Az-Zukhruf

See ayat 8 for tafseer.

See ayat 8 for tafseer.

See ayat 8 for tafseer.

See ayat 8 for tafseer.

See ayat 8 for tafseer.

See ayat 8 for tafseer.

See ayat 8 for tafseer.

At the opening of the surah we once again encounter the muqatta'at letters — Ha Mim. This is the fourth surah that opens with "Ha Mim." Three other surahs also open with these same two letters. Collectively, these seven surahs form the "family of Ha Mim." In order they are: 1. Al-Mu'min; 2. Ha Mim al-Sajdah; 3. Al-Shura; 4. Al-Zukhruf; 5. Al-Dukhan; 6. Al-Jathiyyah; 7. Al-Ahqaf. The muqatta'at have already been discussed at length in the preceding volumes of Tafsir-i Namunah (see Vol. 1, opening of Surah al-Baqarah; Vol. 2, opening of Surah Al 'Imran; Vol. 6, opening of Surah al-A'raf; and Vol. 20, opening of Surah Ha Mim al-Sajdah). In the second verse of this series, taking an oath by the Holy Quran, it is stated: by the clear Book (وَالْكِتَابِ الْمُبِينِ) — that Book whose realities are manifest, whose meaning is clear, whose proofs of truthfulness are evident, and whose paths of guidance are plain and luminous. We have made it an Arabic Quran so that you may comprehend it (إِنَّا جَعَلْنَاهُ قُرْآنًا عَرَبِيًّا لَّعَلَّكُمْ تَعْقِلُونَ). (Explanatory Note: In "wa al-kitabi al-mubin," the "waw" is for oath-taking, and the clause "inna ja'alnahu qur'anan 'arabiyyan" is the response to the oath.) The Quran's being Arabic is either in consideration of the fact that it was revealed in the Arabic language — one of the most expansive and comprehensive languages of the world for expressing realities, and one that sets forth the most subtle and delicate meanings with extraordinary refinement and grace — or "Arabic" is in the sense of "eloquence" (for one meaning of the word "'arabi" is "fasih" — eloquent), which is an allusion to the fact that We have revealed this Quran in the most eloquent manner so that it may express the finest realities through its sentences and words and all people may comprehend it well. There is also an interesting point here: the oath and its response are one and the same thing. An oath is taken by the Quran that this Book has been made Arabic so that all people may understand its meanings — and this may be an allusion to the fact that nothing surpassing the Quran exists by which an oath could be taken. If anything could surpass the Quran, it would be only the Quran itself — for it is the speech of God and this divine speech is a manifestation of His most holy essence. The use of "la'alla" — perhaps, it may be — is not because the Lord Almighty entertains any doubt about the effectiveness of the Holy Quran, nor is it a situation of aspiration and hope in which some difficulty is encountered in reaching the desired end. Rather, it is an allusion to the fact that the intellectual and moral levels of those who hear the Quranic verses vary, and accordingly the effectiveness of the Quran varies in proportion to those levels — toward which a summary allusion is made through "la'alla." (For further details see Tafsir-i Namunah, Vol. 3, the commentary on verse 200 of Surah Al 'Imran.) Three further qualities of this heavenly Book are then set forth: and indeed it is in the source book — the Lawh al-Mahfuz — with Us, exalted and full of wisdom (وَإِنَّهُ فِي أُمِّ الْكِتَابِ لَدَيْنَا لَعَلِيٌّ حَكِيمٌ). The first quality alludes to the fact that the Holy Quran is recorded and preserved in the "umm al-kitab" with the Lord Almighty, as also stated in verses 21-22 of Surah al-Buruj: بَلْ هُوَ قُرْآنٌ مَّجِيدٌ فِي لَوْحٍ مَّحْفُوظٍ — it is a glorious Quran in a preserved tablet. The question now is: what is meant by "umm al-kitab" or "lawh mahfuz"? In the Arabic language the word "umm" carries the meaning of the origin, foundation, and basis of every thing. If the Arabs call a mother "umm" it is because she is the foundation of the family and the refuge of her children. Accordingly, "umm al-kitab" means the book that is the origin and foundation of all heavenly books — and that is the tablet which, in God's presence, is preserved from every kind of change, alteration, and distortion. Such a book is "the knowledge of the Lord Almighty" which remains with Him, and in which are recorded the realities of the entire universe, the conditions that have occurred and will occur in the universe past, present, and future, and all the heavenly books — and to this extent none has access to it except those whom God Himself informs. This is the great exaltedness of the Holy Quran, whose wellspring is the boundless knowledge of the Almighty, and whose origin and foundation is with God Himself. On this basis, the second quality is then stated: it is an exalted book (لَعَلِيٌّ). Regarding the third quality it is stated: it is full of wisdom, firm, sound, and well-calculated (حَكِيمٌ). And what has a direct connection with the infinite knowledge of God ought to be possessed of such qualities. Some exegetes consider the Quran to be exalted in the sense that it surpasses and takes precedence over all other heavenly books, has abrogated all of them, and has been elevated to the highest station of inimitability. Others hold that it is possessed of an exalted station because its contents encompass realities that are beyond the reach of human thought — in addition to those realities whose outward meaning every person grasps. It is also noteworthy that the word "hakim" is generally used as a quality of a human being or person, not of a book — but since this heavenly book is itself a great teacher and bestower of wisdom, this expression is most appropriate and fitting for it. The meaning of "hakim" as "firm" and "free from every kind of defect" has also been cited, and all these meanings and contents are present in the word and apply truly and correctly to the Quran — for the Quran is "hakim" in respect of all these meanings. In the subsequent verse, addressing those who turn away from the Quran and deny it, it is stated: shall We then turn away from you — this reminder that is the cause of your awakening and attention — simply because you are a people given to excess and transgression? (أَفَنَضْرِبُ عَنكُمُ الذِّكْرَ صَفْحًا أَن كُنتُمْ قَوْمًا مُّسْرِفِينَ). It is true that in opposing and being hostile to the truth you have left no stone unturned and have carried your opposition to the point of excess and extravagance — but the grace, mercy, and kindness of God is also so vast that He does not regard your such conduct as a barrier to His mercy, and He continues to send this awakening heavenly book for you, so that those hearts in which some degree of readiness is found may be stirred into motion and come onto the straight path. This is the meaning of the general mercy and rahmâniyyah of the Lord Almighty, which encompasses both friend and foe alike. "Afanadribu 'ankum" has been interpreted as "shall We turn it away from you and leave it" — for when a rider wishes to turn his mount from one path toward another he strikes it, and accordingly in such a context the word "darb" is used in the sense of "turning away" (Reference: Tafsir Majma' al-Bayan, under these verses). "Safh" is originally used in the sense of "side" and "a direction," and also in the sense of "breadth" — but in this verse the first meaning is used: shall We turn away from you, to another direction, this Quran that is the cause of reminder? "Musrif" is from the root "israf," meaning to exceed the limit — and this is an allusion to the fact that the polytheists and enemies of the Messenger of God — peace and blessings of God be upon him and his family — had exceeded all limits in their enmity and opposition and recognised no boundary for their hostility and antagonism. Then, both as a witness to the above ruling and as a consolation for the Noble Prophet — peace and blessings of God be upon him and his family — and simultaneously as a warning and threat to the obstinate deniers, it is stated briefly yet firmly: We have sent many prophets among the former peoples for the sake of guidance (وَكَمْ أَرْسَلْنَا مِن نَّبِيٍّ فِي الْأَوَّلِينَ). But no prophet came to them without their mocking him (وَمَا يَأْتِيهِم مِّن نَّبِيٍّ إِلَّا كَانُوا بِهِ يَسْتَهْزِئُونَ). Such opposition and mockery never obstructed the divine grace — for this is divine beneficence that flows from eternity to eternity, a generosity that is equal for all servants of God, and indeed fundamentally God created them for the sake of mercy: وَلِذَٰلِكَ خَلَقَهُمْ (Hud — 119). Therefore your turning away and obstinacy can never obstruct His grace and generosity, and the Prophet — peace and blessings of God be upon him and his family — and the believers should not become despondent and distressed — for turning away from truth and following the desires of the lower self is not a product of today but has persisted since ancient times. However, this too must not be forgotten by the unbelievers: the boundless grace and generosity of the Lord Almighty cannot be a barrier to His punishment — for punishing the guilty is also a requirement of His wisdom. Hence the subsequent verse states: We have destroyed those who were more powerful than they (فَأَهْلَكْنَا أَشَدَّ مِنْهُم بَطْشًا). And the example of the former peoples has already passed (وَمَضَىٰ مَثَلُ الْأَوَّلِينَ). In the verses revealed before this, many examples of the rebellion and disobedience of such defiant nations have been presented, and their detailed conditions have reached you through revelation in full — among these nations were some that were many times more powerful than the Arab polytheists, with abundant resources and means, no shortage of human power, great military strength, and greater capacities — such as Pharaoh and his nation, and the nations of 'Ad and Thamud in terms of power. But now go and look upon their cities in ruins; read their chronicles in the books of history — and the clearest account of all is present in the Quran; study it and reflect carefully upon it. Then you shall know that the obstinate and defiant can never escape the painful punishment of God. "Batsh" — on the measure of "farsh" — means, as Raghib states in al-Mufradat, "to seize something with force." Here the word "ashadd" is also used alongside it to convey extreme intensity of power. The pronoun in "minhum" returns to the Arab polytheists who were the addressees in the preceding verses — but here the pronoun is in the third person because they are not worthy of God's continued direct address. Some distinguished exegetes understand the clause "wa mada mathalu al-awwalin" — the example of the former peoples has passed — as a reference to the preceding Surah al-Shura, which has already passed, and in which some mention of such people appears. However, there is no proof for such a restriction — particularly since Surah al-Shura contains very little allusion to the chronicles of former nations, while their detailed accounts are recorded in other Quranic surahs. In any case, this verse is analogous to verse 78 of Surah al-Qasas: أَوَلَمْ يَعْلَمْ أَنَّ اللَّهَ قَدْ أَهْلَكَ مِن قَبْلِهِ مِنَ الْقُرُونِ مَنْ هُوَ أَشَدُّ مِنْهُ قُوَّةً وَأَكْثَرُ جَمْعًا — did Qarun not know that God had destroyed before him generations who were mightier than him in power and greater in the accumulation of wealth? Or it is analogous to verse 21 of Surah al-Mu'min, which warns the Arab polytheists: أَوَلَمْ يَسِيرُوا فِي الْأَرْضِ فَيَنظُرُوا كَيْفَ كَانَ عَاقِبَةُ الَّذِينَ كَانُوا مِن قَبْلِهِمْ كَانُوا هُمْ أَشَدَّ مِنْهُمْ قُوَّةً وَآثَارًا فِي الْأَرْضِ فَأَخَذَهُمُ اللَّهُ بِذُنُوبِهِمْ وَمَا كَانَ لَهُم مِّنَ اللَّهِ مِن وَاقٍ — did they not travel through the land and observe what the end of those before them was? They were mightier than them in power and in the traces they left upon the earth, but God seized them for their sins and there was no one to protect them from the punishment of God.

See ayat 14 for tafseer.

See ayat 14 for tafseer.

See ayat 14 for tafseer.

See ayat 14 for tafseer.

See ayat 14 for tafseer.

At this point the discussion of tawhid and polytheism begins, and the first approach is to establish tawhid by keeping human nature and disposition in view. After presenting the proofs of the order governing the universe and setting forth five blessings of the Lord Almighty, the human sense of gratitude is awakened, and then idol-worship and other polytheistic beliefs and superstitious notions are refuted. In the first portion of the verse it is stated: if you ask them who created the heavens and the earth, they will certainly answer that the All-Mighty, All-Knowing God created them (وَلَئِن سَأَلْتَهُم مَّنْ خَلَقَ السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالْأَرْضَ لَيَقُولُنَّ خَلَقَهُنَّ الْعَزِيزُ الْعَلِيمُ). This kind of expression, which appears in four Quranic verses with minor variation — Surah al-'Ankabut verse 61, Surah Luqman verse 25, Surah al-Zumar verse 38, and this very verse of Surah al-Zukhruf — (Explanatory Note: In two further places in the Quran their acknowledgment of God's creatorship is also recorded — in one instance regarding the descent of rain from the sky (al-'Ankabut — 63) and in another regarding God's creatorship with respect to their own selves (al-Zukhruf — 87).) — is an indicator of both the natural proof of God-consciousness and the manifestation of divine light in human nature. At the same time it is evidence that the polytheists also acknowledged that the Creator of the heavens and the earth is God, and except in rare instances did not attribute creatorship to their deities. Moreover, from a third angle, their acknowledgment constitutes the very basis for demonstrating the invalidity of idol-worship — for the One deserving of worship is He who is the creator and governor of the universe, not those things that have no share in this regard whatsoever. Their acknowledgment of the creatorship of God is thus itself a crushing argument against their own corrupt and erroneous religion. The expression "all-mighty and all-knowing," which conveys the absolute power, knowledge, and wisdom of the Lord Almighty, is a Quranic formulation — yet it is not something the polytheists could deny, for the acknowledgment of the attribution of the creation of the heavens and the earth to God necessarily entails acknowledging that He is all-mighty and all-knowing. They attributed knowledge and power to the idols themselves — how much more then to God, to reach whom they regarded those idols as their means of intercession. Five of God's great blessings are then alluded to, each of which is a specimen of the system of creation and one of the divine signs. The first is the earth. It is stated: He it is who made the earth a cradle and a place of repose for you (الَّذِي جَعَلَ لَكُمُ الْأَرْضَ مَهْدًا). "Mahd" and "mihad" are two words used for a place prepared for sitting, sleeping, and resting — originally it denotes the place where a child is laid to sleep, whether a cradle or something else. God has indeed made the earth a cradle for the human being — though it has various kinds of motion, and despite the law of gravity, atmospheric pressure from all sides, and many other different factors, it is so still and stable that those who dwell upon it feel not the slightest agitation. It is self-evident that repose, tranquility, and security are the very foundation for benefiting from all other blessings. Nor is it hidden from anyone that if these various factors did not combine with one another, this stability would never have come into being. The second blessing is then set forth: He has made paths for you in the earth so that you may be guided and reach your intended destination (وَجَعَلَ لَكُمْ فِيهَا سُبُلًا لَّعَلَّكُمْ تَهْتَدُونَ). This blessing — which has been mentioned repeatedly in the Holy Quran (see Surah Ta Ha — 53; Surah al-Anbiya' — 131; Surah al-Nahl — 15) — is one of those blessings from which many people are heedless. For it is known that virtually all dry land is encircled by various kinds of elevations and depressions, covered by mountains large and small and different hillocks — and the interesting thing is that among the world's great mountain ranges there are generally passes, through which the human being can make his way. It is very rare for mountains to be the cause of complete separation between different parts of the earth. This is one of the secrets of the system of creation and one of God's blessings upon His servants. Moreover, many parts of the earth are connected to one another through river routes, and this too is included in the general meaning of the verse. (Explanatory Note: The word "subul" is the plural of "sabil," which applies to paths on land as well as to routes on water — as in the Du'a' al-Jawshan al-Kabir: ya man fi al-barr wa al-bahr sabiluhu.) From all the above the conclusion follows that "la'allakum tahtadun" refers to guidance toward the intended destination and the exploration of the various regions of the earth — even though exegetes have also taken from it the meaning of guidance in the matter of tawhid and God-consciousness. (There is, however, no obstacle to combining both meanings.) The third blessing is the descent of rain, which revives dead lands. In the subsequent verse this is set forth: He it is who sent down water from the sky in a measured amount (وَالَّذِي نَزَّلَ مِنَ السَّمَاءِ مَاءً بِقَدَرٍ). And thereby We gave life to a dead land (فَأَنشَرْنَا بِهِ بَلْدَةً مَّيْتًا). Just as dead lands are revived through rainwater, you too shall emerge from the graves alive after death in the same manner (كَذَٰلِكَ تُخْرَجُونَ). The word "qadar" is a subtle allusion to the particular order governing the descent of rain — rain falls only to the extent that is beneficial and fruitful, not harmful and damaging. It is true that floods sometimes occur and devastate lands, but this is an exceptional situation that functions as a form of chastisement. As for the overwhelming majority of rains, they are beneficial and useful. Fundamentally, the flourishing of all trees, verdant fields, flowers, and fruit-laden gardens is a blessing arising from the descent of rain in measured amounts. Were there no order and system to the rain, none of these blessings would be obtained. In the second portion of the verse the word "ansharná" appears, derived from "nushur" — meaning to spread and expand. This brings vividly before the eyes the spectacle of the plant world on the Day of Resurrection — dry lands hold the seeds of vegetation within their hearts just as graves conceal the dead, and as soon as the "trumpet" of the descent of rain is blown they stir into motion, and like the dead, vegetation raises its head from within the earth, and a resurrection of freshness and verdure comes about — which is itself an example of the human resurrection, toward which the close of this verse and numerous other verses point. After the mention of rain's descent and the life of vegetation, in the fourth stage different animals are alluded to: He it is who created all things in pairs (وَالَّذِي خَلَقَ الْأَزْوَاجَ كُلَّهَا). "Azwaj" means "pairs," and this word points to different kinds of animals — since the preceding verses mentioned vegetation. Although some exegetes have taken this as pointing to all categories of beings, whether minerals, plants, animals, or human beings, for the law of duality governs all of them and each has its opposite counterpart — the sky and the earth, night and day, light and darkness, bitter and sweet, dry and moist, sun and moon, paradise and hell — in short, nothing except the holy essence of God is singular and unique. It is only God in whom no duality is to be found. However, as stated above, the context indicates that "pairs of animals" is intended here — and it is known to all that the law of pairedness governs all living beings, and if there are some rare exceptional individuals excluded from it, this does not prevent the law from being universal. Some exegetes have taken "azwaj" to refer to the different species of animals, such as birds, quadrupeds, aquatic creatures, and insects. In the fifth stage, the final blessing in this series is mentioned — the conveyances that the Lord Almighty has placed at the disposal of the human being for traversing land and sea routes. It is stated: He has made for you from ships and livestock what you ride upon (وَجَعَلَ لَكُم مِّنَ الْفُلْكِ وَالْأَنْعَامِ مَا تَرْكَبُونَ). This is a great bestowal and kindness of the Lord Almighty upon humanity that is not seen in any other living creature — for the Lord Almighty has given humanity conveyances that assist it in traversing land and sea routes, as stated in verse 70 of Surah Bani Isra'il: وَلَقَدْ كَرَّمْنَا بَنِي آدَمَ وَحَمَلْنَاهُمْ فِي الْبَرِّ وَالْبَحْرِ وَرَزَقْنَاهُم مِّنَ الطَّيِّبَاتِ وَفَضَّلْنَاهُمْ عَلَىٰ كَثِيرٍ مِّمَّنْ خَلَقْنَا تَفْضِيلًا — We have honoured the children of Adam and carried them on land and sea, provided them with wholesome provisions, and granted them superiority over much of what We have created. In reality, through these conveyances human activities and the endeavours of human life are multiplied manifold. Indeed, even the high-speed conveyances of the present era — produced by availing of the properties of various things and utilised by the human being — are a great bestowal of the Lord Almighty: means of transport that have completely transformed the face of life, imparted speed to all things, and provided humanity with every kind of ease and comfort. The subsequent verse sets forth the ultimate creative purpose of these conveyances: so that you may ride comfortably upon their backs, then remember the blessing of your Lord when you have mounted upon them, and say: glorified be He who has subjugated this for us, for we could not have subdued it ourselves (لِتَسْتَوُوا عَلَىٰ ظُهُورِهِ ثُمَّ تَذْكُرُوا نِعْمَةَ رَبِّكُمْ إِذَا اسْتَوَيْتُمْ عَلَيْهِ وَتَقُولُوا سُبْحَانَ الَّذِي سَخَّرَ لَنَا هَٰذَا وَمَا كُنَّا لَهُ مُقْرِنِينَ). The clause "litastawu 'ala zuhurihi" alludes to the fact that God created these conveyances in such a manner that you may mount them and reach your intended destination in comfort and ease. (Explanatory Note: The pronoun in "'ala zuhurihi" returns to the relative "ma" in "ma tarkabun," referring to both ships and livestock, and the pronoun is singular on account of the apparent form of the word.) In this verse two fundamental creative purposes of land and sea conveyances are stated: first, the remembrance of God's blessings at the time of mounting; and second, the glorification of that God who has subjected them to the human being. Ships and ocean vessels have been constructed in such a way that they cleave the hearts of the seas and carry their passengers to their intended destinations, and livestock have been made subservient to the human being. "Muqrinin" is from the root "iqran," meaning "to gain power over something" and "to obtain control." Some lexicographers have also stated that "iqran" means to restrain and preserve something, concealed in the meaning of being a thing's "qarin" — companion — which necessarily entails its protection and keeping it under control. (Explanatory Note: In Lisan al-'Arab it is stated that "aqrana lahu" and "qarna 'alayhi" means "ataqahu wa qawiya 'alayhi wa i'tala" — gained power over it and mounted it. In the Holy Quran: "wa ma kunna lahu muqrinina" means "mutiqina.") Accordingly, the import of "wa ma kunna lahu muqrinina" would be: had it not been for the grace and generosity of God, we would not have had the power to control these conveyances. Contrary winds would always have capsized ships and ocean vessels and we could never have reached the shore of safety. These powerful and spirited animals — whose strength is many times greater than the human being's — if the spirit of obedience had not prevailed within them, the human being could not even approach them. This is why whenever an animal becomes enraged and casts off its obedience, it becomes so dangerous that several human beings together cannot confront it — whereas ordinarily it is possible to tether dozens or even hundreds of animals with a single rope and hand their halter to even a child who leads them wherever desired. God Almighty appears to be elucidating both the exceptional states of livestock alongside their ordinary states. In the final portion of this verse the speech of true believers upon mounting is mentioned, and with this the verse is completed: they say when mounting: and verily unto our Lord we shall return (وَإِنَّا إِلَىٰ رَبِّنَا لَمُنقَلِبُونَ). This clause, following the preceding discussion of tawhid, is an allusion to the matter of the ma'ad — for awareness of the Creator and the Origin always directs the human being toward the Return. It is also an allusion to the following: lest when you mount these conveyances and gain control over them you become arrogant and absorbed in the glamour of the world — rather, you must in every condition remain mindful of the hereafter, for at such moments the human being is particularly prone to arrogance and pride, and those who make their conveyances a means of superiority and pride are not few in the world. Furthermore, the transition from one place to another by means of conveyances reminds us of the great transition from this world to the next — and ultimately we must be transferred toward God.

Among the noteworthy points found in Qur’anic verses is that certain supplications have been taught to the believers, to be recited when they benefit from divine blessings. These supplications, owing to their constructive content, contribute to the spiritual growth of the human heart and soul, and remove the آثار of arrogance and heedlessness. Thus, Prophet Nuh (علیہ السلام) was instructed: فَإِذَا اسْتَوَيْتَ أَنتَ وَمَن مَّعَكَ عَلَى الْفُلْكِ فَقُلِ الْحَمْدُ لِلَّهِ الَّذِي نَجَّانَا مِنَ الْقَوْمِ الظَّالِمِينَ When you and those with you have settled upon the Ark, say: all praise is due to God, who has delivered us from the wrongdoing people (al‑Mu’minun: 28). Likewise, Prophet Nuh (علیہ السلام) was instructed to say upon disembarking at a blessed place: رَبِّ أَنزِلْنِي مُنزَلًا مُّبَارَكًا وَأَنتَ خَيْرُ الْمُنزِلِينَ My Lord, cause me to alight at a blessed landing place, for You are the best of those who grant landing (al‑Mu’minun: 29). In the verses under discussion, it is commanded that upon mounting a conveyance one should turn attention to the blessings of the Lord and glorify Him. When it becomes a habit for a person to remember the true Benefactor and the source of نعمت at every moment of enjoying a blessing, he neither falls into the darkness of heedlessness nor is overcome by arrogance. Rather, material blessings become, for him, a means of drawing nearer to the Lord of the worlds. It is reported in the accounts of the Prophet of Islam (صلی اللہ علیہ و آلہ وسلم) that when he placed his foot in the رکاب, he would say “بسم اللہ,” and when he had fully mounted, he would recite: الحمد اللہ علیٰ کل حال، سبحان الذی سخرلنا ھذا و ما کنا لہ مقرنین و انا الیٰ ربنا لمنقلبون (Transliteration: Tafsir Fakhr al‑Razi, vol. 27, p. 199). In another narration, it is reported that a person recited “سبحان الذی سخر لنا ھذا” when mounting in the presence of Imam Hasan al‑Mujtaba (علیہ السلام), whereupon the Imam said: you have not been commanded to say it in this manner only; rather, you should first say: الحمد اللہ الذی ہدانا للاسلام، الحمد اللہ الذی من علینا بمحمد، والحمد اللہ الذی جعلنا من خیر امة اخرجت للناس، and then say: سبحان الذی سخر لنا ھذا (Transliteration: Tafsir Fakhr al‑Razi, vol. 27, p. 199). This indicates that it is not merely the utterance “سبحان الذی سخر لنا ھذا” that has been commanded, but that prior to it one should recall the great divine blessings—guidance to Islam and the blessing of the Messengership of the Prophet—after which one offers glorification for the subjugation of the conveyance. It is also noteworthy that some narrations indicate that whoever recites “سبحان الذی سخر لنا ھذا… و انا الیٰ ربنا لمنقلبون” upon mounting a conveyance will be protected from all forms of harm. This meaning is also reported in a narration from the Imams (علیہم السلام) in Usul al‑Kafi. (Transliteration: Tafsir Nur al‑Thaqalayn, vol. 4, p. 593). The contrast between Islamic teachings and the conduct of arrogant, self‑indulgent individuals is striking. Such people treat their conveyances as instruments of ostentation and pride, and at times even as means for sinful conduct. Zamakhshari relates in his Tafsir al‑Kashshaf that a certain ruler once mounted his luxurious conveyance to travel between two cities separated by a journey of a month; throughout the journey he remained so absorbed in indulgence in intoxicants that he lost all awareness of the passage of time, regaining his senses only upon reaching his destination.

See ayat 19 for tafseer.

See ayat 19 for tafseer.

See ayat 19 for tafseer.

See ayat 19 for tafseer.

In the preceding verses, attention was directed to the signs of God, His blessings, and His beneficence throughout the cosmos, thereby strengthening the foundations of the doctrine of Divine Unity. In contrast, the verses under discussion initiate a critique of its opposite—namely, shirk and the worship of other than God. The first form of shirk addressed is the veneration of angels, as it is stated: they have assigned to Him a part from among His servants (وَجَعَلُوا لَهُ مِنْ عِبَادِهِ جُزْءًا). The belief that angels are daughters of God and worthy of worship was a widespread superstition among certain polytheistic communities. The term “جزء” here conveys that they regarded angels as offspring of God, since offspring are conventionally considered parts of their progenitors’ existence, originating from them and subsequently taking on independent existence. This expression simultaneously indicates that they also worshipped angels, treating them as deities alongside God. At the same time, this terminology implicitly refutes such beliefs, for if angels were truly God’s offspring, it would imply that God possesses parts and is therefore composite, whereas both rational and textual proofs affirm His absolute simplicity and unity. The notion of “جزء” applies only to contingent beings, not to the Divine Essence. The verse then states: indeed, the human being is manifestly ungrateful (إِنَّ الْإِنسَانَ لَكَفُورٌ مُبِينٌ). Despite being surrounded by countless divine blessings—many of which were enumerated in earlier verses—human beings turn away from their Creator and instead attach themselves to His creation. In the subsequent verses, the Qur’an refutes this superstition by appealing to the very assumptions held by the polytheists themselves. They preferred sons over daughters and considered daughters a source of disgrace; yet they ascribed daughters to God. Thus it is stated: has He chosen daughters from what He creates and favored you with sons? (أَمِ اتَّخَذَ مِمَّا يَخْلُقُ بَنَاتٍ وَأَصْفَاكُم بِالْبَنِينَ). This rhetorical argument exposes the inconsistency of their belief: if daughters are considered inferior, why do they attribute them to God while selecting sons for themselves? Although in reality, within the Divine perspective, male and female possess equal value, the argument addresses their own assumptions in order to prompt reflection. The critique is further elaborated: when one of them is informed of that which he attributes as a likeness to the Most Merciful, his face darkens and he is filled with suppressed grief (وَإِذَا بُشِّرَ أَحَدُهُم بِمَا ضَرَبَ لِلرَّحْمَٰنِ مَثَلًا ظَلَّ وَجْهُهُ مُسْوَدًّا وَهُوَ كَظِيمٌ). The term “كظیم” conveys a state of inner turmoil, as one whose heart is filled with anger and sorrow. Thus, they react with distress to the birth of daughters while simultaneously attributing daughters to God. The argument continues: is one who is brought up in adornment and is unable to express herself clearly in dispute to be attributed to God? (أَوَمَن يُنَشَّؤُ فِي الْحِلْيَةِ وَهُوَ فِي الْخِصَامِ غَيْرُ مُبِينٍ). This reflects the general social perception of women at that time—emphasizing ornamentation and modesty, which may limit assertiveness in dispute—not as an inherent deficiency, but as a reflection of prevailing cultural norms. The aim is to challenge their own assumptions and expose the inconsistency of their attribution. Finally, it is explicitly stated: they have regarded the angels, who are servants of the Most Merciful, as female (وَجَعَلُوا الْمَلَائِكَةَ الَّذِينَ هُمْ عِبَادُ الرَّحْمَٰنِ إِنَاثًا). In reality, angels are devoted servants of God, fully obedient to His command, as affirmed elsewhere: بَلْ عِبَادٌ مُّكْرَمُونَ لَا يَسْبِقُونَهُ بِالْقَوْلِ وَهُم بِأَمْرِهِ يَعْمَلُونَ. The use of “عباد” emphasizes their status as servants, thereby negating any notion of divine offspring. Moreover, this term is employed generically and is not restricted by gender categories, given that angels transcend such classifications. The verse concludes with a decisive challenge: were they present when the angels were created? (أَشَهِدُوا خَلْقَهُمْ). Their claim lacks any evidential basis. It is further stated that their testimony will be recorded and they will be questioned regarding it (سَتُكْتَبُ شَهَادَتُهُمْ وَيُسْأَلُونَ). Thus, these verses collectively dismantle a central element of polytheistic belief by exposing its logical inconsistency, its lack of evidential support, and its contradiction with the fundamental doctrine of Divine Unity.

See ayat 22 for tafseer.

See ayat 22 for tafseer.

In the preceding verses, a rational refutation was presented against the polytheists’ fabricated belief regarding the angels—that they were daughters of God. It was emphasized that, for any claim to be valid, one must possess direct evidence, such as witnessing the event in question. Since no worshipper of idols could claim to have been present at the creation of the angels, their assertion stands without proof. The present verses continue this line of reasoning and further expose the falsity of such superstition through additional arguments. First, one of their principal arguments is summarized and refuted. It is stated: they say, “If the Most Merciful had willed, we would not have worshipped them” (وَقَالُوا لَوْ شَاءَ الرَّحْمَٰنُ مَا عَبَدْنَاهُم). This statement may reflect two possible underlying ideas. One is their belief in determinism, whereby they claimed that all their actions were carried out under divine will. Alternatively, they may have meant that if their practices had been displeasing to God, He would have prevented them; since He did not, it must be that He approved of them. In either case, their reasoning is fundamentally flawed and baseless. It is true that nothing occurs in the universe outside divine will; however, this does not imply that human beings are compelled. Rather, divine will itself has decreed that humans possess freedom and choice, so that they may be tested and morally developed. Moreover, both revelation and human reason testify against such claims. All prophets have categorically rejected polytheism, and even the innate faculty of reason within human beings rejects such contradictions. Thus, the verse concludes succinctly: they have no knowledge of this; they are merely conjecturing (مَا لَهُم بِذَٰلِكَ مِنْ عِلْمٍ إِنْ هُمْ إِلَّا يَخْرُصُونَ). The term “يَخْرُصُونَ” denotes speculative estimation and, by extension, falsehood, indicating that their claim is nothing more than an unfounded conjecture. The Qur’an elsewhere records that the polytheists repeatedly used such arguments to justify their beliefs. For example: “سَيَقُولُ الَّذِينَ أَشْرَكُوا لَوْ شَاءَ اللَّهُ مَا أَشْرَكْنَا…” (الأنعام: 148)، and similarly in النحل: 35. In each case, their argument is rejected as a baseless excuse. The verse then presents another line of reasoning: were they given any prior scripture to support their claim? (أَمْ آتَيْنَاهُمْ كِتَابًا مِّن قَبْلِهِ فَهُم بِهِ مُسْتَمْسِكُونَ). This rhetorical question highlights that their belief has neither rational evidence nor textual authority. All revealed scriptures and all sound reasoning consistently affirm Divine Unity. Finally, the root of their belief is identified: blind adherence to ancestral tradition. It is stated: rather, they say, “We found our forefathers upon a certain religion, and we follow in their footsteps” (بَلْ قَالُوا إِنَّا وَجَدْنَا آبَاءَنَا عَلَىٰ أُمَّةٍ وَإِنَّا عَلَىٰ آثَارِهِم مُّهْتَدُونَ). In reality, they possess no argument except imitation of their forefathers. Yet, as the Qur’an elsewhere emphasizes, those forefathers neither possessed understanding nor guidance (وَلَوْ كَانَ آبَاؤُهُمْ لَا يَعْقِلُونَ شَيْئًا وَلَا يَهْتَدُونَ). Such imitation is fundamentally flawed, for valid reliance (taqlid) is permissible only in secondary matters and only when directed toward those endowed with knowledge. Blind adherence to ignorance, especially in foundational matters of belief, is both irrational and reprehensible. Thus, these verses present a comprehensive refutation of polytheistic ideology by demonstrating: - the absence of experiential or empirical evidence, - the lack of rational justification, - the absence of revealed textual support, and - the invalidity of blind imitation. Collectively, they reaffirm the primacy of توحید and expose the intellectual and moral incoherence of shirk.

See ayat 25 for tafseer.

See ayat 25 for tafseer.

The present verses constitute a continuation of the preceding discussion regarding the principal justification advanced by the polytheists for idol‑worship, namely, their blind imitation of ancestral tradition. It is first stated that this claim was not exclusive to the Arab polytheists alone; rather, it represents a recurring pattern throughout history: thus, We did not send any warner before you to any town except that its affluent and arrogant elites said: we found our forefathers upon a certain religion, and we follow in their footsteps (وَكَذَلِكَ مَا أَرْسَلْنَا مِن قَبْلِكَ فِي قَرْيَةٍ مِّن نَّذِيرٍ إِلَّا قَالَ مُتْرَفُوهَا إِنَّا وَجَدْنَا آبَاءَنَا عَلَىٰ أُمَّةٍ وَإِنَّا عَلَىٰ آثَارِهِم مُّقْتَدُونَ). This verse clearly indicates that the leaders of opposition to the prophets, and those who insisted upon the imitation of their ancestors, were the “مترفین”—the affluent, self‑indulgent, and arrogant classes. The term “مترف” derives from “ترفہ,” signifying abundance of نعمت; however, it commonly refers to those who become intoxicated with luxury, lose moral restraint, and fall into arrogance and transgression. This category often includes powerful rulers, tyrannical authorities, wealthy elites, and self‑centered individuals. Indeed, the message of the prophets threatened the arbitrary power and unjust privileges of such individuals, and offered liberation to the oppressed. Consequently, they resorted to various stratagems in order to corrupt public thinking and perpetuate ignorance. Even in contemporary times, much of the فساد and injustice in the world originates from such classes. It is also noteworthy that earlier their statement was expressed as: “إِنَّا عَلَىٰ آثَارِهِم مُهْتَدُونَ,” indicating their claim that their ancestors’ path was itself guidance, whereas here it is expressed as “مُقْتَدُونَ,” emphasizing their deliberate imitation. The former reflects a claim of legitimacy, while the latter reflects persistence in imitation. In any case, this verse provides consolation to the Prophet (صلی اللہ علیہ و آلہ وسلم) and the believers, demonstrating that such objections are not new, but part of a historical pattern among misguided communities. The following verse presents the response delivered by earlier prophets: they said, would you still follow your forefathers even if I bring you something more rightly guided than that which you found them upon? (قَالَ أَوَلَوْ جِئْتُكُم بِأَهْدَىٰ مِمَّا وَجَدتُّمْ عَلَيْهِ آبَاءَكُمْ). This is an example of a most courteous and measured approach in discourse. The prophets do not directly denounce the ancestral tradition as false; rather, they present their message as more guided and invite reflection. This demonstrates a refined method of engaging even stubborn and arrogant opponents. However, despite such reasoned and respectful dialogue, the response of the people remained rooted in ignorance and obstinacy. They simply declared: indeed, we disbelieve in what you have been sent with (قَالُوا إِنَّا بِمَا أُرْسِلْتُم بِهِ كَافِرُونَ). They offered no argument, nor did they engage in reflection, but rejected the message outright. Such a defiant and unreasonable attitude renders a community liable to divine punishment. Accordingly, it is stated: so We took retribution from them (فَانتَقَمْنَا مِنْهُمْ). Different communities were destroyed through various forms of punishment—floods, earthquakes, storms, or thunderous blasts—each according to divine decree. Finally, addressing the Prophet (صلی اللہ علیہ و آلہ وسلم) and, by extension, the deniers, it is said: observe then how was the end of those who denied (فَانظُرْ كَيْفَ كَانَ عَاقِبَةُ الْمُكَذِّبِينَ). The stubborn polytheists of Makkah are thus warned to reflect upon the fate of earlier peoples and recognize the consequences of persistent rejection.

See ayat 30 for tafseer.

See ayat 30 for tafseer.

See ayat 30 for tafseer.

See ayat 30 for tafseer.

In these verses there is an allusion to the story of Ibrahim — peace be upon him — and the incident with the idol-worshipping people of Babylon, so as to complete the refutation of blind imitation mentioned in the preceding verses. This is because: First, Ibrahim — peace be upon him — was the greatest elder and progenitor of the Arab nation, regarded with reverence by all who took pride in his history. When he tears apart the veils of blind imitation, if these people are truthful in their claim they should follow his example. If it is established that the tradition of the forefathers is to be followed, why should one follow idol-worshippers? Why not follow Ibrahim? Second, the idol-worshippers who confronted Ibrahim — peace be upon him — also resorted to this same empty and hollow argument (imitation of the forefathers), but Ibrahim — peace be upon him — rejected their argument outright, as stated in verses 53-54 of Surah al-Anbiya': قَالُوا وَجَدْنَا آبَاءَنَا لَهَا عَابِدِينَ قَالَ لَقَدْ كُنتُمْ أَنتُمْ وَآبَاؤُكُمْ فِي ضَلَالٍ مُّبِينٍ — the idol-worshippers said: we found our forefathers worshipping them; he said: verily you and your forefathers are in manifest and evident error. Third, this constitutes a form of consolation and comfort for the Prophet of Islam — peace and blessings of God be upon him and his family — and the Muslims of early Islam, so that they may know that such opponents and pretexts have always existed and they must not become dejected and despondent. First it is stated: recall when Ibrahim said to his (adoptive) father Azar and to his idol-worshipping people: I am free of what you worship (وَإِذْ قَالَ إِبْرَاهِيمُ لِأَبِيهِ وَقَوْمِهِ إِنَّنِي بَرَاءٌ مِّمَّا تَعْبُدُونَ). (Explanatory Note: "Bara'" — on the measure of "sawari" — is a verbal noun in the meaning of "tabarra'" — to disavow — and in such positions it carries a sense of emphasis and hyperbole in its attributive meaning, as in "Zaydun 'adlun." And since it is a verbal noun it is the same for singular, plural, masculine, and feminine.) Since many idol-worshippers also used to worship God, he immediately excepted Him by stating: except for Him who created me, and He shall guide me (إِلَّا الَّذِي فَطَرَنِي فَإِنَّهُ سَيَهْدِينِ). In this brief expression he confined worship exclusively to the Lord Almighty — for the one deserving of worship can only be the Creator of the universe and Governor of the world, and all acknowledged that the Creator is God. At the same time there is an allusion to the takwini and tashri'i guidance of God, for the principle of divine grace requires precisely this. (Explanatory Note: According to this interpretation, "illa alladhi fatarni" contains a connected exception, since many idol-worshippers were not deniers of God but regarded others as His partners. The possibility of a disconnected exception has also been mentioned, with "illa" carrying the meaning of "lakin" — however, the expression "ma ta'budun" generally points to idols, for this expression is not ordinarily used in reference to God — reflect carefully.) Matters of this kind have also been mentioned in verses 77-82 of Surah al-Shu'ara'. Ibrahim — peace be upon him — was not merely a supporter of the principle of tawhid and an enemy of every kind of idol-worship during his own lifetime — he strove with all his might to ensure that the word of tawhid would remain established and enduring in the world permanently. As the subsequent verse states: he established the word of tawhid as an enduring word among his descendants so that they might return to God (وَجَعَلَهَا كَلِمَةً بَاقِيَةً فِي عَقِبِهِ لَعَلَّهُمْ يَرْجِعُونَ). (Explanatory Note: "'Aqib" is fundamentally in the meaning of "the heel of the foot," but subsequently its meaning was extended and it came to be used in the sense of "children" and thereafter "the children of children.") It is also noteworthy that every religion on the face of the earth today that professes tawhid draws guidance from the teachings of Ibrahim grounded in monotheism, and the three great prophets of God — Moses, Jesus, and Muhammad — peace be upon them — all belong to his family. This is one of the true prophecies of the Holy Quran. It is true that prophets before Ibrahim — peace be upon him — such as Noah — peace be upon him — also strove against polytheism and idol-worship and called the people of the world to tawhid. But the prophet who gave the word of tawhid firmness and raised its banner everywhere was Ibrahim the idol-breaker. Not only did he strive to give permanence to the path of tawhid in his own era, but in his supplications too he continued to petition the Lord Almighty: وَاجْنُبْنِي وَبَنِيَّ أَن نَّعْبُدَ الْأَصْنَامَ — keep me and my children away from worshipping idols (Ibrahim — 35). Another interpretation is also found here: the pronoun in "ja'al" returns to God, in which case the meaning of the clause would be: God kept the word of tawhid established among the descendants of Ibrahim. However, the first interpretation — the pronoun returning to Ibrahim — appears more appropriate, since the preceding clauses constitute a part of Ibrahim's own achievements, particularly as many other Quranic verses emphasise with greater force that Ibrahim persistently sought to ensure that his descendants and generations would remain upon the divine religion, as in verses 131-132 of Surah al-Baqarah: إِذْ قَالَ لَهُ رَبُّهُ أَسْلِمْ قَالَ أَسْلَمْتُ لِرَبِّ الْعَالَمِينَ وَوَصَّىٰ بِهَا إِبْرَاهِيمُ بَنِيهِ وَيَعْقُوبُ يَا بَنِيَّ إِنَّ اللَّهَ اصْطَفَىٰ لَكُمُ الدِّينَ فَلَا تَمُوتُنَّ إِلَّا وَأَنتُم مُّسْلِمُونَ — recall when his Lord said to him: submit; he said: I have submitted to the Lord of all worlds. And Ibrahim enjoined this upon his sons and so did Jacob: O my sons, God has chosen this religion for you, so do not die except as Muslims. If there is the notion that the expression "ja'al" carries the meaning of creation and origination and is specific to the Lord Almighty, that is incorrect — for "ja'al" applies to both humans and non-humans, and there are many such instances in the Holy Quran. For example, in the story of Joseph — peace be upon him — when his brothers resolved to throw him into the well, the Quran uses the word "ja'al" there as well: فَلَمَّا ذَهَبُوا بِهِ وَأَجْمَعُوا أَن يَجْعَلُوهُ فِي غَيَابَتِ الْجُبِّ (Yusuf — 15). From the above discussion it also becomes clear that the pronoun of the object in "ja'alaha" returns to the word of tawhid and the testimony of "la ilaha illa Allah," for this is understood from the clause "innani bara'un mimma ta'buduna" — I am free of what you worship — and the news of Ibrahim's sincere efforts to establish and maintain the monotheistic creed in his future generations is also conveyed. In numerous traditions that have reached us from the Imams of the Ahl al-Bayt — peace be upon them — the referent of the pronoun has also been identified as the matter of the Imamate. It is evident that in such an interpretation the pronoun of the agent would return to God — that is, the Lord Almighty made the matter of the Imamate enduring in the lineage of Ibrahim. As is understood from verse 124 of Surah al-Baqarah, when the Lord Almighty said to Ibrahim: I have made you an Imam for the people — he petitioned that there should be Imams among his descendants as well, and the Lord Almighty accepted his supplication, though He excluded the wrongdoers from it: قَالَ إِنِّي جَاعِلُكَ لِلنَّاسِ إِمَامًا قَالَ وَمِن ذُرِّيَّتِي قَالَ لَا يَنَالُ عَهْدِي الظَّالِمِينَ. However, the apparent difficulty is that the verse under commentary does not speak of the Imamate — unless the clause "sa-yahdini" (God will guide me) is taken as an allusion to this meaning, since the guidance of prophets and Imams — peace be upon them — is also a ray of God's absolute guidance, and the realities of Imamate and guidance are one. Even more appropriately, it may be said that the matter of the Imamate is contained within the word of tawhid itself, for tawhid has several branches, one of which is oneness and unity in governance, wilayah, and leadership. It is known that the Imams — peace be upon them — receive their wilayah and leadership from God, and do not become Imam and leader of their own accord. Therefore these traditions are understood as one instance and one branch of the general import of "ja'alaha kalimatan baqiyah" and are not contradictory to the first interpretation set forth at the outset — reflect carefully. (Reference: The author of Tafsir Nur al-Thaqalayn has cited these traditions in Vol. 4, p. 596, and they are also mentioned in Tafsir al-Burhan, Vol. 4, pp. 138-139.) It is also noteworthy that exegetes have mentioned several possibilities in the interpretation of "fi 'aqibihi." Some have interpreted it as encompassing all of Ibrahim's lineage and descendants until the end of the world. Some have said it is specific to Ibrahim's tribe and his community. Some have interpreted it as referring to the Family of Muhammad — peace be upon them. However, what appears on the surface is that its meaning is broad and general, encompassing the descendants of Ibrahim until the Day of Resurrection, and the interpretation referring to the Family of Muhammad is a clear and luminous instance of it. The subsequent verse is in reality a response to several questions — chief among them: despite these circumstances, why does the Lord Almighty not afflict the polytheists of Makkah with punishment? Did we not read in the preceding verses the account of nations that denied the prophets and insisted upon their denial, about which it was stated "fantaqamna minhum" — We exacted retribution from them? In response to this question it is stated: rather, We provided this group (the polytheists of Makkah) and their forefathers with the enjoyment of worldly blessings until the truth and a clear Messenger came to them (بَلْ مَتَّعْتُ هَٰؤُلَاءِ وَآبَاءَهُمْ حَتَّىٰ جَاءَهُمُ الْحَقُّ وَرَسُولٌ مُّبِينٌ). We did not confine ourselves to the rational ruling on the invalidity of polytheism and idol-worship, nor did we consider the ruling of conscience regarding tawhid sufficient — rather, for the completion of proof We granted them respite until this heavenly book, which is truth from beginning to end, and this magnificent Prophet — peace and blessings of God be upon him and his family — came to them for their guidance. In other words, "la'allahum yarji'un" in the preceding verse indicates that all of Ibrahim's efforts had the purpose of bringing all his descendants to turn toward the path of tawhid. Whereas the Arabs claimed to be of Ibrahim's lineage, yet did not turn toward it — but even so God granted them respite until the great Messenger and the new Book reached them so that they might awaken from this deep slumber. Many people did indeed awaken. But astonishingly, when the truth reached them — instead of reforming themselves and remedying their past errors and sins — many on the contrary girded themselves for opposition and said: this is sorcery and we deny it (وَلَمَّا جَاءَهُمُ الْحَقُّ قَالُوا هَٰذَا سِحْرٌ وَإِنَّا بِهِ كَافِرُونَ). Indeed, they called the Quran sorcery and the great Prophet of God a sorcerer. Had they not abandoned this course of theirs, the divine punishment would have overtaken them.

See ayat 32 for tafseer.

The preceding verses addressed the pretexts and excuses of the polytheists in response to the call of the prophets — sometimes calling it sorcery and sometimes turning their backs on divine commands by citing the pretext of following their forefathers. In the verses under commentary, the Lord Almighty alludes to yet another groundless and hollow pretext of theirs, stating: they said — why was this Quran not sent down upon some great man of these two cities, Makkah and Ta'if? (وَقَالُوا لَوْلَا نُزِّلَ هَٰذَا الْقُرْآنُ عَلَىٰ رَجُلٍ مِّنَ الْقَرْيَتَيْنِ عَظِيمٍ). In one sense they had grounds for resorting to such pretexts — for in their view the standard of human values was wealth, outward prestige and fame, and worldly grandeur. These headstrong people supposed that their wealthy and tyrannical tribal chieftains were the most privileged in the sight of God above all others. They therefore wondered why this great blessing of prophethood and mercy had not been sent down upon such people — but had instead been sent down upon a person who was an orphan, poor, and without means: Muhammad — peace and blessings of God be upon him and his family — ibn 'Abdallah! This was simply not credible. Indeed, from a system of values so fundamentally mistaken, only such a conclusion could be drawn. The greatest affliction of great human societies and the root cause of the crookedness of their thinking is precisely these systems grounded in false values, which sometimes turn realities completely upside down. Whereas the bearer of this divine call ought to be a person whose entire being is pervaded by the spirit of taqwa — informed and discerning, possessed of firm resolve, courageous and just, and familiar with the pain of the deprived and oppressed. These are the conditions and qualities that must be present in the bearer of this heavenly apostolic mission — not beautiful clothing, expensive palaces, and outward grandeur. The prophets of God were specifically deprived of such things so that true authority would not become confused with false powers. The question arises here: who were the specific persons of Makkah and Ta'if that these pretexters had in mind? The exegetes hold different views on this matter. Most cite 'Urwah ibn Mas'ud al-Thaqafi for Ta'if and Walid ibn al-Mughirah for Makkah. Some exegetes, however, have named 'Utbah ibn Rabi'ah for Makkah and Habib ibn 'Amr al-Thaqafi for Ta'if. But the apparent sense is that their words were not about any particular individual — rather, their intent was any wealthy, well-known person of prominence within their tribe and people. The Holy Quran, in order to crush this erroneous and misguided mode of thinking, delivers a decisive and compelling response, giving complete concrete form to the Islamic and divine perspective, and first states: is it they who distribute the mercy of your Lord? (أَهُمْ يَقْسِمُونَ رَحْمَتَ رَبِّكَ). So that they may bestow prophethood upon whomever they wish, send down the heavenly book upon whomever they wish, and not do so for whomever they do not wish? They are mistaken. Your Lord distributes His mercy Himself and knows best who is worthy of this great station — as stated in verse 124 of Surah al-An'am: اللَّهُ أَعْلَمُ حَيْثُ يَجْعَلُ رِسَالَتَهُ — God knows best where to place His apostolic mission. Beyond this, if any difference and disparity exists in people's lives, it can never serve as evidence of differences in their spiritual and moral stations. Rather — "We have distributed their livelihood among them in the life of this world, and We have raised some of them above others in degrees, so that some may employ others in service and they may cooperate with one another" (نَحْنُ قَسَمْنَا بَيْنَهُم مَّعِيشَتَهُمْ فِي الْحَيَاةِ الدُّنْيَا وَرَفَعْنَا بَعْضَهُمْ فَوْقَ بَعْضٍ دَرَجَاتٍ لِّيَتَّخِذَ بَعْضُهُم بَعْضًا سُخْرِيًّا وَرَحْمَتُ رَبِّكَ خَيْرٌ مِّمَّا يَجْمَعُونَ). They have forgotten that human life is a collective life that cannot proceed without mutual cooperation and service to one another. If all people were on the same level in terms of their lives and capacities and all occupied the same position in society, the principle of cooperation, mutual service, and mutual benefit would be undermined. Therefore, such differentiation must not deceive them and they must not regard it as the standard of human values. Rather, the mercy of your Lord is far better than what they accumulate — whether that be position and rank or wealth and riches (وَرَحْمَتُ رَبِّكَ خَيْرٌ مِّمَّا يَجْمَعُونَ). Indeed, all these worldly positions, offices, wealth, and riches do not amount to the worth of a fly's wing in comparison with the Lord's mercy and proximity to Him. The word "rabbuka" appears twice in this verse — a subtle allusion to the particular grace and kindness that the Lord Almighty has bestowed upon His seal of prophets — peace and blessings of God be upon him and his family — by adorning his distinguished stature with the adornment of prophethood and the seal of apostleship.

At this point several questions arise when studying the above verses, and the enemies of Islam also use them as documentary evidence to attack Islam's universal perspective. The first question is: how has the Holy Quran made it permissible for one human being to be employed in the service of and subjugated by another? Does this mean that Islam has endorsed, from an economic standpoint, a class system in which one class receives service and another renders it? Furthermore, if livelihood and sustenance have already been distributed by God and this economic hierarchy proceeds from Him, to what extent can the pursuit of provision be beneficial and fruitful for us? Does this not amount to a negation of striving and effort in life? If the text of the noble verse is carefully examined, the answers to these questions become fully clear. Those who raise such objections imagine that the import of the verse is that a particular class of human beings should subjugate and dominate others — and subjugation in the sense of tyrannical exploitation of the human being by another human being. However, this is not the case. Rather, what is meant is the general and mutual seeking of services from one another — that is, each group has its own particular resources and capacities, by virtue of which it is active in certain matters of life and naturally its services in those matters are of use to others, just as other groups have other matters. Their service-seeking is therefore at an equal level and is mutual between the two parties. In other words, the real purpose and objective is mutual cooperation in life — and nothing else. It is self-evident that if all people were equal in intellect, spiritual and physical capacities, and all occupied the same position in society, no social order could ever come into being — just as if all the cells of the human body were alike in structure and defensive power, the system of the human body would break down. The robust and powerful cells of the heel bone are on an entirely different plane from the delicate and fine cells of the membrane of the eye — each has been created in accordance with its own mode of structure to perform its own function. A living example of this can be found in the mutual service of the various organs of the human body in the form of breathing, blood circulation, eating, and other bodily activities — and this is a luminous instance of "li-yattakhidha ba'duhum ba'dan sukhriyyan," at least at the level of the internal functioning of the body. Can any objection be raised against this kind of subjugation? If it is said that the clause "rafa'na ba'dahum fawqa ba'din darajatin" presents a view contrary to social justice, the response is that this would only be the case if "justice" were interpreted as "equality" — whereas true justice consists in placing each thing where it belongs. Does the existence of ranks and positions in a military institution or in the conduct of national affairs imply that it is unjust? It is possible that some people, in the form of a slogan, use the word "equality" everywhere without attention to its genuine meaning — but this remains only a slogan. In practical life no order can come into existence without mutual differentiation. However, this mutual differentiation must not become a means of the exploitation of one human being by another. All people must be free to employ their creative capabilities, develop their capacities, benefit fully from the results of their activities, and where their reach does not extend those who have the power must extend a helping hand. Now as for the second question — how can striving and effort be continued when each person's provision is already fixed? — the misunderstanding here arises from the supposition that the Lord Almighty has not accorded importance to human effort and has not commanded it. It is true that the Lord Almighty has deposited within the human being different capacities for different activities, and it is also true that some external factors beyond the human being's own will exercise a considerable influence upon life — but even so, among these factors, striving and effort has been designated as one important and fundamental factor. The principle of وَأَن لَّيْسَ لِلْإِنسَانِ إِلَّا مَا سَعَىٰ (al-Najm — 39) also clarifies that a great portion of the human being's life is the product of his own struggle and effort. In any case, an extremely subtle and refined point is this: the human race is not a collection of identical vessels manufactured in a factory from a single mould and design and for a single purpose. Were this the case, they could not coexist for a single day. Nor were human beings created like the nuts and bolts of a machine that the manufacturer and engineer has tightened in place, which then compulsorily continues performing its function. On the contrary, all human beings are both volitionally free and at the same time bound to the discharge of responsibilities and duties — and despite this their capacities and aptitudes differ. The name of such a pure and complex compound is the human being. If any objection is raised about this, it is precisely because those who object are unacquainted with the true knowledge of the human being. In brief, the Lord Almighty has not granted one human being superiority and precedence over another in all respects. Rather, bearing in mind the clause "rafa'a ba'dahum fawqa ba'din darajatin," various distinctions are found among all people by virtue of which each has superiority over others in certain ways — and the service-seeking and subjugation of each group from another also occurs in view of these very distinctions. And this is precisely what justice, sound management, and wisdom mean. (Explanatory Note: Further details on this matter have been set forth in Tafsir-i Namunah, Vol. 3, under verse 32 of Surah al-Nisa', and in Vol. 6, under verse 165 of Surah al-An'am.)

See ayat 35 for tafseer.

See ayat 35 for tafseer.

These verses continue the discussion of the false justifications presented by the polytheists for idol‑worship and clarify the values of the Islamic worldview, emphasizing that wealth, status, and material grandeur are not criteria of true worth. At the outset it is stated that if it were not for the risk that people might all incline toward disbelief upon seeing the material luxuries of the disbelievers, God would have granted the deniers of the Most Merciful the most extravagant forms of wealth. It is said: had it not been that mankind would become a single community (in disbelief), We would have made for those who disbelieve in the Most Merciful, roofs of silver for their houses (وَلَوْلَا أَنْ يَكُونَ النَّاسُ أُمَّةً وَاحِدَةً لَجَعَلْنَا لِمَنْ يَكْفُرُ بِالرَّحْمَٰنِ لِبُيُوتِهِمْ سُقُفًا مِن فِضَّةٍ). This statement makes clear that material prosperity is not an indication of divine favor; rather, such luxuries could have been granted even more abundantly to the disbelievers, were it not for the potential moral consequences for humanity as a whole. The description continues: and for their houses, stairways upon which they ascend (وَمَعَارِجَ عَلَيْهَا يَظْهَرُونَ). The term “معارج” denotes means of ascent, indicating multi‑storied structures of distinction and magnificence. Further, it is stated: and for their houses, doors and couches upon which they recline (وَلِبُيُوتِهِمْ أَبْوَابًا وَسُرُرًا عَلَيْهَا يَتَّكِئُونَ). This imagery portrays grand residences furnished with multiple entryways and elaborate furnishings, features typically associated with luxury and affluence. The description does not end there; it continues: and adornment (وَزُخْرُفًا). The term “زخرف” encompasses all forms of decoration and embellishment, including intricate designs and, by extension, gold itself, which is a primary medium of adornment. Thus, these verses depict a fully developed image of material opulence: lofty buildings with silver roofs, elevated structures, numerous doors, elaborate furnishings, and ornamental displays—everything that worldly individuals consider symbols of success and prestige. Yet the verse concludes with a decisive clarification: all of this is nothing but the enjoyment of the worldly life, whereas the Hereafter, with your Lord, is for the God‑fearing (وَإِن كُلُّ ذَٰلِكَ لَمَّا مَتَاعُ الْحَيَاةِ الدُّنْيَا وَالْآخِرَةُ عِندَ رَبِّكَ لِلْمُتَّقِينَ). This statement establishes that material wealth, however grand, possesses no intrinsic value in the divine scale. Its function is limited to transient worldly use, whereas true worth lies in piety and moral excellence, which determine one’s مقام in the Hereafter. Indeed, the implication is that worldly wealth is so lacking in ultimate value that it could be granted in abundance even to those who deny the truth, without conferring upon them any true dignity. If such distribution were to mislead humanity en masse toward disbelief, then it would defeat the purpose of moral testing; hence, it is withheld or apportioned in a balanced manner. Furthermore, the use of “زخرف” in this context subtly alludes to the deceptive nature of material adornment: just as decorative embellishment may conceal the underlying reality, so too the attractions of worldly life often obscure deeper truths. Similarly, superficial or empty speech is described as “زخرف” because it is adorned outwardly despite lacking substance. In summary, these verses articulate a fundamental principle of the Qur’anic worldview: - material possessions are not indicators of truth or divine proximity, - wealth and luxury may be granted even to the disbelievers, - the true معيار of human worth is تقویٰ, - and ultimate success belongs not to those who possess worldly luxury, but to those who attain spiritual integrity and moral refinement.

These verses express, in the most powerful manner, the negation of false and distorted value systems and the abrogation of such concepts. The Prophet (صلی اللہ علیہ وآلہ وسلم) was sent to transform a society in which the criterion of a person’s worth was determined by the number of camels possessed, the quantity of dirhams and dinars, the number of slaves and maidservants, and the extent of adornment, dwellings, and material display. Indeed, they even expressed astonishment that Muhammad ibn ‘Abdullah (صلی اللہ علیہ وآلہ وسلم), an orphan and materially poor individual, had been chosen for Prophethood. The first and most fundamental step in reforming such a society is to dismantle these erroneous standards and to establish correct human values in their place—values such as piety (taqwa), knowledge, wisdom, altruism, sacrifice, courage, and bravery. Otherwise, any reform remains superficial, outward, and unstable. This is precisely the task that Islam, the Qur’an, and the Messenger of God (صلی اللہ علیہ وآلہ وسلم) accomplished in the most exemplary manner. As a result, a backward society steeped in superstition was transformed, within a short period, into one of the foremost civilizations of the world. In this regard, the following hadith of the Prophet (صلی اللہ علیہ وآلہ وسلم) is especially significant: “لو وزنت الدنیا عند اللہ جناح بعوضة ما سقی الکافر منھا شربة ماء.” If the world had even the weight of a mosquito’s wing in the sight of God, He would not have given a disbeliever even a sip of water from it. (Tafsir al-Kashshaf, transliteration: Kashshaf, vol. 4, p. 350). Amir al-Mu’minin ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib (علیہ السلام) has expressed this concept with remarkable eloquence. He states that Musa (علیہ السلام), accompanied by his brother Harun (علیہ السلام), approached Fir‘awn wearing garments of wool and carrying staffs. They proposed to him that if he accepted Islam, his kingdom and honor would remain intact. Fir‘awn responded contemptuously to his courtiers, asking whether they did not find it astonishing that these two individuals, in such a poor and humble condition, were making such promises—why, if they possessed power, were they not adorned with bracelets of gold? This reaction reflected his valuation of gold as a sign of greatness and his disdain for simplicity. Imam ‘Ali (علیہ السلام) further explained that if God had so willed, He could have endowed the prophets with treasures of gold, opened for them the mines of precious metals, and accompanied them with the birds of the sky and beasts of the earth. However, had this been done, the purpose of testing would have been nullified, and the system of reward and punishment rendered meaningless. In another passage, he states that God has tested humanity, from Adam (علیہ السلام) to the last generations, through objects such as stones that neither harm nor benefit, neither see nor hear. Yet these stones were made into the Sacred House (Ka‘bah), a center of security for mankind. It was placed in a barren land, surrounded by rugged mountains, sparse vegetation, limited water sources, and scattered settlements—areas unsuitable even for grazing animals—yet people were commanded to turn toward it and gather there. This was a test of sincerity beyond material attraction. (Nahj al-Balagha, transliteration: Nahj al-Balagha, Sermon 192, Khutbah Qasi‘ah). He further adds that had God placed His Sacred House amidst lush gardens, flowing rivers, fertile plains, flourishing cities, and abundant resources, the reward would have diminished in proportion to the reduction of trial and difficulty. Such conditions would have drawn people toward superficial attractions, diverting them from genuine divine values. In essence, the Islamic revolution is fundamentally a revolution of values. If Muslims today face difficult and unfavorable conditions and find themselves oppressed by ruthless adversaries, it is largely because they have abandoned divine values and reverted to the standards of the pre-Islamic period of ignorance (jahiliyyah). These false values—centered on wealth, status, and material display—have once again taken root. Knowledge, piety, and virtue have been sidelined, and people have become absorbed in materialistic pursuits, estranged from the spirit of Islam. Until a transformation occurs within individuals and societies—until divine values regain authority over human conduct—the support and grace of God cannot be expected. For the Qur’anic principle clearly states: “إِنَّ اللّهَ لا يُغَيِّرُ ما بِقَوْمٍ حَتّى يُغَيِّروا ما بِأَنفُسِهِمْ” Indeed, God does not change the condition of a people until they change what is within themselves (al-Ra‘d: 11).

From the study of the above verses, it appears that the Qur’an negates ostentation, worldly adornment, and outward magnificence. However, in Surah al‑A‘raf (7:32), it is stated: “قُلْ مَنْ حَرَّمَ زِينَةَ اللّهِ الَّتِي أَخْرَجَ لِعِبَادِهِ وَالطَّيِّبَاتِ مِنَ الرِّزْقِ قُلْ هِيَ لِلَّذِينَ آمَنُوا فِي الْحَيَاةِ الدُّنْيَا خَالِصَةً يَوْمَ الْقِيَامَةِ كَذَلِكَ نُفَصِّلُ الْآيَاتِ لِقَوْمٍ يَعْلَمُونَ” And elsewhere: “يَا بَنِي آدَمَ خُذُوا زِينَتَكُمْ عِندَ كُلِّ مَسْجِدٍ” This gives rise to the question: how can these two sets of verses be reconciled? The answer is that the primary objective of the verses under discussion is to negate false values and eliminate them. The intention is that wealth, material display, and outward grandeur should not be regarded as the معيار of human personality and worth; it is not that material means themselves are intrinsically blameworthy. The essential point is that material resources should remain limited to the level of means and instruments, and should not be regarded as the ultimate aim. At the same time, such resources possess value only when they remain within reasonable and appropriate limits and are free from extravagance and wastefulness—not when they take the form of constructing palaces of gold and silver or accumulating excessive wealth. It also becomes clear that the possession of such material blessings by disbelievers and wrongdoers cannot be considered proof of their worth or dignity, nor does the lack of such resources diminish the status of believers. Furthermore, making moderate and balanced use of such means does not harm a person’s faith or piety. This represents the authentic Islamic and Qur’anic perspective.

See ayat 40 for tafseer.

See ayat 40 for tafseer.

See ayat 40 for tafseer.

See ayat 40 for tafseer.

The preceding verses addressed those devoted to the world who measure all things by a material standard, and the verses under commentary discuss one of the deadly consequences of this worldly attachment — the total estrangement from God and the heart's devotion to the world. It is stated: and whoever turns away from the remembrance of the All-Merciful, We appoint for him a devil who becomes his constant companion (وَمَن يَعْشُ عَن ذِكْرِ الرَّحْمَٰنِ نُقَيِّضْ لَهُ شَيْطَانًا فَهُوَ لَهُ قَرِينٌ). (Explanatory Note: "Ya'shu" is derived from the root "'ashw" — on the measure of "nashr." When it is made transitive with "ila," as in "'ashawtu ilayhi," it means to seek guidance through something with a weak eye; and when transitive with "'an," as in "'asha 'anhu," it means to turn away from something — and the verse under commentary carries this second meaning. See Lisan al-'Arab, entry "'ashw." "Nuqayyid" is from the root "qayḍ" — on the measure of "fayḍ" — meaning the shell of an egg, and it has subsequently come to be used in the sense of overpowering and dominating something.) Indeed, heedlessness of the remembrance of God, becoming lost in worldly pleasures, and attachment to the glamour of the world cause a devil to be imposed upon the human being who remains with him perpetually — placing a collar around his neck through which it drags him everywhere. It is self-evident that no deterministic inference can be drawn from this verse, for this is the result of people's own deeds. It has been repeatedly stated that the first effect of the human being's own actions — particularly becoming absorbed in worldly pleasures and becoming polluted with various sins — is that veils fall over his heart, eyes, and ears, causing him to become estranged from God; the satanic forces are then imposed upon him, satanic thoughts surround him from all sides, and this is the result of his own deeds. Although its attribution to God as "musal-al-asbab" — the Cause of causes — is correct, this is the same thing that in other Quranic contexts is designated "tazyin al-Shaytan" — the beautification of Satan — as in verse 63 of Surah al-Nahl: فَزَيَّنَ لَهُمُ الشَّيْطَانُ أَعْمَالَهُمْ, or is called the guardianship of Satan, as in the same verse: فَهُوَ وَلِيُّهُمُ الْيَوْمَ. It is also noteworthy that "nuqayyid" in its lexical meaning points both to the domination of the devil over the human being and to its companionship with him — and despite this the subsequent clause "fa-huwa lahu qarinun" comes for further emphasis that the devil can never be separated from such people. The word "Rahman" is a subtle allusion to the question of why they turn away from that God whose mercy encompasses all, and why they remain heedless of His remembrance. Could the fate of such people be anything other than becoming the companions of the devil and the slaves of its command? Some exegetes have expressed the possibility that "shayatin" here carries a broad meaning encompassing even the human devil, understanding from it an allusion to "the leaders and ringleaders of misguidance" who dominate those heedless of the remembrance of God, accompany them, and overpower them. This possibility grounded in a broad meaning is also not remote. Two important matters are then alluded to — matters that the satanic forces carry out with respect to these heedless ones. It is stated: they prevent these people from the path of God (وَإِنَّهُمْ لَيَصُدُّونَهُمْ عَنِ السَّبِيلِ). (Explanatory Note: The plural pronoun in "innahum" and the subsequent clause returns to "shayatin" — although the pronoun preceding it appeared in the singular form, for in reality it carries the meaning of a plural.) Whenever they intend to turn toward God, the satanic forces place obstacles and barriers in their paths so that they may in no way return to the straight path. The satanic forces present the paths of misguidance to them with such allure that "they suppose that they alone are on the path of guidance" (وَيَحْسَبُونَ أَنَّهُم مُّهْتَدُونَ). Just as Surah al-'Ankabut verse 38 states regarding the peoples of 'Ad and Thamud: وَزَيَّنَ لَهُمُ الشَّيْطَانُ أَعْمَالَهُمْ فَصَدَّهُمْ عَنِ السَّبِيلِ وَكَانُوا مُسْتَبْصِرِينَ — the devil beautified their deeds in their sight and barred them from the straight path, even though they had already found their way. In sum, this state shall persist — the heedless and unknowing human being engrossed in his own misguidance, and the satanic forces engaged in leading him astray — until all veils are lifted and the human being's truth-seeing gaze is opened. Then "when he comes to Us and his companion comes along with him — that very companion who was the cause of all his ruin — he shall cry out: would that between me and you there were the distance of the two easts — and what an evil companion you are!" (حَتَّىٰ إِذَا جَاءَنَا قَالَ يَا لَيْتَ بَيْنِي وَبَيْنَكَ بُعْدَ الْمَشْرِقَيْنِ فَبِئْسَ الْقَرِينُ). All the torment on one side and the company of this evil companion on another — the company of a devil that constantly looks upon him with eyes of contempt. All the memories of misguidance and wretchedness shall stand embodied before his gaze — that very devil that had always presented all evil before him as good, the wrong path as right, and misguidance as guidance. Alas — that same companion is his eternal fellow and fellow-traveller. Indeed, what transpires in this world shall be given concrete form on a vaster scale on the plain of the Resurrection — and whatever companion, wealth, and guide one has here shall be there as well. Indeed, some exegetes hold that there both companions shall be shackled in a single chain. It is self-evident that "al-mashriqayn" — the two easts — refers to the east and the west, for it is the custom of the Arabs that when they wish to form a dual of two different things of the same genus, they take one of the words and make it a dual — such as "shamsan" for the sun and moon, "zahrayn" for the noon and afternoon prayers, and "'isha'ayn" for the sunset and night prayers. While exegetes have cited other interpretations on this point, none appears appropriate for the verse under commentary — such as the eastern horizon at the beginning of winter or the beginning of summer, which though appropriate in other contexts does not fit here. Whatever the case, this expression describes the most remote conceivable distance — for "the distance of east and west" is a well-known idiom on this subject. But this wish shall never be fulfilled and no separation shall ever take place between these people and the satanic forces. Hence the subsequent verse states: on this Day such speech and regret can bring you no benefit whatsoever, for you have done wrong, and as a result you shall share in the punishment (وَلَن يَنفَعَكُمُ الْيَوْمَ إِذ ظَّلَمْتُمْ أَنَّكُمْ فِي الْعَذَابِ مُشْتَرِكُونَ). You must taste the punishment of this evil companion's torment along with the punishment, and experience the taste of punishment forever. (Explanatory Note: In this interpretation, the subject of "yanfa'u" is the preceding speech in which they expressed the wish for the distance of east and west between themselves and the devil; "idh zalamtum" sets forth the cause of this non-benefit; and "annakum fi al-'adhabi mushtarikun" is the result of that wrongdoing.) In this manner their wish to be separated from the satanic forces shall be transformed forever into despair — and how soul-destroying shall be the company of that companion. Several other possibilities have also been mentioned in the interpretation of this verse. One is that sometimes when a person sees his sympathisers his pain and grief is to some extent reduced — for the well-known saying has it: البَلِيَّةُ إِذَا عَمَّتْ طَابَتْ — when a calamity becomes universal it becomes bearable. But even this form of consolation shall not be available to them — rather, they shall be so submerged in the punishment that even the punishment of their fellow the devil can provide them no peace of heart. (In this interpretation: "annakum fi al-'adhabi mushtarikun" would be the subject of "yanfa'a" rather than its result.) Another possibility is that sometimes when a calamity strikes, the human being distributes its consequences among his friends, which to some degree lightens the burden of hardship. But this too shall not occur there — for the divine punishment allotted to each shall be so overwhelming that each shall be incapable of bearing another's burden. However, since this verse constitutes a completion of the verse immediately preceding it, the first interpretation selected above is more appropriate. At this point the Holy Quran leaves these people to their state, turns its address toward the Noble Prophet — peace and blessings of God be upon him and his family — and begins to speak of these blind-hearted and heedless individuals who perpetually denied him and were of the kind mentioned in the preceding verses. It thus states: can you make the deaf hear, or guide the blind, or call to the straight path those who are in manifest misguidance and are not even aware of this misguidance? (أَفَأَنتَ تُسْمِعُ الصُّمَّ أَوْ تَهْدِي الْعُمْيَ وَمَن كَانَ فِي ضَلَالٍ مُّبِينٍ). Similar statements appear in other Quranic verses in which the obstinate, unguidable, insightless, and pleasure-seeking individuals submerged in sins are likened to the deaf, the dumb, and even the dead. In verse 42 of Surah Yunus: أَفَأَنتَ تَهْدِي الْعُمْيَ وَلَوْ كَانُوا لَا يُبْصِرُونَ — can you then guide the blind even if they do not see? And in verse 80 of Surah al-Naml: إِنَّكَ لَا تُسْمِعُ الْمَوْتَىٰ وَلَا تُسْمِعُ الصُّمَّ الدُّعَاءَ إِذَا وَلَّوْا مُدْبِرِينَ — you cannot make the dead hear, nor can you make the deaf hear the call when they turn their backs. And there are many other similar verses. Such explicit statements exist because in the view of the Holy Quran the human being has "two kinds of ears, two kinds of eyes, and two kinds of life — one outward and one inward." Of these the second is the more important — for if the human being's inner perceptions and inner life become inoperative, no admonition or warning can be effective upon him. It is also noteworthy that in the preceding verses such people were likened to those whose eyes are weak and whose gaze is limited — but in this final verse they are likened to the deaf and blind. The reason is that when a person first becomes preoccupied with the world he is like one whose eyes see to some limited extent, but as his preoccupation with the world increases, his inclination toward material things grows, and his indifference toward spirituality deepens, the stages of diminished sight also advance. Beginning with a limited range of vision, the condition progresses until it reaches complete blindness. This is precisely what has brought these conclusive arguments to their completion — that a person's persistence and repetition of an act causes the intensification and entrenchment of either its positive or negative effects within his being, and the Holy Quran has also observed this very sequence. (Reference: Tafsir al-Kabir of Fakhr al-Razi, Vol. 27, pp. 214-215.)

See ayat 45 for tafseer.

See ayat 45 for tafseer.

See ayat 45 for tafseer.

See ayat 45 for tafseer.

These verses, following the earlier discussion that addressed the obstinate and incorrigible disbelievers and wrongdoers, now turn toward the Prophet (صلی اللہ علیہ وآلہ وسلم) with the dual purpose of issuing a severe warning to such people and offering consolation and reassurance to the Messenger of Islam (صلی اللہ علیہ وآلہ وسلم). It is stated: “If We take you away from among them, We shall certainly take vengeance upon them and punish them.” (فَإِمَّا نَذْهَبَنَّ بِكَ فَإِنَّا مِنْهُم مُّنتَقِمُونَ) The expression referring to the “removal” of the Prophet (صلی اللہ علیہ وآلہ وسلم) from among them may denote either his death or his migration from Makkah to Madinah. In either case, the meaning conveyed is that even if he is no longer present among them—and they persist in their conduct—they will not escape divine punishment. The term “انتقام” in this context signifies the administration of punishment. However, based on several Qur’anic verses addressing similar themes, it appears more appropriate to interpret this “removal” as referring to the Prophet’s passing. For example: “وَإِمَّا نُرِيَنَّكَ بَعْضَ الَّذِي نَعِدُهُمْ أَوْ نَتَوَفَّيَنَّكَ فَإِلَيْنَا مَرْجِعُهُمْ ثُمَّ اللّهُ شَهِيدٌ عَلَى مَا يَفْعَلُونَ” This meaning is also reflected in other passages such as Surah al‑Ra‘d and Surah al‑Mu’min. The verse then continues: “Or We show you that which We have promised them; then indeed We have full power over them.” (أَوْ نُرِيَنَّكَ الَّذِي وَعَدْنَاهُمْ فَإِنَّا عَلَيْهِم مُّقْتَدِرُونَ) Thus, whether the Prophet (صلی اللہ علیہ وآلہ وسلم) remains present among them or not, they remain under divine authority and cannot escape punishment if they persist in their conduct. The fulfillment of that punishment may occur during his lifetime or after his passing; delay is possible, but avoidance is not. This emphatic assertion may respond, on one hand, to the impatience of the disbelievers who demanded immediate punishment, and on the other, to their anticipation of the Prophet’s demise, assuming that his departure would end the matter altogether. Following this warning, the Prophet (صلی اللہ علیہ وآلہ وسلم) is instructed: “Hold fast to that which has been revealed to you; indeed you are upon a straight path.” (فَاسْتَمْسِكْ بِالَّذِي أُوحِيَ إِلَيْكَ إِنَّكَ عَلَى صِرَاطٍ مُّسْتَقِيمٍ) This affirms that there is no deviation or error in the Qur’an or in the conduct of the Prophet, and that rejection by certain groups does not undermine the truth of his mission. He is urged to remain steadfast, while the outcome rests with divine authority. It is further stated: “And indeed it is a reminder for you and for your people.” (وَإِنَّهُ لَذِكْرٌ لَّكَ وَلِقَوْمِكَ) The Qur’an is thus presented as a means of remembrance and awakening, intended to inform people of their duties. “And you shall soon be questioned.” (وَسَوْفَ تُسْأَلُونَ) This indicates that people will be held accountable for their response to this divine message and revelation. In this context, “ذکر” denotes awareness of God and recognition of religious obligations, a meaning consistent with numerous other Qur’anic passages. Although some exegetes interpret “ذکر” here as honor or distinction bestowed upon the Prophet and his community—particularly due to the Qur’an being revealed in their language—the broader and more consistent interpretation relates to its function as a reminder and guidance. The passage then presents a decisive argument against polytheism: “Ask those of Our messengers whom We sent before you, did We ever appoint any deities besides the Most Merciful to be worshipped?” (وَاسْأَلْ مَنْ أَرْسَلْنَا مِن قَبْلِكَ مِن رُّسُلِنَا أَجَعَلْنَا مِن دُونِ الرَّحْمَنِ آلِهَةً يُعْبَدُونَ) This indicates that all prophets دعوت people to توحید and have consistently rejected idolatry. Thus, the opposition of the Prophet (صلی اللہ علیہ وآلہ وسلم) to idol worship is not a novel stance, but a continuation of the enduring prophetic tradition. Although the address appears directed to the Prophet, its intended audience includes the broader community, including his opponents. The inquiry refers collectively to the teachings of previous messengers and their followers, whose unified witness constitutes a definitive testimony to the monotheistic foundation of all prophetic traditions. In this context, the use of the name “الرحمن” underscores the irrationality of abandoning a universally merciful God in favor of powerless idols from whom neither benefit nor harm may be expected.

With reference to the verse “وَإِنَّهُ لَذِكْرٌ لَّكَ وَلِقَوْمِكَ,” a question arises regarding the identity of the “قوم” mentioned therein. Three possible interpretations have been proposed in this regard: first, that it refers to the entire Muslim community; second, that it denotes the Arab people; and third, that it specifically refers to the tribe of Quraysh. From the Qur’anic perspective, the term “قوم” is frequently used in various verses to refer to the communities of prophets or to their contemporaneous peoples. Therefore, it appears that the same meaning is intended here as well. According to this understanding, the Qur’an functions as a source of reminder and guidance for all Islamic communities (in accordance with the first interpretation), and as a means of honor and distinction for them (in accordance with the second interpretation). However, numerous narrations transmitted through the sources of Ahl al‑Bayt indicate that the Imams (علیہم السلام) have stated that the term “قوم” in this verse refers specifically to them, that is, to the Ahl al‑Bayt of the Prophet. (These traditions have been compiled by the author of Tafsir Nur al‑Thaqalayn, transliteration: Nur al‑Thaqalayn, vol. 4, pp. 64–65.) Nevertheless, it is not unlikely that such interpretations represent a clear instance (misdaq) of the verse rather than its exclusive definition. Whether the term “قوم” encompasses the entirety of the Muslim community, the Arab nation, or the tribe of the Prophet (صلی اللہ علیہ وآلہ وسلم), in all such cases the Imams of the Ahl al‑Bayt (علیہم السلام) constitute its most evident and exemplary manifestation.

See ayat 50 for tafseer.

See ayat 50 for tafseer.

See ayat 50 for tafseer.

See ayat 50 for tafseer.

In these verses, reference is made to certain aspects of the life of the Messenger of God, Musa ibn ‘Imran, and his encounter with Pharaoh, in order to respond to the unfounded objections raised by the polytheists, who argued that if God were to appoint a messenger, why was a wealthy individual from Makkah or Ta’if not chosen for such a significant position? Pharaoh had raised a similar objection against Musa (علیہ السلام), employing the same line of reasoning. He criticized Musa (علیہ السلام) on the basis of his simple appearance, including his wearing of woolen garments and the absence of gold and silver ornaments. Accordingly, in the first of these verses, it is stated: “وَلَقَدْ أَرْسَلْنَا مُوسَى بِآيَاتِنَا إِلَى فِرْعَوْنَ وَمَلَائِهِ” And Musa said to them: “فَقَالَ إِنِّي رَسُولُ رَبِّ الْعَالَمِينَ” The term “آیات” refers to the miracles entrusted to Musa, through which he demonstrated the truth of his mission. Among these, two were of particular significance: the staff (“عصا”) and the luminous hand (“یدِ بیضاء”). As previously noted, the term “ملأ” refers to a group of prominent individuals united by a common purpose, typically denoting elites, wealthy figures, or members of the royal court in Qur’anic usage. The reference to “رَبِّ الْعَالَمِينَ” constitutes both a claim and its proof, for only the One who is the sustainer, owner, and regulator of all worlds is worthy of worship, not dependent beings such as Pharaoh or idols. The Qur’an then describes the reaction of Pharaoh and his people to the rational arguments and clear miracles of Musa (علیہ السلام): “فَلَمَّا جَاءَهُم بِآيَاتِنَا إِذَا هُم مِّنْهَا يَضْحَكُونَ” This response—mockery and ridicule—is characteristic of all tyrants and arrogant individuals when confronted by divine guidance. Through ridicule, they seek to dissuade others from taking such teachings seriously. However, God continued to present successive signs and miracles: “وَمَا نُرِيهِم مِّنْ آيَةٍ إِلَّا هِيَ أَكْبَرُ مِنْ أُخْتِهَا” Each sign was more compelling and decisive than the previous one, leaving no room for excuse. These included, in addition to the staff and the luminous hand, afflictions such as the flood, locusts, lice, frogs, and related calamities. Furthermore, it is stated: “وَأَخَذْنَاهُم بِالْعَذَابِ لَعَلَّهُمْ يَرْجِعُونَ” They were subjected to various punishments, such as drought, famine, and scarcity of produce, as mentioned in: “وَلَقَدْ أَخَذْنَا آلَ فِرْعَونَ بِالسِّنِينَ وَنَقْصٍ مِّن الثَّمَرَاتِ” At times, the waters of the Nile would turn to blood, rendering them unusable, and at other times agricultural disasters would destroy their crops. Although these trials would momentarily awaken them and compel them to appeal to Musa (علیہ السلام), once relief was granted, they would revert to their previous behavior. As stated: “وَقَالُوا يَا أَيُّهَا السَّاحِرُ ادْعُ لَنَا رَبَّكَ بِمَا عَهِدَ عِندَكَ إِنَّنَا لَمُهْتَدُونَ” It is noteworthy that they simultaneously referred to Musa (علیہ السلام) as a “sorcerer” while seeking his intercession for relief and promising to follow guidance, revealing a contradictory and insincere attitude. Various interpretations have been offered for the term “ساحر,” including its usage as a respectful designation or as a metaphor for extraordinary skill. However, it is equally plausible that their statements reflect inconsistency and opportunism—criticizing him while depending upon him in times of distress and making promises they did not intend to fulfill. Even in their supplication, their arrogance was evident. They referred to God as “ربّک” (your Lord) rather than “our Lord,” despite Musa’s clear declaration that he was the messenger of the Lord of all worlds. Nevertheless, Musa (علیہ السلام), despite such derogatory speech and repeated breaches of commitment, did not abandon his mission. He continued his دعوت with patience and perseverance, repeatedly praying for the removal of afflictions. Yet, as the Qur’an states: “فَلَمَّا كَشَفْنَا عَنْهُمُ الْعَذَابَ إِذَا هُمْ يَنكُثُونَ” Whenever the punishment was lifted, they broke their covenant. These events serve as enduring lessons for believers and as a means of consolation for the Prophet of Islam (صلی اللہ علیہ وآلہ وسلم), encouraging him not to be discouraged by persistent opposition and obstinacy. Rather, he is urged to continue his mission with steadfastness and determination, following the example of Musa (علیہ السلام), who ultimately prevailed over Pharaoh and his people. At the same time, these verses provide a stern warning to arrogant and obstinate adversaries: they are neither more powerful nor more formidable than Pharaoh and his followers, and they should reflect upon the ultimate outcome of such opposition.

See ayat 56 for tafseer.

See ayat 56 for tafseer.

See ayat 56 for tafseer.

See ayat 56 for tafseer.

See ayat 56 for tafseer.

In these verses, the Qur’an contrasts the reasoning of Musa (علیہ السلام) with the deceptive rhetoric of Pharaoh, illustrating how false value systems are constructed and employed to mislead societies. On one hand stand the clear arguments of Musa (علیہ السلام) and his manifest miracles; on the other, the afflictions that befell the people of Egypt and were removed through his supplication. Collectively, these factors exerted a profound influence upon the social environment, shaking public confidence in Pharaoh and compelling people to reflect upon their prevailing religious and social order. At this critical juncture, Pharaoh sought to undermine the impact of Musa (علیہ السلام) through deception. He invoked the material and superficial values prevalent in society and established a comparison between himself and Musa (علیہ السلام) in order to demonstrate his supposed superiority. The Qur’an states: “وَنَادَى فِرْعَوْنُ فِي قَوْمِهِ قَالَ يَا قَوْمِ أَلَيْسَ لِي مُلْكُ مِصْرَ وَهَذِهِ الْأَنْهَارُ تَجْرِي مِن تَحْتِي أَفَلَا تُبْصِرُونَ” Through this proclamation, Pharaoh emphasized his dominion over Egypt and the flowing rivers, seeking to portray these material markers as indicators of greatness. By contrast, he portrayed Musa (علیہ السلام) as lacking wealth and adornment, thereby implying inferiority. This method mirrors the attitude of the polytheists of the Age of Ignorance, who likewise assessed worth through material status in their opposition to the Prophet of Islam (صلی اللہ علیہ وآلہ وسلم). The expression “نادى” suggests that Pharaoh addressed a large assembly of elites or issued a proclamation throughout his realm. His reference to the rivers reflects the central importance of the Nile to Egypt’s prosperity, as its waters underpinned the entirety of Egyptian civilization. Thus, Pharaoh invoked it as a symbol of his power. The phrase “تجري من تحتي” indicates his claim of control over these natural resources, rather than a literal interpretation that the river flowed beneath his palace. The Qur’an then records Pharaoh’s further argument: “أَمْ أَنَا خَيْرٌ مِّنْ هَذَا الَّذِي هُوَ مَهِينٌ وَلَا يَكَادُ يُبِينُ” Here, he contrasts two supposed advantages of his own—political authority and material wealth—with what he portrays as two deficiencies in Musa (علیہ السلام)—poverty and difficulty in speech. However, the latter is unfounded, as Musa (علیہ السلام)’s speech impediment had already been removed through divine response to his supplication: “وَاحْلُلْ عُقْدَةً مِّن لِّسَانِي” Pharaoh further advances two additional objections: “لَوْلَا أُلْقِيَ عَلَيْهِ أَسْوِرَةٌ مِّن ذَهَبٍ أَوْ جَاءَ مَعَهُ الْمَلَائِكَةُ مُقْتَرِنِينَ” Why, he argues, was Musa (علیہ السلام) not adorned with gold bracelets or accompanied by angels as validation? These objections reflect a deeply materialistic conception of authority, in which wealth and external grandeur serve as criteria for legitimacy. In reality, the prophets are characterized precisely by their detachment from such superficial values. Their mission is to dismantle false standards and replace them with authentic human virtues such as knowledge, piety, and moral purity. Without the reformation of a society’s value system, no lasting progress can be achieved. The Qur’an then identifies the underlying mechanism of Pharaoh’s influence: “فَاسْتَخَفَّ قَوْمَهُ فَأَطَاعُوهُ” He exploited the intellectual weakness of his people, manipulating them through deception and diminishing their capacity for critical thought. This method is characteristic of all oppressive regimes, which maintain authority by lowering public awareness, distorting values, and preventing access to truth. The verse concludes: “إِنَّهُمْ كَانُوا قَوْمًا فَاسِقِينَ” This indicates that the people themselves bore responsibility for their condition. They were not compelled to follow Pharaoh blindly; rather, their فسق and estrangement from truth made them susceptible to his manipulation. Finally, the fate of Pharaoh and his people is described: “فَلَمَّا آسَفُونَا انتَقَمْنَا مِنْهُمْ فَأَغْرَقْنَاهُمْ أَجْمَعِينَ” When they provoked divine displeasure, God took retribution and drowned them entirely. The selection of drowning as their punishment bears symbolic significance, as their power and prosperity had been intimately linked to the Nile. That which had been the source of their strength became the instrument of their destruction. The concluding verse states: “فَجَعَلْنَاهُمْ سَلَفًا وَمَثَلًا لِلْآخِرِينَ” They were made an example and a precedent for those who follow. The term “سلف” denotes those who have preceded, while “مثل” refers to an instructive example circulated among people. Thus, their story stands as a perpetual lesson regarding the consequences of arrogance, deception, and rejection of truth.

See ayat 62 for tafseer.

See ayat 62 for tafseer.

See ayat 62 for tafseer.

See ayat 62 for tafseer.

See ayat 62 for tafseer.

It is reported in Sirat Ibn Hisham that one day the Messenger of God (صلی اللہ علیہ وآلہ وسلم) was seated in the مسجد with Walid ibn Mughirah when Nadr ibn Harith also came and sat with them. A number of Qurayshi leaders were also present in that gathering. The Messenger of God (صلی اللہ علیہ وآلہ وسلم) spoke with them, whereupon Nadr ibn Harith rose in opposition to him. The Messenger of God (صلی اللہ علیہ وآلہ وسلم), through rational arguments, demonstrated the invalidity of idol worship and silenced him. He then recited before them the following verses: “إِنَّكُمْ وَمَا تَعْبُدُونَ مِن دُونِ اللَّهِ حَصَبُ جَهَنَّمَ أَنتُمْ لَهَا وَارِدُونَ أَ لَوْ كَانَ هَؤُلَاءِ آلِهَةً مَّا وَرَدُوهَا وَكُلٌّ فِيهَا خَالِدُونَ” “You and those whom you worship besides God will be the fuel of Hell, and you shall enter it. If these had been deities, they would not have entered it; and all of you shall abide therein eternally.” After this incident, the Messenger of God (صلی اللہ علیہ وآلہ وسلم) rose and departed. Meanwhile, ‘Abdullah ibn Zaba‘ri arrived and joined the gathering. Walid said to him: Nadr ibn Harith has been overcome in argument by Muhammad (صلی اللہ علیہ وآلہ وسلم) and was unable to respond. Muhammad (صلی اللہ علیہ وآلہ وسلم) claims that we and all our deities will be fuel for Hell. ‘Abdullah replied: By God, had I been present, I would certainly have answered him. Ask him whether, in such a case, all worshippers and all that is worshipped would enter Hell. We worship the angels, the Jews worship عزیر, and the Christians worship Isa ibn Maryam. What harm would there be if we were in the same place as the angels, عزیر, and Isa? This response greatly pleased Walid and the others present. In their view, it constituted a decisive reply. They then went to the Messenger of God (صلی اللہ علیہ وآلہ وسلم) and conveyed this argument to him. The Messenger (صلی اللہ علیہ وآلہ وسلم) replied: Yes, whoever is pleased to be worshipped will go to Hell along with their worshippers. In reality, these idol‑worshippers were worshipping devils, and they worshipped those things that Satan commanded them to worship. At that point, verse 101 of Surah al‑Anbiya was revealed: “إِنَّ الَّذِينَ سَبَقَتْ لَهُم مِّنَّا الْحُسْنَى أُوْلَئِكَ عَنْهَا مُبْعَدُونَ” Those for whom the promise of goodness has already been decreed by Us—those believers who were never willing to be taken as objects of worship—shall be kept far away from it. In connection with this, the verse under discussion was also revealed: “وَ لَمَّا ضُرِبَ ابْنُ مَرْيَمَ مَثَلًا إِذَا قَوْمُكَ مِنْهُ يَصِدُّونَ” (Sirat Ibn Hisham, transliteration: Sirat Ibn Hisham, vol. 1, p. 385, summarized).

In these verses, the Qur’an addresses the negation of the belief held by the polytheists regarding the divinity of ‘Isa (علیہ السلام) and their idols. The discussion continues, in a complementary manner, the earlier narrative concerning Musa (علیہ السلام) and his confrontation with the idol‑worshippers of Pharaoh, and it serves as a powerful warning for the polytheists of the Prophet’s (صلی اللہ علیہ وآلہ وسلم) time, indeed for all polytheists across history. Although these verses appear to speak in a concise manner, internal indicators within the verses themselves as well as references from other Qur’anic passages clarify their meaning and demonstrate that, contrary to some differing exegetical interpretations, their content is not complex. It is first stated: “وَلَمَّا ضُرِبَ ابْنُ مَرْيَمَ مَثَلًا إِذَا قَوْمُكَ مِنْهُ يَصِدُّونَ” When the example of the son of Maryam was presented, your people began laughing and turning away from it. The term “یصدّون” (derived from “صدّ”) conveys the sense of loud ridicule, mockery, and uproar, as typically occurs when someone is being derided. The question arises regarding the nature of this “example” and who presented it. From the context of the subsequent verses—especially the statement “ما ضربوہ لک الا جدلاً”—it becomes evident that this example was presented by the polytheists themselves, and that it was connected to their idols. This becomes clear when one considers the background: upon hearing the verse: “إِنَّكُمْ وَمَا تَعْبُدُونَ مِن دُونِ اللَّهِ حَصَبُ جَهَنَّمَ” the polytheists responded mockingly by saying that ‘Isa ibn Maryam was also worshipped, and therefore, according to this verse, he too should enter Hell. They further remarked that it would be no misfortune if they and their idols were in the company of ‘Isa (علیہ السلام). This statement was accompanied by laughter and ridicule. They then said: “وَقَالُوا أَآلِهَتُنَا خَيْرٌ أَمْ هُوَ” Are our gods better, or is he? Their intent was argumentative rather than sincere. As the Qur’an states: “مَا ضَرَبُوهُ لَكَ إِلَّا جَدَلًا بَلْ هُمْ قَوْمٌ خَصِمُونَ” They presented this example only for the sake of argument; rather, they are a contentious people. They were fully aware that only those deities who accepted worship from their followers would be subject to punishment—such as Pharaoh, who explicitly called others to worship himself—not figures like ‘Isa (علیہ السلام), who was entirely disassociated from such claims. Thus, the Qur’an clarifies: “إِنْ هُوَ إِلَّا عَبْدٌ أَنْعَمْنَا عَلَيْهِ وَجَعَلْنَاهُ مَثَلًا لِّبَنِي إِسْرَائِيلَ” He is merely a servant upon whom We bestowed favor, and We made him a sign for the Children of Israel. His birth without a father, his speech in the cradle, and his other miracles were all signs of divine power and evidence of his prophethood, not of divinity. Throughout his life, he remained devoted to the worship of God and دعوت others to the same. Beliefs in his divinity or in the Trinity were later innovations. Some alternative interpretations have been proposed by various exegetes, but these do not align with the characteristics evident in the verses—namely that the “example” was introduced by the polytheists, was intended humorously or derisively, related to ‘Isa (علیہ السلام), and was used as a pretext for contentious argument. A number of narrations transmitted through both Shi‘i and Sunni sources recount that the Prophet (صلی اللہ علیہ وآلہ وسلم) said to ‘Ali (علیہ السلام): “You have a likeness to ‘Isa; a group loved him excessively and perished, and another group hated him and perished.” Upon hearing this, the hypocrites mocked the comparison, which led to the recitation of the verse: “وَلَمَّا ضُرِبَ ابْنُ مَرْيَمَ مَثَلًا …” (Manāqib, transliteration: Manaqib; cited in Kashf al‑Ghummah, p. 95; see also Ahqaq al‑Haq, vol. 3, p. 398; Tafsir Nur al‑Thaqalayn, vol. 4, p. 609; Tafsir Majma‘ al‑Bayan under the relevant verses). These narrations, however, represent an application (misdaq) rather than the primary occasion of revelation. The following verse states: “وَلَوْ نَشَاءُ لَجَعَلْنَا مِنكُم مَّلَائِكَةً فِي الْأَرْضِ يَخْلُفُونَ” If We willed, We could make angels succeed you upon the earth. This serves to negate the assumption that divine mission requires supernatural or angelic manifestation. Prophets are sent from among human beings so that they may understand human conditions and serve as practical models. The next verse declares: “وَإِنَّهُ لَعِلْمٌ لِّلسَّاعَةِ” He is indeed a knowledge (or sign) of the Hour. According to numerous narrations, this refers to the descent of ‘Isa (علیہ السلام) in the final era, which will serve as a sign of the قيامت. Reports mention that he will descend and pray behind the leader of the Muslim community. (Majma‘ al‑Bayan; Ruh al‑Ma‘ani under the verse). An alternative interpretation suggests that the pronoun refers to the Qur’an itself, as its revelation signals the proximity of the Hour. However, the contextual flow of the verses, which centers on ‘Isa (علیہ السلام), supports the former interpretation. The passage then commands: “فَلَا تَمْتَرُنَّ بِهَا وَاتَّبِعُونِ هَذَا صِرَاطٌ مُّسْتَقِيمٌ” Do not doubt it, and follow Me; this is the straight path. And warns: “وَلَا يَصُدَّنَّكُمُ الشَّيْطَانُ إِنَّهُ لَكُمْ عَدُوٌّ مُّبِينٌ” Let not Satan turn you away, for he is your manifest enemy. Satan’s enmity began with Adam and continues as an ongoing effort to mislead humanity. Therefore, one must remain vigilant and not allow his influence to divert one from the straight path or from preparing for the Hereafter.

See ayat 65 for tafseer.

See ayat 65 for tafseer.

In the preceding verses, certain distinctive aspects of the life of ‘Isa (علیہ السلام) were mentioned. The verses under discussion continue this theme and refer to his دعوت toward the pure religion and his negation of every form of shirk. It is stated: “وَلَمَّا جَاءَ عِيسَى بِالْبَيِّنَاتِ قَالَ قَدْ جِئْتُكُم بِالْحِكْمَةِ وَلِأُبَيِّنَ لَكُم بَعْضَ الَّذِي تَخْتَلِفُونَ فِيهِ فَاتَّقُوا اللَّهَ وَأَطِيعُونِ” When ‘Isa came with clear proofs (miracles and divine signs), he said: I have come to you with wisdom so that I may clarify for you some of the matters in which you differ; therefore, be mindful of God and obey me. Thus, the capital of ‘Isa (علیہ السلام) consisted of “بینات,” that is, divine signs and miracles, which on the one hand demonstrated his truthfulness, and on the other hand elucidated realities related to the origin (mabda’), the return (ma‘ad), and the essential requirements of human life. In this expression, ‘Isa (علیہ السلام) presents “حکمت” as the محور of his دعوت. The fundamental meaning of “حکمت” is to restrain and regulate with the aim of reform. It encompasses correct beliefs and a sound system of life that prevents deviation in both faith and practice, including moral and spiritual refinement. Thus, the term here carries a broad meaning, encompassing both practical and theoretical wisdom. It also aims at resolving those اختلافات which disrupt social order and lead to confusion. A question arises as to why ‘Isa (علیہ السلام) stated that he had come to clarify “some” of the matters of اختلاف, rather than all. The most appropriate explanation is that اختلافات among people are of two kinds. One type pertains to beliefs and actions that shape human character and have individual and social consequences. The second type consists of matters that are not essential for human guidance, such as the nature of the solar system, the essence of the soul, and similar issues. It is therefore the task of prophets to resolve the first type, not every intellectual اختلاف. The verse concludes: “فَاتَّقُوا اللَّهَ وَأَطِيعُونِ” Be mindful of God and obey me. He then removes any possible misconception regarding his own status by declaring: “إِنَّ اللَّهَ هُوَ رَبِّي وَرَبُّكُمْ” Indeed, God is my Lord and your Lord. The repetition of the word “رب” emphasizes that both he and his audience stand equally in need of the same divine sustainer. Consequently, he states: “فَاعْبُدُوهُ” Therefore, worship Him. And further emphasizes: “هَذَا صِرَاطٌ مُّسْتَقِيمٌ” This is the straight path. Despite such clear teaching, divisions emerged after his time: “فَاخْتَلَفَ الْأَحْزَابُ مِن بَيْنِهِمْ” Different groups arose among them—some exaggerated and attributed divinity to him, others declared him the son of God, and still others incorporated him into the doctrine of تثلیث. Only a small minority regarded him as a servant and messenger of God. Finally, the verse issues a warning: “فَوَيْلٌ لِّلَّذِينَ ظَلَمُوا مِنْ عَذَابِ يَوْمٍ أَلِيمٍ” Thus, woe to those who committed ظلم and deviated from the straight path, for them is the painful punishment of a grievous day. Indeed, the Day itself will be painful in its reckoning, punishment, regret, and humiliation.

See ayat 69 for tafseer.

See ayat 69 for tafseer.

See ayat 69 for tafseer.

After the preceding verses, which described the obstinate idolaters of the time of the Messenger of Islam (صلی اللہ علیہ وآلہ وسلم) and similarly the misguided and polytheistic groups among the followers of ‘Isa (علیہ السلام), the verses under discussion present their ultimate fate in a vivid and concrete manner. It is stated: “هَلْ يَنظُرُونَ إِلَّا السَّاعَةَ أَن تَأْتِيَهُم بَغْتَةً وَهُمْ لَا يَشْعُرُونَ” What are they waiting for except that the Hour should come upon them suddenly, while they are unaware? This interrogative, expressed in a rhetorical and negative form, aims to reveal the true condition of such individuals. It resembles the statement made about someone who disregards all advice and prepares the causes of his own destruction—that he is merely waiting for his end. In this verse, as in many other Qur’anic passages, the term “السّاعة” refers to the Day of Judgment, because its events will occur swiftly, as though within a single moment. It may also include, in some contexts, the final moment of the world’s termination, given the close connection between the two. Two features of the coming of the Hour are emphasized here: its suddenness (“بغتة”) and people’s state of unawareness. It is possible for an event to occur suddenly while still being anticipated and prepared for; however, the calamity here lies in the fact that the greatest and most momentous event will occur unexpectedly while people remain completely heedless. The condition of these wrongdoers is precisely this: they will be so absorbed in heedlessness that, as reported in a hadith of the Prophet (صلی اللہ علیہ وآلہ وسلم), the Hour will occur while people are engaged in ordinary activities—some milking livestock and others conducting trade. (Ruh al‑Bayan, vol. 25, p. 89). Such a state signifies the ultimate unpreparedness before a decisive reality. The following verse describes the fate of those relationships that are formed upon sin, worldliness, and mutual distraction from truth: “الْأَخِلَّاءُ يَوْمَئِذٍ بَعْضُهُمْ لِبَعْضٍ عَدُوٌّ إِلَّا الْمُتَّقِينَ” On that Day, close friends will become enemies to one another—except for the God‑conscious (muttaqin). The term “الأخلاء” (plural of “خلیل”) denotes intimate companions. Such relationships, if founded upon worldly motives or mutual involvement in wrongdoing, will turn into enmity, since each will regard the other as a cause of his ruin. Each will say, in effect, that the other led him toward heedlessness and deviation. By contrast, friendships grounded in taqwa will endure and strengthen, as their basis is permanent and their outcomes manifest positively on the Day of Judgment. This reflects a fundamental principle: partnerships built upon falsehood result in mutual blame, while those built upon truth result in shared reward. A narration from Imam Ja‘far al‑Sadiq (علیہ السلام) states: “الا كُل خلة كانت في الدنيا في غير الله عزّ وجلّ فانّها تصير عداوة يوم القيامة” Every friendship in this world that is not for the sake of God will turn into enmity on the Day of Judgment. (Tafsir ‘Ali ibn Ibrahim, as cited in Nur al‑Thaqalayn, vol. 4, p. 613). On that Day, God will address the righteous with a message of reassurance: “يَا عِبَادِ لَا خَوْفٌ عَلَيْكُمُ الْيَوْمَ وَلَا أَنتُمْ تَحْزَنُونَ” O My servants! No fear shall be upon you today, nor shall you grieve. This address is characterized by its directness, its affectionate tone (“My servants”), and its removal of both future fear and past sorrow. It conveys complete tranquility in a most difficult and overwhelming situation. The final verse in this sequence further defines these righteous individuals: “الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا بِآيَاتِنَا وَكَانُوا مُسْلِمِينَ” They are those who believed in Our signs and were in submission. Thus, their defining qualities consist of faith (ایمان) and submission (اسلام): the former reflecting the foundation of belief, and the latter indicating the practical manifestation of that belief in obedience and conduct. In summary, these verses present a powerful contrast: the heedless, who await sudden destruction and whose worldly relationships turn into hostility, and the God‑conscious, who enter the Hereafter free of fear and sorrow, their faith and submission forming the basis of their ultimate success.

See ayat 73 for tafseer.

See ayat 73 for tafseer.

See ayat 73 for tafseer.

These verses describe the reward of those pure servants of God and righteous believers who were mentioned earlier, and they convey glad tidings of seven precious blessings of the highest Paradise. First, it is stated that they will be addressed by the All‑Gracious and Magnificent God: “ادْخُلُوا الْجَنَّةَ” Enter Paradise. Thus, their true host will be God Himself, who will invite His guests and command them to enter Paradise. Then, referring to the first blessing, it is said: “أَنتُمْ وَأَزْوَاجُكُمْ” You and your spouses. It is evident that the companionship of faithful and affectionate spouses will be a source of joy both for men and for women. If they shared one another’s sorrows and hardships in the world, they will likewise share one another’s joys in the Hereafter. Some exegetes have interpreted “أزواج” to include companions, friends, and those closely associated. Even in that sense, it would constitute a great blessing; however, the apparent meaning of the verse remains the former. Then it is stated: “تُحْبَرُونَ” You will be delighted and rejoicing, with the آثار of happiness manifest upon your faces. The term “تحبرون” is derived from “حبر,” which denotes a pleasing effect or adornment, and is also applied to the visible signs of joy and happiness reflected upon the face. As the third blessing, it is stated: “يُطَافُ عَلَيْهِم بِصِحَافٍ مِّن ذَهَبٍ وَأَكْوَابٍ” Golden trays filled with the finest foods and cups containing pure drink will be circulated among them by special attendants. These vessels will be of the highest quality, and their hospitality will be conducted in an atmosphere of comfort, contentment, and sincerity, free from any form of hardship or anxiety. The word “صحاف” refers to large, wide dishes, while “أكواب” denotes cups without handles. At the fourth and fifth stages, two further blessings are mentioned: “وَفِيهَا مَا تَشْتَهِيهِ الْأَنفُسُ وَتَلَذُّ الْأَعْيُنُ” In Paradise, whatever the soul desires and whatever brings delight to the eyes will be available. This expression represents one of the most comprehensive and encompassing descriptions of the blessings of Paradise. It includes all conceivable material and spiritual delights, extending even beyond what the human mind can fully imagine. It is noteworthy that pleasures of the soul and pleasures of the eye are mentioned separately. This distinction is meaningful: after presenting a general description, the verse singles out visual delight as particularly significant. Some exegetes understand “مَا تَشْتَهِيهِ الْأَنفُسُ” to include all bodily pleasures, while “تَلَذُّ الْأَعْيُنُ” refers to higher, even spiritual pleasures. Then, the continuation emphasizes permanence and assurance in these blessings. In Tafsir Majma‘ al‑Bayan (transliteration: Majma al‑Bayan), it is noted that even if all creatures were to attempt to describe the blessings encompassed by this phrase, they would fail to capture its full extent. From another perspective, this expression conveys a sense of total fulfillment: whatever one desires or finds beautiful will be present there. It suggests a realm of complete harmony between desire and attainment, where longing itself is met with immediate realization. Thus, these verses collectively portray a realm in which joy, companionship, honor, comfort, and fulfillment converge in a manner unparalleled and beyond limitation.

This passage raises a question discussed by exegetes: does the general meaning of this verse imply that even those things which are prohibited in this world would be granted in Paradise if people desired them? In reality, such a question arises from a failure to consider an essential point. Prohibited and impure things are analogous to forms of nourishment that are entirely unsuitable for the human soul. A sound and healthy soul does not desire such things. Rather, it is diseased souls that develop inclinations toward harmful and corrupt “foods.” One can observe even in this world that certain individuals, during illness, may develop abnormal cravings—such as a desire to eat earth or other unsuitable substances. However, once the illness is removed, these improper desires disappear of their own accord. In the same way, in Paradise, such desires will not arise at all, since they belong to the condition of spiritual sickness, not to a state of purity and سلامت. This question resembles the report in which an Arab came to the Messenger of God (صلی اللہ علیہ وآلہ وسلم) and asked whether there would be camels in Paradise, since he was deeply fond of them. The Prophet (صلی اللہ علیہ وآلہ وسلم), knowing that the blessings of Paradise would surpass such limited desires, responded in brief yet comprehensive terms: “یا اعرابی ان ادخلک اللہ الجنّة اصبت فیھا ما اشتھت نفسک و لذّة عینک” O Arab, if God admits you into Paradise, you will find therein whatever your soul desires and whatever delights your eyes. (Tafsir Ruh al‑Bayan, vol. 8, p. 291). In other words, the state of Paradise is one in which the human soul becomes harmonized with truth and perfection. What one desires and what one beholds are brought into complete correspondence. Furthermore, the true value of any blessing lies in its permanence. Therefore, as a sixth characteristic, the people of Paradise are reassured: “وَأَنتُمْ فِيهَا خَالِدُونَ” You shall remain therein forever. This removes any anxiety regarding the cessation or decline of these blessings. Then, to clarify that these rewards are not arbitrary but are granted in accordance with human action, it is stated: “وَتِلْكَ الْجَنَّةُ الَّتِي أُورِثْتُمُوهَا بِمَا كُنتُمْ تَعْمَلُونَ” This is the Paradise which you have been made to inherit because of what you used to do. There is a noteworthy subtlety here: on the one hand, reward is described as the result of human deeds, while on the other, it is expressed in terms of inheritance (“وراثت”), which typically implies acquisition without toil. This suggests that while actions are the cause of attaining Paradise, the magnitude of the reward surpasses those actions to such an extent that it appears as though it were granted without effort. Some exegetes have interpreted this expression as indicating that each person has a potential place both in Paradise and in Hell, and that the inhabitants of Paradise inherit the places of those who are destined for Hell. However, the former interpretation appears more appropriate. Finally, the seventh blessing is mentioned: “لَكُمْ فِيهَا فَاكِهَةٌ كَثِيرَةٌ مِّنْهَا تَأْكُلُونَ” In it, you will have abundant fruits from which you shall eat. Although earlier references to vessels and cups imply the presence of various foods and drinks, fruits are mentioned separately due to their distinct importance. The phrase “مِنْهَا” indicates that the fruits of Paradise are so abundant that only a portion of them will ever be consumed; their supply is inexhaustible. A hadith states: “No one picks a fruit from the trees of Paradise except that another grows in its place.” Thus, the blessings of Paradise are not only diverse and complete but also perpetual and ever‑renewing. These descriptions present a glimpse of the spiritual and material rewards awaiting those who possess true faith and perform righteous deeds.

See ayat 80 for tafseer.

See ayat 80 for tafseer.

See ayat 80 for tafseer.

See ayat 80 for tafseer.

See ayat 80 for tafseer.

See ayat 80 for tafseer.

In these verses, the fate of the criminals and disbelievers on the Day of Judgment is described, in contrast to the encouraging end of the obedient and believing servants of God mentioned earlier, so that both dimensions may be clearly distinguished. It is first stated: “إِنَّ الْمُجْرِمِينَ فِي عَذَابِ جَهَنَّمَ خَالِدُونَ” Indeed, the criminals shall remain eternally in the punishment of Hell. The term “مجرم” derives from the root “جرم,” which originally signifies “cutting” or “severing.” It was first used for cutting fruit from trees or cutting the trees themselves, but later came to denote all forms of sinful acts—perhaps because such actions sever a person from God and from true human values. However, it is clear that not all sinners are intended here; rather, the reference is to those criminals who have adopted disbelief. This is indicated by the notion of everlasting punishment and by the contrast with the believers mentioned in the preceding verses. The interpretation that includes all sinners is therefore unlikely. It might be imagined that over time the intensity of this punishment would diminish, but the following verse removes this possibility: “لَا يُفَتَّرُ عَنْهُمْ وَهُمْ فِيهِ مُبْلِسُونَ” Their punishment will not be lightened for them, and they will be plunged into despair. The word “فتور” signifies a weakening after intensity, or a softening after severity. Thus, the verse denies any reduction in the intensity of the punishment. The term “مبلسون” (from “ابلاس”) denotes a state of overwhelming despair, grief, and helpless silence. It is the condition of one who has lost all hope of escape. Accordingly, three aspects of their punishment are emphasized: - its permanence, - its unchanging severity, - and the absolute despair accompanying it. This combination represents an exceedingly painful state. The next verse clarifies that this punishment is not an act of injustice: “وَمَا ظَلَمْنَاهُمْ وَلَكِن كَانُوا هُمُ الظَّالِمِينَ” We did not wrong them; rather, they themselves were the wrongdoers. Just as the earlier verses attributed the blessings of Paradise to the deeds of the righteous, here the eternal punishment is attributed to the actions of the wrongdoers. The greatest injustice lies in denying divine revelation and thereby destroying one’s own potential for success. The verse then describes another aspect of their helplessness: “وَنَادَوْا يَا مَالِكُ لِيَقْضِ عَلَيْنَا رَبُّكَ” They will call: O Malik (keeper of Hell), let your Lord put an end to us. Although human beings naturally flee from death, in extreme suffering they may begin to long for it. Such a state will be general among the inhabitants of Hell, who will seek annihilation as relief from torment. Yet their request will be rejected: “قَالَ إِنَّكُم مَّاكِثُونَ” He will say: Indeed, you shall remain. The word “ماكثون” implies remaining or waiting indefinitely, suggesting that there will be no escape, even through death. Some reports indicate a delay in the response, highlighting the depth of their abandonment and distress. A question arises as to why they call upon Malik instead of directly addressing God. The reason is that they will be veiled from their Lord, as indicated elsewhere in revelation, and thus appeal through the guardian of Hell. The next verse explains the reason for their punishment: “لَقَدْ جِئْنَاكُم بِالْحَقِّ وَلَكِنَّ أَكْثَرَكُمْ لِلْحَقِّ كَارِهُونَ” We brought you the truth, but most of you were averse to it. This indicates that their opposition was not merely to the prophets but to truth itself. This aversion led them inevitably to their fate. Another aspect of their conduct is described: “أَمْ أَبْرَمُوا أَمْرًا فَإِنَّا مُبْرِمُونَ” Have they resolved upon a plan? Then We have also determined a plan. They schemed against the truth—seeking to extinguish divine guidance and harm the believers—while God, in turn, decreed their punishment in this world and the Hereafter. Finally, their false assumption is exposed: “أَمْ يَحْسَبُونَ أَنَّا لَا نَسْمَعُ سِرَّهُمْ وَنَجْوَاهُم بَلَى وَرُسُلُنَا لَدَيْهِمْ يَكْتُبُونَ” Do they think that We do not hear their secrets and private conversations? Rather, We do hear, and Our messengers are present with them, recording everything. The term “سر” refers to inner, hidden thoughts, while “نجوى” denotes whispered speech. God’s knowledge encompasses both, and appointed angels record all actions and utterances so that individuals may witness the consequences of their deeds. Thus, these verses present a complete portrayal: the permanence and severity of punishment, the cause rooted in human actions, the futility of escape, and the comprehensive awareness of all deeds. Provide your feedback on BizChat

See ayat 85 for tafseer.

See ayat 85 for tafseer.

See ayat 85 for tafseer.

See ayat 85 for tafseer.

The preceding verses—particularly at the beginning of the Surah—referred to the statements and beliefs of the polytheists concerning the attribution of offspring to God; they regarded the angels as daughters of God. Furthermore, a few verses earlier, reference was made to ‘Isa (علیہ السلام) and his call to pure monotheism and to the worship of the Lord. Therefore, in these verses, another method has been adopted to refute such false beliefs. Thus, God states: “قُلْ إِن كَانَ لِلرَّحْمَنِ وَلَدٌ فَأَنَا أَوَّلُ الْعَابِدِينَ” Say: If the Most Merciful had offspring, then I would be the first to honor and obey that. For my faith and conviction in God are greater than yours, and my awareness and knowledge of Him are also superior; therefore, I would precede you in honoring His offspring and in obedience. Although some exegetes have considered the content of this verse to be complex and have offered various interpretations—some of which appear unusual—these interpretations often do not accord with the apparent meaning of the verse. For example, some have taken “إن” in the sense of negation and “أَنَا أَوَّلُ الْعَابِدِينَ” to mean “I am the first to worship God,” thus rendering the verse as: “God has no offspring, and I am the first to worship Him.” Others have understood “العابدين” to mean “those who refuse to worship,” yielding the sense that if God had offspring, such a being would not be worthy of worship. Clearly, such interpretations diverge from the ظاهر of the verse. However, upon reflection, there is no difficulty in the meaning. Rather, it is an engaging and effective rhetorical style employed in addressing obstinate and contentious individuals. For instance, if someone incorrectly claims that a certain person is the most knowledgeable, one may respond: if he were indeed the most knowledgeable, we would be the first to follow him. The purpose is to prompt reflection and lead the person away from false assumptions. Two points should be noted here. First, the term “عبادت” does not always mean worship; it can also denote obedience, reverence, and respect, and it is used here in that sense. For even if, hypothetically, God had offspring, that would not in itself justify worship, but it would imply obedience and acknowledgment. Second, in Arabic rhetoric, a conditional expression may indicate something impossible; however, in this case, the expression has been framed in a way that corresponds with the mode of speech of the interlocutor, demonstrating a form of rhetorical accommodation. Thus, the Prophet (صلی اللہ علیہ وآلہ وسلم) conveys that the notion of God having offspring is untenable; if such a thing were true, he would be foremost in acknowledging it. After this statement, another clear argument is presented to refute such unfounded claims: “سُبْحَانَ رَبِّ السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالْأَرْضِ رَبِّ الْعَرْشِ عَمَّا يَصِفُونَ” Glory be to the Lord of the heavens and the earth, the Lord of the Throne, far exalted above what they attribute to Him. The One who is the owner and administrator of the heavens, the earth, and the عظیم Throne—how could such a Being have any need of offspring? He is infinite, encompassing all existence, and the sustainer of all creation. The concept of offspring applies only to those who are subject to mortality, who seek continuity of lineage, or who require assistance in states of weakness or loneliness. Thus, attributing offspring implies embodiment and limitation in time and space, which are incompatible with the Divine. The mention of “رَبِّ السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالْأَرْضِ” followed by “رَبِّ الْعَرْشِ” represents a transition from general to specific, emphasizing the comprehensive dominion of God. The term “عرش” signifies the entirety of the cosmos as the seat of divine sovereignty. It may also be understood as referring to metaphysical reality in contrast to the material world indicated by “السماوات والأرض.” The discourse then adopts a tone of disregard and warning toward the obstinate: “فَذَرْهُمْ يَخُوضُوا وَيَلْعَبُوا حَتَّى يُلَاقُوا يَوْمَهُمُ الَّذِي يُوعَدُونَ” So leave them to engage in vain discourse and play until they meet the Day that has been promised to them. This “Day” evidently refers to the Day of Judgment, not merely the moment of death, since the full recompense of deeds occurs on that day. It is the same “يوم الموعود” mentioned elsewhere. The following verse continues the discussion of توحید and presents seven attributes of God that reinforce its foundations. First, it rejects the belief in multiple deities associated with different realms or functions. It states: “وَهُوَ الَّذِي فِي السَّمَاءِ إِلَهٌ وَفِي الْأَرْضِ إِلَهٌ” He is the One who is God in the heavens and God on the earth. Since His lordship over the heavens and the earth has already been established, His status as the sole object of worship necessarily follows. Neither angels, nor ‘Isa (علیہ السلام), nor idols possess ربوبیت; all are created beings, sustained by Him, and themselves engaged in His worship. Then two further attributes are mentioned: “وَهُوَ الْحَكِيمُ الْعَلِيمُ” He is the Wise and the All‑Knowing. His actions are based on wisdom, and He is fully aware of all things. Next, His sovereignty and boundless blessings are described: “وَتَبَارَكَ الَّذِي لَهُ مُلْكُ السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالْأَرْضِ وَمَا بَيْنَهُمَا” Blessed is He to whom belongs the dominion of the heavens, the earth, and all that lies between them. The term “تبارك” denotes both abundance of goodness and permanence; both meanings apply, as He is eternal and the source of all good. Finally, the last two attributes are stated: “وَعِندَهُ عِلْمُ السَّاعَةِ وَإِلَيْهِ تُرْجَعُونَ” With Him is the knowledge of the Hour, and to Him you will be returned. Thus, ultimate knowledge of the Day of Judgment rests solely with Him, and all will return to Him. Therefore, one should seek goodness and blessing from Him alone, not from idols or false deities who hold no power over one’s destiny.

Translate to academic English from Urdu, written left‑to‑right, preserve and not translate Qur’anic expressions verbatim and Arabic text, and do no add any additional material from any other source to explain. Be accurate in translation and do not skip text. use standard paragraph break and setting. Write names of persons, place, book or items in English. Transliterate the reference of book.

Some narrations indicate that certain heretics and polytheists attempted to use the verse “وَهُوَ الَّذِي فِي السَّمَاءِ إِلَهٌ وَفِي الْأَرْضِ إِلَهٌ” as evidence for their own belief, and, due to their erroneous assumption, interpreted it to mean that there is one deity in the heavens and another deity on the earth. However, the verse itself conveys the exact opposite: namely, that He alone is the deity in the heavens and also the deity on the earth—in other words, He alone is the deity everywhere. When this matter was presented as a question before the Infallible Imams (علیہم السلام), they responded to it both with a naqdi (refutational) answer and a halli (analytical) answer. It is reported in Usul al‑Kafi (transliteration: Usul al‑Kafi, vol. 1, Kitab al‑Tawhid, Bab al‑Harakah wa al‑Intiqal, Hadith 10), on the authority of Hisham ibn Hakam, that Abu Shakir Daisani—who was among the scholars of the Daisani sect and held dualistic beliefs—said to him: “There is a verse in the Qur’an that supports our doctrine.” I asked, “Which one?” He recited: “وَهُوَ الَّذِي فِي السَّمَاءِ إِلَهٌ وَفِي الْأَرْضِ إِلَهٌ.” I was unable to provide a response. That year, I had the honor of visiting the House of God, and I presented myself before Imam Ja‘far al‑Sadiq (علیہ السلام), relating the entire matter to him. The Imam (علیہ السلام) said: “This is the statement of a corrupt heretic. When you return, ask him what he is called in Kufah; he will say such‑and‑such. Then ask him what he is called in Basrah; he will say such‑and‑such. Then tell him: our Lord is similar in this respect—He is ‘Ilah’ in the heavens and ‘Ilah’ on the earth; likewise in rivers, deserts, and everywhere—He alone is the deity.” Hisham relates that when he returned and conveyed this answer to Abu Shakir, he said: “This cannot be your answer; rather, you have brought it from Hijaz.” The distinguished exegete Tabarsi, in the interpretation of this verse, mentions two reasons for the repetition of the word “Ilah”: first, to emphasize the Divine divinity in all domains; and second, to indicate that the angels in the heavens worship Him and human beings on the earth also worship Him. Therefore, He is the deity of angels, humans, and all beings in the heavens and the earth.

See ayat 89 for tafseer.

See ayat 89 for tafseer.

See ayat 89 for tafseer.

In these concluding verses of Surah al‑Zukhruf, the fate of the polytheists is once again described, and the falsity of their beliefs is demonstrated through several arguments, in continuation of the preceding discussion. It is first stated that if they worship such deities under the assumption of their intercession, they should know: “وَلَا يَمْلِكُ الَّذِينَ يَدْعُونَ مِن دُونِهِ الشَّفَاعَةَ” Those whom they invoke besides God possess no authority of intercession. The right of intercession in the divine presence operates only by God’s permission, and the Wise God has certainly not granted such authority to lifeless idols made of stone and wood, devoid of intellect and awareness. However, since their objects of worship include angels and other created beings, an exception is mentioned within the same verse: “إِلَّا مَن شَهِدَ بِالْحَقِّ” Except those who bear witness to the truth. These are the ones who wholeheartedly accept the oneness of God at all stages and submit entirely before the truth. Such individuals, by divine command, are granted the authority of intercession. Yet, even they do not intercede indiscriminately for all people—whether idolaters or polytheists—but rather: “وَهُمْ يَعْلَمُونَ” They know well for whom intercession is permissible. Thus, the expectation of the polytheists regarding the intercession of angels is nullified through two arguments: first, that the angels themselves bear witness to divine unity, and second, that they possess discerning knowledge regarding the conditions of intercession. The verse then turns to the beliefs of the polytheists themselves and offers a decisive refutation: “وَلَئِن سَأَلْتَهُم مَّنْ خَلَقَهُمْ لَيَقُولُنَّ اللَّهُ” If you were to ask them who created them, they would surely say: God. As has been noted repeatedly, very few among the ancient polytheists regarded idols as creators. Rather, they viewed them as intermediaries or symbols of divine proximity. Nevertheless, when questioned regarding creation, they readily acknowledged God as the Creator. The Qur’an consistently emphasizes that worship is due only to the Creator and Sustainer of all. Therefore, if they accept God as the Creator, logic demands that they devote worship exclusively to Him. Hence, the verse concludes with reproach: “فَأَنَّى يُؤْفَكُونَ” How then are they turned away? The following verse refers to the complaint of the Prophet (صلی اللہ علیہ وآلہ وسلم): “وَقِيلِهِ يَارَبِّ إِنَّ هَؤُلَاءِ قَوْمٌ لَّا يُؤْمِنُونَ” And his saying: “My Lord, indeed these are a people who do not believe.” Despite continuous exhortation—day and night, through glad tidings and warnings, through reminders of past nations and appeals to divine mercy—their hearts remain unmoved and they refuse to believe. Finally, God instructs the Prophet (صلی اللہ علیہ وآلہ وسلم): “فَاصْفَحْ عَنْهُمْ وَقُلْ سَلَامٌ” So turn away from them and say: Peace. This “سلام” is not one of companionship or greeting, but rather an expression of dignified withdrawal—similar to the usage in: “وَإِذَا خَاطَبَهُمُ الْجَاهِلُونَ قَالُوا سَلَامًا” Yet even with this withdrawal, a warning is given: “فَسَوْفَ يَعْلَمُونَ” Soon they shall come to know. They will eventually realize the consequences of their obstinacy, and the painful outcome of their actions will become evident to them. Thus, the Surah concludes by juxtaposing argument, warning, and restraint: the exposure of false beliefs, the declaration of truth, and the ultimate handing over of the matter to divine judgment.