿ, near Madinah. This elevated position overlooked the trench, enabling their archers to monitor and control any attempted crossing. In any case, the forces of disbelief laid siege to the Muslims from all directions. According to one narration, the siege lasted twenty days; according to another, twenty‑five days; and in some reports, it continued for nearly a month (Ref: Bihār al‑Anwār, vol. 20, p. 228). Despite the enemy’s superiority in multiple respects, as previously noted, they ultimately failed and withdrew.

As is known, the digging of the trench was initiated on the advice of Hazrat Salman al-Farsi. At that time, the trench was an effective means of defense in the land of Iran, and until then, there was no example of it in the Arabian Peninsula. Among the Arabs, it was considered one of the new innovations. Digging the trench around Medina also had military significance. This trench was a means to demoralize the enemy and was also an effective source of spiritual strengthening for the Muslims. Accurate information and details about the trench are not entirely accessible; however, historians have certainly written that its width was such that enemy cavalry could not cross it even by leaping. Its depth was certainly such that if a person entered it, he could not easily come out on the other side. Moreover, the Muslim archers had so much control over the area of the trench that if anyone intended to cross the trench, it was possible for them to target him with arrows while he was inside the trench. As for its length, considering the famous narration that the Prophet Muhammad صلی اللہ علیہ وآلہ وسلم assigned ten people to dig the trench of forty cubits (approximately 20 meters), and according to the commonly accepted view that the army of Islam consisted of three thousand men, the total length is estimated to be about twelve thousand cubits (six thousand meters). It must also be acknowledged that digging such a trench with very primitive means at that time was an extremely laborious task, especially since the Muslims were also severely constrained in terms of food and other resources. Certainly, the trench was dug in a very short period. This indicates that the army of Islam had made the necessary preparations with full vigilance before the enemy’s attack and had completed the digging of the trench three days before the army of Kufr reached Medina.

The Battle of al‑Aḥzāb constituted an extraordinary test for the general body of Muslims as well as for those who professed adherence to Islam. It also served as a trial for individuals who outwardly claimed neutrality, yet inwardly maintained alignment with the enemies of Islam. Through this conflict, the positions of all three groups—true believers, those weak in faith, and the hypocrites—were fully revealed through their conduct and actions, and the values of Islam became manifest in their entirety. Each group demonstrated, within the intense furnace of the Battle of al‑Aḥzāb, the sincerity or lack thereof of its commitment. The storm of this event was so intense that no individual was able to conceal what lay within his heart. Matters which, under ordinary circumstances, would have required many years to become apparent were fully exposed in less than a month. It is also noteworthy that the Prophet Muḥammad صلى الله علیہ و آلہ وسلم demonstrated remarkable patience, steadfastness, courageous resistance, determination, trust in God, and confidence. By personally participating alongside the المسلمين in digging the trench, sharing in their hardships, and enduring the burdens of warfare, he provided practical evidence that he firmly believed in the teachings he had previously conveyed. He demonstrated unwavering fidelity to those teachings and showed that he was the first to act upon whatever he instructed others to do.

An important event of this battle was the encounter of Hazrat Ali (علیہ السلام) with the renowned enemy champion, Amr ibn Abdood. History relates that the Confederates had invited several powerful Arab warriors among their gallant men to aid them in this battle. Among them, five were particularly famous: Amr ibn Abdood, Ikrimah ibn Abi Jahl, Babirah, Nawfal, and Dharrar. During the siege, one day they prepared for hand-to-hand combat, donning their battle attire, and from a narrower section of the trench, which was somewhat out of reach of the Muslim archers, they leaped over with their horses and stood before the Islamic army. Among them, Amr ibn Abdood was the most famous and well-known. His cry of "Is there any brave?" echoed in the battlefield of the Confederates, and since none of the Muslims stepped forward to face him, he grew more insolent and mocked Muslim beliefs and ideologies, saying: "You say that your slain are in Paradise and our slain in Hell; is there not among you anyone who will send me to Paradise or I send him to Hell?" At this moment, he recited his famous verses: وَلَقَد بَحَحتُ عنِ النِداءِ بِجَمعِكُم هَل مِن مُبارِزْ! وَوقَفتُ اذ جَبَنَ المُشَجِّعُ مَوقِفَ البَطلِ المُناجِز! انَّ السَّمَاحَةَ وَالشَّجاعَةَ في الفَتى خَيرُ الغَريزَةِ!! In your gathering, I called out so much seeking a challenger that my voice became hoarse. I stand where the cowardly warrior fears to stand in the position of a heroic fighter. Indeed, generosity and courage in a young man are the best instincts! At this moment, the Prophet Muhammad (صلى الله عليه و آله وسلم) commanded that someone stand up to ward off his harm from the Muslims. But no one, except Hazrat Ali ibn Abi Talib (علیه السلام), was willing to fight him. Then the Prophet (صلى الله عليه و آله وسلم) said, "This is Amr ibn Abdood." Hazrat Ali (علیه السلام) replied, "O Prophet! I am fully prepared, no matter who he is." The Holy Prophet instructed him to come closer. Thus, Ali (علیه السلام) approached, and the Prophet wrapped a turban on his head, bestowed upon him his special sword Zulfiqar, and prayed for him with these words: اللّٰهم احفظہ من بین يديه و من خلفه و عن يمينه وعن شمالہ ومن فوقہ ومن تحته۔ O Allah! Protect him from before him, from behind him, from his right and left, from above him and from beneath him. Hazrat Ali (علیہ السلام) swiftly entered the battlefield against Amr, reciting these couplets: لا تعجلن فقد اتاک مجیب صوتک غیر عاجز! ذونیة وبصيرة والصدق منجی کل فائز! انی لارجوان اقیم علیک نائحة الجنائز! من ضربة غلاء یبقی صوتها بعد الهزاهز! Do not rush, for the powerful responder to your call has arrived. One who possesses pure intent, profound insight, and truthful salvation for every victor! I expect that I will raise the lamentation of mourning women at your funeral! From a strike so mighty that its echo remains even after the turmoil of battle! At this very moment, the Prophet of the Last Messenger (صلى الله عليه و آله وسلم) uttered the famous phrase: "برز الإيمان كله إلى الشرك كله" All of faith has appeared against all of polytheism. (References: Bihar al-Anwar, Vol. 20, p. 215; Ibn Abi al-Hadeed: Sharh Nahj al-Balagha, Vol. 4, p. 344; Haqaq al-Haqq, Vol. 6, 9. These traditions have been cited from these books.) Amir al-Mu’mineen Ali (علیه السلام) first invited him to Islam, which Amr refused. Then he asked him to leave the battlefield, which he also declined, considering it a disgrace for himself. Ali (علیه السلام) offered a third proposal: to dismount from his horse and fight hand-to-hand. Amr became enraged and said, "I never thought any Arab would make such a suggestion to me." He dismounted and struck at Ali (علیه السلام) with his sword. However, Amir al-Mu’mineen skillfully blocked the blow with his shield, though the sword cut through the shield and wounded Ali's honorable head. After this, Hazrat Ali (علیه السلام) employed a special strategy. He said to Amr ibn Abdood, "You are a formidable Arab champion, and yet I fight you alone. But who have you gathered behind you?" As Amr turned to look behind, Hazrat Ali (علیه السلام) struck his leg with the sword, causing him to fall face down on the ground. A heavy dust storm enveloped the battlefield. Some hypocrites thought that Hazrat Ali (علیه السلام) had been martyred at the hands of Amr. But when they heard the Takbir (Allahu Akbar), they realized Ali's victory was evident. Suddenly, people saw blood flowing from Ali’s noble head, and the army of Islam was returning slowly and proudly, their faces adorned with the smile of victory, while Amr lay headless and lifeless at the edge of the field. The death of the famed Arab champion dealt a severe blow to the Confederates and their ambitions. Their spirits were crushed, and their hearts weakened. This blow dashed their hopes of victory. Accordingly,The Prophet Muhammad PBUH & His Pure Progeny said to Hazrat Ali رضي الله عنه concerning this victory: “If your deeds today are weighed against the deeds of the entire ummah of Muhammad, your deeds will outweigh theirs. This is because there is no house of the polytheists left where humiliation and disgrace have not entered due to the killing of Amr, and there is no house of the Muslims where honor has not entered due to the killing of Amr!” (Reference: Bihar al-Anwar, vol. 20, p. 216). The well-known Ahl al-Sunnah scholar, Hakim Nishapuri, also recorded this conversation, though with different wording, as follows: “The duel of Ali ibn Abi Talib with Amr ibn Abd Wudd on the Day of the Trench is better than the most pious deeds of my ummah until the Day of Judgment.” (Reference: Mustadrak Hakim, vol. 3, p. 32). That is, the fighting of Ali ibn Abi Talib with Amr ibn Abd Wudd on the Day of the Trench surpasses the righteous deeds of my ummah until the Day of Resurrection. The philosophy behind this statement is clear, because on that day Islam and the Quran had visibly reached the brink of annihilation; these were extremely critical moments. The person who, after the sacrifice of the Prophet Muhammad PBUH & His Pure Progeny, demonstrated the greatest selflessness and sacrifice on that battlefield preserved Islam from this threat and guaranteed its continuation until the Day of Judgment. His sacrifice strengthened the roots of the tree of Islam, which later spread throughout the worlds. Therefore, the worship of all people came to be dependent on him. Some historians have recorded that the polytheists sent a man to the Prophet to buy the body of Amr ibn Abd Wudd for ten thousand dirhams (perhaps they thought that the Muslims would treat Amr’s body as harshly as the cruel oppressors had treated the body of Hazrat Hamza in the Battle of Uhud), but the Messenger of Allah PBUH & His Pure Progeny said: “His body is your property. We do not take payment for the dead.” It is also noteworthy that at that time Amr’s sister came to her brother’s body and saw his precious armor, which Hazrat Ali عليه السلام had not removed from his body. She said: “ما قتله الا كفو كريم” “I acknowledge that his killer was a noble and generous person.” (Explanatory note: This section draws upon Ahqaq al-Haqq vol. 6, Bihar al-Anwar vol. 20, Tafsir al-Mizan vol. 16, Habib al-Siyar vol. 1, and Furugh-e-Abdiat vol. 2).

The success of the Messenger of God صلى الله علیہ و آلہ وسلم and the Muslims in the Battle of al‑Aḥzāb was due to numerous factors. Among them was the violent storm that overturned the entire arrangement of the confederate forces, as well as the unseen armies of God. In addition to these, there were also other military and political factors, the most important of which was faith and belief in God. Some of these factors were as follows: First, the Messenger of God صلى الله علیہ و آلہ وسلم accepted the proposal of digging a trench, thereby introducing a new element into Arab military strategy that had not previously existed. This strategy raised the morale of the Muslim forces and confounded the enemy. Second, the killing of ʿAmr ibn ʿAbd Wudd at the hands of the great and distinguished hero of Islam, ʿAlī ibn Abī Ṭālib عليه السلام, shattered the hopes and aspirations of the confederate army. Third, the well‑planned defensive arrangements and appropriate military strategies of the Muslim forces prevented the enemy from entering the city of Madinah. Fourth, as already stated, the most decisive factor in the victory was faith and reliance upon God. The Prophet صلى الله علیہ و آلہ وسلم had implanted this faith in the hearts of the Muslims. Throughout this prolonged battle, Qurʾānic verses were continuously recited, and the inspiring words of the Prophet nurtured faith and trust in God within the believers. Fifth, the conduct of the Prophet صلى الله علیہ و آلہ وسلم—his noble character, strong spirit, and confidence—provided reassurance and inner strength to the Muslims. Sixth, the episode of Nuʿaym ibn Masʿūd played an important and effective role in creating division within the confederate forces and weakening them.

Naʿīm ibn Masʿūd had recently embraced Islam, and his tribe, Ghatafān, was unaware of his conversion. He came to the Messenger of God صلى الله علیہ و آلہ وسلم and submitted that he would carry out whatever instructions he was given in order to secure ultimate success. The Messenger of God صلى الله علیہ و آلہ وسلم replied that there was no one like him among them and instructed him to create division within the enemy ranks if possible, adding that warfare consists of concealed strategies. Naʿīm ibn Masʿūd devised an effective plan. He first went to the Jews of Banū Qurayẓah, with whom he had pre‑Islamic ties, and told them that he was sincerely attached to them. They affirmed their trust in him. He then advised them that Quraysh and Ghatafān were not like them; this was their own city, where their wealth, families, and children resided, and they could not simply depart. He warned them that Quraysh and Ghatafān, if faced with difficulty, would abandon the battlefield and return to their homelands, whereas Banū Qurayẓah would be left alone to confront Muḥammad صلى الله علیہ و آلہ وسلم. Therefore, he advised them not to commit to battle unless they secured a guarantee from Quraysh in the form of hostages from among their leaders. The Jews found this counsel convincing. Naʿīm then secretly approached Quraysh, including Abū Sufyān, and reminded them of his longstanding relationship with them. He informed them, under oath of secrecy, that the Jews regretted their alliance and had reached out to Muḥammad صلى الله علیہ و آلہ وسلم with an offer: they would take several leaders of Quraysh and Ghatafān as hostages and hand them over to him, thereby ensuring their own reconciliation with him. He warned Quraysh not to hand over any hostages if such a request were made, as it would place them in grave danger. Thereafter, he went to his own tribe, Ghatafān, and conveyed the same information, presenting himself as a sincere advisor. He repeated the same narrative regarding the Jews’ alleged intentions and cautioned them about the consequences. By coincidence, this took place on the night between Friday and Saturday in the month of Shawwāl, 5 AH. Abū Sufyān and the leaders of Ghatafān sent representatives to Banū Qurayẓah, urging them to commence battle promptly, as their provisions were dwindling and conditions were deteriorating. The Jews responded that the next day was the Sabbath, on which they would not undertake any action, and reiterated that they feared abandonment by Quraysh and Ghatafān in the event of adversity. They insisted that hostages be provided before they would participate in hostilities. When this demand reached Quraysh and Ghatafān, they concluded that Naʿīm ibn Masʿūd had spoken truthfully and suspected betrayal. They refused to provide any hostages and demanded that the Jews join the battle without such conditions. Upon receiving this response, Banū Qurayẓah also concluded that Naʿīm’s information had been accurate and refused to engage without guarantees. As a result, distrust and division arose among the confederate forces. At that critical moment, a severe, cold storm struck during the night, uprooting their tents and overturning their cooking vessels. These combined factors led to the complete disintegration of the enemy forces, compelling them to abandon the battlefield in disarray, until not a single combatant remained. (Ref: Sīrah Ibn Hishām, vol. 3, p. 240, summarized).

Many historical sources report that Ḥudhayfah al‑Yamānī said: during the days of the Battle of al‑Khandaq we were afflicted by hunger, fatigue, fear, and anxiety to such an extent that only God fully knew our condition. One night—after dissension had arisen within the confederate forces—the Prophet صلى الله علیہ و آلہ وسلم said: Is there anyone among you who will secretly enter the enemy camp and bring me information about them, so that he may be my companion in Paradise? Ḥudhayfah relates: by God, no one rose from his place because of the intensity of fear, fatigue, and hunger. When the Prophet صلى الله علیہ و آلہ وسلم observed this state, he called me, and I presented myself before him. He instructed me to go and bring news of the enemy, adding that I should not undertake any other action until I returned to him. I proceeded in that condition while a severe wind and storm were raging, and God’s unseen forces were devastating the enemy. Their tents were being torn apart by the wind, fires had spread across the camp, and their utensils were overturned. Suddenly, I perceived Abū Sufyān in the darkness, addressing his companions in a loud voice, saying that each person should verify the identity of the one sitting beside him so that no outsider might be present. I immediately asked the person next to me who he was, and he identified himself, thereby ensuring that I was not suspected. Abū Sufyān then declared: by God, this is not a place to remain. Our camels and horses have perished, Banū Qurayẓah have broken their agreement, and the storm has left nothing intact. He then hurried toward his camel to mount it and depart. In his haste, he neglected to untie its fetters, so that it stood awkwardly upon three legs. I considered shooting him with an arrow, but at that moment I recalled the instruction of the Prophet صلى الله علیہ و آلہ وسلم that I should not engage in any action and should only bring back information. Therefore, I returned and reported all that I had witnessed. The Messenger of God صلى الله علیہ و آلہ وسلم then supplicated: “اللّٰهُمّ انت منزل الكتاب، سريع الحساب، اهزم الأحزاب اللّٰهُمّ اهزمهم و زلزلهم” “O God, You are the One who revealed the Book and are swift in reckoning. Defeat the confederates; O God, defeat them and shake them.” (Ref: Bihār al‑Anwār, vol. 20, p. 208).

The Battle of the Confederates (Ahzab) proved to be a significant turning point and milestone in Islamic history, in which the scale tipped decisively in favor of the Muslims, both militarily and politically. In summary, the beneficial outcomes of this battle can be stated in a few sentences: a) The failure of the enemy's final attempts and the breaking of their last remaining power of dominance. b) The exposure of the hypocrites' conspiracy and the complete unmasking of these dangerous internal enemies. c) Compensation for the bitter memories of the defeat at the Battle of Uhud. d) The instillation of even greater strength and fear of the Muslims in the hearts of the enemy. e) The raising of the Muslims' morale due to the miracles they witnessed on this battlefield. f) The recognition of the Prophet’s (PBUH & His Pure Progeny) position both inside and outside Medina. g) The clearing of the land of Medina from the evil of the Jewish tribe Bani Qurayza.

We know that the selection of individuals sent by God is for the purpose that they may serve as practical models for the community, since one of the most important and effective dimensions of prophetic preaching and guidance is their lived example. For this reason, Islamic scholars regard ʿiṣmah (infallibility) as an essential condition of prophethood, and one of the key arguments for this is that prophets must serve as an “uswah” (exemplary model) for humanity. It is noteworthy that in the āyah under discussion, the command to follow and emulate the Prophet صلى الله علیہ و آلہ وسلم is expressed in absolute terms, encompassing all aspects of his life. Although the immediate context of revelation relates to the Battle of al‑Aḥzāb, the occasions of revelation do not restrict the scope of the āyah’s meaning. Accordingly, in Islamic traditions we find references to emulation of the Prophet extending from major matters to even the most minor aspects of life. In a narration, Amīr al‑Muʾminīn ʿAlī عليه السلام states: “إن الصبر على ولاة الأمر مفروض لقول الله عز وجل لنبيه فاصبر كما صبر أولو العزم من الرسل… لقد كان لكم في رسول الله أُسوة حسنة” “Patience in relation to those in authority has been made obligatory because God has commanded His Prophet to be patient as the messengers of firm resolve were patient, and He has made the same incumbent upon His devotees and those who obey Him by instructing them to follow the Messenger as an exemplary model.” (Ref: Nūr al‑Thaqalayn, vol. 4, p. 255, citing Iḥtijāj al‑Ṭabrisī). In another narration from Imām Jaʿfar al‑Ṣādiq عليه السلام, it is reported that when the Prophet صلى الله علیہ و آلہ وسلم would perform the night prayer, he would prepare his ablution water and place his miswāk beside him. After describing the manner of his night prayer, the Imām concluded by reciting: “وَلَقَدْ كَانَ لَكُمْ فِي رَسُولِ اللَّهِ أُسْوَةٌ حَسَنَةٌ” “You have in the Messenger of God an excellent example.” (Ref: Wasāʾil al‑Shīʿah, vol. 1, p. 356). Indeed, if one were to adopt the life of the Prophet صلى الله علیہ و آلہ وسلم as a model—drawing guidance from his faith, trust in God, sincerity, courage, discipline, and piety—this would lead to a profound transformation, illuminating and elevating one’s entire life. In the present time, it is incumbent upon all Muslims, particularly committed and conscious youth, to study the life of the Prophet صلى الله علیہ و آلہ وسلم carefully and internalize it, making it a comprehensive model in all aspects of their lives. For this constitutes the most essential means of attaining سعادت and the principal key to success and prosperity.

The command to remember God—especially “ذکر کثیر”—has been mentioned repeatedly in Qurʾānic verses, and it has also been given great importance in Islamic traditions. Among these, a ḥadīth from Abū Dharr states that he entered the mosque and presented himself before the Messenger of God صلى الله علیہ و آلہ وسلم, whereupon the Prophet said: “عليك بتلاوة كتاب الله، وذكر الله كثيرًا فإنه ذكر لك في السماء ونور لك في الأرض” “You must adhere to the recitation of the Book of God and abundant remembrance of God, for it will result in your being remembered in the heavens (by the angels) and will be a light for you on the earth.” (Ref: Nūr al‑Thaqalayn, vol. 4, p. 257, citing Khaṣāl). In another narration from Imām Jaʿfar al‑Ṣādiq عليه السلام: “اذا ذكر العبد ربّه اليوم مأة مرة كان ذلك كثيرا” “When a person remembers God one hundred times in a day, that is counted as abundant remembrance.” (Ref: Safīnat al‑Bihār, vol. 1, p. 484). Furthermore, in another ḥadīth, the Prophet صلى الله علیہ و آلہ وسلم said to his companions: “الا اخبركم بخير اعمالكم وأزكاها عند مليككم، وارفعها في درجاتكم، وخير لكم من الدينار والدرهم، وخير لكم من أن تلقوا عدوكم فتقتلونهم ويقتلونكم؟” “Shall I inform you of your best deeds, the most purified in the sight of your Lord, the highest in your ranks, and better for you than gold and silver, and even better than meeting your enemy in battle, killing them and being killed by them?” They replied: “Yes, O Messenger of God.” He said: “ذكر الله كثيرًا” “The abundant remembrance of God.” (Ref: Safīnat al‑Bihār, vol. 1, p. 484). However, it should not be assumed that the meaning of remembrance (dhikr) here is limited to verbal repetition alone. Islamic traditions explicitly clarify that it also includes remembrance of the heart and action. That is, whenever a person is confronted with a prohibited act, he recalls God and refrains from it. The purpose is that God remains present and manifest throughout the entirety of a person’s life, and that divine نور illuminates all aspects of existence. One should remain constantly engaged in His remembrance and take His commands as the central guiding principle. Assemblies of dhikr are not those gatherings in which uninformed individuals assemble and engage in self‑invented recitations or propagate innovations. Rather, a ḥadīth states that the Prophet صلى الله علیہ و آلہ وسلم said: “بادروا إلى رياض الجنة” “Hasten to the gardens of Paradise.” The companions asked: “وما ریاض الجنة؟” “What are the gardens of Paradise?” He replied: “حلق الذكر” “They are the circles of remembrance.” (Ref: Safīnat al‑Bihār, vol. 1, p. 486). These gatherings refer to assemblies in which Islamic knowledge is revived and educational and ethical programs are conducted, aiming to cultivate and reform individuals so that they abstain from sin and follow the path of God.

See ayat 27 for tafseer.

In Medina, there lived three famous Jewish tribes: Banu Quraiza, Banu Nadir, and Banu Qurayza. All three groups had previously made a treaty with the Prophet Muhammad (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) that they would not support his enemies, would not spy against him, and would live peacefully alongside the Muslims. However, the tribe of Banu Qurayza broke their treaty in the second year of Hijra on various pretexts, and Banu Nadir did the same in the fourth year of Hijra, preparing themselves to confront the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم). Ultimately, their resistance and ability to fight were depleted, and they were expelled from Medina. The Banu Qurayza moved towards the regions of Azra'at in Syria, some members of Banu Nadir went towards Khaybar, and some towards Syria. (Reference: Kamil Ibn Kathir, Vol. 2, pp. 173-137). Consequently, by the fifth year of Hijra, at the time of the Battle of the Confederates (Ahzab), only the tribe of Banu Quraiza remained in Medina. As mentioned in the exegesis of the seventeen verses regarding the Battle of Ahzab, even they broke their treaty and sided with the Arab polytheists, drawing swords against the Muslims. When the Battle of Ahzab ended, and the Quraysh, Banu Ghatafan, and other Arab tribes, after a humiliating defeat, returned from Medina, according to Islamic traditions, the Prophet Muhammad (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) returned to his home, removed his armor, and began to bathe. At that moment, Gabriel (Jibril) came down by God's command and said: "Why have you taken off your weapons while the angels are still ready to fight? Immediately proceed towards Banu Quraiza and settle their matter." Indeed, there was no better opportunity to settle accounts with Banu Quraiza. The Muslims were rejoicing in their victory, Banu Quraiza were enveloped in the intense fear of defeat, and their friends and allies from among the Arab tribes had retreated to their towns and regions in a state of defeat and very low morale, with no one to support them. At any rate, the caller announced on behalf of the Prophet Muhammad (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم): "Depart for Banu Quraiza before the Asr prayer." The Muslims rapidly prepared for battle and, by sunset, had besieged the strong and fortified forts of Banu Quraiza. The siege continued for twenty-five days. Afterwards, as will be discussed in the points of detail, they all surrendered their weapons and gave themselves up to the Muslims. Some were killed, adding another victory to the Muslims, and the land of Medina was thus eternally cleansed of these hypocritical communities and staunchly obstinate enemies. The verses under discussion briefly and eloquently refer to this incident. As we have mentioned, these verses were revealed after the achievement of victory, and the episode is mentioned as a great favor and bounty from God. Firstly, it is stated: "God brought down from their fortified strongholds a group among the People of the Book who had supported the Arab polytheists." (وَأَنزَلَ الَّذِينَ ظَاهَرُوهُم مِّنْ أَهْلِ الْكِتَابِ مِن صَيَاصِيهِمْ). The word "صياصي" is the plural of "صيصيه," which means strong fortresses. Later on, this term came to be applied to every means of defense, such as the horns of an ox or the spur on a rooster's leg. From this, it is clear that the Jews had built their forts near Medina on high, elevated ground and defended themselves from their tall towers. The term "Anzala" (brought down) here points to this meaning. Next, it is stated: "God cast fear and terror into their hearts." (وَقَذَفَ فِي قُلُوبِهِمُ الرُّعْبَ). Eventually, their case reached the point that: "You were killing some of them and capturing others." (فَرِيقًا تَقْتُلُونَ وَتَأْسِرُونَ فَرِيقًا). "And He gave you their lands, homes, and wealth as inheritance." (وَأَوْرَثَكُمْ أَرْضَهُمْ وَدِيَارَهُمْ وَأَمْوَالَهُمْ). These few sentences summarize the common outcome of the Battle of Banu Quraiza. Some of these traitors were killed by the Muslims, some were imprisoned, and a great amount of spoils including their lands, homes, properties, and wealth came into the hands of the Muslims. The term "inheritance" is used because the Muslims did not exert much effort in acquiring these spoils; rather, all that wealth, which the Jews had amassed over years through oppression, tyranny, and plunder, fell easily into their hands. At the end of the verse, it is stated: "And land which you had not yet trodden upon was also given to you." (وَأَرْضًا لَّمْ تَطَؤُوهَا). "And God has power over all things." (وَكَانَ اللَّهُ عَلَى كُلِّ شَيْءٍ قَدِيرًا). Regarding the phrase "وَأَرْضًا لَّمْ تَطَؤُوهَا" (land which you had not yet trodden upon), scholars differ. Some interpret it as a reference to the land of Khaybar, which the Muslims later conquered. Some consider it a reference to the land of Mecca. Others think it refers to the lands of Rome and Persia. And some understand it as encompassing all these lands.They understand the indication to be that from that day until the Day of Judgment, they will be included among the possessions of the Muslims. However, none of these possibilities aligns with the clear verse. Because the verb in the past tense, as indicated by "وَرِثْتُّمُ" (you inherited), bears witness that this land came into the possession of the Muslims specifically in the incident of the Battle of Banu Qurayza. Moreover, the land of Mecca was not such that Muslims had never set foot on it, whereas the Qur’an says that such a land was given into your possession in which you had not yet set foot. Clearly, this phrase points to those particular orchards and lands that were in the possession of Banu Qurayza, and no one had the right to enter them. This is because the Jews were very protective and careful of their property. Furthermore, even if one disregards the past occurrence of this victory and success, it is more appropriate that the land pertains to Khaybar, which was taken from the Jews and came under the Muslims’ possession within a very short period. (The Battle of Khaybar took place in the seventh year of Hijrah.)

The Qurʾān explicitly testifies that the primary cause of this conflict was the support extended by the Jews of Banū Qurayẓah to the Arab polytheists during the Battle of al‑Aḥzāb, as indicated by the divine statement: “الَّذِينَ ظَاهَرُوهُم” — “those who assisted them.” Moreover, in principle, the Jewish groups residing in Madinah functioned as a fifth column (FIFTH COLUMN) in opposition to Islam. They were actively engaged in propaganda against the nascent Muslim community and left no opportunity unused to inflict harm upon the Muslims. As previously noted, among the three Jewish tribes—Banū Qaynuqāʿ, Banū Naḍīr, and Banū Qurayẓah—the latter remained in Madinah at the time of the Battle of al‑Aḥzāb. The former two had already been expelled from the city in the second and fourth years after Hijrah, respectively, due to their breach of covenant. It had therefore become necessary to hold this third group accountable, for they had committed the most overt act of treachery by violating their covenant and extending support to the enemies of Islam. Consequently, they were brought to face the consequences of their actions.

We have already mentioned that as soon as the Battle of the Trench ended, the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH & His Pure Progeny) was commanded to deal with the Banu Qurayza Jews. It is written that the Muslims hurried so much towards the forts of Banu Qurayza that some people neglected their Asr prayer and were compelled to offer it later as Qaza. The Prophet Muhammad (PBUH & His Pure Progeny) ordered the siege of their forts. The siege continued for twenty-five days. According to the command of the Quran, Allah instilled severe fear and terror in the hearts of the enemies. Ka'b ibn Asad was counted among the leaders of the Jews. He said to his people, "I am certain that Muhammad (PBUH & His Pure Progeny) will not leave us until we fight. Therefore, I have three proposals, accept one of them." The first proposal was that they should give allegiance to that person and follow him, because it had been proven to them that he is the Prophet of Allah and his signs are found in their scriptures; in that case, their wealth, lives, children, and women would be safe. They said, "We will never abandon the commandments of the Torah, nor will we adopt an alternative." He said, "If you do not accept this proposal, then come and kill your children and women with your own hands so that you may enter the battlefield with peace of mind, and then see what Allah wills. If we are killed, then from the perspective of our families there will be no concern, and if we are victorious, then there will be many women and children." They said, "Shall we kill these helpless ones with our own hands? After them, what value will life have for us?" Ka'b ibn Asad said, "If you do not accept this either, then today being Saturday night, Muhammad (PBUH & His Pure Progeny) and his companions will think that we will not attack tonight. Use this negligence to attack them; maybe success will be attained." They said, "We will not do this either, because he will not disrespect the sanctity of Saturday in any case." Ka'b said, "From birth until today, reason has not come into you." After this, they spoke to the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH & His Pure Progeny) requesting that Abu al-Babha be sent to them to consult with them. When Abu al-Babha came to them, the Jewish women and children wept and cried before him. This had a great impact on his heart. At that time, people said, "Do you advise us to surrender to Muhammad?" Abu al-Babha said, "Yes," and at the same time pointed to his throat, meaning "You will all be killed." Abu al-Babha says that as soon as I left there, I felt a strong sense of guilt. I did not go to the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH & His Pure Progeny) but went straight to the mosque and tied myself to a pillar of the mosque, saying I will not move from here until Allah accepts my repentance. In the end, Allah forgave his sin based on his sincerity. Related to this, the verse was revealed, "And others who have acknowledged their sins..." (At-Tawbah 9:102) Finally, the Banu Qurayza Jews were compelled to surrender unconditionally. The Prophet Muhammad (PBUH & His Pure Progeny) said, "Sa’d ibn Mu’adh, whatever decision you make concerning them, will you accept it?" They agreed. Sa’d ibn Mu’adh said, "Now the time has come for Sa’d to declare the command of Allah without fearing any blame." When Sa’d once again took this pledge from the Jews, he closed his eyes, turned towards the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH & His Pure Progeny), and asked, "Will you also accept my decision?" The Prophet (PBUH & His Pure Progeny) said, "Certainly!" Sa’d said, "I say that those among Banu Qurayza who were ready to fight the Muslims should be killed; their women and children should be taken as captives, and their property divided." However, one group out of them was saved from death after accepting Islam. (Reference: Seerat Ibn Hisham, Volume 3, page 224; and al-Kamil ibn al-Athir, Volume 2, page 185 [with some abridgment])

The victory of the Muslims over the oppressive and obstinate forces produced highly significant and beneficial outcomes. Among these were the following: a. The internal front of Madinah was neutralized, and Muslims attained security from the espionage activities of the Jewish factions. b. The bases of the Arab polytheists within Madinah were dismantled, and their hopes of fomenting internal unrest were eliminated. c. The spoils of war obtained as a result of the conflict strengthened the economic foundations of the Muslim community. d. The path was cleared for subsequent victories, particularly the conquest of Khaybar. e. The standing and authority of the Islamic government were firmly established in the eyes of both allies and adversaries, both within and beyond Madinah.

In the verses under discussion, several distinct expressions are observed. One of these is that, regarding those who were killed in the battle, the Qurʾān states: “فَرِيقًا تَقْتُلُونَ”. Here, the word “فريقًا” precedes the verb “تقتلون,” whereas in the case of captives, the noun “فريقًا” follows its verb “تَأْسِرُونَ.” Some exegetes have explained that this precedence is due to the fact that those who were killed included the prominent leaders among the Jews, whereas those taken captive were relatively lesser‑known individuals. In addition, this variation in word order serves to juxtapose the acts of killing and capturing—two principal manifestations of victory—thereby highlighting their connection and proportional relationship. Another observation is that in the first āyah under discussion, the descent of the Jews from their fortresses is mentioned before the phrase: “وَقَذَفَ فِي قُلُوبِهِمُ الرُّعْبَ.” Naturally, one might expect the sequence to be reversed, since fear would ordinarily precede their coming down from fortified positions. However, the reversal emphasizes what was more significant and gratifying for the Muslims, namely the collapse of those formidable strongholds, which constituted the primary objective. Similarly, the expression “وَأَوْرَثَكُمْ أَرْضَهُمْ وَدِيَارَهُمْ” conveys that God granted the Muslims their lands, dwellings, and possessions without the need for prolonged struggle in comparison to the scale of what was obtained, thus underscoring the completeness of the divine favor. Finally, the concluding statement of the āyah, “وَكَانَ اللَّهُ عَلَى كُلِّ شَيْءٍ قَدِيرًا,” points to the absolute and enduring power of God. It indicates that on one occasion He defeated the confederate forces through a storm, wind, and unseen armies, and on another occasion He destroyed their supporters—the Jews of Banū Qurayẓah—by instilling fear and terror in their hearts.

See ayat 31 for tafseer.

See ayat 31 for tafseer.

See ayat 31 for tafseer.

Exegetes have reported several occasions of revelation (shan-e nuzul) for these āyāt, which, in essence, are not substantially different in their overall conclusion. These reports indicate that, after a number of campaigns during which a considerable quantity of spoils came into the possession of the Muslims, the wives of the Prophet began to request increases in maintenance and various provisions for their living arrangements. According to some exegetical accounts, Umm Salamah requested a maidservant for assistance, Maymunah sought a specific garment, Zaynab bint Jahsh requested a particular Yemeni cloth, Ḥafṣah asked for Egyptian attire, Juwayriyah desired a fine garment, and Sawdah asked for a Khaybarī covering. In short, each presented distinct requests. The Prophet Muhammad صلى الله علیہ و آلہ وسلم was fully aware that yielding to such demands—demands which are inherently open-ended—could adversely affect the integrity and dignity of the prophetic office. Consequently, he declined to fulfill these requests and refrained from associating with them for approximately one month. Thereafter, the relevant āyāt were revealed, addressing them in a firm yet compassionate manner: if they desired an embellished worldly life, they were free to separate from the Prophet and depart as they wished; but if they sought attachment to Allah, His Messenger, and the Hereafter, then they should be content with the simple yet honorable life of the Prophet’s household and partake in the عظیم reward of Allah. In this way, a decisive and unambiguous response was given regarding the expectations that had been raised, while simultaneously granting them the choice between remaining within the Prophet’s household or separating from it.

You will not have forgotten that in the opening verses of this Surah, the Lord of the Worlds placed the crown of honor and dignity upon the heads of the Prophet’s wives and introduced them with the title "Mothers of the Believers" (أُمَّهَاتُ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ). It should be clear that exalted and honor-bestowing ranks always carry heavy responsibilities as well. How can the wives of the Prophet PBUH & His Pure Progeny be called Mothers of the Believers when their hearts and eyes are focused on the adornments and vanities of this world, and when they entertain the thought that if the Muslims acquire spoils of war, they should receive the best share of it—just like the wives of kings—and that what is obtained as a sacrifice of the lives of the martyrs and their sacred blood should be handed over to them, while many people are living in poverty and hardship? Leaving this aside, according to the previous verses, not only is the Prophet of Islam PBUH & His Pure Progeny a role model for the people, but his household should be an example for other families, and his wives should be exemplars for the faithful women until the Day of Judgment. The Prophet PBUH & His Pure Progeny is not a king whose harem is lavish and splendid, with his wives adorned with precious jewels and other ornaments of beauty. Perhaps, at that time, some Muslims who had emigrated from Mecca to Medina used to spend nights in Suffah (that particular platform adjacent to the Prophet’s Mosque). In that city, they had no home or shelter. Under such circumstances, the Prophet PBUH & His Pure Progeny could never permit his wives to have such expectations from him. Some narrations indicate that some wives went to the extent of harsh speech towards the Noble Prophet PBUH & His Pure Progeny and even said: لَعَلَّكَ تَظُنُّ أَنَّ طَلَّقْتَنَا لَنْ نَجِدَ زَوْجًا مِّنْ قَوْمِنَا غَيْرَكَ "Perhaps you think that if you divorce us, we will not find a husband from among our own people except you." (Reference: Kanz al-‘Irfān, Vol. 2, p. 238). At this occasion, the Noble Prophet PBUH & His Pure Progeny was commanded by God to firmly oppose this notion and to make his position clear to them forever. In any case, the first of the verses under discussion addresses the Noble Prophet PBUH & His Pure Progeny, stating: "O Prophet! Tell your wives, 'If you desire the worldly life and its adornments, then come, I will provide you with a fair compensation and will release you in a goodly manner.'" يَا أَيُّهَا النَّبِيُّ قُل لِّأَزْوَاجِكَ إِن كُنتُنَّ تُرِدْنَ الْحَيَاةَ الدُّنْيَا وَزِينَتَهَا فَتَعَالَيْنَ أُمَتِّعْكُنَّ وَأُسَرِّحْكُنَّ سَرَاحًا جَمِيلًا The word "أُمَتِّعْكُنَّ" derives from the root "متعہ" which, as stated in Surah Al-Baqarah, verse 236, means an appropriate gift given to a woman. The meaning here is that a suitable gift should be given corresponding to the specified dower (mahr), such that they are satisfied and pleased, and the separation takes place in a friendly and peaceful manner. The word "سراح" originally comes from "سرح" (with the letter Re written as “ر”) and denotes a plant that has fruits and leaves. "سرحت الإبل" means "I let the camels loose so that they may graze the leaves of plants." Subsequently, the word acquired a broader meaning of freeing or releasing people or things. Sometimes, this word is used metaphorically to refer to divorce. "تسريح الشعر" means combing hair, because there too the idea of releasing and letting go is implied. In any case, in the verse under discussion, "سراح جمیل" refers to divorcing the women in a manner that is kind and good, without any quarrel or conflict. On this subject, Islamic jurists and commentators have discussed in detail what is meant here by the choice given by the Prophet PBUH & His Pure Progeny to his wives regarding whether to remain or to separate. If they chose separation, would that act itself be considered divorce without the need to pronounce the formula of divorce (ṭalāq)? Or was it that they should choose one of the two paths, and if they chose separation, the Prophet PBUH & His Pure Progeny would then pronounce the divorce formula, otherwise, divorce would not take place? Upon examination, the verse does not clearly indicate either matter. Some hold the view that this verse grants the wives of the Prophet PBUH & His Pure Progeny the choice to stay in the house or to leave it, and that this command is specific to the Prophet PBUH & His Pure Progeny (not applicable to others). However, this is not the correct view. Because when this verse is considered alongside the verses of divorce, it becomes clear that their separation would be through divorce. In any case, this issue is a point of difference between Shia and Sunni jurists, though the latter opinion—that separation by way of divorce—is closer to the apparent meaning of the verses. Moreover, the phrase "أُسَرِّحْكُنَّ" (I will set you free) indicates that the Prophet PBUH & His Pure Progeny would initiate their separation, especially since the word "سَرَحَ" is used elsewhere in the Quran with the meaning of divorce (Al-Baqarah, 2:229). (For further details on this matter, refer to jurisprudential works, especially Jawāhir al-Kalām, Vol. 29, p. 123). The subsequent verse further states:"But if you wish for Allah and His Messenger and the Home of the Hereafter, and are content with the life of this world, even though it is simple and deprived in material respects, then Allah has prepared for the righteous among you a great reward and recompense" (وَإِن كُنتُنَّ تُرِدْنَ اللَّهَ وَرَسُولَهُ وَالدَّارَ الْآخِرَةَ فَإِنَّ اللَّهَ أَعَدَّ لِلْمُحْسِنَاتِ مِنكُنَّ أَجْرًا عَظِيمًا). Indeed, within these few sentences the entire foundation of faith and the conduct of a believer have been explained. On one hand, the faith and belief in God, the Prophet, and the Day of Resurrection are mentioned, and on the other hand, practically being among the righteous doers and beneficent men and women. Thus, merely expressing love and attachment to God, the Hereafter, and the Prophet is not sufficient; practical life must also be in harmony with this. In this way, Allah has made the responsibilities of the wives of the Prophet PBUH & His Pure Progeny—who are to be examples for the believing women—clear forever. That is, if they possess asceticism and piety, disregard for worldly luxury, and special attention to faith, righteous deeds, and spirituality, then they should remain and retain the great honor of being the wives of the Messenger of God. Otherwise, they should take their own path and separate from them. Although this address is specifically to the wives of the Prophet PBUH & His Pure Progeny, in its content and conclusion it is comprehensive, especially for those who are in positions of leadership and guidance of creation. Such individuals are always at a crossroads: either to use their apparent status to attain a prosperous life or to offer themselves for all kinds of deprivation in order to attain the pleasure of God and guide creation. Then, in the following verse, the severe responsibilities of the wives of the Prophet PBUH & His Pure Progeny are clearly stated by the Qur'an in explicit terms: "O wives of the Prophet, whoever among you commits an open sin, her punishment will be doubled, and that is easy for Allah" (يَا نِسَاءَ النَّبِيِّ مَن يَأْتِ مِنكُنَّ بِفَاحِشَةٍ مُّبَيِّنَةٍ يُضَاعَفْ لَهَا الْعَذَابُ ضِعْفَيْنِ وَكَانَ ذَلِكَ عَلَى اللَّهِ يَسِيرًا). You live in the house of revelation and the center of prophethood; your knowledge in Islamic matters is greater than that of ordinary people due to your close proximity to the Messenger of God. Moreover, other women pay attention to you, and you are an example for them. Therefore, your sin will be greater in the presence of God compared to others because reward and punishment are proportionate to knowledge and understanding; similarly, it has an effect on the environment. You have more awareness, and your status in influencing society is very sensitive. Apart from all this, your wrongful deeds will distress the Prophet and will harm the dignity of the Messenger of God, and this itself is a sin which necessitates further punishment. The term "فاحشة مبينة" (open sin) refers to manifest sins, and it is clear that the harms resulting from such sins committed by an important personality increase when they are open and apparent. The matter of "doubling and multiplying" will be discussed in the section on points regarding this. As for the statement "and that is easy for Allah," it indicates that never must you think that punishing you is difficult for Allah, nor will your relationship with the Prophet PBUH & His Pure Progeny prevent it, just as in worldly affairs friends and close relatives often overlook the sins of their own or give them little importance. Here, that is absolutely not the case; rather, it is an unequivocal judgment that applies to you as well. On the contrary, the ruling is: "And whoever among you is obedient to Allah and His Messenger and does righteous deeds, We will give her her reward twice, and We have prepared for her a generous provision" (وَمَن يَقْنُتْ مِنكُنَّ لِلَّهِ وَرَسُولِهِ وَتَعْمَلْ صَالِحًا نُّؤْتِهَا أَجْرَهَا مَرَّتَيْنِ وَأَعْتَدْنَا لَهَا رِزْقًا كَرِيْمًا). "يقنت" derives from the root "قنوت," which means obedience combined with humility and respect. (Reference: Mufradat Raghib, root قنوت). By employing this word, the Qur'an intends to convey that they must both obey the commands of God and the Messenger and also meet the condition of complete reverence. Here again, we see the point that mere claim of faith and obedience is not sufficient; "and does righteous deeds" demands that the effects of this be manifested in action. "رزق كريم" (generous provision) holds a broad meaning that encompasses all spiritual and material blessings of God, and its interpretation as "Paradise" is appropriate because Paradise is the center of all these blessings.

As previously stated, although the aforementioned āyāt specifically address the wives of the Prophet and declare that their obedience to God yields multiplied reward, while any manifest sin entails multiplied punishment, the fundamental criterion in this regard is status, rank, and social standing. Accordingly, this principle extends to all individuals who occupy positions of prominence and influence within society. Such individuals are not confined solely to their personal identity; rather, their existence possesses a dual dimension. One dimension pertains to their individual selves, while the other relates to their connection with society. Consequently, their conduct has the potential either to guide or mislead others. For this reason, their actions have a dual impact: one personal and the other social. Each action therefore warrants a distinct and amplified measure of reward or punishment. In a ḥadīth, Imām Jaʿfar al‑Ṣādiq عليه السلام states: “يُغفر للجاهل سبعون ذنبًا قبل أن يُغفر للعالم ذنب واحد” “Seventy sins of an ignorant person may be forgiven before a single sin of a learned person is forgiven” (Ref: Mufradāt Rāghib, root q-n-t). Beyond this, there has always existed a close relationship between intellectual capacity and recompense, as reflected in the tradition: “إن الثواب على قدر العقل” “Reward corresponds to the measure of one’s intellect and awareness” (Ref: Usul al‑Kafi, vol. 1, p. 9, Kitab al‑ʿAql wa al‑Jahl). In another narration, Imām Muhammad al‑Bāqir عليه السلام states: “إنما يُداق الله العباد في الحساب يوم القيامة على قدر ما آتاهم من العقول في الدنيا” “On the Day of Resurrection, God will call people to account in proportion to the intellect granted to them in this world” (Ref: Usul al‑Kafi, vol. 1, p. 9, Kitab al‑ʿAql wa al‑Jahl). It is even reported in a narration from Imām Jaʿfar al‑Ṣādiq عليه السلام that the repentance of a learned person may not be accepted at certain stages, citing the āyah: “إِنَّمَا التَّوْبَةُ عَلَى اللّهِ لِلَّذِينَ يَعْمَلُونَ السُّوءَ بِجَهَالَةٍ” (al‑Nisāʾ, 17) which indicates that repentance is for those who commit wrongdoing out of ignorance (Ref: Usul al‑Kafi, vol. 1, p. 37, Bab Luzum al‑Ḥujjah ʿala al‑ʿAlim). From this it becomes evident that the expressions such as “مضاعف” or “مرتين” signify an increase in reward and punishment—sometimes doubled and at times multiplied further—similar to numerical expressions that indicate plurality. As Rāghib states in Mufradāt: “صاعفته ضممت إليه مثله فصاعدًا” “I doubled it, meaning I added to it its like and even more.” The previously cited tradition comparing the sins of the learned and the ignorant, mentioning up to seventy-fold difference, further corroborates this principle. In essence, the social status of individuals, their influence, and their exemplary role within society directly affect the degree of their reward or punishment. This discussion may be concluded with a narration from Imām Zayn al‑ʿĀbidīn ʿAlī ibn al‑Ḥusayn عليه السلام. When someone stated to him, “You are the Ahl al‑Bayt whose sins are forgiven,” the Imām responded with displeasure: “We are more deserving that what God has decreed regarding the wives of the Prophet be applied to us, rather than what you say; we hold that our righteous receive double reward and our wrongdoers double punishment.” Then he recited the relevant two āyāt as evidence (Ref: Majmaʿ al‑Bayān, vol. 8, p. 354).

See ayat 34 for tafseer.

See ayat 34 for tafseer.

In the previous verses, the status and great responsibility of the Prophet’s wives were discussed. In the verses under consideration, this subject continues in the same manner. In these few verses, seven important commands are given to the wives of the Prophet. First, a brief preamble is stated: “O wives of the Prophet! If you keep your duty (to Allah), you are not like any other women” (يَا نِسَاءَ النَّبِيِّ لَسْتُنَّ كَأَحَدٍ مِّنَ النِّسَاءِ إِنِ اتَّقَيْتُنَّ). On one hand, you are related to the Messenger of Allah; on the other, you are at the center of revelation, hearing the Qur’anic verses and knowing the Islamic teachings. Due to this special status, you can be an example and model for all women in both piety and sin. On this basis, recognize your status and do not entrust your grave responsibility to the common crowd. Know that if you adopt taqwa (piety), you will hold a very high rank and position before the Lord. In this introduction, the Qur’an urges the addressees to accept their responsibilities and reminds them of their high status. Then, the first command concerning chastity and purity is given, highlighting a subtle point so that other related issues become clear on their own. Accordingly, the Qur’an states: “Therefore, do not be soft in speech so that one in whose heart is a disease may feel desire” (فَلَا تَخْضَعْنَ بِالْقَوْلِ فَيَطْمَعَ الَّذِي فِي قَلْبِهِ مَرَضٌ). Rather, when speaking, be direct, clear, and customary. Do not speak like lowly women who try to use seductive and provocative speech that causes lustful individuals to indulge in sinful thoughts. The phrase “الَّذِي فِي قَلْبِهِ مَرَضٌ” (one in whose heart is a disease) clarifies this reality: sexual desires being kept within limits and in a lawful manner is true safety, and when those limits are exceeded, it becomes a kind of disease. Sometimes it reaches the level of obsession, referred to as “sexual obsession.” In modern times, experts have detailed these psychological diseases in their books, which arise due to the excessive exercise of this power beyond proper bounds and falling into various sexual impurities and corrupt environments. At the end of the verse, the second command is explained as follows: you should speak polite speech that pleases both Allah and the Noble Prophet (peace be upon him) and is adorned with truth and justice (وَقُلْنَ قَوْلًا مَّعْرُوفًا). In fact, the phrase “لَا تَخْضَعْنَ بِالْقَوْلِ” points to the manner of speech, and “قُلْنَ قَوْلًا مَّعْرُوفًا” points to the content of the speech. However, the phrase “قول معروف” (good and proper speech) has a broad meaning, which besides the aforementioned, also negates all forms of false, indecent, sin-tainted, and opposing-to-truth speech. It should be remembered that the last phrase may be a clarification of what came before. Hence, no one should think that the style of speech of the wives of the Prophet (peace be upon him) should be harsh or disrespectful towards non-related men; rather, their speech should be polite and refined but without any provoking aspect. The third command related to chastity and purity is: “And remain in your houses and do not display yourselves like the display of the former times of ignorance” and do not show your bodies and adornments before others (وَقَرْنَ فِي بُيُوتِكُنَّ وَلَا تَبَرَّجْنَ تَبَرُّجَ الْجَاهِلِيَّةِ الْأُولَى). The word “قرن” is derived from “وقار” (dignity) and metaphorically means to remain settled and stay within the home. Some have also suggested the possibility that the word comes from the root “قرار”, meaning settlement or result, which practically amounts to a similar meaning. (Note of explanation: However, if it is from the root “قرار”, its imperative verb form would have been “اُقررن” where the first “ر” is omitted as a form of consonant softening and its vowel sound transferred to the “ق” thus the word becomes “قرن” without having the hamzah for connection. Consider this point carefully.) The word “تبرج” means to show oneself before people and is derived from “برج,” which means something that is visible and apparent to all. As for what is meant by “جاهلیت الأولى” (the former times of ignorance), evidently it refers to the period of ignorance before the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him). As historical records show, at that time, women did not observe proper veil; rather, they would cover part of their headscarf behind their back in such a way that their neck, chest, and earrings remained visible. The Qur’an forbids the wives of the Prophet (peace be upon him) from such behaviors. There is no doubt that this is a command and the Qur’an directly addressing the wives of the Prophet is for emphasis. Just as one would say to a scholar, “You should not lie,” it does not imply lying is permissible for others, but rather that a scholar should exercise more strictness in refraining. In any case, this expression indicates that other societies are not confronted with the same kind of ignorance as the Arabs were, the effects of which…We are also considering the new perspective. However, since the earlier commentators did not have such information, they struggled in interpreting this word and used to consider the interval between Adam (علیہ السلام) and Noah (علیہ السلام) as "First Ignorance" (جاہلیت اولى). Alternatively, they regarded the interval during the times of David (علیہ السلام) and Solomon (علیہ السلام) as ignorance, in which women wore such delicate clothing that revealed their bodies. Thus, they considered the ignorance before Islam as "Second Ignorance" (جاہلیت ثانیہ). But, as we have already mentioned, this is not necessary. Rather, it is clear that "First Ignorance" refers to that pre-Islamic ignorance which the Qur’an has mentioned several times (Al-Imran 3:143, Al-Ma'idah 5:50, Al-Fath 48:26), and "Second Ignorance" is the ignorance that will arise later (such as in our time). Further details on this topic will be presented in the discussion of points. Finally, the fourth, fifth, and sixth commands have been stated: “You (O wives of the Prophet!) establish prayer, give zakat, obey Allah and His Messenger.” (وَأَقِمْنَ الصَّلَاةَ وَآتِينَ الزَّكَاةَ وَأَطِعْنَ اللَّهَ وَرَسُولَهُ). If more emphasis is placed on the acts of worship such as prayer and zakat, it is because prayer is the most important connection with the Creator, and zakat, despite being a great act of worship, is also an unbreakable bond with the creation of Allah. As for “َأَطِعْنَ اللَّهَ وَرَسُولَهُ” (obey Allah and His Messenger), this is a general command and applies to all matters ordained by Allah. These three commands also clarify that the discussed injunctions are not limited to the wives of the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) alone but are applicable to all, although there is greater emphasis concerning the wives of the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم). Allah Almighty says at the end of the verse: “O Ahl al-Bayt! Indeed, Allah desires to remove all impurity from you and purify you completely.” (إِنَّمَا يُرِيدُ اللَّهُ لِيُذْهِبَ عَنكُمُ الرِّجْسَ أَهْلَ الْبَيْتِ وَيُطَهِّرَكُمْ تَطْهِيرًا). The phrase “إنما” which is generally used to indicate exclusivity serves as evidence that this blessing is exclusively for the family of the Prophet (peace be upon them). The word “يريد” (desires) indicates the Divine creative will (ارادة تکوینیة); otherwise, the legislative will concerning Ahl al-Bayt would not be exclusive to the Prophet’s family, but rather all people, without exception, would be bound under the Shariah command to remain free from all kinds of sin and impurity. It may be said that the creative will implies a form of compulsion; however, when attention is paid to the discussions regarding the infallibility of the Prophets and Imams (peace be upon them), the answer becomes clear. In brief, it can be asserted that the infallibles possess a kind of acquired merit due to their deeds and, simultaneously, an innate and bestowed merit from their Lord so that they may serve as exemplars and role models for the people. In other words, the strength of the infallibles, due to Divine support and their pure deeds, is so exalted that although they have the power and ability to commit sin, they do not incline toward sinning. It should be understood that no rational person would willingly place a burning ember in their mouth, despite the absence of coercion or compulsion. It is a condition emerging naturally and instinctively from a person's knowledge, awareness, and inherent foundational principles. The word “رجس” means impurity, whether it is impurity concerning a person’s temperament and nature, intellectual knowledge, the law of Shariah, or any of these reasons taken together. (Explanatory note: Raghib, in the book Mufradat, has explained the above meanings of the root “رجس” and the four types of its instances.) Some have interpreted “رجس” as signifying sin, polytheism, stinginess, envy, or false beliefs, but in reality, these are illustrations of its instances, while the word’s meaning is general and broad, including every type of impurity, as the definite article “الـ” here indicates a class. The meaning of “تطهير” is purification, and in reality, it emphasizes the removal of impurities and uncleanness. Its occurrence as an absolute object here further emphasizes this meaning. Regarding the term “Ahl al-Bayt” (people of the house), all Islamic scholars and exegetes agree that it refers to the family of the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم). This is also evident from the verse itself since “Bayt” here, though mentioned in an absolute form, is understood from the contextual reference of the surrounding verses to mean the house and family of the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم). (Explanatory note: Some have mistakenly considered "Bayt" here to mean the Masjid al-Haram and the Ka’bah and have included its pious residents in Ahl al-Bayt. This is highly inappropriate given the context of the verse, which clearly pertains to the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) and his household, not the Masjid al-Haram.) As for who exactly is intended by the “Ahl al-Bayt of the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)”, there is a difference of opinion among commentators. Some limit it to the wives of the Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) and consider the earlier and subsequent verses, which discuss the wives, as evidence for this. However, one interpretation suggests that...By this, this theory is negated, which states that the pronouns that appear in the preceding and following verses are all in the feminine plural form, whereas the pronouns in this part of the verse "إِنَّمَا يُرِيدُ اللَّهُ لِيُذْهِبَ عَنكُمُ الرِّجْسَ أَهْلَ الْبَيْتِ وَيُطَهِّرَكُمْ تَطْهِيرًا" are all in the masculine plural form, and this indicates that there is another intended meaning here. Therefore, some other exegetes have adopted a broader view, considering the whole family of the Prophet Muhammad PBUH & His Pure Progeny to be included in this verse, whether they are men or his wives. On the other hand, many traditions narrated in both Sunni and Shia sources provide a different meaning and deny the inclusion of the entire family of the Prophet Muhammad PBUH & His Pure Progeny. They state that the address in this verse is only to five individuals, namely the Prophet Muhammad PBUH & His Pure Progeny, Hazrat Ali (AS), Hazrat Fatimah (AS), Imam Hasan (AS), and Imam Husayn (AS). Thus, with such abundant textual evidence, clear indications for the interpretation of each verse exist. The acceptable interpretation of this verse is the third meaning, that is, the verse is specifically designated for the "Khamsa Tayyiba" (the five pure ones). Here remains one question: How has this matter come up in the midst of mentioning the responsibilities of the wives of the Prophet PBUH & His Pure Progeny, which does not include the wives themselves? The great exegete, the late Tabarsi, gives the answer in Majma‘ al-Bayan as follows: This is not the first occasion in the Quran where we encounter verses that, although placed side by side, speak on different topics. The Quran is full of such examples. Similarly, in the poetry and sayings of the Arab wise men, many such instances are found. The great author of Tafsir al-Mizan added another answer, summarized as follows: We have no proof that the phrase " إِنَّمَا يُرِيدُ اللَّهُ لِيُذْهِبَ عَنكُمُ الرِّجْسَ...." was revealed together with these verses; rather, traditions clearly show that this part was revealed separately but was joined with these verses during the compilation of the Quran in the time of the Prophet PBUH & His Pure Progeny or afterward. A third possible answer to this question is that the Quran wishes to tell the wives of the Prophet PBUH & His Pure Progeny that by you, a household has become associated that consists of infallible individuals. So whoever is under the shadow of the tree of infallibility and at the center of the infallible ones is more deserving than others to be more cautious and not to forget that one who is linked to such a family, in which five pure and infallible persons exist, bears great responsibilities. God and the creation have many expectations from them. God willing, in the discussion of points, we will elaborate on those Sunni and Shia traditions that have been narrated regarding the interpretation of this verse. In the last part of the verse under discussion, the mention of the wives of the Prophet comes as the seventh and final section, where they are all cautioned and warned that the best opportunity is available to them for benefiting and becoming aware of the truths of Islam. Accordingly, it says: "And remember what is recited in your homes of the verses of Allah and wisdom"—and improve yourselves under its shade, for the best opportunity is in your hands. (وَاذْكُرْنَ مَا يُتْلَى فِي بُيُوتِكُنَّ مِنْ آيَاتِ اللَّهِ وَالْحِكْمَةِ) You are present at the place of revelation and the source and center of the light of the Quran, so even if you sit at home, the atmosphere of your house is reverberating with verses through the speech of the Prophet of Islam PBUH & His Pure Progeny. Therefore, you should properly benefit from Islamic teachings and the guidance of the Prophet PBUH & His Pure Progeny, since every breath of the Messenger of Allah PBUH & His Pure Progeny is a lesson and every word establishes a determined path of action. A question arises: What is the difference between "Verses of Allah" and "wisdom"? Some exegetes say that both words point to the Quran. However, the term "verses" describes its miraculous aspect, while "wisdom" refers to its deep and profound meanings and knowledge. Other exegetes say that "Verses of Allah" point to the verses of the Quran, and "wisdom" indicates the Sunnah of the Prophet PBUH & His Pure Progeny and his wise admonitions and counsel. Although both interpretations fit the context and wording of the verse, the first interpretation seems more correct, as the term "recitation" is more suitable with the divine verses. Moreover, multiple verses in the Quran mention the revelation of both verses and wisdom. For example, Surah al-Baqarah, verse 231 (وَمَا أَنزَلَ عَلَيْكُمْ مِّنَ الْكِتَابِ وَالْحِكْمَةِ), and similarly Surah an-Nisa, verse 113, also mention this. In summary, at the end of the verse, it is said: "Indeed, Allah is ever subtle and aware." (إِنَّ اللَّهَ كَانَ لَطِيفًا خَبِيرًا) This indicates that He is fully aware and knowledgeable about the most subtle and delicate matters, well aware of your intentions and the inner secrets of your hearts. This is so when "Latif" is interpreted as the entity who is subtle and all-aware of every tiny detail; and if "Latif" is meant in the sense of being kind and gentle, then this indicates that Allah, in relation to the wives of the Messenger, is full of kindness and...He is Merciful and "Khabir" (All-Aware) of your deeds. It is also possible that "Latif" refers to the miraculous nature of the Quranic verses, and "Khabir" pertains to its wise content. Nevertheless, there is no contradiction between these meanings, and all these meanings can be gathered in the sense of the verse.

Some exegetes interpret “رجس” in the āyah as referring exclusively to major sins such as shirk or fornication; however, there is no evidence to support such limitation. Rather, the term “الرجس” (with the definite article indicating genus) denotes every form of impurity and sin, since every sin constitutes “رجس.” For this reason, the term in the Qurʾān has been used in relation to shirk, intoxicants, gambling, hypocrisy, unlawful and impure meat, and similar matters (Hajj‑30; Mā'idah‑90; Tawbah‑125; Anʿām‑145). Given that the divine will is unfailing and the phrase “إِنَّمَا يُرِيدُ اللَّهُ لِيُذْهِبَ عَنكُمُ” indicates a decisive and definitive intention—particularly in light of the term “إنّما,” which denotes exclusivity and emphasis—it becomes clear that it is God’s categorical will that the Ahl al‑Bayt be purified from every form of impurity, defilement, and sin. This state is precisely what is meant by infallibility (ʿiṣmah). It is also important to note that the divine will mentioned in this āyah does not refer to legislative commands concerning lawful and unlawful matters, since such regulations apply universally and are not exclusive to the Ahl al‑Bayt. Therefore, that interpretation would not be consistent with the restrictive and emphatic sense conveyed by “إنّما.” Accordingly, this continuous and definitive will points to a form of divine assistance that sustains the purity and continuity of the infallibility of the Ahl al‑Bayt. At the same time, it does not negate human free will and choice, as has already been explained. In essence, the meaning of the āyah aligns with the expression found in Ziyārat Jāmiʿah: “عصمكم الله من الزلل وامنكم من الفتن، وطهّركم من الدنس، وأذهب عنكم الرجس، وطهّركم تطهيرًا” “God protected you from error, safeguarded you from trials, purified you from defilement, removed from you all impurity, and purified you with complete purification.” In light of this explanation, there should remain no doubt that the āyah indicates the infallibility of the Ahl al‑Bayt.

As previously stated, although this āyah appears among those addressing the wives of the Prophet صلى الله علیہ و آلہ وسلم, the shift in grammatical form—specifically the transition from feminine plural pronouns to masculine plural—indicates that its subject matter is entirely distinct from the surrounding verses. For this reason, the interpretation advanced by some exegetes—that the āyah is not exclusive to the Prophet, ʿAlī, Fāṭimah, Ḥasan, and Ḥusayn عليهم السلام but also includes the wives of the Prophet—is not supported. While acknowledging the honor and respect due to the wives of the Prophet, numerous traditions clearly indicate that this āyah pertains specifically to those outstanding personalities. A significant number of narrations are transmitted to this effect, and a selection of them may be presented as follows. (a) Some narrations originate from the wives of the Prophet themselves. These reports state that when the Prophet صلى الله علیہ و آلہ وسلم spoke regarding this āyah, they would ask whether they were included among its recipients, and he would reply that although they were upon goodness, they were not included within this specific group. One such narration is recorded by al‑Thaʿlabī in his Tafsir, transmitted from Umm Salamah. It relates that the Prophet was in his home when Fāṭimah entered. He instructed her to call her husband and her two sons Ḥasan and Ḥusayn. When they gathered, he covered them with a cloak and invoked: “اللّٰهُم هؤلاء اهل بيتي و عترتی فاذهب عنهم الرجس وطهّرهم تطهيرًا” At that moment, the āyah “إِنَّمَا يُرِيدُ اللَّهُ ...” was revealed. Umm Salamah then asked whether she was included, to which the Prophet replied, “انّكِ إلى خير,” indicating that she was upon goodness but not included in this specific designation. Similarly, al‑Thaʿlabī transmits from ʿĀʾishah that when she was asked about her involvement in the events of the Battle of al‑Jamāl, she acknowledged it as a divine decree. When questioned about ʿAlī عليه السلام, she stated that he was among the most beloved of people to the Prophet, and described witnessing the Prophet gather ʿAlī, Fāṭimah, Ḥasan, and Ḥusayn under a cloak, invoking purification for them. When she asked if she was included, the Prophet told her to remain aside, affirming her goodness but excluding her from that group (Ref: Majmaʿ al‑Bayān). These narrations clearly indicate that the wives of the Prophet are not included within the specific referent of the āyah. (b) Numerous narrations concerning the well‑known tradition of al‑Kisāʾ report that the Prophet gathered ʿAlī, Fāṭimah, Ḥasan, and Ḥusayn, covered them with a cloak, and invoked divine purification for them. At that moment, the āyah “إِنَّمَا يُرِيدُ اللَّهُ لِيُذْهِبَ عَنكُمُ الرِّجْسَ” was revealed. Al‑Ḥākim al‑Ḥaskānī al‑Nīshāpūrī records these traditions through multiple chains in Shawāhid al‑Tanzīl (Ref: Shawahid al‑Tanzil, vol. 2, p. 31). The purpose of gathering them under the cloak was to distinguish them explicitly and to clarify that the āyah pertains specifically to them, so that no ambiguity might arise regarding its scope. In some narrations, the Prophet repeated the supplication multiple times to emphasize this point (Ref: Tafsir al‑Durr al‑Manthur). (c) Other narrations report that after the revelation of this āyah, the Prophet صلى الله علیہ و آلہ وسلم would, for six months—or up to eight or nine months—pass by the house of Fāṭimah at the time of the morning prayer and call out: “الصلوة يا اهل البيت! إنما يريد الله ليذهب عنكم الرجس اهل البيت ويطهركم تطهيرًا” This report is transmitted by al‑Ḥākim al‑Ḥaskānī from Anas ibn Mālik (Ref: Shawahid al‑Tanzil, vol. 2, p. 11), with similar reports from Abū Saʿīd al‑Khudrī and Ibn ʿAbbās. The repeated proclamation served to eliminate any doubt regarding the specific referents of the āyah. (d) Several narrations from Abū Saʿīd al‑Khudrī explicitly state: “نزلت في خمسة: في رسول الله و علي و فاطمة و الحسن و الحسين” indicating that the āyah was revealed concerning these five individuals (Ref: Shawahid al‑Tanzil, vol. 4, p. 25). The abundance of such narrations has led some scholars to regard them as mutawātir. Extensive compilations, such as Iḥqāq al‑Ḥaqq, document numerous such reports from Sunni sources, while Shia sources contain even more (Ref: Iḥqāq al‑Ḥaqq, vol. 2 and annotations). Additionally, in Shawāhid al‑Tanzīl, over 130 narrations are recorded on this matter (Ref: Shawahid al‑Tanzil, vol. 4, pp. 10–92). Finally, historical evidence indicates that some of the wives of the Prophet were involved in actions that do not correspond to the doctrine of infallibility, such as the participation in the Battle of al‑Jamāl, which led to significant conflict and loss of life. Such events further differentiate their status from that of those encompassed by the āyah. In view of the cumulative textual and historical evidence, the conclusion is that the āyah is specifically concerned with the purified members of the Ahl al‑Bayt identified in these narrations.

As explained earlier in the exegesis of the āyah, the term “إِنَّمَا يُرِيدُ اللَّهُ لِيُذْهِبَ عَنكُمُ الرِّجْسَ” refers not to irādah tashrīʿiyyah (legislative will), but to irādah takwīnīyyah (creative or ontological will). For further clarification, it is necessary to note that irādah tashrīʿiyyah pertains to divine commands and prohibitions—such as the obligation of prayer, fasting, ḥajj, and jihād. This type of will is related to human actions and addresses all individuals subject to divine law. By contrast, in the āyah under discussion, the will is connected to a divine act; the Qurʾān states that God intends to remove all impurity from the Ahl al‑Bayt. Consequently, this must be understood as a creative will operating within the order of existence. Moreover, if the meaning were legislative, it would not be specific to the Ahl al‑Bayt, since God has commanded all people to maintain purity and piety. Such a reading would contradict the exclusivity implied by the term “إِنَّمَا,” which conveys restriction and emphasis. Therefore, the continuous and definitive nature of this will indicates a form of divine support that ensures the purity and permanence of the infallibility (ʿiṣmah) of the Ahl al‑Bayt. At the same time, this does not negate free will, as previously explained. The term “رجس” in this context does not refer to external impurity, but to inner defilements. Nor is it limited to acts such as shirk or immoral conduct; rather, it encompasses all forms of doctrinal, ethical, and practical impurity. Another important point is that irādah takwīnīyyah here functions in the sense of a determining cause or enabling condition (muqtaḍī), rather than a complete determinative cause (ʿillah tāmmah) that would impose compulsion and eliminate human choice. This may be clarified by observing that ʿiṣmah is a state of profound God‑consciousness that arises in the Prophets and the Imams through divine assistance. Despite possessing the capacity to commit sin, they refrain from it by virtue of their knowledge, awareness, and voluntary choice. This may be compared to a skilled physician who refrains from touching a poisonous substance, not because he lacks the ability to do so, but because he fully understands its harmful consequences. His insight and intellectual awareness lead him to abstain willingly. It should also be noted that this divine protection is a special gift granted by God to the Prophets and the Imams, not to others, and it is bestowed in view of their heavy responsibility for guidance and leadership. It is an honor whose benefit extends to all, and it is entirely consistent with divine justice—just as certain delicate and highly sensitive organs of the body are endowed with special qualities for the benefit of the entire organism. Furthermore, the greater the distinctions and divine favors granted to these individuals, the greater their responsibility. Even a tark al‑awlā (leaving the preferable act) on their part may be regarded as equivalent to a major sin in the case of ordinary individuals. This, too, reflects divine justice. In summary, the will expressed in this āyah is a takwīnī will in the sense of an enabling condition, not an absolute cause; it does not entail compulsion, nor does it diminish the merit inherent in the مقام of the Ahl al‑Bayt.

As has already been indicated, a group of commentators have been doubtful regarding the interpretation of the verses under discussion about "الجاهلية الاولٰى" (the first period of ignorance). It is as if they could not believe that after the emergence of Islam, another form of ignorance also appeared in the world, before which even the ignorance of the Arabs prior to Islam would pale in comparison. But in our time, this matter is completely resolved for us, as witnesses to the horrific manifestations of the ignorance of the twentieth century, and it should be counted among the miraculous prophecies of the Glorious Qur'an. If during the era of the first Arab ignorance, war and plundering were rampant, and, for example, the marketplace of Ukaz became the center of senseless bloodshed on multiple occasions in which some individuals were killed, then in the ignorance of our time, global wars of similar nature occur, in which sometimes twenty million people fall victim, and a greater number are wounded or disabled. If in the ignorance of the Arabs, women used to "تبرج بزینت" (wear ornaments ostentatiously) and utilized their scarves (dupatta) in such a way that the chest, neck, necklaces, and earrings became visible, then in our time there are clubs, which are referred to as "clubs of the naked" (examples of which exist in England). We apologize greatly, but in such clubs, people go completely naked by birthright. The moral degradation on seaside plazas, swimming pools, and even in public streets is beyond description. If during the ignorance of the Arabs there were "زنان آلودہ ذوات الاعلام" (depraved women under flags) who would hoist flags on their houses as an invitation to sin, then in the ignorance of our century there also exist individuals who publish such content in specialized periodicals that even the pen is ashamed to mention, and in comparison, the ignorance of the Arabs appears honorable. In short, what shall we say about the state of these evils that exist in this materialistic and mechanical civilization, devoid of faith, which are better left unspoken of, and we do not wish to contaminate this sacred tafseer with them. What we have presented are just a few samples from the life of such people who sever their connection with God and, despite thousands of universities, scholarly centers, and famous intellectuals, have become trapped in the swamp of moral corruption or drowned in the mire of sexual immorality. Even the intellectuals of these very centers have themselves been victims of such devastations.

According to some exegetes, when the wife of Jaʿfar ibn Abī Ṭālib, Asmāʾ bint ʿUmays, returned from Abyssinia with her husband, she went to visit the wives of the Messenger of God صلى الله علیہ و آلہ وسلم. Among the first questions she asked was whether anything had been revealed in the Qurʾān concerning women. The wives of the Prophet replied in the negative. Thereupon, she immediately presented herself before the Messenger of God صلى الله علیہ و آلہ وسلم and asked whether women were at a disadvantage. The Prophet responded by asking how this could be so. Asmāʾ replied that no virtue comparable to that mentioned for men had been revealed concerning women in the Qurʾān. At this point, the relevant āyah was revealed, reassuring her that in the presence of God, men and women are equal in terms of spiritual proximity and rank. Their merit and distinction depend upon faith, righteous action, and adherence to Islamic ethical principles.

As stated in the preceding verses concerning the responsibilities of the wives of the Prophet, the present āyah continues with a comprehensive discussion of both men and women and their distinguished qualities. It enumerates ten attributes—doctrinal, practical, and ethical—and then concludes by describing their immense reward. A portion of these ten attributes pertains to the stages of faith, namely verbal affirmation, inner conviction of the heart and spirit, and action through the limbs. Another portion relates to control over the tongue, the stomach, and sexual desire, as these three elements exert decisive influence over human life and moral conduct. A further aspect refers to supporting the needy and demonstrating steadfastness in the face of severe trials—patience being the foundation of faith. Finally, the āyah addresses the preservation and continuity of these qualities through the remembrance of God. Thus it states: “إِنَّ الْمُسْلِمِينَ وَالْمُسْلِمَاتِ” and “وَالْمُؤْمِنِينَ وَالْمُؤْمِنَاتِ” and “وَالْقَانِتِينَ وَالْقَانِتَاتِ”. Although some exegetes have considered “Islam” and “Iman” in this āyah to be synonymous, the repetition indicates that they are distinct. This corresponds to the statement in Sūrah al‑Ḥujurāt (14): “قَالَتِ الْأَعْرَابُ آمَنَّا قُل لَّمْ تُؤْمِنُوا وَلَكِن قُولُوا أَسْلَمْنَا وَلَمَّا يَدْخُلِ الْإِيمَانُ فِي قُلُوبِكُمْ,” demonstrating that Islam refers to outward submission, whereas Iman denotes inner conviction. This distinction is also reflected in Islamic traditions. In a narration, Imām Jaʿfar al‑Ṣādiq عليه السلام explained that Islam is the testimony to the unity of God and the prophethood of the Messenger, while Iman is guidance that resides in the heart and manifests itself in action (Ref: Usul al‑Kafi, vol. 2, p. 41). The term “قانت” derives from “قنوت” and indicates obedience accompanied by humility and devotion—thus reflecting the practical dimension of faith. The āyah then highlights truthfulness: “وَالصَّادِقِينَ وَالصَّادِقَاتِ.” Traditions affirm that the soundness of faith depends upon the soundness of the tongue; it is reported: “لا يستقيم إيمان امرء حتى يستقيم قلبه… ولَا يستقيم قلبه حتى يستقيم لسانه.” Patience is then mentioned: “وَالصَّابِرِينَ وَالصَّابِرَاتِ,” as it represents the foundation of faith, much like the head in relation to the body. This is followed by humility: “وَالْخَاشِعِينَ وَالْخَاشِعَاتِ,” which stands in contrast to arrogance and pride (Ref: Mahajjat al‑Bayda, vol. 5, p. 153). Next, charity is highlighted: “وَالْمُتَصَدِّقِينَ وَالْمُتَصَدِّقَاتِ,” counteracting the destructive tendency of attachment to wealth. Thereafter, the āyah addresses fasting: “وَالصَّائِمِينَ وَالصَّائِمَاتِ,” and chastity: “وَالْحَافِظِينَ فُرُوجَهُمْ وَالْحَافِظَاتِ,” indicating control over bodily desires. Finally, the āyah concludes with the attribute that sustains all others: “وَالذَّاكِرِينَ اللَّهَ كَثِيرًا وَالذَّاكِرَاتِ.” Continuous remembrance of God removes heedlessness, dispels satanic whispers, and corrects lapses. Various interpretations of “ذِكْر كَثِير” appear in the traditions. For example, it is reported from the Prophet صلى الله علیہ و آلہ وسلم that if a man awakens his wife at night and they both perform prayer, they will be counted among those who remember God abundantly (Ref: Tafsir Majmaʿ al‑Bayān; Tafsir Qurtubī). Another narration from Imām Jaʿfar al‑Ṣādiq عليه السلام associates it with reciting the supplications of Fāṭimah al‑Zahrāʾ (Ref: Tafsir Majmaʿ al‑Bayān). Accordingly, remembrance signifies reflection, which in turn serves as the foundation of action; mere verbal utterance without thought and practice is not intended. The āyah concludes: “أَعَدَّ اللَّهُ لَهُم مَّغْفِرَةً وَأَجْرًا عَظِيمًا.” God first removes their sins—those impurities that stain the soul—and then grants them immense reward, the magnitude of which is known only to Him. This expression conveys both the removal of harm and the attainment of benefit. The word “أجر” itself implies greatness, and its qualification by “عظيم” further emphasizes its magnitude, while its absolute expression indicates its vastness. The use of the past tense “أعدّ” (has prepared) signifies either the certainty of this reward or that Paradise and its blessings have already been prepared for the believers.

Some people assume that Islam has placed greater honor on men and that women do not hold much status or rank in Islamic achievements. Perhaps this misunderstanding arises from the fact that Islam, in certain places, distinguishes between the rights and laws of men and women, each having its own distinct reason and particular philosophy. There is no doubt that, regardless of such differences—which are based on specific social positions and particular natural conditions—Islam makes no distinction between men and women in terms of their human aspect and spiritual stature. The above-mentioned verse is clear evidence of this reality because, when describing the characteristics of the believers and the most important fundamental issues of faith, ethics, and action, men and women are placed side by side like the scales of a balance, and equal reward is promised to both without any slight difference or distinction. In other words, just as the physical differences between men and women cannot be denied, likewise, their spiritual differences are also not denied. It is obvious that this difference is necessary for the continuity and maintenance of human society’s system, the consequences of which are manifested in certain laws regarding the rights of men and women. However, Islam does not question the humanity of women nor the presence of the human soul within them, as some former Christian scholars did. Islam not only refrains from such questioning but also rejects any difference between men and women in terms of the human soul. Therefore, we read in Surah An-Nahl, verse 97: "مَنْ عَمِلَ صَالِحًا مِّن ذَكَرٍ أَوْ أُنثَى وَهُوَ مُؤْمِنٌ فَلَنُحْيِيَنَّهُ حَيَاةً طَيِّبَةً وَلَنَجْزِيَنَّهُمْ أَجْرَهُم بِأَحْسَنِ مَا كَانُواْ يَعْمَلُونَ۔" "Whoever does righteousness, whether male or female, while he is a believer—we will surely cause him to live a good life, and We will surely give them their reward according to the best of what they used to do." Islam similarly advocates economic freedom for women just as it does for men, in contrast to many past and present laws in which women have been deprived of any form of economic freedom. On this basis, Islamic “Ilm al-Rijal” (Science of Narrators) mentions learned women who were among the ranks of jurists and narrators, remembered as unforgettable personalities. If we return to pre-Islamic Arab history and investigate the condition of women in that society and how they were deprived of many of their fundamental rights, it will be found that sometimes people did not even believe in the right of women to live and would bury them alive after birth. Similarly, observing the condition of women in the present age reveals that the few false claimants of civilization have considered women as lifeless toys, nothing more! At this point, we confirm how greatly Islam has served women and how much right Islam holds over their status. (Explanatory note: For this subject, see also the commentary under Surah Al-Baqarah, verse 328, in Volume 1 of Tafseer Namunah and under Surah An-Nahl, verse 97, in Volume 6.)

See ayat 38 for tafseer.

See ayat 38 for tafseer.

According to the majority of Islamic historians and exegetes, the āyāt under discussion were revealed concerning Zaynab bint Jahsh—who was the cousin of the Messenger of God صلى الله علیہ و آلہ وسلم—and Zayd ibn Ḥārithah, who had been freed by the Prophet. The account is as follows. Prior to the prophetic mission, and thereafter, when Khadījah al‑Kubrā married the Prophet صلى الله علیہ و آلہ وسلم, she had purchased a slave named Zayd and subsequently presented him as a gift to the Prophet. The Prophet set him free, and since Zayd had been separated from his tribe, the Messenger of Mercy صلى الله علیہ و آلہ وسلم adopted him as his son, in accordance with the prevailing custom of tabannī (adoption), by which an adopted child was treated as a biological son. After the advent of Islam, Zayd became one of the earliest and most sincere Muslims and attained a distinguished position. He later served as a commander in the Muslim forces and was martyred in the Battle of Muʾtah. When the Prophet صلى الله علیہ و آلہ وسلم intended to arrange a marriage for Zayd, he proposed his cousin Zaynab bint Umaymah bint ʿAbd al‑Muṭṭalib as a bride for him. Initially, Zaynab assumed that the Prophet intended to marry her himself, and she expressed her willingness. However, when she learned that the proposal was for Zayd, she became distressed and refused. Her brother, ʿAbd Allāh, also strongly opposed the arrangement. At this point, the first of the relevant āyāt was revealed, instructing individuals such as Zaynab and her brother that when God and His Messenger decide upon a matter, they have no option but to submit. Upon hearing this, they accepted the decision. It subsequently became evident that this marriage was not merely a personal union, but rather a preliminary step toward abolishing a pre‑Islamic custom. In the age of jāhiliyyah, women from noble families would not consent to marry a freed slave, regardless of his merit. However, the marriage between Zayd and Zaynab did not endure, and due to personal incompatibility, it ultimately led to divorce, despite the Prophet’s efforts to prevent it. Thereafter, in order to remedy the situation and fulfill a divine command, the Prophet صلى الله علیہ و آلہ وسلم married Zaynab. This matter concluded at that point, although various discussions arose among people, which the Qurʾān addressed through the subsequent āyāt. (Ref: Tafsīr Majmaʿ al‑Bayān; Tafsīr al‑Qurṭubī; Tafsīr al‑Mīzān; Tafsīr Fakhr al‑Rāzī; Tafsīr Fī Ẓilāl al‑Qurʾān; Sīrah Ibn Hishām, vol. 1, p. 264; al‑Kāmil by Ibn al‑Athīr, vol. 1, p. 277).

As has already been explained, although this āyah appears among those addressing the wives of the Prophet صلى الله علیہ و آلہ وسلم, the change in its grammatical structure—specifically the shift from feminine plural pronouns to masculine plural—indicates that its subject matter is distinct from the surrounding verses. For this reason, the view of those who expand its meaning to include not only the Prophet, ʿAlī, Fāṭimah, Ḥasan, and Ḥusayn عليهم السلام but also the wives of the Prophet is not substantiated. Numerous narrations clearly indicate that the āyah is specifically related to these distinguished personalities and does not include the wives, despite their respected status. (a) Certain narrations are reported by the wives of the Prophet themselves. These indicate that when the Prophet صلى الله علیہ و آلہ وسلم referred to this āyah, they would ask whether they were included among its addressees, and he would respond that although they were upon goodness, they were not included in this particular group. One such narration, recorded by al‑Thaʿlabī in his Tafsir from Umm Salamah, describes how the Prophet gathered ʿAlī, Fāṭimah, Ḥasan, and Ḥusayn under a cloak and supplicated: “اللّٰهُم هؤلاء اهل بيتي و عترتی فاذهب عنهم الرجس وطهّرهم تطهيرًا” At this moment, the āyah “إِنَّمَا يُرِيدُ اللَّهُ ...” was revealed. When Umm Salamah asked if she was included, the Prophet replied, “انّكِ إلى خير,” indicating that she was upon goodness but not among those specifically referred to. Similarly, a narration attributed to ʿĀʾishah reports that she described witnessing the Prophet gathering these same individuals under a cloak and invoking their purification. When she asked whether she was included, she was instructed to step aside, being affirmed as virtuous but not included (Ref: Majmaʿ al‑Bayān). (b) A large number of narrations concerning the well‑known ḥadīth of al‑Kisāʾ report that the Prophet صلى الله علیہ و آلہ وسلم gathered ʿAlī, Fāṭimah, Ḥasan, and Ḥusayn and covered them with a cloak, invoking divine purification for them, upon which the āyah “إِنَّمَا يُرِيدُ اللَّهُ لِيُذْهِبَ عَنكُمُ الرِّجْسَ” was revealed. These traditions are transmitted through multiple chains, as collected by al‑Ḥākim al‑Ḥaskānī al‑Nīshāpūrī in Shawāhid al‑Tanzīl (Ref: Shawahid al‑Tanzil, vol. 2, p. 31). The act of gathering them under the cloak served to distinguish them explicitly and to clarify that the āyah pertains specifically to them, so that no ambiguity would arise. In some narrations, the Prophet repeated the supplication several times to emphasize this point (Ref: Tafsir al‑Durr al‑Manthur). (c) Other narrations report that after the revelation of this āyah, the Prophet صلى الله علیہ و آلہ وسلم would, for six to nine months, pass by the house of Fāṭimah at the time of the dawn prayer and call out: “الصلوة يا اهل البيت! إنما يريد الله ليذهب عنكم الرجس اهل البيت ويطهركم تطهيرًا” This report is transmitted from Anas ibn Mālik (Ref: Shawahid al‑Tanzil, vol. 2, p. 11), with similar reports from Abū Saʿīd al‑Khudrī and Ibn ʿAbbās. This repeated proclamation removed any scope for doubt and made the intended referents of the āyah unmistakably clear. (d) Several narrations transmitted from Abū Saʿīd al‑Khudrī explicitly state: “نزلت في خمسة فی رسول الله و علی و فاطمة و الحسن و الحسين” indicating that the āyah was revealed concerning these five individuals (Ref: Shawahid al‑Tanzil, vol. 4, p. 25). The abundance of these narrations has led some scholars to consider them mutawātir. Large compilations, such as Iḥqāq al‑Ḥaqq, have collected numerous such reports from Sunni sources, while Shia sources contain even more (Ref: Iḥqāq al‑Haqq, vol. 2). Moreover, the author of Shawāhid al‑Tanzīl, a prominent Sunni scholar, has recorded approximately 130 narrations on this subject (Ref: Shawahid al‑Tanzil, vol. 4, pp. 10–92). In addition to these textual proofs, historical accounts indicate that certain actions attributed to some of the wives of the Prophet do not correspond to the concept of infallibility, such as their involvement in events like the Battle of al‑Jamāl, which resulted in significant conflict and loss of life. Such historical considerations further distinguish their status from that of those encompassed by the āyah. Taken together, the extensive body of narrations and supporting evidence leaves little room for doubt regarding the specific referents of this āyah, affirming that it pertains to the purified members of the Ahl al‑Bayt identified in these traditions.

The story of the Prophet Muhammad's (peace be upon him) marriage to Zainab has been explicitly narrated in the Qur’an, which also clarifies that its purpose was to abolish an ingrained practice of ignorance through marrying the divorced wife of an adopted son. Despite this, the enemies of Islam distorted it into a romantic tale. In this way, they committed the impious audacity of defiling the noble character of the Prophet (peace be upon him) by relying on suspicious and fabricated hadiths. Among these stories is one such narrative that when the Prophet (peace be upon him) went to inquire about Zaid’s condition and, upon opening the door, his gaze fell upon Zainab’s beauty and he said: "سُبْحَانَ اللَّهِ خَالِقِ النُّورِ تَبَارَكَ اللَّهُ أَحْسَنُ الْخَالِقِينَ" “Glory be to Allah, the Creator of light; blessed is Allah, the best of creators.” These people use this phrase as evidence for the Prophet’s (peace be upon him) affection towards Zainab (may Allah be pleased with her), whereas there are clear evidences to refute such fables, setting aside the issue of purity and prophethood: First, Zainab was the Prophet’s (peace be upon him) paternal aunt’s daughter and grew up almost in the same family environment before him. Indeed, it was he who proposed to her on behalf of Zaid. If Zainab had been excessively beautiful and her charm had attracted the Prophet’s (peace be upon him) attention, then neither was her beauty concealed nor was it difficult for the Prophet (peace be upon him) to marry her before this incident. In fact, she herself was not interested in marrying Zaid and had explicitly expressed her objection, preferring instead to become the wife of the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him). When the Prophet (peace be upon him) came to propose to her on behalf of Zaid, she was very pleased, thinking that he had come to propose for himself, but after the revelation of the Qur’anic verse and bowing submissively before Allah and His Prophet, she agreed to marry Zaid. Given these circumstances, what room remains for suspicion that the Prophet (peace be upon him) was unaware of Zainab’s condition, or that he could not have taken action despite desiring to marry her? Second, when Zaid came to the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) to seek counsel for divorcing his wife Zainab, the Prophet repeatedly advised him against it and tried to dissuade him from divorcing. This itself is another testimony against such fabrications. Third, the Qur’an explicitly states the purpose of this marriage so that no space remains for other interpretations. Fourth, in the aforementioned verse, the Lord Almighty speaks to His Prophet, indicating that there was nothing special or shameful in marrying the divorced wife of Zaid that would cause the Prophet (peace be upon him) to fear the people, as he should fear Allah alone. The fear of Allah clarifies that this marriage was performed as an act of obedience to a divine command, setting aside personal matters for the fulfillment of a sacred divine purpose. Even though, due to this, the Prophet (peace be upon him) suffered the verbal wounds of hardened enemies and the fabrications of hypocrites, he paid a great price for obeying God’s command and breaking a wrongful custom, and continues to bear it to this day. However, in the lives of true leaders, there come moments when they must demonstrate self-sacrifice and endure accusations and allegations from such people in order to ultimately achieve their true objective. Now, if the Prophet (peace be upon him) had neither seen nor recognized Zainab at all, and she had not shown any inclination to marrying him, and Zaid had not been willing to divorce her (setting aside the issue of prophethood and infallibility), then such talk and suspicions could have been entertained. But since the Prophet had indeed seen her, all possibilities are negated, and the falsity and fabrication of these stories become clear. Moreover, there is no moment in the life of the Prophet (peace be upon him) that indicates any special affection or desire for Zainab; rather, like other wives, and perhaps less than some of the others, demonstrating another reason to reject these tales. Finally, it is necessary to address the point that some may say: “It was indeed necessary to abolish that wrongful custom, but why did the Prophet himself have to take practical action? He could have legislated the matter as a law and encouraged others to marry the divorced wives of their adopted sons.” However, it must be noted that sometimes the eradication of an ignorant and erroneous custom, especially in marriage matters and involving people who were of low social standing in the eyes of society, cannot be achieved by mere discourse. People say, “If this act is righteous, then why does the Prophet himself not perform it?”Why do they not marry the divorced wife of their freed slave themselves? Etc. In such situations, a practical example eliminates all such objections decisively and breaks that incorrect custom, regardless of the fact that this act itself was a kind of self-sacrifice and devotion.

There is no doubt that human intellectual and spiritual autonomy does not permit unconditional submission before every individual, since such individuals are themselves human and may be subject to error in many matters. However, when the matter pertains to God—the All‑Knowing and All‑Wise—and to His Messenger, who speaks and acts in accordance with divine command, then the refusal to submit completely becomes a sign of deviation. This is because their command is free from all forms of error and deficiency. Moreover, such commands are ultimately for the benefit of human beings themselves, whereas the Essence of God is completely independent and gains nothing from human obedience. In such a case, it is inconceivable that a rational person, after recognizing this reality, would disregard his own welfare and well‑being. Furthermore, apart from all these considerations, human beings belong entirely to God, and whatever they possess has been granted by Him. Thus, submission to Him is the only possible course. Accordingly, the Qurʾān contains many verses that refer to this principle. For example: “إِنَّمَا كَانَ قَوْلُ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ إِذَا دُعُوا إِلَى اللَّهِ وَرَسُولِهِ لِيَحْكُمَ بَيْنَهُمْ أَن يَقُولُوا سَمِعْنَا وَأَطَعْنَا وَأُوْلَئِكَ هُمُ الْمُفْلِحُونَ” (al‑Nūr, 51). The true believers are those who, when called to God and His Messenger for judgment, say: “We hear and we obey.” Similarly: “فَلَا وَرَبِّكَ لَا يُؤْمِنُونَ حَتَّى يُحَكِّمُوكَ فِيمَا شَجَرَ بَيْنَهُمْ ثُمَّ لَا يَجِدُوا فِي أَنفُسِهِمْ حَرَجًا مِّمَّا قَضَيْتَ وَيُسَلِّمُوا تَسْلِيمًا” (al‑Nisāʾ, 65). They cannot attain true faith until they accept the Messenger as the arbiter in their disputes and submit entirely without any hesitation. At another point, the Qurʾān states: “وَمَنْ أَحْسَنُ دِينًا مِّمَّنْ أَسْلَمَ وَجْهَهُ لِلَّهِ وَهُوَ مُحْسِنٌ” (al‑Nisāʾ, 125). No one has a better religion than the one who submits himself completely to God while performing righteous deeds. In essence, the very term “Islam” is derived from submission, and it reflects this reality. The degree to which a person submits before the truth corresponds to the extent to which they partake in the spirit of Islam. In this regard, people fall into several categories. One group submits to divine commands only when those commands align with their personal interests. In reality, such individuals exhibit a form of associating partners (shirk) while outwardly identifying as Muslim. They fragment divine guidance according to their preferences, exemplifying the attitude of “تؤمن ببعض ونكفر ببعض.” Even their belief is motivated by self‑interest rather than by obedience to divine command. A second group consists of those whose will and desires are subordinated to the will of God. When their personal interests appear to conflict with divine command, they relinquish those interests and submit to God. These are the true believers and genuine Muslims. A third group stands above both of the previous categories. These individuals desire only what God desires and will only what God wills. Their ultimate aspiration and objective are entirely aligned with the divine will. They love what God loves and dislike what He dislikes. Such individuals are the elect (khawāṣṣ), the sincere (mukhlisīn), and the proximate (muqarrabīn) servants of God. Their entire being is imbued with the spirit of Tawḥīd, immersed in divine love, and absorbed in the contemplation of His جمال.

In the first verse under discussion, relating to the conversation about the prophets mentioned in the last of the previous verses, an important general duty of the prophets is indicated: "They (the previous prophets) were those who conveyed the messages of Allah, feared Him, and feared no one except Allah." (الَّذِينَ يُبَلِّغُونَ رِسَالَاتِ اللَّهِ وَيَخْشَوْنَهُ وَلَا يَخْشَوْنَ أَحَدًا إِلَّا اللَّهَ). You (Prophet PBUH & His Pure Progeny) too should not be even slightly afraid of anyone in the matter of conveying the messages of your Lord. Allah commands you to break an ignorant custom and marry the divorced wife of your adopted son, and marry this divorced wife, Zainab. Do not express any worry or fear in fulfilling this duty, for fear is not the tradition of the prophets. Principally, the task of the prophets in various stages is to abolish such customs. If they show even a little fear or panic, they certainly cannot succeed in fulfilling their duties. They must proceed decisively, endure the abusive language of ill-mannered people, and complete their plans without caring for rumors, the conspiracies of the malicious and corrupt, and the noise made by troublemakers. All calculations and accounting are with Allah. This is why at the end of the verse it is stated: "And sufficient is Allah as Accountant." (وَكَفَى بِاللَّهِ حَسِيبًا). In this path, Allah also protects the account of the sacrifices and selflessness of the prophets, rewards them, and holds accountable those who use abusive language and slander, bringing them to their deserved consequences. Indeed, the phrase "كَفَى بِاللَّهِ حَسِيبًا" is proof that divine guides should not be distressed or fearful in propagating their religion because the One who holds account of their hardships, pains, and efforts, and who rewards them, is Allah Himself.

It denotes the act of conveying and delivering. When the term tablīgh is connected with “risālat Allāh,” it signifies that whatever God has taught the prophets through revelation, they in turn communicate to people, and embed it within their hearts through reasoning, effective presentation, glad tidings, and exhortation.

It denotes a form of fear that is accompanied by reverence and respect. On this basis, its meaning differs from ordinary fear in which such qualities are absent, although at times this term is also used in the general sense of fear. In some of the works of Muḥaqqiq Ṭūsī, a discussion has been presented regarding the distinction between these two terms, which in reality reflects their spiritual rather than purely lexical meanings. He explains that although “خشیت” and “خوف” are synonymous or nearly synonymous in linguistic usage, individuals of spiritual insight distinguish between them. According to his explanation, “خوف” refers to an inner unease or anxiety concerning punishment and retribution, which a person anticipates as a result of committing sin or neglecting obedience. This state is common among most people, although it admits of varying degrees, and its highest level is attained by only a few. By contrast, “خشیت” is a state that arises from the perception of divine greatness and majesty, combined with the fear of being deprived of the divine effulgence and grace. This condition is not accessible except to those who possess awareness of the exalted stature and supreme مقام of the Divine Essence and who have experienced the sweetness of proximity to Him. For this reason, the Qurʾān has restricted this state to the knowledgeable servants, stating: “إِنَّمَا يَخْشَى اللَّهَ مِنْ عِبَادِهِ الْعُلَمَاءُ” “Indeed, only the learned among His servants have خشیت of Allah.” (Ref: Majmaʿ al‑Baḥrayn, root “kh‑sh‑y”). Provide your feedback on BizChat

It may be said that this verse contradicts the previous statement made in the earlier verses, because here it is stated that the Prophets of God fear God alone and no one else, whereas in the earlier verses it is mentioned that you were hiding something in your heart which God has made manifest. You fear people, whereas you should fear God: "وَتَخْشَى النَّاسَ وَاللَّهُ أَحَقُّ أَن تَخْشَاهُ." However, the answer to this question becomes clear by paying attention to two points. First, if the Prophet (PBUH) experienced any kind of fear, it was only due to the concern that breaking this tradition might be intolerable for many people, which could cause them to waver in their faith and the fundamentals of Islam. In reality, this kind of fear is essentially a reflection of the fear of God. Second, the noble Prophets never fall prey to fear and panic in the preaching of the divine message; however, in their personal and specific matters, experiencing fear and anxiety at dangerous circumstances is natural. Given human nature, expressing fear and anxiety is not blameworthy as long as it does not reach an extreme degree. Even the bravest individuals face such situations in their lives. The blameworthy fear is that which arises during the performance of divine duties and responsibilities in communal life.

Some have inferred from the āyah under discussion that taqiyyah is not permissible for prophets in the conveyance of the divine message, because the Qurʾān states: “وَلَا يَخْشَوْنَ أَحَدًا إِلَّا اللَّهَ.” However, it should be noted that taqiyyah has several forms. One form is known as taqiyyah khawfī (precaution based on fear), and it is this type that the aforementioned āyah negates in relation to the prophetic mission of conveying divine revelation. There are, however, other types of taqiyyah, including taqiyyah taḥbībī and taqiyyah poshishī. Taqiyyah taḥbībī refers to concealing one’s belief at times in order to win over the opposing party and gradually bring them into intellectual and ideological harmony. Taqiyyah poshishī refers to concealing plans and their مقدمات in order to achieve an objective, since premature disclosure could lead to failure if the enemy becomes aware of them. The lives of the prophets—particularly that of the Prophet Muḥammad صلى الله علیہ و آلہ وسلم—contain many examples of this type of strategic concealment. It is well known that on numerous occasions, when proceeding toward the battlefield, the Prophet would conceal his intended objective, and military strategies were kept confidential. Such strategic withholding of information constitutes a form of taqiyyah. At times, even in conveying certain rulings, a gradual method was employed, which may also be considered a form of taqiyyah. For example, the prohibition of ribā (usury) and the prohibition of intoxicants were not declared in a single stage but were introduced gradually through successive divine commandments, moving from milder forms to their final prohibition. In general, taqiyyah possesses a very broad meaning, namely: concealing a reality in order to prevent the objective from being placed at risk. This principle has been recognized and utilized by all rational individuals, and divine leaders adopt it at various stages to ensure the success of their sacred mission. The narrative of Ibrāhīm عليه السلام illustrates this principle. On the day when idol worshippers left the city for their festival, he concealed his intention in order to seize the opportunity to destroy the idols. Similarly, the “مؤمن آل فرعون” concealed his faith in order to assist Mūsā عليه السلام at critical moments and protect him from being killed; the Qurʾān mentions this individual with honor. Thus, it is only taqiyyah based on fear in the sense of abandoning the duty of conveying the message that is not permissible for prophets, not the other forms of taqiyyah. Although much more could be said on this subject, it may be concluded with a comprehensive statement from Imām Jaʿfar al‑Ṣādiq عليه السلام: “التقية ديني و دين آبائي، ولا دين لمن لا تقية له، والتقية ترس الله في الأرض، لأن مؤمن آل فرعون لو أظهر الإسلام لقتل” “Taqiyyah is my religion and the religion of my forefathers. One who has no taqiyyah has no religion. Taqiyyah is the shield of God on the earth, for if the believer from the family of Pharaoh had openly declared his faith, he would have been killed.” (Ref: Tafsīr Majmaʿ al‑Bayān, vol. 8, p. 521, under Sūrah al‑Muʾmin, āyah 28).

The above āyah provides clear evidence that a fundamental condition for progress in matters of propagation (tablīgh) is firmness, sincerity, and fearlessness of all except God. Those who, in matters pertaining to divine truth, give precedence to the desires of every claimant and the baseless inclinations of various factions, and who, through their own inadequacies, disregard truth and justice, can never achieve any fundamental outcome. No favor is greater than the blessing of guidance, and no service surpasses the act of granting this blessing to another human being. For this reason, its reward is of the highest order. In a ḥadīth, Amīr al‑Muʾminīn states that when the Messenger of God صلى الله علیہ و آلہ وسلم sent him to Yemen, he instructed him not to engage in combat until he had first invited the people to the truth. He further said: “وَأَيْمُ اللَّهِ لَئِنْ يَهْدِيَ اللَّهُ عَلَى يَدَيْكَ رَجُلًا خَيْرٌ مِمَّا طَلَعَتْ عَلَيْهِ الشَّمْسُ وَغَرَبَتْ” “By God, if a single person is guided through you, it is better for you than all that the sun rises and sets upon.” (Ref: Kāfī, cited in Bihār al‑Anwār, vol. 2, p. 361). Therefore, it is essential for sincere preachers to fulfill their duty of propagation with independence from people and without fear of even the highest worldly authority. For dependence (niyāz) and fear (khawf) inevitably influence their thinking and determination. A true preacher, in light of the principle “وَكَفَى بِاللَّهِ حَسِيبًا,” maintains the awareness that only God will hold him to account for his actions. It is this consciousness and insight that supports him along the path that is filled with challenges and trials.

This verse is the final link in the discussion aimed at breaking a mistaken custom of the Jahiliyyah era regarding Zaid’s divorced wife and her marriage to the Prophet Muhammad PBUH & His Pure Progeny. A brief but well-grounded response is given as the ultimate answer. Incidentally, another important fact is mentioned due to a specific relevance, and that is the issue of the "Seal of Prophethood." It is first stated: "Muhammad is not the father of any one of your men" (مَّا كَانَ مُحَمَّدٌ أَبَا أَحَدٍ مِّن رِّجَالِكُمْ). Neither Zaid’s nor anyone else’s; if people had at some point called him the son of Muhammad, it was merely out of habit and worldly custom, which Islam and the revelation of the Quran have abolished. This is neither a natural nor a blood relationship. However, the Holy Prophet Muhammad PBUH & His Pure Progeny did have biological sons named Qasim, Tayyib, Tahir, and Ibrahim. But according to historians, they all passed away before reaching maturity. Therefore, the term "rijal" (men) does not apply to them. (Reference: Tafsir al-Qurtubi and Tafsir al-Mizan under the relevant verse.) Imam Hasan and Imam Husayn (peace be upon them) were also called sons of the Messenger PBUH & His Pure Progeny, although they too reached adulthood. But at the time of the revelation of this verse, they were still children, which is why the phrase "مَّا كَانَ مُحَمَّدٌ أَبَا أَحَدٍ مِّن رِّجَالِكُمْ" is in the past tense and absolutely applies to that time. And if certain expressions attributed to the Prophet PBUH & His Pure Progeny include: "أنا وعليّ أبوا هذه الأمة" “I and Ali are the fathers of this ummah,” then certainly the meaning is not of a biological father but a relationship based on education, upbringing, and guidance. In these circumstances, the marriage to Zaid’s divorced wife, whose reasoning the Quran explicitly describes as breaking false customs, was nothing that should be a subject of public criticism or exploited by anyone for their wrongful purposes. Furthermore, it is stated that the Prophet’s relationship with you is only based on prophethood and finality because "he is the Messenger of Allah and the Seal of the Prophets" (وَلَكِن رَّسُولَ اللَّهِ وَخَاتَمَ النَّبِيِّينَ). Thus, the beginning of the verse completely severs the biological connection and ends by affirming the spiritual connection that arises from prophethood and finality. Herein lies the clear relationship between the beginning and end of the verse. Apart from this, there is also an indication of the fact that, although the Prophet PBUH & His Pure Progeny was not a father to any man, his relationship is even greater than that of a father to a son because it is the relationship of a Messenger with his ummah. Moreover, it is a Messenger who knows that no prophet will come after him. Therefore, the needs that may arise for the ummah until the Day of Judgment are to be fulfilled thoroughly and with utmost compassion. Indeed, the All-Knowing and Aware God granted him all that was necessary in this regard—be they fundamental or practical, general or specific. This is why it is stated at the end of the verse: "And Allah is Knowing of all things" (وَكَانَ اللَّهُ بِكُلِّ شَيْءٍ عَلِيمًا). It should also be noted that "Seal of the Prophets" (خاتم الأنبياء) also means "Seal of the Messengers" (خاتم المرسلين). Those who in this era devise new religions and try to undermine the issue of finality of prophethood present the argument that the Quran only calls the Prophet of Guidance "Seal of the Prophets" but not "Seal of the Messengers," which is a great misconception because the rank of messenger is higher than the rank of prophet (consider this carefully). It is exactly like saying that a person is not in the land of Hijaz, which means he is surely not in Mecca. But if it is said that he is not in Mecca, he may still be somewhere else in Hijaz. Similarly, if the honorable Prophet had been called "Seal of the Messengers," it might be conceivable that he was not the Seal of the Prophets, but since it is stated that he is the "Seal of the Prophets," he is surely also the "Seal of the Messengers." Logically and terminologically, the relationship between "Messenger" and "Prophet" is that of general to particular or absolute specific. (Once again, consider carefully.)

In the previous verses, the purpose of sending the Prophet was described as to instill fear and terror. In the present verses, the first one mentions the grace and mercy of God that manifests when a messenger is sent to a people. Thus, it is stated: Had We inflicted a punishment on them for what their hands have sent before (them), they would have said, "Our Lord, why did You not send to us a messenger so that we might follow Your verses and be among the believers?" (وَلَوْلَا أَن تُصِيبَهُم مُّصِيبَةٌ بِمَا قَدَّمَتْ أَيْدِيهِمْ فَيَقُولُوا رَبَّنَا لَوْلَا أَرْسَلْتَ إِلَيْنَا رَسُولًا فَنَتَّبِعَ آيَاتِكَ وَنَكُونَ مِنَ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ) (Explanatory Note: Some commentators have clarified that the answer to "لولا" was initially omitted. The result of this condition should be "لما أرسلنا رسولًا" or "لما وجب إرسال الرسل," which is more accurate and closest to the truth. In any case, this discourse relates to rulings that reason independently comprehends, otherwise sending prophets and revelations from God is also obligatory. Among the benefits of the arrival of prophets is the emphasis on rational commandments, the negation of polytheism, the condemnation of injustice, and the harmfulness of evil and corruption.) This verse points to the fact that the path of truth is clear, and every intellect commands the falsity of polytheism and idolatry; many of their deeds—for example, oppression and injustice—are such that reason finds them detestable and so abominable that those guilty of them deserve punishment even without a prophet being sent. However, despite the clarity and evident judgment of reason regarding their misdeeds, God sends prophets with heavenly books and miracles to nullify all their excuses and complete the proof so that none among them can say, "Our calamity was because there was no guide sent to us by God; if there had been a guide from God for us, we would have been saved and on the path of guidance." In any case, this verse is among those that describe the necessity of God's grace when sending a prophet and prove that God does not punish a people for their sins before sending a messenger to them. As mentioned in Surah An-Nisa, verse 165: رُّسُلًا مُبَشِّرِينَ وَمُنذِرِينَ لِئَلاَّ يَكُونَ لِلنَّاسِ عَلَى اللّهِ حُجَّةٌ بَعْدَ الرُّسُلِ وَكَانَ اللّهُ عَزِيزًا حَكِيمًا We sent messengers who gave glad tidings and warnings so that there would be no argument for mankind against God after the messengers, and God is Mighty, Wise. After this, the Quran addresses the excuses of those disbelieving nations who, even after a prophet was sent to them, did not abandon making excuses and continued on their old rebellious paths. Therefore, God says: When the truth came to them from Us, they said, "Why was this prophet not given the same as what was given to Moses?" (فَلَمَّا جَاءَهُمُ الْحَقُّ مِنْ عِندِنَا قَالُوا لَوْلَا أُوتِيَ مِثْلَ مَا أُوتِيَ مُوسَى) Why does he not have Moses’ staff in his hand? Why does he not have a shining hand? Why does the sea not part for him? Why are his enemies not drowned? Why does this not happen? Why does that not happen? These are the objections of those disbelievers. The Quran responds to these excuses in this manner: Did they not already deny what was given to Moses before? (أَوَلَمْ يَكْفُرُوا بِمَا أُوتِيَ مُوسَى مِن قَبْلُ) Did the disbelievers of that era not say: "These two (Moses and Aaron) are magicians who have conspired together to mislead us. We reject both of them." (قَالُوا سِحْرَانِ تَظَاهَرَا وَقَالُوا إِنَّا بِكُلٍّ كَافِرُونَ) Here the word "سحران" (two magicians) is used. Grammatically, it should have been "ساحران." The term "سحران" is for emphasis because the Arabs had the custom that when they wanted to emphasize a matter strongly, they would consider the attribute as if it were the essence itself, e.g., a just person called "the very justice," a tyrant called "the very oppression," a magician called "the very magic," etc. At this point, there is also the possibility that the word "سحران" refers to the two great miracles of Moses (peace be upon him): the staff and the shining hand. If one objects here and says, "What connection is there between the denial of the disbelievers of Egypt and the denial of the disbelievers of Mecca?" the answer is clear: The excuse-making of the disbelievers is not a new phenomenon. All disbelievers share the same disposition; their objections resemble one another, and their hostile plans are also alike. The above commentary on the verse is free from doubt, but some commentators have expressed this verse in another way. They say that "سحران تظاهران" refers to two prophets, Moses (peace be upon him) and Muhammad, peace be upon him, because the Arab polytheists used to say that these two were magicians and that they reject both of them. These commentators supported their claim with a ta--It is also reported that: The people of Mecca sent a few individuals to the scholars of the Jews on the day of their feast. These men asked the Jewish scholars whether Muhammad was truly a prophet of God. The scholars replied that they had read about him in the Torah along with his attributes. These representatives returned and narrated the entire event to the polytheists of Mecca. At that time, the disbelievers of Mecca said, "سحران تظاھران ۔۔۔ وانا بکل کافرون" (These two are magicians and we equally deny both) (Reference: Tafseer Ruh al-Ma'ani, Vol. 20, p. 81). However, upon considering two points, this interpretation seems far from the truth. Firstly: From traditions and history, it is very rare that the Arab polytheists accused Prophet Musa (peace be upon him) of sorcery, and perhaps this is where such a possibility was suggested. Secondly: How is it possible for someone to claim, knowing that nearly two thousand years separate the missions of Prophet Musa (peace be upon him) and Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him), that both were magicians conspiring with one another? Also, is it conceivable that a magician thousands of years ago would know what kind of person would be born in the future and what he would claim? In any case, the obstinate polytheists of Mecca insisted that the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) did not have miracles like those of Prophet Musa (peace be upon him). Moreover, they neither paid attention to the testimony and signs regarding the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) present in the Torah, nor did they believe in the Quran and its sublime verses. Therefore, the Quran addressed the Prophet thus: Say (O Prophet), "If you are truly believers that these two books are not from God, then bring a book from Allah that is more guiding than these two, so that I may follow it" (قُلْ فَأْتُوا بِكِتَابٍ مِّنْ عِندِ اللَّهِ هُوَ أَهْدَى مِنْهَا أَتَّبِعُهُ إِن كُنتُمْ صَادِقِينَ). But _____ the disbelievers of Mecca were not seekers of truth but merely pretext-makers. Hence, they insisted on seeking some other strange book of guidance and on the Prophet possessing miracles, remaining unaware of the reality that what could be a greater miracle and a better book of guidance than the Quran? Even if the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) had nothing besides the Quran, that alone would have sufficed to prove the truth of his prophethood. After this, the following words are added: (O Prophet) If these disbelievers do not accept your message, then know that they are only following their desires: (فَإِن لَّمْ يَسْتَجِيبُوا لَكَ فَاعْلَمْ أَنَّمَا يَتَّبِعُونَ أَهْوَاءَهُمْ). Because a person who is not a worshipper of the self bows before such logical presentation, but they never come to the right path and reject every message of the Prophet with some excuse or another. Can anyone be more misguided than one who follows his desires without any guidance from Allah? (وَمَن أَضَلُّ مِمَّنِ اتَّبَعَ هَوَاهُ بِغَيْرِ هُدًى مِنَ اللَّهِ). It is established that Allah does not guide the group of wrongdoers: (إِنَّ اللَّهَ لَا يَهْدِي الْقَوْمَ الظَّالِمِينَ). Although these people were misguided, if they recognized their error and sought the truth, Allah’s grace would require: "وَٱلَّذِينَ جَٰهَدُواْ فِينَا لَنَهْدِيَنَّهُمْ سُبُلَنَا" (Those who strive in Our cause, We will surely guide them to Our ways). (Explanatory note: Those who strive towards Us, We guide them to the paths of guidance). However, these people are oppressors. They wrong even themselves and the society in which they live. Their purpose in life is nothing except corruption and enmity. In such a state, how is it possible for Allah to assist them on the path of guidance?

Although the above āyah is in itself sufficient to establish the concept of the finality of prophethood, the proof of the finality (khatm al‑nubuwwah) of the Messenger of God صلى الله علیہ و آلہ وسلم does not depend solely upon it. Other Qurʾānic verses also indicate this meaning, and numerous traditions exist in support of it. Among these is the statement in Sūrah al‑Anʿām (19): “وَأُوحِيَ إِلَيَّ هَذَا الْقُرْآنُ لِأُنذِرَكُم بِهِ وَمَن بَلَغَ” “This Qurʾān has been revealed to me so that I may warn you and all those to whom it reaches.” The expression “وَمَن بَلَغَ” (all those to whom it reaches) indicates both the universality of the Qurʾān and the global mission of the Prophet صلى الله علیہ و آلہ وسلم, and at the same time supports the concept of the finality of prophethood. Other verses also confirm the universal scope of his mission, such as: “تَبَارَكَ الَّذِي نَزَّلَ الْفُرْقَانَ عَلَى عَبْدِهِ لِيَكُونَ لِلْعَالَمِينَ نَذِيرًا” (al‑Furqān, 1) and: “وَمَا أَرْسَلْنَاكَ إِلَّا كَافَّةً لِّلنَّاسِ بَشِيرًا وَنَذِيرًا” (Sabaʾ, 28) and: “قُلْ يَا أَيُّهَا النَّاسُ إِنِّي رَسُولُ اللّهِ إِلَيْكُمْ جَمِيعًا” (al‑Aʿrāf, 158). The breadth of expressions such as “العالمين,” “الناس,” and “كافة” supports this meaning. Furthermore, there is consensus among Islamic scholars on this matter, it is considered a fundamental principle of religion, and numerous traditions from the Prophet صلى الله علیہ و آلہ وسلم and other religious authorities clearly affirm it. For example, a well‑known ḥadīth states: “حلالي حلال إلى يوم القيامة وحرامي حرام إلى يوم القيامة” “My lawful is lawful until the Day of Resurrection, and my unlawful is unlawful until the Day of Resurrection.” (Ref: Bihār al‑Anwār, vol. 2, p. 260). In another version: “حلال محمد حلال أبدًا إلى يوم القيامة وحرامه حرام أبدًا إلى يوم القيامة لا يكون غيره ولا يجيء غيره” indicating that the legal system of the Prophet remains permanent and unaltered (Ref: Usul al‑Kafi, vol. 1). Similarly, the well‑known ḥadīth of Manzilah states: “أنت مني بمنزلة هارون من موسى إلا أنه لا نبي بعدي” “You are to me as Hārūn was to Mūsā, except that there is no prophet after me.” This ḥadīth has been transmitted in numerous sources, including Dhakhaʾir al‑ʿUqbā, Ṣawāʿiq al‑Muḥriqah, and Tārīkh Baghdād. Another widely transmitted ḥadīth compares the Prophet’s mission to the completion of a building: “مثلي ومثل الأنبياء كمثل رجل بنى بنيانًا… وأنا خاتم النبيين” The Prophet described himself as the final component completing the structure of prophethood (Ref: Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim, vol. 4, pp. 1790–1791). The concept is also affirmed in Nahj al‑Balāghah, where in several sermons the Prophet صلى الله علیہ و آلہ وسلم is described as “خاتم رسله,” the Seal of the Messengers, and the one through whom revelation was concluded. During the Farewell Pilgrimage, the Prophet صلى الله علیہ و آلہ وسلم explicitly declared: “لا نبي بعدي ولا أمة بعدكم” “There is no prophet after me, nor any community after you.” He then raised his hands and said: “اللهم اشهد أني قد بلغت” “O God, bear witness that I have conveyed [the message].” Additionally, a narration from Imām Jaʿfar al‑Ṣādiq عليه السلام states: “إن الله ختم بنبيكم النبيين فلا نبي بعده أبدًا وختم بكتابكم الكتب فلا كتاب بعده أبدًا” “God has sealed the line of prophets through your Prophet; thus, there will be no prophet after him, and He has concluded the revealed books through your Book, so that no book will come after it.” (Ref: Usul al‑Kafi, vol. 1). Numerous other traditions have been collected on this subject, including more than one hundred reports compiled in works such as Maʿālim al‑Nubuwwah. Taken together, these Qurʾānic declarations and abundant traditions establish beyond doubt the finality of the prophethood of Muḥammad صلى الله علیہ و آلہ وسلم.

Various questions arise in connection with the concept of the finality of prophethood (khatm al‑nubuwwah), and these will be examined in the following discussion.

The first question that arises in this discussion is whether it is possible for human society to come to a halt and stop at a particular stage? Is there any limit or boundary to human evolution and development? Are we not witnessing with our own eyes that the people of the present age surpass those of the past in terms of knowledge, wisdom, civilization, and culture? Under these circumstances, how is it possible for the office of Prophethood to be completely closed, depriving humanity of the guidance of new prophets in its evolutionary stages? The answer to this question becomes clear by paying attention to one point, which is: can a human being reach such a stage of intellectual and civilizational maturity where the last Prophet, who has provided comprehensive principles and teachings, leaves no need for a new Shariah, and the human being, through benefiting from those same principles, can continue his journey? Precisely in the same way that a person requires new teachers and instructors in various fields of education to pass through different academic stages, but when he attains the level of a doctorate and becomes an authority and expert in one or a few sciences, he no longer needs to go to a new teacher to continue his education. Rather, based on the education acquired from previous teachers, especially the last teacher, he engages in his own research. Thus, he continues passing through the stages of his evolution, resolving the difficulties of the path through the general principles he obtained from the last teacher. Therefore, it is not necessary that with the passage of time, new religions keep appearing (please consider this carefully). In other words, each of the previous Prophets had to provide certain maps for human advancement so that humanity could progress through these fluctuating paths, until the appearance of the Last Prophet, peace be upon him and his family. By that time, such capability and competence had developed that the last Prophet received from God a complete and most comprehensive map through which he could solve the difficulties of the path. Clearly, when a comprehensive and complete map exists, there is no need for another map. This is indeed the explanation or clarification of the narrations regarding the finality of Prophethood, in which the Holy Prophet, peace be upon him and his family, has been described as the last brick in the edifice of Prophethood or the one who laid the final brick. All these arguments were directed towards the negation of a new religion. As for the issue of guidance and Imamate—meaning the full supervision of the implementation of these laws and principles and the assistance of people in the path of guidance—that is a separate matter. Human beings can never become independent of this at any time. This is why the end of the Prophethood cannot mean the end of the Imamate, because the interpretation, clarification, and actualization of these principles inevitably require Imamate, which cannot be achieved without the benefit of some infallible leader and guide appointed by God.

Apart from the first question related to the theory of evolution, another question arises in this context: it is universally acknowledged that the requirements of different times and places vary. In other words, human needs are continually changing, whereas the laws of the Sharīʿah of the Seal of the Prophets are fixed and enduring. The question, therefore, is whether these laws possess the capacity to meet the needs of human beings in every age. This question can be adequately addressed by paying attention to a fundamental point: if all Islamic laws were purely particularistic, specifying detailed rulings for every individual circumstance separately, then such an objection might have been valid. However, Islam contains a set of universal principles that possess a broad and flexible scope, enabling them to accommodate changing conditions and evolving human requirements. Consequently, the basis for such an objection does not remain. For example, with the passage of time, legal and contractual relations among people have expanded significantly, and new forms of agreements have emerged that did not exist at the time of the revelation of the Qurʾān. Among these is the concept of insurance, which now exists in multiple forms. Similarly, various types of modern corporations have developed in response to contemporary needs. Despite these developments, Islam provides a general and comprehensive principle, expressed at the beginning of Sūrah al‑Māʾidah: “يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا أَوْفُوا بِالْعُقُودِ” “O you who believe, fulfill contracts.” This command encompasses all forms of mutual agreements, although it is accompanied by certain general conditions that must be observed. Thus, there exists a stable and enduring principle whose applications may vary and expand over time as new circumstances arise. Another example is the well‑established principle in Islamic jurisprudence known as the rule of “lā ḍarar” (no harm). Any ruling within an Islamic society that results in harm or injury may be addressed and rectified through this principle, thereby providing solutions to numerous issues. In addition to this, principles such as the preservation of the social order, the rule that the means to an obligation also assume an obligatory status, and the prioritization of the more important over the less important, serve as foundational guidelines capable of resolving even complex problems. Furthermore, the wide‑ranging authority vested in the Islamic government—within the framework of “wilāyat al‑faqīh”—allows solutions to be derived in accordance with these general principles, ensuring adaptability without departing from the core tenets of Islam. It should be noted that each of these topics requires extensive discussion, particularly given that the gate of ijtihād remains open. Ijtihād refers to the process of deriving legal rulings from Islamic sources. However, detailed examination of these issues falls beyond the immediate scope. Nonetheless, this brief overview suffices to indicate the answer to the objection raised.

Another question arises: even setting aside the issue of revelation (waḥy) in relation to legislation, does not the connection with the unseen (ʿālam al‑ghayb) and the transcendental realm represent a great divine favor and a source of hope for humanity? If so, does the cessation of such revelation after the Seal of the Prophets صلى الله علیہ و آلہ وسلم not deprive later generations of an important source of guidance? This question may be answered by attending to the following points: First, revelation and connection with the unseen are, in essence, means for accessing truth. When the essential truths have already been fully conveyed, and when the comprehensive and universal principles required for all generations up to the Day of Resurrection have been clarified through the teachings of the Prophet Muḥammad صلى الله علیہ و آلہ وسلم, then the discontinuation of legislative revelation does not give rise to any deficiency. Second, what has permanently ceased with the conclusion of prophethood is the form of revelation associated with bringing a new Sharīʿah or completing a previous one. It does not mean that every form of connection with the unseen realm has been entirely cut off. The Imams عليهم السلام maintain a form of connection with the unseen, and likewise, true believers who refine their souls, remove the veils from their hearts, and attain spiritual realization through discipline and purification may also experience forms of inspiration and inner unveiling (kashf wa shuhūd). The well‑known philosopher Mullā Ṣadrā, in Mafātīḥ al‑Ghayb, writes that revelation, in the sense of an angel descending upon a prophet with a divinely binding mission, has indeed come to an end. No angel now descends with new commandments, as indicated by “أَكْمَلْتُ لَكُمْ دِينَكُمْ,” meaning that whatever was necessary for humanity has already been conveyed. However, the door of inspiration (ilhām) and illumination (ishrāq) remains open and cannot be closed. In principle, such spiritual connection is the result of the refinement of the soul, inner purity, and spiritual development. It is not limited exclusively to prophethood. Whenever the necessary conditions are fulfilled, this form of connection may occur. Humanity has never been entirely deprived of this spiritual benefit, nor will it ever be (reflect upon this point).

See ayat 44 for tafseer.

See ayat 44 for tafseer.

See ayat 44 for tafseer.

In the previous verses, the discussion was about the severe responsibilities of the Prophet of Islam regarding the propagation of the message. Now, in the above-mentioned verses, some responsibilities of the believers have been described to expand the scope of this propagation to the entire society. Addressing all of them, it was said: "O you who have believed, remember Allah with much remembrance" (يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا اذْكُرُوا اللَّهَ ذِكْرًا كَثِيرًا). And glorify Him morning and evening: (وَسَبِّحُوهُ بُكْرَةً وَأَصِيلًا) - Since in material life there are many factors causing heedlessness for them and the arrows of Satan's whispers are being shot from all sides, to fight against these, there is no other way except "much remembrance." By the true meaning of "much remembrance," it is to have attention towards God with the whole being, not merely verbally. Such much remembrance is that which overshadows all the deeds of a person and casts light and illumination on them. In this way, the Holy Quran holds all believers responsible for remaining engaged in the remembrance of God in every condition. At the time of worship, they should remember Him with presence of heart and sincerity; if they reach places of sin, they should remember Him and shut their eyes to sins; if a slip occurs, they should repent and return to the right path. At the time of blessings, they should remember Him and be thankful; at times of affliction and calamity, they should remember Him and remain patient and grateful. In summary, His remembrance should never be forgotten from the heart, as it is the cause of correct and divine conduct in every aspect of life. There is a hadith narrated through Abu Saeed Khudri in Sahih Tirmidhi and Musnad Ahmad ibn Hanbal, in which people asked the Prophet (peace be upon him): "Who are the servants of Allah with the highest rank on the Day of Resurrection?" He replied: "Those who remember Allah much." Abu Saeed said: "O Messenger of Allah! Are these people higher in rank than those who fight in the way of Allah?" The Prophet (peace be upon him) said: "If someone strikes the disbelievers and polytheists with his sword until it breaks and is stained with blood, those who remember Allah much are still higher in rank than him." (Reference: Tafsir Al-Mizan, Volume 16, p. 353, citing Durmanthur). Because pure jihad is also impossible without much remembrance of God. From this, it is understood that "much remembrance" has a broad meaning, and if some narrations mention the Tasbih of Lady Fatimah Al-Zahra (peace be upon her) (34 times Allahu Akbar, 33 times Alhamdulillah, and 33 times SubhanAllah), and if some commentators say that much remembrance refers to exalted attributes, the beautiful names (Asma’ al-Husna), and declaring the Lord free from any imperfection or the like, these all are clear examples of remembrance and not restrictions that limit the meaning of the verse to any of these specific instances. As is clear from the context of the verses, "glorify Him every morning and evening" means that glorification and remembrance should continue day and night, and the specification of these two times is actually as the start and end of the day. Some have interpreted this to mean the Salat of Fajr and Asr, which is also a valid example. Thus, "much remembrance of God and glorifying Him every morning and evening" cannot happen without constant attention towards the Lord and declaring Him free from every defect and shortcoming. Moreover, everyone knows that the remembrance of God is as important for the soul as water and food are for the body. Hence, in Surah Ar-Ra’d, verse 28, it states: "أَلَا بِذِكْرِ اللَّهِ تَطْمَئِنُّ الْقُلُوبُ" "Know that only with the remembrance of Allah do hearts find peace." The result of the peace and tranquility of hearts is the same as what is mentioned in Surah Al-Fajr, verses 27-30: يَا أَيَّتُهَا النَّفْسُ الْمُطْمَئِنَّةُ ارْجِعِي إِلَى رَبِّكِ رَاضِيَةً مَّرْضِيَّةً فَادْخُلِي فِي عِبَادِي وَادْخُلِي جَنَّتِي "O serene soul! Return to your Lord, pleased and pleasing [to Him], and enter among My servants and enter My paradise." The following verse is essentially the ultimate cause and effect of such continuous remembrance and glorification, where God says: He is the One who sends blessings upon you, and His angels also send blessings upon you so that He may bring you out of the darkness of ignorance, disbelief, and polytheism into the light of faith, knowledge, and piety. (هُوَ الَّذِي يُصَلِّي عَلَيْكُمْ وَمَلَائِكَتُهُ لِيُخْرِجَكُم مِّنَ الظُّلُمَاتِ إِلَى النُّورِ). “For indeed He is Merciful to the believers.” On this basis, He has taken upon Himself their guidance and leadership and has also appointed His angels to assist them (وَكَانَ بِالْمُؤْمِنِينَ رَحِيمًا). The word "yusalli," derived from the root "salat," here means attention and special care. This attention from God is the sending of mercy, and from the angels, it is the invocation of mercy and support.Indeed, it is about seeking forgiveness and the demand for mercy. As stated in Surah Al-Mu’minun, verse 7: وَيَسْتَغْفِرُونَ لِلَّذِينَ آمَنُوا — that is, the bearers of the Throne seek forgiveness for the believers. However, this verse is a great glad tidings and a magnificent news for those believers who constantly remain in the remembrance of God, because the verse explicitly states that they are not alone in their journey towards Allah. The word "يصلي" is in the present tense, which indicates continuity [permanence/endurance], implying that the believers always remain under the shade of mercy of God and His angels. Under this shade of mercy, the veils of darkness are torn apart, and the light of knowledge and wisdom, faith and piety illuminates their hearts and souls. Yes! This verse is a great glad tidings for the seekers of the path of truth and gives them hope that a strong attraction from the Beloved exists so that the efforts of the helpless lover eventually lead to some result. It is a guarantee for the Mujahideen who put themselves at the forefront in the way of God, because such people are counted among the pure individuals whom Satan confessed his weakness and incapacity on the very first day by saying: "فَبِعِزَّتِكَ لَأُغْوِيَنَّهُمْ أَجْمَعِينَ إِلَّا عِبَادَكَ مِنْهُمُ الْمُخْلَصِينَ". "O Allah! By Your Glory, I will surely mislead them all except Your chosen servants among them." (Saad 82-83) In the phrase "وَكَانَ بِالْمُؤْمِنِينَ رَحِيمًا," the verb "كان" is past tense, which is evidence that God’s mercy is always upon the believers, and it is another emphasis on what was stated at the beginning of the verse. It is by God’s special mercy that He leads the believers out of the darkness of illusions, desires, and satanic whisperings to the light of certainty and tranquility. If His mercy did not encompass them, the dangers and the complicated path could never be traversed. In the last verse of the current sequence, the status of the believers and their reward are depicted in a brief and excellent phrase. The greeting of the divine angels to them on the Day when they meet with Him is peace (تَحِيَّتُهُمْ يَوْمَ يَلْقَوْنَهُ سَلَامٌ). The word "تحيت" derives from "حیات" and means "safety" and a prayer for "another life" (for further clarification, see Tafseer Namuna, Vol. 2, p. 532). This is a greeting that is free from torment and every kind of pain, distress, and hardship, and is accompanied by tranquillity and satisfaction. Although some commentators hold the view that "تحيتهم" refers to the believers greeting one another, if we consider the preceding verses, in which the discourse is about the صلى and mercy of God and the angels in this world, it appears that "this greeting" will also come from His angels in the Hereafter. As in Surah Ar-Ra’d, verses 23-24: "وَالْمَلاَئِكَةُ يَدْخُلُونَ عَلَيْهِم مِّن كُلِّ بَابٍ سَلاَمٌ عَلَيْكُم بِمَا صَبَرْتُمْ". "On that day, the angels will enter upon them from every gate, saying, ‘Peace be upon you for what you patiently endured.’" From what we have said, it becomes indirectly clear that "يوم يلقونه" refers to the Day of Resurrection, which is called "the Day of Meeting Allah." Generally, this expression in Quranic verses is used with the same meaning. After this greeting, which in reality is connected with the beginning, an indication is given towards its outcome: "God has prepared for them a great and noble reward" (وَأَعَدَّ لَهُمْ أَجْرًا كَرِيمًا). This phrase, despite its brevity, encompasses everything— all of God’s blessings and every kind of forgiveness are hidden within it.

When the name of God is mentioned, an entire world of majesty, power, knowledge, and wisdom is illuminated within the heart, for He is the possessor of the most beautiful names (asmāʾ al‑ḥusnā) and the highest attributes, the owner of all perfections, and completely free from every نقص and imperfection. Continuous attention to this reality guides the human soul toward virtues and purity and restrains it from evils and vices. In other words, the reflection of divine attributes manifests within the human spirit. Attention to such a عظیم Maʿbūd generates a sense of constant presence before Him, and through this awareness, the distance between the human being and sin increases, leading him gradually away from wrongdoing. The remembrance of God is, in fact, a reminder of His vigilance, His reckoning, His recompense, His justice, and the realities of Paradise and Hell. It is a form of remembrance that purifies the soul and grants light and vitality to the heart. For this reason, Islamic traditions state that everything has a defined limit, except the remembrance of God, which has no limit. According to a narration in Usul al‑Kafi, Imām Jaʿfar al‑Ṣādiq علیه السلام said: “ما من شیءٍ الا وله حدّ ينتهي إليه إلا الذكر، فليس له حد ينتهي إليه” “Everything has a limit that, once reached, marks its completion, except the remembrance of God, which has no limit.” He further explained: “فرض الله عزوجل الفرائض فمن أداهن فهو حدهن… إلا الذكر فإن الله عزوجل لم يرض منه بالقليل ولم يجعل له حدًا ينتهي إليه” “God has prescribed obligations; whoever performs them has reached their limit… except remembrance, for God is not satisfied with its little, nor has He set a limit for it.” Then he recited: “يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا اذْكُرُوا اللَّهَ ذِكْرًا كَثِيرًا…” (Ref: Usul al‑Kafi, vol. 2, Kitab al‑Duʿāʾ, Bab Dhikr Allāh). In the continuation of the same report, Imām al‑Ṣādiq علیه السلام relates that his father, Imām Muhammad al‑Bāqir علیه السلام, was constantly engaged in remembrance. Whether walking, eating, or speaking with others, he never neglected the remembrance of God. The narration concludes with a significant statement: “والبيت الذي يقرأ فيه القرآن ويذكر الله عزوجل فيه تكثر بركته… ويضيء لأهل السماء كما يضيء الكوكب الدري لأهل الأرض” “The house in which the Qurʾān is recited and God is remembered becomes filled with blessing; angels are present within it, devils depart from it, and it shines for the inhabitants of the heavens as a radiant star shines for the people of the earth.” (Ref: Usul al‑Kafi, vol. 2). Conversely, a house devoid of Qurʾānic recitation and remembrance loses its blessings, angels depart from it, and devils take residence. The importance of remembrance is such that in another ḥadīth, it is equated with the totality of good in this world and the hereafter. The Prophet صلى الله علیہ و آلہ وسلم said: “من أعطي لسانًا ذاكرًا فقد أعطي خير الدنيا والآخرة” “Whoever is granted a tongue that remembers God has been granted the good of this world and the hereafter.” (Ref: Usul al‑Kafi, vol. 2). The traditions regarding the significance of remembrance are extremely numerous. To conclude, we cite a concise yet comprehensive statement from Imām Jaʿfar al‑Ṣādiق علیہ السلام: “ومن أكثر ذكر الله عزوجل أظله الله في جنته” “Whoever remembers God abundantly, God will shelter him in His Paradise under His grace.” (Ref: Usul al‑Kafi, vol. 2). It must again be emphasized that all these virtues do not pertain merely to verbal remembrance devoid of reflection and action. Rather, the intended remembrance is that which gives rise to thought and manifests itself in human conduct, as has been clearly indicated in the traditions.

As already explained, in the Qurʾān this expression generally refers to the Day of Resurrection. Since a sensory or physical “meeting” with God has no meaningful application—because He is neither a body nor subject to physical attributes—some exegetes have been compelled, in accordance with interpretive convention, to assume an implied word (ḥadhf al‑muḍāf), interpreting it as “meeting the reward of God” (liqāʾ thawāb Allāh) or “meeting the angels of God.” However, it is also possible to understand “liqāʾ Allāh” in its real sense—not in a physical or sensory way, but as an inner vision, a perception through the “eye of the heart.” This is because on the Day of Resurrection all veils will be removed, and the greatness of God and His signs will manifest with greater clarity and intensity than at any other time. Human beings will attain a level of inner witnessing (shuhūd bāṭinī) and perception through the heart, and every individual will reach this elevated state according to the measure of his knowledge (maʿrifah) and righteous action. In this connection, Fakhr al‑Dīn al‑Rāzī presents an insightful observation in his Tafsir Kabīr, which aligns with this explanation. He states that in this world, human beings are generally preoccupied with material concerns and the pursuit of livelihood, and thus remain heedless of God. However, in the Hereafter, when these preoccupations are removed and the human being becomes free from worldly concerns, he will turn entirely toward God with his whole being. This total orientation itself constitutes the meaning of “liqāʾ Allāh” (Ref: Tafsir Kabir, under the relevant āyah). In light of this, it becomes clear that interpretations which restrict this expression to the moment of death or to the meeting with the angel of death do not adequately correspond to the context of the āyāt under discussion, nor to the general Qurʾānic usage of similar expressions. In particular, the use of the singular pronoun in “يَلْقُونَهُ” points directly to the Divine Essence, whereas references to the angels who take souls are typically expressed in the plural form, and the preceding āyah itself employs the plural “ملائكة.”

The phrase "أَعَدَّ لَهُمْ أَجْرًا كَرِيْمًا" makes it clear that Paradise and its blessings have already been created and are awaiting the believers. However, a question may arise here: preparing something seems appropriate for those with limited power, who might not be able to provide it at the time of need. But God's power is unlimited; whenever He wills something, He commands "Be," and it is immediately. There is no such need there. Then what is the purpose of preparation mentioned in this verse and in other verses of the Qur'an? Answer: Attention to one point resolves this difficulty, and that is that preparing something is not always due to limited power, but sometimes to warm the heart, increase assurance, and at times, out of the utmost respect and honor. For example, when we invite a guest, and some time before their arrival, we busy ourselves with preparing the means of hospitality, this shows our great respect and importance for them. Conversely, if we start to arrange hospitality only after their arrival, it reflects a kind of negligence, indifference, and lack of appreciation. Nevertheless, this does not prevent the fact that the more believers strive in their self-reformation, knowledge, and purity of actions, the more the reward and recompense from God will develop and progress accordingly.

See ayat 48 for tafseer.

See ayat 48 for tafseer.

See ayat 48 for tafseer.

In these āyāt, the address is directed to the Prophet صلى الله علیہ و آلہ وسلم, while the outcome and implications are intended for the believers. These verses serve as a continuation and completion of earlier āyāt in which certain responsibilities of the believers were discussed. Among these four āyāt, the first two present five attributes of the Messenger of God صلى الله علیہ و آلہ وسلم, and the latter two mention five duties and responsibilities. All of these are interconnected and mutually complementary. First, it is stated: “يَا أَيُّهَا النَّبِيُّ إِنَّا أَرْسَلْنَاكَ شَاهِدًا” — O Prophet, We have sent you as a witness. The Prophet is, on the one hand, a witness over the deeds of his community, since he observes their actions. As stated elsewhere: “وَقُلِ اعْمَلُوا فَسَيَرَى اللَّهُ عَمَلَكُمْ وَرَسُولُهُ وَالْمُؤْمِنُونَ” “Say: act, for God, His Messenger, and the believers will see your deeds” (Tawbah, 105). The presentation of the deeds of the community before the Prophet and the Imāms establishes their knowledge and awareness of these actions. On the other hand, the Prophet is also a witness over previous prophets who themselves bore witness over their respective communities: “فَكَيْفَ إِذَا جِئْنَا مِن كُلِّ أُمَّةٍ بِشَهِيدٍ وَجِئْنَا بِكَ عَلَى هَـؤُلَاءِ شَهِيدًا” “How will it be when We bring from every nation a witness and bring you as a witness over them?” (Nisāʾ, 41). In addition, through his blessed existence, noble qualities, exemplary character, reformative program, luminous past, and righteous actions, he serves as a witness to the truth of his mission and to the grandeur and power of God. Next, the second and third attributes are mentioned: “وَمُبَشِّرًا وَنَذِيرًا” He is sent as a bearer of glad tidings and as a warner. He conveys good news to the righteous of the boundless reward of God, everlasting felicity, and eternal success, while warning disbelievers and hypocrites of divine punishment, loss of all existential assets, and ruin in both worlds. As has been noted previously, fear and hope must remain balanced. The human being is motivated both by the desire to attain benefit and the need to avoid harm. “بشارت” corresponds to the former, while “انذار” corresponds to the latter. Any approach that relies solely on one of these two aspects fails to account for the full nature of the human being and the causes underlying human conduct. Finally, the next āyah refers to the fourth and fifth attributes of the Prophet صلى الله علیہ و آلہ وسلم: “وَدَاعِيًا إِلَى اللَّهِ بِإِذْنِهِ وَسِرَاجًا مُّنِيرًا” He is one who calls to God by His permission and a radiant, illuminating lamp. Thus, the Prophet’s role encompasses witnessing, giving glad tidings, warning, inviting toward God, and illuminating the path—each aspect complementing the others within a comprehensive framework of guidance.

Before all of the aforementioned attributes, the āyah first mentions this مقام (station), because this مقام depends solely upon the existence of the Prophet and his رسالت, and does not require any preliminary stage or مقدمہ. Once he is established in this مقام and rank, his being a witness in all the previously mentioned dimensions becomes evident and unquestionable. However, the مقام of “بشارت” (glad tidings) and “انذار” (warning) are positions that manifest subsequently in an existential form, following this primary station.

This stage follows bashārat (glad tidings) and indhār (warning), because these two serve as means to prepare individuals for the acceptance of truth. When, through encouragement and admonition, a readiness to accept the truth is created, then the actual invitation toward God begins. It is only at such a stage that the دعوت becomes effective.

Although all actions of the Prophet صلى الله علیہ و آلہ وسلم are, in reality, carried out by the command and permission of God, here the act of دعوت has been specifically qualified with “بِإِذْنِهِ.” The reason for this distinction is that inviting people toward God constitutes the most difficult and significant task of the prophets. This is because it requires guiding people away from their personal desires and inclinations and directing them toward the straight path. Such a transformation demands divine support, assistance, and authorization, so that the دعوت may reach its proper and effective conclusion. At the same time, this expression also clarifies that the Prophet does not speak or act independently; rather, whatever he conveys is entirely by the permission of God. (It is also possible that the qualification “بِإِذْنِهِ” extends to all the previously mentioned attributes; however, the ظاهر of the āyah indicates that it is specifically connected to “داعيًا إلى الله.”)

The term “سراج” means “lamp,” and “منیر” means “illuminating.” Together, they point to the miracles of the noble Prophet صلى الله علیہ و آلہ وسلم, the evidences of his truth, and the signs confirming the authenticity of his دعوت. He is described as a luminous lamp that is, in itself, its own testimony—dispersing darkness and drawing the attention of both eyes and hearts. Just as “آفتاب آمد دلیل آفتاب” (the sun itself is proof of the sun), so too the very existence of the Prophet constitutes proof of his truthfulness. It is noteworthy that the term “سراج” appears four times in the Qurʾān, and in three instances it refers to the sun. For example, in Sūrah Nūḥ (16): “وَجَعَلَ الْقَمَرَ فِيهِنَّ نُورًا وَجَعَلَ الشَّمْسَ سِرَاجًا” Here, the sun is described as a radiant lamp. The term originally refers to a lamp fueled by a wick and oil in earlier times, or by electricity in contemporary contexts. However, as Rāghib explains in Mufradāt, the term gradually came to denote any source of light. The application of “سراج” to the sun is due to the fact that its light originates from within itself, unlike the moon, which reflects light from another source. In a similar way, the blessed existence of the Prophet صلى الله علیہ و آلہ وسلم resembles a radiant sun that removes the darkness of ignorance, shirk, and disbelief from the horizons of the human soul. However, just as blind individuals cannot benefit from sunlight, and bats cannot perceive its brilliance, those who are spiritually blind or obstinate are unable to benefit from this نور. This has been true in all times—figures such as Abū Jahl metaphorically blocked their ears so as not to hear the recitation of the Qurʾān. Darkness is a source of fear, fragmentation, and confusion, while light brings tranquility, unity, and vitality. Biological growth—trees, flowers, fruits, and all living processes—depends upon light. Thus, the depiction of the Prophet as a source of light evokes a comprehensive range of meanings: his presence brings calm, repels the enemies of truth, and becomes the means for spiritual growth, moral refinement, and the flourishing of faith. His life stands as a living testimony to these realities. After describing the five noble attributes of the Prophet, the āyāt proceed to outline five fundamental responsibilities. First, it is stated: “وَبَشِّرِ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ بِأَنَّ لَهُم مِّنَ اللَّهِ فَضْلًا كَبِيرًا” This indicates that the glad tidings given by the Prophet are not limited to the reward earned by righteous deeds alone, but rather include divine فضل—a generosity that far exceeds the proportional relationship between action and reward. Other Qurʾānic verses support this idea. For example: “مَن جَاءَ بِالْحَسَنَةِ فَلَهُ عَشْرُ أَمْثَالِهَا” (al‑Anʿām, 160) and: “مَّثَلُ الَّذِينَ يُنفِقُونَ أَمْوَالَهُمْ… كَمَثَلِ حَبَّةٍ أَنْبَتَتْ سَبْعَ سَنَابِلَ…” (al‑Baqarah, 261) These indicate that rewards may be multiplied many times over—sometimes reaching seven hundredfold or even beyond. In some cases, the reward exceeds all human comprehension: “فَلَا تَعْلَمُ نَفْسٌ مَّا أُخْفِيَ لَهُم…” (al‑Sajdah, 17). Following this, two further commands are given: “وَلَا تُطِعِ الْكَافِرِينَ وَالْمُنَافِقِينَ” Although the Prophet صلى الله علیہ و آلہ وسلم never obeyed disbelievers or hypocrites, the command emphasizes a critical principle: leaders in the path of truth must avoid compromise and surrender. The greatest dangers in leadership are capitulation and bargaining, often arising from threats or temptations. History shows that opponents repeatedly attempted to pressure the Prophet—through offers of wealth, power, social status, or even strategic compromise—but accepting any of these would have undermined the entire foundation of the Islamic mission. Finally, the last instruction states: “وَدَعْ أَذَاهُمْ وَتَوَكَّلْ عَلَى اللَّهِ وَكَفَى بِاللَّهِ وَكِيلًا” This highlights the Prophet’s endurance in the face of continuous harm—whether through verbal abuse, physical hardship, or economic pressure. The term “أذى” encompasses all forms of injury, both physical and psychological. Despite these challenges, the Prophet and the early Muslims remained steadfast, relying solely upon God. Trust in God (tawakkul) is presented as the ultimate source of strength. It is through reliance on God that all obstacles are overcome. Thus, the command is not to be distracted by the harm of opponents, but to continue the mission with firmness, patience, and unwavering confidence. Taken together, these five directives—giving glad tidings, refusing compromise, ignoring harm, and relying upon God—constitute a comprehensive framework for success in the path of دعوت.

The verses of this Surah (Al-Ahzab) can be clearly and distinctly divided into various sections. In some of these, the address is specifically to the Prophet PBUH & His Pure Progeny, while in others it is to all the believers. This is why sometimes the phrase "يَا أَيُّهَا النَّبِيُّ" (O Prophet) appears, and at other times "يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا" (O you who have believed). Within these verses, obligatory rulings are presented alternately, indicating that the person of the Prophet PBUH & His Pure Progeny is considered within these rulings, as are all the believers. The verse under consideration is amongst those where the speech is directed towards all the faithful, whereas in the previous verses evidently the address was only to the Noble Messenger PBUH & His Pure Progeny, and then in the subsequent verses the address returns to the Prophet PBUH & His Pure Progeny again. According to the term "لَفْظ و نَشْرُ مُرَتَّب" (arranged expression and distribution), this forms a part of the Surah. Allah Almighty says: "O you who have believed, when you marry believing women and then divorce them before you have touched them, there is no waiting period (ʿidda) you must count concerning them." (يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا إِذَا نَكَحْتُمُ الْمُؤْمِنَاتِ ثُمَّ طَلَّقْتُمُوهُنَّ مِن قَبْلِ أَن تَمَسُّوهُنَّ فَمَا لَكُمْ عَلَيْهِنَّ مِنْ عِدَّةٍ تَعْتَدُّونَهَا) Here, Allah states an exception to the ruling of the waiting period ('idda) of divorced women by saying that if the divorce occurs before consummation (penetration), then there is no obligation to observe 'idda. From this wording, it is understood that the ruling of 'idda had already been mentioned prior to this verse. The use of the term "مُؤْمِنَات" (believing women) does not imply that marriage with disbelieving or non-Muslim women is categorically prohibited. It might indicate a preference or priority. Therefore, this verse does not contradict the narrations regarding marriage to the People of the Book (Kitābiyah) or the established opinions (fatwas) of prominent jurists. It should be noted that the phrase "لَكُمْ" (for you) and similarly "تَعْتَدُّونَهَا" (you count the 'idda) indicates that observing the 'idda is, in reality, a kind of concern or account for the man. This is appropriate because it is possible the woman may be pregnant, and if the 'idda is neglected, she may marry another man, causing uncertainty about the child's lineage, and thus the man's right would be violated. Besides this, another benefit of 'idda is that both man and woman are given the opportunity to reconsider their decision if the situation leading to divorce arose from anger or haste. This reconsideration period is a right of both spouses. As for the objection raised by some that if 'idda is the man's right, it can be waived or forfeited, this objection is not valid because, in jurisprudence, there exist many rights that cannot be relinquished—such as the inheritance rights of a deceased’s heirs in his wealth or the right of the poor to receive zakat—and none of these rights can be forgone. Next, the verse indicates another ruling concerning women who are divorced before consummation. This is also alluded to in Surah Al-Baqarah where it is said: "(So) provide them with a gift of compensation." (فَمَتِّعُوهُنَّ) There is no doubt that giving a suitable gift to the woman is obligatory in such cases where a specific dowry (mahr) has not been fixed, as stated in Surah Al-Baqarah, verse 236: "لَا جُنَاحَ عَلَيْكُمْ إِن طَلَّقْتُمُ النِّسَاءَ مَا لَمْ تَمَسُّوهُنَّ أَوْ تَفْرِضُوا لَهُنَّ فَرِيضَةً وَمَتِّعُوهُنَّ" "There is no blame upon you if you divorce women before you have touched them or specified a dowry for them. But give them a suitable gift." Therefore, although the verse under discussion is broad and covers all such occasions—including those when a dowry has been set and when it has not—the contextual correlation with Surah Al-Baqarah verse 236 restricts the present verse to cases where no dowry has been determined since if a dowry has been fixed but consummation has not taken place, paying half the dowry is obligatory (as in Surah Al-Baqarah, verse 237). However, some interpreters and jurists have also suggested the possibility that the command to give a "suitable gift" in the present verse is a general ruling, encompassing even those cases where a dowry was set—where it is recommended; and those where it was not—where it is obligatory. Thus, some verses and narrations also point towards this meaning. (Explanatory note: For example, Surah Al-Baqarah, verse 241, along with several narrations and "Abwāb al-Mahūr" (chapters on dowries) in "Al-Masā’il al-Shī‘ah" (Book of Marriage Issues, Volume 15, page 59) also contain relevant narrations. Among them, in one tradition, Imam Ali (peace be upon him) said: "لَكُلِّ مُطَلَّقَةٍ مُتْعَةٌ إِلَا الْمُخْتَلِعَةَ" "Every divorced woman deserves a suitable gift, except the one who gives up her dowry or something else in order to obtain her husband's consent to divorce.") As for what the amount of this gift should be, the Quran briefly describes it as: "مَتَاعًا بِالْمَعْرُوفِ" "A suitable gift." (Al-Baqarah, 236) Moreover, the verse states: "عَلَى الْمُوسِعِ قَدَرُهُ وَعَلَى الْمُقْتِرِ قَدَرُهُ" "According to the ability of the affluent and according to the ability of the one who is restrained." Therefore, if an Islamic ru...The verses mention home, servants, and other similar matters, which correspond to the principle that varies according to the husband's capability and the wife's circumstances. The final injunction of the same verse is: "And release the divorced women in a good manner and part from them graciously:" (وَسَرِّحُوهُنَّ سَرَاحًا جَمِيلًا). The meaning of "سرَاح جَمِيل" is to separate with love and respect, avoiding all forms of harshness, oppression, and disrespect. In summary, as stated in Surah Al-Baqarah, verse 229: "Either retain them in a proper manner or release them with kindness": فَإِمْسَاكٌ بِمَعْرُوفٍ أَوْ تَسْرِيحٌ بِإِحْسَانٍ Maintaining the marriage should also be in accordance with humane standards, as should separation and divorce. It is not permissible that when a husband intends separation, he exhibits every form of neglect, oppression, verbal abuse, harshness, and severity toward his wife, because this is certainly an un-Islamic practice. Some commentators have understood "سرَاح جَمِيل" to mean the completion of divorce according to Islamic requirements, as indicated in the narration found in the tafseer of Ali bin Ibrahim and in "Uyun al-Athar"; this meaning has also been conveyed there. However, it is established that "سرَاح جَمِيل" is not limited to this meaning but is rather a clear example of it. Other commentators have interpreted "سرَاح جَمِيل" as permission to leave the house and migrate, because here the woman is not bound by the period of ‘iddah (waiting) and custody. Therefore, she should be set free so that she may go wherever she wishes. However, considering that "سرَاح جَمِيل" and similar expressions appear in other Quranic verses, even concerning women who must observe ‘iddah, this meaning appears unlikely. Regarding the origin and linguistic meaning of "سرَاح" and why it was used to mean both letting go and divorce, we have explained this in detail under verse 28 of Surah Al-Ahzab.

As previously explained, a portion of the āyāt in this Sūrah presents the responsibilities of the Prophet صلى الله علیہ و آلہ وسلم in the form of laf wa nashr murattab. Thus, after mentioning certain rulings related to divorce in the preceding āyah, the discourse now turns again toward the Prophet and outlines seven categories in which marriage was made permissible for him. First, it is stated: “يَا أَيُّهَا النَّبِيُّ إِنَّا أَحْلَلْنَا لَكَ أَزْوَاجَكَ اللَّاتِي آتَيْتَ أُجُورَهُنَّ” These are the wives with whom the Prophet had contracted marriage by paying their bridal due (mahr). From the context, it is understood that this refers to women who were not related to the Prophet. It was customary in such marriages that the mahr would be paid promptly. Although immediate payment is recommended—especially where needed—it is not obligatory, and payment may be deferred by mutual agreement. Second, it states: “وَمَا مَلَكَتْ يَمِينُكَ مِمَّا أَفَاءَ اللَّهُ عَلَيْكَ” This refers to female captives obtained through fayʾ and anfāl. The term “أفاء الله” (from fayʾ) denotes wealth acquired without hardship. According to Rāghib in Mufradāt, it originally signifies “return,” and by extension refers to property obtained without sustained effort. Some exegetes have identified among the Prophet’s wives examples such as Māriyah al‑Qibṭiyyah, and also Ṣafiyyah and Juwayriyah, who were freed and married, reflecting the broader Islamic policy of emancipating captives and restoring their human dignity. Third, it states: “وَبَنَاتِ عَمَّاتِكَ وَبَنَاتِ خَالِكَ وَبَنَاتِ خَالَاتِكَ اللَّاتِي هَاجَرْنَ مَعَكَ” Marriage is permitted with paternal cousins, paternal aunts’ daughters, maternal uncles’ daughters, and maternal aunts’ daughters, provided they migrated with the Prophet. The condition of migration (hijrah) may indicate either a mark of true faith—since in that period migration distinguished believers from non‑believers—or a sign of their special merit and suitability. Among these categories, a clear historical instance is the marriage of the Prophet to Zaynab bint Jahsh, his cousin, which is also discussed in this Sūrah. Fourth, it is stated: “وَامْرَأَةً مُّؤْمِنَةً إِن وَهَبَتْ نَفْسَهَا لِلنَّبِيِّ…” If a believing woman offers herself for marriage to the Prophet without requesting a mahr, and the Prophet accepts, such a marriage is permissible. However, this privilege is exclusive to the Prophet: “خَالِصَةً لَّكَ مِن دُونِ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ” The āyah then clarifies: “قَدْ عَلِمْنَا مَا فَرَضْنَا عَلَيْهِمْ…” God is fully aware of what has been prescribed for other believers regarding marriage and legal obligations. Every ruling is based on wisdom and calculated purpose. It continues: “لِكَيْلَا يَكُونَ عَلَيْكَ حَرَجٌ” These concessions are granted so that no undue difficulty may be placed upon the Prophet in the fulfillment of his mission. Finally, the āyah concludes: “وَكَانَ اللَّهُ غَفُورًا رَّحِيمًا” indicating divine mercy and forgiveness in legislating these rulings. Overall, these permissions demonstrate that the Prophet’s personal rulings were closely linked with his mission. They were not arbitrary privileges, but carefully regulated allowances designed to facilitate the effective performance of his prophetic responsibilities.

There is no doubt that the permission to contract marriage without a specified mahr (dowry) is exclusive to the Messenger of God صلى الله علیہ و آلہ وسلم. This constitutes one of his unique distinctions (khaṣāʾiṣ), and the āyah is entirely explicit in affirming this ruling. On this basis, no other individual has the right to contract marriage with a woman without stipulating a mahr, whether small or large. Even in cases where the marriage contract (ṣīghah al‑ʿaqd) is concluded without mention of a mahr, and no contextual indication exists regarding it, the husband is obligated to provide mahr al‑mithl. Maḥr al‑mithl refers to the customary dowry generally given to women of similar social standing and circumstances.

Has this general ruling created any external example concerning the Prophet of Islam (peace be upon him) or not? There is a difference of opinion among the commentators on this matter. Some commentators, such as Ibn Abbas and a few others, hold the view that the Prophet (peace be upon him) did not marry any woman under this condition, and the mentioned general ruling was a universal command for him from which he never benefited. Whereas some other commentators have named three or four of his wives who entered into marriage with him without a right of dower. These were "Maymunah bint Harith" and "Zainab bint Khuzaymah," who belonged to the Ansar; a woman from Bani Asad named "Um Shareek bint Jabir"; and "Khuwlah bint Hakeem." Some narrations mention that when Khuwlah gave herself in marriage to the Noble Prophet (peace be upon him), Lady Aisha raised a voice of protest and said: "What is the matter with women that they give themselves away without a dower?" At that time, this verse was revealed, but Lady Aisha said to the Messenger of Allah: "It seems that Allah fulfills your purpose very quickly." (This was a kind of sarcasm directed at him). Then the Prophet (peace be upon him) replied: "وَإِن كُنتَ إِذًا لِّلَّـهِ تَسْعَىٰ" "If you also obey Allah, He will soon fulfill your purpose." (Explanatory note: Tafsir Majma‘ al-Bayan is under the same verse. In Tafsir al-Qurtubi, the phrase also appears: "وَاللَّهِ مَا أَرَى رَبَّكَ إِلَّا يَسْرِعُ فِي هَوَاكَ" Meaning: "By Allah, I have never seen your Lord fail to quickly fulfill your wish.") And Alusi, in "Ruh al-Ma‘ani," has also mentioned this verse, thus the meaning of such inappropriate and biting discourse is not hidden from anyone. Yet the Prophet (peace be upon him), due to his greatness and nobility, passed the occasion with great eloquence and composure. There is no doubt that these kinds of women only desired a spiritual honor, which could only be attained by being associated with the pure Messenger (peace be upon him). Therefore, they consented to his marriage without any right of dower. However, as we have just said, historically, an external example of this kind is not certain. What is certain is only that Allah had permitted the Noble Prophet (peace be upon him) such allowance. As for the question of what the philosophy behind this was, it will be alluded to later.

This āyah makes it clear that the execution of the marriage contract using the expression “هبة” (gift) was specific to the Messenger of God صلى الله علیہ و آلہ وسلم, and no other individual is permitted to contract marriage using such terminology. However, if the contract is concluded using the standard expression of marriage (nikāḥ), then it is permissible that the mahr is not explicitly mentioned at the time of the عقد. In such a case, as previously explained, the husband is required to provide mahr al‑mithl, which consists of the customary dowry appropriate to women of similar social standing and circumstances.

The final sentence of the aforementioned āyah, in reality, alludes to the underlying rationale behind the specific rulings granted to the Messenger of God صلى الله علیہ و آلہ وسلم. These rulings reflect the fact that the Prophet’s circumstances were distinct from those of others, and this distinction necessitated certain differences in legal provisions. In clearer terms, the Qurʾān indicates that the purpose of these rulings was to remove constraints and hardships from the Prophet in the fulfillment of his mission. This is a subtle yet significant expression, which suggests that the Prophet’s marriages to multiple women were not driven by personal inclination, but were closely linked to resolving a series of social and political challenges. At the outset of his mission, the Prophet صلى الله علیہ و آلہ وسلم stood virtually alone. For a considerable period, only a small number of individuals believed in his message. He rose in opposition to the entrenched customs, beliefs, and social order of his environment, which naturally led to the unification of tribes and groups against him. In such circumstances, it was necessary to weaken and dismantle this hostile coalition. One effective means was the establishment of marital alliances with different tribes. In pre‑Islamic Arabian society, kinship bonds constituted one of the strongest forms of social cohesion. A son‑in‑law was regarded as a member of the tribe, deserving of loyalty and protection, and abandoning him was considered a matter of disgrace. Available historical indications show that many of the Prophet’s marriages carried clear socio‑political significance. For example, his marriage to Zaynab served to abolish a deeply rooted pre‑Islamic custom, as previously discussed. Other marriages helped to soften the hostility of certain tribes and foster alliances that reduced opposition to Islam. Furthermore, a consideration of the Prophet’s life demonstrates that these marriages cannot reasonably be attributed to personal or sensual motives. He married Khadījah, a widow significantly older than himself, at the age of twenty‑five, and he remained exclusively married to her until the age of fifty‑three. It was only later in life—during a period of intense communal responsibility—that multiple marriages took place. It is also noteworthy that, except for one instance, all of the Prophet’s wives were widows. Such circumstances do not align with interpretations based on personal desire. Historical reports even indicate that in some cases marriages remained at the level of formal عقد, without further personal involvement, serving primarily to establish social ties. In addition, despite multiple marriages, the Prophet did not leave behind a large number of children, which further refutes the notion that these unions were motivated by personal inclination. While opponents have attempted to interpret these marriages negatively and have even fabricated narratives for this purpose, the broader historical context—his age at the time, the social circumstances of the women involved, and the political and reformative objectives—clearly demonstrates otherwise. These factors collectively reveal the deeper wisdom behind these marital relationships and expose the baseless nature of such criticisms.

In the exegesis of verses 28 and 29 of the same Surah and in the explanation of their circumstances of revelation, according to the commentators, some of the wives of the Prophet PBUH & His Pure Progeny requested him to increase their provision and expenses. (Since their focus was on the spoils of war, they desired to receive more than what was allotted to them.) In response, the aforementioned verses were revealed, explicitly making it clear to them that if they desired this world and its adornments, they should separate from the Prophet PBUH & His Pure Progeny forever, but if they desired Allah, the Messenger, and the Hereafter, then they should remain with him in a simple lifestyle. Additionally, there was rivalry among them regarding the distribution of the Prophet’s PBUH & His Pure Progeny time, which caused him great distress and hardship alongside his other important duties and difficulties. Although the Prophet PBUH & His Pure Progeny maintained necessary justice among them, they still did not desist from disputes. Therefore, the verse in question was revealed, granting the Prophet PBUH & His Pure Progeny full freedom in the distribution of his time among them and simultaneously warning them that this was a divine command. Thus, no one should be troubled by it, nor should any wrongful conclusion be drawn from it. (Reference: Extracted from Majma' al-Bayan and other tafsirs).

The concluding portion of the higher‑mentioned āyah, in fact, points toward the underlying rationale behind these specific provisions granted to the Messenger of God صلى الله علیہ و آلہ وسلم. It indicates that the Prophet’s unique circumstances required special rulings, distinct from those applicable to others. In more explicit terms, the Qurʾān conveys that these rulings were intended to remove constraints and hardships from the Prophet, thereby enabling him to fulfill his mission effectively. This is a subtle yet meaningful expression, demonstrating that the Prophet’s marital arrangements were closely connected to resolving social, political, and communal challenges rather than being matters of personal inclination. A prophet such as Muḥammad صلى الله علیہ و آلہ وسلم, who was surrounded by severe crises and whose enemies were engaged in both internal and external conspiracies, could not devote excessive attention to his personal household concerns. It was essential that his domestic life be relatively stable and free from disturbance so that he could address the complex challenges facing the community with clarity, composure, and strategic focus. If both his public responsibilities and his household environment were turbulent, the resulting pressure would have been extremely detrimental in such critical circumstances. As previously established, many of the Prophet’s marriages had social, political, and humanitarian objectives. Nevertheless, it is natural that among multiple spouses, differences and customary rivalries could arise, which at times created tensions within the household and diverted attention. At this stage, the Qurʾān granted the Prophet a special prerogative to manage these situations in a manner that would eliminate persistent disputes and provide him with peace of mind. Thus, it states: “تُرْجِي مَن تَشَاءُ مِنْهُنَّ وَتُؤْوِي إِلَيْكَ مَن تَشَاءُ” Here, “ترجي” implies postponement, while “تؤوي” denotes bringing someone into one’s company. In general Islamic law, when a man has multiple wives, he is required to divide his time among them fairly—a principle known as “حق القسم.” However, due to the exceptional demands of the Prophet’s mission, this obligation was relaxed in his case. Particularly during his time in Madinah, where he faced continuous military and political pressures and had multiple wives, the āyah granted him broad discretion in arranging his time. Despite this special permission, historical records indicate that the Prophet صلى الله علیہ و آلہ وسلم still endeavored to maintain fairness and equality as much as possible. This demonstrates not only his commitment to justice but also the voluntary nature of his equitable conduct, even when not strictly required. The āyah further clarifies: “وَمَنِ ابْتَغَيْتَ مِمَّنْ عَزَلْتَ فَلَا جُنَاحَ عَلَيْكَ” This indicates that his authority was not limited to initial arrangements but extended continuously, allowing him flexibility over time (takhyīr istimrārī). Such comprehensive authority relieved the Prophet of potential constraints and enabled him to dedicate himself fully to the responsibilities of prophethood. From the perspective of the wives of the Prophet, this arrangement also carried a distinctive honor. By accepting these divine rulings, they demonstrated a form of sacrifice and submission, recognizing both their privileged position and their role in supporting the prophetic mission. The Qurʾān emphasizes that this arrangement would bring them comfort and satisfaction: “ذَلِكَ أَدْنَى أَن تَقَرَّ أَعْيُنُهُنَّ وَلَا يَحْزَنَّ وَيَرْضَيْنَ بِمَا آتَيْتَهُنَّ كُلُّهُنَّ” This is because, firstly, the ruling applied uniformly, and secondly, it was established by divine wisdom. Thus, it was appropriate for them to accept it with contentment rather than distress. Despite the existence of this concession, the Prophet صلى الله علیہ و آلہ وسلم generally maintained fairness among them, except in rare and exceptional circumstances dictated by urgency or necessity. This, in itself, enhanced their satisfaction, as they observed his consistent effort toward justice despite possessing full discretion. The āyah concludes with the statement: “وَاللَّهُ يَعْلَمُ مَا فِي قُلُوبِكُمْ وَكَانَ اللَّهُ عَلِيمًا حَلِيمًا” This affirms that God is fully aware of the intentions and inner inclinations of all hearts—those of the Prophet, his wives, and the believers more broadly. He knows who accepts the divine command with sincerity and who harbors reservations. At the same time, He is Ḥalīm—forbearing—delaying punishment and granting space for understanding and acceptance. Thus, the expression “قلوبكم” carries a broad scope, encompassing not only the immediate subjects of the āyah but all believers, highlighting the importance of inner sincerity and submission to divine wisdom in matters of religious guidance.

In Islamic jurisprudence, under the discussion of the khaṣāʾiṣ (specific prerogatives) of the Prophet, this issue has long been examined: whether the equal division of time among wives (ḥaqq al‑qism) was obligatory for the Messenger of God صلى الله علیہ و آلہ وسلم in the same manner as for other believers, or whether he possessed an exceptional and discretionary ruling in this regard. The widely accepted view among our jurists, as well as among a number of Sunni scholars, is that the Prophet صلى الله علیہ و آلہ وسلم was exempt from this obligation. As evidence, they cite the āyah under discussion, in which Allah states: “تُرْجِي مَن تَشَاءُ مِنْهُنَّ وَتُؤْوِي إِلَيْكَ مَن تَشَاءُ” “You may defer whom you wish among them and keep with yourself whom you wish.” Since this statement follows the mention of all the wives of the Prophet, it implies that the plural feminine pronoun “هُنَّ” refers to all of them collectively. This interpretation has been accepted by jurists and many exegetes. However, some scholars have attempted to restrict this pronoun to those wives who had offered themselves to the Prophet without a stipulated mahr. Yet, firstly, from a historical perspective, it is not definitively established that such a category even had a clear or recurring external instance; some have argued that there was only a single such case. Therefore, the historical basis for this restriction is uncertain. Secondly, this interpretation does not accord with the ظاهر of the āyah, nor does it align with the reported contexts of revelation (shan al‑nuzūl). Accordingly, it is more appropriate to accept that this ruling is general in scope and applies to all the wives of the Prophet صلى الله علیہ و آلہ وسلم, thereby affirming that he was granted a special exemption regarding the obligation of equal time division.

This verse presents one of the important commandments related to the wives of the Prophet PBUH & His Pure Progeny. Allah says: "There is no woman lawful for you after [this], nor is it permitted for you to replace them with other wives, even if their beauty pleases you, except those [captives] whom your right hand possesses. And Allah is ever, over all things, an Observer." (لَا يَحِلُّ لَكَ النِّسَاءُ مِن بَعْدُ وَلَا أَن تَبَدَّلَ بِهِنَّ مِنْ أَزْوَاجٍ وَلَوْ أَعْجَبَكَ حُسْنُهُنَّ إِلَّا مَا مَلَكَتْ يَمِينُكَ وَكَانَ اللَّهُ عَلَى كُلِّ شَيْءٍ رَّقِيبًا). Exegetes and jurists have extensively discussed this verse, and various narrations about it have appeared in Islamic sources. First, we will explain the apparent meaning of this verse as derived from its connection with the preceding and succeeding verses (regardless of what opposers say about it), and then proceed to other meanings. The phrase "after [this]" (مِن بَعْدُ) indicates that after this point, no new marriage is permissible for you. Thus, the term "after" carries the meaning of a temporal aftermath, i.e., from this time onward, no new marriage is lawful for the Prophet PBUH & His Pure Progeny. Therefore, he should not take a new wife. Or, after the wives have exercised their choice according to the previous divine command to either live simply in the Prophet's household or separate, having chosen to remain in your companionship of their own free will, after that, the Prophet PBUH & His Pure Progeny should not marry any other woman, nor should he divorce any of them to take someone else. In other words, neither can their number be increased nor can the existing wives be replaced.

This limitation does not constitute any deficiency for the Messenger of God صلى الله علیہ و آلہ وسلم; rather, it reflects a ruling grounded in a profound wisdom. Historical evidence indicates that numerous individuals and tribes persistently sought to establish marital ties with the Prophet, and people from various Muslim tribes regarded it as a matter of honor and pride that a woman from their clan should be associated with the Prophet through marriage. As previously noted, some women were even prepared to enter into such a relationship without claiming any mahr, offering themselves in the form of “هبة.” While such matrimonial alliances could, to a certain extent, serve the social, political, and communal objectives of the Prophet, it is evident that if this process exceeded its appropriate limits, it would itself lead to complications. Every tribe aspired to secure such a connection, and if the Prophet were to fulfill all such expectations by accepting multiple new marriages, numerous practical and social difficulties would inevitably arise. For this reason, divine wisdom established a clear and firm regulation to restrain further expansion, restricting additional marriages and preventing alterations in the existing marital framework. In this context, it is also conceivable that some individuals attempted to advance such proposals under pretexts—for instance, by suggesting that many of the Prophet’s wives were widowed or advanced in age and therefore not distinguished by physical beauty, hence proposing new marriages. The Qurʾān directly addresses this line of reasoning by emphasizing that even in the presence of women possessing outward beauty, no further marital claims were permissible. Moreover, considerations of loyalty and recognition of merit also played a role. The wives of the Prophet had demonstrated exceptional devotion, preferring a simple and spiritual life over material comforts. The preservation of their status and honor required a corresponding restriction, which is reflected in the divine ruling. As for the exception concerning bondwomen, it reflects a different context. The Prophet’s experience with free wives already entailed significant responsibilities and potential difficulties, and thus there was no necessity to impose the same limitation in that sphere. Nonetheless, historical evidence suggests that even this concession was not widely utilized. In summary, the apparent meaning of the āyah demonstrates that these regulations were instituted not as personal privileges in a superficial sense, but as measured responses to specific social and historical circumstances, ensuring the stability of the Prophet’s domestic environment, the integrity of his mission, and the preservation of existing familial and societal commitments.

Some narrations regarding the āyah under discussion are either weak in terms of transmission, while others require careful consideration. According to these reports, the phrase: “لَا يَحِلُّ لَكَ النِّسَاءُ مِن بَعْدُ” is interpreted as referring to the categories of women whose prohibition has already been stated in Sūrah al‑Nisāʾ (23–24), such as mothers, daughters, sisters, paternal aunts, and maternal aunts. Some of these narrations explicitly argue that it would be inconceivable for certain women to be lawful for the general community yet unlawful for the Messenger of God صلى الله علیہ و آلہ وسلم; thus, no women are prohibited for him except those who are universally prohibited (Ref: Tafsir Nūr al‑Thaqalayn, vol. 4, pp. 294–295). However, it appears unlikely that the āyah here refers to those verses of Sūrah al‑Nisāʾ. A further complication is that some of these narrations explicitly state that the phrase “مِن بَعْدُ” refers to women other than those already prohibited in Sūrah al‑Nisāʾ. On this basis, it is preferable to set aside such isolated reports (akhbār āḥād) and, in methodological terms, to leave their knowledge to their أهل (i.e., the infallible authorities), especially since these narrations do not conform to the ظاهر of the āyah. We are obligated to act in accordance with the apparent meaning of the Qurʾānic text, while these reports remain speculative. Another interpretation advanced in some circles is that the āyah prohibited the Messenger of God صلى الله علیہ و آلہ وسلم from any further marriages altogether, but that this ruling was subsequently abrogated, allowing him to marry again, though he did not exercise this permission. According to this view, the āyah: “إِنَّا أَحْلَلْنَا لَكَ أَزْوَاجَكَ اللَّاتِي آتَيْتَ أُجُورَهُنَّ” is considered the abrogating verse (nāsikh), even though it appears earlier in the written arrangement of the Qurʾān. Proponents assert that, despite its placement, it was revealed later (Ref: Kanz al‑ʿIrfān, vol. 2, p. 244). This opinion, however, conflicts both with the aforementioned narrations and with the apparent meaning of the Qurʾānic text. The context and sequence of the āyāt indicate that “إِنَّا أَحْلَلْنَا لَكَ…” was revealed before the āyah under discussion, and the claim of abrogation requires unequivocal and definitive evidence, which is not present here. Accordingly, the most reliable and consistent position is that derived from the ظاهر of the āyah itself: after the revelation of this verse, any new marriages or substitutions among wives were no longer permissible for the Messenger of God صلى الله علیہ و آلہ وسلم. This ruling embodies a profound wisdom, as has already been indicated.

A group of exegetes has understood the phrase “وَلَوْ أَعْجَبَكَ حُسْنُهُنَّ” as an indication of the well‑known ruling referenced in Islamic traditions: that when a person intends to marry a woman, he may look at her beforehand to the extent necessary to become acquainted with her appearance and physical constitution. The rationale behind this ruling is to enable a person to make a well‑informed choice regarding marriage, thereby preventing later regret that could endanger the stability of the marital bond. This is reflected in a ḥadīth in which the Prophet صلى الله علیہ و آلہ وسلم said to one of his companions who intended to marry: “انظر إليها فإنه أجدر أن يدوم بينكما” “Look at her beforehand, for this is more likely to ensure lasting affection between you.” (Ref: Tafsir al‑Qurṭubī). In another narration, Imām Jaʿfar al‑Ṣādiq عليه السلام was asked whether a man may look at a woman with the intention of marriage, examining her face and physical form. He replied: “نعم لا بأس أن ينظر الرجل إلى المرأة إذا أراد أن يتزوجها ينظر إلى خلفها وإلى وجهها” “Yes, there is no harm if a man looks at a woman when he intends to marry her; he may look at her face and physical features.” (Ref: Wasāʾil al‑Shīʿah). However, some narrations explicitly state that such a gaze must not be motivated by desire (shahwah) or pleasure. It is further clear that this ruling applies only when there is a genuine intention to investigate the possibility of marriage. If no firm intention exists, a person may not use mere curiosity or vague prospects of marriage as justification for looking at women. Some exegetes have suggested that the āyah may refer instead to accidental or unintended glances. According to this view, the āyah itself would not establish this legal ruling, and its basis would rest solely upon the traditions. However, the phrase “وَلَوْ أَعْجَبَكَ حُسْنُهُنَّ” (“even if their beauty pleases you”) does not appear compatible with accidental or involuntary glances. Therefore, its indication of the previously mentioned ruling—that purposeful observation in the context of intended marriage is permissible—cannot be considered remote or implausible.

See ayat 54 for tafseer.

In this āyah, the address once again turns to the believers, presenting additional rulings—particularly concerning the etiquettes of interaction with the Messenger of God صلى الله علیہ و آلہ وسلم and his household. These instructions are conveyed in concise, clear, and explicit terms. It is stated: “يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا لَا تَدْخُلُوا بُيُوتَ النَّبِيِّ إِلَّا أَن يُؤْذَنَ لَكُمْ إِلَى طَعَامٍ غَيْرَ نَاظِرِينَ إِنَاهُ.” Believers are instructed not to enter the houses of the Prophet without permission, even if invited for a meal, and then only at the appropriate time—without arriving early and waiting for the food to be prepared. This establishes an important principle of social etiquette. Although the directive specifically refers to the Prophet’s household, it clearly extends as a general rule to all homes, as reflected elsewhere in the Qurʾān. A further instruction is given: “وَلَكِنْ إِذَا دُعِيتُمْ فَادْخُلُوا فَإِذَا طَعِمْتُمْ فَانتَشِرُوا.” When invited, one should enter properly, and after eating, depart without lingering unnecessarily. Remaining after the meal without purpose imposes inconvenience upon the host and contradicts proper ethical conduct. The third directive states: “وَلَا مُسْتَأْنِسِينَ لِحَدِيثٍ.” After the meal, one should not remain merely for extended conversation, unless the host himself desires such interaction. In contexts where the invitation is solely for dining, prolonging one’s stay becomes a source of difficulty, particularly in a household such as that of the Prophet, which served as the center of significant religious and communal responsibilities. The Qurʾān then explains the rationale: “إِنَّ ذَلِكُمْ كَانَ يُؤْذِي النَّبِيَّ فَيَسْتَحْيِي مِنكُمْ وَاللَّهُ لَا يَسْتَحْيِي مِنَ الْحَقِّ.” Such behavior causes discomfort to the Prophet, though he may refrain from expressing it out of courtesy; however, God does not refrain from stating the truth. The fourth ruling concerns propriety in requesting items from the wives of the Prophet: “وَإِذَا سَأَلْتُمُوهُنَّ مَتَاعًا فَاسْأَلُوهُنَّ مِن وَرَاءِ حِجَابٍ.” When something is needed from them, it should be requested from behind a screen. This does not refer to the general requirement of modest dress alone, but rather to an additional protocol specific to the wives of the Prophet, due to their special status and the need to safeguard their dignity and public perception. The term “حجاب” here denotes a barrier or separation, consistent with its linguistic meaning. The reason for this directive is explicitly given: “ذَلِكُمْ أَطْهَرُ لِقُلُوبِكُمْ وَقُلُوبِهِنَّ.” It contributes to the purity of both parties’ hearts, reinforcing ethical boundaries and preventing undue familiarity. The fifth directive states: “وَمَا كَانَ لَكُمْ أَن تُؤْذُوا رَسُولَ اللَّهِ.” Believers are categorically prohibited from causing harm or discomfort to the Messenger of God in any form. While the context includes specific examples such as improper conduct in his household, the principle is general and encompasses all forms of harm. Finally, the sixth and concluding ruling affirms: “وَلَا أَن تَنكِحُوا أَزْوَاجَهُ مِن بَعْدِهِ أَبَدًا إِنَّ ذَلِكُمْ كَانَ عِندَ اللَّهِ عَظِيمًا.” It is permanently prohibited to marry the wives of the Prophet after his passing, as such an act would constitute a grave violation in the sight of God. The wisdom behind this prohibition becomes clear upon reflection. First, it prevented malicious individuals from exploiting such marriages as a means of dishonoring the Prophet or seeking revenge against him. Second, it safeguarded the integrity of the community by preventing misuse of association with the Prophet’s household for personal or political advantage, including potential distortions of his teachings. For this reason, the wives of the Prophet were honored with the designation “أمهات المؤمنين,” emphasizing their elevated status. The āyah concludes with a general principle: “إِن تُبْدُوا شَيْئًا أَوْ تُخْفُوهُ فَإِنَّ اللَّهَ كَانَ بِكُلِّ شَيْءٍ عَلِيمًا.” Whether intentions or actions are concealed or expressed, God is fully aware of them. This serves as a reminder that all inner states and external actions are subject to divine knowledge and accountability.

In this āyah, the address once again turns to the believers, and certain additional rulings are presented, particularly those relating to the etiquettes of social interaction with the Prophet Akram and the household of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم. These are expressed in concise, clear, and explicit terms. It is stated: “يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا لَا تَدْخُلُوا بُيُوتَ النَّبِيِّ إِلَّا أَن يُؤْذَنَ لَكُمْ إِلَى طَعَامٍ غَيْرَ نَاظِرِينَ إِنَاهُ”. In this manner, the Qurʾān establishes an important principle of social etiquette, especially within a context where such considerations were rarely observed. Although the discussion concerns the house of the Prophet, it is evident that this ruling is not exclusive to him; rather, one should not enter any house without permission, as also stated in Surah al‑Nur, Ayah 27. It is reported that the Prophet would always seek permission before entering the house of his daughter Fatimah al‑Zahra, and in one instance, when Jabir ibn Abdullah Ansari was with him, he sought permission both for himself and for Jabir before entering (ref: Kafi, vol. 5, p. 528). Furthermore, when guests are invited for a meal, they should be mindful of proper timing and avoid causing inconvenience to the host by arriving prematurely or unnecessarily. The second instruction states: “وَلَكِنْ إِذَا دُعِيتُمْ فَادْخُلُوا فَإِذَا طَعِمْتُمْ فَانتَشِرُوا”. This serves as an emphasis and completion of the previous instruction: one should neither enter at an inappropriate time nor neglect the invitation, nor remain after eating for an extended period. Such behavior causes inconvenience to the host and is contrary to ethical principles. The third directive is: “وَلَا مُسْتَأْنِسِينَ لِحَدِيثٍ”. After eating, one should not remain for the sake of idle conversation in the house of the Prophet or in any other host’s house. However, if the host himself desires such conversation out of affection, then this would constitute an exception. The instruction applies specifically where the invitation is limited to dining, and in such cases, prolonged conversation should be avoided, particularly in the house of the Prophet, which was the center for the fulfillment of the greatest divine responsibilities. The reason for this ruling is then explained: “اِنَّ ذَلِكُمْ كَانَ يُؤْذِي النَّبِيَّ فَيَسْتَحْيِي مِنكُمْ وَاللَّهُ لَا يَسْتَحْيِي مِنَ الْحَقِّ”. The fourth instruction relates to the matter of ḥijāb: “وَإِذَا سَأَلْتُمُوهُنَّ مَتَاعًا فَاسْأَلُوهُنَّ مِن وَرَاءِ حِجَابٍ”. It was customary among Arabs and other peoples to borrow items of daily use from one another, and the household of the Prophet was not exempt from this practice. At times, people would request such items from the wives of the Prophet; however, since their appearance before people—even with the observance of Islamic modesty—was not considered appropriate, it was commanded that such requests be made from behind a barrier, either through a curtain or behind a door. It should be noted that the term “ḥijāb” in this context does not refer to the general concept of women’s dress, but rather to an additional ruling specific to the wives of the Prophet. People were obligated, in recognition of the special sanctity of the Prophet, to request items from his wives from behind a barrier, and the wives themselves were not to appear before others even with ordinary coverings. This ruling was specific to them, whereas other women were permitted to appear before others while observing the general Islamic standard of modest dress. Linguistically, “ḥijāb” denotes anything that serves as a barrier between two things (ref: Lisan al‑Arab, root ḥ‑j‑b), and in the Qurʾān it is consistently used in the sense of a barrier or separation. The wisdom behind this command is clearly stated: “ذَلِكُمْ أَطْهَرُ لِقُلُوبِكُمْ وَقُلُوبِهِنَّ”. The fifth ruling is expressed as: “وَمَا كَانَ لَكُمْ أَن تُؤْذُوا رَسُولَ اللَّهِ”. It is not permissible for anyone to cause harm or distress to the Messenger of God. Although the immediate examples include improper behavior such as inappropriate entry into his house or remaining after meals, the scope of this ruling is general and includes every form of harm or annoyance. Finally, the sixth and concluding instruction is: “وَلَا أَن تَنكِحُوا أَزْوَاجَهُ مِن بَعْدِهِ أَبَدًا إِنَّ ذَلِكُمْ كَانَ عِندَ اللَّهِ عَظِيمًا”. It is categorically prohibited to marry the wives of the Prophet after his passing, as this would constitute a grave offense in the sight of God. A question may arise as to why the wives of the Prophet were deprived of remarriage, even though some were still young at the time of his death. The answer becomes clear when the underlying wisdom is considered. Firstly, as indicated by the occasion of revelation, some individuals had intended such actions as a means of dishonoring the Prophet. Secondly, if this were permitted, individuals might exploit such marriages to gain illegitimate influence, claim privileged knowledge of the Prophet’s domestic life, or introduce distortions into the religion. Hypocrites might also use such situations to propagate statements unworthy of the Prophet. This possible danger was reinforced by the fact that certain individuals had already expressed such intentions. Therefore, God, who is fully aware of what is hidden and manifest, issued a decisive ruling to prevent such corruption entirely. To further establish this protection, the wives of the Prophet were given the title “Umm al‑Muʾminin”, indicating that marriage with them would, in principle, resemble marriage with one’s own mother. In light of these reasons, it becomes evident why the wives of the Prophet accepted this restriction willingly. In human life, there are occasions where individuals must sacrifice certain rights for greater objectives, especially when accompanied by profound honor and responsibility. The wives of the Prophet had already attained a unique and elevated status, and corresponding sacrifice was appropriate. Thus, they lived lives of great respect among the Muslim community after the Prophet and regarded this restriction not as deprivation but as an honorable distinction. In the following āyah, God warns: “إِن تُبْدُوا شَيْئًا أَوْ تُخْفُوهُ فَإِنَّ اللَّهَ كَانَ بِكُلِّ شَيْءٍ عَلِيمًا”. Whether something is made manifest or concealed, God is fully aware of all matters. One should not presume that harmful intentions toward the Prophet are hidden from Him; He is fully aware of both what is spoken and what remains concealed within the heart, and He deals with every individual according to their actions and intentions.

As the āyah under discussion mentions certain duties of the Muslims in the context of an invitation issued by the Messenger of God صلى الله علیہ وآلہ وسلم, it appears appropriate to present a brief exposition of Islamic teachings concerning hospitality, the rights of the guest, and the obligations of the host.

Islam gives special importance to the issue of hospitality, to the extent that in a Hadith the Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه و آله وسلم said: "الضيف دليل الجنة" The guest is the guide to Paradise. (Reference: Bihar al-Anwar, Vol. 75, p. 460 (Hadith 14), Chapter 93). The importance and respect for the guest is so great that in Islam it is described as a heavenly gift. The Prophet صلى الله عليه و آله وسلم said: "اذا اراد اللہ بقوم خيرا اهدي اليهم ھدية، قالوا وما تلك الهدية؟ قال، الضيف، ینزل برزقه، ویرtحل بذنوب اهل البيت" "When Allah intends good for a people, He sends to them a precious gift." They asked, "O Messenger of Allah, what is that precious gift?" He said, "The guest, who comes with his provision and takes away the sins of the household." (Reference: Bihar al-Anwar, Vol. 75, p. 460 (Hadith 14), Chapter 93). It is noteworthy that someone said to the Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه و آله وسلم: "My parents be sacrificed for you. My practice is that I perform complete ablution, establish prayer, give zakat perfectly, and show humility with the smiling face of a guest for the sake of God's pleasure." The Prophet صلى الله عليه و آله وسلم replied: "بخ، بخ، بخ، ما لجهنم عليك سبيل ان الله قد براك من الشح ان كنت كذلک" "Bravo, bravo, bravo! Hell’s path is closed for you, and if this is your state, then Allah has purified you from all stinginess." Much can be said on this topic, but in consideration of brevity, this is sufficient.

Despite the importance accorded to the guest, undue formality and the presentation of elaborate and excessive varieties of food are not only discouraged in Islam, but have in fact been explicitly prohibited. The Islamic directive is that hospitality and reception should remain simple. In defining the rights and duties of both guest and host, Islam has established a balanced and equitable standard: the host should not withhold whatever is available to him, and the guest should not expect anything beyond that. In this regard, Imam Jaʿfar al‑Sadiq stated: “المؤمن لا يحتشم من أخيه، وما أدري أيهما أعجب؟ الذي يكلف أخاه إذا دخل عليه أن يتكلف له، أو المتكلف لأخيه؟” “The believer does not maintain artificial formality with his believing brother. I do not know which of the two is more astonishing: the one who burdens his brother by causing him trouble when he visits him, or the one who imposes unnecessary formality upon himself for his brother.” (ref: Bihar al‑Anwar, vol. 75, p. 451). Salman al‑Farsi narrates from the Messenger of God صلى الله علیه وآله وسلم that he said: “أن لا نتكلف للضيف ما ليس عندنا وأن نقدم إليه ما حضرنا” “That we should not burden ourselves to provide for the guest what we do not possess, and that we should present to him what is available with us.”

In Islamic teaching, it has already been explained that the guest is regarded as a divine gift and a manifestation of God’s grace. Consequently, the guest must be honored in the same manner as one honors oneself, and utmost respect must be observed in all aspects of interaction. In this regard, Amir al‑Muʾminin reports from the Messenger of God صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم: “من حق الضيف أن تمشي معه فتخرجه من حريمك إلى البرّ”. This indicates that among the rights of a guest is that the host should accompany him courteously up to the door when bidding farewell (ref: Mahajjat al‑Bayda, vol. 3, p. 29, bab thalith). Moreover, the host should provide for the guest’s comfort and needs without imposing unnecessary formality. It is reported in a tradition: “قال رسول الله ان من حق الضيف ان يُعدّ له الخلال” (ref: Bihar al‑Anwar, vol. 75, p. 455), meaning that even small items, such as a toothpick, fall within the rights of the guest. This emphasizes that attention should be given to even minor aspects of hospitality. At times, guests may be reserved or shy, and for this reason, it has been instructed that the host should not inquire whether the guest has eaten; rather, whatever is available should be presented. Imam Jaʿfar al‑Sadiq states: “لا تقل لاخيك اذا دخل عليك أكلت اليوم شيئًا؟ ولكن قرّب اليه ما عندك فإن الجواد كل الجواد من بذل ما عنده” (ref: Bihar al‑Anwar, vol. 75, p. 455). This indicates that true generosity lies in offering what one possesses without hesitation, rather than engaging in unnecessary questioning. Another important principle is that the host should not consider the food he has prepared to be insignificant, since every blessing granted by God possesses inherent dignity and worth. However, it is often observed that individuals inclined toward excessive formality, even after presenting an abundance of food, express dissatisfaction with what they have offered, saying that it is inadequate or unworthy. Such an attitude is contrary to proper conduct. Similarly, it is also the responsibility of the guest not to regard what is presented as trivial. In this regard, Imam Jaʿfar al‑Sadiq states: “هلك امرؤ احتقر لأخيه ما يُحضره وهلك امرؤ احتقر من أخيه ما قُدّم اليه” (ref: Mahajjat al‑Bayda, vol. 3, p. 30). This means that a host who belittles what he prepares for his brother is misguided, and likewise, a guest who considers what is offered to him as insignificant is also in error. Islam strongly emphasizes the appreciation and respectful treatment of guests. It is even reported that assistance should be extended to the guest upon arrival, but not necessarily upon departure, lest the guest feel that the host is eager for him to leave (ref: Bihar al‑Anwar, vol. 75, p. 455, hadith 27). Thus, the Islamic framework of hospitality is founded upon simplicity, mutual respect, and avoidance of unnecessary burden, ensuring a balance between the dignity of the guest and the comfort of the host.

In the Islamic perspective, rights and duties always exist in a reciprocal relation. Just as the host bears certain important responsibilities toward the guest, likewise the guest also assumes specific obligations toward the host. In addition to what has already been mentioned in the preceding traditions, it is also the duty of the guest to accept whatever the host presents within his home. For example, whatever arrangement is made for seating should be accepted willingly. Imam Jaʿfar al‑Sadiq states: “اذا دخل احدكم على اخيه في رحله فليقعد حیث یأمر صاحب الرحل فان صاحب الرجل اعرف بعورة بيته من الداخل عليه”. This means that when one enters the house of his believing brother, he should sit where the host instructs him to sit, for the host is more aware of the private aspects of his home than the one who enters it (ref: Bihar al‑Anwar, vol. 75, p. 451). In summary, the etiquettes and obligations of hospitality and hosting, along with their characteristics in an Islamic society, constitute a subject of considerable depth and require detailed discussion. Those who seek further elaboration may consult Bihar al‑Anwar, vol. 17, kitab al‑ʿashara, from bab 88 to bab 94, and also Mahajjat al‑Bayda, vol. 3, bab 4, faḍilat al‑ḍiyafa. Regrettably, it must be acknowledged that in the present age of materialism, this ancient human and moral tradition has become significantly diminished, and in some societies it has nearly disappeared. It is reported that when people from such cultures visit Islamic lands and observe the open‑hearted hospitality extended to guests—along with the warmth and affection displayed—they are astonished at how individuals dedicate the best of their resources and provisions for the sake of guests, even when the relationship is minimal or newly formed during travel. However, when Islamic traditions—some of which have been mentioned here—are properly considered, the underlying reasons for such generosity and selflessness become evident. It then becomes clear that these practices are rooted in spiritual and ethical considerations, which transcend the material calculations and perspectives characteristic of purely materialist worldviews.

Some commentators have reported that after the revelation of the verse of Hijab (the previous verse), the fathers, children, and other relatives of the wives of the Messenger of Allah (PBUH & His Pure Progeny) came to him and asked, "O Messenger of Allah! Should we also speak to them while observing the veil?" In response, the verse before us was revealed, answering them that this command is not for you.

In the previous āyah, a general injunction had been issued concerning the observance of ḥijāb for the wives of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم. This could have given rise to the assumption that even their maḥram relatives were also included in this ruling and that they too were required to observe complete seclusion in their presence. Consequently, the present āyah was revealed to clarify this matter and to legislate the appropriate distinction. God states: “لَّا جُنَاحَ عَلَيْهِنَّ فِي آبَائِهِنَّ وَلَا أَبْنَائِهِنَّ وَلَا إِخْوَانِهِنَّ وَلَا أَبْنَاءِ إِخْوَانِهِنَّ وَلَا أَبْنَاءِ أَخَوَاتِهِنَّ وَلَا نِسَائِهِنَّ وَلَا مَا مَلَكَتْ أَيْمَانُهُنَّ”. In other words, there is no sin upon them if they appear without ḥijāb before their fathers, their sons, their brothers, the sons of their brothers, the sons of their sisters, their women, and those whom their right hands possess. These six categories represent their maḥram relations and are therefore exempted from the ruling. If it is asked why other maḥram relations, such as paternal and maternal uncles, are not explicitly mentioned, the answer lies in the Qurʾānic principle of eloquence and conciseness, whereby unnecessary repetition is avoided. By mentioning nephews and nieces, the corresponding relations of uncles are implicitly included, since maḥramiyyah operates reciprocally. Just as a woman is maḥram to her nephew, the nephew is maḥram to her; similarly, the relational structure extends to paternal and maternal uncles. This reflects a subtle and profound aspect of Qurʾānic expression. Another question may arise as to why the father‑in‑law and step‑son are not mentioned, even though they are maḥram. The reason is that the discussion here pertains specifically to the wives of the Prophet, and it is known that at the time of the revelation of these āyāt, neither the Prophet’s father nor his forefathers were alive, nor did he have a surviving son. Therefore, there was no necessity to mention them explicitly. Historical sources indicate that his sons—Qasim, Abdullah (also known as Tayyib and Tahir), and Ibrahim—had either passed away in early childhood or were not present at the time of this revelation; Ibrahim was born later and died in infancy. Similarly, foster relationships are not mentioned separately because they are included under the broader categories of maḥram relations. At the conclusion of the āyah, the mode of address shifts from the third person to the second person, and the wives of the Prophet are directly addressed: “وَاتَّقِينَ اللَّهَ إِنَّ اللَّهَ كَانَ عَلَى كُلِّ شَيْءٍ شَهِيدًا”. This indicates that the ultimate objective behind such rulings is the attainment of taqwā. The regulations concerning ḥijāb and related matters serve as means for safeguarding against sin, but the essential goal remains the cultivation of taqwā. Without it, external measures alone are insufficient. It is also important to note that the phrase “نِسَائِهِنَّ” refers to believing women, that is, women who share the same faith. As has been explained in the exegesis of Surah al‑Nur, it is not appropriate for Muslim women to appear без ḥijāb before non‑Muslim women, as there exists the possibility that such observations may later be disclosed to others. As for the expression “مَا مَلَكَتْ أَيْمَانُهُنَّ”, it possesses a broad meaning that includes both male and female bondspeople; although, according to certain narrations, its application in this context may be limited to female servants. This may explain its mention after the general reference to women, in order to include even non‑Muslim female servants within the scope of the ruling.

See ayat 58 for tafseer.

See ayat 58 for tafseer.

(Explanatory Note: It is a remarkable coincidence that the interpretation of these verses began on the night of the birth of the Prophet صلی اللہ علیہ و آلہٖ وسلم in the month of Rabi’ al-Awwal 1404 AH.) In the preceding verses, the Prophet صلی اللہ علیہ و آلہٖ وسلم spoke about the sanctity accorded to him and the protection against any form of harm or injury. In these verses, firstly, the special relationship and affection that Allah and His angels have for the Messenger of Allah صلی اللہ علیہ و آلہٖ وسلم is described. Then, a command is given to the believers related to this matter. After that, a painful punishment and the unfortunate end are foretold for those who cause distress to the Messenger of Allah صلی اللہ علیہ و آلہٖ وسلم. Finally, the great sin of those who harm the believers through false accusations is mentioned. It is stated: "Indeed, Allah and His angels send blessings upon the Prophet." (إِنَّ اللَّهَ وَمَلَائِكَتَهُ يُصَلُّونَ عَلَى النَّبِيِّ). The status of the Prophet of mercy صلی اللہ علیہ و آلہٖ وسلم is so exalted that the Creator of the entire universe, and the angels appointed by the command of the Almighty to govern this cosmos, send blessings upon him. Now, since this is the case, you too align yourselves with this profound message. "O you who have believed, send blessings upon him and greet him with peace." (يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا صَلُّوا عَلَيْهِ وَسَلِّمُوا تَسْلِيمًا). He is a precious gem of the universe of creation, and if by the grace of Allah he is made available to you, do not undervalue him; do not forget his grandeur and status as regarded by Allah and His angels. He is a great human being who stands among you, yet he is not an ordinary man but one whose existence is a summary of the entire universe.

1. The plural of “صلات” is “صلوات,” and when this term is attributed to God, it denotes the sending or bestowal of mercy; whereas when it is attributed to angels or believers, it signifies the supplication and request for mercy. (Explanatory note: Raghib has presented this meaning in Mufradat in slightly different terms.) 2. The use of “يصلون” in the form of the present tense verb (fiʿl muḍāriʿ) indicates continuity, meaning that God and the angels continuously and perpetually send mercy and blessings upon him—a constant and everlasting mercy and benediction. 3. What is the difference between “صلوا” and “سلموا”? Exegetes have discussed this at length. However, from the lexical and apparent Qur’anic meaning, it may be understood that “صلوا” signifies the command to invoke mercy and blessings upon the Prophet صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم. As for “سلموا,” it either denotes complete submission to the commands and decrees of the Prophet, as expressed in Surah al‑Nisaʼ (65): “ثُمَّ لاَ يَجِدُواْ فِي أَنفُسِهِمْ حَرَجًا مِّمَّا قَضَيْتَ وَيُسَلِّمُوا تَسْلِيمًا”, meaning that believers must accept his judgments wholeheartedly without any hesitation, or it signifies conveying greetings, such as “السلام عليك يا رسول الله,” invoking peace upon him. In a narration, Abu Basir asked Imam Jaʿfar al‑Sadiq about the meaning of “taslim,” and he replied: “هو التسليم له فی الامور,” meaning total submission to him in all matters. (Ref: Majmaʿ al‑Bayan). Another narration, reported by Abu Hamzah al‑Thumali from the Companion Kaʿb, states that when this verse was revealed, the Companions asked how to send blessings, and the Prophet instructed them to say: “اللّٰهُمّ صلّ على محمد و آل محمد كما صليت على ابراهيم انك حميد مجيد، و بارك على محمد و آل محمد كما باركت على ابراهيم و آل ابراهيم انك حميد مجيد.” Although the meanings of salutation (taslim) may appear distinct, upon reflection they converge upon a single reality: verbal and practical submission to the Prophet. Sending salutations and invoking peace upon him reflects love, devotion, and acknowledgment of his authority. Numerous Shiʿi and Sunni narrations explicitly state that when invoking blessings upon Muhammad, the phrase “آل محمد” should be included. In al‑Durr al‑Manthur, narrations from sources such as Sahih al‑Bukhari, Sahih Muslim, Sunan Abi Dawud, Sunan al‑Tirmidhi, Sunan al‑Nasa’i, Sunan Ibn Majah, and others report from Kaʿb ibn ʿUjrah that when asked about sending blessings, the Prophet instructed: “اللّٰهم صلّ على محمد و على آل محمد …” Al‑Suyuti has transmitted eighteen similar narrations indicating the inclusion of “آل محمد.” These narrations are reported from a group of Companions including Ibn ʿAbbas, Talhah, Abu Saʿid al‑Khudri, Abu Hurayrah, Abu Masʿud al‑Ansari, Buraydah ibn Masʿud, Kaʿb ibn ʿUjrah, and Amir al‑Muʾminin Ali (Ref: Tafsir al‑Mizan, vol. 16, pp. 365–366). Similar narrations are also found in Sahih al‑Bukhari (vol. 6, p. 151) and Sahih Muslim (vol. 1, p. 305). 4. It is noteworthy that some narrations combine “محمد” and “آل محمد” without separation by the preposition “على,” as in: “اللهم صل على محمد و آل محمد.” In conclusion, Ibn Hajar al‑Makki reports in al‑Sawaʿiq al‑Muhriqah that the Prophet said: “لا تصلوا علي الصلاة البتراء … بل قولوا اللهم صل على محمد و آل محمد” (Ref: Sawaʿiq al‑Muhriqah, p. 144), emphasizing that blessings should not be incomplete. As for whether sending blessings upon the Prophet is obligatory, Shiʿi jurists consider it obligatory in both tashahhuds of the prayer and recommended elsewhere. Among Sunni jurists, Imam al‑Shafiʿi considers it obligatory in the second tashahhud, whereas others differ (Ref: Tadhkirah al‑ʿAllamah al‑Hilli, vol. 1, p. 126). Imam al‑Shafiʿi also expressed this ruling in verse form, stating that the love of the Ahl al‑Bayt is divinely mandated and that prayer is invalid without invoking blessings upon them. The following āyah contrasts this by stating: “إِنَّ الَّذِينَ يُؤْذُونَ اللَّهَ وَرَسُولَهُ…”—those who cause harm to God and His Messenger are distanced from divine mercy and subjected to a humiliating punishment. The harm to God is understood metaphorically as acts such as disbelief and disobedience, while harm to the Messenger includes all forms of offense, whether through disbelief, disobedience, false accusations, or causing inconvenience, as indicated earlier in “إِنَّ ذَلِكُمْ كَانَ يُؤْذِي النَّبِيَّ”. Narrations further indicate that harming the family of the Prophet falls within this category. For example, it is reported: “فاطمة بضعة مني فمن أغضبها أغضبني” (Ref: Sahih al‑Bukhari, vol. 5, p. 200) and “إن فاطمة بضعة مني يؤذيني ما آذاها” (Ref: Sahih Muslim, vol. 4, p. 1903). The term “لعن” denotes removal from divine mercy and stands in contrast to mercy and blessing mentioned previously. This removal, especially in both this world and the Hereafter, constitutes one of the severest forms of punishment, preceded by divine condemnation and followed by “عذاب مهين.” The final āyah extends the discussion to harming believers: “وَالَّذِينَ يُؤْذُونَ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ…” meaning that those who harm believing men and women without cause commit slander and manifest sin. The phrase “بِغَيْرِ مَا اكْتَسَبُوا” indicates that such harm is inflicted without any wrongdoing on their part. The precedence of “بهتان” over “إثم مبين” reflects its severity, as slander constitutes one of the gravest forms of harm. As expressed in Arabic verse: “جراحات السنان لها التئام ولا يلتام ما جرح اللسان” Islamic traditions strongly emphasize this matter. Imam Jaʿfar al‑Sadiq reports that God declares: “ليأذن بحرب مني من آذى عبدي المؤمن” (Ref: Usul al‑Kafi, vol. 2, p. 35), meaning that harming a believer is equivalent to waging war against God. Another narration from Imam al‑Rida states: “من بهت مؤمنا … أقامه الله على تل من نار…” (Ref: Bihar al‑Anwar, vol. 75, p. 194), indicating the severe consequences of slander in the Hereafter.

See ayat 62 for tafseer.

See ayat 62 for tafseer.

See ayat 62 for tafseer.

In the tafseer of Ali ibn Ibrahim, the cause of revelation of the first verse is explained as follows: At that time, Muslim women used to go to the mosque and pray behind the Prophet Muhammad PBUH & His Pure Progeny. When they went for the Maghrib and Isha prayers at night, some indecent and unruly youths would sit in their path, speaking in a manner lacking modesty and causing them distress by blocking their way. This verse was revealed regarding this matter, commanding the women to observe proper hijab so that it becomes clear that these are Muslim women and no one can find an excuse to oppose them. In the same book, the cause of revelation of the second verse is recorded as follows: In Medina, there was a group of hypocrites whose task was to spread various rumors about the Prophet PBUH & His Pure Progeny whenever he went to fight in certain battles. Sometimes they would say that the Prophet had been killed, sometimes that he had been captured. Those Muslims who did not have the strength to fight were greatly troubled by these rumors. When the Prophet PBUH & His Pure Progeny was informed of this complaint, this verse was revealed and those spreading such rumors were sternly admonished. (Reference: Noor al-Thaqalayn, Volume 4, page 307, referring to Tafseer Ali ibn Ibrahim).

The Lord of the Worlds, after prohibiting harm and distress to the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH & His Pure Progeny) and the believers in the previous verses, here mentions another cause of harm and outlines two ways to address it. First, the believing women are commanded not to do anything that could give ill-intentioned people an excuse. Then, a strong admonition is given to the hypocrites, troublemakers, vagabonds, and those who spread rumors—such a severe admonition is rarely found in the Quranic verses. The first part states: "O Prophet! Say to your wives, your daughters, and the women of the believers that they should draw their jilbabs over themselves. That is more suitable that they will be known and not be harassed." (يَا أَيُّهَا النَّبِيُّ قُل لِّأَزْوَاجِكَ وَبَنَاتِكَ وَنِسَاءِ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ يُدْنِينَ عَلَيْهِنَّ مِن جَلَابِيبِهِنَّ ذَلِكَ أَدْنَى أَن يُعْرَفْنَ فَلَا يُؤْذَيْنَ). What is meant by "yu‘rafna" (to be recognized)? There are two views among the exegetes about this, which are not contradictory. The first is that it was customary in that time for maidservants to go out without covering their heads and necks. Since this was considered morally inappropriate, occasionally reckless and obscene youths would tease them. Therefore, believing free women were commanded here to fully observe Islamic hijab to be distinguished from maidservants and to prevent giving any pretext to indecent and reckless individuals. It should be noted that this discussion does not mean that rude and ill-natured people have the right to harass the maidservants. Rather, the aim is to remove any excuse from the hands of ill-intentioned people. The second purpose was also to prevent Muslim women from being careless and neglectful about the veil, as some carefree women remain unveiled despite the hijab and display most parts of their bodies, thus attracting the attention of unchaste men. What is meant by "jilbab"? The exegetes and lexicons discuss a few meanings: 1. A large outer garment and cloak, bigger than a shawl, covering the head, neck, and chest. 2. A hood or a veil (dupatta and scarf). 3. A long, loose tunic. (References: see Lisān al-‘Arab, Majma‘ al-Jawāmi‘, Mufradāt Rāghib, Qatr al-Muḥīt, and Taj al-‘Arūs.) Although the meanings vary, their common feature is covering the body with such a garment. (Note that "jilbab" is pronounced with a vowel above or below the letter jīm). However, the better understanding seems to be that it refers to that clothing which is larger than a dupatta but smaller than a full chador, as explained by the author of Lisān al-‘Arab. And "yudnīna" (draw near) means that women should bring their outer coverings close to their bodies so that they are properly covered, not to leave them free so that they might shift and expose the body — that is, they should wrap themselves well. As for the matter that some infer from this sentence that the face should also be covered, there is no evidence for this meaning, and very few exegetes have included the covering of the face within the purport of this verse. (Explanatory note: The philosophy and importance of hijab, as well as the issue regarding the hands (except up to the wrist), have been discussed in detail in Tafsir Namuna, volume 13, Surah An-Nur, verses 30 and 31.) In any case, it is understood from this verse that the command of hijab for free women had already been revealed previously, but some women were careless in observing it out of naivety. Therefore, this verse emphatically enjoins full attention and diligence in observing it. Since some believing women became concerned about this matter after the revelation of this command, the verse concludes with the addition: "And Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful." (وَكَانَ اللَّهُ غَفُورًا رَّحِيمًا). If there has been any negligence from your side in this matter, it was due to ignorance and lack of knowledge; hence, Allah will forgive you. Repent and return to Him and carry out the duties of chastity, purity, and hijab well. After commanding the believing women to observe hijab, the verse addresses another issue: the oppressive acts of the troublemakers and immoral individuals. It is said that if the hypocrites, those whose hearts are diseased, and the agitators who spread false rumors in Medina do not desist from their actions, then We will incite you against them; then they will not remain in your city except for a little while. (لَئِن لَّمْ يَنتَهِ الْمُنَافِقُونَ وَالَّذِينَ فِي قُلُوبِهِم مَّرَضٌ وَالْمُرْجِفُونَ فِي الْمَدِينَةِ لَنُغْرِيَنَّكَ بِهِمْ ثُمَّ لَا يُجَاوِرُونَكَ فِيهَا إِلَّا قَلِيلًا). (Explanatory note: Here "qalīlan" is an omitted exception, and the estimation is that it means: "They will not remain neighbors with you a time except for a little period.") “Murjifūn” comes from the root “irjāf,” meaning those who spread such rumors that cause harm to others.They are described as going around and this word "ارجاف" actually means agitation and instability, and since rumors create agitation among common people, this word is used for them. "نغرینک" is derived from the root "اغراء," which means to invite or urge someone to perform an action or obtain something, including encouragement, persuasion, and incitement. From the style of the verse, it appears that in Medina three groups were engaged in sabotage. One group intended to fulfill their unclean desires, and this was carried out with a well-thought-out scheme and an organized plan, not on an individual or personal basis. Firstly, there were the opponents who wanted to destroy Islam through their conspiracies. Secondly, there were the ruffians and vagabonds, whom the Holy Qur’an describes as “those in whose hearts is a disease” (الَّذِينَ فِي قُلُوبِهِمْ مَرَضٌ), as in the same Surah (Al-Ahzab) verse 32, referring to those afflicted with desire and lust: "فَلَا تَخْضَعْنَ بِالْقَوْلِ فَيَطْمَعَ الَّذِي فِي قَلْبِهِ مَرَضٌ" “O wives of the Messenger, do not be soft in speech, lest he who is in whose heart is a disease should desire (you).” Thirdly, there were those whose job was to spread rumors in Medina, especially at times when the Prophet of God and the army of Islam went to war. They would stay behind in Medina to discourage the people and weaken their hearts by spreading news of the defeat of the Prophet and the believers. According to some commentators, this group was the Jews. In any case, the Qur’an severely reproaches all three groups. In the tafseer of the verse, there is also the possibility that these three destructive programs were the machinations of the hypocrites, presented separately to clarify their methods. In any case, the Qur’an states that if they continue this vile and improper conduct, a general assault and attack will be commanded against them so that the believers, through a united and courageous effort, will root out all the hypocrites from Medina, and thereafter they will never be fit to remain in that city. And when they are expelled from this city and deprived of the protection of the Islamic government, "wherever they are found, they will be seized and killed with a thorough killing" (مَلْعُونِينَ أَيْنَمَا ثُقِفُوا أُخِذُوا وَقُتِّلُوا تَقْتِيلًا). The word "ثقفوا," derived from "ثقف" and "ثقافة," skillfully implies seizing or capturing something completely. The term "ثقافة" (culture) is based on the same meaning. This indicates that after this general attack, they will find no refuge anywhere and will be hunted down and killed. Does this verse mean that they will be sought out in Medina and executed? Or, after a general exile order, if they remain in Medina, they will suffer such a fate? There are two possibilities, and neither contradicts the other; in the sense that when the Islamic government takes responsibility for this, these conspiratorial, diseased-hearted and rumor-spreading saboteurs will be ordered to leave Medina. Whether they stay or leave, courageous and devoted Muslims will not allow them safety anywhere. Then, in the last verse, it is stated that this is not a new command, but "this is the way of Allah which occurred before among those who passed away," that whenever a group of saboteurs and corrupt people shamelessly exceeded the limits in their conspiracies, the order for a general assault was issued against them (سُنَّةَ اللَّهِ فِي الَّذِينَ خَلَوْا مِن قَبْلُ). And since this command is a divine law, it can never be changed, for "you will never find any change in the way of Allah" (وَلَن تَجِدَ لِسُنَّةِ اللَّهِ تَبْدِيلًا). This expression literally enforces the warning and makes it clear that this is definite and certain, and no change can occur in it. Therefore, they should either reform their shameful deeds or prepare for such a painful outcome.

In this āyah, the command concerning the full observance of Islamic ḥijāb is conveyed, and the Qurʾān addresses the Messenger of God صلى الله علیه وآله وسلم to communicate this injunction. In doing so, priority is first given to the wives of the Prophet, followed by his daughters and then the believing women. This arrangement contains a subtle indication that reform should begin with one’s own self and household, and this principle constitutes a fundamental method for all reformers of humanity. The mention of wives before daughters reflects the fact that wives are the closest associates of an individual, whereas daughters, upon marriage, move to the households of their husbands and therefore no longer reside within the immediate domestic sphere.

Since social evils generally do not arise from a single cause but rather from multiple factors, their confrontation must likewise be comprehensive. In the above āyāt, believing women have been instructed not to engage in any conduct that might provide pretext for the mischief of immoral and unruly individuals. At the same time, those who engage in harassment and misconduct have been strongly reproached and restrained. This represents a universal and enduring method: the reform of one’s own side must be pursued, while opposition to wrongdoing must be carried out firmly and decisively.

From the severe and power-based warnings in these verses, it becomes clear that when the incident of Banu Qurayzah ended and this internal enemy of the Muslims was eradicated, the position of the Muslims in Madinah became completely stable. Now, only opposition remained from those hypocrites who had infiltrated the Muslim ranks in disguise, or from delinquent and stray individuals, or from those who spread rumors. Therefore, at this occasion, the Prophet PBUH & His Pure Progeny spoke to them in the language of power and warned that if they did not desist from their poisonous propaganda and corrupt conspiracies, they would be dealt with decisively in a single attack. Thus, this decisive and well-considered warning produced its effect.

In the above āyāt, a method has been outlined for addressing the instigations of hypocrites who plotted against Islam, those who violated the honor of Muslims, and those who spread rumors. The question arises whether this method is applicable across all times and in all Islamic governments, or whether it is limited to a particular context. Very few exegetes have engaged in detailed discussion on this matter; however, it appears that this ruling, like other Islamic rulings, is not confined to any specific time, place, or group of individuals. If poisonous propaganda and conspiratorial activities truly exceed their limits, take on the form of an organized movement, and pose genuine threats to an Islamic society, then there is no impediment to an Islamic government implementing the directive of these āyāt and mobilizing people under a unified banner to eradicate the roots of corruption. However, there is no doubt that such measures, and others of a similar nature—particularly those described as immutable divine practices—cannot be independently enforced by individuals. Rather, their implementation is contingent solely upon the authorization of the guardian and legitimate authority of the Muslims and the ruler of the Sharīʿah.

In these verses, we have already read that the Qur’an has indicated one of God's unchanging laws: that a general attack is commanded to uproot the conspirators, and this was also the case in previous nations. Such an expression appears at another place in the Holy Qur’an as well. Among them, in Surah Al-Ahzab, verse 38, permission is granted to break a wrongful custom of the age of ignorance, that it is lawful to marry the divorced wife of one's openly disowned son. Then it is stated: "There is no blame upon the Prophet for that which Allah has imposed upon him. [This is] the established way of Allah with those who passed on before. And the command of Allah is a decree determined." Then it further states: "سُنَّةَ اللَّهِ فِي الَّذِينَ خَلَوْا مِن قَبْلُ وَكَانَ أَمْرُ اللَّهِ قَدَرًا مَّقْدُورًا." This is the Lord’s Sunnah (law) which existed among the previous peoples and righteous prophets, and the Divine Decree is firm and unchangeable. In Surah Fatir, verse 43, after warning the disbelieving and sinful nations of destruction, it is said: "فَهَلْ يَنظُرُونَ إِلَّا سُنَّتَ الْأَوَّلِينَ فَلَن تَجِدَ لِسُنَّتِ اللَّهِ تَبْدِيلًا وَلَن تَجِدَ لِسُنَّتِ اللَّهِ تَحْوِيلًا." "Do they await except the way of the former peoples? You will never find in the way of Allah any change, nor will you find in the way of Allah any alteration." According to Surah Al-Mu’min, verse 85, when idolatrous disbelievers among the former peoples witnessed the destructive punishment, at that time they believed, but such faith was of no benefit to them. It states: "سُنَّتَ اللَّهِ الَّتِي قَدْ خَلَتْ فِي عِبَادِهِ وَخَسِرَ هُنَالِكَ الْكَافِرُونَ." "This is the Sunnah of Allah that has passed before among His servants, and there the disbelievers incurred loss." Also, in Surah Al-Fath, verse 23, after mentioning the success of the believers, the defeat of the disbelievers, and that no helpers were available to them in battles, it says: "سُنَّةَ اللَّهِ الَّتِي قَدْ خَلَتْ مِنْ قَبْلُ وَلَن تَجِدَ لِسُنَّةِ اللَّهِ تَبْدِيلًا." "This is the way of Allah which had preceded before, and you will never find the way of Allah to change." Furthermore, in Surah Al-Isra, verse 77, where the conspiracy to banish the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) or to finish his work is mentioned, it is stated afterwards: "If they had carried out their plan, they would not have remained after you except for a little." سُنَّةَ مَن قَدْ أَرْسَلْنَا قَبْلَكَ مِنْ رُّسُلِنَا وَلَا تَجِدُ لِسُنَّتِنَا تَحْوِيلًا. "This is the Sunnah of those We sent before you among Our messengers, and you will not find any change in Our Sunnah." From these verses, it becomes clear that on such occasions “Sunnah” refers to the fixed, fundamental laws of God, whether legislative or cosmic, which never undergo alteration. In other words, in both general creation and legislation, the Almighty has certain principles and laws which are never subject to change and are not liable to alteration like human-made and devised laws. These laws ruled over the former nations and will remain in force hereafter. Helping the Prophets, defeating the disbelievers, strictly following divine commands even if the environment dislikes it, the ineffectiveness of repentance at the time of divine punishment, and other similar matters are parts of these eternal Sunnahs. Such expressions, on one hand, encourage all the followers of the right path and grant them the blessing of tranquility, and on the other hand, clarify the uniformity of the laws governing the unity and order of the Prophets, which in reality stems from the proof of Tawhid (Divine Unity).

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.

The preceding āyāt were discussing the mischief and conspiracies of evildoers and hypocrites. In these āyāt, reference is made to their subversive plans, for at times they would raise questions in a mocking and derisive manner, and at other times, by creating doubts in the hearts of simple-minded individuals, they would pose the question: when will the Resurrection occur in the manner described by Muhammad صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم? It is stated: “يَسْأَلُكَ النَّاسُ عَنِ السَّاعَةِ”. It is also possible that some believers may have asked such questions out of a desire for investigation, inquiry, or the increase of knowledge. However, by considering the subsequent āyāt, it becomes apparent that the first interpretation is more consistent with the meaning. This is supported by another āyah found in Surah al‑Shura: “وَمَا يُدْرِيكَ لَعَلَّ السَّاعَةَ قَرِيبٌ يَسْتَعْجِلُ بِهَا الَّذِينَ لَا يُؤْمِنُونَ بِهَا وَالَّذِينَ آمَنُوا مُشْفِقُونَ مِنْهَا وَيَعْلَمُونَ أَنَّهَا الْحَقُّ”. Thereafter, the response is given in the present āyah: “قُلْ إِنَّمَا عِلْمُهَا عِندَ اللَّهِ”. That is, the knowledge of this matter belongs solely to God, and none besides Him—whether a prophet or an angel—can claim awareness of it. Then it is stated: “وَمَا يُدْرِيكَ لَعَلَّ السَّاعَةَ تَكُونُ قَرِيبًا”. Thus, one should always remain in anticipation of the Resurrection. Indeed, the wisdom of concealing its exact time lies precisely in this—that no one should consider himself secure, nor deem the Day of Judgment as distant, nor imagine himself safe from divine punishment. Subsequently, the disbelievers are warned, and a glimpse of their painful punishment is presented: “إِنَّ اللَّهَ لَعَنَ الْكَافِرِينَ وَأَعَدَّ لَهُمْ سَعِيرًا”. They will remain therein forever: “خَالِدِينَ فِيهَا أَبَدًا لَّا يَجِدُونَ وَلِيًّا وَلَا نَصِيرًا”. There will be no protector or helper for them, for only God grants assistance that enables one to attain his objective. Then a portrayal of their suffering on the Day of Resurrection is given: “يَوْمَ تُقَلَّبُ وُجُوهُهُمْ فِي النَّارِ”. Their faces will be turned over in the fire, either in the sense that their colors will change—becoming red, blue, pale, and distressed—or in the sense that their faces will be turned repeatedly in the flames. At that moment, they will cry out in regret: “يَقُولُونَ يَا لَيْتَنَا أَطَعْنَا اللَّهَ وَأَطَعْنَا الرَّسُولَا”. They will bewail that had they obeyed God and His Messenger, they would not have faced such a painful fate. They will further say: “وَقَالُوا رَبَّنَا إِنَّا أَطَعْنَا سَادَتَنَا وَكُبَرَاءَنَا فَأَضَلُّونَا السَّبِيلَا”. They will confess that they followed their leaders and elders who led them astray. The term “سادة” refers to those who exercise authority and leadership, while “كبراء” refers to those who support and advise them. They will thus attempt to justify themselves by stating that they were influenced by the apparent power, prestige, and authority of these individuals. At this stage, overcome with anger, they will demand severe punishment for their leaders, saying: “رَبَّنَا آتِهِمْ ضِعْفَيْنِ مِنَ الْعَذَابِ وَالْعَنْهُمْ لَعْنًا كَبِيرًا”. They deserve double punishment not only for their own misguidance but also for leading others astray. However, as indicated in Surah al‑Aʿraf: “لِكُلٍّ ضِعْفٌ وَلَـكِن لَّا تَعْلَمُونَ”, both the leaders and their followers will receive multiplied punishment. The leaders will bear a greater burden because of their role in misguidance, but the followers will also be punished for their own deviation and for supporting the oppressors. Finally, the underlying reason is that oppression and corruption cannot advance without supporters; those who assist tyrants contribute to the spread of wrongdoing. Therefore, although both groups will be punished, the leaders will face a more severe and intense punishment due to their greater responsibility.

See ayat 71 for tafseer.

See ayat 71 for tafseer.

In the preceding āyāt, immediately following the command to maintain respect for the Messenger of God صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم and to refrain from any form of causing him discomfort, the discourse turns toward the believers, and the Qurʾān states: “يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا لَا تَكُونُوا كَالَّذِينَ آذَوْا مُوسَى فَبَرَّأَهُ اللَّهُ مِمَّا قَالُوا وَكَانَ عِندَ اللَّهِ وَجِيهًا”. That is, O you who believe, do not be like those who caused harm to Musa; rather, God absolved him from the accusations they made, and he was held in honor and high rank in the presence of God. The selection of Musa among the prophets who were harmed is due to the fact that the people of Bani Israel subjected him to greater hardship than any other prophet. Moreover, some of the forms of harm inflicted upon him resemble the types of injury that the hypocrites inflicted upon the Messenger of Islam صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم. A question arises regarding the nature of the harm inflicted upon Musa and why the Qurʾān has presented it in a general and unspecified manner. Exegetes have proposed various interpretations in this regard. Among them are the following: One report suggests that Musa and Harun ascended a mountain, where Harun passed away, and certain members of Bani Israel falsely accused Musa of causing his death. However, God revealed the true situation and exposed their false propaganda. Another interpretation, previously discussed in the exegesis of Surah al‑Qasas, relates that Qarun devised a plot to evade the payment of zakat and the rights of the needy. He incited a morally corrupt woman to falsely accuse Musa of illicit conduct. Yet, by divine grace, not only did the scheme fail, but the woman herself testified to Musa’s purity, thereby exposing Qarun’s plot. A third interpretation states that some of Musa’s opponents accused him of sorcery, madness, and fabricating lies about God, but God vindicated him through clear miracles. A fourth view maintains that some among Bani Israel attributed physical defects to Musa, such as leprosy. As a result, God removed this false suspicion by revealing his bodily integrity. A fifth category of harm consisted in the repeated obstinacy and demands of Bani Israel, such as requesting to see God, objecting to divine provisions, or refusing to enter the Holy Land and engage in struggle, thereby causing continuous distress to Musa. However, the interpretation most consistent with the āyah is that it presents a general principle. Bani Israel inflicted harm upon Musa through various methods, similar to how certain individuals in Madinah caused distress to the Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم—through the spread of rumors, fabrication of false accusations, and actions such as imputations against members of his household or objections regarding his personal matters. As for allegations of sorcery, madness, or physical defects, although such claims were directed against Musa, the wording “يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا” indicates that the present warning is directed toward believers in relation to the Prophet of Islam. It is historically evident that believers neither accused Musa nor Muhammad of such deficiencies. From this āyah, a general principle may be deduced: when an individual possesses dignity and honor in the sight of God, God Himself undertakes to defend and vindicate him against false accusations, provided that the individual maintains purity of conduct and integrity before God. Even if adversaries exert utmost effort in fabricating accusations, divine justice ultimately reveals the truth. This reality is exemplified in the narrative of Yusuf, whom God absolved from grave accusations, and in the case of Maryam, whose infant son testified to her innocence. It should also be noted that the address of this āyah is not limited to the believers of the Prophet’s time; it extends to subsequent generations as well. Any action that causes distress to the spirit of the Prophet, undermines his religion, or neglects his legacy falls within the scope of this warning. Accordingly, some narrations indicate that causing harm to Ali and his descendants is also encompassed within this āyah (ref: Nur al‑Thaqalayn, vol. 4, p. 308). In conclusion, reflection upon the lives of the prophets demonstrates that even the most exalted individuals were not free from the harm caused by ignorant and hypocritical persons. Therefore, no one should presume immunity from such behavior. As Imam Jaʿfar al‑Sadiq states: “إن رضا الناس لا يملك والسنتهم لا تضبط”, meaning that it is neither possible to secure the satisfaction of all people nor to restrain their speech. He further remarked that Musa was subjected to numerous accusations and hardships, yet God ultimately declared him free from all such allegations (ref: Nur al‑Thaqalayn, vol. 4, p. 309).

When the issue of those who spread rumors and cause harm with their tongues has been discussed, the following verse issues a command which is, in fact, the remedy for this great social problem. Thus, God says: "O you who have believed, fear Allah and speak words of appropriate justice" (يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا اتَّقُوا اللَّهَ وَقُولُوا قَوْلًا سَدِيدًا). “Sadid” is derived from the root “سد,” which means “firm and established,” such that no defect can occur in it. It is the speech that is true and according to reality, which, like a firm dam, stops the waves of falsehood. Some interpreters have taken it to mean “correct” (صواب), others as being free from lies and nonsense, and some have interpreted it as the harmony of apparent and hidden truth, as well as meaning “reform and guidance.” All these meanings ultimately return to the comprehensive meaning mentioned above. The subsequent verse states the result of “sadid speech” and “speaking the truth”: “Indeed, the Lord of the worlds will improve for you your deeds and forgive you your sins” (يُصْلِحْ لَكُمْ أَعْمَالَكُمْ وَيَغْفِرْ لَكُمْ ذُنُوبَكُمْ). The reality is that taqwa (piety) is the foundation of correcting speech and the source of truthful speech; truthful speech is among the effective factors in the reform of deeds, and the reform of deeds is the cause for the forgiveness of sins because: “Indeed, good deeds erase bad deeds” (إِنَّ الْحَسَنَاتِ يُذْهِبْنَ السَّـيِّئَاتِ) (Hud 11:114). Scholars of ethics have said that the tongue is the most blessed organ of the body and the most effective means of obedience, guidance, and reform, yet it is also the most dangerous and the most sinful organ of the body. As a matter of fact, thirty major sins originate from this small organ. (Explanatory note: Imam Ghazali in "Ihya Ulum al-Din" mentions twenty such slips or major sins related to the tongue: 1- Lying, 2- Backbiting, 3- Slander, 4- Expression of hypocrisy with the tongue, 5- Excessive praise/flattery, 6- Using foul language and cursing, 7- Singing and wrong poetry, 8- Excessiveness in joking, 9- Mockery and ridicule, 10- Revealing others’ secrets, 11- Breaking promises, 12- Excessive cursing, 13- Fighting and quarreling, 14- Talking about false matters, 15- Excessive talking, 16- Discussing matters unrelated to a person, 17- Praising in gatherings of sin such as drinking and gambling, 18- Asking questions about matters beyond human comprehension, 19- Speaking artificially and with difficulty. In addition, we add ten more: 1- Slander, 2- Giving false testimony, 3- Lewdness and spreading baseless rumors, 4- Self-praise, 5- Unwarranted insistence, 6- Harshness in speech, 7- Verbal harm, 8- Criticizing those undeserving of criticism, 9- Ingratitude of blessings by the tongue, 10- Propagation of falsehood.) In another hadith, the Prophet Muhammad (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) said: “None of a servant’s faith is sound until his heart is sound, and none of a heart is sound until his tongue is sound” (Reference: Bihar al-Anwar, vol. 71, p. 78). Another notable hadith narrated from Imam Zain al-Abidin (عليه السلام) states: “Every person’s tongue greets all other organs every morning and inquires: ‘How did you wake up?’ They all answer, in response to the tongue’s expression of love: ‘We are well, if you leave us alone!’ Then they say: We swear by God, take care of us. Indeed, through you we earn reward and because of you we incur punishment” (Reference: Bihar al-Anwar, vol. 71, p. 378). In this context, there are many narrations emphasizing the tremendous impact of the tongue, indicating that the refinement and moral reformation of the human self greatly depends on the tongue. For this reason, there is a hadith: “Whenever the Messenger of Allah (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) would sit on this pulpit, he would recite this verse: ‘O you who have believed, fear Allah and speak words of appropriate justice’” (Reference: Tafsir al-Mizan, vol. 16, p. 376; referring to Tafsir al-Durr al-Manthur). At the end of the verse, the Qur’an says: “And whoever obeys Allah and His Messenger has certainly attained a great attainment” (وَمَن يُطِعِ اللَّهَ وَرَسُولَهُ فَقَدْ فَازَ فَوْزًا عَظِيمًا). What success could be greater than that a person’s deeds be purified, his sins forgiven, and that he be honored and elevated in the Presence of the Lord of Glory?

See ayat 73 for tafseer.

These two final verses of Surah al-Ahzab bring to completion the important themes addressed in this Surah concerning faith, righteous deeds, jihad, self-sacrifice, chastity and moral purity, propriety, and ethics. They also make clear how distinguished a station the human being occupies — capable as he is of bearing the great divine responsibility — and how, if he fails to recognize the worth and value of his own existence and remains ignorant of it, he inflicts injustice upon himself and falls to the lowest of the low. First, in setting forth the most important and greatest distinction accorded to the human being among all of creation, it is declared: "We offered Our trust to the heavens, the earth, and the mountains" (إِنَّا عَرَضْنَا الْأَمَانَةَ عَلَى السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالْأَرْضِ وَالْجِبَالِ). Yet these great and mighty beings of the created order refused to bear the weight of this trust, expressed their incapacity, and were in awe of it (فَأَبَيْنَ أَن يَحْمِلْنَهَا وَأَشْفَقْنَ مِنْهَا). It is evident that their refusal was not born of arrogance — as was the case with Satan in his turning away from prostrating before Adam, described as: أَبَى وَاسْتَكْبَرَ (Surah al-Baqarah, verse 34) — but rather their refusal was accompanied by "ishfāq," that is, a reverential awe combining both attentiveness and humility. Yet in the midst of all this, the human being — that wonder of the created universe — stepped forward and bore it upon his shoulders (وَحَمَلَهَا الْإِنسَانُ). But alas, "from the very outset he inflicted injustice upon himself, failed to recognize his own worth and station, and did not fulfill what the bearing of this trust demanded of him" (إِنَّهُ كَانَ ظَلُومًا جَهُولًا). The great exegetes have engaged extensively with this verse, expending considerable effort in determining and expounding the true meaning of "trust" (amānat), and have expressed a variety of views. From among these, we select the most sound position by examining the contextual evidence embedded within the verse itself. Fundamentally, five points within this meaning-laden verse merit particular attention. 1. What is meant by the "divine trust"? 2. What is the purpose of offering it to the heavens, the earth, and the mountains? 3. Why and in what manner did these beings refuse to bear this trust? 4. How did the human being come to carry the burden of this trust? 5. Why and in what manner was he deemed "ẓalūm" and "jahūl"? Various interpretations have been recorded concerning the "trust," among them: that it refers to freedom of will and volition, which distinguishes the human being from all other beings; or that it refers to reason ('aql), upon which reward and punishment are contingent; or that it refers to the perfection of the quality of servitude ('ubūdiyyat), attained through knowledge and righteous deeds; or that it refers to the limbs and organs of the human body — for instance, the eye is a divine trust that must be safeguarded and not employed in the path of sin, and each of the ear, hand, foot, and tongue is likewise a divine trust whose preservation is obligatory upon every human being. Or it may refer to the trusts that human beings hold in relation to one another; or it may mean the fulfillment of covenants and pledges; or it may mean knowledge of God (ma'rifat Allāh); or it may refer to the divine obligations and duties, such as prayer, fasting, and pilgrimage. However, upon brief reflection it becomes clear that there is no contradiction among these interpretations; some may even be subsumed within others. Some scholars have illuminated certain aspects of the core meaning, while others have shed light upon its entirety. To arrive at a comprehensive answer, we must cast a glance at the human being and consider what he possesses that neither the heavens, nor the earth, nor the mountains possess. The human being is a creature endowed with an extraordinarily vast capacity, through the exercise of which he can become the most complete embodiment of the concept of God's vicegerent (khalīfat Allāh), and through the acquisition of knowledge, refinement of the self, and the attainment of perfections, he can ascend to the heights of honor and distinction, even surpassing the angels. This capacity is accompanied by freedom of will and volition — that is, it is a path that begins from zero and extends toward an infinite destination, traversed by the human being through his own will and choice alone. The heavens, the earth, and the mountains also possess a form of divine knowledge; they recite the remembrance and glorification of God and are prostrate and submissive before His majesty. But all of this is inherent, dispositional (takwīnī), and compelled in nature. For this reason, there is no development or ascent within their existence. There is only one being whose arc of descent and ascent is boundless, who can soar to unlimited heights of development, and who accomplishes all of this through his own will and choice — and that being is the "human being." This, then, is the bearer of the divine trust whose bearing all other beings refused. Thus, he alone entered the arena and placed it upon his shoulders. It is for this reason that in the subsequent verse we observe the human being divided into three groups: believers, disbelievers, and hypocrites. On this basis, it may be stated in a single concise phrase that the divine trust is precisely that boundlessly evolutionary capacity combined with will and volition, through which the human being, upon attaining the perfection of humanity and the station of special servitude to God, receives and accepts divine guardianship (walāyat-i ilāhiyyah). As for why this particular matter alone is termed "trust," when our entire life and all that we have constitutes a divine trust — in truth, this designation is on account of the supreme and extraordinary distinction of the human being; otherwise, the other blessings of God are also His trust, though their importance is vastly less by comparison. At this point, another meaning of the divine trust may also be proposed: that by "divine trust" is meant the acceptance of a position and a responsibility. It is for this reason that those who have understood the trust to refer to the attribute of freedom of will and volition have pointed to only one dimension of this great trust. Likewise, those who have interpreted it as "reason," or "limbs of the body," or "confidences exchanged among people," or "obligatory duties," or "the fulfillment of all religious injunctions" — each has reached out to only one branch of a great and fruitful tree and gathered its fruit. Alternatively, the presentation of the trust may be understood as a mutual comparison of things — that is, when the trust was compared with the capacities of these beings, they declared, through the language of their state (lisān al-ḥāl), their inability to accept this great trust. The second meaning appears more appropriate, and in this way the heavens, the earth, and the mountains called out through their state: "The bearing of the burden of this trust is beyond our power." From this, the answer to the third question also becomes clear — namely, how these beings refused to bear this great trust and expressed their reverential awe with great propriety. From the same point, the manner in which the human being came to bear this divine trust also becomes clear, since the human being was created in such a way that he is capable of shouldering the burden of fulfilling the covenant and the responsibility, accepting divine guardianship (walāyat-i Khudā), setting out on the path of servitude and perfection, and traversing that path on his own feet with the assistance of the Lord. As for the numerous traditions transmitted through the Ahl al-Bayt (peace be upon them) which indicate that the divine trust refers to "the guardianship (walāyat) of Amir al-Mu'minin Ali (peace be upon him) and his noble progeny (peace be upon them)" — the intent of this is that the guardianship of the noble prophets and the pure Imams is in truth a powerful ray of that absolute divine guardianship (walāyat-i muṭlaqah ilāhiyyah), and that attainment of servitude and traversal of the path of ascent is utterly impossible without acceptance of the guardianship of God's awliyā'. When someone asked Imam Ali ibn Musa al-Ridha (peace be upon him) about the interpretation of the verse concerning the offering of the trust, he replied: "al-amānat al-walāyat, man idda'āhā bi-ghayr ḥaqq kafar" — "The trust is none other than walāyat; one who lays claim to it without right departs from the community of Muslims." (Reference: Tafsīr al-Burhān, volume 3, page 341, under the verse under discussion.) In another tradition, when Imam Ja'far al-Sadiq (peace be upon him) was asked about the interpretation of this verse, he replied: "al-amānat al-walāyat, wa al-insān huwa abū al-shurūr al-munāfiq" — "The trust is walāyat, and the human being described as ẓalūm and jahūl is the perpetrator of numerous sins and is a hypocrite." (Reference: Tafsīr al-Burhān, volume 3, page 341, under the verse under discussion.) Another point that appears necessary to mention here is that we have already discussed the world of particles ('ālam al-dharr) in the commentary on Surah al-A'raf, verse 172. It appears that when God took the covenant of divine unity from human beings in the world of particles, this was through the medium of the human being's innate nature, capacity, and constitution. In truth, the world of particles is simply another name for the world of primordial capacity and nature (fitrat). The same must be said concerning the acceptance of the divine trust: this acceptance was not subject to any prescribed general rule, nor was it a mere formality; rather, it is a dispositional (takwīnī) acceptance in accordance with the world of primordial capacity. Now only one question remains — the matter of the human being's being "ẓalūm and jahūl." Is the characterization of the human being with these two words — which on the surface appear to censure him — on account of his acceptance of this trust? Certainly the answer to this question is negative, for the acceptance of this trust is a great honor for the human being. How could it be that having attained so great an honor, he is then censured? Rather, this characterization is on account of the fact that the human being is prone to forgetfulness, persists in inflicting injustice upon himself, and remains unacquainted with the worth and station of his own humanity — a condition that had its foundation laid from the very beginning of the human lineage through Cain (Qābīl), and which those who followed in his footsteps carried forward and have continued to perpetuate to the present day. That human being to whom the call descends from the heights of the Divine Throne; that son of Adam upon whose head the crown of "كَرَّمْنَا" (We have honored) has been placed; that human being who is the embodiment of "إِنِّي جَاعِلٌ فِي الْأَرْضِ خَلِيفَةً" (I am placing a vicegerent in the earth); that mortal who is the teacher and the object of prostration of the angels — what is he if not "ẓalūm and jahūl," when he consigns these great values to the shelf of oblivion, makes himself a prisoner of this world, joins the ranks of the satans, and plunges into the bottomless depths of the lowest of the low? Yet it must be stated with great sorrow that those who have walked this deviant path have done so since time immemorial — a powerful evidence of the human being's being "ẓalūm and jahūl." So much so that Adam himself (peace be upon him), who was the first link in the chain of humanity and who occupied the station of purity and infallibility, is seen acknowledging his own injustice upon himself, supplicating in the Divine Presence: "رَبَّنَا ظَلَمْنَا أَنفُسَنَا وَإِن لَّمْ تَغْفِرْ لَنَا وَتَرْحَمْنَا لَنَكُونَنَّ مِنَ الْخَاسِرِينَ" (Surah al-A'raf, verse 23). In truth, it was precisely on account of his forgetting one dimension of the greatness of this great trust that a lapse of what was more appropriate (tark al-awlā) issued from him. In any case, it must be acknowledged that the human being — who outwardly appears a small and frail creature — is yet a wonder of the created universe: one who has borne upon his shoulders the burden of that great trust which the earth, the heavens, and the mountains were unable to carry. Indeed, his greatness in this station endures only so long as he does not forget this station of his. [Explanatory note: What we have stated in the interpretation of this verse makes it clear that there is no need to posit any implied element (taqdīr) in this verse, as some exegetes have held. Those exegetes interpreted the verse such that the presentation of the trust to the heavens, the earth, and the mountains means its presentation to those who dwell within them — namely, the angels — and on this basis they assert that those who refused to bear the trust fulfilled it, while those who accepted it committed betrayal. This interpretation is contrary to the apparent meaning not only by virtue of its requiring an implied element, but is also objectionable on the grounds that the angels too are bound by a form of obligation and carry a portion of the trust. Apart from all these considerations, it is altogether strange to characterize the inhabitants of the mountains as angels. (Reflect upon this.)] The subsequent verse is in truth the statement of the reason for presenting this trust to the human being, and sets forth the reality that after bearing the burden of this great divine trust, human beings divided into three groups: hypocrites, polytheists, and believers. Thus God declares: "The purpose is that God may punish the hypocrite men and the hypocrite women and the polytheist men and the polytheist women, and that God may turn in mercy to the believing men and the believing women; and God has always been Most Forgiving, Most Merciful" (لِّيُعَذِّبَ اللَّهُ الْمُنَافِقِينَ وَالْمُنَافِقَاتِ وَالْمُشْرِكِينَ وَالْمُشْرِكَاتِ وَيَتُوبَ اللَّهُ عَلَى الْمُؤْمِنِينَ وَالْمُؤْمِنَاتِ وَكَانَ اللَّهُ غَفُورًا رَّحِيمًا). According to Arabic grammatical principles, what type of lām is the lām in "li-yu'adhdhiba"? Two possibilities arise in this regard. The first is that it is the lām of purpose (lām al-ghāyah), which is employed to indicate the outcome of something. On this basis, the meaning of the verse would be as follows: "The outcome of the bearing of this trust was that one group chose the path of hypocrisy and another the path of polytheism, and on account of their betrayal of this divine trust, they became subject to its punishment; while a group of the faithful, by virtue of fulfilling this trust and remaining steadfast in their obligations, was deemed worthy of divine mercy." The second is that it is the lām of causation (lām al-'illat), and an implied phrase is understood within it. On this basis, the interpretation of the verse would be as follows: "The purpose of presenting the trust was that all human beings might be placed in the crucible of trial, and that each individual, by manifesting his inner state, might receive recompense and punishment in accordance with his own merit."

1. The reason for placing the hypocrites before the polytheists is that the hypocrite presents himself as "trustworthy," while in reality he is a traitor. The treachery of the polytheist, by contrast, is manifest. For this reason, the hypocrite is more deserving of punishment. 2. The reason these two groups are placed before the believers may be that the concluding portion of the preceding verse ends with "ẓalūm and jahūl," and "ẓalūm and jahūl" is more fitting in relation to the hypocrite and the polytheist: the hypocrite is "ẓālim" and the polytheist is "jāhil." 3. The word "Allah" appears once in connection with the punishment of both the hypocrites and the polytheists, and once again in connection with the recompense of the believers. The reason for this is that, with respect to their ultimate end, the first two groups are alike, whereas the case of the believers is entirely distinct from theirs. 4. In relation to the believers, the word "tawbah" has been employed rather than "reward" (jazā'). The most likely reason for this is that the believers are most often gripped by fear on account of the lapses that occasionally issue from them. The Exalted Lord therefore reassures them that their lapses will be forgiven. Alternatively, it may be because God's acceptance of the servants' repentance ultimately refers back to His mercy, and it is well known that the word "mercy" (raḥmat) encompasses within it every form of reward and forgiveness. 5. The description of the Lord as "Ghafūr and Raḥīm" is either because this expression stands in contrast to the words "ẓalūm and jahūl," or because it is appropriate to the context of repentance in relation to the believing men and the believing women. Now that, by the grace of the Lord, we have reached the conclusion of Surah al-Ahzab, it is deemed necessary to note that the harmony between the opening and the close of this Surah is most worthy of reflection. For this Surah begins by exhorting the Prophet to adopt God-consciousness (taqwā), by restraining him from obedience to the disbelievers and hypocrites, and by directing him to place his reliance upon the All-Knowing and All-Wise God — and it concludes with the mention of the greatest matter of human life, namely the bearing of the divine trust, followed by the division of human beings into three groups — hypocrites, disbelievers, and believers — and the mention of the All-Forgiving and All-Merciful God. Between these two discussions, the subject of how each of these three groups has dealt with the divine trust has been addressed — each part completing the others and shedding light upon them. May the Lord count us among those who accepted this noble trust with sincerity of heart, safeguarded it to the utmost degree of devotion, and discharged their obligation. O Lord! Make us such believers upon whom Your mercy and forgiveness have descended. Count us not among the hypocrites and polytheists who, by virtue of being "ẓalūm and jahūl," have been deemed deserving of punishment. O Lord! In this age in which the confederates of unbelief (aḥzāb al-kufr) have laid siege to the city of Islam (madīnat al-Islām), send down upon them a fearsome storm of Your wrath and fury; bring their palaces and fortresses crashing down upon their heads; and grant us such strength and steadfastness that in these critical moments we may stand firm as mountains and guard the city of Islam with our lives and souls. Āmīn, O Lord of all the worlds.