Sad

See ayat 3 for tafseer.

See ayat 3 for tafseer.

In the books of tafsīr and ḥadīth, several similar accounts of the occasion of revelation (shān al-nuzūl) for the opening verses of this Surah are mentioned. One of them, which is more detailed and comprehensive, is presented here; it is the narration transmitted by al-Kulaynī from Imam al-Bāqir (ʿalayhi al-salām). Abū Jahl and a group from Quraysh came to Abū Ṭālib, the uncle of the Prophet (ṣallā Allāhu ʿalayhi wa-ālīhi wa-sallam), and said: your nephew has caused us much distress and has also offended our gods. Summon him and instruct him not to speak ill of our gods, so that we in turn shall not speak ill of his God. Abū Ṭālib sent someone to the Prophet (ṣallā Allāhu ʿalayhi wa-ālīhi wa-sallam). When the Prophet (ṣallā Allāhu ʿalayhi wa-ālīhi wa-sallam) entered the house and looked around the room, he observed that, apart from the polytheists, no one else was present with Abū Ṭālib. He said: “السلام على من اتبع الهدٰی” (peace be upon those who follow guidance). He then sat down, and Abū Ṭālib conveyed to him what they had said. In response, the Prophet (ṣallā Allāhu ʿalayhi wa-ālīhi wa-sallam) stated: او هل لهم فى كلمة خير لهم يسودون بها العرب ويطاؤن أعناقهم Are they willing to agree with me upon a single statement by means of which they may gain ascendancy over the Arabs and exercise authority over them? Abū Jahl, becoming stirred by this proposal and imagining that he could obtain the key to dominion over the Arabs from the Prophet (ṣallā Allāhu ʿalayhi wa-ālīhi wa-sallam), said: yes, we agree; what is that statement? The Prophet (ṣallā Allāhu ʿalayhi wa-ālīhi wa-sallam) replied: تقولون لا اله الا الله Say: there is no deity except Allah (and abandon these idols which are the cause of your misfortune, disgrace, and backwardness). Upon hearing this, those present were so alarmed that they placed their fingers in their ears and fled hastily, exclaiming: we have never heard such a thing before; this is nothing but falsehood. At this point, the opening verses of Surah “Ṣād” were revealed [biḥawālah: Uṣūl al-Kāfī (as نقل in Nūr al-Thaqalayn, vol. 4, p. 441)].

In the opening verse of this Surah, once again one of the ḥurūf muqaṭṭaʿāt appears, namely the letter “ص”. Here too the same earlier discussions arise: whether this points to the grandeur of the Qur’an Majid, which is composed of simple letters such as “alif” and “bā,” yet whose meanings and themes are such that they transform the world of humanity, and whether this reflects a remarkable manifestation of divine power, whereby from such simple elements a composition of extraordinary nature has been brought into existence; or whether it alludes to the mysteries and secrets that existed between God and His noble Prophet (ṣallā Allāhu ʿalayhi wa-ālīhi wa-sallam), serving as a message exchanged between two who are intimately acquainted; or whether it is to be interpreted in other ways. A group of mufassirīn have, in this instance, specifically considered “ص” to be an abbreviation for “asmāʾ ilāhiyyah” or for certain other meanings, since many divine names begin with “ص,” such as Ṣādiq, Ṣamad, and Ṣāniʿ; or that it is an اشاره to the phrase “ṣidq Allāh,” presented in summary form through a single letter. Further elaboration on the interpretation of the ḥurūf muqaṭṭaʿāt may be observed at the beginnings of Surah al-Baqarah, Āl ʿImrān, and al-Aʿrāf. Thereafter it is stated: “وَالْقُرْآنِ ذِي الذِّكْرِ” — by the Qur’an that possesses reminder. This is an oath, whose implied response is that you are upon truth and that this Book is a divine miracle. The Qur’an is itself “dhikr” and also the bearer of “dhikr.” The meaning of “dhikr” is remembrance: that which removes the rust of heedlessness from the صفحه دل—remembrance of God, remembrance of His signs, remembrance of the عظیم accountability of the Day of Judgment, and remembrance of the purpose of human creation. Indeed, a principal cause of human misfortune is heedlessness, and the Qur’an Majid removes it. Concerning the hypocrites, the Qur’an states: “نَسُوا اللهَ فَنَسِيَهُمْ” — they forgot God, so He ignored them (al-Tawbah 67). In this same Surah (Ṣād), verse 26 states regarding those who go astray: “إِنَّ الَّذِينَ يَضِلُّونَ عَنْ سَبِيلِ اللهِ لَهُمْ عَذابٌ شَدِيدٌ بِما نَسُوا يَوْمَ الْحِسابِ” — those who stray from the path of God shall face severe punishment because they forgot the Day of Reckoning. Indeed, the greatest affliction for the misguided and sinful is forgetfulness, to the extent that they forget themselves and the value of their own existence, as the Qur’an states: “وَلا تَكُونُوا كَالَّذِينَ نَسُوا اللهَ فَأَنْساهُمْ أَنْفُسَهُمْ أُولئِكَ هُمُ الْفاسِقُونَ” — do not be like those who forgot God, so He caused them to forget themselves; they are the transgressors (al-Hashr 19). The Qur’an is the means of tearing away the veils of such forgetfulness and is a light that dispels the darkness of heedlessness. Its verses remind الإنسان of God and the Hereafter, and its expressions acquaint him with the worth and dignity of his own being. In the following verse it is stated: if you observe that they do not submit before these illuminating verses and this awakening Qur’an, it is not because any veil exists over this truth-filled speech; rather, it is because the disbelievers are immersed in pride and opposition: “بَلِ الَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا فِي عِزَّةٍ وَ شِقاقٍ”. The term “ʿizzah,” according to al-Rāghib in al-Mufradāt, is a state that prevents a person from being overcome (a condition of invincibility), derived originally from “ʿazāz,” meaning firm and impenetrable land. It is of two kinds: praiseworthy “ʿizzah,” as when the Divine Essence is described as “ʿAzīz,” and blameworthy “ʿizzah,” which consists in obstinacy and refusal to accept truth—such “ʿizzah” is in reality humiliation. “Shiqāq” derives from “shaqq,” meaning a split or division, and later came to denote اختلاف, as اختلاف leads each group to stand in a separate division. Thus, the Qur’an identifies obstinacy, arrogance, division, and discord as the causes of the misfortune of the disbelievers. These reprehensible traits veil a person’s sight and hearing and deprive him of discernment; it is indeed tragic that one may have eyes and ears, yet remain blind and deaf. In Surah al-Baqarah, verse 206, it is stated: “وَإِذا قِيلَ لَهُ اتَّقِ اللهَ أَخَذَتْهُ الْعِزَّةُ بِالْإِثْمِ فَحَسْبُهُ جَهَنَّمُ وَلَبِئْسَ الْمِهادُ” — when it is said to him, “fear God,” arrogance seizes him in sin; Hell is sufficient for him, and what an evil resting place it is. Thereafter, in order to awaken these heedless and arrogant individuals, the Qur’an leads them by the hand to the history of past humanity, showing them the fate of proud and obstinate nations, so that perhaps they may take heed: “كَمْ أَهْلَكْنا مِنْ قَبْلِهِمْ مِنْ قَرْنٍ” — how many generations before them We destroyed. At the time of the descent of punishment, their cries were raised—but to no avail, for the time had passed and the opportunity for salvation was lost: “فَنادَوْا وَلاتَ حِينَ مَناصٍ”. This was the day about which the Prophets of God and the awliyāʾ of truth had admonished them and warned them of the evil consequences of their deeds, yet they were not prepared to listen; rather, they mocked the believers, persecuted them, and even killed them. When the respite ended and the paths of return were cut off, “ʿadhāb istīṣāl” descended for their destruction, and no avenue for repentance or return remained; hence, their cries reached nowhere. The word “لات” is used for negation, originally “lā” with the addition of a feminine “tāʾ,” and it assumes specific grammatical properties, including its usage with reference to time and with an omitted predicate or subject. “Mānāṣ” derives from “nawṣ,” meaning refuge or a place of escape. The Arabs would repeat “manāṣ, manāṣ” in times of severe calamity, especially in war, meaning: where is the refuge? where is the place of escape? In any case, so long as they had the opportunity to seek refuge in the merciful embrace of divine grace, they failed to take benefit from it. But once all opportunities were lost and “ʿadhāb istīṣāl” descended, their cries and their search for refuge proved futile. This has been the established divine practice for all past nations and will continue to be so in the future, for there is no alteration in His سنت. It is unfortunate that many people are unwilling to benefit from the experiences of others and insist on undergoing bitter trials anew—trials which, in reality, occur only once in a lifetime and require no repetition, for their beginning and end are one and the same.

See ayat 7 for tafseer.

See ayat 7 for tafseer.

See ayat 7 for tafseer.

Regarding these verses as well, a shān al-nuzūl similar to that mentioned for the preceding verses has been reported. It is not unlikely that all these verses share a collective occasion of revelation. However, since this particular report contains some additional points, it is presented here from Tafsīr ʿAlī ibn Ibrāhīm: When the Messenger of God (ṣallā Allāhu ʿalayhi wa-ālīhi wa-sallam) made his call public, the leaders of Quraysh came to Abū Ṭālib and said: O Abū Ṭālib! your nephew calls us ignorant, speaks ill of all our gods, has corrupted our youth, and has sown division within our community. If he is pursuing this due to poverty, we will gather such wealth for him that he will become the wealthiest among Quraysh; we are even prepared to appoint him as our chief and ruler. Abū Ṭālib conveyed this message to the Prophet (ṣallā Allāhu ʿalayhi wa-ālīhi wa-sallam). The noble Prophet (ṣallā Allāhu ʿalayhi wa-ālīhi wa-sallam) replied: لو وضعوا الشمس فى يمينى والقمر فى يسارى ما اردته، ولكن كلمة يعطونى يملكون بها العرب وتدين بها العجم ويكونون ملوكا فى الجنّة! If they were to place the sun in my right hand and the moon in my left, I would not incline toward abandoning this matter; rather, if they accept a single statement from me, by means of it they will attain authority over the Arabs, the non-Arabs will enter into their religion, and they will become kings in Paradise. When Abū Ṭālib conveyed this message to them, they replied: we are prepared to accept not just one statement but even ten—what is the statement you require? The Prophet (ṣallā Allāhu ʿalayhi wa-ālīhi wa-sallam) said: تشهدون أن لّا اله الا الله وإنّي رسولِ الله Bear witness that there is no deity except God and that I am the Messenger of God. They were deeply alarmed by this statement and said: shall we abandon 360 gods and accept only one God? How astonishing this is—especially a God who cannot be seen! At this point, the following verses were revealed: “وَعَجِبُوا أَنْ جاءَهُمْ مُنْذِرٌ مِنْهُمْ وَقالَ الْكافِرُونَ هذا ساحِرٌ كَذَّابٌ … إِنْ هذا إِلَّا اخْتِلاقٌ” [biḥawālah: Tafsīr ʿAlī ibn Ibrāhīm, as cited in Nūr al-Thaqalayn, jild 4, p. 442 (ḥadīth 7)]. A similar account is reported in Majmaʿ al-Bayān with slight variation, where it is stated that the Prophet (ṣallā Allāhu ʿalayhi wa-ālīhi wa-sallam), with emotion, said: O my uncle! if they were to place the sun in my right hand and the moon in my left so that I might abandon this matter, I would never do so; I shall either establish this message in society or be killed in its path. When Abū Ṭālib heard this, he said: continue with your mission; by God, I shall never withdraw my support from you [biḥawālah: Majmaʿ al-Bayān, jild 8, p. 65].

Arrogant and rebellious people neither accept any influence nor withdraw from their position. Whatever they adopt through their limited and deficient thinking, they regard as the only valid standard and consider it the measure for evaluating all values. Thus, when the Prophet of Islam (ṣallā Allāhu ʿalayhi wa-ālīhi wa-sallam) raised the banner of tawḥīd in Makkah and rose against all the idols—both great and small—whose number reached 360, at times they expressed astonishment that a warner had been sent from among themselves: “وَعَجِبُوا أَنْ جاءَهُمْ مُنْذِرٌ مِنْهُمْ”. Their astonishment was that Muhammad (ṣallā Allāhu ʿalayhi wa-ālīhi wa-sallam) was one of their own. Why did an angel not descend from the heavens? They regarded this great strength as a weakness, whereas one raised from among the people was fully aware of their needs, conditions, pains, and hardships, and could serve as a practical model in every respect. Yet they viewed this great distinction in the Prophet’s mission as a point of deficiency and expressed wonder at it. At times they went even further, saying: “وَقالَ الْكافِرُونَ هذا ساحِرٌ كَذَّابٌ” — this is nothing but a lying magician. They attributed magic to the Prophet because they witnessed undeniable miracles and the extraordinary influence of his message, and they accused him of falsehood because he opposed the established yet baseless customs and degraded ideas of that society while claiming prophethood from God. When the Prophet (ṣallā Allāhu ʿalayhi wa-ālīhi wa-sallam) openly proclaimed tawḥīd, they said among themselves: “أَ جَعَلَ الْآلِهَةَ إِلهاً واحِداً إِنَّ هذا لَشَيْ‏ءٌ عُجابٌ” — has he made all the gods into one God? This is indeed something astonishing. At times, arrogance, selfishness, despotism, and corrupt environments so distort human reasoning that people become astonished at clear and evident truths while firmly adhering to superstitions and false ideas. The word “عُجاب” conveys an extreme degree of astonishment. These intellectually deficient individuals imagined that the greater the number of their deities, the greater their power and authority; hence, a single God appeared insignificant to them. Yet, from a philosophical perspective, multiplicity implies limitation, whereas the unlimited reality cannot be more than one, and thus all true inquiry culminates in tawḥīd. When their leaders lost hope in persuading Abū Ṭālib, they departed and said: persevere with your gods and remain steadfast, for this matter is something intended against us: “وَ انْطَلَقَ الْمَلَأُ مِنْهُمْ أَنِ امْشُوا وَ اصْبِرُوا عَلى‏ آلِهَتِكُمْ إِنَّ هذا لَشَيْ‏ءٌ يُرادُ”. “انطلق” denotes departing swiftly, here indicating that they left in anger. “الملأ” refers to the chiefs and elites of Quraysh, who urged their followers not to abandon their idols but to adhere firmly to them. The phrase “لَشَيْءٌ يُرادُ” is general and has been interpreted in various ways: that the Prophet’s mission was a scheme to gain authority, that it was a plot against their leadership, that it sought to undermine their society, or that he was firmly determined and would not withdraw, rendering negotiation futile. Such rhetoric was often used by the leaders of falsehood to silence the voice of truth, labeling it as conspiracy and urging common people to remain attached to inherited beliefs while leaving opposition to the elite. A similar statement appears in the account of Prophet Nūḥ: “مَا هذا إِلَّا بَشَرٌ مِثْلُكُمْ يُرِيدُ أَنْ يَتَفَضَّلَ عَلَيْكُمْ” (al-Muʾminūn 24). To justify themselves and keep others heedless, they said: “ما سَمِعْنا بِهذا فِي الْمِلَّةِ الْآخِرَةِ إِنْ هذا إِلَّا اخْتِلاقٌ” — we have not heard of this in the later religion; this is nothing but fabrication. They argued that if tawḥīd had any reality, their forefathers would have recognized it. The phrase “الْمِلَّةِ الْآخِرَةِ” may refer to their immediate ancestral tradition or, possibly, to the religion of earlier communities such as the Christians. Yet the Arabs of jāhiliyyah generally relied primarily on ancestral tradition rather than scriptural authority. “اختلاق” denotes creating something without precedent and came to be used for falsehood, as false speakers often present baseless claims. Thus, they regarded the call to tawḥīd as a novel and unfounded claim, considering its novelty itself as evidence of its falsity. Fear of new ideas has historically been one of the causes of resistance to prophetic دعوت. Such people feared anything new and viewed it negatively. Yet neither tawḥīd was truly a new concept nor does novelty imply falsehood; rather, truth must be accepted wherever it appears and from whomever it comes. It is regrettable that even some scholars, at times, exhibit similar خوف in the face of new intellectual developments, opposing them or attempting to align them artificially with older views to avoid criticism. Historical examples, especially among ecclesiastical authorities, illustrate opposition to scientific discoveries, such as the reaction to Galileo’s views about the motion of the earth. This pattern of rejecting or fearing new insights has been harmful to human society and to the advancement of knowledge. At the same time, it must be emphasized that not every new idea is to be accepted merely because of its novelty, just as blind adherence to tradition is also misguided. The balanced Islamic approach requires avoidance of both extremes—neither rigid traditionalism nor uncritical acceptance of every new claim.

See ayat 11 for tafseer.

See ayat 11 for tafseer.

See ayat 11 for tafseer.

In the preceding verses, the discussion concerned the negative criticism and fault‑finding of the opponents regarding the path of tawḥīd and the Prophethood of the Messenger of Islam (ṣallallāhu ʿalayhi wa ālihi wa sallam). The verses under discussion continue this same theme. When the polytheists of Mecca perceived their illegitimate interests to be in danger and the fire of envy and resentment began to burn within their hearts, they resorted to weak and superficial arguments in order to console themselves and mislead others. Among their objections, expressed with astonishment and denial, was the claim: أَ أُنْزِلَ عَلَيْهِ الذِّكْرُ مِنْ بَيْنِنا “Has the Reminder been sent down upon him alone from among us?” They questioned why revelation had not been granted to one of their elders, nobles, or wealthy leaders, instead of to Muḥammad (ṣallallāhu ʿalayhi wa ālihi wa sallam), who did not belong to the affluent elite. This mode of thinking is not confined to that era; in every age, when an important responsibility is entrusted to someone, jealousy arises. People begin to murmur that such a task should have been given to someone more prominent or wealthy. Thus, worldly attachment and envy led even some among the People of the Book to distance themselves from Islam and align with the polytheists, claiming: أَ لَمْ تَرَ إِلَى الَّذِينَ أُوتُوا نَصِيباً مِنَ الْكِتابِ يُؤْمِنُونَ بِالْجِبْتِ وَالطَّاغُوتِ... They considered the path of the disbelievers superior to that of the believers. In reality, such objections stemmed not only from envy and worldly desire, but also from a flawed معيار of value. They measured human worth in terms of wealth, status, and age—criteria that have no validity in determining divine selection. The Qur’an therefore clarifies: بَلْ هُمْ فِي شَكٍّ مِنْ ذِكْرِي “Rather, they are in doubt concerning My Reminder.” Their criticism of the person of the Prophet is merely a pretext; the true cause lies in their doubt, which arises from desire, attachment to the world, and jealousy—not from any ambiguity in revelation. The verse then warns: بَلْ لَمَّا يَذُوقُوا عَذَابِ “They have not yet tasted My punishment.” Thus, their boldness and resistance persist only because they have not yet experienced divine chastisement. In response, the Qur’an further states: أَمْ عِنْدَهُمْ خَزائِنُ رَحْمَةِ رَبِّكَ الْعَزِيزِ الْوَهَّابِ “Do they possess the خزائن of the mercy of your Lord, the Mighty, the Bestower?” God, as Rabb, selects for Prophethood those who are suited to guide humanity. As ʿAzīz, He is not subject to anyone’s desires, and as Wahhāb, He bestows His فضل freely. The Qur’an then challenges them: أَمْ لَهُمْ مُلْكُ السَّماواتِ وَالْأَرْضِ وَما بَيْنَهُما فَلْيَرْتَقُوا فِي الْأَسْبابِ “Or do they possess the dominion of the heavens and the earth and whatever is between them? Then let them ascend (and take control).” Since they neither control divine grace nor have the power to prevent revelation, their اعتراض is baseless. Finally, the Qur’an declares: جُنْدٌ ما هُنالِكَ مَهْزُومٌ مِنَ الْأَحْزابِ “They are but a small defeated host among the confederates.” This statement, revealed in the early Meccan period—when Muslims were weak and oppressed—confidently foretold the eventual defeat of the opponents. Despite appearing powerful, they were destined to fail, just as earlier hostile groups had been destroyed. Thus, the passage conveys a broader message: just as those adversaries were defeated, so too any force opposing truth will ultimately fail. Believers are therefore called to remain steadfast, trusting in divine وعدہ and maintaining their commitment to truth.

See ayat 16 for tafseer.

See ayat 16 for tafseer.

See ayat 16 for tafseer.

See ayat 16 for tafseer.

In the final verse of the preceding section, news was given of the defeat of the polytheists, who were designated therein as a small and vanquished army from among the confederate parties. The verses now under consideration mention several communities that denied the prophets and record their evil fate. It is stated: "Before them, the people of Noah, 'Ād, and Pharaoh — the possessor of stakes — gave the lie to the signs of God and His messengers." (كَذَّبَتْ قَبْلَهُمْ قَوْمُ نُوحٍ وَعادٌ وَفِرْعَوْنُ ذُو الْأَوْتادِ). "And likewise Thamūd, the people of Lot, and the companions of al-Ayka — these were the confederate parties." (وَثَمُودُ وَقَوْمُ لُوطٍ وَأَصْحابُ الْأَيْكَةِ أُولئِكَ الْأَحْزابُ). [Explanatory note: "أُولئِكَ الْأَحْزابُ" is a subject and predicate construction; "أُولئِكَ" refers to the six communities mentioned in these two verses, and "aḥzāb" refers back to the confederate parties mentioned in the two preceding verses, among which the polytheists of Mecca were counted as a small group.] Indeed, these six groups were among the communities of the age of ignorance and idol-worshippers. They rose up against their great prophets: the people of Noah rose against Noah, peace be upon him; 'Ād rose against Hūd, peace be upon him; Pharaoh rose against Moses and Aaron, peace be upon them; Thamūd rose against Ṣāliḥ, peace be upon him; the people of Lot rose against Lot, peace be upon him; and the companions of al-Ayka rose against Shu'ayb, peace be upon him. These communities did whatever was within their power against the prophets and the people of faith, gave them the lie, and inflicted suffering upon them — but in the end the divine punishment seized them and cut them down like dried-up harvests. The people of Noah were destroyed by the flood and devastating rains; 'Ād was annihilated by a tremendous and terrifying storm; Pharaoh and his companions were drowned in the waves of the Nile; Thamūd was struck by a celestial thunderbolt; the people of Lot were overtaken by a terrible earthquake and a shower of stones from the heavens; and the people of Shu'ayb were likewise struck by a death-dealing bolt that fell upon them from a cloud above their heads. It is as though they were destroyed by water, wind, earth, and fire — the very things upon which human life depends. The ledger of the lives of these rebellious transgressors was thus closed in such a manner that no trace or sign of them remained. The polytheists of Mecca should therefore reflect carefully — for compared to those communities they amount to no more than a small group; why then do they not awaken from the slumber of heedlessness? The expression "dhū al-awtād" — possessor of stakes — is used for Pharaoh; it constitutes an explicit statement in these verses of the firm power of Pharaoh and his associates. This matter is also present by way of allusion in verse 10 of Surah al-Fajr. The expression is also used in common parlance to convey stability and strength — it is said that such-and-such a person's stakes are firm — since stakes of various kinds are used to secure tents and the like. Some have taken it as an allusion to Pharaoh's great armies, since armies generally make use of tents and employ stakes and pegs to secure them. Others hold that it alludes to the terrifying methods the Pharaonic people used against their opponents — they would kill them with four stakes, driving nails into their hands and feet upon a scaffold or a wall and leaving them in that state until their souls departed. Some have also mentioned the interpretive possibility that "awtād" refers to the Pyramids of Egypt, which are driven into the earth like pegs — and since the pyramids are a distinguishing feature of the pharaohs, this attribute appears in the Quran exclusively for them. All these possibilities, however, are not mutually exclusive, and the import of the word may encompass all these meanings. In "aṣḥāb al-Ayka," "ayka" means a thicket of trees, and "aṣḥāb al-Ayka" refers to the people of Shu'ayb. Their region lay between the Ḥijāz and Syria and was abundant in water and trees. A detailed discussion of this was presented as required in the commentary on verse 8 of Surah al-Ḥijr (readers are referred to volume 11 in this connection). Indeed, each of these groups gave the lie to the messengers of God and the divine punishment was duly set in motion against them: (إِنْ كُلٌّ إِلَّا كَذَّبَ الرُّسُلَ فَحَقَّ عِقابِ). [Explanatory note: "فَحَقَّ عِقابِ" is in origin "fa-ḥaqqa 'iqābī" in the customary form, with the "yā'" elided and the kasra indicating it retained. "Ḥaqqa" is the verb and "'iqāb" its subject — meaning: My punishment against them has been established.] History shows how each of these groups was seized by calamity — and in no time their cities were turned to ruins and rubble, and the inhabitants of those cities became lifeless bodies. Given the conduct of the Meccans, can their fate be any better than those peoples whose deeds were the same and God's established practice the same? The subsequent verse then states in a decisive and threatening manner: "These people — with such conduct — can await nothing except a single celestial cry that admits of no respite." (وَما يَنْظُرُ هؤُلاءِ إِلَّا صَيْحَةً واحِدَةً ما لَها مِنْ فَواقٍ). This cry may be of the same kind as befell the earlier communities — a terrifying thunderbolt or an earthquake arriving with a tremendous sound that disrupted their lives completely. Or it may allude to the great cry at the end of this world — referred to as the first blowing of the trumpet. Some exegetes have criticised the first interpretation and declared it contrary to verse 33 of Surah al-Anfāl, which states: وَما كانَ اللهُ لِيُعَذِّبَهُمْ وَأَنْتَ فِيهِمْ — "God would not punish them while you are among them." However, attending to the point that the polytheists held no conviction regarding the Prophet of Islam, peace be upon him and his household, and their deeds were like those of the communities that were overtaken by the celestial cry, it is possible that they remained at every moment in anticipation of a similar fate — since the verse speaks of anticipation. Some have also raised an objection to the second interpretation: the polytheists of Arabia would not be alive at the end of this world for the great cry to seize them. But this objection is likewise not sound — on the same grounds as stated — since no one knows when the world will end and when the Resurrection will come; hence the polytheists may at every moment be in anticipation of that great cry from which there is no return. [Explanatory note: The interpretive possibility raised by some exegetes that this refers to the second cry — that which will be sounded for the resurrection of the dead and their appearance before the divine court — appears very far-fetched, since it is consonant neither with the subsequent verse nor with the preceding ones.] In any case, these ignorant people — on account of denying the divine verses, levelling false accusations against the Prophet of Islam, obstinately persisting in idol-worship, and perpetrating injustice and corruption — are as it were in anticipation of a divine punishment that will reduce the harvest of their lives to ash, or in anticipation of a cry that will bring this world itself to an end and set them upon a path from which there is no return. "Fawāq" (on the metrical pattern of "riwāq") according to many lexicologists and exegetes denotes the interval between two successive milkings from the udder — since when milk has been drawn once, one must wait a while for the milk to gather in the udder again. Some take it as meaning the interval created when the fingers open and close during the act of milking. Furthermore, when the milk is drawn, the udder experiences a kind of relief — hence the word is also used in the sense of rest and comfort. And since this interval causes the milk to return to the udder, the word is also used in the sense of return, reversion, and recovery — which is why a patient's recovery of health is called "ifāqa," since health and soundness return to him, and the coming to of an unconscious person or the sanity of one who was deranged is also called "ifāqa," since consciousness and reason return to them. [Explanatory note: Some lexicologists have drawn a distinction between "fawwāq" and "fawāq," while others regard both as carrying the same meaning. For further details, refer to Mufradāt al-Rāghib, Tafsīr Rūḥ al-Ma'ānī, Tafsīr Fakhr al-Dīn al-Rāzī, Tafsīr Abū al-Futūḥ, Tafsīr al-Qurṭubī, and other lexical sources.] In any case, in this terrifying cry there is no room whatsoever for return, rest, or repose — and when it comes to pass, all doors will be closed to the human being. Neither will remorse be of any avail, nor will any possibility of redress remain, nor will any cry or lamentation reach anywhere. In the final verse under consideration, a further allusion is made to certain statements that the disbelievers and deniers used to make mockingly: "They said: Our Lord, hasten to us our portion before the Day of Reckoning." (وَقالُوا رَبَّنا عَجِّلْ لَنا قِطَّنا قَبْلَ يَوْمِ الْحِسابِ). These arrogant blind-hearted ones were so intoxicated with the wine of arrogance that they even mocked the divine punishment and its court — saying: why has our portion of punishment been delayed? Why does God not hasten our portion? Among the earlier communities too there was no shortage of such frivolous and self-important individuals — but when they fell into the divine punishment they would cry out and writhe like animals, yet then no one would come to their aid. "Qiṭṭ" (on the metrical pattern of "jinn") originally means something cut in width, while "qadd" (on the same metrical pattern) means something cut in length. Since each person's appointed portion is as it were something cut off and allotted, the word is used in the sense of a share or portion. The word also sometimes carries the meaning of the piece of paper upon which something is written, or upon which people's names and their rewards are inscribed. This is why in the interpretation of the verse under consideration, some exegetes have said the meaning is: "Our Lord, give us our record of deeds in our hands before the Day of Recompense." They said this when the Quranic verses informed them that on the Day of Resurrection one group's record of deeds would be placed in their right hand and another group's in their left — and they mockingly said it would be better if the record were given to them right now so they could read and see which account they stood in. In any case, both ignorance and arrogance are extremely reprehensible and blameworthy qualities that are generally inseparable from each other. The ignorant are arrogant and the arrogant are ignorant — and the effects of both these qualities were very much in evidence among the polytheists of the age of ignorance.

See ayat 20 for tafseer.

See ayat 20 for tafseer.

See ayat 20 for tafseer.

Prophet Dāwūd (ʿalayhi al-salām) was among the eminent Prophets of Banū Isrāʾīl, and God granted him a great dominion. Numerous verses of the Qur’an Majid praise his exalted rank. In the preceding verses, the ظلم of the polytheists and idol‑worshippers was described, as well as the unfounded accusations they directed toward the Prophet of Islam (ṣallā Allāhu ʿalayhi wa-ālīhi wa-sallam). Following this, the Qur’an relates the account of Dāwūd (ʿalayhi al-salām) in order to console the Messenger of God (ṣallā Allāhu ʿalayhi wa-ālīhi wa-sallam) and the believers of his time. He was a Prophet to whom God granted such authority that even the mountains and birds were subjected to him, demonstrating that when divine grace embraces a person, the multitude of enemies becomes insignificant. Yet despite this outward power, this great Prophet was not secure from the reproaches of people’s tongues; thus, this situation serves as a source of consolation for the Prophet of Islam (ṣallā Allāhu ʿalayhi wa-ālīhi wa-sallam), indicating that such experiences are not unique to him, but have been shared by the great figures of history. It is stated: “اصْبِرْ عَلى‏ ما يَقُولُونَ وَاذْكُرْ عَبْدَنا داوُدَ ذَا الْأَيْدِ إِنَّهُ أَوَّابٌ” — be patient over what they say, and remember Our servant Dāwūd, endowed with strength; indeed, he was one who constantly returned. The term “أيد” signifies both power and نعمة, and Dāwūd (ʿalayhi al-salām) possessed both. His physical strength was such that when Jālūt confronted him in battle, he struck him with a stone using a sling with such force that he fell from his mount. His political authority was equally remarkable, as he ruled a powerful kingdom and stood firmly against his enemies. In addition, his spiritual, moral, and devotional strength was profound: he devoted a significant portion of the night to worship and spent much of the year in fasting. Moreover, God bestowed upon him numerous outward and inward blessings. In summary, Dāwūd (ʿalayhi al-salām) was distinguished by strength in warfare, devotion, knowledge, and governance, combined with abundant divine favors. The term “اوّاب,” derived from “اوب,” denotes one who continually returns; in its intensive form it signifies that Dāwūd (ʿalayhi al-salām) frequently turned back toward God, repenting even for minor lapses or “ترکِ اولیٰ.” Following its method of elaborating after summarization, the Qur’an proceeds to detail the divine favors granted to Dāwūd. It states: “إِنَّا سَخَّرْنَا الْجِبالَ مَعَهُ يُسَبِّحْنَ بِالْعَشِيِّ وَ الْإِشْراقِ” — We subjected the mountains with him, so that they glorified God alongside him in the evening and at sunrise. Not only the mountains, but also the birds were gathered for him: “وَ الطَّيْرَ مَحْشُورَةً,” and all of them were responsive and returning: “كُلٌّ لَهُ أَوَّابٌ.” The pronoun in “لَهُ” may refer to Dāwūd, meaning that they were in harmony with him, or it may refer to God, indicating that all beings return to Him and submit to His command. Exegetes have expressed differing views regarding how the mountains and birds accompanied Dāwūd in glorification. Some have considered it to be the effect of his melodious and moving voice; others have viewed it as a form of conscious participation reflective of an underlying awareness within creation; and still others have interpreted it as a تکوینی glorification inherent in all beings. Among these, the interpretation emphasizing a special manifestation of divine power—whereby an otherwise hidden reality became perceptible in association with Dāwūd (ʿalayhi al-salām)—appears more appropriate. The following verse continues the enumeration of divine blessings: “وَ شَدَدْنا مُلْكَهُ” — We strengthened his kingdom, and “وَ آتَيْناهُ الْحِكْمَةَ” — We granted him wisdom. The Qur’an states elsewhere: “وَمَنْ يُؤْتَ الْحِكْمَةَ فَقَدْ أُوتِيَ خَيْراً كَثِيراً” (al-Baqarah 269). Here, “الحكمة” may denote knowledge, sound governance, prophethood, or a جامع combination of these, encompassing both theoretical understanding and practical righteousness, all of which were manifest in Dāwūd (ʿalayhi al-salām). Finally, it is stated: “وَ فَصْلَ الْخِطابِ” — He was granted decisive judgment and the capacity for just adjudication. The expression “فصل الخطاب” refers to rendering a conclusive decision between disputing parties, thereby terminating their اختلاف. It may also indicate eloquence and clarity of expression, such that his word was final and decisive in every matter. Indeed, when God possesses the power to bestow such strength and excellence upon a human being, there remains no justification for despair regarding His grace. Hence, this account serves not only as consolation for the believers of the Prophet’s time, who were subjected to severe pressure in Makkah, but also as reassurance for all believers in every age who encounter hardship and difficulty.

Some exegetes have derived from the aforementioned verses ten great blessings that were granted by God to Prophet Dāwūd (ʿalayhi al-salām). These blessings reflect his elevated rank and, in reality, also illustrate the characteristics of the perfected human being. 1. Despite the lofty مقام of the Prophet of Islam (ṣallā Allāhu ʿalayhi wa-ālīhi wa-sallam), he is instructed to adopt patience by following the example of Dāwūd and to draw strength from his life account: “اصْبِرْ عَلى‏ ما يَقُولُونَ وَ اذْكُرْ”. 2. Dāwūd is described in terms of his station of servitude, which is presented as his foremost characteristic: “عَبْدَنا داوُد”. A similar expression is used for the Prophet of Islam (ṣallā Allāhu ʿalayhi wa-ālīhi wa-sallam) in the account of Miʿrāj: “سُبْحانَ الَّذِي أَسْرٰى‏ بِعَبْدِهِ” (Banī Isrāʾīl 1). 3. He is characterized as possessing great strength in obedience to God, avoidance of sin, and administration of governance: “ذَا الْأَيْدِ”. Similarly, it is stated regarding the Prophet of Islam: “هُوَ الَّذِي أَيَّدَكَ بِنَصْرِهِ وَبِالْمُؤْمِنِين” (al-Anfāl 62). 4. He is وصف as “اوّاب,” meaning one who continually returns, repeatedly turning toward the Divine presence: “إِنَّهُ أَوَّابٌ”. 5. The mountains were subjected to him, glorifying God with him in the morning and evening, which the Qur’an counts among his distinctions: “إِنَّا سَخَّرْنَا الْجِبالَ مَعَهُ يُسَبِّحْنَ بِالْعَشِيِّ وَ الْإِشْراقِ”. 6. The birds were also gathered to accompany him in worship and glorification, constituting another divine blessing: “وَ الطَّيْرَ مَحْشُورَةً”. 7. They were not merely passively in harmony; whenever he turned to the glorification of God, they responded in unison: “كُلٌّ لَهُ أَوَّابٌ”. 8. God granted him a firmly established dominion, providing both material and spiritual means for its consolidation: “وَ شَدَدْنا مُلْكَهُ”. 9. Another significant divine endowment was profound knowledge and wisdom, which is a source of abundant خیر and blessing: “وَ آتَيْناهُ الْحِكْمَةَ”. 10. He was endowed with powerful expression, effective speech, and the capacity for decisive and just judgment: “وَ فَصْلَ الْخِطابِ” [biḥawālah: Tafsīr Kabīr Fakhr Rāzī, under these verses, jild 26, p. 183]. Indeed, the foundations of any governance cannot be firmly established without knowledge, strength, sound reasoning, divine consciousness, self-discipline, and servitude toward God.

See ayat 25 for tafseer.

See ayat 25 for tafseer.

See ayat 25 for tafseer.

See ayat 25 for tafseer.

In these verses, a simple and clear account is presented regarding the judgment of Prophet Dāwūd (ʿalayhi al-salām). However, due to distortions and incorrect interpretations that have been introduced in this context, a considerable dispute has arisen—often unconsciously—among commentators. The matter has generated such controversy that even some Muslim exegetes have been affected by it, leading them to issue incorrect and, in some cases, highly inappropriate conclusions concerning this great Prophet. We first present the Qur’anic text without commentary, so that the reader may approach the meaning of the verses with an unprejudiced mind. In the preceding verses, certain distinctive qualities of Dāwūd (ʿalayhi al-salām) were mentioned and the عظیم divine blessings bestowed upon him were described. Following this, a particular incident related to adjudication and judgment is recounted. Addressing the Prophet of Islam (ṣallā Allāhu ʿalayhi wa-ālīhi wa-sallam), it is stated: “وَهَلْ أَتاكَ نَبَأُ الْخَصْمِ إِذْ تَسَوَّرُوا الْمِحْرابَ” — has there reached you the account of the disputants when they climbed over the wall of the miḥrāb? The term “خصم” originally denotes dispute, but it is often used for the disputing parties themselves and may refer to singular or plural. The word “تسوّروا,” from the root “سور,” conveys the sense of climbing or surmounting a wall. “محراب” originally denotes the prominent place in an assembly or an elevated chamber, and later came to signify a place of worship. Although Dāwūd (ʿalayhi al-salām) was surrounded by guards, two individuals bypassed the ordinary entrance and entered by climbing the wall of his chamber, appearing suddenly before him. The Qur’an continues: “إِذْ دَخَلُوا عَلى‏ داوُدَ فَفَزِعَ مِنْهُمْ” — when they entered upon Dāwūd, he was alarmed, assuming perhaps an ill intention. They quickly reassured him: “قالُوا لا تَخَفْ خَصْمانِ بَغى‏ بَعْضُنا عَلى‏ بَعْضٍ” — do not fear; we are two disputants, one of us has wronged the other. They requested: “فَاحْكُمْ بَيْنَنا بِالْحَقِّ وَ لا تُشْطِطْ وَ اهْدِنا إِلى‏ سَواءِ الصِّراطِ” — judge between us in truth, do not deviate from justice, and guide us to the straight path. The term “تشطط” derives from “شطط,” meaning deviation or excess, and refers to distancing oneself from truth and justice. One of them presented his claim: “إِنَّ هذا أَخِي لَهُ تِسْعٌ وَ تِسْعُونَ نَعْجَةً وَلِيَ نَعْجَةٌ واحِدَةٌ فَقالَ أَكْفِلْنِيها وَعَزَّنِي فِي الْخِطابِ” — this is my brother; he has ninety‑nine sheep, and I have but one, yet he demands that I hand over mine, and he has overpowered me in argument. The word “نعجة” denotes a sheep, and “أكفلنيها” implies handing it over into his care. “عزّني” conveys the sense of overpowering or prevailing in speech. From the ظاهر of the verses, it appears that Dāwūd (ʿalayhi al-salām), without hearing the statement of the second party, said: “لَقَدْ ظَلَمَكَ بِسُؤالِ نَعْجَتِكَ إِلى‏ نِعاجِهِ” — he has indeed wronged you by demanding your sheep in addition to his own. He added that many associates transgress against one another: “وَ إِنَّ كَثِيراً مِنَ الْخُلَطاءِ لَيَبْغِي بَعْضُهُمْ عَلى‏ بَعْضٍ إِلَّا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا وَ عَمِلُوا الصَّالِحاتِ وَقَلِيلٌ ما هُم” — except those who believe and perform righteous deeds, and they are few. Such individuals who observe justice even with those close to them are indeed rare, and this is achieved only through faith and righteous action. It appears that both parties were satisfied and departed. However, Dāwūd reflected thereafter. Although his judgment was based on justice—since the absence of objection from the other party could be taken as tacit confirmation—the standards of judicial procedure required that he also hear the second party before issuing a decision. Thus, he realized that this had been a test: “وَ ظَنَّ داوُدُ أَنَّما فَتَنَّاهُ”. He sought forgiveness, fell in prostration, and turned back in repentance: “فَاسْتَغْفَرَ رَبَّهُ وَ خَرَّ راكِعاً وَ أَنابَ”. The term “خر” denotes falling down with intensity, often accompanied by sound, and is used here metaphorically for سجدة. The word “راكعاً” may either signify prostration in a broad linguistic sense or refer to bowing as a prelude to prostration. God then extended His grace and forgave this lapse, which was in the nature of “ترکِ اولیٰ”: “فَغَفَرْنا لَهُ ذلِكَ”. Finally, it is stated: “وَ إِنَّ لَهُ عِنْدَنا لَزُلْفى‏ وَ حُسْنَ مَآبٍ” — indeed, for him is nearness with Us and an excellent return. The term “زلفى” signifies closeness in the divine presence, while “حسن مآب” refers to a good and blessed final abode in the Hereafter.

What is evident from the Qur’an Majid does not extend beyond this: certain individuals came to Dāwūd (ʿalayhi al-salām) seeking judgment, having climbed over the wall of his miḥrāb. He was initially alarmed; then he listened to the complaint of the claimant. One of them possessed ninety‑nine sheep, while the other had only one. The owner of the ninety‑nine sheep was insisting that the single sheep also be handed over to him. Dāwūd declared the claimant truthful and regarded the demand of the other party as an act of ظلم. Thereafter, he felt regret over his action, sought forgiveness from God, and God forgave him. Two expressions here require particular reflection: the notion of trial (fitnah) and that of seeking forgiveness and repentance. The Qur’an does not explicitly elaborate upon these matters. However, from the apparent meaning of the verses and the contextual indications found in narrations related to their interpretation, it becomes clear that Dāwūd (ʿalayhi al-salām) possessed great knowledge and skill in adjudication, and God intended to test him. Thus, extraordinary circumstances occurred—such as the arrival of the disputants by an unusual route, scaling the wall of the miḥrāb. In this situation, he acted with haste and issued a judgment before seeking clarification from the second party, even though the judgment itself was just. Although he quickly became aware of this lapse and remedied it without delay, it nonetheless did not fully accord with the elevated مقام of prophethood. For this reason, he sought forgiveness for this “ترکِ اولیٰ,” and God, in turn, granted him pardon. Support for this interpretation is found in the verse immediately following, wherein Dāwūd is addressed: “We have appointed you as a khalīfah upon the earth; therefore judge among people with truth and do not follow desire.” This indicates that the lapse pertained to the procedure of judgment. Thus, there is nothing in these verses that detracts from the dignity or exalted rank of this great Prophet.

We now turn to the Torah in order to examine what it states in this regard, and also to identify the origin of the interpretations advanced by certain uninformed and unaware individuals. In the Second Book of Samuel, chapter 11, verses 2–27, the following is narrated: It is reported that at the time of sunset, Dāwūd arose from his bed and walked upon the roof of the king’s house. From the rooftop he saw a woman bathing, who was exceedingly beautiful. Dāwūd sent someone to inquire about her, and it was said that she was Bathsheba, the daughter of Eliam and the wife of Uriah the Hittite. Dāwūd then sent messengers to bring her; she came to him, and he lay with her. After she was purified from her impurity, she returned to her house. The woman conceived and sent word to Dāwūd that she was pregnant. Dāwūd then sent a message to Joab, instructing him to send Uriah the Hittite. When Uriah came, Dāwūd questioned him about the condition of Joab and the state of the war. Thereafter, he instructed Uriah to go to his house, but Uriah did not do so; instead, he slept at the entrance of the king’s house with the servants of his master. When Dāwūd learned this, he questioned him, but Uriah refused, citing the conditions of the army and his companions. Subsequently, Dāwūd wrote a letter to Joab and sent it with Uriah, instructing that Uriah be placed in the forefront of intense battle and then abandoned so that he would be struck down and die. This instruction was carried out, and Uriah was killed. After the mourning period, Dāwūd took the woman into his house and she became his wife. However, it is stated that this action displeased God [biḥawālah: Kitāb Samuʾīl, chapter 11, verses 2–27]. In summary, this narrative presents that Dāwūd, upon seeing a woman, became inclined toward her, brought her to himself, and she became pregnant. Her husband, who was a high-ranking officer, was subsequently killed through a deliberate scheme, after which she was lawfully married to Dāwūd. The subsequent part of the account, mentioned in chapter 12 of the same book, states that God sent the Prophet Nathan to Dāwūd. He narrated a parable: in a city there were two men, one rich and one poor. The rich man possessed many sheep and cattle, whereas the poor man had only a single lamb. A guest came to the rich man, and instead of using his own livestock, he took the poor man’s lamb and slaughtered it. Dāwūd became enraged and declared that such a person deserved death and should compensate with four sheep. Nathan then said to him: “you are that man.” Dāwūd realized his error, repented, and God accepted his repentance, though severe consequences befell him thereafter. Within this account, certain aspects are particularly notable: 1. No litigants appear before Dāwūd for judgment; rather, a prophet‑advisor narrates a parable for admonition. 2. The account differs entirely from the Qur’anic narrative: there is no mention of disputants climbing a wall, no sudden ورود, no judicial proceeding, and no immediate request for a ruling. 3. Dāwūd declares the rich man worthy of death for the taking of a single lamb, raising the question of proportionality. 4. At the same time, he prescribes restitution of fourfold compensation, which appears inconsistent with the prior judgment. 5. The narrative includes an explicit attribution of moral fault to Dāwūd concerning Uriah’s wife. 6. It further describes a consequential punishment in terms that are highly severe. 7. The same woman is subsequently presented as the mother of Sulaymān. The recounting of such narratives is indeed distressing. However, it becomes necessary to mention them because certain individuals, under the influence of such Isra’ili traditions, have introduced elements into the interpretation of the Qur’an Majid that obscure the purity of its verses. Therefore, in order to clarify the truth, it has been unavoidable to refer to parts of this problematic account.

1. Concerning a Prophet whose ten عظیم attributes have been described by God in the preceding verses, and from whose life the Prophet of Islam (ṣallā Allāhu ʿalayhi wa-ālīhi wa-sallam) is instructed to derive guidance—can it be conceivable that even a fraction of such allegations could rightly be attributed to him? 2. The Qur’an Majid in the subsequent verse states: “يا داوُدُ إِنَّا جَعَلْناكَ خَلِيفَةً فِي الْأَرْضِ” — O Dāwūd! We have appointed you as a khalīfah on the earth. Is such a declaration compatible with the aforementioned fabrications? 3. If an ordinary individual—not a Prophet of God—were to commit such an act, depriving a loyal, pure, and faithful officer of his wife through such reprehensible means, what judgment would people pass upon him and what punishment would he deserve? Even if such an action were to be attributed to the most sinful of individuals, it would still be astonishing. Although it is true that the Torah does not explicitly describe Dāwūd as a Prophet, it nonetheless presents him as an exalted and just ruler and the founder of a great sanctuary among Banū Isrāʾīl. 4. It is also noteworthy that one of the well‑known books of the Torah is “Mazāmīr Dāwūd,” containing the supplications of Dāwūd. Can the supplications and words of a person portrayed in such a manner be regarded as part of a revealed tradition? 5. Anyone possessing even a minimal degree of عقل can recognize that the narratives found in the present, altered Torah are a collection of خرافات, produced either by enemies of the prophetic tradition or by extremely uninformed and ignorant individuals. How, then, can such material serve as a foundation for scholarly discussion? Indeed, it is the distinction of the Qur’an that it is entirely free from such fabrications.

In Islamic narrations, the indecent and baseless account attributed to the Torah is rejected in the strongest terms. Among these is a report narrated from Amīr al-Muʾminīn ʿAlī (ʿalayhi al-salām), in which he stated: لا اوتى برجل يزعم داود تزوج امرأة اوريا الا جلدته حدين حدًا للنبوة وحدًا للاسلام If a person is brought before me who claims that Dāwūd married the wife of Uriah, I would inflict upon him two punishments: one for violating the sanctity of prophethood and one for violating Islam [biḥawālah: Majmaʿ al-Bayān, under these verses]. This is because such an assertion involves, on the one hand, attributing an unlawful act to a believing individual, and on the other hand, it constitutes a violation of the dignity of prophethood. Therefore, the one making such a claim deserves the prescribed punishment for false accusation twice, that is, two sets of eighty lashes. A similar meaning is also reported from Imām ʿAlī (ʿalayhi al-salām) in another form: من حدثكم بحديث داود على ما يرويه القصاص جلدته مائة وستين Whoever relates to you the story of Dāwūd in the manner narrated by storytellers, I would administer one hundred and sixty lashes to him [biḥawālah: Tafsīr Fakhr al-Dīn al-Rāzī, under these verses]. Another narration is recorded by Shaykh al-Ṣadūq in al-Amālī from Imām Jaʿfar al-Ṣādiq (ʿalayhi al-salām), who said: أن رضا الناس لا يملك، وألسنتهم لا تضبط، أ لم ينسبوا داود الى أنه تبع الطير حتى نظر الى امرأة اوريا فهواها، وأنه قدم زوجها امام التابوت حتى قتل ثم تزوج بها! It is not possible to satisfy all people, nor can their tongues be restrained. Have they not attributed to Dāwūd that he followed a bird until he saw the wife of Uriah, became enamored with her, sent her husband before the ark in battle until he was killed, and then married her? [biḥawālah: Nūr al-Thaqalayn, jild 4, p. 446]. This statement highlights how, even a great Prophet of God could not remain secure from people’s false attributions, thus illustrating the inevitability of such slanders. Another narration is reported in ʿUyūn al-Akhbār from Imām ʿAlī ibn Mūsā al-Riḍā (ʿalayhi al-salām), who, in a discussion concerning the infallibility of the Prophets, asked ʿAlī ibn al-Jahm about Dāwūd. When he repeated the well‑known tale of the bird, the woman, and the قتل of her husband, the Imām became deeply distressed and struck his forehead, saying: إِنَّا لِلهِ وَ إِنَّا إِلَيْهِ راجِعُونَ، لقد نسبتم نبيًا من انبياء الله الى التهاون بصلاته حتى خرج فى اثر الطير، ثم بالفاحشة ثم بالقتل؟! Indeed, to God we belong and to Him we return. You have attributed to a Prophet of God negligence in prayer, then indecency, and thereafter the قتل of an innocent person! When asked what the actual mistake of Dāwūd was, the Imām explained that it pertained to haste in adjudication and cited the verse: “يا داوُدُ إِنَّا جَعَلْناكَ خَلِيفَةً فِي الْأَرْضِ.” He further clarified that in the time of Dāwūd, it was customary for widows not to remarry. Dāwūd was the first through whom God permitted the remarriage of widows, and when Uriah happened to be killed in battle, Dāwūd married his wife in accordance with this divine allowance. This practice was difficult for the people of that time to accept, and subsequently various stories were fabricated around it [biḥawālah: Nūr al-Thaqalayn, jild 4, p. 445]. From this narration, it becomes evident that the issue concerning Uriah had a simple and legitimate basis. Dāwūd performed an act as part of a divine directive, yet enemies, ignorant supporters, and storytellers embellished it with fabricated details, eventually attributing to this great Prophet actions of grave moral wrongdoing. Thus, the narrations attributed to such accounts stem not from authentic revelation but from later fabrications, and Islamic tradition firmly rejects them, maintaining the purity and integrity of the مقام of the Prophets.

Some exegetes have advanced additional interpretations concerning the account of Dāwūd. Although these explanations are not fully consistent with the apparent meaning of the verses, it is not inappropriate to refer to some of them for the sake of completing the discussion. 1. One view is that Dāwūd had organized his time according to a structured program and did not meet people outside designated hours. On one occasion, two individuals who intended to kill him climbed over the wall of the miḥrāb while he was engaged in worship. Upon seeing the guards around him, they became frightened and immediately fabricated a claim, stating that they had come for adjudication regarding a dispute and then narrated the account mentioned in the Qur’an. Dāwūd delivered a judgment between them; however, knowing that they had approached him with hostile intent, he became angered and intended to take vengeance. Shortly thereafter, he regretted this intention and sought forgiveness [biḥawālah: Tafsīr Fakhr Rāzī and Rūḥ al-Maʿānī; similarly accepted in Tafsīr al-Marāghī]. 2. The interpretation presented by the distinguished exegete of al-Mīzān is, in principle, consistent with what other major interpreters of Islam have stated regarding this account, and it has already been outlined above. However, his discussion differs in certain respects and is therefore mentioned here. Many exegetes hold that the two individuals who came before Dāwūd were in fact angels sent by God for the purpose of testing him. Yet, the specific features of the narrative—such as their climbing into the miḥrāb in an unusual manner, Dāwūd’s alarm, and the overall character of the event as a divine trial—indicate that this occurred in the form of تمثل, that is, the angels appeared in human form. According to this view, their existence was not external in the material sense; rather, within the perceptive faculty of Dāwūd they appeared as two human figures. Consequently, the judgment rendered by him occurred within this realm of تمثل, similar to experiences in dreams. Just as events occurring in dreams do not entail legal responsibility, occurrences within the domain of تمثل likewise do not impose accountability, since responsibility pertains to the realm of external, material existence. Thus, even if an error is assumed in this context, it would belong to that level of perception and would not conflict with the مقام of عصمت. Accordingly, the repentance of Dāwūd would not be for an actual sin but for something analogous to what is attributed to Ādam prior to his descent to the earthly realm [biḥawālah: al-Mīzān, jild 17, p. 203]. However, the apparent meaning of the verses indicates that the disputants possessed external existence. At the same time, the judgment itself does not constitute a sin, since it was based on the apparent claim of the complainant. Nevertheless, the recommended propriety of judicial procedure required that Dāwūd refrain from haste and hear both parties in full, and his استغفار pertains to this “ترکِ اولیٰ.” In any case, there is no necessity to interpret this event as belonging to the realm of تمثل or, as some suggest, as a purely symbolic trial devised for admonition. It is preferable to preserve the apparent meaning of the verses while providing an interpretation that maintains both the integrity of the wording and the مقام of عصمت of the Prophets.

See ayat 29 for tafseer.

See ayat 29 for tafseer.

See ayat 29 for tafseer.

After narrating the preceding incident, the Qur’an proceeds to address Prophet Dāwūd (ʿalayhi al-salām) directly, emphasizing his elevated character while simultaneously outlining his grave responsibilities in a clear and meaningful manner. It is stated: “يا داوُدُ إِنَّا جَعَلْناكَ خَلِيفَةً فِي الْأَرْضِ فَاحْكُمْ بَيْنَ النَّاسِ بِالْحَقِّ وَلا تَتَّبِعِ الْهَوى‏ فَيُضِلَّكَ عَنْ سَبِيلِ اللهِ إِنَّ الَّذِينَ يَضِلُّونَ عَنْ سَبِيلِ اللهِ لَهُمْ عَذابٌ شَدِيدٌ بِما نَسُوا يَوْمَ الْحِسابِ” In this verse, the exalted rank of Dāwūd is affirmed and his significant office is articulated. Its content clearly indicates that the fabricated tales regarding his alleged conduct with the wife of Uriah are entirely unfounded. How could God entrust the vicegerency of the earth and the مقام of judicial authority to one who would betray the honor of believers or stain his hands with innocent blood? This verse comprises five statements, each expressing an important truth. The first truth concerns the station of khilāfah of Dāwūd on the earth. This may be understood either as succession to earlier Prophets or as khilāfat ilāhiyyah; the latter interpretation appears more appropriate and is consistent with the statement in Surah al-Baqarah (2:30): “وَإِذْ قالَ رَبُّكَ لِلْمَلائِكَةِ إِنِّي جاعِلٌ فِي الْأَرْضِ خَلِيفَةً”. Here, khilāfah signifies representation of God—implementing His commands among His servants—rather than replacement in the literal sense. This indicates that legitimate governance must be rooted in divine authority, while any rule deviating from this foundation is unjust and usurped. The second statement establishes that, given this عظیم trust, Dāwūd is obligated to judge among الناس with truth and justice. Thus, khilāfah of God necessarily entails sovereignty of truth, and the right to govern emerges directly from this principle. The third statement points to the greatest danger confronting a just ruler: the اتباع of whims and desires. Indeed, hoā-yi nafs acts as a barrier that obscures reality and separates a person from justice. The fourth statement clarifies that following such desires leads to deviation from the path of God, which is the path of truth. Wherever deviation exists, it is rooted in such impulses; and wherever such impulses dominate, deviation is inevitable. A ruler governed by desire sacrifices the rights and interests of the people for personal aims, rendering his authority unstable and ultimately subject to failure. The concept of “hoā” may encompass both personal desires and the pressures of collective inclinations. In this sense, the Qur’an implicitly rejects any approach that treats public inclination alone as the معيار of truth. Governance must rest upon الحق, while benefiting from the participation of the people in its implementation. The fifth statement identifies the source of deviation: forgetfulness of “يَوْمَ الْحِسابِ.” This forgetfulness leads to severe punishment and represents a fundamental cause of human misguidance. Attention to the Hereafter thus possesses profound تربیتی significance in human life. In Islamic tradition, this theme is emphasized in the saying of the Prophet of Islam (ṣallā Allāhu ʿalayhi wa-ālīhi wa-sallam) and Amīr al-Muʾminīn ʿAlī (ʿalayhi al-salām): “أيّها الناس أن أخوف ما أخاف عليكم إثنان إتباع الهوٰى و طول الامل …” — the اتباع of desire leads away from truth, and prolonged امید causes forgetfulness of the Hereafter [Nahj al-Balāghah, sermon 42]. Similarly, it is reported from Imām al-Bāqir (ʿalayhi al-salām): “ثلاثُ موبقات … شح مطاع وهوٰى متبع، وأعجاب المرء بنفسه” [Nūr al-Thaqalayn, jild 4, p. 453]. Following the mention of Dāwūd’s khilāfah, the discussion expands to the purposeful nature of creation: “وَمَا خَلَقْنَا السَّماءَ وَالْأَرْضَ وَمَا بَيْنَهُما باطِلًا …” — the heavens and the earth have not been created in vain; this is the assumption of the disbelievers. The principle that creation is purposeful constitutes the foundation of all rights and responsibilities. Once it is accepted that the universe is not without purpose, its objective must be sought, which may be summarized as تكامل، تعليم، and تربیت. Accordingly, governance must align itself with this purpose and contribute to the moral and spiritual development of humanity. Thus, the structure of existence itself is grounded in truth and justice, and governance must harmonize with this universal order. The reference to forgetfulness of the Hereafter in the previous verse further reinforces this, since acknowledgment of accountability is integral to a meaningful and purposeful creation. Without such accountability, existence itself would be rendered devoid of meaning. The verse continues: “أَمْ نَجْعَلُ الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا وَعَمِلُوا الصَّالِحاتِ كَالْمُفْسِدِينَ فِي الْأَرْضِ … أَمْ نَجْعَلُ الْمُتَّقِينَ كَالْفُجَّار” — is it conceivable that those who believe and perform righteous deeds should be treated like those who spread فساد, or that the God‑conscious should be equated with the wicked? This affirms that equality between righteousness and corruption is impossible. The righteous move in harmony with the purpose of creation, whereas the corrupt oppose it. Thus, the doctrine of resurrection (maʿād) is established through two lines of reasoning: the argument from divine wisdom, which necessitates purpose, and the argument from justice, which requires differentiation between good and evil. Without a final reckoning, the order of the world would contradict both wisdom and justice. Finally, the concluding verse emphasizes the role of revelation: “كِتابٌ أَنْزَلْناهُ إِلَيْكَ مُبارَكٌ لِيَدَّبَّرُوا آياتِهِ وَ لِيَتَذَكَّرَ أُولُوا الْأَلْبابِ” — a blessed Book has been sent down so that its verses may be deeply contemplated and that those endowed with intellect may take heed. The Qur’an is described as “مبارك,” indicating a source of enduring good. Its purpose is not merely recitation but contemplation, awakening of conscience, and transformation into action. Its teachings are comprehensive, its guidance life‑giving, and its message directs humanity toward the ultimate purpose of creation.

In the verses under discussion, “فساد فی الارض” is placed in contrast with “ایمان و عمل صالح,” and similarly “فجور” (the tearing of the veil of religion) is set in opposition to “تقوٰی و پرہیزگاری.” The question arises whether these two expressions convey a single حقیقت or whether they express two distinct meanings. It is not unlikely that both expressions ultimately refer to a single حقیقت. This is because “متقین” are, in essence, those who are believing and act righteously, while “فجار” correspond to those who are “مفسدين في الارض.” Nevertheless, another احتمال is that the first expression encompasses both اعتقادی and عملی dimensions, comparing those who possess sound belief together with righteous action against those who are corrupt in belief and deed; whereas the second expression may refer specifically to the عملی aspect alone. It is also possible to distinguish the two by considering that “تقویٰ” and “فجور” pertain primarily to the individual dimension of human perfection and degeneration, while “عمل صالح” and “فساد فی الارض” relate more directly to the اجتماعی dimension of human conduct. However, the first interpretation—namely that both expressions emphasize a single حقیقت—appears to be more appropriate.

In one narration concerning the interpretation of these verses, it is stated that “الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا وَ عَمِلُوا الصَّالِحاتِ” refers to Amīr al-Muʾminīn ʿAlī (ʿalayhi al-salām) and his companions and supporters, whereas “الْمُفْسِدِينَ فِي الْأَرْضِ” refers to their opponents [biḥawālah: Tafsīr Nūr al-Thaqalayn, jild 4, p. 453 (ḥadīth 37)]. In another ḥadīth reported by Ibn ʿAsākir from Ibn ʿAbbās, it is stated that “الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا” refers to ʿAlī, Ḥamzah, and ʿUbaydah, who came forth in the Battle of Badr to confront ʿUtbah, Walīd, and Shaybah from the ranks of disbelief and polytheism and engaged them in combat, ultimately prevailing over them; and that “الْمُفْسِدِينَ فِي الْأَرْضِ” refers to those three individuals from the forces of disbelief and polytheism [Tafsīr Rūḥ al-Maʿānī, jild 23, p. 171]. It is evident that the intent of such narrations is not to restrict the verse exclusively to particular individuals, but rather to indicate the occasion of revelation (shān al-nuzūl) or to present clear and exemplary instances of its application.

See ayat 33 for tafseer.

See ayat 33 for tafseer.

See ayat 33 for tafseer.

Some exegetes have advanced another interpretation of these verses; we now present it. A more widely known view is that the pronouns in “توارت” and “ردّوها” refer to “الشمس” (the sun), which is not explicitly mentioned in the text but is inferred from the word “عشي” (the time of afternoon) occurring in the verses. According to this interpretation, the meaning of the verses would be that Sulayman (ʿalayhi al-salām) became absorbed in observing the horses until the sun set beyond the western horizon and became concealed. He was then deeply distressed at having missed the prayer of the afternoon and called out: O angels of God, return the sun to me. His request was fulfilled, the sun returned, and Sulayman performed ablution (the wiping over the legs and neck being interpreted as the act of masḥ, as practiced in his law), after which he performed his prayer. Some uninformed and unrefined individuals have gone even further and attributed an even more objectionable claim to this great Prophet, asserting that “فَطَفِقَ مَسْحاً بِالسُّوقِ وَالْأَعْناقِ” means that Sulayman ordered the cutting of the horses’ legs and necks with a sword, or that he himself did so, because these horses had caused him to neglect the remembrance of God and forget his prayer. The falsehood of this latter assertion is self‑evident, for the horses were not at fault such that they would deserve to be slaughtered. If there was any fault, it would have lain with Sulayman himself for becoming absorbed in observing them. Moreover, killing the horses would constitute both ظلم and اسراف. It is therefore inconceivable that such an act could be attributed to a Prophet. Accordingly, Islamic narrations emphatically reject such attributions to Sulayman. As for the interpretation that he neglected the afternoon prayer, it raises another question: is it possible for a معصوم Prophet to forget an obligatory duty, even if he were engaged in another legitimate responsibility such as inspecting horses prepared for jihād? Some have suggested that the neglected prayer was a recommended (nafl) prayer, in which case omission would not be objectionable. However, if this were so, there would be no necessity for the extraordinary event of returning the sun. In addition, this interpretation faces several other objections: 1. The word “الشمس” is not explicitly mentioned in the verses, whereas “الصَّافِناتُ الْجِيادُ” (swift horses) is explicitly stated. It is therefore more appropriate that the pronouns refer to what is explicitly mentioned. 2. The apparent meaning of “عَنْ ذِكْرِ رَبِّي” is that the love of these horses arose from remembrance of God and obedience to His command, whereas in the aforementioned interpretation “عن” is taken in the sense of “على,” implying preference over God’s remembrance—an interpretation contrary to the ظاهر. 3. The expression “رُدُّوها عَلَيَّ” employs an imperative tone. It is not appropriate to construe this as Sulayman addressing God or the angels in such a commanding manner. 4. Although the return of the sun is not impossible for divine power, it entails numerous implications and cannot be accepted without clear and definitive evidence. 5. The verses begin with praise of Sulayman, whereas according to this interpretation they would end with his censure. 6. If the abandoned prayer were obligatory, its justification becomes exceedingly difficult; and if it were supererogatory, the return of the sun would be unwarranted. A further question arises: why do such interpretations appear in a number of narrations recorded in books of ḥadīth? Upon careful examination of their chains of transmission and critical evaluation, it becomes evident that none of these reports possess reliable authority; most are mursal. Is it not preferable, therefore, to refrain from relying upon such unauthenticated narrations and to entrust their ultimate knowledge to those qualified in the discipline, while adhering to what can be directly understood from the verses themselves, without imposing preconceived conclusions upon them, thereby avoiding these various difficulties?

See ayat 40 for tafseer.

See ayat 40 for tafseer.

See ayat 40 for tafseer.

See ayat 40 for tafseer.

See ayat 40 for tafseer.

See ayat 40 for tafseer.

These verses continue describing aspects of the life of Prophet Sulaymān (ʿalayhi al-salām). They make clear that however elevated a human being may rise in rank and power, nothing truly belongs to him independently; rather, whatever he possesses is from God. Awareness of this حقیقت removes the veils of غرور and غفلت, enabling a person to recognize his true position within the order of existence. The first part of these verses refers to a divine trial. God subjected Sulaymān to an آزمائش in which a form of “ترکِ اولیٰ” occurred. Thereafter, Sulaymān turned toward the Divine presence and repented for this ترکِ اولیٰ. Because the verses are expressed concisely, storytellers and imaginative narrators have exploited them, fabricating baseless accounts and attributing to this great Prophet matters that are either incompatible with the essence of prophethood, contrary to the مقامِ عصمت, or even opposed to reason and logic. Such fabrications themselves constitute a آزمائش for interpreters of the Qur’an. Had attention remained confined to what is explicitly stated in the text, these unwarranted elaborations would not have arisen. The first of the verses states: “وَ لَقَدْ فَتَنَّا سُلَيْمانَ وَ أَلْقَيْنا عَلى‏ كُرْسِيِّهِ جَسَداً ثُمَّ أَنابَ” — indeed, We tested Sulaymān and cast upon his “کرسی” a “جسد,” then he turned back. The term “کرسی” denotes a low‑footed throne, distinct from a more elevated throne referred to as “عرش.” The word “جسد” signifies a lifeless body or form. From the verse, it is clear in general that Sulaymān’s trial was connected with the appearance of such a “جسد” placed upon his seat, though the Qur’an does not provide detailed explanation. Exegetical narrations have offered various interpretations. One of the more coherent explanations is that Sulaymān desired offspring endowed with strength and nobility who would assist in governance and in struggle against enemies. Having numerous wives, he intended to approach them so that many sons might be born. However, in this intention he became briefly neglectful and did not say “in shāʾ Allāh,” which reflects reliance upon God in all matters. As a result, no child was born to him except for one imperfect infant, described figuratively as resembling a lifeless “جسد,” which was placed upon his throne. Realizing his momentary غفلت and reliance upon his own power, he was deeply distressed, repented, and returned to God. Another interpretation suggests that Sulaymān was tested through severe illness, such that he became like a “جسد” upon his throne. In Arabic usage, a greatly weakened and infirm person may be likened to a lifeless body. Eventually, he recovered and returned to his former state, and “أَنابَ” is taken to indicate his restoration as well as his turning to God. However, this explanation raises certain linguistic difficulties regarding the structure of the verse. As for the various fanciful and objectionable accounts found in some sources—such as the claim that Sulaymān’s ring was lost or seized by a shayṭān who then occupied his throne—such narratives are regarded as اسرائیلیات with roots in extra‑Qur’anic traditions and are rejected by critical scholarship. These accounts lack rational and textual support and contradict the اصول of prophethood and divine sovereignty; authority is not dependent upon an external object, nor would God entrust prophetic مقام to a manifestation of shayṭān. The following verse elaborates upon Sulaymān’s repentance: “قالَ رَبِّ اغْفِرْلِي وَ هَبْ لِي مُلْكاً لا يَنْبَغِي لِأَحَدٍ مِنْ بَعْدِي إِنَّكَ أَنْتَ الْوَهَّابُ” — he said: my Lord, forgive me and grant me a dominion that shall not be fitting for anyone after me; indeed, You are the Bestower. This supplication reflects both humility and recognition that all authority is a divine gift. Sulaymān’s request was not an expression of worldly ambition but a manifestation of reliance upon God and a desire that his divinely granted rule serve as a unique and enduring sign of divine favor.

In response to this question, exegetes have offered numerous interpretations, many of which are not consistent with the apparent meaning of the verses. The explanation that appears more appropriate and more consistent with reason is as follows: Prophet Sulaymān (ʿalayhi al-salām) requested from God a form of dominion distinguished by particular miraculous characteristics, setting it apart from all other forms of rule. As is well known, each Prophet was granted a specific miracle: Mūsā (ʿalayhi al-salām) was given the staff and the “يد بيضاء,” Ibrāhīm (ʿalayhi al-salām) witnessed the fire become cool and safe, Ṣāliḥ (ʿalayhi al-salām) was given the extraordinary she‑camel, and the Prophet of Islam (ṣallā Allāhu ʿalayhi wa-ālīhi wa-sallam) was granted the Qur’an Majid. Likewise, Sulaymān (ʿalayhi al-salām) was granted a form of kingship accompanied by divine wonders, such as command over the winds, authority over the shayāṭīn, and other distinctive features. Such a request does not constitute any deficiency for a Prophet; rather, asking for a specific miracle that clearly manifests one’s مقام and mission is fully consistent with the prophetic role. Hence, it does not preclude the possibility that others might possess forms of dominion that are outwardly more extensive, yet lacking the unique characteristics that distinguished the rule of Sulaymān. This understanding is supported by the verses that follow, wherein the acceptance of Sulaymān’s supplication is indicated through the mention of the subjugation of the winds and the shayāṭīn to him. These constitute precisely the distinctive features that set his rule apart, demonstrating that his request was directed toward a divinely marked and exceptional form of authority rather than mere worldly power.

These verses continue the account of Prophet Sulaymān (ʿalayhi al-salām), highlighting both the عظیم favors bestowed upon him and the distinctive qualities of his divine governance. From them it becomes clear that, regardless of how elevated a human being’s مقام may appear, all that he possesses is from God alone. Awareness of this حقیقت removes the veils of arrogance and heedlessness, allowing one to understand one’s true position within creation. The first part of the passage refers to a divine trial, in which a “ترکِ اولیٰ” occurred, followed by Sulaymān’s turning back to God in repentance. Because the Qur’anic account is presented in a concise manner, it left room for speculative and imaginative elaborations, leading some narrators to fabricate baseless stories and attribute to this great Prophet matters incompatible with the مقامِ نبوت, مقامِ عصمت, and even with reason itself. A disciplined reading of the text, however, confines itself to what the Qur’an explicitly states and avoids such distortions. The verse states: “وَ لَقَدْ فَتَنَّا سُلَيْمانَ وَ أَلْقَيْنا عَلى‏ كُرْسِيِّهِ جَسَداً ثُمَّ أَنابَ” — indicating that Sulaymān was tested and then returned to God. The precise details of this آزمائش are not elaborated in the Qur’an, and thus must not be extended beyond what is supported by sound interpretation. Among the explanations offered, the more coherent understanding is that Sulaymān experienced a momentary lapse in reliance upon God, realized it, and immediately returned to the Divine presence, thereby demonstrating the characteristic of “اوّاب,” that is, continual return to God. The subsequent verse elaborates upon his prayer: “قالَ رَبِّ اغْفِرْلِي وَ هَبْ لِي مُلْكاً لا يَنْبَغِي لِأَحَدٍ مِنْ بَعْدِي إِنَّكَ أَنْتَ الْوَهَّابُ”. This supplication has been interpreted in a manner consistent with prophetic dignity: Sulaymān did not seek dominion out of worldly ambition, exclusivity, or jealousy, but rather requested a form of governance distinguished by divine miracles, setting it apart from all other forms of rule. Just as each Prophet was given a specific sign—such as the staff of Mūsā, the cooling of fire for Ibrāhīm, and the Qur’an for the final Prophet—Sulaymān sought a form of rule marked by unique miraculous features. These included command over the winds, authority over unseen forces, and other extraordinary attributes. Such a request reflects not نقص but rather a manifestation of prophetic function, since miracles serve to establish and clarify the مقام of prophethood. A narration attributed to Imām Mūsā ibn Jaʿfar (ʿalayhi al-salām) explains this further, distinguishing between illegitimate rule obtained through coercion and legitimate authority granted by God. Sulaymān sought a dominion so clearly marked by divine support that no one could attribute it to worldly domination or oppression. Thus, his request was not driven by بخل, but by a desire to manifest divine legitimacy in its purest form. The verses that follow demonstrate the acceptance of this supplication through the enumeration of specific divine favors granted to Sulaymān: First, the subjugation of the wind: “فَسَخَّرْنا لَهُ الرِّيحَ تَجْرِي بِأَمْرِهِ رُخاءً حَيْثُ أَصابَ”. The wind became a means of controlled and rapid movement under his command. Whether in its speed (as “عاصفة”) or its gentleness (as “رخاء”), it functioned as an extraordinary وسیلہ granted through divine قدرت, enabling administration across a vast domain. Second, the subjugation of rebellious forces: “وَ الشَّياطِينَ كُلَّ بَنَّاءٍ وَ غَوَّاصٍ”. These forces were employed in constructive activities such as building and diving, indicating that even inherently rebellious elements could, under divine authority, be directed toward constructive purposes. Third, the restraint of destructive elements: “وَآخَرِينَ مُقَرَّنِينَ فِي الْأَصْفادِ”. Those who could not be directed toward beneficial action were restrained, preserving societal order. Fourth, extensive discretionary authority: “هذا عَطاؤُنا فَامْنُنْ أَوْ أَمْسِكْ بِغَيْرِ حِسابٍ”. This indicates the breadth of Sulaymān’s authority in the distribution or withholding of resources, grounded in his عدالت and responsibility. Fifth, his spiritual rank: “وَ إِنَّ لَهُ عِنْدَنا لَزُلْفى‏ وَ حُسْنَ مَآبٍ”. This affirms his closeness to God and his благословенный конечный исход, refuting all unfounded allegations and affirming his purity and elevated مقام. Thus, these verses collectively demonstrate that Sulaymān’s governance was not merely political authority but a divinely sanctioned نظام distinguished by miraculous support, moral integrity, and spiritual مقام. They also establish that such مقام is inseparable from humility, repentance, and continual return to God, thereby offering a comprehensive model of prophetic leadership.

There is no doubt that the purpose of the Qur’an in recounting the histories of the Prophets is that from these living events, real truths may be reflected so that the program of moral and spiritual formation may be completed. From the account of Sulaymān (ʿalayhi al-salām), a number of such realities emerge, among which are the following: First, a powerful حکومت, abundant material resources, extensive economic means, prosperity, and a flourishing civilization are not in conflict with spiritual مقام or with divine and human values. As is evident in the verses under discussion, after mentioning all the material blessings granted to Sulaymān, the Qur’an concludes by referring to his elevated مقام in the Divine presence and his noble outcome. In a ḥadīth, the Prophet of Islam (ṣallā Allāhu ʿalayhi wa-ālīhi wa-sallam) states: “أَ رَأَيْتُمْ ما أُعْطِيَ سُلَيْمَانُ بْنُ دَاوُدَ مِنْ مُلْكِهِ؟ فَإِنَّ ذلِكَ لَمْ يَزِدْهُ إِلَّا تَخَشُّعاً، ما كانَ يَرْفَعُ بَصَرَهُ إِلَى السَّماءِ تَخَشُّعاً لِرَبِّهِ!” — Have you seen what was given to Sulaymān ibn Dāwūd of dominion? Yet it increased him in nothing but humility; such was his خشوع before his Lord that he would not raise his gaze toward the sky. Second, the administration of a developed and prosperous polity requires rapid systems of communication, the utilization of diverse forces, the restraint of destructive and corrupt elements, attention to human and social needs, the use of various وسائل for economic production, and the granting of broad authority to capable and competent administrators and officials. All of these principles are clearly reflected in this account. Third, all forms of power and potential should be utilized constructively—even those that might otherwise be neglected. Rather than ignoring such capacities, they should be directed, where possible, toward beneficial purposes. Only those forces that are entirely irreformable should be restrained and confined, so that society may remain protected from their harmful effects.

The Qur’an presents a portrayal of this great Prophet as a pure, exalted, discerning, and just individual. In contrast, the present altered Torah (نعوذ باللہ) depicts him as a pleasure‑seeking and morally compromised figure afflicted with numerous weaknesses. It is remarkable that within the same text there are also included the supplications, religious hymns, and wise sayings attributed to Sulaymān, which indicate that he was a sage, a man of understanding, a struggler, and a person of noble character. This, therefore, reveals a striking contradiction within the current Torah. For further elaboration, reference may be made to the detailed discussion presented in Tafsīr Namūnah, jild 18, under the commentary of Surah Saba, verses 12–14.

See ayat 44 for tafseer.

See ayat 44 for tafseer.

See ayat 44 for tafseer.

The preceding verses concerned Solomon's grandeur and dominion — a manifestation of God-given power — and the account of Solomon was like glad tidings for the Noble Prophet, peace be upon him and his household, and for those in Mecca who were under severe pressure. The verses under consideration concern Job, peace be upon him — an exemplar of patience and steadfastness — and his mention is included so that the Muslims of that time, and thereafter of every age to come, may receive a lesson in steadfastness, perseverance, and struggle in the face of difficulties and hardships, be invited to firmness, and have the excellent outcome of such patience and steadfastness made clear to them. Job, peace be upon him, is the third prophet whose life story is partially recounted in this surah, and it is enjoined upon our great Prophet, peace be upon him and his household, to call this narrative to mind and set it forth before the Muslims so that they may not be alarmed by exhausting difficulties and never despair of God's grace and mercy. The name of Job, peace be upon him, and the mention of his life appear in several surahs of the Holy Quran. In verse 163 of Surah al-Nisā' and verse 84 of Surah al-An'ām, only his name is given alongside those of other prophets — establishing and clarifying his station of prophethood — in contrast to the existing Torah, which does not count him among the prophets but regards him as a righteous and upright man who had many children and was a person of means. In verses 83 and 84 of Surah al-Anbiyā' certain aspects of his life are set forth, while in the verses under consideration of Surah Ṣād, a more detailed account than elsewhere is presented — comprising four verses. First it is stated: "Remember Our servant Job, when he called out to his Lord and said: Affliction and suffering have been visited upon me by Satan." (وَاذْكُرْ عَبْدَنا أَيُّوبَ إِذْ نادى رَبَّهُ أَنِّي مَسَّنِيَ الشَّيْطانُ بِنُصْبٍ وَعَذابٍ). "Nuṣb" (on the metrical pattern of "'usr") and "naṣab" (on the metrical pattern of "ḥasad") both carry the meaning of affliction and calamity. In this verse: first, Job's lofty station in the divine court is evident from the expression "'abdanā" — Our servant; and second, an allusive mention is made of his severe and exhausting suffering and abundant affliction. The details of this event do not appear in the Quran but are transmitted in the well-known works of hadith and exegesis. Someone once asked Imam al-Ṣādiq, peace be upon him: on what account was the affliction that befell Job? — the questioner perhaps supposing that some wrongdoing on his part had caused God to subject him to it. The Imam gave a detailed answer whose substance is as follows: Job was not ensnared in these great afflictions on account of ingratitude toward God's blessings; on the contrary, it was on account of gratitude toward those blessings. For Satan had said to God: this gratitude that Job shows You is because of the abundant blessings You have given him — if those blessings were taken from him, he would certainly not remain a grateful servant. In order that Job's sincerity be made manifest to the entire world and that he be set as a model for all created beings — so that people in both states, of blessing and of adversity, might remain grateful and patient — God gave Satan leave to take possession of Job's worldly goods. Satan requested that Job's abundant wealth, his fields, his flocks, and his children all be brought to ruin. Calamities and afflictions came one after another and in no time everything was destroyed — yet not only did Job's gratitude not diminish, it increased. Satan then requested that he be given mastery over Job's body as well, so that he might become so ill that his body would be seized by the grip of intense pain and he would be confined to a bed of sickness — but even this did not diminish his station of gratitude. Then an event occurred that broke Job's heart and deeply wounded his soul: a group of travellers from the Children of Israel came to see him and said: what sin have you committed on account of which you are afflicted with such painful punishment? Job replied: By my Lord's oath, I have done nothing wrong — I have always striven in obedience to God, and whenever I ate a morsel of food, there was always some orphan or destitute person at my table. It is true that Job was grieved by his friends' taunts more than by any other affliction — yet even so he did not release the hem of patience, nor did he taint the clear and sweet water of gratitude with ingratitude. He turned only toward the divine court and offered the statement already mentioned. And since he acquitted himself excellently in God's trials, God opened once again the gates of His mercy upon this grateful and patient servant and restored the lost blessings to him one by one in even greater abundance than before — so that all people might witness the excellent outcome of patience and gratitude. [Explanatory note: This narration is transmitted in Nūr al-Thaqalayn on the authority of Tafsīr 'Alī ibn Ibrāhīm. The same content appears with some variation in Tafsīr al-Qurṭubī, Tafsīr Fakhr al-Dīn al-Rāzī, Tafsīr al-Ṣāfī, and A'lām al-Qur'ān. In the Old Testament, the Book of Job, similar contents appear, though differing from the details transmitted in Islamic works.] Some eminent exegetes have mentioned the interpretive possibility that Satan afflicted Job, peace be upon him, through various temptations — at times saying: your illness has gone on too long, God has forgotten you; at times saying: what great blessings you had, what health and strength — God has taken them all from you, and you still give Him thanks? Perhaps this interpretation is on account of those exegetes having considered it unlikely that Satan would have mastery over the person, wealth, and children of a prophet such as Job. However, attending to the fact that first, this mastery was by God's command; second, it was temporary; and third, it was for the purpose of the trial and elevation of this great prophet — no difficulty arises from it. In any case, it is related that his illness and affliction lasted seven years — and according to one narration seventeen years — to the extent that even his closest companions abandoned him; only one wife remained loyal and steadfast — which is itself a testimony to the faithfulness of certain wives. But what grieved Job most was the taunts of his enemies. Hence in one hadith it is related that when Job had recovered his lost health and well-being and the gates of divine mercy had opened for him, people asked him: which pain was most intense for you? He replied: the taunts of enemies. In the end, Job, peace be upon him, emerged sound and whole from that blazing furnace of divine trial and the dawn of God's mercy began. He was commanded: "Strike your foot upon the ground" — a spring of water will gush forth that will be cool for your bathing and wholesome for your drinking. (ارْكُضْ بِرِجْلِكَ هذا مُغْتَسَلٌ بارِدٌ وَشَرابٌ). "Urkuḍ" is derived from the root "rakḍ" (on the metrical pattern of "mukth"), meaning striking the ground with the foot; the word also sometimes carries the meaning of running, but here the first meaning is intended. The same God who caused a spring to flow beneath the heels of the infant Ishmael in the dry and scorching wilderness — the same God from whom every movement and stillness, every blessing and grace, proceeds — issued this command for Job as well. A spring of water gushed forth — cool and sweet, healing for all inward and outward ailments. Some hold that this spring contained a kind of mineral water that was both wholesome for drinking and effective in driving away illness. In any case, whatever it was, it was God's grace and kindness toward a patient and grateful prophet. "Mughtasal" denotes water used for bathing; some have taken it as meaning a place of bathing, but the first meaning appears more correct. The description of the water as cool may be an allusion to the special efficacy of bathing in cold water for bodily health and well-being — as has also been established by modern medicine. It is also a subtle allusion to the fact that the best water for bathing is that which in terms of purity and clarity resembles drinking water — a point witnessed by the fact that in Islamic ordinances it is also stated: before bathing with water, drink a mouthful from it. [Reference: Wasā'il al-Shī'a, vol. 1, chapter 13 of Abwāb Ādāb al-Ḥammām, hadith 1.] The foremost and most important divine blessing is health — when it returned to Job, the return of other blessings followed. In this connection the Quran states: "We gave him his household" (وَوَهَبْنا لَهُ أَهْلَهُ) "and the like of them with them" (وَمِثْلَهُمْ مَعَهُم) "as a mercy from Us and a reminder for those possessed of understanding." (رَحْمَةً مِنَّا وَذِكْرى لِأُولِي الْأَلْبابِ). Various interpretations exist as to how his household returned to him. The well-known view is that they had died and God restored them to life. Some, however, have written that on account of Job's prolonged illness they had scattered in all directions, and when he recovered they gathered around him once more. Some have also mentioned the possibility that all of them, or some of them, had fallen ill in various ways — God's mercy encompassed them and they recovered, and like moths to a flame they gathered around their father. The expression "and the like of them with them" alludes to God having made his household even more populous and flourishing than before, granting him additional sons. Although these verses do not speak of Job's wealth, the contextual indicators present suggest that God also bestowed upon him far more abundant wealth than before. It is worthy of attention that in the verse under consideration, two purposes are assigned for the return of divine blessings to Job: one is God's mercy upon him — which has an individual dimension and is in reality the recompense and reward of a patient and grateful servant; and the other is a lesson of guidance for the possessed of reason and understanding throughout all of human history, so that they may not abandon the path of patience and forbearance in difficulties and hardships and may remain hopeful of God's mercy. Now only one difficulty remained for Job — the oath he had sworn concerning his wife. He had witnessed from her some act contrary to his wishes and in that state of illness had sworn that when he regained his strength he would strike her one hundred blows — or somewhat less — in punishment. But after his recovery he wished to pardon her in consideration of her services and faithfulness, while the matter of the oath and God's name stood between them. God resolved this difficulty for him as well. As the Quran states, it was said to him: "Take in your hand a bundle of wheat stalks — or something of the kind — and strike with it, and do not break your oath." (وَخُذْ بِيَدِكَ ضِغْثاً فَاضْرِبْ بِهِ وَلا تَحْنَثْ). "Ḍighth" (on the metrical pattern of "ḥirṣ") means a handful of the soft and tender stalks of wheat or barley, or the fibres of a date cluster, or a handful of flowers and the like. According to one narration, Job's wife was named Liyā bint Ya'qūb. Exegetes disagree as to what fault she had committed. The well-known exegete Ibn 'Abbās transmits that Satan — or a Satan-like figure — came to Job's wife in the guise of a physician and said: I will treat your husband on the sole condition that when he recovers, he should say only: he cured me — I ask no other fee. His wife, who was greatly distressed by the prolonged illness, accepted this condition and put the proposal before Job. Job, who perceived Satan's snare, was greatly displeased and swore to punish his wife. Some have said that Job had sent her on an errand and she was delayed; Job, who was suffering from illness, was greatly vexed and swore an oath of this kind. In any case, while on the one hand she may have merited punishment of this kind, on the other hand her faithfulness, service, and devoted nursing through that long illness deserved precisely such forgiveness and forbearance. It is true that striking with a bundle of wheat stalks or fibres of a date cluster was not the actual fulfilment of his oath — but it was done to preserve the sanctity of God's name and prevent the spread of violation of the law. And this is applicable only in a situation where someone is deserving of pardon, and the person wishes to preserve the outward form of the law while still extending forgiveness — for in situations where no such desert of pardon exists, such an act is by no means permitted. [Explanatory note: The counterpart of this meaning also appears in the chapter of Islamic legal penalties and their execution in the case of offending persons who are ill (Kitāb al-Ḥudūd, Abwāb Ḥadd al-Zinā).] Finally, in the last sentence of the verses under consideration — which is the distillation of the beginning and end of this account — it is stated: "We found him patient — how excellent a servant! He was one who turned constantly toward God." (إِنَّا وَجَدْناهُ صابِراً نِعْمَ الْعَبْدُ إِنَّهُ أَوَّابٌ). It is self-evident that his turning toward God in supplication and his requesting the removal of Satan's temptations, pain, suffering, and illness is not incompatible with the station of patience and steadfastness — and that too after enduring illness and poverty and remaining grateful for seven years, or according to one narration eighteen years. It is worthy of attention that in this sentence Job, peace be upon him, is described with three important qualities — whoever possesses which is a complete human being: first, the station of servitude; second, patience and steadfastness; and third, perpetual return and turning toward God.

Although the entire account of this patient Prophet is presented in only four verses of this Surah, even this brief narration offers profound guidance regarding many important truths: A: The field of divine آزمائش is vast and all‑encompassing. Even the greatest Prophets are subjected to the most intense and severe trials, for this is the very nature of worldly life. In principle, the latent potentials within human beings do not manifest without enduring rigorous آزمائش. B: Relief and expansion follow hardship. When the waves of adversity press upon a person from every side, one should not despair; rather, such circumstances should be understood as a prelude to the opening of divine رحمت. As Amīr al-Muʾminīn ʿAlī (ʿalayhi al-salām) states: “عند تناهى الشدة تكون الفرجة، وعند تضايق حلق البلاء يكون الرخاء” — when hardship reaches its peak, relief approaches, and when the حلقہ of trial tightens, ease arrives. C: This narrative clarifies certain فلسفات underlying the presence of hardship and affliction in human life. Those who imagine that suffering contradicts the order of creation are answered by this account: such trials are often necessary for the manifestation of hidden capacities, for testing and refinement, and for the spiritual growth and تکامل of human beings. Thus, it is reported from Imām al‑Ṣādiq (ʿalayhi al-salām): “إن اشد الناس بلاء الانبياء ثم الّذي يلونهم الأمثل فالأمثل” — the Prophets experience the most severe hardships, followed by those closest to them in rank, each according to their degree. And it is also reported: “إن في الجنة منزلة لا يبلغها عبدًا الّا بالإبتلاء” — there is a rank in Paradise that cannot be attained except through trials. D: The story serves as a comprehensive lesson in صبر and استقامت for all sincere believers. Such patience ultimately leads to success and triumph and becomes the means for attaining a lofty مقام before God. E: A trial that befalls an individual simultaneously becomes a test for his companions and associates, revealing the depth of their loyalty and sincerity. When Ayyūb (ʿalayhi al-salām) lost his wealth and health, his companions dispersed, and both friends and دشمنان engaged in reproach and blame. The pain caused by their words was greater than physical suffering, for, as is well known, wounds inflicted by words may leave deeper scars than those caused by weapons. F: True devotion to God is not confined to times of نعمت. Rather, a genuine servant remembers God equally in ease and hardship, in prosperity and poverty, in illness and health. Material fluctuations do not alter his ایمان or worldview. As Imām ʿAlī (ʿalayhi al-salām) describes the متقین: “نزلت أنفسم منهم في البلاء التي نزلت في الرخاء” — their inner state during hardship is the same as in times of comfort. G: This account emphasizes once again that neither the loss of material resources nor the onset of hardship and poverty is an indication of divine displeasure, nor is the possession of wealth and power a sign of distance from God. A person may remain a devoted servant of God in both circumstances, provided that he does not become enslaved by wealth, status, or progeny, and that he does not lose the restraint of صبر when these are taken away.

Although the noble and patient countenance of this great Prophet—whose exemplary perseverance has become proverbial—has been clearly affirmed by the Qur’an, which praises him both at the beginning and at the conclusion of his account, it must regrettably be acknowledged that even the biography of this eminent Prophet has not remained secure from distortion at the hands of ignorant individuals or learned adversaries. Fabrications of such a nature have been attributed to him from which his sacred and pure شخصیت is entirely free. Among these is the claim that during his illness worms appeared in his body and that such foul odor emanated from him that the inhabitants expelled him from their settlement. Undoubtedly, such reports are fabricated and baseless, even if they appear within certain compilations of ḥadīth. The very nature and purpose of prophetic رسالت requires that people be able, at all times and in all circumstances, to approach the Prophet with inclination and acceptance. Any condition that would lead to aversion, repulsion, or distance—whether in the form of repugnant بیماری, physical defect, or harshness of character—is incompatible with the principles underlying prophethood, since such qualities would negate its essential function. The Qur’an Majid states concerning the Prophet of Islam: “فَبِما رَحْمَةٍ مِنَ اللهِ لِنْتَ لَهُمْ وَ لَوْ كُنْتَ فَظًّا غَلِيظَ الْقَلْبِ لَانْفَضُّوا مِنْ حَوْلِك” — by the mercy of God, you were gentle with them; had you been harsh and hard‑hearted, they would have dispersed from around you (Āl ʿImrān 159). This verse clearly indicates that a Prophet cannot possess qualities that would cause people to withdraw from him. However, in the Torah there appears an extensive narrative concerning Ayyūb, preceding “Mazāmīr Dāwūd,” consisting of forty‑two chapters in which detailed discussions are presented. In some passages, distressing assertions are found; for example, in one portion it is stated that Ayyūb opened his speech in complaint and expressed extensive lamentation, whereas the Qur’an has instead praised his صبر and استقامت.

In this same Surah Ṣād, three Prophets are described with the term “اوّاب”: Dāwūd (ʿalayhi al-salām), Sulaymān (ʿalayhi al-salām), and Ayyūb (ʿalayhi al-salām). In Surah Qāf, verse 36, this attribute is extended to all the people of Paradise: “هذا ما تُوعَدُونَ لِكُلِّ أَوَّابٍ حَفِيظٍ”. These expressions indicate that the “اوّابین” occupy an exceedingly elevated مقام. When we turn to linguistic analysis, we find that “اوّاب” is derived from the root “اوب” (on the pattern of “قول”), meaning to return or to turn back. In its intensive form, it conveys repetition and frequency. Thus, it signifies that the “اوّابین” are highly sensitive to any factors that distance them from God—whether these be the attractions of the material world or the whisperings of the nafs and shayāṭīn. If they are distanced even momentarily, they immediately become aware and return to Him; if they lapse into heedlessness even briefly, they compensate by renewed remembrance. This return may also denote a continual orientation toward the divine commands and prohibitions, such that their attachment in all circumstances remains directed toward obedience, and they return constantly to Him. In Surah Sabaʾ, verse 10, it is stated: “يا جِبالُ أَوِّبِي مَعَهُ وَالطَّيْرَ” — this relates to Dāwūd (ʿalayhi al-salām), and from it another meaning of “اوّاب” can be understood, namely harmony and consonance, as the command implies: O mountains and birds, be in unison with him. Accordingly, an “اوّاب” is one who is in harmony with the laws of creation, the divine commands, and the universal glorification of existing beings, aligning himself with the overall order of existence. It is noteworthy that one of the meanings associated with the name “Ayyūb” also corresponds to “اوّاب.”

See ayat 48 for tafseer.

See ayat 48 for tafseer.

See ayat 48 for tafseer.

In the preceding verses, the lives of David and Solomon, peace be upon them, were discussed at length, and a brief mention was made of the important aspects of the life of the great prophet Job, peace be upon him. In the verses under consideration, six other prophets from among the greatest of God's prophets are named, and the excellent qualities that can serve as a model and exemplar for all human beings are briefly set forth. It is worthy of attention that six distinct qualities are mentioned for these six great prophets, each carrying a particular significance and meaning. First, the address is directed toward the Prophet of Islam, peace be upon him and his household, and it is stated: "Remember Our servants Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob." (وَاذْكُرْ عِبادَنا إِبراهِيمَ وَإِسْحاقَ وَيَعْقُوبَ). The station of servitude and devotion is the first quality mentioned for them — and in reality everything is encompassed within it. Servitude to God means absolute attachment to Him, having no will of one's own in the face of His will, and bowing one's head before Him in every state. Servitude to God means freedom from need of all else, indifference toward everything other than God, and fixing one's gaze solely upon His grace and generosity — this is the summit of the human being's elevation and his highest honour and distinction. Thereafter it is further stated: "They were possessed of powerful hands and seeing eyes." (أُولِي الْأَيْدِي وَالْأَبْصارِ). What a remarkable expression: possessed of hands and eyes. "Aydī" is the plural of "yad" and "abṣār" is the plural of "baṣar," meaning eye and sight. The human being, in attaining his goals, is in need of two powers: first, the power of perception and cognition; and second, the power of action and deed. In other words, "knowledge" and "power" must be drawn upon in order to achieve one's purpose. God has described these prophets as having possessed sufficient perceptive capacity and powerful insight for the performance of their tasks. They were not persons of limited awareness — their level of knowledge and cognition was elevated; their understanding of God's religion, the secrets of creation, and the mysteries of life was profound. In terms of will and capacity for action they were not frail or weak but possessed of firm, powerful, and decisive will. This is a model for all who travel the path of truth — that after the station of servitude and devotion to God, they must be armed with these two sharp-edged instruments. From what has been stated it is fully clear that hand and eye here do not refer to two specific limbs — for many people possess both limbs yet have neither sufficient perception and awareness nor strength of will nor capacity for action. Rather, these two qualities are metonyms for knowledge and power. Regarding their fourth quality it is stated: "We have purified them with a particular and pure quality —" (إِنَّا أَخْلَصْناهُمْ بِخالِصَةٍ) "— the remembrance of the Abode." (ذِكْرَى الدَّارِ). ["Dhikrā al-dār" may be the predicate of an implied subject, the full construction being "hiya dhikrā al-dār," or it may stand as a substitute for "khāliṣa."] Indeed, they were always engaged in the remembrance of the other world. Their gaze was not confined to this world's few days of life and its pleasures — beyond this transient life they beheld an everlasting abode replete with boundless blessings and always strove toward it. Accordingly, "al-dār" — the Abode — which is stated in absolute form, means the abode of the Hereafter, as though no other abode exists and all else is merely a passing passage toward it. Some exegetes have also mentioned the possibility that "al-dār" here refers to the abode of this world, with the expression "dhikrā al-dār" alluding to the good repute these prophets left behind in this world — but this possibility appears very far-fetched, especially attending to the absolute form of "al-dār," and is not particularly consonant with the word "dhikrā" either. Some have also mentioned the possibility that it refers to a fine mention and beautiful praise in the Abode of the Hereafter — but this too appears far-fetched. In any case, it is possible for other people occasionally to remember the abode of the Hereafter as well — especially when a friend departs from this world, or when they are present at someone's funeral or at a commemoration gathering. But this remembrance is not pure, being bound up with the remembrance of this world. The men of God, however, maintain pure, deep, perpetual, and continuous attention toward the other world — as though it is always present before their eyes — and the expression "khāliṣa" in the verse alludes to this very point. Their fifth and sixth qualities appear in the subsequent verse: "They are indeed, in Our sight, from among the elect and the best." (وَإِنَّهُمْ عِنْدَنا لَمِنَ الْمُصْطَفَيْنَ الْأَخْيارِ). ["Muṣṭafīn" — with fatḥa on the "fā'" — is the plural of "muṣṭafā," originally "muṣṭafayn" with the first "yā'" elided.] Their faith and righteous deeds caused God to select them from among His servants and honour them with the office of prophethood and messengership, and their righteous conduct reached such a degree that they became worthy of being called "akhyār" — the best — in the absolute sense. Their thoughts are good, their morals are good, their deeds and their entire lives are good — "all that the good possess, they alone possess." Accordingly, some exegetes have inferred from this expression — that God addresses them absolutely as "akhyār" without any qualification — the meaning of the station of infallibility for the prophets. [Reference: Tafsīr Fakhr al-Dīn al-Rāzī, vol. 26, p. 217.] The expression "'indanā" — "in Our sight" — is most meaningful, alluding to the fact that their being elect and righteous is not established in the eyes of people — who sometimes excuse their own assessments — but their possession of these two qualities is established in Our sight, through a thorough examination and scrutiny of their outward and inward states. After indicating the important station of these three prophets, the turn comes for three others: "And remember Ishmael, Elisha, and Dhū al-Kifl — all of them from among the best." (وَاذْكُرْ إِسْماعِيلَ وَالْيَسَعَ وَذَا الْكِفْلِ وَكُلٌّ مِنَ الْأَخْيارِ). Each of them was a model and exemplar of patience, steadfastness, and obedience to God's command — especially Ishmael, who was prepared to sacrifice his life in His path and was accordingly known as Dhabīḥ Allāh — the one slaughtered for God. He collaborated greatly with his father in the construction of the Ka'ba, in giving life to that great centre, and in many other responsibilities. Attending to his life is a source of strength for the Prophet of Islam and all Muslims. The study of the lives of such great men of God provides guidance in human life, revives in people the spirit of piety, devotion, and self-sacrifice, and keeps them steadfast in the face of severe difficulties. The expression "kullun min al-akhyār" — attending to the fact that this same description — "al-akhyār" — appears as the final quality for Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob as well — may allude to the fact that these three prophets too are possessed of all the qualities of the preceding three, since absolute good carries a broad meaning that encompasses prophethood, attention toward the abode of the Hereafter, and the station of servitude, knowledge, and power. Of these three prophets, Ishmael is the most well-known and most widely recognised. As for Elisha — whose name appears only twice in the Quran, here and in verse 86 of Surah al-An'ām — the Quranic expression indicates that he too was among the great prophets of God and among those eminent figures concerning whom it is stated: وَكلًّا فَضَّلْنا عَلَى الْعالَمِينَ — "We gave each of them superiority and distinction over all the worlds." (al-An'ām, 86.) Some hold that he is the well-known Israelite prophet Yūsha' ibn Nūn, with the definite article prefixed and its "shīn" replaced by "sīn" — and the prefixing of the definite article to a non-Arabic name, Hebrew in this case, is not unusual, just as the Arabs know "Iskandar" by the name "al-Iskandar." Others regard it as an Arabic word derived from "yasa'" — root: "wus'a," imperfect tense — which after assuming a nominal aspect was prefixed with the definite article as a distinguishing marker. Verse 86 of Surah al-An'ām indicates that he was from the descendants of Abraham, but does not clarify whether or not he was from the Children of Israel. In the Books of Kings in the Torah his name is written as "Elisha son of Shaphat," and in Hebrew "Elisha" means "saviour" and "Shaphat" means "judge." Some identify him with Khiḍr, but no clear proof exists for this; and those who identify him with Dhū al-Kifl contradict the explicit statement of the verse under consideration, since the verse conjoins Dhū al-Kifl to Elisha. In any case, he is a prophet of elevated station and firm steadfastness, and for deriving lessons from his life this much suffices. As for Dhū al-Kifl — it is well established that he was among the prophets, and the mention of his name in verse 85 of Surah al-Anbiyā' alongside the names of prophets, after Ishmael and Idrīs, is evidence of this meaning. Some hold that he was among the prophets of the Children of Israel and regard him as a son of Job, peace be upon him, whose original name was Bishr, Bashīr, or Sharaf; some identify him with Ḥizqīl — Ezekiel — with Dhū al-Kifl having become well known as his sobriquet. [Reference: Each of A'lām al-Qur'ān, Tafsīr al-Qurṭubī, Tafsīr Rūḥ al-Bayān, and Tafsīr al-Mīzān has alluded to a portion of the above content.] Why was he called Dhū al-Kifl? Attending to the fact that "kifl" carries both the meaning of share and portion, and the meaning of guardianship and responsibility, scholars have mentioned various possibilities. Sometimes it is said that since God bestowed upon him an abundant share of His reward and mercy, he was named "Dhū al-Kifl" — possessor of an ample portion. At other times it is said that since he had made the commitment to rise for worship at night, to fast during the day, and never to become angry when adjudicating and making judgments — and he remained faithful to this commitment — he was given this title. At other times it is also said that since he took responsibility for a group of the prophets of the Children of Israel and saved their lives from the tyrannical king of the time, he was given this name. In any case, only this much of his life's account is accessible to us today — his obedience and servitude to God and his steadfastness and perseverance against the oppressors serve as proof and as a lesson for our today and tomorrow, even if precise judgments about the details of his life cannot be made on account of the distance of time.

See ayat 54 for tafseer.

See ayat 54 for tafseer.

See ayat 54 for tafseer.

See ayat 54 for tafseer.

See ayat 54 for tafseer.

From this point, the second section of the verses of this Surah begins. In this section, while comparing the God‑conscious (muttaqīn) with the rebellious transgressors, the outcomes of both groups in the Hereafter are described, thereby completing, in a general sense, the themes discussed in the preceding verses. First, in a comprehensive manner, it is stated regarding the accounts of the earlier Prophets and the moral and educational lessons derived from their lives: “هذا ذِكْرٌ” — this is a reminder. Indeed, the objective of recounting the rise and fall of their magnificent histories is not mere narration, but remembrance and admonition. As indicated at the very beginning of this Surah: “ص وَالْقُرْآنِ ذِي الذِّكْرِ”. The principal aim is to awaken reflection and insight among the believers for whom these verses were revealed, to elevate their level of understanding and awareness, and to strengthen their capacity for steadfastness and perseverance. Thereafter, the discussion moves from the particular lives of the Prophets to a general principle. Addressing the ultimate destiny of the God‑conscious, it is stated: “وَإِنَّ لِلْمُتَّقِينَ لَحُسْنَ مَآب” — indeed, for the God‑conscious there is an excellent return. Following this concise statement, which presents a general image of their fortunate state, the Qur’anic method of elaboration is employed, and its details are explained: their return is to eternal gardens, whose gates are already open before them: “جَنَّاتِ عَدْنٍ مُفَتَّحَةً لَهُمُ الْأَبْوابُ”. The term “جنّات” refers to the gardens of Paradise, and “عدن” signifies permanence and abiding stability, indicating the everlasting nature of these gardens. The expression “مُفَتَّحَةً لَهُمُ الْأَبْوابُ” suggests that even the effort of opening doors will not be required; Paradise itself awaits them, as if opening its embrace and inviting them inward. It is then described that they will recline therein upon couches, enjoying comfort and tranquility, while abundant fruits and drinks will be at their disposal, brought to them whenever they desire: “مُتَّكِئِينَ فِيها يَدْعُونَ فِيها بِفاكِهَةٍ كَثِيرَةٍ وَ شَرابٍ”. Whether these blessings are brought instantly by attendants or are realized through mere intention, both possibilities may be considered. The mention of fruits and beverages indicates that these will constitute a primary form of nourishment, though other forms of sustenance are also affirmed elsewhere in the Qur’an. The expression “كَثِيرَةٍ” points to the diversity and abundance of these provisions. Subsequently, the pure spouses of Paradise are described: “وَعِنْدَهُمْ قاصِراتُ الطَّرْفِ أَتْرابٌ” — they will have companions who restrain their gaze, devoted exclusively to their partners, and who are of equal age. The expression “قاصِرات الطرف” indicates that they direct their gaze solely toward their spouses, signifying exclusive affection and devotion. The term “أتراب” denotes equality in age, suggesting harmony and compatibility, further enhancing mutual affection. Finally, referring to all these blessings collectively, it is stated: “هذا ما تُوعَدُونَ لِيَوْمِ الْحِسابِ” — this is what you are promised for the Day of Reckoning. It is a firm and invigorating promise from God. To emphasize the eternal and inexhaustible nature of these blessings, it is further stated: “إِنَّ هذا لَرِزْقُنا ما لَهُ مِنْ نَفادٍ” — this is Our provision, which shall never come to an end. Thus, unlike the transient provisions of this world, over which the shadow of decline and cessation is always present, the نعمت of Paradise are everlasting. They are sustained by the infinite خزائن of God, free from depletion and limitation, enduring for eternity by divine will.

See ayat 61 for tafseer.

See ayat 61 for tafseer.

See ayat 61 for tafseer.

See ayat 61 for tafseer.

See ayat 61 for tafseer.

See ayat 61 for tafseer.

In the preceding verses, seven types of blessings and divine favors for the God‑conscious were enumerated. In the verses under discussion, following the Qur’anic method of comparison, the ominous fate of rebellious transgressors and the various forms of their punishment are described. It is first stated: “هذا وَإِنَّ لِلطَّاغِينَ لَشَرَّ مَآبٍ” — what has been mentioned pertains to the reward of the God‑conscious, and indeed for the transgressors there is an evil return. The God‑conscious possess “حُسْنَ مَآب,” whereas these are characterized by “شَرَّ مَآب,” an evil end and a regrettable final abode. The Qur’an then elaborates upon this concise statement: their wretched abode is Hell, into which they shall enter and therein burn, and what an evil resting place it is: “جَهَنَّمَ يَصْلَوْنَها فَبِئْسَ الْمِهادُ.” The expression “يَصْلَوْنَها” indicates that they will not merely observe Hell from a distance, but will enter it and remain in its consuming fire. Nor will they become accustomed to it; rather, its burning torment will persist. The word “مِهاد,” which denotes a bed or place of rest, intensifies the contrast, for instead of comfort, their “bed” will be the fire of Hell. Thereafter, another form of punishment is described: “هذا فَلْيَذُوقُوهُ حَمِيمٌ وَغَسَّاقٌ” — this is a boiling liquid and “غسّاق” which they must taste. “حميم” refers to scalding, intensely hot liquid that burns the body. In contrast, “غسّاق” has been understood as a dark, foul, and extremely distressing substance, sometimes interpreted as the discharge or corruption issuing from wounds, or as a form of punishment whose nature is particularly severe and repugnant. Together, these represent diverse and painful forms of suffering. The Qur’an adds: “وَآخَرُ مِنْ شَكْلِهِ أَزْواجٌ” — and there are other punishments of similar kinds. This expression indicates multiple forms of torment, varied in intensity and nature, paralleling the multiplicity of delights mentioned for the inhabitants of Paradise. The final dimension of their punishment is the presence of evil companionship. When the leaders of misguidance see their followers being brought into Hell, they say: “هذا فَوْجٌ مُقْتَحِمٌ مَعَكُمْ لا مَرْحَباً بِهِمْ إِنَّهُمْ صالُوا النَّارِ” — this is a group entering with you; no welcome to them, for they too shall burn in the fire. This expression of rejection provokes a response from the followers, who say: “بَلْ أَنْتُمْ لا مَرْحَباً بِكُمْ أَنْتُمْ قَدَّمْتُمُوهُ لَنا فَبِئْسَ الْقَرارُ” — rather, no welcome to you; it is you who prepared this fate for us, and what an evil abode it is. Thus, mutual blame emerges: those who followed accuse their leaders of leading them astray, while recognizing the permanence of their punishment. They then appeal to God: “رَبَّنا مَنْ قَدَّمَ لَنا هذا فَزِدْهُ عَذاباً ضِعْفاً فِي النَّارِ” — our Lord, whoever brought this upon us, increase his punishment manifold in the Fire. This reflects a fundamental principle: the leaders of misguidance bear a greater burden, though both leaders and followers are subject to punishment, as each contributed—leaders through direction and followers through compliance—to the perpetuation of wrongdoing. These verses depict the collapse of false solidarity in the Hereafter. Those who were متحد in error in worldly life become adversaries, exchanging blame, reproach, and curses. It is noteworthy that the diversity of blessings described for the God‑conscious exceeds the diversity of punishments described for the transgressors. This corresponds to the principle expressed in the supplication: “يا من سبقت رحمته غضبه” — O One whose mercy precedes His wrath.

See ayat 64 for tafseer.

See ayat 64 for tafseer.

These verses, continuing the discourse of the inhabitants of Hell, set forth one of their conversations — from which their profound and soul-rending remorse and a spiritually harrowing condition is expressed. The Quran states: "When the leaders of misguidance look about them in Hell, they will say: Why do we not see the men we used to count among the wicked?" (وَقالُوا ما لَنا لا نَرى رِجالًا كُنَّا نَعُدُّهُمْ مِنَ الْأَشْرارِ). Indeed, when individuals such as Abū Jahl and Abū Lahab find no trace of men such as 'Ammār Yāsir, Khabbāb, Ṣuhayb, and Bilāl in Hell, they will think to themselves and ask one another: where have these people gone? We regarded them as trouble-makers, corruptors of the earth, evildoers and rabble who had risen to destroy the peace and tranquility of society and to put an end to the authority of our elders — it now appears that our path was entirely wrong. "Did we mock them, or have our eyes missed them?" (أَتَّخَذْناهُمْ سِخْرِيًّا أَمْ زاغَتْ عَنْهُمُ الْأَبْصارُ). [Explanatory note: It is worthy of attention that "zāghat" — derived from the root "zaygh," meaning deviation from truth and rectitude — is here attributed to the eyes, not to those who possess eyes; this is for the purpose of hyperbole.] Yes — we used to mock those persons of great stature and attach to them the label of wickedness, and at times we regarded them as even lower than that, considering them so contemptible and debased that they did not register in our sight at all. But now it has become clear that the veil of passion, ignorance, and arrogance had been drawn over our eyes — they were among the intimates of God's court and at this moment the highest Paradise is their abode. A group of exegetes has mentioned another interpretive possibility in the commentary of this verse: that the mockery alludes to the condition of the world, and the sentence "am zāghat 'anhum al-abṣār" alludes to the condition of Hell — meaning that here, near-sighted eyes cannot see them amid the smoke and flames. However, the first meaning appears more correct. It is worthy of attention that one of the factors impeding the comprehension of realities is failing to take matters seriously and mocking the truth. One should always investigate matters with sincere intent so that reality may become clear and manifest. Thereafter, summarising the discourse that will take place among the inhabitants of Hell and by way of emphasis upon what has preceded, it is stated: "It is indeed a truth and a certainty that the inhabitants of Hell will engage in mutual disputations." (إِنَّ ذلِكَ لَحَقٌّ تَخاصُمُ أَهْلِ النَّارِ). [Explanatory note: "Takhāṣumu ahl al-nār" is an exposition of "dhālika."] The inhabitants of Hell are ensnared in enmity and strife in this world as well — the spirit of contention, quarrel, and dispute rules over them and they are daily at each other's throats in one way or another. And the Day of Resurrection is the day on which all hidden things become manifest — whatever is within them will be brought to light, and in Hell they will be at each other's throats; yesterday's friends will become today's enemies and yesterday's devoted followers will become today's adversaries. Only the path of faith and monotheism is the path of unity and purity both in this world and in the Hereafter. A delightful contrast is that the inhabitants of Paradise will be reclining on thrones engaged in friendly conversation — as is set forth in various Quranic verses — while the inhabitants of Hell will be engaged in conflict and strife; the former is itself a blessing and a great gift, and the latter is a painful punishment. A Note: In a hadith transmitted on the authority of Imam al-Ṣādiq, peace be upon him, he said to one of his companions: "God has mentioned you — the followers of the school of the Ahl al-Bayt — in the Quran, while your enemies in the fire of Hell will say: Why do we not see here the men we used to count among the wicked? Did we mock them, or was it sheer contempt that kept them from registering in our sight? — By God, those persons referred to are you — the people whom one group regards as evildoers. But by God, in Paradise you will be joyful and glad, while the inhabitants of Hell will be wandering about in their thoughts of you." [Reference: This narration is transmitted from Rawḍa al-Kāfī in Nūr al-Thaqalayn, vol. 4, p. 467.]

See ayat 70 for tafseer.

See ayat 70 for tafseer.

See ayat 70 for tafseer.

See ayat 70 for tafseer.

See ayat 70 for tafseer.

Since all the preceding discussion — whether concerning the painful punishment of the inhabitants of Hell or the worldly punishment of the sinful nations of the past — carried a dimension of warning and threat for the polytheists, the rebellious, and the oppressors, the verses under consideration, continuing this same theme, state: "Say: I am only a warner." (قُلْ إِنَّما أَنَا مُنْذِرٌ). It is true that the Prophet is also a bearer of glad tidings, and the Quranic verses speak to both meanings — but since glad tidings are for the believers and warning is for the polytheists and the corrupt, and the address here is directed toward the second group, only warning is mentioned. Thereafter it is further stated: "There is no deity except God, the One, the All-Subduing." (وَما مِنْ إِلهٍ إِلَّا اللهُ الْواحِدُ الْقَهَّارُ). The mention of His subduing power is likewise so that no one becomes deluded by His grace and kindness, imagining himself safe from His subduing power, and plunges into the whirlpool of disbelief and sin. Without interval, as a proof of the Lord's uniqueness of divinity and worship, it is further stated: "He is the Lord of the heavens and the earth and all that is between them — the Mighty, the Most Forgiving." (رَبُّ السَّماواتِ وَالْأَرْضِ وَما بَيْنَهُمَا الْعَزِيزُ الْغَفَّارُ). In reality this verse sets forth three of God's attributes, each serving to establish a particular purpose. The first is His "rububiyya" — Lordship — over the entire realm of existence: He is the Owner of this whole world, an Owner who administers and nurtures it. Only such a being is worthy of worship, not those idols that possess not even a needle's point of anything of their own. The second is His "'izza" — might. "Azīz" in its lexical meaning denotes one over whom no one can prevail and whose every will comes to pass — in other words, He is always prevailing and never overcome. Given this, how is it possible to escape the grip of His power or attain deliverance from His punishment? The third attribute is the station of "ghaffāriyya" — abundant forgiveness — which keeps the doors of return and turning back toward Him open before sinners and pours the rain of His mercy upon them, so they do not suppose that His being the Subduer and the Mighty means closing the doors of mercy and repentance before His servants. In reality one attribute gives expression to awe and the other to hope — for without the balance of these two states, the human being's perfection and elevation is not possible: either he falls prey to arrogance and heedlessness or drowns in the whirlpool of despair. In other words, His description as the Mighty and the Most Forgiving is yet another proof of His divinity — for only that being is worthy of worship which, in addition to Lordship, also possesses the power to punish, and alongside the power to punish keeps the doors of His mercy and forgiveness open as well. Thereafter the Noble Prophet, peace be upon him and his household, is addressed and in a brief yet arresting manner it is stated: "Say: it is a great news." (قُلْ هُوَ نَبَأٌ عَظِيمٌ). "From which you are turning away." (أَنْتُمْ عَنْهُ مُعْرِضُونَ). What is this news that is alluded to and described as great? The Quran? The prophetic mission of the Prophet? The Resurrection and the fate of the believers and the disbelievers? The oneness and uniqueness of God? Or all of these together? Since the Quran encompasses and unifies all these matters, and since it was also from the Quran that the polytheists turned away, the first meaning — the Quran — is most appropriate. Yes, this great heavenly book is a momentous news that carries a greatness commensurate with the whole realm of existence, for it has been sent down by the Creator of this world — the Creator who is the Mighty and Most Forgiving, the One and the All-Subduing. A news whose greatness a very large group did not comprehend at the time of its revelation — some mocked it, some called it sorcery, and a group declared it poetry. But it was not long before this "great news" manifested its inner depth and transformed the course of human history, cast its shadow over the vast realm of existence, and spread its great and luminous civilisation in every field. It is worthy of attention that the proclamation of this "great news" was made in this Meccan surah at a time when the Muslims were apparently in the utmost weakness and helplessness and the paths of success and deliverance were closed before them. Even in the present age this great news is not fully clear to the people of the world — indeed, not even to the Muslims themselves — and the future alone will reveal it. The Quranic statement "you are turning away from it" remains true to this day, and it is this very turning away on the part of Muslims that has prevented them from being fully satiated from this gushing spring of divine bounty, from advancing properly in the light of its illumination, and from scaling the peaks of honour and glory. Thereafter the event of the creation of Adam, peace be upon him, is recounted — including the elevation of the human being's station to the degree that the angels prostrated before him. By way of preamble it is stated: "I had no knowledge of the highest assembly when they were in discourse." (ما كانَ لِي مِنْ عِلْمٍ بِالْمَلَإِ الْأَعْلى إِذْ يَخْتَصِمُونَ). "I am only informed through revelation — I am but a clear warner." (إِنْ يُوحى إِلَيَّ إِلَّا أَنَّما أَنَا نَذِيرٌ مُبِينٌ). Although the angels were not engaged in any actual dispute or contention with the Lord — the situation was only that when God said to them "I intend to place a vicegerent on earth," they began to speak and said: "Will You place one who will cause corruption and shed blood?" — to which the reply came: "I know what you do not know" (al-Baqara, 30) — the expression "mukhāṣama" has been applied to these very statements of theirs, which is a figurative application. And as has been alluded to, this is in reality a prelude and introduction to the subsequent verses that discuss the creation of Adam, peace be upon him. The possibility also exists that "al-mala' al-a'lā" carries a broad meaning that encompasses Satan as well — since at that time Satan was also in the ranks of the angels and rose to contend with God, raised objections, and was consequently eternally expelled from the divine court. The first interpretation, however, is more appropriate. In numerous narrations transmitted through both Shia and Sunni sources it is related that the Noble Prophet, peace be upon him and his household, asked one of his companions: "Do you know what the angels of the highest assembly discourse about?" He said: No. The Prophet then stated: "They discourse about acts of atonement and degrees of elevation. As for the acts of atonement — they are performing ablution with full water in the cold of winter, walking to congregational prayer, and waiting for the next prayer after performing one. As for the degrees of elevation — they are spreading the greeting of peace abundantly, feeding others, and performing the night prayer while people are asleep." [Explanatory note: Majma' al-Bayān, under the verse under consideration. This same hadith is also transmitted in Tafsīr Durr al-Manthūr through several chains of transmission from various companions of the Prophet, with some variation.] However, this hadith does not explicitly state that it was transmitted in the context of the exegesis of the verse under consideration, even though its expressions resemble those of the verse. In any case, from this hadith it becomes apparent that by "mukhāṣama" here is meant simply discourse concerning the deeds of human beings — specifically those acts that serve as atonement for sins and those that increase the human being's degrees of elevation. Perhaps their discourse concerns the enumeration of the acts that are the source of these merits, or the determination of the limit and standard of the degrees attained through those acts — and in this manner a third interpretation of the verse emerges that is appropriate in several respects, but does not bear a particularly close relationship to the subsequent verses. And as has been stated, it is possible that this hadith pertains to another discourse of the angels, not the one connected to these verses. It is also worthy of attention that the Noble Prophet's lack of knowledge in this matter means: I do not know this from myself — I know only what is revealed to me through revelation.

See ayat 83 for tafseer.

See ayat 83 for tafseer.

See ayat 83 for tafseer.

See ayat 83 for tafseer.

See ayat 83 for tafseer.

See ayat 83 for tafseer.

See ayat 83 for tafseer.

See ayat 83 for tafseer.

See ayat 83 for tafseer.

See ayat 83 for tafseer.

See ayat 83 for tafseer.

See ayat 83 for tafseer.

As explained, these verses relate to the discourse concerning al‑Malāʾ al‑Aʿlā and the account of Iblīs. The overall purpose of presenting this narrative is, first, to remind human beings of the عظمت and worth of their existence: that all the angels prostrated before their forefather Ādam. How, then, does a being honored with such a مقام fall into the snare of Shayṭān and the desires of the nafs, forgetting his own value and stooping to bow before stone and wood? In principle, one of the most effective methods of تربیت is to remind individuals of their inherent dignity and elevated status, so that they themselves recognize that degeneration and baseness are unworthy of them, and thus naturally distance themselves from such states. Second, the obstinacy, arrogance, and envy of Iblīs serve as a warning and lesson for all arrogant and self‑conceited individuals. These very qualities caused him to fall permanently from the heights of honor into the depths of disgrace and divine rejection. Third, the account introduces a formidable دشمن who has sworn to mislead all human beings, so that they remain vigilant and do not fall into his snares. These themes collectively continue and complete the preceding discussion. Thus, the first of the verses states: “إِذْ قالَ رَبُّكَ لِلْمَلائِكَةِ إِنِّي خالِقٌ بَشَراً مِنْ طِينٍ” — when your Lord said to the angels: I am going to create a human being from clay. Lest it be imagined that the human being is defined only by this material aspect, the following verse adds: “فَإِذا سَوَّيْتُهُ وَ نَفَخْتُ فِيهِ مِنْ رُوحِي فَقَعُوا لَهُ ساجِدِينَ” — when I have fashioned him and breathed into him of My روح, then fall down in prostration before him. Thus, the creation of the human being reached completion: the خاکی element and the divine روح converged, producing a remarkable and unprecedented existence—one capable of both extreme elevation and extreme سقوط, and endowed with the استعداد of khilāfat. Accordingly, all the angels, without exception, prostrated: “فَسَجَدَ الْمَلائِكَةُ كُلُّهُمْ أَجْمَعُونَ”. However, one being alone refused: “إِلَّا إِبْلِيسَ اسْتَكْبَرَ وَ كانَ مِنَ الْكافِرِينَ”. He displayed arrogance and rebellion and thereby fell from his exalted مقام. Indeed, arrogance is among the gravest afflictions of the human condition; it blinds perception, obstructs recognition of truth, and removes a person from the صف of the obedient servants of God, placing him among the rebellious. God then addressed him: “قالَ يا إِبْلِيسُ ما مَنَعَكَ أَنْ تَسْجُدَ لِما خَلَقْتُ بِيَدَيَّ” — O Iblīs, what prevented you from prostrating to that which I created with My hands? Here, “يَدَيَّ” is not to be understood literally, but as a metaphor for divine قدرت and special creative care, indicating the particular attention and distinction granted to the human being. Then it is said: “أَسْتَكْبَرْتَ أَمْ كُنْتَ مِنَ الْعالِينَ” — did you act out of arrogance, or were you among those who consider themselves above such a command? Iblīs chose the latter, asserting: “قالَ أَنَا خَيْرٌ مِنْهُ خَلَقْتَنِي مِنْ نارٍ وَ خَلَقْتَهُ مِنْ طِينٍ”. His reasoning rested upon three premises: that he was created from fire and Ādam from clay; that fire is superior to clay; and that the superior should not submit to the inferior. His error lay in the latter two claims. The distinction of Ādam was not his earthly substance alone but the divine روح imparted to him. Moreover, clay is not inferior, for it is the origin of life, growth, sustenance, and all material blessings. Above all, obedience to the command of God is absolute and unconditional. Thus, Iblīs’s argument reflects a deeper denial—an implicit challenge to divine wisdom—and therefore represents a profound سقوط into disbelief. His deviation was the result of a combination of self‑regard, arrogance, ignorance, and envy. He was then expelled: “فَاخْرُجْ مِنْها فَإِنَّكَ رَجِيمٌ”، and it was declared: “وَإِنَّ عَلَيْكَ لَعْنَتِي إِلى‏ يَوْمِ الدِّينِ”. Yet instead of repentance, he persisted in obstinacy and requested respite: “قالَ رَبِّ فَأَنْظِرْنِي إِلى‏ يَوْمِ يُبْعَثُونَ”. His request was granted, not absolutely but conditionally: “إِلى‏ يَوْمِ الْوَقْتِ الْمَعْلُوم”. Thereafter, he revealed his intent: “قالَ فَبِعِزَّتِكَ لَأُغْوِيَنَّهُمْ أَجْمَعِينَ”. However, he acknowledged an exception: “إِلَّا عِبادَكَ مِنْهُمُ الْمُخْلَصِينَ”. Those who attain sincerity and purity in their devotion remain beyond his reach. As confirmed elsewhere: “وَلَقَدْ صَدَّقَ عَلَيْهِمْ إِبْلِيسُ ظَنَّهُ … إِلَّا فَرِيقاً مِنَ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ”. Thus, the narrative establishes fundamental truths: the exalted مقام of the human being, the danger of arrogance and envy, the reality of a persistent adversary, and the ultimate protection afforded by إخلاص—continuous return to God and steadfastness upon His path.

A number of issues arise in connection with the verses under discussion—among them the problem of the creation of Shayṭān, the rationale behind the prostration of the angels before Ādam, the cause of Ādam’s superiority over the angels, the types of individuals over whom Shayṭān exerts influence, the consequences of arrogance and self‑centeredness, the meaning of “طين” and “روحِ الٰہی,” and questions concerning the مستقل creation of Ādam in relation to theories of gradual development. These matters have been discussed in detail in earlier exegesis; here, attention is drawn specifically to the question concerning the فلسفہ of the creation of Shayṭān. A common question arises: if the human being has been created for تکامل, for the attainment of felicity through obedience to God, then what justification exists for the presence of Shayṭān, who appears to function as a destructive force opposing this very goal—an intelligent, cunning, and persistent adversary intent on misguidance? However, even a brief reflection reveals that the existence of such an adversary itself serves as an instrument for human growth and development. Strength and vitality manifest most clearly in confrontation with difficulty and opposition. Those who withstand and struggle against formidable enemies emerge stronger and advance further along the path of development. In various domains of human experience, this principle is evident: - Skilled commanders and seasoned soldiers are those who have faced powerful adversaries in severe conflict. - Capable leaders and statesmen are those who have navigated intense crises and opposition. - Accomplished athletes and champions achieve their excellence through engagement with strong competitors. Accordingly, there is no surprise in recognizing that the servants of God, through continuous struggle against Shayṭān, increase in strength, awareness, and spiritual refinement. Modern scientific reflection has even drawn analogous conclusions in the physical domain. It is observed that the existence of resistant microorganisms stimulates the defenses of the human body; without such challenges, the organism would weaken and its development would be diminished. In a similar manner, the confrontation of the human spirit with Shayṭān and the impulses of the nafs becomes a means of strengthening and elevating it. This, however, does not imply that Shayṭān was created with the intrinsic purpose of misguiding humanity. Rather, he was, in his origin, created in a state of purity like all other beings. His deviation, fall, and transformation into Shayṭān occurred as a result of his own choice, arising from pride, envy, and self‑assertion. Thus, God did not create him as Shayṭān from the beginning; he became Shayṭān by his own volition. Nevertheless, even his role as an adversary cannot harm the sincere servants of God but instead becomes a means for their advancement and perfection. A related question remains: why was Shayṭān granted respite rather than being immediately destroyed? The answer lies in the very nature of the worldly order. This world is a field of آزمائش—a domain in which human beings are tested, developed, and refined. Such آزمائش cannot be realized without opposition, challenge, and resistance. The presence of Shayṭān intensifies this process, making the trial more profound and the opportunity for growth more substantial. It should be noted that even in the absence of Shayṭān, the internal inclinations of the nafs would suffice to create آزمائش. However, Shayṭān represents an external factor, complementing the internal one. The existence of both inward impulses and outward temptation renders the arena of آزمائش more complete and more rigorous. Thus, the presence of Shayṭān, far from negating the purpose of human creation, contributes to its fulfillment by providing the conditions necessary for striving, resistance, and ultimately attainment of higher degrees of spiritual perfection.

Among those extraordinarily sensitive matters that draw attention to themselves in the event of Iblīs and his being expelled from the divine court is the influence of the factor of self-centeredness and arrogance in the darkness and wretchedness of the human being — to such a degree that it may be said this is the most important and most dangerous factor of deviation. It was this very thing that in a single moment annihilated six thousand years of worship; it was this very thing that cast into the lowest pit of wretchedness a being who had been a companion of the great angels of the heavens and rendered him deserving of God's eternal curse. Self-centeredness and arrogance do not permit the human being to see the face of reality in its true form. Self-centeredness is the source of envy, envy is the source of malice and rancour, and malice and rancour lead to bloodshed and other crimes. Self-centeredness urges the human being to persist in errors and mistakes, and when it has taken hold it renders all awakening factors ineffective. Self-centeredness and obstinacy snatch from the human being the opportunity for repentance and redress and close the doors of salvation before him. In sum, whatever is said regarding the dangerousness of this reprehensible and blameworthy quality falls far short of what is due. How excellently did Amir al-Mu'minin 'Alī, peace be upon him, state: فَعَدُوُّ اللهِ إِمَامُ الْمُتَعَصِّبِينَ، وَسَلَفُ الْمُسْتَكْبِرِينَ، الَّذِي وَضَعَ أَسَاسَ الْعَصَبِيَّةِ، وَنَازَعَ اللهَ رِدَاءَ الْجَبَرِيَّةِ، وَادَّرَعَ لِبَاسَ التَّعَزُّزِ، وَخَلَعَ قِنَاعَ التَّذَلُّلِ، أَلَا تَرَوْنَ كَيْفَ صَغَّرَهُ اللهُ بِتَكَبُّرِهِ؟ وَوَضَعَهُ بِتَرَفُّعِهِ؟ فَجَعَلَهُ فِي الدُّنْيَا مَدْحُورًا وَأَعَدَّ لَهُ فِي الْآخِرَةِ سَعِيرًا — "This enemy of God is the leader of the partisans of bigotry and the forerunner of the arrogant — he who laid the foundation of fanaticism, self-conceit, and self-centeredness; who rose to dispute with God against His station of majesty and omnipotence; who clothed himself in the garment of self-aggrandisement and cast off the veil of humility and submissiveness. Do you not see how God diminished him on account of his arrogance and brought him low on account of his self-elevation? He made him in this world a castaway and has prepared for him in the Hereafter a blazing fire." (Nahj al-Balāgha, Khutba 192, Khutba al-Qāṣi'a.)

See ayat 88 for tafseer.

See ayat 88 for tafseer.

See ayat 88 for tafseer.

See ayat 88 for tafseer.

These verses, which form the conclusion of Surah Ṣād, in reality present a summary of its entire content and the outcome of all the discussions conveyed throughout the Surah. In response to Iblīs—who had declared with determination that he would mislead all human beings except the “مخلصين”—God states: “قالَ فَالْحَقُّ وَ الْحَقَّ أَقُول” — by the Truth, and the Truth I speak. “لَأَمْلَأَنَّ جَهَنَّمَ مِنْكَ وَ مِمَّنْ تَبِعَكَ مِنْهُمْ أَجْمَعِينَ” — I shall surely fill Hell with you and with all those who follow you. All that has been presented from the beginning of the Surah until this point is grounded in حق: the struggles of the Prophets, the realities of resurrection and recompense, the نعمت prepared for the righteous, and the عذاب awaiting the rebellious. The Surah thus concludes with a categorical affirmation of truth and a decisive response to Iblīs’s claim. The emphatic structure—repetition of “حق,” the oath, the use of “لام” and “نونِ تاکید,” and the word “أجمعين”—eliminates all doubt: there remains no path of salvation for Shayṭān and those who persist in following him. After this definitive declaration, four essential points are presented concisely: First, it is stated: “قُلْ ما أَسْئَلُكُمْ عَلَيْهِ مِنْ أَجْرٍ” — say: I do not ask of you any recompense. Thus, all pretexts are removed. The message is purely for the salvation and well‑being of humanity; it is not motivated by material gain, social status, gratitude, or power. The Prophet’s reward is solely with God: “إِنْ أَجْرِيَ إِلَّا عَلَى اللَّهِ.” This itself constitutes a clear indication of the truthfulness of the prophetic mission, for false claimants invariably reveal their ulterior interests. Second, it is stated: “وَ ما أَنَا مِنَ الْمُتَكَلِّفِينَ” — I am not among those who impose artificiality. The message is devoid of affectation; it is clear, natural, and grounded in reason and حقیقت. The first statement emphasizes the sincerity of the messenger, while the second highlights the clarity and authenticity of the message itself. Third, the fundamental purpose of revelation is clarified: “إِنْ هُوَ إِلَّا ذِكْرٌ لِلْعالَمِينَ” — it is nothing but a reminder for all the worlds. The essential objective is بیداری—awakening human consciousness. The path of truth is already clear, and human فطرت inclines toward it; what is required is remembrance and attention. The role of the Prophets and divine revelation is thus to awaken, not to impose something alien to human nature. Fourth, a warning is given: “وَ لَتَعْلَمُنَّ نَبَأَهُ بَعْدَ حِينٍ” — you will surely come to know its reality after a time. Even if the message is initially disregarded, its truth will manifest inevitably—both in this world, through the unfolding of historical and اجتماعی realities, and in the Hereafter, through the manifestation of divine recompense. In summary, the Surah concludes with a powerful synthesis: affirmation of divine truth, clarification of human responsibility, elimination of excuses, and a decisive warning regarding the consequences of following the path of misguidance.

In the verses under consideration it is set forth that the Noble Prophet, peace be upon him and his household, counts among his distinctions the fact that he is not among the "mutakalllifīn" — those who affect pretension and artificiality. In the narrations there are very extensive discussions concerning the signs and characteristics of the "mutakalllifīn." In a hadith transmitted in Jawāmi' al-Jāmi' on the authority of the Noble Prophet, peace be upon him and his household, it is stated: لِلْمُتَكَلِّفِ ثَلَاثُ عَلَامَاتٍ: يُنَازِعُ مَنْ فَوْقَهُ، وَيَتَعَاطَى مَا لَا يَنَالُ، وَيَقُولُ مَا لَا يَعْلَمُ — "The mutakallif has three signs: he is always in conflict and contention with those above him; he pursues matters he can never attain; and he speaks about subjects of which he has no knowledge." [Reference: Jawāmi' al-Jāmi', according to al-Mīzān, vol. 17, p. 243.] This same content appears in another formulation in the words of Luqmān the Wise, transmitted on the authority of Imam al-Ṣādiq, peace be upon him. In another hadith, set forth among the Prophet's testamentary counsels to 'Alī, it is stated: لِلْمُتَكَلِّفِ ثَلَاثُ عَلَامَاتٍ: يَتَمَلَّقُ إِذَا حَضَرَ، وَيَغْتَابُ إِذَا غَابَ، وَيَشْمَتُ بِالْمُصِيبَةِ — "The mutakallif has three signs: he flatters and fawns when present; he backbites when absent; and he gloats in the face of affliction." [Reference: Nūr al-Thaqalayn, vol. 4, p. 473.] In yet another hadith transmitted on the authority of Imam al-Ṣādiq, peace be upon him, it is stated: الْمُتَكَلِّفُ مُخْطِئٌ وَإِنْ أَصَابَ، وَالْمُتَكَلِّفُ لَا يَسْتَجْلِبُ فِي عَاقِبَةِ أَمْرِهِ إِلَّا الْهَوَانَ، وَفِي الْوَقْتِ إِلَّا التَّعَبَ وَالْعَنَاءَ وَالشَّقَاءَ، وَالْمُتَكَلِّفُ ظَاهِرُهُ رِيَاءٌ وَبَاطِنُهُ نِفَاقٌ، وَهُمَا جَنَاحَانِ بِهِمَا يَطِيرُ الْمُتَكَلِّفُ، وَلَيْسَ فِي الْجُمْلَةِ مِنْ أَخْلَاقِ الصَّالِحِينَ، وَلَا مِنْ شِعَارِ الْمُتَّقِينَ الْمُتَكَلِّفُ فِي أَيِّ بَابٍ، كَمَا قَالَ اللهُ تَعَالَى لِنَبِيِّهِ قَالَ مَا أَسْئَلُكُمْ عَلَيْهِ مِنْ أَجْرٍ وَمَا أَنَا مِنَ الْمُتَكَلِّفِينَ — "The mutakallif is in error even if he outwardly reaches the truth. The mutakallif will ultimately obtain nothing save humiliation and abasement; and in the present moment his portion is nothing but anguish, toil, and wretchedness. The outward of the mutakallif is ostentation and his inward is hypocrisy, and these are the two wings upon which the mutakallif flies. In sum, pretension and artificiality — in whatever domain — is not among the moral qualities of the righteous nor among the distinguishing marks of the pious, as God says to His Prophet: 'Say: I ask of you no reward for it, and I am not among the mutakalllifīn.'" [ibid.] From all these narrations taken together it becomes apparent that the mutakalllifīn are those who, stepping outside the path of truth, justice, and rectitude, disregard realities and pursue imaginations; they give news of matters about which they have no knowledge and interfere in affairs they do not understand. Their outward and inward states are at variance with each other, and their presence and absence are in contradiction. They cast themselves into anguish and toil and obtain nothing save shame and wretchedness — and the pious and the righteous are entirely free and transcendent of this "quality." O Lord, grant us the grace to remain far from all manifestations of pretension, hypocrisy, rebellion, and insubordination. O God, place us in the ranks of the sincere — those whom You protect under the canopy of Your guardianship and from whom the misleading Satan despairs. O Lord, bestow upon us that awakening and discernment to rise in order to give life to the meanings and content of this Holy Quran — that we may unite the strength and power of all the Muslims of the world, advance with one heart and one voice upon Your path, and reduce to naught the enemies of truth and reality. Āmīn, yā Rabb al-'Ālamīn.