Maarif-ul-Quran — Al-Baqarah 2:129 – Al-Baqarah 2:238

The prayer of Ibrahim (علیہ السلام) for the Holy Prophet ﷺ Let us start by commenting on certain words which occur in this verse. The Arabic word Yatlu يَتْلُو (translated in English as "recite", or "read out" ) comes from the word Tilawah, (تلاوہ) which lexically signifies "to follow, to obey", but in the terminology of the Qur'an and the Hadith denotes the recitation or reading of the Holy Qur'an or of a Di-vine Book, for one who reads a Divine Book is also required to obey it fully. The word also suggests that it is obligatory to read the Holy Qur'an exactly as it has been revealed by Allah, and not to add or sub-tract a word on one's own part, not even to change the pronunciation of a word which often may, in the Arabic language, change the very meaning of the word concerned. In his "Mufradat al-Qur'an مفردات القرآن ", Imam al-Raghib al-Isfahani (رح) says that the word Tilawah cannot, in current idiom, be applied to the reading of any book other than the Word of Allah. The word Kitab کتاب (Book) in this verse, of course, refers to the Holy Qur'an itself. As to the word Hikmah حکمہ (usually translated in English as "wisdom" ), it carries various meanings in Arabic - for example, arriving at the truth , justice, exact knowledge, etc. (al-Qamus). According to al-Raghib al-Isfahani (رح) ، when the word is used in speaking of Allah, it connotes the total and perfect knowledge of all existents, and flawless creation; but when applied to someone other than Allah, it connotes a proper knowledge of the existents, and good deeds. In connection with the present verse, Maulana Mahmud al-Hasan has interpreted the word as "profound truths, or subtle realities", while Maulana Ashraf ` Ali Thanavi (رح) has taken it to mean "the art of understanding properly". The commentators from among the blessed Companions and their immediate successors, whose interpretations come directly from the teachings of the Holy Prophet ﷺ himself, have advanced different connotations of the word Hikmah حکمہ - some say that it refers to the commentary and exegesis of the Holy Qur'an, others believe that it means the proper understanding of the religion (Din دین ), or the injunctions of the Shari'ah, or such commandments of Allah which have been received through the word of the Holy Prophet g . But the truth of the matter is that in spite of the apparent variety of expressions used, the substance of all these statements is the same - namely, the Way (Sunnah) of the Holy Prophet and the Hadith. This is the interpretation reported from Qatadah by Ibn Kathir and Ibn Jarir. Commentary Now, to proceed with the commentary, let us consider why Sayyidna Ibrahim (علیہ السلام) in praying for the well-being of his descendants in this world and in the other, requested Allah to send a prophet from among them. The reason is twofold. Firstly, the appearance of a prophet from among them would in itself be an honour and a blessing. Secondly, the prophet being a member of their own group, they would be thoroughly familiar with his past and present and with his ways, and thus find it easy to have trust in him, and to profit from his guidance. According to a hadith, in accepting this prayer Allah promised that this prophet would be sent in the last of all ages. (Ibn Jarir and Ibn Kathir) According to a hadith reported by Imam Ahmad in his "Musnad", the Holy Prophet ﷺ has said that Allah had chosen him as the Last Prophet at a time when Sayyidna Adam (علیہ السلام) was not yet born and only his clay was being prepared, and that he was the manifestation of the prayer of his father, Sayyidna Ibrahim (علیہ السلام) ، of the good tidings brought by Sayyidna ` Isa (Jesus Christ (علیہ السلام) and of the dream seen by his mother. The good-tidings refer to the announcement made by Sayyidna ` Isa (علیہ السلام) as reported in the Holy Qur'an: مُبَشِّرً‌ا بِرَ‌سُولٍ يَأْتِي مِن بَعْدِي اسْمُهُ أَحْمَدُ I have brought the good-tidings of a prophet who is to come after me, and his name is Ahmad." (61:6) And the mother of the Holy Prophet had, during her pregnancy, seen in a dream that a light went out of her which illumined the places in far-off Syria. Then, the words of the present prayer of Sayyidna Ibrahim (علیہ السلام) have been repeated in two different places in the Holy Qur'an - once in Surah "'Al` Imran" (Ch.3) and then in Surah "Al-Jumu` ah" (Ch. 62). Both the passages where these words have been repeated speak of the prophethood of Sayyidna Muhammad ﷺ ، and thus show that he is the prophet whom Sayyidna Ibrahim (علیہ السلام) had prayed for. All these verses - namely, the present verse from Surah "Al-Baqarah", and the other two from Surah "'Al-` Imran" and Sarah "Al-Jumu` ah" respectively - say the same thing about the Holy Prophet ﷺ in the same words. That is to say, they define the purpose of his being sent to the world as the Messenger of Allah and his functions as a prophet. These functions are threefold. Firstly, to recite the verses; secondly, to teach the Book and also to teach "wisdom"; and thirdly, "to purify" the people. Now, let us examine the three in detail. (1) The verse speaks separately of "reciting" the Holy Qur'an and of "teaching" it. Since "reciting" pertains to the words, and "teaching" to their meanings, the explicit distinction between the two shows that the words of the Holy Qur'an are no less important in themselves and for themselves than their meanings, and that the recitation and preservation of the words is obligatory, and constitutes an act of worship. In order to understand this aspect of the question we have only to recall that the first and immediate listeners and disciples of the Holy Prophet not only knew Arabic very well but were themselves very eloquent speakers of the language, some of them being even poets. For an audience like this it should have apparently been enough to recite the Holy Qur'an, without any explanation or commentary, for them to be taught - in their case, the "reciting" and the "teaching" should have, for all practical purpose, become one and the same thing. Why has the Holy Qur'an, then, mentioned them separately as two distinct prophetic functions? If one considers the question seriously, one can easily draw two important conclusions. To begin with, one would come to see that the Holy Qur'an is not like other books where meanings are the ultimate object, while words have only a secondary place as being no more than a vehicle for the ideas, and can hence tolerate minor changes and modifications so long as the meaning does not suffer. In the case of man-made books, it would thus be totally frivolous to go on reading the words without paying any attention to the meanings. On the contrary, in the case of the Holy Qur'an the words are in themselves as necessary and inalienable a part of the intention as the meanings, and the Shari` ah has laid down particular injunctions with regard to the words of the Holy Qur'an. That is why in the Science of the Principles of Islamic Jurisprudence (Usul al-Fiqh اصول افقہ) the Holy Qur'an has been defined as comprehending words and meaning both. In other words, if the meanings of the Holy Qur'an are expressed in a different language, or even if certain other Arabic words are substituted for the revealed ones, such a version shall not be entitled to the name "Qur'an", in spite of the meanings being intact. Consequently, if one were to recite this modified version in Salah, one's prayers shall not be valid. Similarly, a reading of this version shall not bring one the reward promised in the Hadith for the recitation of the Holy Qur'an, nor shall any of the injunctions related to the Holy Qur'an apply to it. Hence the Fuqaha' have forbidden the printing and publication of a translation of the Holy Qur'an without the Arabic text. It is quite wrong to speak of an "Urdu Qur'an" or "English Qur'an", simply be-cause a translation of the original into any language whatsoever cannot properly be called "the Qur'an". In short, the word Yatlu یتلو in the present verse leaves no doubt as to the fact that the "recitation of the verses" is an end in itself, for one does not "recite" meanings, but words. Of course, it goes without saying that Allah has sent the Holy Qur'an for us to understand it and to follow its guidance. To be content with memorizing the words alone and being indifferent to the meanings would merely show one's ignorance of the nature of the Book of Allah, and one's ungratefulness. But there are so many people these days who suppose that the Holy Qur'an is like other books, and believe that it is a waste of time to read or memorize its words without knowing what they mean. In view of this wide-spread error, we cannot insist too much on the truth that the recitation of the words of the Holy Qur'an is in itself a regular act of worship and brings a great reward. This is borne out by the practice of the Holy Prophet and his blessed Companions. They knew the meanings of the Holy Qur'an as no one else can, and yet they never thought that once they had understood it and acted upon it, nothing more was required of them. On the contrary, they kept reciting the Holy Qur'an again and again as long as they lived. Some of the Companions used to recite the whole Book of Allah in a single day, some in two days, and some in three. Reciting the Holy Qur'an in one week has always been quite a usual practice among the Muslims, which is indicated by the division of the Holy Qur'an into seven stages (Manazil منازل ). In fact, by instituting the recitation of the Holy Qur'an as an act of worship, carrying a reward of its own, and by giving it a separate and regular position among the prophetic functions, Allah has been very merciful to those Muslims who are not for some reason yet able to understand the meanings, and has saved them from the misfortune of being indifferent to the words and thus being totally deprived of the blessings which flow from His Book. Even such Muslims should, no doubt, keep trying to understand the meanings too so that they may receive the blessings in full, and the ultimate purpose of the Revelation may be realized. (2) According to the present verses, "teaching the Book" is a prophetic function distinct from "reciting the Verses". We can easily infer from it the principle that in order to understand the Holy Qur'an it is not sufficient merely to know the Arabic language, but that it also requires the "teaching" of the Holy Prophet ﷺ . As everyone knows, in order to learn a science or art - be it medicine or engineering, or something as ordinary as cookery - it is not enough to read a book or to be proficient in a language. Had it been the only qualification required, one could have easily mastered all the sciences and the arts on which one could find books written in the language one knew. To learn the meanest craft, then, one needs the regular and constant guidance of a teacher. This being so, how can one hope to understand, unaided, the Holy Qur'an which has something to say on the most difficult subjects possible, ranging from theology to philosophy and physics? Had a competence in the Arabic language been sufficient for this task, scores of Jewish and Christian scholars and men of letters in the Arabic countries today would have been counted among the greatest commentators as would have been Abu Jahl ابو جھل and Abu Lahab ابو لہب in the days of the Holy Prophet . By distinguishing "the teaching of the Book" from "the reciting of the verses" as a distinct prophetic function, the Holy Qur'an has underlined the fact that in order to understand the Book of Allah properly it is not enough, even for those who know Arabic very well, merely to listen to a recitation of the verses, but that such an understanding can be acquired only through the teaching of the Holy Prophet ﷺ and that to separate the one from the other, and to make an attempt at interpretation on one’ s own is no more than a self-delusion. Had it not really been necessary to explain and teach the meanings of the Holy Qur'an, why should have Allah sent us a Messenger? There were many other ways of conveying His Book to men. But Allah knows everything, and is All-Wise. He knows that an understanding of His Book depends on the guidance of a teacher much more than that of human sciences and arts does - in fact, on the guidance, not of an ordinary teacher, but of one who in his turn receives guidance from Allah Himself directly through Revelation (Wahy وحی ), and who is designated in Islamic terminology as a Nabiyy نبی (Prophet) and a Rasul رسول (Messenger of Allah). According to the Holy Qur'an itself, Allah has sent the Holy Prophet ﷺ to men for the express purpose of explaining to them in detail the injunctions and the meanings of the Divine Book لِتُبَيِّنَ لِلنَّاسِ مَا نُزِّلَ إِلَيْهِمْ : "So that you should explain to men what We have revealed for them". (16:44) According to the present verse, the prophetic function of "teaching the Book" also includes the "teaching of Hikmah حِکمہ As we have shown above, although this word carries various meanings in the Arabic language, yet, with reference to this verse and similar ones, the blessed Companions and their immediate successors have interpreted Hikmah حِکمہ as "the Sunnah" or the Way of the Holy Prophet ﷺ . It means that along with "teaching the Book" the prophetic functions include the teaching of the principles and modes of spiritual discipline. The Holy Prophet ﷺ has himself said, اِنَّما بُعثِتُ مَعَلِماً have been sent only as a teacher." From this, it necessarily follows that his followers are required to be disciples, and that every Muslim, man or woman, should as a Muslim be a life-long student, keen to learn what the Holy Prophet ﷺ has taught. If one cannot for some reason master the different sciences connected with the Holy Qur'an and the Sunnah, one must try to acquire at least a satisfactory knowledge and understanding of the basic doctrines of Islam and of the fundamental injunctions of the Shari'ah which are absolutely indispensable for every Muslim. (3) "Purifying the people" is also an essential prophetic function. The Arabic word Tazkiyah تذکیہ denotes purifying a thing or person from all kinds of filth, internal as well as external. One can see for oneself what the different kinds of external filth are - the Shari'ah has clearly defined them. The internal varieties include, on the one hand, false beliefs like infidelity (Kufr کفر ), association (Shirk شرک ), or total reliance on someone other than Allah, and, on the other hand, pride, vanity malice, jealousy, love of worldly things, etc. Although the evil nature of such beliefs and tendencies has been fully explained in the Holy Qur'an and the Sunnah, yet in making the purification of the people" a distinct and separate prophetic function the present verse indicates that just as a mere knowledge of words and technical terms does not make one the master of a science or art, in the same way a knowledge, or even a proper understanding of its principles does not by itself make one perfect in the science or art concerned. To attain any degree of perfection one must also learn to put the principles into practice, and "realize" them in oneself and for oneself, which again requires the supervision of an authentic teacher and guide. In the Way of Sufis (Tariqah) the function of the spiritual guide (Shaykh) is to help the disciple in obeying the injunctions of the Holy Qur'an and the Sunnah so thoroughly that it becomes a matter, not of effort, but of habit - so to say, his very "nature".36 36. At this point, we must sound a note of warning. It has grown, in our day, almost habitual to speak of Islam as "the religion of action" - if not of "activism". In such phrases, the implication is never absent that "action" is tc be considered as an anti-thesis of "thought", and "practice" as that of "theory" - as if there is a dichotomy, and the two activities can hardly be reconciled with each other. And there is always the insinuation that in order to be worthy of any respect one must make an either/or kind of choice in favour of "action" and "practice" as against "thought" and "theory". Such formulations are no older than four centuries, and are the necessary products of certain dilemmas which historically arose in the society of the Christian West. They do not and cannot, as such, belong to a religious or metaphysical approach to things. In so far as an activity can be described as specifically "human", it cannot be purely automatic, but is preceded by thought. In other words, all "practice" is governed by a "theory", and all "action" guided by "thought" or some principle, good or bad. The rule is so general that it applies even to the action of those who have been promoting the dichotomy. As far as the Islamic way of looking at things is concerned, it goes without saying that no action or practice, however good, can have the slightest merit or spiritual efficacy until and unless it carries a divine sanction. It logically follows that the foremost duty of a Muslim is to acquaint himself with divine commandments, and then to obey them. One can, if one likes, give to the first the name of "theory", and the second the name of "practice". But there is no dichotomy involved, nor any choice called for۔ No "practice" can be valid without being informed by "theory", and no "theory" can be of much avail without being put into "practice". It is "theory" which makes "practice" meaningful, and it is through "practice" alone that one acquires a true knowledge of "theory". They are not two entities, but only two ways of considering the same reality. What finally matters is "realization" or making the essential truths "real" to oneself. In the West itself, and as late as the end of the Middle Ages, there were people who knew that theoria and praxis went together in the terminology of spiritual disciplines. In fact, the Greek word does, in its original meaning, say all that we have been trying to explain here. For, even if "theory" in modern European languages has come to mean just a 'speculation', or a 'supposition', even a 'fancy', the Greek verb theoreo signified "to see", and the noun theoros denoted the "man who sees". Thus, theoria was not merely a fancy, but a truth which could be "seen", or actively realized. Now that we are on the subject of purification (tazkiyah تزکیہ ), we might add another important consideration. From the days of the First Prophet to the days of the Last (علیہم السلام) it has been the Way of Allah that in order to guide men and to show them the Straight Path, He has been sending them not only His Books but His prophets also. This indicates the general principle that for their guidance men need, on the one hand, a Divine Teaching revealed in the form of a Book, and, on the other, a human teacher in the form of a prophet who should train and discipline them into absorbing the divine guidance fully. Men need not merely one of these, but both. For, a man alone can be the teacher of another man, and not a book - which serves only as an aid. That is why Islam began with a Book and a Prophet, and the two, working together, produced a society of men who are unparalleled in history for their rectitude. For the coming generations too, the two basic principles of guidance have continued to function in the form of the Shari'ah and the Men of Allah". The Holy Qur'an has emphasised the point again and again. Let us quote a few instances: يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا اتَّقُوا اللَّـهَ وَكُونُوا مَعَ الصَّادِقِينَ ﴿119﴾: "0 believers, fear Allah, and be with the truth-ful" (9:119). In summing up the qualities of "the truthful" (Al-Sadiqun الصدیقون ), another verse ends with the words: أُولَـٰئِكَ الَّذِينَ صَدَقُوا ۖ وَأُولَـٰئِكَ هُمُ الْمُتَّقُونَ "It is they who are truthful, and it is they who are the God-fearing". (2:177) As we have explained in our commentary on the first chapter, the Surah "Al-Fatihah الفاتحة " is the quintessence of the Holy Qur'an, and the essence of this Surah is the guidance towards the Straight Path (Al-Sirat al-Mustaqim السیرۃ المتقیم). Now, in order to indicate the Straight Path the Holy Qur'an has, instead of calling it the Path of the Qur'an or the Path of the Prophet ﷺ or the Path of the Sunnah, spoken of the Men of Allah who can show the Straight Path to the seeker. Says the Holy Qur'an: صِرَ‌اطَ الَّذِينَ أَنْعَمْتَ عَلَيْهِمْ غَيْرِ‌ الْمَغْضُوبِ عَلَيْهِمْ وَلَا الضَّالِّينَ ﴿7﴾ the path of those on whom You have bestowed Your grace, not of those who have incurred Your wrath, nor of those who are misguided". (1:7) An-other verse provides greater specification - فَأُولَـٰئِكَ مَعَ الَّذِينَ أَنْعَمَ اللَّـهُ عَلَيْهِم مِّنَ النَّبِيِّينَ وَالصِّدِّيقِينَ وَالشُّهَدَاءِ وَالصَّالِحِين : "Those on whom Allah has bestowed His grace - the prophets, the truthful, the martyrs and the righteous." (4:69) Similarly, the Holy Prophet ﷺ has, for the benefit of all the later generations of Muslims, explicitly named certain personalities who should be followed in religious matters: یا ایھا الناس انِّی ترکتُ فیکم ما اَن اَخَذتم بہ لَن تضِلُّوا کتاب اللہ عِترَتِی اَھلِ بیتی " I am leaving behind me two things; if you stand firm by them you will never fall into misguidance - firstly, the Book of Allah, and, secondly, my descendants and the members of my family." (Tirmidhi ترمذی) A hadith reported by Al-Bukhari says: اقتدوا بالذین من بعدی ابی بکر و عمر "After me, follow Abu Bakr and ` Umar." And a third hadith says: علیکم بسنتی و سنۃ الخلفاء الراشدین "You must adopt my way (the Sunnah) and the way of Al-Khulafa' al-Rashidin" - that is, the first four rightly-guided Caliphs. In short, whether it be religion or the different sciences and arts, the acquisition of knowledge in the proper sense of the term depends on profiting from authentic books and authentic teachers. In the case of religion, however, people are, while turning to these two modes, liable to fall into the error of putting exclusive or excessive emphasis on one of them alone, which brings them more harm than good. Thus, there are, on the one hand, people who neglect the Book of Allah, and begin to adore their scholars and spiritual masters, without taking the trouble of finding out whether they are obedient to the Shari` ah or not. In fact, this has been the characteristic malady of the Jews and the Christians. Speaking of them, the Holy Qur'an says: اتَّخَذُوا أَحْبَارَ‌هُمْ وَرُ‌هْبَانَهُمْ أَرْ‌بَابًا مِّن دُونِ اللَّـهِ : "They have taken their rabbis and their monks as their lords apart from Allah." (9:31) Obviously, this is the royal road to Shirk شرک (association) and Kufr کفر (infidelity), on which millions have perished, and go on perishing. On the other hand, there are people who claim that the Book of Allah is by itself sufficient for them, and that in order to understand it they do not need the guidance of a teacher or a scholar or a spiritual master. This too is a form of misguidance, for an attempt to interpret the Book of Allah on one's own, without the aid of reliable specialists, inevitably draws one into all sorts of errors, makes one a slave of one's own desires and inclinations, and may, in some cases at least, lead one straight outside the pale of Islam. So, what one is required to do is to put each of these two means of knowledge in its proper place, and to profit from both. One should be quite clear about the basic principle in this respect - to Allah alone belongs the authority to lay down a commandment, and it is Allah alone we have been called upon to obey, while the Holy Prophet ﷺ is a means of helping us to know how Allah is to be obeyed, and one obeys Him on the ground that to obey the Holy Prophet ﷺ is to obey Allah Himself. Besides that, one should, when faced with difficulties in understanding the Holy Qur'an and the Hadith or in acting upon them, turn for help, willingly and respectfully, to the words and deeds of the masters in these subjects, and consider it to be the key to the door of salvation. There is a second conclusion to be drawn from the fact that the present verse includes the teaching of the Book among the prophetic functions. As we know, Allah has promised to safeguard the Holy Qur'an Himselfإِنَّا نَحْنُ نَزَّلْنَا الذِّكْرَ‌ وَإِنَّا لَهُ لَحَافِظُونَ ﴿9﴾ : "It is We who have revealed the Guidance, and it is We who watch over it." (15:9) Consequently, every single word, every consonant and every vowel of the Holy Qur'an has remained intact upto this day, and shall remain intact as long the world lasts. Now, according to the present verse, the teaching of the Holy Prophet ﷺ is absolutely indispensable for a proper understanding of the Holy Qur'an, and without this guidance it is not possible to act upon the Holy Qur'an in a real sense. It logically follows from it that the teachings of the Holy Prophet ﷺ should also receive divine protection in their own degree, and remain intact as a whole till the end of the world; otherwise, the preservation of the words of the Holy Qur'an would not, by itself, fully serve the purpose for which Allah has revealed it. It goes without saying that the teachings of the Holy Prophet ﷺ are identical with what is called the Sunnah or the Hadith. Although Allah has not promised the same degree of protection to the Hadith as to the Holy Qur'an, and the words of the Sunnah have not been preserved exactly in the same manner as the words of the Holy Qur'an, yet the prophetic interpretations too must, according to the present verse, remain intact, and it has, taken as a whole, remained intact upto this day.Whenever an attempt has been made to distort a Hadith or to invent spurious ones, the specialists in the science have always exposed the fraud. Thus, in accordance with the prediction implicit in the present verse, Allah has preserved the teachings of the Holy Prophet ﷺ from the days of the blessed Companions to our own day through fully authentic collections of the Ahadith and through the masters of this subject. And this divine protection shall continue to the last day of the world. For, the Holy Prophet ﷺ himself has assured us that in his Ummah there shall always remain till the end of the world a group of authentic scholars who shall jealously and watchfully guard the Holy Qur'an and the Hadith against all attempts at distortion or misrepresentation. This hadith by itself gives the lie to some contemporary writers who have, for the ulterior motive of discrediting the injunctions of the Islamic Shari'ah, been trying to propagate the notion that the whole body of the Ahadith we possess is inauthentic and hence unreliable. But anyone who has eyes to see can easily understand the stratagem - if one cannot trust the Hadith, one can no longer trust the text of the Holy Qur'an. And this is exactly what the Westerners and their local allies want to accomplish - that is, to make the Muslims turn away from the Holy Qur'an. In the end, let us note that the three prophetic functions which Sayyidna Ibrahim (علیہ السلام) referred to in his prayer, and which the Holy Prophet ﷺ was sent to perform, were fulfilled in his own life-time. In order to have an idea of the great transformation which the recitation of the Holy Qur'an, the teaching of the Holy Prophet ﷺ and his purifying influence brought about in men, it is enough to see what the Holy Qur'an says in praise of his Companions (رضی اللہ تعالیٰ عنہم) وَالَّذِينَ مَعَهُ أَشِدَّاءُ عَلَى لْكُفَّارِ‌ رُ‌حَمَاءُ بَيْنَهُمْ ۖ تَرَ‌اهُمْ رُ‌كَّعًا سُجَّدًا يَبْتَغُونَ فَضْلًا مِّنَ اللَّـهِ وَرِ‌ضْوَانًا "Those who are with him are hard against the disbelievers, merciful to one another; you see them-bowing and prostrating themselves (in prayers), seeking the bounty of Allah and His pleasure". (48:29).

The earlier verses have defined the basic principles of the religion of Sayyidna Ibrahim (علیہ السلام) ، called upon men to follow it, and warned them against the dangers involved in turning away from it. They have also refuted the claims of the Jews and the Christians to be the followers of this religion, while indicating Islam as the only religion which is now faithful to the Abrahamic Tradition, and which has, in its essentials, been the religion common to all the prophets. The present verses show the solicitude of the prophets (علیہم السلام) in giving religious and spiritual instruction and guidance to their descendants. The Ibrahimic Way Verse 130 speaks of the superiority of the religion of Sayyidna Ibrahim (علیہ السلام) ، from which arises his own spiritual station and glory in this world and in the other. This being so, anyone who turns away from this religion only displays his own stupidity.37 Anyhow, the point is that only he can turn away from this religion who does not possess any understanding, or has totally lost it, for this alone is the religion of "Nature", and no one can deny it so long as his "nature", in the essential and integral sense of the word, remains intact. The superiority of this religion is shown by the simple fact that Allah conferred a special honour on Sayyidna Ibrahim (علیہ السلام) in this world and in the next on account of this very religion. As for the honour and greatness he received in this world, everyone knows how Namrud نمرود (Nimrod) with all his might failed to impress him, how he accepted gladly to be thrown into the fire rather than give up the worship of the One God, and how the Lord of the worlds changed the fire into a garden for him, so that believers and non-believers alike finally came to recognize his uprightness and his unalloyed faith. The associators of Arabia were, after all, his progeny, and had , in spite of their idol-worship, always continued to hold him in great esteem, and even claimed to be his followers. Certain remnants of his religion were still present among them, though somewhat distorted by their ignorance - for example, the Hajj, the annual sacrifice of animals, hospitality etc. These are the manifestations of the special divine grace which had designated "the Friend of Allah" (Khalilullah خلیل اللہ ) as the 'Imam' of people. (2:124) So much for his greatness in this world. As to the next, Verse 130 has announced the exalted station Allah has granted him in the Hereafter. 37. Let us note that the relevant phrase in the Arabic text of this verse can be translated into English in three ways: (a) Such a man is stupid in himself (b) he has besotted himself, and allowed himself to become stupid (c) he is ignorant of his own self.

Verse 131 defines the basic principle of the religion of Sayyidna Ibrahim (علیہ السلام) . Allah asked him to submit himself, and he willingly and gladly agreed to submit himself to "the Lord of the worlds." Let us add that the word of command employed in this verse is Aslim اَسلِم ، which comes from the same root as the word Islam. It is difficult to find an exact English equivalent, for the word signifies "to obey, to submit oneself, to surrender one's will." Anyhow, we should notice that in reply to the divine command, he did not say, as one would have expected, اَسلَمتُ لَک : "I submit myself to you," but, more elaborately: اَسلَمتُ لِرَبِّ الْعَالَمِين : "I submit myself to the Lord of the worlds." This particular form of reply expresses the attitude of respect and awe proper to the occasion, and includes the praise of Allah which the moment of receiving the honour of divine address demanded. It also carries a recognition of the fact that in submitting himself to the Lord of the worlds he was only performing the essential duty of a servant towards the Master of All, and doing it for his own benefit. The reply makes it clear that the basic principle of the religion of Sayyidna Ibrahim (علیہ السلام) ، and its very essence is contained in one word, Islam, which signifies total obedience and willing submission of oneself to Allah. It was to show to the world his perfect adherence to this principle that he was made to pass through all the trials before attaining his exalted station. Islam اسلام ، or submission to Allah, is what the world has been created for; it is the end all the prophets and all the divine books have been sent to serve. We also learn from this verse that the religion common to all the prophets (علیہم السلام) and the point on which all of them come together is Islam اسلام . Beginning with Sayyidna Adam (علیہ السلام) upto the Last Prophet ﷺ every messenger of Allah and every prophet has called men to اسلام Islam alone, and enjoined upon his followers to keep to this Straight Path. The Holy Qur'an is quite explicit on this subject: إِنَّ الدِّينَ عِندَ اللَّـهِ الْإِسْلَامُ. "Certainly, in the eyes of Allah the only religion is Islam" (3:19) and وَمَن يَبْتَغِ غَيْرَ‌ الْإِسْلَامِ دِينًا فَلَن يُقْبَلَ مِنْهُ "Whoso desires a religion other than Islam, it shall not be accepted of him." (3:85) In order to put the question in the proper perspective as also to avoid the risk of misunderstanding let us add a few remarks. All the religions which different prophets brought to the world had a divine sanction behind them, were essentially instituted by Allah Himself, and each of them was, in its own time, "accepted" in the sight of Allah. Consequently, each of these religions - whether one calls it Judaism or Christianity or something else - must in its essence be Islam, in the general sense of the word - namely, total submission to Allah. But the religion of Sayyidna Ibrahim (علیہ السلام) is distinguished from others by a peculiar characteristic - that is, he gave to his religion the name of Islam, and to his followers the name of Muslims. We have al-ready seen in Verse, 128 how he prayed for himself, his son and his progeny: رَ‌بَّنَا وَاجْعَلْنَا مُسْلِمَيْنِ لَكَ وَمِن ذُرِّ‌يَّتِنَا أُمَّةً مُّسْلِمَةً لَّكَ And, our Lord, keep us both obedient (Muslimayn مُسْلِمَيْنِ ) to you, and make of our progeny a people (Ummah) obedient (Muslimah مُّسْلِمَةً ) to you." And now in Verse 132 we find him advising his descendants not to die without being sure that they have been Muslims. After him this distinction of being specifically called Muslims and "the Islamic Ummah" passed on, according to his own instruction, to the Ummah of the Holy Prophet۔ ﷺ Addressing the Muslims, the Holy Qur'an says: مِّلَّةَ أَبِيكُمْ إِبْرَ‌اهِيمَ ۚ هُوَ سَمَّاكُمُ الْمُسْلِمِينَ مِن قَبْلُ وَفِي هَـٰذَا "Be steadfast in the religion of your father, Ibrahim. He named you Muslims before this as well as in this (the Holy Qur'an)." (22:78) When the Holy Qur'an was revealed, the Jews and the Christians, and even the idol-worshippers of Arabia used to make the claim, each group on its own part, that they were the followers of the Abrahamic religion, but the 'Holy Qur'an and its followers have made it quite evident that in this last phase of human history the religion of the Holy Prophet ﷺ ، and this alone, is the religion of Sayyidna Ibrahim (علیہ السلام) the religion of quintessential "Nature" (Al-fitrah). In short, the essence of all the divine books, all the Shari'ahs and the teachings of all the prophets is Islam - that is, turning away from one's desires in order to obey divine commandments, and giving up individual opinion in order to submit oneself to divine guidance. But we are grieved to see that there are thousands of Muslims today, who have forgotten this basic truth, and wish to pursue their own desires in the name of Islam. What appeals to them is that kind of interpretation (rather, misinterpretation) of the Holy Qur'an and the Hadith which should flatter their desires. In fact, what they strive to do is to distort the Shari'ah to suit their fancies, and to do it so cleverly that the idols they really worship should appear in the garb of religion. Such men are, indeed, trying to be clever with Allah Himself who knows every particle of the universe and who can look into the deepest recesses of the human heart - the Almighty before whom nothing avails but complete surrender and total submission. What Islam requires of man is that he should set aside all his desires and inclinations, and seek, in everything he does, the pleasure of his Lord. And he can find this pleasure only when he knows the commandments of his Lord, and also performs these tasks exactly in the manner He has prescribed. This is what ` Ibadah عبادہ or worship is, in the real sense of the word. It is the perfection of this total obedience and submission and love which constitutes the final stage of man's spiritual development, which is known as the Station (Maqam) of Abdiyyah (عبدِیہ Servanthood). This is the station where Sayyidna Ibrahim (علیہ السلام) received from Allah the title of Khalilullah خلیلُ اللہ (the Friend of Allah), and the Last of All the Prophets the title of عبَدِنا :Abduna (Our Servant). On the subsidiary levels of the Station of Servanthood stand the Abdal عبدال ، the Aqtal, the Awliya اَولِیا ، the men of Allah - the 'saints' of the Islamic Ummah, each in his own degree. This is the essence of Tawhid توحید (the realization of unicity), on attaining which all one's fears and hopes become bound with Allah, and with no one else. Thus, Islam signifies total obedience to Allah, and this obedience is possible only when one follows the Sunnah, the Way of the Holy Prophet ﷺ . The Holy Qur'an has laid down the principle in very explicit words: فَلَا وَرَ‌بِّكَ لَا يُؤْمِنُونَ حَتَّىٰ يُحَكِّمُوكَ فِيمَا شَجَرَ‌ بَيْنَهُمْ ثُمَّ لَا يَجِدُوا فِي أَنفُسِهِمْ حَرَ‌جًا مِّمَّا قَضَيْتَ وَيُسَلِّمُوا تَسْلِيمًا ﴿65﴾ "By your Lord, they will never be true Muslims till they make you the judge regarding the disagreements between them, and find in themselves no resistance against your verdict, and sur-render themselves in full submission." (4:65). In the end let us clarify an important point. As reported in Verse 132, Sayyidna Ibrahim (علیہ السلام) made his descendants promise that before they died they should make sure that they had been Muslims. It means that one should steadfastly follow the teachings of Islam throughout one's life, so that one receives the grace of Allah and remains a Muslim upto the last breath. A number of ahadith too say that one would die in the state which one has maintained in one's life, and one would, on the Day of Resurrection, rise from the grave in the same state. This is the usual way of Allah with men - if His servant makes up his mind to do good deeds and also strives in this direction as best as he can, Allah helps him and makes the task easy for him. This principle does not in any way stand in opposition to what has been said in another hadith to this effect: A man keeps doing the kind of good deeds for which Paradise has been promised and it seems that there is only an arms' length between him and Paradise, and then all of a sudden his destiny overcomes him, and he starts doing what would lead him to Hell, and finally he reaches Hell; on the other hand, a man keeps doing what would lead him to Hell, and it seems that there is only an arm's length between him and Hell, and then his destiny overcomes him, and he starts doing what would make him worthy of Paradise, and finally he enters Paradise. We have said that there is no contradiction involved, for some texts of this hadith mention a proviso too - "as it appeared to people." That is to say, the first of these two men appeared in the eyes of the onlookers to be performing good deeds, while in fact he was doing just the opposite; similarly, the second man had from the outset been doing what would make him worthy of Paradise, though people thought him to be a sinner. (Ibn Kathir) We conclude this discussion with the remark that the man who has been steadfast in doing good deeds, should trust the divine promise, rely on the usual way of Allah with His creatures, and hope that through the grace of Allah he would depart from this world in this blessed state.

Verse 131 defines the basic principle of the religion of Sayyidna Ibrahim (علیہ السلام) . Allah asked him to submit himself, and he willingly and gladly agreed to submit himself to "the Lord of the worlds." Let us add that the word of command employed in this verse is Aslim اَسلِم ، which comes from the same root as the word Islam. It is difficult to find an exact English equivalent, for the word signifies "to obey, to submit oneself, to surrender one's will." Anyhow, we should notice that in reply to the divine command, he did not say, as one would have expected, اَسلَمتُ لَک : "I submit myself to you," but, more elaborately: اَسلَمتُ لِرَبِّ الْعَالَمِين : "I submit myself to the Lord of the worlds." This particular form of reply expresses the attitude of respect and awe proper to the occasion, and includes the praise of Allah which the moment of receiving the honour of divine address demanded. It also carries a recognition of the fact that in submitting himself to the Lord of the worlds he was only performing the essential duty of a servant towards the Master of All, and doing it for his own benefit. The reply makes it clear that the basic principle of the religion of Sayyidna Ibrahim (علیہ السلام) ، and its very essence is contained in one word, Islam, which signifies total obedience and willing submission of oneself to Allah. It was to show to the world his perfect adherence to this principle that he was made to pass through all the trials before attaining his exalted station. Islam اسلام ، or submission to Allah, is what the world has been created for; it is the end all the prophets and all the divine books have been sent to serve. We also learn from this verse that the religion common to all the prophets (علیہم السلام) and the point on which all of them come together is Islam اسلام . Beginning with Sayyidna Adam (علیہ السلام) upto the Last Prophet ﷺ every messenger of Allah and every prophet has called men to اسلام Islam alone, and enjoined upon his followers to keep to this Straight Path. The Holy Qur'an is quite explicit on this subject: إِنَّ الدِّينَ عِندَ اللَّـهِ الْإِسْلَامُ. "Certainly, in the eyes of Allah the only religion is Islam" (3:19) and وَمَن يَبْتَغِ غَيْرَ‌ الْإِسْلَامِ دِينًا فَلَن يُقْبَلَ مِنْهُ "Whoso desires a religion other than Islam, it shall not be accepted of him." (3:85) In order to put the question in the proper perspective as also to avoid the risk of misunderstanding let us add a few remarks. All the religions which different prophets brought to the world had a divine sanction behind them, were essentially instituted by Allah Himself, and each of them was, in its own time, "accepted" in the sight of Allah. Consequently, each of these religions - whether one calls it Judaism or Christianity or something else - must in its essence be Islam, in the general sense of the word - namely, total submission to Allah. But the religion of Sayyidna Ibrahim (علیہ السلام) is distinguished from others by a peculiar characteristic - that is, he gave to his religion the name of Islam, and to his followers the name of Muslims. We have al-ready seen in Verse, 128 how he prayed for himself, his son and his progeny: رَ‌بَّنَا وَاجْعَلْنَا مُسْلِمَيْنِ لَكَ وَمِن ذُرِّ‌يَّتِنَا أُمَّةً مُّسْلِمَةً لَّكَ And, our Lord, keep us both obedient (Muslimayn مُسْلِمَيْنِ ) to you, and make of our progeny a people (Ummah) obedient (Muslimah مُّسْلِمَةً ) to you." And now in Verse 132 we find him advising his descendants not to die without being sure that they have been Muslims. After him this distinction of being specifically called Muslims and "the Islamic Ummah" passed on, according to his own instruction, to the Ummah of the Holy Prophet۔ ﷺ Addressing the Muslims, the Holy Qur'an says: مِّلَّةَ أَبِيكُمْ إِبْرَ‌اهِيمَ ۚ هُوَ سَمَّاكُمُ الْمُسْلِمِينَ مِن قَبْلُ وَفِي هَـٰذَا "Be steadfast in the religion of your father, Ibrahim. He named you Muslims before this as well as in this (the Holy Qur'an)." (22:78) When the Holy Qur'an was revealed, the Jews and the Christians, and even the idol-worshippers of Arabia used to make the claim, each group on its own part, that they were the followers of the Abrahamic religion, but the 'Holy Qur'an and its followers have made it quite evident that in this last phase of human history the religion of the Holy Prophet ﷺ ، and this alone, is the religion of Sayyidna Ibrahim (علیہ السلام) the religion of quintessential "Nature" (Al-fitrah). In short, the essence of all the divine books, all the Shari'ahs and the teachings of all the prophets is Islam - that is, turning away from one's desires in order to obey divine commandments, and giving up individual opinion in order to submit oneself to divine guidance. But we are grieved to see that there are thousands of Muslims today, who have forgotten this basic truth, and wish to pursue their own desires in the name of Islam. What appeals to them is that kind of interpretation (rather, misinterpretation) of the Holy Qur'an and the Hadith which should flatter their desires. In fact, what they strive to do is to distort the Shari'ah to suit their fancies, and to do it so cleverly that the idols they really worship should appear in the garb of religion. Such men are, indeed, trying to be clever with Allah Himself who knows every particle of the universe and who can look into the deepest recesses of the human heart - the Almighty before whom nothing avails but complete surrender and total submission. What Islam requires of man is that he should set aside all his desires and inclinations, and seek, in everything he does, the pleasure of his Lord. And he can find this pleasure only when he knows the commandments of his Lord, and also performs these tasks exactly in the manner He has prescribed. This is what ` Ibadah عبادہ or worship is, in the real sense of the word. It is the perfection of this total obedience and submission and love which constitutes the final stage of man's spiritual development, which is known as the Station (Maqam) of Abdiyyah (عبدِیہ Servanthood). This is the station where Sayyidna Ibrahim (علیہ السلام) received from Allah the title of Khalilullah خلیلُ اللہ (the Friend of Allah), and the Last of All the Prophets the title of عبَدِنا :Abduna (Our Servant). On the subsidiary levels of the Station of Servanthood stand the Abdal عبدال ، the Aqtal, the Awliya اَولِیا ، the men of Allah - the 'saints' of the Islamic Ummah, each in his own degree. This is the essence of Tawhid توحید (the realization of unicity), on attaining which all one's fears and hopes become bound with Allah, and with no one else. Thus, Islam signifies total obedience to Allah, and this obedience is possible only when one follows the Sunnah, the Way of the Holy Prophet ﷺ . The Holy Qur'an has laid down the principle in very explicit words: فَلَا وَرَ‌بِّكَ لَا يُؤْمِنُونَ حَتَّىٰ يُحَكِّمُوكَ فِيمَا شَجَرَ‌ بَيْنَهُمْ ثُمَّ لَا يَجِدُوا فِي أَنفُسِهِمْ حَرَ‌جًا مِّمَّا قَضَيْتَ وَيُسَلِّمُوا تَسْلِيمًا ﴿65﴾ "By your Lord, they will never be true Muslims till they make you the judge regarding the disagreements between them, and find in themselves no resistance against your verdict, and sur-render themselves in full submission." (4:65). In the end let us clarify an important point. As reported in Verse 132, Sayyidna Ibrahim (علیہ السلام) made his descendants promise that before they died they should make sure that they had been Muslims. It means that one should steadfastly follow the teachings of Islam throughout one's life, so that one receives the grace of Allah and remains a Muslim upto the last breath. A number of ahadith too say that one would die in the state which one has maintained in one's life, and one would, on the Day of Resurrection, rise from the grave in the same state. This is the usual way of Allah with men - if His servant makes up his mind to do good deeds and also strives in this direction as best as he can, Allah helps him and makes the task easy for him. This principle does not in any way stand in opposition to what has been said in another hadith to this effect: A man keeps doing the kind of good deeds for which Paradise has been promised and it seems that there is only an arms' length between him and Paradise, and then all of a sudden his destiny overcomes him, and he starts doing what would lead him to Hell, and finally he reaches Hell; on the other hand, a man keeps doing what would lead him to Hell, and it seems that there is only an arm's length between him and Hell, and then his destiny overcomes him, and he starts doing what would make him worthy of Paradise, and finally he enters Paradise. We have said that there is no contradiction involved, for some texts of this hadith mention a proviso too - "as it appeared to people." That is to say, the first of these two men appeared in the eyes of the onlookers to be performing good deeds, while in fact he was doing just the opposite; similarly, the second man had from the outset been doing what would make him worthy of Paradise, though people thought him to be a sinner. (Ibn Kathir) We conclude this discussion with the remark that the man who has been steadfast in doing good deeds, should trust the divine promise, rely on the usual way of Allah with His creatures, and hope that through the grace of Allah he would depart from this world in this blessed state.

The previous verses have defined the religion of Sayyidna Ibrahim (علیہ السلام) and the essence of Islam. Now, these two verses bring before us another aspect of the question. Call it the religion of Sayyidna Ibrahim or Islam, it is in any case meant for the whole world. Then why have the descendants of Sayyidna Ibrahim and Sayyidna Ya` qub (علیہم السلام) been specifically mentioned here, and why should have these two great prophets been so particular in giving this counsel to their sons? We shall say that these specifications show that love for one's progeny and solicitude for their well-being is in no way incompatible with the station of prophethood or even with that of "the Friend of Allah". For, Sayyidna Ibrahim (علیہ السلام) ، who was, on one occasion, not only willing but happy to be sacrificing his son in obedience to the commandment of Allah, did on a different occasion pray for the well-being of his progeny in this world and the other, and wished, while departing from this world, to offer them what was the greatest blessing in his eyes - namely, Islam. Verses 132 and 133 suggest this very principle. So, even prophets love their children, the only difference being that while ordinary men consider the good things of this world alone to be worthwhile and wish to leave to their children as much of these as they can, in the eyes of the prophets and their genuine followers the only thing that counts is Iman ایمان (faith) and good deeds - in one word, Islam - and it is this eternal wealth which they wish and strive to transmit wholly to their descendants. This practice of the prophets provides a special guidance to parents: just as they are keen to secure the worldly comfort and happiness of their children, they should pay equal, if not greater, attention to the discipline of their external and internal behaviour according to the requirements of the Shari'ah. Is it at all reasonable that one should strain every nerve to protect one's children from the heat of the sun, but leave them exposed to the fire of Hell? From this example of the prophets we also learn that it is the duty of the parents and the right of the children that one should first of all take care of the spiritual health of one's own children, and worry about others only afterwards. This principle rests on three considerations. Firstly, one's children are, on account of the special relationship with the parents, likely to accept the counsel more easily and thoroughly than others, and may later on be of great help in the efforts which one makes in the service of Islam. Secondly, the easiest and the most effective way of transmitting the Truth to a whole people is that the head of each family should take upon himself the responsibility of teaching and training the members of his family. Employing a current and popular term, we may say that this localized and decentralized method distributes the responsibility over a large number of individuals, and teaching the families separately amounts finally to teaching the society, as a whole. The Holy Qur'an itself has laid down the principle: يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا قُوا أَنفُسَكُمْ وَأَهْلِيكُمْ نَارً‌ا : "0 believers, guard yourselves and your families against a Fire." (66:6) In fact, the Holy Prophet ﷺ himself who is the Messenger of Allah for the whole of humanity and whose guidance shall remain valid upto the last day of the world, was commanded to convey the Truth first of all to the members of his family. Thus, the Holy Qurian says: وَأَنذِرْ‌ عَشِيرَ‌تَكَ الْأَقْرَ‌بِينَ : "And warn your clan, your nearest kin." (26:214) and وَأْمُرْ‌ أَهْلَكَ بِالصَّلَاةِ وَاصْطَبِرْ‌ عَلَيْهَا “ And bid your familyto offer Salah, and be regular in them yourself”. (20:132) And the Holy Prophet ﷺ always fulfilled these commandments. Thirdly, one can observe for oneself that if the close relations or the members of his family do not support a man in what he wishes to teach, or do not seem to be acting upon it, his teachings do not succeed so well with others. When the Holy Prophet took upon himself the prophetic function, the usual reply of his listeners was that he should first convince his own clan, the Quraysh, before turning to others. But when his own clan accepted Islam and the process had been completed at the time of the conquest of Makkah, the world saw, as the Holy Qur'an reports يَدْخُلُونَ فِي دِينِ اللَّـهِ أَفْوَاجًا "People entering Allah's religion in throngs." (110:2) The main reason for the ignorance and the indifference towards Islam which is wide-spread among the Muslims today, is that even when the parents themselves are good Muslims in every way, they leave their children to themselves and let the social environment mould them in its own fashion. Their only worry is to see their children doing well in this world, and they never think of what will happen to them in the next. Let us pray that Allah, in His mercy, grant all of us the solicitude for the other world, and help us to make a genuine effort for acquiring the only wealth that can ever be: faith and rectitude! Injunctions and related considerations Verse 133 reports that the sons of Sayyidna Ya` qub (علیہ السلام) (Jacob) promised to worship اِلٰہ اٰباءک ابراہیم و اسماعیل و اسحٰق :"The God of your father, Ibrahim and Ismail and-Ishaq ." This phrase indicates that the term "father" includes the grand-father as well. The blessed Companion ` Abdullah ibn ` Abbas ؓ has deduced from this verse the rule that in matters of inheritance the grandfather shall be treated like the father.

Verse 134 tells us that the good deeds of one's forefathers shall not suffice one, if one has not been performing good deeds oneself, and that, similarly, one shall not have to suffer for the misdeeds of one's forefathers, if one's own account is clean. It follows upon this principle that children of mushrikin مشرکین (associators) and Kafirin کافرین (infidels), if they die before having come of age, shall not be punished in the other world on account of the disbelief of their parents. The verse also refutes the claim of the Jews that irrespective of what they had been doing they would go to Paradise on account of the good deeds of their forefathers. Let this be a warning to those Muslims who, being the descendants of the Holy Prophet ﷺ or of a saint, delude themselves with the hope that their sins would go unpunished in consideration of this privileged position. In fact, the Holy Qur'an is very explicit and very insistent on this point. For example: وَلَا تَكْسِبُ كُلُّ نَفْسٍ إِلَّا عَلَيْهَا ۚ وَلَا تَزِرُ‌ وَازِرَ‌ةٌ وِزْرَ‌ أُخْرَ‌ىٰ "Each man shall reap the fruits of his own deeds, and no one shall bear the burden of another" (6:164). Addressing his own clan, the Holy Prophet ﷺ said: "Beware, 0 Banu Hashim, let it not be that on the Day of Judgment while others bring their good deeds with them, you on your part, having neglected good deeds, bring with you only the trust in being my relations, and so I have to tell you that on that day, I cannot save you from the wrath of Allah." Another hadith says: من بطابہ عملہ لم یسرع بہ نسبہ :"He who has been pulled back by his deeds cannot be pushed forward by his ancestry."

The earlier verses have defined the religion (Millat مِلَّت of Sayyidna Ibrahim (علیہ السلام) and established that its present form is Islam. Now, the Jews and the Christians, in spite of their pretension to be his followers, did not in actual fact follow his religion. Each of these two groups, instead of accepting Islam, used to ask the Muslims to accept its own religion in order to find true guidance. No doubt, each of these two religions was, in its own time and for its own time, a genuine religion, but in its present form each had become distorted, and had also been abrogated by Allah. So, in answer to them, Allah asks the Holy Prophet $ to declare on his own behalf and on that of his followers that they are and shall remain steadfast in the religion of Sayyidna Ibrahim (علیہ السلام) who shunned all kinds of association (Shirk شرک), who adored nothing but the One God and obeyed no one but Him, and whose religion, therefore, did not have even a trace of distortion. Then, in the second of these verses Allah asks the Muslims to declare the basic tenets of this religion too, which are as follows:- (1) Muslims believe in Allah and in the guidance which He has sent them through the Holy Prophet ﷺ (2) They also believe in all the prophets sent by Allah from time to time - some of whom have been mentioned in this verse. (3) Some of the prophets may in some ways be superior to others, but it is essential for a Muslim to believe in all the prophets without making any distinction. (4) Muslims believe that the Shari` ah of all the prophets mentioned here were instituted by Allah Himself, but they have now been abrogated. So, Muslims follow the Shari'ah of the Holy Prophet ﷺ ، for this alone is now valid. (5) Muslims ultimately obey Allah alone, and submit themselves totally to Him. In the second of these verses the progeny of Sayyidna Ya` qub (علیہ السلام) (Jacob) has been described as Asbat اسباط or "tribes." The reason is that he had twelve sons, and the offspring of each son came to form a tribe. Allah so blessed his seed that in Egypt, Sayyidna Yusuf (علیہ السلام) (Joseph) and his brothers made up a group of twelve men, but their lineage flourished, and when the Israelites left Egypt along with Sayyidna Musa (علیہ السلام) (Moses), their number ran into thousands. Another form of this blessing was that the progeny of Sayyidna Ya` qub (علیہ السلام) included a large number of prophets.

The earlier verses have defined the religion (Millat مِلَّت of Sayyidna Ibrahim (علیہ السلام) and established that its present form is Islam. Now, the Jews and the Christians, in spite of their pretension to be his followers, did not in actual fact follow his religion. Each of these two groups, instead of accepting Islam, used to ask the Muslims to accept its own religion in order to find true guidance. No doubt, each of these two religions was, in its own time and for its own time, a genuine religion, but in its present form each had become distorted, and had also been abrogated by Allah. So, in answer to them, Allah asks the Holy Prophet $ to declare on his own behalf and on that of his followers that they are and shall remain steadfast in the religion of Sayyidna Ibrahim (علیہ السلام) who shunned all kinds of association (Shirk شرک), who adored nothing but the One God and obeyed no one but Him, and whose religion, therefore, did not have even a trace of distortion. Then, in the second of these verses Allah asks the Muslims to declare the basic tenets of this religion too, which are as follows:- (1) Muslims believe in Allah and in the guidance which He has sent them through the Holy Prophet ﷺ (2) They also believe in all the prophets sent by Allah from time to time - some of whom have been mentioned in this verse. (3) Some of the prophets may in some ways be superior to others, but it is essential for a Muslim to believe in all the prophets without making any distinction. (4) Muslims believe that the Shari` ah of all the prophets mentioned here were instituted by Allah Himself, but they have now been abrogated. So, Muslims follow the Shari'ah of the Holy Prophet ﷺ ، for this alone is now valid. (5) Muslims ultimately obey Allah alone, and submit themselves totally to Him. In the second of these verses the progeny of Sayyidna Ya` qub (علیہ السلام) (Jacob) has been described as Asbat اسباط or "tribes." The reason is that he had twelve sons, and the offspring of each son came to form a tribe. Allah so blessed his seed that in Egypt, Sayyidna Yusuf (علیہ السلام) (Joseph) and his brothers made up a group of twelve men, but their lineage flourished, and when the Israelites left Egypt along with Sayyidna Musa (علیہ السلام) (Moses), their number ran into thousands. Another form of this blessing was that the progeny of Sayyidna Ya` qub (علیہ السلام) included a large number of prophets.

The definition of ` Iman ایمان From the beginning of the Surah Ai-Baqarah upto this place, different verses have been explaining the nature and essence 'Iman ایمان (faith), sometimes succinctly and sometimes in detail. Verse 137 defines 'Iman ایمان in a simple and short phrase which is at the same time so comprehensive that all possible details and explanations are inherent in it. The earlier verses having established that the only religion which is valid at present is Islam, this verse assures the Muslims that the Jews and the Christians can find the guidance only "if they believe just as you believe", or, in other words, "if they believe in what you believe in." The immediate addressees of the phrase "you believe" are the Holy Prophet ﷺ and his blessed Companions. Thus, in doctrinal matters above all, their 'Iman ایمان has been placed before us as a model, and the verse is essentially a divine commandment, laying down the fundamental principle that the only 'Iman ایمان acceptable to Allah is the one which was adopted by the Holy Prophet ﷺ and his blessed Companions, and that any doctrines or beliefs that deviate from it in the least are neither valid nor acceptable to Allah. That is to say, one should believe in Allah and His attributes, in the angels, in the Books of Allah, in the messengers and prophets of Allah and in their teachings exactly in the same manner as the Holy Prophet ﷺ and the blessed Companions did, without adding or subtracting anything on one's own part and without advancing one's own interpretations or distorting the authentic meanings of the doctrines. Nor is one allowed to assign to the angels or the prophets a station higher or lower than the one assigned to them by the word or deed of the Holy Prophet ﷺ . Moreover, one is also required to be sincere and pure in one's faith, for the contrary would amount to hypocrisy (Nifaq نفاق ). This explanation helps us to see in its true proportions the situation of the heterodox sects among the Muslims - of those who make tall claims as to the genuineness of their 'Iman ایمان ، but do not possess 'Iman ایمان in the full sense of the term. As for that, even the idolators of Arabia used to proclaim the authenticity of their 'Iman ایمان as do the Jews and the Christians even today, and as do even the heretics in every age, but since their faith in Allah, in the prophets and the angels, and in the Day of Judgment etc. did not conform to the 'Iman ایمان of the Holy Prophet ﷺ ، it was not acceptable to Allah and was summarily rejected. To give a few examples, some of the associators of Arabia used to deny the very existence of angels, while others considered them to be the daughters of God. Some groups among the Jews refused to obey the prophets and were so hostile to them that they came to assassinate a number of them, while other groups among the Jews and the Christians began to revere the prophets so extravagantly as to identify them with God Himself, or to place them on the level of God or to consider them the sons of God. These two attitudes are the two extremes of deviation, and are clearly seen, in the light of this verse, to be only two forms of misguidance. According to the Shari'ah, it is, of course, obligatory for every Muslim to respect and love the Holy Prophet ﷺ ، and if one lacks in this respect and love, one cannot be said to possess 'Iman ایمان in the true sense of the term; all the same, let it be clearly understood that it is misguidance and association (Shirk شرک ) to make him the equal of Allah with respect to an attribute like knowledge or power. For, according to the Holy Qur'an, the essence of Shirk شرک lies in making someone other than Allah the equal of Allah with respect to a divine attribute, as is indicated by this verse: إِذْ نُسَوِّيكُم بِرَ‌بِّ الْعَالَمِينَ : "And when we used to make you equal of the Lord of the worlds." (26:98) There are some Muslims who consider the Holy Prophet ﷺ to be omniscient and omnipresent like Allah Himself, and, in doing so, congratulate themselves upon showing the respect and love which is required of a Muslim, while they are only disobeying the Holy Prophet ﷺ and going against his teachings. They should learn from this verse that the respect and love for the Holy Prophet ﷺ which Allah demands from a Muslim is only that kind of respect and love which his blessed Companions had for him - neither more nor less than this, for either would be a deviation and a sin. The terms Zilli and Buruzi are not valid On the other hand, there are people [ like the group called the Qadianis قادیانی or the Ahmadis احمدی of Lahore ] who have been deying the unambiguous and clear declaration of the Holy Qur'an that Sayyidna Muhammad ﷺ is the last of all the prophets, and (Qadianis قادیانی ) trying to make room for a new prophet. In order to serve this evil purpose, they have out of their own fantasy manufactured exotic forms of prophethood, and given to them equally fanciful names like Buruz (incarnation) or Zill (manifestation). The present verse exposes this fraud as well, for the 'Iman ایمان of the Holy Prophet ﷺ and of his blessed Companions ؓ does not show any trace of a belief in prophets of this genre, and anyone who pretends to such a belief is an avowed heretic. Similarly, there are people whose minds and hearts are so befogged in modern materialism and the so-called "rationalism" that they find it difficult to accept the idea of the other world and the things that pertain to it, and then try to subject them to crooked interpretations, which they suppose to be an effort to make Islam more acceptable to the modern mind, and hence a great service to Islam. But, insofar as these interpretations transgress the commandment indicated in this verse - that is to say, they do not conform to the 'Iman ایمان of the Holy Prophet ﷺ and of his Companions ؓ ، they are totally false, and must be rejected. It is obligatory for a Muslim to believe without demur in what the Holy Qur'an and the Hadith tell us with regard to the other world and all that pertains to it. For example, it is quite inadmissible to maintain that on the Day of Judgment men will be resurrected only "spiritually" and not bodily, or that the reward and the punishment in the other world will be "spiritual" and not physical, or that the "weighing of the deeds" is only a metaphorical expression. Let us insist once again that all such interpretations are doctrinally false and unacceptable to Allah - as the present verse has established. Having defined the 'Iman which is acceptable to Allah, Verse 137 also points out that the enemies of Islam may yet remain unconvinced out of sheer obstinacy and malice. Allah asks the Holy Prophet not to worry about them, for Allah will deal with them Himself, and protect His prophet. This promise has been made more explicitly in an other verse: وَاللَّـهُ يَعْصِمُكَ مِنَ النَّاسِ : "And Allah will protect you against these people." (5:67) Subsequent events showed the fulfillment of this promise.

The Colour of Allah Verse 138 delineates Islam as the "colouring of Allah", and explains this "colouring" as the unalloyed worship of Allah and total submission to Him. Verse 135 has identified Islam with "the religion of Ibrahim." If we put Verse 135 and 138 together, it becomes clear that essentially Islam - or any authentic religion, for that matter – is the religion of Allah, and that the association of a religion with the name of a prophet can only be symbolised. Verse 138 presents religion as "colouring" صبغہ (Sibghah). The expression carries within itself several levels of meaning. But the immediate allusion is to a certain ceremony of the Christians. On the seventh day of its birth, they used to bathe an infant in coloured (probably yellow) water, which was supposed to be a substitute for circumcision, and a sufficient guarantee for the external and internal purification of the infant - the fast and indelible "colouring" of Christian faith, so to say. The verse suggests that this colour is wasted away with the water, without leaving a trace outside or inside, nor does this kind of baptism serve the purpose of circumcision and cleanse a man of physical impurity. And the verse declares that the only colouring worth the name is the colouring of a genuine and unabrogated religion - that is, Islam اسلام۔ the only colouring which can guarantee physical and spiritual purification, and the only one which shall remain. Then, the word Sibghah صِبْغَةَ or "colouring" has a deeper meaning too. Just as a certain colour is openly and clearly visible to the beholder, the signs of genuine and pure 'Iman ایمان should shine through the face, the movements, the habits and the behaviour of a Muslim. In this sense, the verse is a commandment, asking Muslims "to dye" themselves in the "colouring of Allah", outwardly and inwardly by offering unalloyed worship to Him alone, by submitting themselves totally to His commandments, and by gladly accepting His will.

These three verses bring to an end the section of the Surah in which certain claims of the Jews and the Christians have been refuted -- for example, their assertion that Sayyidna Ibrahim (علیہ السلام) (Abraham), Sayyidna Ismail (علیہ السلام) (Ishmael), Sayyidna Ishaq (علیہ السلام) (Isaac), Sayyidna Ya` qub (علیہ السلام) (Jacob) and the prophets (علیہم السلام) in his lineage were either Jews or Christians, and the claim that they were the chosen people and would have the exclusive privilege of being sent straight to Paradise which would be denied to Muslims. The earlier verses have established that the religion of all these prophets was Islam, in the general sense of the term, but that the earlier Shari` ahs have now been abrogated, and the title of "Islam" been specially given to the religion of Sayyidna Muhammad ﷺ . Should the Jews and the Christians still continue, in their stubbornness, to deny, Allah asks the Holy Prophet ﷺ and the Muslims to declare in plain and simple words that Allah, being the Lord of All, cannot show any special favour to any particular group of His creatures, and that on the Day of Judgment He will assess the Jews and the Christians as well as the Muslims according to what each has believed in and how each has been behaving - a principle which was accepted by the People of the Book too. The Muslims have also been asked to announce that they on their part recognize no other god but Allah, and have purified their religion of all traces of association (Shirk شرک ) - as against the Jews and the Christians who consider Sayyidna ` Uzayr (علیہ السلام) (Ezra) and Sayyidna ` Isa (علیہ السلام) (Jesus) respectively to be "the Son of God", and whose religions have, moreover, been abrogated. In this respect at least, Muslims have a superiority over them. If the People of the Book should, on account of their affiliation with the earlier prophets, still keep insisting on their own rectitude, the Muslims may ask them a basic question - who knows the truth better, Allah or the People of the Book? Allah has definitely and finally announced the truth in the Last Revelation, and the People of the Book themselves know that the religion of the earlier prophets was Islam. Yet they are trying to conceal the truth, and being unjust, in the gravest sense of the term. Allah knows what they have been doing, and will judge them according to their own deeds, and not according to the deeds of their ancestors. Thus, at the end of this section, Verse 141, which is a repetition of Verse 134, warns them against the consequences of their vanity and pretentiousness, and advises them to take care of themselves rather than relying on ancestral glory. Verse 139 brings out the essential and peculiar characteristic of the Islamic Ummah اُمَّت۔ it has purified itself of all possible admixture of Shirk شرک (association), and devoted itself, externally and internally, to Allah. The Arabic word in the text is Mukhlisun مُخلصون ، the plural of Mukhlis مخلص which signifies "one who has purified himself', and which is allied to the word Ikhlas اخلاص ، "the act of purifying oneself." According to Said ibn Jubayr, Ikhlas اخلاص consists in worshipping no one but Allah, associating no one with Allah, and doing good deeds only for the sake of obeying Allah, and not for the purpose of winning the admiration of the people. Certain spiritual masters have said that Ikhlas اخلاص is a deed which can be identified neither by men, nor by angels nor by Satan شیطان ، and that it is a "secret" between Allah and His servant.38 38. The word Ikhlas اخلاص is usually rendered into English as "sincerity" and Mukhlis مخلص as "sincere." It is to be doubted whether the word "sincerity" did, at any time and in any Western language, carry the full gamut of the meanings of the Arabic word Ikhlas اخلاص . Anyhow, the sense of the word "sincerity" has, in current usage, become not only perverted but some-times actually inverted. The word used to imply a harmony between external action and inner inclination, along with the tacit assumption that the external action concerned was, if nothing else, at least socially accept-able to some degree. But "sincerity", as employed in our days, suggests a compliance with one's emotions or even with one's instincts. As such, the concept of "sincerity" is being used to justify and authorize fornication, or even murder. It is easy to see that such an idea of "sincerity" is the exact anti-thesis of Ikhlas اخلاص . For, one cannot attain even the lowest degree of Ikhlas اخلاص without forming a clear intention to obey the injunctions of the Shaah as against letting oneself be guided by one's instinctual urges or emotional inclinations while the concept of "sincerity" in vogue requires one to ignore the Shari'ah or even mundane considerations and to do the bidding of one's impulse of the moment, thus reducing man to an automaton at the mercy of his reflexes. Nor should we forget another serious aspect of the problem. There is another allied notion of "sincerity" which has been disturbing the peace of many pious people even in the past, but which has acquired a devastating intensity in our own days. This notion of "sincerity" demands one to seek fixity and unrelieved continuity in an emotional state, which is, of course, not possible for man as he is constituted. It so happens with some pious people that once they start seeking this kind of "sincerity" in offering their enjoined prayers, they find that they cannot keep up an unbroken concentration of mind, and are so frightened by this lapse that they sometimes give up offering their prayers, believing such worship to be "insincere" and hence invalid. Let us make it clear once for all that the only thing the Shari` ah requires from us is to have the correct intention and attitude when we begin our prayers or perform any other good deed. This alone is the pre-requisite for attaining Ikhlas اخلاص ، which, anyhow, is not a matter of emotions and affective states. In short, Islam requires us to perfect the quality of Ikhlas اخلاص as defined by the Shari'ah, and not to seek "sincerity" in the Western sense of the term, ancient or modern. For an elaborate treatment of the subject, see Tarbiyyah al-Salik تربیہ السالک by Maulana Ashraf ` Ali Thanavi (رح) .

These three verses bring to an end the section of the Surah in which certain claims of the Jews and the Christians have been refuted -- for example, their assertion that Sayyidna Ibrahim (علیہ السلام) (Abraham), Sayyidna Ismail (علیہ السلام) (Ishmael), Sayyidna Ishaq (علیہ السلام) (Isaac), Sayyidna Ya` qub (علیہ السلام) (Jacob) and the prophets (علیہم السلام) in his lineage were either Jews or Christians, and the claim that they were the chosen people and would have the exclusive privilege of being sent straight to Paradise which would be denied to Muslims. The earlier verses have established that the religion of all these prophets was Islam, in the general sense of the term, but that the earlier Shari` ahs have now been abrogated, and the title of "Islam" been specially given to the religion of Sayyidna Muhammad ﷺ . Should the Jews and the Christians still continue, in their stubbornness, to deny, Allah asks the Holy Prophet ﷺ and the Muslims to declare in plain and simple words that Allah, being the Lord of All, cannot show any special favour to any particular group of His creatures, and that on the Day of Judgment He will assess the Jews and the Christians as well as the Muslims according to what each has believed in and how each has been behaving - a principle which was accepted by the People of the Book too. The Muslims have also been asked to announce that they on their part recognize no other god but Allah, and have purified their religion of all traces of association (Shirk شرک ) - as against the Jews and the Christians who consider Sayyidna ` Uzayr (علیہ السلام) (Ezra) and Sayyidna ` Isa (علیہ السلام) (Jesus) respectively to be "the Son of God", and whose religions have, moreover, been abrogated. In this respect at least, Muslims have a superiority over them. If the People of the Book should, on account of their affiliation with the earlier prophets, still keep insisting on their own rectitude, the Muslims may ask them a basic question - who knows the truth better, Allah or the People of the Book? Allah has definitely and finally announced the truth in the Last Revelation, and the People of the Book themselves know that the religion of the earlier prophets was Islam. Yet they are trying to conceal the truth, and being unjust, in the gravest sense of the term. Allah knows what they have been doing, and will judge them according to their own deeds, and not according to the deeds of their ancestors. Thus, at the end of this section, Verse 141, which is a repetition of Verse 134, warns them against the consequences of their vanity and pretentiousness, and advises them to take care of themselves rather than relying on ancestral glory. Verse 139 brings out the essential and peculiar characteristic of the Islamic Ummah اُمَّت۔ it has purified itself of all possible admixture of Shirk شرک (association), and devoted itself, externally and internally, to Allah. The Arabic word in the text is Mukhlisun مُخلصون ، the plural of Mukhlis مخلص which signifies "one who has purified himself', and which is allied to the word Ikhlas اخلاص ، "the act of purifying oneself." According to Said ibn Jubayr, Ikhlas اخلاص consists in worshipping no one but Allah, associating no one with Allah, and doing good deeds only for the sake of obeying Allah, and not for the purpose of winning the admiration of the people. Certain spiritual masters have said that Ikhlas اخلاص is a deed which can be identified neither by men, nor by angels nor by Satan شیطان ، and that it is a "secret" between Allah and His servant.38 38. The word Ikhlas اخلاص is usually rendered into English as "sincerity" and Mukhlis مخلص as "sincere." It is to be doubted whether the word "sincerity" did, at any time and in any Western language, carry the full gamut of the meanings of the Arabic word Ikhlas اخلاص . Anyhow, the sense of the word "sincerity" has, in current usage, become not only perverted but some-times actually inverted. The word used to imply a harmony between external action and inner inclination, along with the tacit assumption that the external action concerned was, if nothing else, at least socially accept-able to some degree. But "sincerity", as employed in our days, suggests a compliance with one's emotions or even with one's instincts. As such, the concept of "sincerity" is being used to justify and authorize fornication, or even murder. It is easy to see that such an idea of "sincerity" is the exact anti-thesis of Ikhlas اخلاص . For, one cannot attain even the lowest degree of Ikhlas اخلاص without forming a clear intention to obey the injunctions of the Shaah as against letting oneself be guided by one's instinctual urges or emotional inclinations while the concept of "sincerity" in vogue requires one to ignore the Shari'ah or even mundane considerations and to do the bidding of one's impulse of the moment, thus reducing man to an automaton at the mercy of his reflexes. Nor should we forget another serious aspect of the problem. There is another allied notion of "sincerity" which has been disturbing the peace of many pious people even in the past, but which has acquired a devastating intensity in our own days. This notion of "sincerity" demands one to seek fixity and unrelieved continuity in an emotional state, which is, of course, not possible for man as he is constituted. It so happens with some pious people that once they start seeking this kind of "sincerity" in offering their enjoined prayers, they find that they cannot keep up an unbroken concentration of mind, and are so frightened by this lapse that they sometimes give up offering their prayers, believing such worship to be "insincere" and hence invalid. Let us make it clear once for all that the only thing the Shari` ah requires from us is to have the correct intention and attitude when we begin our prayers or perform any other good deed. This alone is the pre-requisite for attaining Ikhlas اخلاص ، which, anyhow, is not a matter of emotions and affective states. In short, Islam requires us to perfect the quality of Ikhlas اخلاص as defined by the Shari'ah, and not to seek "sincerity" in the Western sense of the term, ancient or modern. For an elaborate treatment of the subject, see Tarbiyyah al-Salik تربیہ السالک by Maulana Ashraf ` Ali Thanavi (رح) .

These three verses bring to an end the section of the Surah in which certain claims of the Jews and the Christians have been refuted -- for example, their assertion that Sayyidna Ibrahim (علیہ السلام) (Abraham), Sayyidna Ismail (علیہ السلام) (Ishmael), Sayyidna Ishaq (علیہ السلام) (Isaac), Sayyidna Ya` qub (علیہ السلام) (Jacob) and the prophets (علیہم السلام) in his lineage were either Jews or Christians, and the claim that they were the chosen people and would have the exclusive privilege of being sent straight to Paradise which would be denied to Muslims. The earlier verses have established that the religion of all these prophets was Islam, in the general sense of the term, but that the earlier Shari` ahs have now been abrogated, and the title of "Islam" been specially given to the religion of Sayyidna Muhammad ﷺ . Should the Jews and the Christians still continue, in their stubbornness, to deny, Allah asks the Holy Prophet ﷺ and the Muslims to declare in plain and simple words that Allah, being the Lord of All, cannot show any special favour to any particular group of His creatures, and that on the Day of Judgment He will assess the Jews and the Christians as well as the Muslims according to what each has believed in and how each has been behaving - a principle which was accepted by the People of the Book too. The Muslims have also been asked to announce that they on their part recognize no other god but Allah, and have purified their religion of all traces of association (Shirk شرک ) - as against the Jews and the Christians who consider Sayyidna ` Uzayr (علیہ السلام) (Ezra) and Sayyidna ` Isa (علیہ السلام) (Jesus) respectively to be "the Son of God", and whose religions have, moreover, been abrogated. In this respect at least, Muslims have a superiority over them. If the People of the Book should, on account of their affiliation with the earlier prophets, still keep insisting on their own rectitude, the Muslims may ask them a basic question - who knows the truth better, Allah or the People of the Book? Allah has definitely and finally announced the truth in the Last Revelation, and the People of the Book themselves know that the religion of the earlier prophets was Islam. Yet they are trying to conceal the truth, and being unjust, in the gravest sense of the term. Allah knows what they have been doing, and will judge them according to their own deeds, and not according to the deeds of their ancestors. Thus, at the end of this section, Verse 141, which is a repetition of Verse 134, warns them against the consequences of their vanity and pretentiousness, and advises them to take care of themselves rather than relying on ancestral glory. Verse 139 brings out the essential and peculiar characteristic of the Islamic Ummah اُمَّت۔ it has purified itself of all possible admixture of Shirk شرک (association), and devoted itself, externally and internally, to Allah. The Arabic word in the text is Mukhlisun مُخلصون ، the plural of Mukhlis مخلص which signifies "one who has purified himself', and which is allied to the word Ikhlas اخلاص ، "the act of purifying oneself." According to Said ibn Jubayr, Ikhlas اخلاص consists in worshipping no one but Allah, associating no one with Allah, and doing good deeds only for the sake of obeying Allah, and not for the purpose of winning the admiration of the people. Certain spiritual masters have said that Ikhlas اخلاص is a deed which can be identified neither by men, nor by angels nor by Satan شیطان ، and that it is a "secret" between Allah and His servant.38 38. The word Ikhlas اخلاص is usually rendered into English as "sincerity" and Mukhlis مخلص as "sincere." It is to be doubted whether the word "sincerity" did, at any time and in any Western language, carry the full gamut of the meanings of the Arabic word Ikhlas اخلاص . Anyhow, the sense of the word "sincerity" has, in current usage, become not only perverted but some-times actually inverted. The word used to imply a harmony between external action and inner inclination, along with the tacit assumption that the external action concerned was, if nothing else, at least socially accept-able to some degree. But "sincerity", as employed in our days, suggests a compliance with one's emotions or even with one's instincts. As such, the concept of "sincerity" is being used to justify and authorize fornication, or even murder. It is easy to see that such an idea of "sincerity" is the exact anti-thesis of Ikhlas اخلاص . For, one cannot attain even the lowest degree of Ikhlas اخلاص without forming a clear intention to obey the injunctions of the Shaah as against letting oneself be guided by one's instinctual urges or emotional inclinations while the concept of "sincerity" in vogue requires one to ignore the Shari'ah or even mundane considerations and to do the bidding of one's impulse of the moment, thus reducing man to an automaton at the mercy of his reflexes. Nor should we forget another serious aspect of the problem. There is another allied notion of "sincerity" which has been disturbing the peace of many pious people even in the past, but which has acquired a devastating intensity in our own days. This notion of "sincerity" demands one to seek fixity and unrelieved continuity in an emotional state, which is, of course, not possible for man as he is constituted. It so happens with some pious people that once they start seeking this kind of "sincerity" in offering their enjoined prayers, they find that they cannot keep up an unbroken concentration of mind, and are so frightened by this lapse that they sometimes give up offering their prayers, believing such worship to be "insincere" and hence invalid. Let us make it clear once for all that the only thing the Shari` ah requires from us is to have the correct intention and attitude when we begin our prayers or perform any other good deed. This alone is the pre-requisite for attaining Ikhlas اخلاص ، which, anyhow, is not a matter of emotions and affective states. In short, Islam requires us to perfect the quality of Ikhlas اخلاص as defined by the Shari'ah, and not to seek "sincerity" in the Western sense of the term, ancient or modern. For an elaborate treatment of the subject, see Tarbiyyah al-Salik تربیہ السالک by Maulana Ashraf ` Ali Thanavi (رح) .

The orientation of Qiblah قبلہ "Qiblah قبلہ " signifies the direction to which one turns one's face. It goes without saying that a true Muslim turns in every form of worship towards Allah alone, and Allah is not limited to any particular direction but transcends all dimensions. The logic of this fact requires that in worshipping Him everyone should be free to choose any orientation that he likes, and that he should have the allowance to keep changing his orientation as it suits him. But Divine Wisdom found it more in the fitness of things that all the worshippers should turn to the same direction, and have a fixed orientation. For, worship has several forms, some of which pertain to a single individual, while others have a collective aspect too. Among the first are included fasting, remembrance of Allah (dhikr ذکر ) etc. which can be performed in privacy, while the Salah and the Hajj are performed openly and in a congregation. The latter, beside being forms of worship, have a secondary function as well - that of providing a social and collective discipline to the Muslims. Obviously, the basic principle of social organization is the unity and integration of the individuals, on the firmness and solidity of which depends the strength of the social organization, whereas an improper emphasis on individuality encourages a disintegrating and fissiparous tendency. As to what the principle of unity and integrity should be, different people have chosen different ways at different times. For example, some have adopted race or colour as the integrating principle, others have opted for the homeland or the geographical region, still others for language. But all these considerations are purely arbitrary and accidental; instead of bringing men together, they divide them, and pro-duce, (as the newspapers show us every day) worldwide concussions. So, the revealed religions and the Shari'ahs of the prophets (علیہم السلام) the collective name for which is "Islam اسلام " - have not shown unnecessary regard to such arbitrary and accidental factors, but have, in determining the principle of integration and unity among men, established themselves on the only basis which can possibly be valid - that is, the unity of mind arising out of doctrinal unity. In other words, Islam has called upon men not to become divided in the worship of a thousand false gods, but to join together in the worship of the True God, the One, the Incomparable - the only worship which can draw men from the four corners of the world, men of the past, of the present and of the future, all into a single body of the Faithful. Then, in order to give this inner unity a visible form and also to reinforce it, certain external expressions of unity have also been prescribed. But in both the cases the basic principle has been that the unity in view should not be imposed by circumstances, but arise from an act of will and choice, and produce a spiritual brotherhood. As to the accidental factors like race or colour or birth-place, Islam has given them their proper place in the social life of man, but has not allowed any of them to usurp the central position. It is only in the field where human’ s will can exercise its power to choose that Islam has sought to establish unity among men, internal as well as external. Moreover, the consideration inherent in the relevant injunctions and regulations has been that the things which are to serve as the point of unity should be of such a nature that every human being - man or woman, literate or illiterate, townsman or rustic - can choose and adopt them with equal ease. It is hence that the Islamic Shari'ah has not imposed a single and rigid mode of dress or food or housing on all the peoples of the world, for, the climatic conditions and the needs and even the preferences of people living in different regions being different, such uniformity would have made life difficult for them. Supposing that in making a certain form of dress obligatory, a certain minimum had been pre-scribed, such a regulation would, beside being inconvenient for some, have gone against the principle of moderation, and amounted to a rejection of Allah's bounties; on the other hand, if a more elaborate dress had been made compulsory, it would have been impossible for the poor to fulfill the conditions. So, instead of prescribing a uniform for all the Muslims, the Shari` ah has permitted the different modes of dressing current among different peoples or regions, and has only laid down certain necessary restrictions - for example, the dress should cover a certain area of the body, specified separately for men and women; in choosing a particular form of dress one should avoid being prodigal or vain, nor should a dress be chosen for the sake of imitating non-Muslims. In short, Islam has established as points of unity for the Muslims only such things as can be the objects of a free choice, are easy to adopt and do not entail undue hardship or expense - for example, keeping the ranks straight in congregational prayers; following the movements of the 'Imam امام in such prayers strictly; adopting a single form of dress while performing the Hajj, etc. Among these, one of the most important is the Qiblah قبلہ or the orientation for the Salah. As we have said, Allah Himself is free of all dimensions whatsoever, but the establishment of a single and definite Qiblah قبلہ provides an easy and concrete unifying principle for men. Now, had the matter of choosing a Qiblah قبلہ been left to men to decide for themselves, it would in itself have become a cause of dissension and a conflict among them. So, it was necessary that a thing of such import be determined by Allah Himself. In fact, the angels had already laid the foundation of the Ka'bah کعبہ ، the House of Allah, even before Sayyidna Adam was sent down to the earth. This was the first Qiblah قبلہ of mankind. إِنَّ أَوَّلَ بَيْتٍ وُضِعَ لِلنَّاسِ لَلَّذِي بِبَكَّةَ مُبَارَ‌كًا وَهُدًى لِّلْعَالَمِينَ ﴿96﴾ "Certainly, the first House which was built for men is the one at Makkah - blessed, and a guidance for the worlds" (3:96). As we have pointed out above in our commentary on Verse 125, this continued to be the Qiblah upto the time of Sayyidna Nuh (Noah علیہ السلام), when the Ka'bah کعبہ was destroyed by the Deluge. It was rebuilt, under divine command by Sayyidna Ibrahim and Sayyidna Ismail (Abraham and Ishmael (علیہما السلام) (and became their Qiblah قبلہ . After that, the Baytul-Maqdis بیت المقدس at Jerusalem was established as the Qiblah قبلہ for the Hebrew prophets and their people. Even so, these prophets, according to Abu al-` Aliyah, used to offer their prayers in the Baytul-Maqdis بیت المقدس in such a way that they should be facing not only the Rock (Sakhrah صخرہ ) but the Ka'bah کعبہ also. (Qurtubi) When Salah was made obligatory for the Holy Prophet ﷺ ، the Qiblah قبلہ appointed for him was, according to some scholars, the Ka'bah کعبہ which had already served as the Qiblah قبلہ for his ancestor, Sayyidna Ibrahim (علیہ السلام) . Sometime after the Hijrah ھجرہ (his migration from Makkah to Madinah), or, as some scholars maintain, a little before that event, he received a divine commandment to turn towards the Baytul-Maqdis بیت المقدس . (This particular commandment has not been reported in the Holy Qur'an - a fact which shows the hollowness of the claim that the Holy Qur'an can be fully understood without the help of the Hadith.) According to a hadith reported by Al-Bukhari, he offered his prayers with the Baytul-Maqdis بیت المقدس as his Qiblah قبلہ for sixteen or seventeen months. The spot where he offered his prayers in this manner is still marked off in the mosque at Madinah. (Qurtubi) The Holy Prophet ﷺ was, of course, obedience personified, and he continued to offer his prayers with the Baytul-Maqdis بیت المقدس as his Qiblah according to the divine commandment, but at the same time he longed that the Ka'bah, which had been the Qiblah of Sayyidna Adam and Sayyidna Ibrahim (علیہ السلام) may be established as his also. The Way of Allah being that He, in His grace, often fulfils the wishes of those of His servants who have found His favour, the Holy Prophet ﷺ hoped that Allah would grant this wish. The Holy Qur'an describes the situation thus: قَدْ نَرَ‌ىٰ تَقَلُّبَ وَجْهِكَ فِي السَّمَاءِ ۖ فَلَنُوَلِّيَنَّكَ قِبْلَةً تَرْ‌ضَاهَا ۚ فَوَلِّ وَجْهَكَ شَطْرَ‌ الْمَسْجِدِ الْحَرَ‌امِ "We have been seeing you turn your face to heaven. So, We will certainly assign to you a Qiblah قبلہ that you would like. Now, turn your face in the direction of the Sacred Mosque (Al-Masjid al-Haram المسجد الحرام ) (2:144). One should notice that the verse we have just cited does not employ the terms, "Ka'bah کعبہ " or Baytullah بیت اللہ ، but the expression Al-Masjid al-Haram (the Sacred Mosque). It indicates that for those who live far away from Makkah it is not necessary, while offering Salah, to have the Ka'bah کعبہ itself exactly in front of them, but turning one's face in the direction of the "House of Allah" is quite sufficient. On the other hand, for those who are present in the Sacred Mosque or can see the Ka'bah from a distance, it is necessary to have the Ka'bah کعبہ or some part of it exactly in front of them, failing which the prayers will not be valid.makhan30 Now, when the Ka'bah کعبہ was finally established as the Qiblah sixteen or seventeen months after the Hijrah ھجرہ ، some Jews, associators and hypocrites began to scoff at the Holy Prophet ﷺ and his Companions ؓ ، for being so capricious in the matter of their Qiblah قبلہ . The Holy Qur'an reports this objection, adding that such an objection can come only from stupid people - just as earlier in this Surah those who turn away from the religion of Sayyidna Ibrahim (علیہ السلام) have been described as people who have besotted themselves. In replying to this objection, the second part of the verse shows that their stupidity lies in not realizing that the East and the West both belong to Allah Himself, and that He guides whomsoever He likes on the straight path. The verse, thus, explains the meaning of adopting an orientation - that is to say, neither does the Ka'bah کعبہ nor the Baytul-Maqdis بیت المقدس by itself possess any exclusive merit in this regard, and it is the divine commandment alone which gives to it the distinction of being the Qiblah قبلہ - it could have as easily chosen some other place to serve the purpose. Moreover, the only merit in adopting a particular Qiblah lies in one's obedience to the divine commandment and in one's total submission to the will of Allah, which is the basic principle of the religion of the founder of the Ka'bah کعبہ ، Sayyidna Ibrahim (علیہ السلام) . In fact, the Holy Qur'an itself explains this truth in clear terms: لَّيْسَ الْبِرَّ‌ أَن تُوَلُّوا وُجُوهَكُمْ قِبَلَ الْمَشْرِ‌قِ وَالْمَغْرِ‌بِ وَلَـٰكِنَّ الْبِرَّ‌ مَنْ آمَنَ بِاللَّـهِ "Righteousness is not that you turn your faces to the East or the West; but righteousness is that one believes in Allah" (2:177). Or in an earlier Verse: أَيْنَمَا تُوَلُّوا فَثَمَّ وَجْهُ اللَّـهِ : "So whichever way you turn, there is the Face of Allah." (2:115) These verses clearly define the meaning and significance of adopting an orientation - that is, the place which has been chosen to serve as the Qiblah قبلہ does not possess any merit in its own right, but the special merit arises from its having been chosen by Allah, and similarly turning towards it constitutes a meritorious act only insofar as it shows a readiness to obey divine commandment. The raison d'etre of changing the Qiblah قبلہ for the Holy Prophet ﷺ might well be to show to the people in a visible form that a Qiblah is not an idol to be worshipped but only a concrete expression of divine commandment, and may hence be changed as and when Allah wills. In fact, the very next verse (2:143) explicitly says that when the Baytul-Maqdis بیت المقدس was earlier appointed as the Qiblah, it was intended to show who was willing to obey the Holy Prophet ﷺ and who was not. Verse 142, thus, fully refutes the antagonists of Islam, and points out that Allah guides whosoever He wills on the Straight Path - the Straight Path, of course, being the readiness to obey divine commandment without demur. And this Straight Path was granted to the Muslims by the grace of Allah. There is also the suggestion that in the matter of the injunctions of the Shari` ah rectitude lies in obeying each and every divine commandment unquestioningly without being too curious about the raison d'etre of such a commandment. For, those who seek a raison d'etre usually do so because they wish to deny or denigrate or disobey the Shari'ah. According to a With reported from Sayyidah ` A'isha ؓ in the "Musnad" of Imam Ahmad, the People of the Book are specially jealous of the Muslims for three things - (1) in answer to the divine commandment to every Ummah (or religious community) to set aside a day in the week for worship, the Jews chose Saturday and the Christians, Sunday, while the Muslims opted for Friday which happened to be the favourite of Allah; (2) the Ka'bah was appointed as the Qiblah for the Muslims, and not for others; (3) the Muslims were given the privilege of saying Amin while offering Salah behind an 'Imam.

The verse qualifies the Islamic nation (Ummah) with the objective Wasat which signifies "moderate, middle or central", and is usually applied to a thing considered to be the best of its kind. According to a hadith reported by al-Tirmidhi from the blessed Companion Abu Said al-Khudri ؓ ، the word Wasat وَسَطً is to be interpreted as "just" - in the sense of being "the best" (Qurtubi). The verse points out that just as Allah has granted to the Muslims a Qiblah قبلہ which is superior to all other orientations, in the same way He has bestowed upon the Islamic Ummah the unparalleled distinction of being moderate, balanced and just - in short, the honour of occupying the central position among all the Ummahs or Traditional communities. This distinction will manifest itself in its full resplendence on the Day of Judgment. Those among the earlier Ummahs who had been denying their prophets would, on that day, pretend that they had never received a book from Allah nor had any prophet given them any kind of guidance. The Islamic Ummah would, then, be called upon to bear witness, and it would, testify that prophets had been coming from Allah in every age, and providing guidance to each and every people. The earlier Ummahs would raise the objection that since the Islamic Ummah did not exist at that time and could not possibly know what had been happening before it came into being, its testimony against the earlier peoples could not be valid. In reply to this, the Islamic Ummah would maintain that even if it was not an eyewitness to the events of the past, yet it had received an authentic report from the most reliable source of information that can possibly be - that is, from the Last Prophet ﷺ and from the Last Book of Allah. The Holy Prophet ﷺ himself would be called in as a witness, and he would confirm the testimony of his Ummah. (For details, see the various Ahadith reported in the collections of al-Bukhari, al-Tirmidhi, al-Nasa'i and Imam Ahmad). The most moderate of all people According to the present verse, the characteristic quality which confers a superiority on the Islamic Ummah over others is its being Wasat وَسَطً - (a word which has been variously translated into English as "midmost, moderate, just, intermediary, middle, central or justly balanced." ) In order to explain the implications of the word Wasat وَسَطً , commentators have usually made use of another Arabic adjective معتدل Mu'tadil (signifying "moderate or temperate" ) and the noun I` tidal اعتدال which means "being equal"; both the words come from the root Adl عدل which signifies "to be equal, or to make equal".41 41. So, for the purpose of the present discussion we shall choose the English word "moderation" in order to explain certain essential features of the Islamic Ummah. In this regard one would like to know why the superiority of a human group or individual should be made to depend on the quality of moderation. Let us begin this discussion with a quite tangible fact. All the medical systems, old or new, are unanimous in accepting the principle that the health of the human body depends on the temperateness of the different elements of which it is composed, and that illness or disease comes from a disturbance of this equilibrium. According to the ancient Greek medicine, which was further developed by the Muslims, these elements or "humours" are four in number - blood, phlegm, yellow bile and black bile, and the humours produce four physical states in the body - heat, cold, wetness and dryness. As long as the four states are properly balanced against one another, the human body enjoys good health; but as soon as there is an immoderate increase or decrease in any one of them, the body becomes diseased, and if the balance is not properly restored in time, it may succumb to the forces of death. Similarly, in the ethical and spiritual sphere too health depends on temperateness and inner equilibrium, and illness arises out of intemperance and disequilibrium, which, if allowed to grow, results in spiritual death. At the same time, anyone who has eyes to see would readily discover for himself that the essence of manhood which places man at the head of all created beings, does not lie in the physical states of his body - that he, in fact, shares with all the animals - but in something higher and subtler: namely, spiritual perfection. As the great Sufi poet Rumi رومی has said: "Manhood does not reside in the flesh, or in the fat or in the skin; manhood is nothing else than seeking to please the Friend." As to those who ignore this essential attribute of man and allow it to be destroyed in themselves, Rumi رومی says: "These people you see all around are non-human; they are not men, but only wear the masks of man." The Universal Man This being so, we are naturally led to the conclusion that he alone can deserve the title of Al-Insan al-Kamil الانسان الکامل ("the Universal Man" ) who has attained ethical and spiritual equilibrium along with physical equilibrium. This quality has specially been granted to all the prophets (علیہم السلام) ، and, in its most perfect form, to the Holy Prophet ﷺ who is thus "the Universal Man" par excellence. As for humanity in general, Allah has, on the other hand, created a stable and complex system of medicines, instruments and physicians for the physical well-being of man; similarly, He has, on the other hand, sent His prophets who bring divine guidance for man, and who are provided with a certain amount of requisite physical force too, so that they may promulgate this law of equilibrium and moderation in the world. The Holy Qur'an defines the purpose of sending prophets and messengers of Allah to men, and of giving them Divine Books: لَقَدْ أَرْ‌سَلْنَا رُ‌سُلَنَا بِالْبَيِّنَاتِ وَأَنزَلْنَا مَعَهُمُ الْكِتَابَ وَالْمِيزَانَ لِيَقُومَ النَّاسُ بِالْقِسْطِ ۖ وَأَنزَلْنَا الْحَدِيدَ فِيهِ بَأْسٌ شَدِيدٌ وَمَنَافِعُ لِلنَّاسِ "Indeed, We have sent Our messengers with the clear signs, and We have sent down with them the Book and the Balance, so that men might uphold justice. And We have sent own iron in which there is great might and many uses for men." (57:25) Let us add by way of explanation that "the Book" is meant for producing inner equilibrium and temperateness in men, and "the Balance" for producing equilibrium in their social conduct and economic transactions - the "Balance" may also stand for the Shari'ah of every prophet which helps us to define what "equilibrium" really is in its various applications in the different spheres of human life, and which serves to establish justice in the world. Now, let us recall that the verse under discussion characterizes the Islamic Ummah with the word Wasat وَسَطً ("moderate, middle, central" ). Our discussion must have made it clear that this simple word comprehends all the qualities which it is possible for an individual or a community of men to possess in this world. Through such a characterization of the Islamic Ummah, the Holy Qur'an has thus indicated that this Ummah possesses the essential quality of manhood to a degree of perfection that no other Ummah does, and that it is superior to all others in serving the purpose for which the whole cosmic order has been created, and for which all the prophets and divine books have been sent. The Universal Community Certain other verses of the Holy Qur'an define this essential quality of the Islamic Ummah in more specific terms. For example: وَمِمَّنْ خَلَقْنَا أُمَّةٌ يَهْدُونَ بِالْحَقِّ وَبِهِ يَعْدِلُونَ : Among those We have created there is an Ummah which guides by the truth, and by it dispenses justice." (7:181) That is to say, the Islamic Ummah displays its spiritual equilibrium in giving up the pursuit of individual desires and interests in order to follow divine guidance and try to make others to do the same, and in settling all kinds of disputes in the light of divine law without being influenced by the vested interests of a person or a group. Another verse is still more specific: كُنتُمْ خَيْرَ‌ أُمَّةٍ أُخْرِ‌جَتْ لِلنَّاسِ تَأْمُرُ‌ونَ بِالْمَعْرُ‌وفِ وَتَنْهَوْنَ عَنِ الْمُنكَرِ‌ وَتُؤْمِنُونَ بِاللَّـهِ "You are the best Ummah that has been brought forth for men, bidding to good deeds and forbidding evil deeds and believing in Allah." (3:110) It is the best Ummah, for it has been granted a unique Prophet ﷺ who taught us to respect all other prophets (علیہم السلام) ، and a Book which is the most comprehensive and the most perfect of all the Divine Books, and has in itself been endowed with the quality of temperateness, moderation and equilibrium to a degree as no other Ummah does enjoy; it has been destined to be the recipient of the most subtle modes of knowledge, to outshine others in all the forms of faith and practice, and, above all, in the fear of Allah - its field of action not limited to any one country or race but extending all over the world, and infusing all the spheres of human existence. The phrase أُخْرِ‌جَتْ لِلنَّاسِ "raised for mankind." (3:110) indicates that the very purpose for which it has been brought into being is to work for the good of men, and to help them find the way to salvation and to Paradise, its function and, so to say, its very insignia as an Ummah being to guide people towards good deeds and to dissuade them from evil deeds. This role of the Islamic Ummah has been formulated very succinctly in a hadith: اَلدینُ نصیحۃ "Religion consists in having the good of others at heart" - particularly of other Muslims. Let us add that the good deeds towards which this Ummah is meant to guide others are those which have been defined as such by the Shari'ah, while the evil deeds from which it is to dissuade them include infidelity (Kufr کفر ), association (Shirk شرک ), innovations in religion (Bid'ah بِدعہ ), sins of different kinds, illegitimate customs, transgression of divine commandments, immoral or indecent actions, etc. As to dissuading people from evil deeds, this too may take various forms - it may require the use sometimes of the tongue, sometimes of the hand, sometimes of the pen and sometimes of the sword - in fact, it would include all the forms of Jihad. As far as the extensive and intensive display of this particular quality is concerned, no other Ummah can compare with the Islamic Ummah. Moderateness: A Comparative View Let us now consider how far the temperateness or the moderation of this Ummah is borne out by actual facts. Since it is not possible here to make a detailed comparative study of the respective beliefs and practices of all the Ummahs, we shall give only a few examples which would, we hope, satisfactorily establish the superiority of this Ummah over others. First of all, let us take up the doctrinal aspect. In the case of the earlier Ummahs one would observe that on the one hand they took their prophets to be the sons of Allah and started worshipping them - وَقَالَتِ الْيَهُودُ عُزَيْرٌ‌ ابْنُ اللَّـهِ وَقَالَتِ النَّصَارَ‌ى الْمَسِيحُ ابْنُ اللَّـهِ "The Jews said, 'Ezra is the son of Allah', and the Christians said, 'Christ is the son of Allah'." (9:30) -, and that on the other hand some people from among them, in spite of having recognized and acknowledged their prophet on the basis of his oft-repeated miracles, refused to obey him when he asked them to take part in a holy war, and bluntly said: اذْهَبْ أَنتَ وَرَ‌بُّكَ فَقَاتِلَا إِنَّا هَاهُنَا قَاعِدُونَ "Go forth, you and your Lord, and fight; we will be sitting here." (5:24) We sometimes see even the spectacle of prophets being tortured by their own followers. On the contrary, we have the Islamic Ummah which has such a deep love for the Holy Prophet g that Muslims have, in every period of their history, taken it to be the greatest blessing to be able to sacrifice their own lives and even the lives of their wives and children at his call, and yet it has never exceeded the limit, and has placed the Holy Prophet only in the station of a prophet and not in the station of Allah. In spite of knowing him to be the most perfect of all the prophets (علیہم السلام) ، it has been calling him: "the servant of Allah, and His messenger." The doctrinal position with regard to him, as defined in the famous Arabic poem "Qasidah al-Burdah قصیدہ البردہ ", is that, short of attributing "the sonhood of Allah" to him (which the Christians do in the case of Christ, and which constitutes an act of infidelity), anything that one says in his praise would be correct; or, in the words of a Persian poet, addressing the Holy Prophet ﷺ : بعد از خدا (اللہ تعالیٰ ) بزرگ تؤی قصہ مختصر "In short, after God, you are the greatest." When we turn from the doctrinal aspect to a consideration of the actual attitudes and practices in the matter of worship and rites, we again find similar excesses and aberrations on the part of earlier Ummahs. On the-one hand, we see their religious scholars misinterpreting or changing the injunctions of their Shari'ah and even distorting the Sacred Books for a few pieces of silver, and inventing all kinds of ruses to get rid of divinely ordained rites; on the other hand, we find people giving up the world altogether, imprisoning themselves in monastic cells, refusing to accept their share in the blessings of the physical world which Allah has not only granted to man but the enjoyment of which also He has permitted, and, in short, believing that imposing hardships on oneself carries the highest merit and is in itself an act of worship par excellence. The history of Islamic Ummah, on the contrary, presents a totally different picture. On the one hand, it has never adopted monasticism as the supreme form of religious life - in fact, Islam forbids such an attitude. On the other hand, through its readiness to sacrifice property and life, even children and all for the sake of the commandments of Allah and His Prophet ﷺ ، the Ummah established its sway even politically over a considerable area of the world. It has demonstrated in its practice as no other Ummah has that religion is meant to be put into action in the market- places and the halls of power as much as in the mosques and the contemplative retreats. It is the Islamic Umniah which has shown the world how the poor in spirit can move about in the robes of kings, and the kings in spirit conceal themselves in the garb of beggars - all because the king as well as the beggar knows that the greatest dignity lies in being the servant of Allah. In the sphere of human and social relations too, the earlier Ummahs have in their behaviour been guilty of excess in one way or another. On the one hand, we see an indifference to human rights and particularly an utter disregard of the rights of women, and, in general, a pursuit of individual interests and desires irrespective of the question of right and wrong. On the other hand, we have the display of an exaggerated sentimentality which forbids the eating of animal flesh, in spite of Allah having made it lawful, and which frowns upon the killing of an insect even accidentally. It was the Islamic Ummah and its Shari'ah which established an equilibrium and a just order in the field of human relations. On the other hand, it set down a clear code of human rights, extended them to women as well, and prescribed that not only in times of peace but on the battle-field itself the enemies too must enjoy certain inalienable rights. On the other hand, it clearly demarcated every right and every duty, and put down every act of falling back from the prescribed mark or exceeding it as a crime. The Islamic Shari'ah also taught that one should try to fulfill all of one's obligations towards others, but if one saw one's own rights suffer, one should exercise patience and forgiveness. In the economic sphere too, the other Ummahs have been a prey to excesses of different kinds. For example, in our own age we have, on the one hand, the Capitalist system which pays no heed to the distinction between the lawful and the unlawful, and is totally blind to the welfare of the people, but exalts the amassing of wealth as the highest virtue; on the other hand are certain economic systems which have no respect for personal property. In actual fact, the essence of these two hostile systems is the same - the pursuit of worldly things as the be-all and the end-all of human life. Contrary to this, the Islamic Shari'ah brings the conflicting elements into an equilibrium, giving to each its proper place. On the one hand, it does not allow the amassing of wealth to be made the ultimate end of man's effort, nor does it make human dignity depend on the considerations of money or rank or office. On the other hand, it promulgates certain principles for the distribution of wealth in a balanced manner so that no member of a society should be deprived of the basic necessities of life, nor should an individual or a group appropriate all the available wealth. The things which can be shared in common by all the members of a society have been entrusted to public or joint control, while in certain specific things the right to private property has been fully respected. It made a clear-cut distinction between lawful (Halal حلال ) possessions and unlawful (Haram حرام ) possessions, insisting on the spiritual merit of lawful possessions and laying down the rules for making use of them. Injunctions and related considerations (1) According to the present verse, Allah has made the Islamic Ummah an equitable and just, and hence a trustworthy community, "so that" it may be qualified to bear witness. From this we infer the legal principle that one who is not ` Adil عادل (trustworthy - as defined by the Shari'ah) cannot be acceptable as a witness in a court of law. (2) According to al-Qurtubi, this verse establishes Ijma`: (اجمع), or the consensus of the Islamic Ummah, as one of the four deciding agencies in the matter of legislation. For, the very fact that Allah Himself has accepted this Ummah as a trustworthy witness as against the other traditional communities, shows that the consensus of this Ummah is a deciding factor in legislative matter, and that it is necessary (Wajib) to act upon it. Thus, the consensus of the blessed Companions has to be accepted by their successors, and that of the latter by the next generation. According to Al-Tafsir al-Mazhari, this verse establishes the principle that the deeds and actions of this Ummah which have been approved by a consensus are all of them commendable, for, if one were to admit the possibility of a consensus on an error, the Ummah cannot be characterized as being moderate and just. Imam al-Jassas adds that the dependability of the consensus is not particular to the time of the Holy Prophet or of the blessed Companions, but that the consensus of the Muslims in any age whatsoever is equally trustworthy, for this verse is addressed to the whole Ummah which includes not only the contemporaries of the Holy Prophet ﷺ but also the succeeding generations of Muslims upto the Day of Judgment. Thus, the Muslims living in any age whatsoever qualify as the witnesses of Allah whose agreement on a certain point becomes a deciding factor in matters of legislation, and who cannot arrive at a consensus on anything which should constitute an error or a deviation.42 42. Let us not, however, forget that consensus or Ijma' in this context does not at all imply a sort of referendum on the basis of adult franchise, but means the agreement of a majority of such scholars as fulfil the necessary conditions for pronouncing a judgment in the matters of the Shari'ah - that is to say, those who possess the authority to exercise Ijtihad. It goes without saying that once a consensus of this kind has been arrived at in any matter, the majority of the Ummah accepts it, and holds by it. The History of the Qiblah قبلہ There is some difference of opinion among the blessed Companions and their Successors as to whether it was the Baytullah بیت اللہ at Makkah or the "Baytul-Maqdis بیت المقدس " at Jerusalem which was appointed as the Qiblah قبلہ ، when the five daily prayers were made obligatory in Makkah al-Mukarramah مکہ المکرمہ before the Hijrah ھجرہ (the migration of the Holy Prophet ﷺ from Makkah to Madinah). According to the blessed Companion ` Abdullah ibn ` Abbas ؓ ، the first Qiblah قبلہ was the Baytul-Maqdis بیت المقدس ، and continued to be so even after the Hijrah for some sixteen or seventeen months, and it was only then that Allah commanded that the Baytullah بیت اللہ be taken as the Qiblah قبلہ . However, the practice of the Holy Prophet ﷺ at Makkah was that he used to offer his prayers between al-Hajar al-Aswad الھجر الاسود ("the Black Stone" ) and al-Rukn al-Yamaniy رکن یمانی ("the corner facing Yemen" ) so that his face should be turned towards the Baytullah بیت اللہ and the Baytul-Maqdis بیت المقدس both at the same time. But this was no longer possible when he migrated to Madinah, and hence his keen desire that the Baytullah بیت اللہ be appointed as the new Qiblah. (Ibn xathir) But other Companions ؓ are of the view that when the five daily prayers were made obligatory at Makkah, it was the Baytullah بیت اللہ which served as the Qiblah قبلہ for the Muslims as it had for Sayyidna Ibrahim and Sayyidna Ismail (علیہما السلام) . As long as the Holy Prophet ﷺ stayed at Makkah, he continued to observe this Qiblah قبلہ . But after the Hijrah, Allah ordained a change in the orientation, and the Baytul-Maqdis بیت المقدس was appointed as the Qiblah قبلہ ، which it continued to be for sixteen or seventeen months. Then came a new commandment, and the Baytullah بیت اللہ was restored as the Qiblah قبلہ . Al-Qurtubi, relying on the authority of Abu ` Amr, prefers the second view to the first. The raison d'etre of these changes of orientation has been explained like this. When the Holy Prophet ﷺ came to Madinah, he had to deal with the Jews, and in order to familiarize them with Islam he adopted their Qiblah قبلہ under divine commandment. But, by and by it became evident that a stubborn people like the Jews would not easily give up their hostility to Islam. So, Allah allowed him to go back to the original Qiblah قبلہ ، which, being the Qiblah قبلہ of his forefathers, Sayyidna Ibrahim and Sayyidna Ismail (علیہما السلام) was naturally dearer to him. In fact, the mosque of Sayyidna Salih (علیہ السلام) was oriented towards the Baytullah بیت اللہ ، as is shown by an incident reported by al-Qurtubi from Abu al-'Aliyah al-Riyahi. The latter once had a debate with a Jew concerning the orientation adopted by Sayyidna Musa (علیہ السلام) (Moses) The Jew insisted that the great prophet turned in his prayers towards the Sakhrah, The Dome of the Rock in the Sacred Mosque at Jerusalem, while Abu al-` Aliyah maintained that he stood near the Sakhrah صخرہ ، but his face was turned towards the Baytullah بیت اللہ . Finally, the latter suggested that the dispute could be decided by having a look at the mosque of Sayyidna Salih (علیہ السلام) situated on a hill below the Baytul-Maqdis بیت المقدس . And, on visiting the mosque, they found that it was oriented towards the Baytulla بیت اللہ . Now, according to those who prefer the first of the two views, the raison d'etre was that it was necessary at Makkah to differentiate the Muslims from the idol-worshippers and to emphasize the distinction between the two, and hence the Baytul-Maqdis بیت المقدس was appointed as the Qiblah قبلہ of the Muslims instead of the Baytullah بیت اللہ which was at that time the Qiblah قبلہ of the mushrikin مشرکین . Then, after the Hijrah ھجرہ ، there arose a new need at Madinah - that of highlighting the distinction between the Muslims and the Jews. So, the Qiblah قبلہ of the Jews was given up, and the Baytullah بیت اللہ was adopted as the Qiblah قبلہ of the Muslims. On account of the difference between these two views, the phrase the Qiblah قبلہ which you used to observe" has also been interpreted in two ways. On the basis of the first view, "the Qiblah قبلہ " referred to in the present verse can only be the Baytul-Maqdis بیت المقدس which was the first and earlier Qiblah قبلہ ; on the basis of the second, it can also be the Ka'bah کعبہ which was the earliest and the first Qiblah قبلہ . Anyhow, the real import of the verse remains the same in either case - the commandment with regard to the change in orientation is a test of the faith of those who claim to be the followers of the Holy Prophet ﷺ ، which would openly demonstrate the distinction between those who are genuinely obedient to Allah and His Messenger ﷺ ، and those who follow their individual opinion. History records that after this verse had been revealed, those who were weak in their faith, or were just hypocrites, forsook Islam, and even accused the Holy Prophet ﷺ of having gone back to the ways of his own people - that is, of the mushrikin مشرکین . Injunctions and related considerations (1) The present verse shows that sometimes an injunction based on the Sunnah, or the Tradition of the Holy Prophet ﷺ is abrogated by the Holy Qur'an. As Imam al-Jassas points out in his "Ahkam al-Qur'an", the Noble Qur'an does not specify that the Holy Prophet ﷺ was ever commanded, before the Hijrah ھجرہ or after, to turn in his prayers towards the Baytul-Maqdis بیت المقدس : we find the relevant evidence only in the Hadith and the Sunnah. It comes to mean that a practice which had been established by the Sunnah was abrogated by this verse of the Holy Qur'an, appointing the Baytullah بیت اللہ as the Qiblah قبلہ . (2) This verse also goes to show that the Hadith of the Messenger of Allah too, in a certain respect, cannot be delinked from the Holy Qur'an, and that the Holy Qur'an recognizes the legitimacy of those injunctions which find no mention in the Holy Qur'an but have been instituted by the Hadith alone. For, the present verse clearly states at the end that prayers which had been offered, taking the Baytul-Maqdis بیت المقدس as the Qiblah قبلہ ، as commanded by the Holy Prophet ﷺ ، are altogether valid and acceptable to Allah. (3) This verse helps us to resolve a delicate problem in Islamic jurisprudence pertaining to the "Khabar al-Wahid" (which is a Hadith reported by one or two persons only). The question which arises in this respect is whether an injunction laid down in the Holy Qur'an, or definitely authenticated otherwise, can be abrogated by such a hadith. The Hanafi School of jurisprudence holds that it cannot, while the reports concerning this verse suggest that it can do so, if strong indications are present to establish the authenticity of such a hadith. For, al-Bukhari, Muslim and nearly all the authentic collections of the Ahadith report the following circumstances from several Companions ؓ اجمعین . When the divine commandment changing the Qiblah came down, the Holy Prophet ﷺ offered his prayers at the time of ` Asr عصر (or, according to other reports cited by Ibn Kathir, at the time of zuhr ظھر ) facing the Baytullah بیت اللہ . Some Companions, departing from the mosque, happened to pass by the mosque of the Bani Salamah tribe, and found these people offering their prayers in the direction of the Baytul-Maqdis بیت المقدس . So, they called out to inform them that the Qiblah قبلہ had now been changed, and that they had just offered their prayers along with the Holy Prophet ﷺ in the direction of the Baytullah بیت اللہ . On hearing this, those people at once changed their orientation to Baytullah بیت اللہ even in the course of the prayers. Nuwaylah Bint Muslim relates that women who were in the back row came forward, so that when the orientation had been changed, men were again in the front row and women in the back row. (Ibn Katnir) Thus the Banu Salmah tribe adopted the new Qiblah قبلہ the very same day. But the news reached Quba قبا the next day in the course of the Fajr فجر prayers - as reported by Al-Bukhari and Muslim from the blessed Companion Ibn ` Umar ؓ ، and the people of Quba قبا too turned towards the Baytullah بیت اللہ in the course of the prayers. (Ibn Kathir and Jassas) After citing these reports, Imam al-Jassas concludes: ھذا خبر صحیح مستفیض فی ایدی اھل العلم قد تلقوہ بالقبول فصار فی حیز تواتر الموجب للعلم "Although this hadith is essentially a solitary report, (that is, Al-Khabar al-Wahid), yet, having been generally accepted and also being supported by strong indication with regard to its authenticity, it has acquired the status of a hadith that has been related by a number of trustworthy reporters in an uninterrupted succession -- a fact which always leads to certitude". The Hanafi jurists agree with this conclusion. They must, however, face another question. This hadith acquired general acceptance only much later, while the news of the change in the orientation must have been conveyed to the Banu Salamah tribe and this hadith immediately without its being widely known? Al-Jassas replies that not only these people but all the Companions already knew that the Holy Prophet ﷺ wished the Baytullah بیت اللہ to be appointed as the Qiblah قبلہ and had even been praying for it, and had begun to consider it quite probable that the injunction to retain Baytul-Maqdis بیت المقدس as the Qiblah قبلہ may not remain operative in the future. In other words, the probability of a change had made the continuation of the Baytul-Maqdis بیت المقدس as the Qiblah قبلہ a bit uncertain, and not definite. In view of this element of uncertainty, the Khabar al-Wahid was considered to be quite sufficient for abrogating the earlier commandment. Otherwise, a Khabar al-Wahid cannot justifiably abrogate a definite and final injunction laid down by the Holy Qur'an. (4) The present verse helps to resolve an important problem which has been the subject of a controversy: if the 'Imam uses a microphone in leading Salah, would it be legitimate for the congregation to obey his call in their movements? If they can hear no more than the sound coming out of the loud-speaker, would it not invalidate their prayers? As we have already noted, Al-Bukhari reports a hadith from the blessed Companion ` Abdullah ibn ` Umar ؓ ، relating how the people of Quba قبا turned towards the Baytullah بیت اللہ even in the course of their prayers as soon as they heard the commandment about the change in orientation. Commenting on this incident, the great Hanafi scholar al-` Ayni says: فیہ جواز تعلیم من لیس فی الصلوۃ من ھو فیھا :"This hadith establishes the rule that a man who is not offering his prayers may teach or instruct the man who is engaged in his prayers." In another place, al-` Ayni also adds that from this hadith, al-Tahtawi has derived the rule that if a man engaged in his prayers hears the words spoken by one who is not so engaged, it does not invalidate his prayers ('Umdah al-Qari). Of course, the Hanafi jurists in general hold that if a man engaged in his prayers obeys the call of another man who is not participating in these prayers, it invalidates his prayers. What they, however, mean is that obeying someone other than Allah in the course of Salah invalidates it, but if one is actually obeying a divine commandment and the other man is acting only as a means of communicating this injunction to him, it does not invalidate the prayers at all. An example would make the point clear. If a man, joining the congregational prayers, finds that there is no room left in the first row, and that he would be the only one to stand in the second, he should, according to the jurists, pull someone back from the first row and make him join the second row along with himself. Now, on the face of it, the man who allows himself to be pulled back is obeying someone other than Allah in the course of the prayers, and this should invalidate his prayers. But, in fact, it is not so. The most authoritative book of Hanafi jurisprudence, "Al-Durr al-Mukhtar الدُر المختار ", lays down the rule that the prayers of this man are perfectly valid. As to why his prayers would not be invalidated, A1-Tahtawi (رح) explains that this man has not actually been obeying the new-comer, but following a divine commandment conveyed to him by the Holy Prophet ﷺ . Let us add that there are two different ways in which a man engaged in his prayers may obey the call of another man who is not participating with him in these prayers. (a) He may wish to please this man and to obey him, In such a case, the prayers would become invalid. (b) He obeys a commandment of the Shari'ah, conveyed to him by the other man. In this case, he is essentially obeying a divine commandment, and hence his prayers would not become invalid. (Tahtawi) This discussion should make it easy to resolve the problem about the use of a microphone by an 'Imam in leading the congregational prayers. Technical experts hold that the sound coming out of a loudspeaker is exactly the sound produced by the 'Imam امام . If it is so, there is no question of the prayers being invalid. But if we suppose that the sound transmitted by a microphone is not exactly the sound produced by the 'Imam امام ، but only an imitation of the sound, or a report of what he has been saying, even then it would be improper to suspect that the people offering their prayers have been obeying the command of the microphone. For, it is obvious enough that they have been obeying the commandment of the Holy Prophet ﷺ to follow the movements of the 'Imam امام۔ the microphone does no more than inform them that the 'Imam امام has, for example, bowed himself down or prostrated himself, and in accepting this information and following his movements, they obey the 'Imam امام and not the instrument. And it is, of course, a divine commandment which requires us to obey the 'Imam امام in the congregational prayers. (5) There is a phrase in the present verse which requires some explanation: "And Allah is not to let your faith go waste." If we take 'Imam (faith) in its usual sense, the phrase would be interpreted like this. When the Qiblah قبلہ was changed, some stupid people thought that the Muslims had forsaken Islam, and that their 'Imam امام had now become null and void. The verse assures the Muslims that Allah would not allow their 'Imam امام to go waste, and asks them not to fall prey to such senseless conjectures. On the other, on the basis of certain Ahadith, some early commentators have interpreted the word 'Imam امام in the verse to mean the Salah. According to this interpretation, Allah assures the Muslims that the commandment changing the Qiblah قبلہ would in no way affect the validity of the prayers they have been offering so far in the direction of the Baytul-Maqdis بیت المقدس - Allah would not allow these prayers to go waste, for they are valid, and have already been accepted. Al-Bukliari has reported from the Companion al-Bara’ 'Ibn ` Azib, and al-Tirmidhi from the Companion Ibn ` Abbas ؓ that when the Baytullah بیت اللہ was appointed as the Qiblah قبلہ ، people became worried about the fate of those Muslims who had been praying in the direction of the Baytul-Maqdis بیت المقدس ، but had died before having the opportunity to pray in the direction of the Baytullah بیت اللہ .

The orientation to Qiblah قبلہ This verse begins by speaking of how deeply the Holy Prophet ﷺ ،; wished that the Ka'bah کعبہ be appointed as the Qiblah قبلہ of the Muslims. This inclination has been explained in different ways, but there is no real contradiction involved in these different views. For example, it has been said that before prophethood was conferred on him, he used to follow, out of the impulsion of his own nature, the way of Sayyidna Ibrahim ؓ (Araham) , and that when he began to receive the Revelation, the Holy Qur'an itself designated his Shari'ah as being in total accord with the Abrahamic Way. Moreover, the Qiblah قبلہ of Sayyidna Ibrahim (علیہ السلام) as well as that of Sayyidna Ismail (علیہ السلام) ، had been the Ka'bah کعبہ . So, it was quite in the nature of things for him to wish that the Ka'bah کعبہ be appointed as the Qiblah قبلہ of the Muslims. An additional factor was that the Arab tribes, in spite of being associators, at least claimed to be the followers of the Abrahamic Way, and acknowledged the Ka'bah کعبہ as their Qiblah قبلہ in contradiction to the Jews. Once the Ka'bah کعبہ had been made the Qiblah قبلہ of the Muslims, the Arabs could be expected to find Islam more acceptable. As. for the hope that the adoption of the Baytul-Maqdis بیت المقدس as the Qiblah قبلہ would bring the Jews closer to Islam, it had been dashed by the events of the last sixteen or seventeen months, for the hostility of the Jews to Islam, fed by their vanity, had only been growing more intense. Whatever be the motive, the Holy Prophet was very keen to see the Ka'bah appointed as the Qiblah. Now, prophets are as close to Allah as man can ever be, and this exalted station teaches them to observe a very strict spiritual etiquette - they never submit a request before Allah until and unless they have received the permission to do so. This principle leads us to believe that the Holy Prophet had already been allowed to pray for his wish to be fulfilled, and that he hoped his prayer would be granted. So, he used to turn his face again and again to the sky, anxiously waiting for an angel to appear and bring the injunction he had been wishing for. In the present verse, Allah describes this state of the Holy Prophet in an appreciative manner, and promises to assign him a Qiblah that he would like. Immediately after the promise, there follows the commandment: فَوَلِّ وَجْهَكَ شَطْرَ‌ الْمَسْجِدِ الْحَرَ‌امِ : .Now turn your face in the direction of the Sacred Mosque." Here we find a manifestation of the subtle workings of divine grace - the Holy Prophet ﷺ was, to begin with, granted the joy of hearing a promise made, and, immediately after, the greater joy of seeing the promise fulfilled. (Qurtubi, Jassas and Mazhari) Injunctions and related considerations As we have explained earlier, Allah is not confined to any direction or dimension و لِلَّـهِ الْمَشْرِ‌قُ وَالْمَغْرِ‌بُ : "And the East and the West both belong to Allah." (2:115) But in order to institute a communal unity among the Muslims scattered all over the world, Divine Wisdom thought fit to assign them a particular and definite orientation which could serve as a visible symbol of that unity. Now, this orientation could have as easily been provided by the Baytul-Maqdis بیت المقدس . But the Ka'bah کعبہ was finally chosen as the Qiblah قبلہ in accordance with the wish of the Holy Prophet ﷺ ، and the injunction was announced in the present verse. The situation required that the Holy Qur'an should use the phrase: 'Turn your face toward the Ka'bah کعبہ ، or toward the Baytullah بیت اللہ .' But we actually find the Holy Qur'an saying: "Turn your face in the direction of Al-Masjid al-Haram المسجد الحرام ." This particular mode of expression helps to clarify several important questions with regard to the Qiblah قبلہ . Although, the Qiblah قبلہ ، to be precise, is the Baytullah بیت اللہ ، which is known as the Ka'bah کعبہ ، yet it is obvious that one can turn exactly towards the Baytullah بیت اللہ only so long as one can see it with one's own eyes, and that for those who live at some distance and cannot see it directly, it would be too rigorous an obligation to fulfill, if they were required to turn exactly towards the Baytullah بیت اللہ - in the case of distant towns, an exact orientation would be difficult and uncertain even with the help of the instruments and calculations. But the Islamic Shari'ah always aims at making things easy for people. So, the Holy Qur'an has designated as the Qiblah قبلہ ، not the Baytullah بیت اللہ or the Ka'bah کعبہ ، but Ali-Masjid al-Haram المسجد الحرام which covers a much wider area, and in the direction of which it is easy to turn even for those who live in far off places. Then, a greater facility has been provided by the use of the word Shatr شطر . This Arabic word signifies "the half of a thing", or the direction in which a thing lies." According to the consensus of the commentators, here the word has been used in the second sense. So, the word itself points to the rule that in the case of places which are far from Makkah it is not even necessary for the prayers to be valid that one should turn exactly towards Al-Masjid al-Harm المسجد الحرام۔ for, it is quite sufficient to turn only "in the direction" of the Sacred Mosque, as the Holy Qur'an itself.has indicated. (Al-Bahr al-Muhit) Let us give an example to make the rule as clear as possible. For countries which lie to the East of Makkah (e.g. Pakistan or India), the direction of Al-Masjid al-Haram المسجد الحرام means the West. So, if one turns towards the West, one's prayers would be valid enough. Since the point at which the sun sets in the summer is different from that where it sets in the winter, the Fuqaha' (the Muslim jurists) have decided that for the purposes of Salah in such countries, the West (the direction of the Qiblah قبلہ in this case) lies in between these two points. In mathematical terminology it means that an area covering 48 degrees between these two points is to be taken as being the direction of the Qiblah قبلہ . That is to say, even if one inclines 24 degrees to the right or to the left of the point at which Al-Masjid al-Hamm al-Haram المسجد الحرام is situated, one would still be considered to be praying in the right direction, and one's prayers would be quite valid. (For details, see "shark al-Chaghmini, ch. IV) This discussion should be enough to expose the ignorance and muddle-headedness of those who, finding a slight deviation of two or three degrees in the orientation of some mosques in Pakistan and India, have pronounced the prayers offered in these mosques to be null and void. Such baseless opinions only betray the desire on their part to produce confusion and bickering among the Muslims. Let us not forget that the Islamic Shari'ah is meant for all men and for all the countries of the world, and will last till the Day of Judgment. Hence, the injunctions of the Shari'ah pertaining to all the spheres of human life have been made easy to practise, so that Muslims living in far flung hamlets, mountains, forests or islands may act upon them only on the basis of their own observation and experience, without needing the help of scientific instruments or mathematical calculations. Thus, people living to the East of Makkah may take an area covering 48 degrees as their Qiblah قبلہ - a deviation of five or ten degrees would not affect the validity of their prayers in any way. This has been made quite clear by a hadith reported by al-Tirmidhi from the blessed Companion Abu Hurayrah ؓ which says: ما بین المشرق و المغرب قبلہ : "The Qiblah lies between the East and the West." This hadith is actually addressed to the people of Madinah whose Qiblah قبلہ lies, to be precise, in the direction of the South somewhere between the East and the West, but, in effect, the hadith provides an explanation of the phrase "'in the direction of Al-Masjid al-Haram" المسجد الحرام . This is the general principle; one should, however, make an effort to ensure, in laying down the foundation of a mosque, that the orientation towards the Baytullah بیت اللہ is as exact as possible. The successors of the Blessed Companions and the generations following them had adopted a very simple method for determining the correct orientation: If there was a mosque built by the blessed Companions present in a town, the neighbouring mosques were given the same orientation, and these in their turn used to serve as the models for the mosques in the villages or towns in the region concerned, thus setting up a chain which went on prolonging itself. Consequently, the method of determining the Qiblah in places far off from Makkah has always been this: If an old mosque is present in the vicinity, the new mosques should conform to its orientation, for in so many towns it is the blessed Companions themselves or their successors who have built mosques and determined their orientation which has been followed by later generations. To conclude, the mosques which have so far been built are quite sufficient for the purpose of determining the orientation, and it is not proper to raise unnecessary objections and doubts in this respect - the Shari'ah actually disapproves of such attempts at leading Muslims into perplexity. For, such a perplexity may sometimes have the consequence of making people suspect that in so far as the blessed Companions, their successors or the generality of Muslims have not been able to determine a mathematically correct orientation, their prayers have not been valid. Such a thought is not only false, but also betrays the insolence of the man who can harbour it. It is in view of this that Ibn Rajab, the famous Hanbali scholar of the 8th century A.H., disapproves of the use of astronomical instruments and complex mathematical calculations for the purpose of fixing the orientation. He writes: و اما علم التیسیر فاذا تعلم منہ ما یحتاج الیہ للاستھداء و معرفۃ القبلۃ والطرق کان جایزاً عند الجمھور ومازاد علیہ فلا حاجۃ الیہ و ھویشغل عماھواھم منہ وربماادی التدقیق فیہ الی اساءۃ الظن بمحاریب المسلمین فی امصارھم کما وقع فی ذلک کثیرمن اھل ھذا العلم قدیماًوحدیثاً وذلک یقحی الی اعتقادخطاًالصحابہ والتابعین فی صلواتھمفی کثیر من المصار وھوباطل وقدانکرالامام احمدالاستدلال بالجدی وقال انما وردمابین المشرق والمغرب قبلہ "As for the science of astronomy, it is legitimate, according to the ` Ulama علما ' in general, to acquire it for its being helpful in de termining the Qiblah قبلہ or in finding one's way in a journey or the directions of the roads. A greater knowledge than this is not at all necessary (according to the Shari'ah), for that may lead one to neglect more important things, and an indulgence in complex calculations may sometimes produce vile doubts about the mosques of Muslims in their towns - a weakness to which the amateurs of such sciences are all too prone. It may even lead one to believe that the prayers of the blessed Companions and their successors in certain towns had been in-valid - a belief which is totally false. For this reason, Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal has forbidden the Pole-Star to be taken into consideration for determining the orientation, on the ground that the hadith says no more than that the Qiblah قبلہ lies between the East and the West." As for deserted regions, forests or new settlements, etc. where no earlier mosques are to be found, the Shari` ah lays down this rule on the basis of the practice of the blessed Companions and their successors: in such places one should arrive at an approximate determination of the Qiblah قبلہ with the help of the Sun, the Moon and Pole-Star, these being the phenomena with which everyone is familiar enough; and if one still suspects some slight deviation, one should ignore it. For, according to al-Bada'i`, the authoritative work on Islamic jurisprudence, in places far off from Makkah, an approximately correct orientation, chosen on the basis of such general indications, stands for the Ka'bah کعبہ ، and all the injunctions pertaining to the Qiblah apply to the orientation selected in this manner. The Shari` ah provides many illustrations of the basic principle involved here. For example, sleep is taken to stand for the passing of wind, and invalidates the Wudu وضو (the prescribed ablution); or, a journey is taken to represent hardship, even when an actual journey does not involve it, and a man who is in the course of any kind of a journey is given all the concessions allowed by the Shari` ah to a traveler. The principle requires that an orientation determined on the basis of general and familiar indications should be accepted as the Qiblah قبلہ . The great scholar known as "Allama Bahr al-'Ulum" lays down the rule thus in his " Rasa'il al-Ark-an": والشروط وقوع المسامتۃ علی حسب مایری المصلی ونحن غیرمامورین بالمسامتۃ علی مایحکم بہ اللالات الرصدیۃ ولھذا افتوا ان الانحراف المفسدان یتجاوز المشارق و المغارب The only condition necessary to be fulfilled in turning to-wards the Qiblah قبلہ is that the man offering his prayers should be duly convinced that his face is turned in the direction of the Ka'bah کعبہ . The Shari` ah does not compel us to adopt exactly the orientation which can be obtained only with the help of astronomical instruments. So the 'Ulama عُلما in general have come to the conclusion that a deviation invalidates the prayers only when the difference is as great as between the East and the West." Those interested in a detailed discussion of the subject may consult my book in Urdu, "Simt-e-Qiblah سمت القبلہ ".

In continuing the discussion on the subject of the Qiblah قبلہ ، or the divinely-ordained orientation, the present verse provides yet another instance of the maliciousness of the People of the Book اھل کتاب . It is not that they demand solid and convincing arguments in order to be able to accept the new injunction with regard to the Qiblah قبلہ : it is sheer stubbornness which does not allow them to give their assent, and no proof in the world, declares the Holy Qur'an, is ever going to satisfy them. In fact, their two groups display an equal malice even towards each other - the Jews have adopted the Baytul-Maqdis as their Qiblah قبلہ ، while the Christians have chosen the East, and each group rejects the Qiblah of the other. On the other hand, the Holy Prophet , cannot accept either of these two orientations, for the new Qiblah قبلہ of the Muslims - the Baytullah بیت اللہ - has been instituted by a divine commandment, and is never going to be abrogated. So, there is no likelihood of an agreement between the People of the Book and the Muslims in this matter. The Baytul-Maqdis بیت المقدس ، no doubt, had once been instituted by a divine commandment, but that commandment has now been abrogated. Anyone who follows an abrogated injunction, and ignores the new in-junction which has replaced the earlier one, is actually disobeying Allah, and acting upon his individual opinion and personal desire. Naturally, it is impossible for the Holy Prophet g to follow the desires of the People of the Book. But, supposing for the sake of supposition, were he to do so even after having received a definite injunction through the Wahy وحی (Revelation), he would be counted among the unjust - that is, among those who disobey divine commandments. Such a situation, however, can never arise. Being a prophet, he is essentially sin-less, and as such cannot possibly be among the unjust. From this principle it logically follows that it is impossible for him to favour the desires of the People of the Book, and to accept their Qiblah قبلہ as his own. Let us make it quite clear that this warning is outwardly addressed to the Holy Prophet ﷺ ، but is, in fact, intended for his Ummah, which is being asked to realize fully the gravity of the sin of ignoring or disobeying the injunction which has finally established the Baytullah بیت اللہ as the Qiblah قبلہ of the Muslims. As for the phrase, وما انت بتبع : "You are not to follow their Qiblah قبلہ ", it is meant to declare that the Baytullah بیت اللہ shall now stay as the Qiblah قبلہ upto the end of the world. Thus, the declaration refutes the scoffing allegation of the People of the Book that there was no stability in the Islamic injunctions, and that the Muslims might again adopt the Baytul-Maqdis بیت المقدس as their Qiblah قبلہ . (Al-Bahr al-Muhit)

Verses 144 and 145 have told us how the People of the Book اھل الکتاب knew in their hearts that a divine commandment itself had instituted the Baytullah بیت اللہ as the Qiblah قبلہ of the Muslims, and yet denied this fact in public. Now, the two present verses show that their conduct towards the Holy Prophet ﷺ was equally dishonest and malicious. The Torah and the Evangel had already foretold the coming of the Holy Prophet ﷺ ، and set down the signs and indications which should help the people to recognize him. On the basis of the irrefutable evidence provided by their own Sacred Books, the Jews and the Christians knew him to be the promised Last Prophet ﷺ ، but many of them refused to acknowledge him as such out of sheer obstinacy. Let us add a word or two in order to explain the simile employed here by the Holy Qur'an - that of man recognizing his own son without any doubt or ambiguity. As everyone knows, in bringing two terms into comparison with each other, a simile does not involve in this analogy all the aspects of these two terms, but only those which should be relevant to the occasion. So, in considering the present simile one should not allow one's imagination to roam far afield, and bring under discussion even those cases which happen to be illegitimate. For, the present simile intends to make a very simple and obvious point - since the son grows from infancy to manhood normally under the eyes of his parents, his face or general appearance is quite sufficient for his father to recognize him without any doubt or hesitation. The Jews and the Christians enjoyed the same kind of facility - or even certainty - in being able to recognize the Last Prophet ﷺ . So, to persist in denying him was as dishonest as refusing to recognize one's own son should normally be. And it was just this kind of gross dishonesty that the People of the Book were indulging in. Some of them, while denying the truth themselves, even tried to keep it concealed from others, although they knew fully well that this particular truth (that is to say, the new injunction with regard to the Qiblah قبلہ) had been established by Revelation from Allah Himself. The phrase, "The Truth is from your Lord", can also be interpreted in a general sense as providing a definition of the nature of truth - namely, that alone is truth which comes from Allah. One who has understood this fact can never allow himself to be in doubt with regard to this particular truth or to any other which has been revealed to a prophet by Allah.

Verses 144 and 145 have told us how the People of the Book اھل الکتاب knew in their hearts that a divine commandment itself had instituted the Baytullah بیت اللہ as the Qiblah قبلہ of the Muslims, and yet denied this fact in public. Now, the two present verses show that their conduct towards the Holy Prophet ﷺ was equally dishonest and malicious. The Torah and the Evangel had already foretold the coming of the Holy Prophet ﷺ ، and set down the signs and indications which should help the people to recognize him. On the basis of the irrefutable evidence provided by their own Sacred Books, the Jews and the Christians knew him to be the promised Last Prophet ﷺ ، but many of them refused to acknowledge him as such out of sheer obstinacy. Let us add a word or two in order to explain the simile employed here by the Holy Qur'an - that of man recognizing his own son without any doubt or ambiguity. As everyone knows, in bringing two terms into comparison with each other, a simile does not involve in this analogy all the aspects of these two terms, but only those which should be relevant to the occasion. So, in considering the present simile one should not allow one's imagination to roam far afield, and bring under discussion even those cases which happen to be illegitimate. For, the present simile intends to make a very simple and obvious point - since the son grows from infancy to manhood normally under the eyes of his parents, his face or general appearance is quite sufficient for his father to recognize him without any doubt or hesitation. The Jews and the Christians enjoyed the same kind of facility - or even certainty - in being able to recognize the Last Prophet ﷺ . So, to persist in denying him was as dishonest as refusing to recognize one's own son should normally be. And it was just this kind of gross dishonesty that the People of the Book were indulging in. Some of them, while denying the truth themselves, even tried to keep it concealed from others, although they knew fully well that this particular truth (that is to say, the new injunction with regard to the Qiblah قبلہ) had been established by Revelation from Allah Himself. The phrase, "The Truth is from your Lord", can also be interpreted in a general sense as providing a definition of the nature of truth - namely, that alone is truth which comes from Allah. One who has understood this fact can never allow himself to be in doubt with regard to this particular truth or to any other which has been revealed to a prophet by Allah.

The change of Qiblah The question of religious orientation being of the highest significance for an Ummah (or a traditional community), these verses continue and enlarge upon the theme of the Qiblah, and lay down further raisons d'etre for the change. It is, the commentators point out, an observable fact that every traditional community has had a religious orientation of its own, whether appointed by Allah or chosen by itself. This being so, why should anyone object, or wonder that Allah has appointed for the Islamic Ummah a Qiblah قبلہ peculiar to it? After all, it is a regular and distinct Tradition in its own right - in fact, the last of all Traditions, which makes it all the more necessary that it must have a distinct Qiblah. Anyhow, once the divine commandment has been promulgated, the Muslims need not worry about the objections or the ridicule of others, but should, above all, concern themselves with the performance of good deeds (as defined by Allah and His Prophet ﷺ). They should, indeed, give up fruitless controversies and strive to excel in good deeds, for they have to appear before Allah on the Day of Judgment when they will be rewarded or punished according to their deeds. The raison d'etre laid down in this verse requires that the Muslims should, whether staying at home or travelling, turn their faces in the direction of Al-Masjid al-Harm المسجد الحرام ، for that undoubtedly is the Qiblah قبلہ appointed for them by divine commandment. It is obligatory for them to obey this as well as any other commandment, bearing in mind that Allah is not unaware of what men do. In repeating this commandment, Verse 150 adds a third raison d'etre. The Torah and the evangel had indicated that the promised Last Prophet ﷺ would have the Ka'bah کعبہ as his Qiblah المسجد الحرام . If the Muslims continued to pray with the Baytul-Maqdis بیت المقدس as their Qiblah قبلہ ، the opponents of Islam would have found an argument to justify their denial of the Holy Prophet ﷺ . But the new commandment with regard to the Qiblah قبلہ takes away the ground from under their feet, and at least the just ones among them can no longer raise this kind of objection. Of course, the stubborn and malignant ones would still carp - they would start saying that it was the Baytul-Maqdis بیت المقدس ، and not the Ka'bah کعبہ ، which had been the Qiblah قبلہ of the earlier prophets, and that the adoption of the Ka'bah کعبہ constituted an infringement of the established prophetic tradition. But the Muslims need not worry about defending Islam against such baseless objections, for the only thing which can be harmful to them is not the hostility of men but the disobedience to or disregard of divine commandments. So, in Verse 150, Allah asks the Muslims to fear, not the enemies of Islam, but Him alone. This is the only way to remain true to the divine guidance they have received - namely, Islam. This steadfastness, too, is a blessing from Allah, and the blessing will appear in its perfect glory in the other world when the Muslims shall, as a reward for their faithfulness, be admitted to Paradise. Let us note that in announcing the commandment with regard to the change in orientation, Verses 144-150 address the listeners three times in the singular number and twice in the plural. In a general way, one can say that this repetition is meant for emphasis. The commandment fixing a new Qiblah قبلہ not only provided an occasion for the glee of the opponents of Islam, but was also a very conspicuous and sudden change in the religious observances of the Muslims themselves, whose hearts would have remained perturbed without such an emphatic repetition. The reiteration also suggests that this is the final and definite decision with regard to the Qiblah قبلہ ، and that no further change can be expected in this matter. Al-Qurtubi has, however, explained this mode of expression in such a way that the repetition becomes something more than mere emphasis, and each phrase, in being repeated, acquires a new implication. It goes without saying that the commandments in the singular number are addressed to the Holy Prophet ﷺ himself, and those in the plural to the blessed Companions and to the Muslims in general. Thus, the commandment in Verse 144 pertains to the situation of those who find themselves in Madinah or in their own home-town, whatever that might be, and is intended to make it clear that the injunction is not particular to the mosque of the Holy Prophet ﷺ but applies to every town or village and to every quarter of a town. Verse 149 repeats the commandment with the addition of the phrase "from wheresoever you set out", which shows that the injunction now refers to the state of a journey. Since a journey involves different situations - for example, unbroken travel for several days at a time, or a short or long stay somewhere in the course of the journey, Verse 150 repeats the injunction in order to cover all these situations. Let us add that Verse 148 introduces the theme of orientation with the word Wijhatun, which lexically signifies "the thing one turns one's face to", and which has been interpreted by the blessed Companion Ibn ` Abbas ؓ as "Qiblah قبلہ " or religious orientation. In fact, the word Qiblatun itself appears in the reading of the blessed Companion Ubayy ibn Ka'b ؓ ، which leaves no ambiguity in interpreting the phrases.43 43. Before we leave the subject, let us remark that nowadays quite a good number of people, especially those with a Western formation, approach the Holy Qur'an as they do a book composed by a human author who pays due regard to what commonly passes as logic and sequential argument, and often do feel embarrassed or confused when they come across the close repetition of words and phrases in the Book of Allah, finding it impossible to explain or justify what is seemingly redundant. And it is not unlikely that this embarrassment may open the way to shame-faced misgivings and doubts even in the minds of those who wish to serve the cause of Islam in the modern world. What these men of good will tend to ignore is the elementary fact that the Word of Allah cannot be subservient to the rules of philosophical or literary composition, and that the reiteration of words and phrases, even of a sequence of sentences, is a regular mode of expression common to all the Sacred Books of the world. Moreover, the great orthodox (in the sense of unfailing adherence to the Qur'an and Sunnah) commentators of the Holy Qur'an have tried, each in his own way, to suggest the raisons d'etre of this device, and also to explain the possible implications of each particular instance of repetition. Some of the explanations pertaining to the verses we are concerned with here have been summarized by Maulana Muhammad Idris in his own commentary, from which we borrow the following resume: (1) The first declaration is addressed to those who reside in Makkah, the second to those who live in the Arabian peninsula, and the third to all men . living anywhere in the world. (2) The first is intended to cover all the situations and states, the second to cover all the places, and the third to cover all the periods of time. (3) This passage of the Holy Qur'an lays down three raisons d'etre for the change in the religious orientation; hence, the commandment has been affirmed afresh along with each argument. (4) This was the first occasion in the Islamic Shari` ah when a new commandment to abrogate an earlier one came. So, repetition was necessary to impress upon the minds of the people the multiple significance of the occasion and of the commandment. (5) The abrogation of any commandment whatsoever is likely to give rise to all sorts of doubts, and to produce internal or external disorder. The naive cannot, anyhow, understand the why and how of an abrogation occurring in the case of a divine commandment. So, an emphatic reiteration becomes all the more essential. Injunctions and related considerations (1) Verse 145 has already indicated to the Muslims that although Allah has now appointed a new and permanent Qiblah قبلہ for the whole of mankind, yet the Jews and the Christians are not going to give up their respective orientations, nor shall the Muslims ever forsake their own. The People of the Book, anyhow, have no right to object to the Ka'bah being divinely chosen as the Qiblah قبلہ of the Muslims, for - as Verse 148 reminds us - every traditional community (Ummah) has always had a Qiblah قبلہ of its own, and so does the Islamic Ummah. Since the Muslims can be sure of their right to a Qiblah قبلہ peculiar to them, and the People of the Book are not expected to listen to reason, Allah asks the Muslims in this verse not to engage themselves in fruitless discussions and futile disputes, but to "strive, then, to excel in good deeds." The Holy Qur'an discourages unnecessary discussions, for they make one neglect one's real task, which is to prepare oneself for one's death and for the other world. So, the verse ends with the rejoinder that on the Day of Judgment Allah shall bring all men together, and suggests that the desire to be safe from the criticism of others and the anxiety to win over them in disputes only betrays one's attachment to the temporal world, and that wisdom lies in caring more for what is everlasting. (2) The expression "strive to excel" also indicates that one should hasten to perform a good deed (whether it be Salah. (prayers) or Sawm صوم (fasting) or the Hajj (pilgrimage) or Zakah (giving of alms) etc.) as soon as one gets the opportunity to do so. For, the ability to do a good deed is a favour from Allah, and negligence in performing it amounts to ungratefulness and disrespect towards Allah. =Hence, it is to be feared that procrastination in this matter may be punished with a withdrawal of the divine favour, and that the culprit may altogether lose the ability to perform good deeds. May Allah protect us from such a fate! The point has been made quite explicit in another verse: يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا اسْتَجِيبُوا لِلَّـهِ وَلِلرَّ‌سُولِ إِذَا دَعَاكُمْ لِمَا يُحْيِيكُمْ ۖ وَاعْلَمُوا أَنَّ اللَّـهَ يَحُولُ بَيْنَ الْمَرْ‌ءِ وَقَلْبِهِ وَأَنَّهُ إِلَيْهِ تُحْشَرُ‌ونَ ﴿24﴾ "0 believers, respond to Allah and to the Messenger when he calls you to that which will gave you life; and know that Allah does (sometimes) stand between a man and his heart, and that to Him you shall be mustered" (8:24). (3) From this very expression - "strive, then, to excel in good deeds" - some of the fugaha-' (Muslim jurists) have drawn the conclusion that it is more meritorious to offer each of the five daily prayers as soon as the appointed time for it begins, or as early as possible, and have even cited the ahadith of the Holy Prophet in support of this view, which is shared by Imam Shafi` i (رح) . On the other hand, the great Imam Abu Hanifah and Imam Malik رحمۃ اللہ علیہما specify that it is more meritorious to offer certain prayers a bit late, as has been indicated by the Holy Prophet ﷺ himself through his speech or action, while the rest of the prayers should, of course, be offered as early as possible within the time prescribed. An example of the former is provided by Al-Bukhari who reports from the blessed Companion Anas ؓ the superior merit of offering the ` Isha عشاء prayers rather late in the night. The blessed Companion Abu Hurayrah ؓ also reports such a preference on the part of the Holy Prophet ﷺ himself (Qurtubi). Similarly, Al-Bukhari and Al-Tirmidhi report from the blessed Companion Abu Dharr that in the course of a journey once the blessed Companion Bilal ؓ wanted to recite Adhan اذان (call for prayers) as soon as the time for the zuhr ظھر prayers began, but the Holy Prophet ﷺ asked him to wait till it was a bit cooler, and remarked that the heat of the noon-day is a part of the fire of Hell. In other words, the Holy Prophet ﷺ evidently preferred the zuhr ظھر prayers to be offered rather late in summer. On the basis of such ahadith, Imam Abu Hanifah and Imam Malik رحمۃ اللہ علیہما have come to the conclusion that although in the case of those prayers regarding which we have not been asked to offer them a bit late (for example, the Maghrib مغرب prayers), it is better to do so as soon as the appointed time begins, yet in the case of those prayers regarding which a specific indication does exist one should offer them somewhat later within the time prescribed. They add that if one wishes to act upon the commandment, "strive, then, to excel in good deeds", even in the latter case, then the only way to do so is not to delay the prayers when the desirable or commendable (Mustahabb مستحب ) time has arrived. In short, Verse 148 has, according to a consensus of all the Fugaha', established the principle that when the time for offering a prescribed prayer has arrived, one should not delay it without a valid excuse, which may either be a clear-cut specification in the Shari'ah (as we have just defined), or a physical disability, like illness, etc.

The change of Qiblah The question of religious orientation being of the highest significance for an Ummah (or a traditional community), these verses continue and enlarge upon the theme of the Qiblah, and lay down further raisons d'etre for the change. It is, the commentators point out, an observable fact that every traditional community has had a religious orientation of its own, whether appointed by Allah or chosen by itself. This being so, why should anyone object, or wonder that Allah has appointed for the Islamic Ummah a Qiblah قبلہ peculiar to it? After all, it is a regular and distinct Tradition in its own right - in fact, the last of all Traditions, which makes it all the more necessary that it must have a distinct Qiblah. Anyhow, once the divine commandment has been promulgated, the Muslims need not worry about the objections or the ridicule of others, but should, above all, concern themselves with the performance of good deeds (as defined by Allah and His Prophet ﷺ). They should, indeed, give up fruitless controversies and strive to excel in good deeds, for they have to appear before Allah on the Day of Judgment when they will be rewarded or punished according to their deeds. The raison d'etre laid down in this verse requires that the Muslims should, whether staying at home or travelling, turn their faces in the direction of Al-Masjid al-Harm المسجد الحرام ، for that undoubtedly is the Qiblah قبلہ appointed for them by divine commandment. It is obligatory for them to obey this as well as any other commandment, bearing in mind that Allah is not unaware of what men do. In repeating this commandment, Verse 150 adds a third raison d'etre. The Torah and the evangel had indicated that the promised Last Prophet ﷺ would have the Ka'bah کعبہ as his Qiblah المسجد الحرام . If the Muslims continued to pray with the Baytul-Maqdis بیت المقدس as their Qiblah قبلہ ، the opponents of Islam would have found an argument to justify their denial of the Holy Prophet ﷺ . But the new commandment with regard to the Qiblah قبلہ takes away the ground from under their feet, and at least the just ones among them can no longer raise this kind of objection. Of course, the stubborn and malignant ones would still carp - they would start saying that it was the Baytul-Maqdis بیت المقدس ، and not the Ka'bah کعبہ ، which had been the Qiblah قبلہ of the earlier prophets, and that the adoption of the Ka'bah کعبہ constituted an infringement of the established prophetic tradition. But the Muslims need not worry about defending Islam against such baseless objections, for the only thing which can be harmful to them is not the hostility of men but the disobedience to or disregard of divine commandments. So, in Verse 150, Allah asks the Muslims to fear, not the enemies of Islam, but Him alone. This is the only way to remain true to the divine guidance they have received - namely, Islam. This steadfastness, too, is a blessing from Allah, and the blessing will appear in its perfect glory in the other world when the Muslims shall, as a reward for their faithfulness, be admitted to Paradise. Let us note that in announcing the commandment with regard to the change in orientation, Verses 144-150 address the listeners three times in the singular number and twice in the plural. In a general way, one can say that this repetition is meant for emphasis. The commandment fixing a new Qiblah قبلہ not only provided an occasion for the glee of the opponents of Islam, but was also a very conspicuous and sudden change in the religious observances of the Muslims themselves, whose hearts would have remained perturbed without such an emphatic repetition. The reiteration also suggests that this is the final and definite decision with regard to the Qiblah قبلہ ، and that no further change can be expected in this matter. Al-Qurtubi has, however, explained this mode of expression in such a way that the repetition becomes something more than mere emphasis, and each phrase, in being repeated, acquires a new implication. It goes without saying that the commandments in the singular number are addressed to the Holy Prophet ﷺ himself, and those in the plural to the blessed Companions and to the Muslims in general. Thus, the commandment in Verse 144 pertains to the situation of those who find themselves in Madinah or in their own home-town, whatever that might be, and is intended to make it clear that the injunction is not particular to the mosque of the Holy Prophet ﷺ but applies to every town or village and to every quarter of a town. Verse 149 repeats the commandment with the addition of the phrase "from wheresoever you set out", which shows that the injunction now refers to the state of a journey. Since a journey involves different situations - for example, unbroken travel for several days at a time, or a short or long stay somewhere in the course of the journey, Verse 150 repeats the injunction in order to cover all these situations. Let us add that Verse 148 introduces the theme of orientation with the word Wijhatun, which lexically signifies "the thing one turns one's face to", and which has been interpreted by the blessed Companion Ibn ` Abbas ؓ as "Qiblah قبلہ " or religious orientation. In fact, the word Qiblatun itself appears in the reading of the blessed Companion Ubayy ibn Ka'b ؓ ، which leaves no ambiguity in interpreting the phrases.43 43. Before we leave the subject, let us remark that nowadays quite a good number of people, especially those with a Western formation, approach the Holy Qur'an as they do a book composed by a human author who pays due regard to what commonly passes as logic and sequential argument, and often do feel embarrassed or confused when they come across the close repetition of words and phrases in the Book of Allah, finding it impossible to explain or justify what is seemingly redundant. And it is not unlikely that this embarrassment may open the way to shame-faced misgivings and doubts even in the minds of those who wish to serve the cause of Islam in the modern world. What these men of good will tend to ignore is the elementary fact that the Word of Allah cannot be subservient to the rules of philosophical or literary composition, and that the reiteration of words and phrases, even of a sequence of sentences, is a regular mode of expression common to all the Sacred Books of the world. Moreover, the great orthodox (in the sense of unfailing adherence to the Qur'an and Sunnah) commentators of the Holy Qur'an have tried, each in his own way, to suggest the raisons d'etre of this device, and also to explain the possible implications of each particular instance of repetition. Some of the explanations pertaining to the verses we are concerned with here have been summarized by Maulana Muhammad Idris in his own commentary, from which we borrow the following resume: (1) The first declaration is addressed to those who reside in Makkah, the second to those who live in the Arabian peninsula, and the third to all men . living anywhere in the world. (2) The first is intended to cover all the situations and states, the second to cover all the places, and the third to cover all the periods of time. (3) This passage of the Holy Qur'an lays down three raisons d'etre for the change in the religious orientation; hence, the commandment has been affirmed afresh along with each argument. (4) This was the first occasion in the Islamic Shari` ah when a new commandment to abrogate an earlier one came. So, repetition was necessary to impress upon the minds of the people the multiple significance of the occasion and of the commandment. (5) The abrogation of any commandment whatsoever is likely to give rise to all sorts of doubts, and to produce internal or external disorder. The naive cannot, anyhow, understand the why and how of an abrogation occurring in the case of a divine commandment. So, an emphatic reiteration becomes all the more essential. Injunctions and related considerations (1) Verse 145 has already indicated to the Muslims that although Allah has now appointed a new and permanent Qiblah قبلہ for the whole of mankind, yet the Jews and the Christians are not going to give up their respective orientations, nor shall the Muslims ever forsake their own. The People of the Book, anyhow, have no right to object to the Ka'bah being divinely chosen as the Qiblah قبلہ of the Muslims, for - as Verse 148 reminds us - every traditional community (Ummah) has always had a Qiblah قبلہ of its own, and so does the Islamic Ummah. Since the Muslims can be sure of their right to a Qiblah قبلہ peculiar to them, and the People of the Book are not expected to listen to reason, Allah asks the Muslims in this verse not to engage themselves in fruitless discussions and futile disputes, but to "strive, then, to excel in good deeds." The Holy Qur'an discourages unnecessary discussions, for they make one neglect one's real task, which is to prepare oneself for one's death and for the other world. So, the verse ends with the rejoinder that on the Day of Judgment Allah shall bring all men together, and suggests that the desire to be safe from the criticism of others and the anxiety to win over them in disputes only betrays one's attachment to the temporal world, and that wisdom lies in caring more for what is everlasting. (2) The expression "strive to excel" also indicates that one should hasten to perform a good deed (whether it be Salah. (prayers) or Sawm صوم (fasting) or the Hajj (pilgrimage) or Zakah (giving of alms) etc.) as soon as one gets the opportunity to do so. For, the ability to do a good deed is a favour from Allah, and negligence in performing it amounts to ungratefulness and disrespect towards Allah. =Hence, it is to be feared that procrastination in this matter may be punished with a withdrawal of the divine favour, and that the culprit may altogether lose the ability to perform good deeds. May Allah protect us from such a fate! The point has been made quite explicit in another verse: يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا اسْتَجِيبُوا لِلَّـهِ وَلِلرَّ‌سُولِ إِذَا دَعَاكُمْ لِمَا يُحْيِيكُمْ ۖ وَاعْلَمُوا أَنَّ اللَّـهَ يَحُولُ بَيْنَ الْمَرْ‌ءِ وَقَلْبِهِ وَأَنَّهُ إِلَيْهِ تُحْشَرُ‌ونَ ﴿24﴾ "0 believers, respond to Allah and to the Messenger when he calls you to that which will gave you life; and know that Allah does (sometimes) stand between a man and his heart, and that to Him you shall be mustered" (8:24). (3) From this very expression - "strive, then, to excel in good deeds" - some of the fugaha-' (Muslim jurists) have drawn the conclusion that it is more meritorious to offer each of the five daily prayers as soon as the appointed time for it begins, or as early as possible, and have even cited the ahadith of the Holy Prophet in support of this view, which is shared by Imam Shafi` i (رح) . On the other hand, the great Imam Abu Hanifah and Imam Malik رحمۃ اللہ علیہما specify that it is more meritorious to offer certain prayers a bit late, as has been indicated by the Holy Prophet ﷺ himself through his speech or action, while the rest of the prayers should, of course, be offered as early as possible within the time prescribed. An example of the former is provided by Al-Bukhari who reports from the blessed Companion Anas ؓ the superior merit of offering the ` Isha عشاء prayers rather late in the night. The blessed Companion Abu Hurayrah ؓ also reports such a preference on the part of the Holy Prophet ﷺ himself (Qurtubi). Similarly, Al-Bukhari and Al-Tirmidhi report from the blessed Companion Abu Dharr that in the course of a journey once the blessed Companion Bilal ؓ wanted to recite Adhan اذان (call for prayers) as soon as the time for the zuhr ظھر prayers began, but the Holy Prophet ﷺ asked him to wait till it was a bit cooler, and remarked that the heat of the noon-day is a part of the fire of Hell. In other words, the Holy Prophet ﷺ evidently preferred the zuhr ظھر prayers to be offered rather late in summer. On the basis of such ahadith, Imam Abu Hanifah and Imam Malik رحمۃ اللہ علیہما have come to the conclusion that although in the case of those prayers regarding which we have not been asked to offer them a bit late (for example, the Maghrib مغرب prayers), it is better to do so as soon as the appointed time begins, yet in the case of those prayers regarding which a specific indication does exist one should offer them somewhat later within the time prescribed. They add that if one wishes to act upon the commandment, "strive, then, to excel in good deeds", even in the latter case, then the only way to do so is not to delay the prayers when the desirable or commendable (Mustahabb مستحب ) time has arrived. In short, Verse 148 has, according to a consensus of all the Fugaha', established the principle that when the time for offering a prescribed prayer has arrived, one should not delay it without a valid excuse, which may either be a clear-cut specification in the Shari'ah (as we have just defined), or a physical disability, like illness, etc.

The change of Qiblah The question of religious orientation being of the highest significance for an Ummah (or a traditional community), these verses continue and enlarge upon the theme of the Qiblah, and lay down further raisons d'etre for the change. It is, the commentators point out, an observable fact that every traditional community has had a religious orientation of its own, whether appointed by Allah or chosen by itself. This being so, why should anyone object, or wonder that Allah has appointed for the Islamic Ummah a Qiblah قبلہ peculiar to it? After all, it is a regular and distinct Tradition in its own right - in fact, the last of all Traditions, which makes it all the more necessary that it must have a distinct Qiblah. Anyhow, once the divine commandment has been promulgated, the Muslims need not worry about the objections or the ridicule of others, but should, above all, concern themselves with the performance of good deeds (as defined by Allah and His Prophet ﷺ). They should, indeed, give up fruitless controversies and strive to excel in good deeds, for they have to appear before Allah on the Day of Judgment when they will be rewarded or punished according to their deeds. The raison d'etre laid down in this verse requires that the Muslims should, whether staying at home or travelling, turn their faces in the direction of Al-Masjid al-Harm المسجد الحرام ، for that undoubtedly is the Qiblah قبلہ appointed for them by divine commandment. It is obligatory for them to obey this as well as any other commandment, bearing in mind that Allah is not unaware of what men do. In repeating this commandment, Verse 150 adds a third raison d'etre. The Torah and the evangel had indicated that the promised Last Prophet ﷺ would have the Ka'bah کعبہ as his Qiblah المسجد الحرام . If the Muslims continued to pray with the Baytul-Maqdis بیت المقدس as their Qiblah قبلہ ، the opponents of Islam would have found an argument to justify their denial of the Holy Prophet ﷺ . But the new commandment with regard to the Qiblah قبلہ takes away the ground from under their feet, and at least the just ones among them can no longer raise this kind of objection. Of course, the stubborn and malignant ones would still carp - they would start saying that it was the Baytul-Maqdis بیت المقدس ، and not the Ka'bah کعبہ ، which had been the Qiblah قبلہ of the earlier prophets, and that the adoption of the Ka'bah کعبہ constituted an infringement of the established prophetic tradition. But the Muslims need not worry about defending Islam against such baseless objections, for the only thing which can be harmful to them is not the hostility of men but the disobedience to or disregard of divine commandments. So, in Verse 150, Allah asks the Muslims to fear, not the enemies of Islam, but Him alone. This is the only way to remain true to the divine guidance they have received - namely, Islam. This steadfastness, too, is a blessing from Allah, and the blessing will appear in its perfect glory in the other world when the Muslims shall, as a reward for their faithfulness, be admitted to Paradise. Let us note that in announcing the commandment with regard to the change in orientation, Verses 144-150 address the listeners three times in the singular number and twice in the plural. In a general way, one can say that this repetition is meant for emphasis. The commandment fixing a new Qiblah قبلہ not only provided an occasion for the glee of the opponents of Islam, but was also a very conspicuous and sudden change in the religious observances of the Muslims themselves, whose hearts would have remained perturbed without such an emphatic repetition. The reiteration also suggests that this is the final and definite decision with regard to the Qiblah قبلہ ، and that no further change can be expected in this matter. Al-Qurtubi has, however, explained this mode of expression in such a way that the repetition becomes something more than mere emphasis, and each phrase, in being repeated, acquires a new implication. It goes without saying that the commandments in the singular number are addressed to the Holy Prophet ﷺ himself, and those in the plural to the blessed Companions and to the Muslims in general. Thus, the commandment in Verse 144 pertains to the situation of those who find themselves in Madinah or in their own home-town, whatever that might be, and is intended to make it clear that the injunction is not particular to the mosque of the Holy Prophet ﷺ but applies to every town or village and to every quarter of a town. Verse 149 repeats the commandment with the addition of the phrase "from wheresoever you set out", which shows that the injunction now refers to the state of a journey. Since a journey involves different situations - for example, unbroken travel for several days at a time, or a short or long stay somewhere in the course of the journey, Verse 150 repeats the injunction in order to cover all these situations. Let us add that Verse 148 introduces the theme of orientation with the word Wijhatun, which lexically signifies "the thing one turns one's face to", and which has been interpreted by the blessed Companion Ibn ` Abbas ؓ as "Qiblah قبلہ " or religious orientation. In fact, the word Qiblatun itself appears in the reading of the blessed Companion Ubayy ibn Ka'b ؓ ، which leaves no ambiguity in interpreting the phrases.43 43. Before we leave the subject, let us remark that nowadays quite a good number of people, especially those with a Western formation, approach the Holy Qur'an as they do a book composed by a human author who pays due regard to what commonly passes as logic and sequential argument, and often do feel embarrassed or confused when they come across the close repetition of words and phrases in the Book of Allah, finding it impossible to explain or justify what is seemingly redundant. And it is not unlikely that this embarrassment may open the way to shame-faced misgivings and doubts even in the minds of those who wish to serve the cause of Islam in the modern world. What these men of good will tend to ignore is the elementary fact that the Word of Allah cannot be subservient to the rules of philosophical or literary composition, and that the reiteration of words and phrases, even of a sequence of sentences, is a regular mode of expression common to all the Sacred Books of the world. Moreover, the great orthodox (in the sense of unfailing adherence to the Qur'an and Sunnah) commentators of the Holy Qur'an have tried, each in his own way, to suggest the raisons d'etre of this device, and also to explain the possible implications of each particular instance of repetition. Some of the explanations pertaining to the verses we are concerned with here have been summarized by Maulana Muhammad Idris in his own commentary, from which we borrow the following resume: (1) The first declaration is addressed to those who reside in Makkah, the second to those who live in the Arabian peninsula, and the third to all men . living anywhere in the world. (2) The first is intended to cover all the situations and states, the second to cover all the places, and the third to cover all the periods of time. (3) This passage of the Holy Qur'an lays down three raisons d'etre for the change in the religious orientation; hence, the commandment has been affirmed afresh along with each argument. (4) This was the first occasion in the Islamic Shari` ah when a new commandment to abrogate an earlier one came. So, repetition was necessary to impress upon the minds of the people the multiple significance of the occasion and of the commandment. (5) The abrogation of any commandment whatsoever is likely to give rise to all sorts of doubts, and to produce internal or external disorder. The naive cannot, anyhow, understand the why and how of an abrogation occurring in the case of a divine commandment. So, an emphatic reiteration becomes all the more essential. Injunctions and related considerations (1) Verse 145 has already indicated to the Muslims that although Allah has now appointed a new and permanent Qiblah قبلہ for the whole of mankind, yet the Jews and the Christians are not going to give up their respective orientations, nor shall the Muslims ever forsake their own. The People of the Book, anyhow, have no right to object to the Ka'bah being divinely chosen as the Qiblah قبلہ of the Muslims, for - as Verse 148 reminds us - every traditional community (Ummah) has always had a Qiblah قبلہ of its own, and so does the Islamic Ummah. Since the Muslims can be sure of their right to a Qiblah قبلہ peculiar to them, and the People of the Book are not expected to listen to reason, Allah asks the Muslims in this verse not to engage themselves in fruitless discussions and futile disputes, but to "strive, then, to excel in good deeds." The Holy Qur'an discourages unnecessary discussions, for they make one neglect one's real task, which is to prepare oneself for one's death and for the other world. So, the verse ends with the rejoinder that on the Day of Judgment Allah shall bring all men together, and suggests that the desire to be safe from the criticism of others and the anxiety to win over them in disputes only betrays one's attachment to the temporal world, and that wisdom lies in caring more for what is everlasting. (2) The expression "strive to excel" also indicates that one should hasten to perform a good deed (whether it be Salah. (prayers) or Sawm صوم (fasting) or the Hajj (pilgrimage) or Zakah (giving of alms) etc.) as soon as one gets the opportunity to do so. For, the ability to do a good deed is a favour from Allah, and negligence in performing it amounts to ungratefulness and disrespect towards Allah. =Hence, it is to be feared that procrastination in this matter may be punished with a withdrawal of the divine favour, and that the culprit may altogether lose the ability to perform good deeds. May Allah protect us from such a fate! The point has been made quite explicit in another verse: يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا اسْتَجِيبُوا لِلَّـهِ وَلِلرَّ‌سُولِ إِذَا دَعَاكُمْ لِمَا يُحْيِيكُمْ ۖ وَاعْلَمُوا أَنَّ اللَّـهَ يَحُولُ بَيْنَ الْمَرْ‌ءِ وَقَلْبِهِ وَأَنَّهُ إِلَيْهِ تُحْشَرُ‌ونَ ﴿24﴾ "0 believers, respond to Allah and to the Messenger when he calls you to that which will gave you life; and know that Allah does (sometimes) stand between a man and his heart, and that to Him you shall be mustered" (8:24). (3) From this very expression - "strive, then, to excel in good deeds" - some of the fugaha-' (Muslim jurists) have drawn the conclusion that it is more meritorious to offer each of the five daily prayers as soon as the appointed time for it begins, or as early as possible, and have even cited the ahadith of the Holy Prophet in support of this view, which is shared by Imam Shafi` i (رح) . On the other hand, the great Imam Abu Hanifah and Imam Malik رحمۃ اللہ علیہما specify that it is more meritorious to offer certain prayers a bit late, as has been indicated by the Holy Prophet ﷺ himself through his speech or action, while the rest of the prayers should, of course, be offered as early as possible within the time prescribed. An example of the former is provided by Al-Bukhari who reports from the blessed Companion Anas ؓ the superior merit of offering the ` Isha عشاء prayers rather late in the night. The blessed Companion Abu Hurayrah ؓ also reports such a preference on the part of the Holy Prophet ﷺ himself (Qurtubi). Similarly, Al-Bukhari and Al-Tirmidhi report from the blessed Companion Abu Dharr that in the course of a journey once the blessed Companion Bilal ؓ wanted to recite Adhan اذان (call for prayers) as soon as the time for the zuhr ظھر prayers began, but the Holy Prophet ﷺ asked him to wait till it was a bit cooler, and remarked that the heat of the noon-day is a part of the fire of Hell. In other words, the Holy Prophet ﷺ evidently preferred the zuhr ظھر prayers to be offered rather late in summer. On the basis of such ahadith, Imam Abu Hanifah and Imam Malik رحمۃ اللہ علیہما have come to the conclusion that although in the case of those prayers regarding which we have not been asked to offer them a bit late (for example, the Maghrib مغرب prayers), it is better to do so as soon as the appointed time begins, yet in the case of those prayers regarding which a specific indication does exist one should offer them somewhat later within the time prescribed. They add that if one wishes to act upon the commandment, "strive, then, to excel in good deeds", even in the latter case, then the only way to do so is not to delay the prayers when the desirable or commendable (Mustahabb مستحب ) time has arrived. In short, Verse 148 has, according to a consensus of all the Fugaha', established the principle that when the time for offering a prescribed prayer has arrived, one should not delay it without a valid excuse, which may either be a clear-cut specification in the Shari'ah (as we have just defined), or a physical disability, like illness, etc.

These verses conclude the discussion on the theme of the Qiblah قبلہ or religious orientation. So, Verse 151 repeats the second part of the prayer of Sayyidna Ibrahim (علیہ السلام) with which the discussion had begun (Verses 127 - 129). He had, as one would recall, prayed Allah to accept his founding of the Ka'bah کعبہ ، and to send among his progeny a Messenger from among themselves. The subsequent discussion on the subject of the Qiblah قبلہ has already shown that the first prayer has been heard and accepted. Now, Verse 151 declares that similarly the second request has also been granted, suggesting that since the Holy Prophet ﷺ has been sent in answer to the prayer of the founder of the Ka'bah کعبہ ، it is no wonder that it should be appointed as his Qiblah قبلہ . Verse 151 has specifically mentioned that the new Prophet (Muhammad ﷺ) is sent with the same attributes as specified by Sayyidna Ibrahim (علیہ السلام) in his prayer, namely: (1) He recites to them the verses of the Qur'an; (2) He teaches them the Book and the wisdom; (3) He purifies them; (4) He teaches them things which his listeners did not know of, nor could they be found in the earlier Divine Books or through individual reason. Since Allah has, in granting the two prayers, sent such great blessings to mankind, Verse 152 asks men to "remember" Him as the Supreme Benefactor, and to render Him thanks by being obedient. As long as they do so, Allah will "remember" them in showering on them His material and spiritual blessings. The verse ends with the reminder that men should not be ungrateful to Allah in denying His blessings or in being disobedient. In the light of this commentary, one can see that the word "as" (in Arabic, the letter Kaf which denotes a comparison between two terms) provides the link between Verse 151 and Verse 152. But, according to al-Qurtubi, the word Kaf or "as" is connected with the first phrase of Verse 152 -: "Remember Me, then". Viewed in the line of this syntactical relationship, the two verses, taken together, would mean that the ability to "remember" Allah is as much a blessing for men as the ordination of the new Qiblah قبلہ and the coming of the Last Prophet ﷺ ، and hence it is the duty of men to render thanks to Allah, so that they may continue to receive His favours.

The merits of 'Dhikr' ذکر (Rememberance) Dhikr ذکر : or "Remembrance" essentially pertains to the heart, but in so far as the tongue is the interpreter of the heart the oral recitation of a Divine Name or a verse of the Holy Qur'an is also described as Dhikr ذکر . In other words, oral Dhikr ذکر can be worth the name only when it is accompanied by the "remembrance" of the heart. As the great Sufi poet Rumi points out, the recitation of a Divine Name can have no efficacy if one keeps thinking of cows and donkeys while repeating it mechanically with the tongue. One must, however, bear in mind that even a mechanical Dhikr ذکر without the heart being engaged in it is not altogether futile. It is related that the great Sufi Abu ` Uthman, hearing a man complain of such a situation, remarked that one should be grateful to Allah even for this favour of having drawn at least one organ of the body, the tongue, into His service. (Qurtubi) The merits of Dhikr ذکر are, indeed, innumerable. What greater merit could one wish for than the assurance that when a man "remembers" Allah, He too "remembers" him. Abu ` Uthman once claimed that he knew the time when Allah remembered His servants. The listeners grew curious as to how he could determine this. He replied that, according to the promise made in the Holy Qur'an, when a Muslim remembers Allah, He too remembers him, and thus everyone can know for himself that as soon as he turns to Allah and remembers Him, Allah too remembers him. Let us add that Verse 152 means to say that if men "remember" Allah by obeying His commandments, He will "remember" them by granting His pardon and His rewards. The commentator Said ibn Jubayr has, in fact, interpreted the Dhikr ذکر or "Remembrance" of Allah as obedience and submission to Him. He says: فمن لم یطعہ لم یذکرہ وان کثر صلاتہ وتسبیحہ "He who has not obeyed Him has not remembered Him, even though he has kept himself externally busy in offering (nafl نفل : supererogatory) prayers and reciting His praises." This explanation is fully supported by a hadith cited by Al-Qurtubi on the authority of "Ahkam al-Qur'an احکام القرآن " by Ibn Khuwayz Mandadh. The Holy Prophet ﷺ has said that one who has been obeying Allah – that is, following the injunctions with regard to the lawful (Halal حلال ) and the unlawful (Haram حرام ) - has truly been remembering Allah, in spite of being deficient in (nafl نفل : supererogatory) prayers and fasting, while one who has been disobeying divine commandments has, in fact, forgotten Allah, in spite of devoting long hours to nafl نفل prayers, fasting and recitation of His praises. The great Sufi Master Dhu al-Nun al-Misri has said that the man who remembers Allah in the full sense of the term forgets everything else, and that, in reward of such a total absorption, Allah Himself takes care of all his concerns, and grants him something far more valuable for everything he loses. Similarly, the blessed Companion Mu` adh ؓ has remarked that in so far as winning absolution from divine wrath is concerned, no good deed on the part of man can compare with Dhikr ذکر . And in a hadith reported by the blessed Companion Abu Hurayrah ؓ ، Allah Himself says that so long as the servant keeps remembering Him and his lips keep moving in Dhikr ذکر ، Allah is with him (for a more elaborate discussion of the subject, see Dhikrulldh ذکراللہ by the author).

As we have already seen, the enemies of Islam have been objecting to the change in the ‘orientation of Qiblah قبلہ ، wishing to produce in the minds of the people doubts about the validity of Islam as a religion. The earlier verses have, in answering these objections, removed all such misgivings. But some of the enemies simply ignored the answers, and still persisted in their hostility. This situation was likely to dishearten the Muslims. So, the present verse nullifies such a re-action on the part of the Muslims by prescribing the method of overcoming one's grief or anxiety. The patience and the Salah نماز : And the method consists in turning to patience and prayers; for Allah assures us here that He is with those who are patient. This promise applies, above all, to those who offer prayers, whether fard فرض (obligatory) or nafl (supererogatory), for prayers are the supreme form of worship. In explaining the context, we have mentioned a specific situation, but the verse, in fact, identifies the elixir for all the ills which are a necessary part of human existence, whether they be wants and needs, or anxiety and suffering. The Holy Qur'an itself has indicated; in a very subtle and eloquent way, the general efficacy of this remedy by employing a generalizing expression - "seek help" - without specifying the situation in which help is to be sought. (Mazhari) Now, the two ingredients of this remedy are patience and prayers. The Arabic term Sabr (صبر) is much more comprehensive than its usual English equivalent, "patience". Lexically, the word "Sabr" signifies "restraining oneself, or keeping oneself under control." In the terminology of the Holy Qur'an and the Hadith, Sabr صبر has three modes: (1) Restraining oneself from what the Shari'ah has declared to be illegal or impermissible (Haram حرام). (2) Forcing oneself to be regular in the observance of the different forms of worship and to be steadfast in obeying the commandments of Allah and the Holy Prophet ﷺ . (3) To endure all kinds of trouble and pain - in other words, to understand clearly and to believe that it is the will of Allah to make one suffer, and to hope that one shall receive a reward for this suffering. With regard to this last point, let us add that, on the authority of the commentator Said Ibn Jubayr, Ibn Kathir says that if one cannot help uttering a word of grief or a sigh of pain, it does not go against Sabr صبر ، or nullify it. People generally identify Sabr صبر with the third mode alone, and ignore the first two which are, indeed, more basic and essential. We cannot insist too much on the fact that all the three are equally obligatory, and that every Muslim is required to practice all the three forms of Sabr صبر . In the terminology of Holy Qur'an and the Hadith, Al-Sabirun is the title of those who are steadfast in observing all the three forms with equal rigour. According to the Hadith, people will hear a call on the Day of Judgment, "Where are the Sabirun صابرون ?"; at this, those who had been constant in observing the three forms of Sabr صبر will stand up, and they will be allowed to enter Paradise without having to present the account of their deeds. In citing this hadith, Ibn Kathir points out that it is corroborated by the Holy Qur'an itself: إِنَّمَا يُوَفَّى الصَّابِرُ‌ونَ أَجْرَ‌هُم بِغَيْرِ‌ حِسَابٍ : "The Sabirun صابرون shall certainly receive their full reward without reckoning." (39:10) As for the second ingredient of the prescription, it is Salah نماز (Prayer). Although Sabr صبر ، as we have just explained it, covers the different forms of worship, including prayers, all of them being its branches. Salah نماز ، however, has been mentioned separately, because that is the most perfect model of Sabr صبر . For, in the state of Salah نماز ; one binds oneself to obedience and worship, and restrains oneself not only from all that is sinful or reprehensible but even from what is otherwise permissible - e.g., from eating or drinking or talking. Hence, Salah نماز is a visible demonstration of Sabr صبر which signifies keeping oneself under control in shunning everything sinful and in submitting oneself totally to obedience. A remedy to all problems Moreover, Salah نماز does possess a special efficacy in releasing man from all kinds of trouble and pain, and in fulfilling all his needs. We may not be able to explain it rationally, but the efficacy is present as a characteristic quality in the very nature of prayers - as happens in the case of certain medicines too. But the efficacy shows itself only when prayers are offered in the proper way and according to the physical and spiritual etiquette laid down by the Shari` ah. If our prayers seem to be fruitless, it is because we have been deficient in observing this etiquette, and have not turned to Allah in single-minded devotion and total submission. Let us not forget that, according to the Hadith, whenever the Holy Prophet $ was faced with a grave problem of any kind, he always hastened to offer nail prayers, and through the barakah بر کہ (benediction) of the prayers Allah came to his aid and resolved the problem satisfactorily. As to how Sabr صبر can save man from all kinds of trouble and pain and resolve all his difficulties, the secret has been revealed in the last phrase of this verse - "Surely, Allah is with those who are patient." That is to say, as a reward for Sabr صبر man receives the honour of the "company" of Allah. And it goes without saying that when the might of the Lord of the Worlds Himself has come to the aid of a man, what pain or trouble can overcome him, and who can prevent his concerns from prospering?

Earlier, alluding to an unpleasant incident, patience and steadfastness were inculcated and the excellence of Sabirun (the patient people) was mentioned. The next verses mention, in some detail, other unpleasant incidents and culminate in describing the excellence of pa-tience, and perseverance in it. Those verses give preference to the theme of war with infidels over other themes for two reasons: first, the sacrifice of life is a grand sacrifice; whoever steadfastly endures this loss will, undoubtedly, learn to be patient on losses of lesser magnitude; second, it is relevant to the situation too, as the objectionist on the orientation of Ka'bah کعبہ had been facing it. Injunctions and related considerations: According to Islamic traditions the dead person is given some kind of a "new life" in Barzakh44 برزخ which develops in him a sensitivity to punishment and reward. Regardless of whether one is a believer or disbeliever, virtuous or vicious, this taste of life-in-Barzakh برزخ is given to everybody. However, the life there has many categories: one of them is for the general lot, while some others are for prophets and virtuous people. The later ones vary in their degree of excellence. A number of scholars have collected relevant facts to assert their points of views, about the life-in-Barzakh برزخ . All of them cannot be summed up here. I will restrict myself here, to presenting the considered and the very balanced view of my worthy teacher Maulana Ashraf ` Ali (رح) of Than a Bhawan; incidentally, his view is in close conformity with the teachings of the Holy Qur'an, as also, those of the Holy Prophet ﷺ . 44. An intermediary stage which begins with death and stretches till the Doomsday. The Martyrs are not dead One who dies in the cause of Allah is a Shahid (Martyr) and, although, it is correct and even allowed to call him "dead", yet we are forbidden to regard their death like ordinary deaths. For, though, life in Barzakh برزخ is given to' everybody which gives him perception of reward and punishment but Shahid شھید in the Barzakh برزخ life is qualitatively different from the one given to other persons. The distinction a Shahid شھید has over others in Barzakh برزخ is that in effect, for the fullness and sensitivity of life, his perception is, keener and deeper. As, for instance, the life sensation is there in finger tips, as also, it is there in heels, but the sensitivity of finger tips is sharper than that of heels. The effect of the finer life-quality of a Shahid شھید in Barzakh برزخ reaches his physical body as well; whereas ordinarily bodies remain unaffected. Consequently, a Shahid's body does not waste away, decay or mingle with dust. On the contrary it retains it freshness and a semblance of being alive too. This is duly endorsed by Ahadith and observations. They are, therefore, reported as living and we are forbidden to call them dead. However, for all worldly purposes they are treated at par with the dead; their properties are divided and their wives can remarry. Lives of prophets in Barzakh برزخ have a further distinction. Their life-sensitivity is even finer and keener than that of Shahids. In Barzakh برزخ their bodies retain their life-quality and, in some ways, its manifestation is extended to this life as well; their properties are not divided and their wives cannot again enter into wedlock. The most strong in the retention of this life-quality are the prophets, then are the Shahids شُهَدَا ، then the ordinary human beings. Nevertheless, according to some ahadith some of the men of Allah and virtuous people share this excellence with Shahids شُهَدَا . Apparently, those who die while exercising stringent discipline against their selves (مجاھدہ النفس) are ranked with Shahids شُهَدَا . In other words, though this verse specifically refers to Shahids شُهَدَا as against the broad humanity, it does not, for that reason, exclude the virtuous and the truthful. If, therefore, the body of a Shahid returns to dust, as bodies of ordinary persons, generally do, the chances are that the person did not, perhaps,, die in the cause of Allah which is the only criterion of martyrdom (Shahadah شهَادہ). In case a person who fulfilled all the prerequisites of martyrdom and, beyond, any doubt, died in the cause of Allah and whose martyrdom (Shahadah شهَادہ) has been unmistakably and repeatedly demonstrated, his body must not, on the authority of a hadith , return to dust. If, in spite of Ahadith, the body mingles with earth (what, in fact, has made the author of Ruh al-Ma` ani doubt is how can, in spite of Ahadith, the body of a Shahid شھید be eaten away by earth) the explanation would be that according to Hadith the body would not return to dust; however, it does not deny the process of decay and decomposition caused by other factors like geo-chemical reaction, body enzymes, and bacteria. Neither does it confute the verse. Other compound objects like weapons, medicines, food, and the commingling of various natural elements like water, fire and air had, undoubtedly, their effects on the bodies of prophets in this world and, obviously, the life-quality of Shahid شھید in Barzakh برزخ is not superior to that of the prophets in this world; if, therefore, the other ingredients register their impact on the bodies of Shahids شُهَدَا in برزخ Barzakh it does not confute, in any sense, the meanings of Ahadith which say the Shahids' bodies are sacred to earth. Another answer is that the distinction which Shahids have over others is apparent from the fact that, comparatively, their bodies remain unspoiled for a pretty long time, although the likelihood of their disintegration in the longer run does exist. The aim of the hadith should, therefore, be explained by saying that the immunity from decay for such a long time is, in itself, an excess on the customary behaviour of dead bodies. Eternal preservation, and preservation for a considerable long time, both are an "excess on the customary behaviour" of dead bodies. By the words, " لَّا تَشْعُرُ‌ونَ ": "you perceive not", the Holy Qur'an asserts the fact that the life in Barzakh برزخ transcends all sensory perceptions.

Earlier, alluding to an unpleasant incident, patience and steadfastness were inculcated and the excellence of Sabirun (the patient people) was mentioned. The next verses mention, in some detail, other unpleasant incidents and culminate in describing the excellence of pa-tience, and perseverance in it. Those verses give preference to the theme of war with infidels over other themes for two reasons: first, the sacrifice of life is a grand sacrifice; whoever steadfastly endures this loss will, undoubtedly, learn to be patient on losses of lesser magnitude; second, it is relevant to the situation too, as the objectionist on the orientation of Ka'bah کعبہ had been facing it. Injunctions and related considerations: According to Islamic traditions the dead person is given some kind of a "new life" in Barzakh44 برزخ which develops in him a sensitivity to punishment and reward. Regardless of whether one is a believer or disbeliever, virtuous or vicious, this taste of life-in-Barzakh برزخ is given to everybody. However, the life there has many categories: one of them is for the general lot, while some others are for prophets and virtuous people. The later ones vary in their degree of excellence. A number of scholars have collected relevant facts to assert their points of views, about the life-in-Barzakh برزخ . All of them cannot be summed up here. I will restrict myself here, to presenting the considered and the very balanced view of my worthy teacher Maulana Ashraf ` Ali (رح) of Than a Bhawan; incidentally, his view is in close conformity with the teachings of the Holy Qur'an, as also, those of the Holy Prophet ﷺ . 44. An intermediary stage which begins with death and stretches till the Doomsday. The Martyrs are not dead One who dies in the cause of Allah is a Shahid (Martyr) and, although, it is correct and even allowed to call him "dead", yet we are forbidden to regard their death like ordinary deaths. For, though, life in Barzakh برزخ is given to' everybody which gives him perception of reward and punishment but Shahid شھید in the Barzakh برزخ life is qualitatively different from the one given to other persons. The distinction a Shahid شھید has over others in Barzakh برزخ is that in effect, for the fullness and sensitivity of life, his perception is, keener and deeper. As, for instance, the life sensation is there in finger tips, as also, it is there in heels, but the sensitivity of finger tips is sharper than that of heels. The effect of the finer life-quality of a Shahid شھید in Barzakh برزخ reaches his physical body as well; whereas ordinarily bodies remain unaffected. Consequently, a Shahid's body does not waste away, decay or mingle with dust. On the contrary it retains it freshness and a semblance of being alive too. This is duly endorsed by Ahadith and observations. They are, therefore, reported as living and we are forbidden to call them dead. However, for all worldly purposes they are treated at par with the dead; their properties are divided and their wives can remarry. Lives of prophets in Barzakh برزخ have a further distinction. Their life-sensitivity is even finer and keener than that of Shahids. In Barzakh برزخ their bodies retain their life-quality and, in some ways, its manifestation is extended to this life as well; their properties are not divided and their wives cannot again enter into wedlock. The most strong in the retention of this life-quality are the prophets, then are the Shahids شُهَدَا ، then the ordinary human beings. Nevertheless, according to some ahadith some of the men of Allah and virtuous people share this excellence with Shahids شُهَدَا . Apparently, those who die while exercising stringent discipline against their selves (مجاھدہ النفس) are ranked with Shahids شُهَدَا . In other words, though this verse specifically refers to Shahids شُهَدَا as against the broad humanity, it does not, for that reason, exclude the virtuous and the truthful. If, therefore, the body of a Shahid returns to dust, as bodies of ordinary persons, generally do, the chances are that the person did not, perhaps,, die in the cause of Allah which is the only criterion of martyrdom (Shahadah شهَادہ). In case a person who fulfilled all the prerequisites of martyrdom and, beyond, any doubt, died in the cause of Allah and whose martyrdom (Shahadah شهَادہ) has been unmistakably and repeatedly demonstrated, his body must not, on the authority of a hadith , return to dust. If, in spite of Ahadith, the body mingles with earth (what, in fact, has made the author of Ruh al-Ma` ani doubt is how can, in spite of Ahadith, the body of a Shahid شھید be eaten away by earth) the explanation would be that according to Hadith the body would not return to dust; however, it does not deny the process of decay and decomposition caused by other factors like geo-chemical reaction, body enzymes, and bacteria. Neither does it confute the verse. Other compound objects like weapons, medicines, food, and the commingling of various natural elements like water, fire and air had, undoubtedly, their effects on the bodies of prophets in this world and, obviously, the life-quality of Shahid شھید in Barzakh برزخ is not superior to that of the prophets in this world; if, therefore, the other ingredients register their impact on the bodies of Shahids شُهَدَا in برزخ Barzakh it does not confute, in any sense, the meanings of Ahadith which say the Shahids' bodies are sacred to earth. Another answer is that the distinction which Shahids have over others is apparent from the fact that, comparatively, their bodies remain unspoiled for a pretty long time, although the likelihood of their disintegration in the longer run does exist. The aim of the hadith should, therefore, be explained by saying that the immunity from decay for such a long time is, in itself, an excess on the customary behaviour of dead bodies. Eternal preservation, and preservation for a considerable long time, both are an "excess on the customary behaviour" of dead bodies. By the words, " لَّا تَشْعُرُ‌ونَ ": "you perceive not", the Holy Qur'an asserts the fact that the life in Barzakh برزخ transcends all sensory perceptions.

Patience in hardship: The way to make it easy The nature and the significance of the severe test man is put to by Allah has been thoroughly discussed while explaining the verse’ وَإِذِ ابْتَلَىٰ إِبْرَ‌اهِيمَ رَ‌بُّهُ 'And when his Lord put Ibrahim to a test'. Whatever their magnitude, accidents are unnerving. But a prior knowledge of such accidents makes it easier to bear them and be patient about them. Since the entire Ummah is addressed here, the Ummah should realize that the world is a place of hardships and labour; it is a place of ordeal. It will not, therefore, amount to impatience if one does regard such accidents as either strange or a remote chance. And as the Ummah, generally, displays the spirit of patience in all its deeds, the reward of Mercy is common to everyone who strives to be patient. But as the quality and degree of patience varies from person to person, everyone will be rewarded individually according to and commensurate with his quality of patience. A formula of peace in hardship That the patient people used to recite: إِنَّا لِلَّـهِ وَإِنَّا إِلَيْهِ رَ‌اجِعُونَ : 'We belong to Allah and to Him we are to return' is, in fact, an inculcation of the principle of virtue. The suggestion is that this is what the patient people should say as it brings excellent reward, relieves from the burden of sorrow and suffering and consoles effectively the grieved heart.

Patience in hardship: The way to make it easy The nature and the significance of the severe test man is put to by Allah has been thoroughly discussed while explaining the verse’ وَإِذِ ابْتَلَىٰ إِبْرَ‌اهِيمَ رَ‌بُّهُ 'And when his Lord put Ibrahim to a test'. Whatever their magnitude, accidents are unnerving. But a prior knowledge of such accidents makes it easier to bear them and be patient about them. Since the entire Ummah is addressed here, the Ummah should realize that the world is a place of hardships and labour; it is a place of ordeal. It will not, therefore, amount to impatience if one does regard such accidents as either strange or a remote chance. And as the Ummah, generally, displays the spirit of patience in all its deeds, the reward of Mercy is common to everyone who strives to be patient. But as the quality and degree of patience varies from person to person, everyone will be rewarded individually according to and commensurate with his quality of patience. A formula of peace in hardship That the patient people used to recite: إِنَّا لِلَّـهِ وَإِنَّا إِلَيْهِ رَ‌اجِعُونَ : 'We belong to Allah and to Him we are to return' is, in fact, an inculcation of the principle of virtue. The suggestion is that this is what the patient people should say as it brings excellent reward, relieves from the burden of sorrow and suffering and consoles effectively the grieved heart.

The subject of the Ka'bah کعبہ ، as we would do well to recollect, started all the way back from Verse 124 : 'And when his Lord put Ibrahim to a test', later opening with the statement that the Ka'bah کعبہ was made a place for repeated convergence, a sanctuary, and a centre of divine worship as ordained (Verse 125). Then came the famous prayer of Sayyidna Ibrahim (علیہ السلام) in which he requested Allah Almighty that he and his people be initiated into the correct method of performing the manasik مناسک ، the required rites, or acts of worship (126 - 129); which is inclusive of the Hajj and ` Umrah. We can now see that the centrality of the House of Allah بیت اللہ as the place of worship has been expressed manifestly when it was declared to be the Qiblah قبلہ ، the direction and orientation of all Salah نمازیں ، no matter where it is performed; while at the same time, the importance of the House of Allah was established when it was made the objective in the performance of the Hajj and ` Umrah. The present verse opens with the solemn declaration that the two hills, Safa صفاء and Marwah مروہ adjoining the Ka'bah کعبہ in Makkah, are tangible signs from Allah. Pilgrims walk briskly between them after they have made the tawaf طواف of the Holy Ka'bah کعبہ . This act of walking briskly or "making rounds" between them, as the Qur'an elects to call it, is known as Sayee سعی a practice which was there even in the Jahiliyyah جاھلیہ and which made Muslims doubt its propriety. It is exactly this doubt Allah Almighty aims to remove here. So, there it was in the earlier treatment of the subject that Allah Almighty eliminated the objection raised by disbelievers against the instituting of the Ka'bah کعبہ as the Qiblah قبلہ of Muslim Salah نماز and here, through a correlated assertion, the doubt of Muslims themselves as to the propriety of Say in the Hajj and ` Umrah, of which the Ka'bah کعبہ is the desired hub, has been removed. That the text is closely bound together by this reason is not difficult to see. Some terms and their meanings 1. The term, Sha a'ir in شعایر اللہ is the plural form of Sha` irah شعیرہ which means a sign, mark or token. So, the شعأیر اللہ "Sha` a'ir of Allah" signify what He has determined to be the marks of Islamic faith. 2. Lexically, Hajj means to aim, to intend; while, in the terminology of the Qur'an and Hadith, the act of deciding to go solely on a pilgrimage of the House of Allah بیت اللہ and performing required rites while there, is called the Hajj. 3. Lexically, ` Umrah means ziyarah زیارہ or pilgrimage; while, in the terminology of the Shari'ah, the visit to al-Masjid al-Haram and the doing of tawaf طواف and Sayee سعی there is called ` Umrah. Sayee سعی between Safa and Marwah is Obligatory Details of the method that governs the performance of the Hajj, ` Umrah and Sayee سعی are easily available in books of Fiqh فقہ . It may be noted that Sayee سعی is a mustahabb (desirable or commendable) practice of the Holy Prophet ﷺ according to Imam Ahmad (رح) ; a fard فرض (absolute obligation) according to Imams Malik and Shafi` i رحمۃ اللہ علیہما ; and a wajib واجب (necessity) according to Imam Abu Hanifah (رح) ، which means, one who abandons it would have to slaughter a goat in compensation. It is advisable to guard against a possible doubt that may arise while reading the words used in the verse under study. One may think that the Qur'an simply says that making Sayee سعی between Safa صفاء and Marwah مروہ is 'no sin'; at the most, it proves that it is one of the many 'allowed' acts. This approach can be corrected by looking at the leading expression لاجُناحَ :'no sin' which has been used here in relation to a question. The question related to all those idols sitting on top of the Safa صفاء and Marwah مروہ hills and it was to show their devotion to them that the people of the Jahiliyyah جاھلیہ used to do say between Safa صفاء and Marwah مروہ ، and in which case, this practice should be haram حرام (forbidden). It is in answer to this doubt that it was declared, "there is no sin" in it. This being the real and authentic Abrahamic Tradition, there is no reason why it should be considered tainted with 'sin'? The 'malpractice' of a pagan band of people in this intervening period does not end up making a 'sin' of what is 'good' in the sight of Allah. The use of the expression 'no sin', therefore, does not go against its being wajib واجب or necessary.

As part of the debated issue of Qiblah قبلہ several verses earlier, the text has pointed out how the people of the Book went about concealing the truth concerning the prophethood of the Holy Prophet for whom the Ka'bah کعبہ was appointed as the Qiblah قبلہ . It was Verse 146, where it was said: الَّذِينَ آتَيْنَاهُمُ الْكِتَابَ يَعْرِ‌فُونَهُ كَمَا يَعْرِ‌فُونَ أَبْنَاءَهُمْ ۖ وَإِنَّ فَرِ‌يقًا مِّنْهُمْ لَيَكْتُمُونَ الْحَقَّ وَهُمْ يَعْلَمُونَ ﴿146﴾ "Those whom We have given the Book recognize him (The Holy Prophet) as they recognize their own sons. And, in fact, a group of them does conceal the truth while they know." Now the text, in order to conclude the subject, warns those who not only conceal the truth but, going further ahead in obstinacy, persist in their effort. The ultimate fate of this senseless persistence being all too obvious, Allah Almighty still extends the promise of His mercy and forgiveness to those who repent and reflect on what they did, retrace their steps and correct their negative attitude towards divine truth and, in order to demonstrate their positive stand, come forward and state the truth clearly and publicly. The natural consequence of such a reformed attitude would be that they will enter the fold of Islam believing in Allah and His prophet, which is the touchstone for any disbeliever's honest change of heart. The duty of spreading the Islamic Knowledge Verse 159 above stated that concealing from people clear signs and guidance revealed by Allah Almighty is a terrible crime which earns the curse of Allah Almighty Himself, as well as that of His entire creation. Let us point out to some injunctions that issue forth from this verse: 1. It is forbidden to conceal knowledge which must be disclosed and disseminated widely. The Holy Prophet ﷺ said: من سٔل عن علم یعلمہ فکتمہ الجمہ اللہ یوم القیامہ بلجام من النار "Anyone who is asked about something (of religion) which he knows would, in the event that he conceals it, be brought forth by Allah on the Doomsday harnessed with a rein of fire." (Narrated by Abu Hurayrah and ` Amr ibn al-'As and reported by Ibn Majah - Qurtubi) According to the fuqaha' فقہاء (Muslim jurists), this warning applies to a person who is the only one available in a given situation. If there are other knowledgeable persons present, he has the option of suggesting that the issue may be discussed with an ` alim who knows. (Qurtubi and Jassas) 2. Another very important rule that emerges from here is that one who himself does not possess the sound knowledge of religious injunctions and rulings should not try to explain them. 3. The third rule we find out is that answers to religious questions which are intricate, deeply involved and way beyond the comprehension level of common people should not be offered before them lest they fall a prey to some misunderstanding. This will not be considered as 'concealment of knowledge' since what is not allowed is the concealment of clear guidance given in the Qur'an and Sunnah which it is rather necessary to disclose and disseminate widely. The expression مِنَ الْبَيِّنَاتِ وَالْهُدَى of clear signs and guidance" in this verse releases a strong suggestion to this effect. It was about such questions that the blessed Companion ` Abdullah ibn Masud ؓ had said: 'If you recite ahadith which people do not understand fully, you will be throwing them into a nest of discord.' (Qurtubi) As reported in Sahih al-Bukhari, Sayyidna ` Ali ؓ has said: 'Disclose to the common people only that much of knowledge as they have the capacity to understand. Do you want them to deny Allah and His Messenger ﷺ ?' For, anything beyond their comprehension would breed doubts in their minds and the possibility is there that they may refuse to accept it. This leads us to the rule that it is the responsibility of an alim عالِم ، a religious scholar or a guide, to talk to people after he has assessed their ability to receive what is to be communicated. Such questions should not be brought up before a person who is likely to fall in error or misunderstanding. It is for this reason that Muslim jurists, while discussing such questions in writing, conclude with a standard warning tag of ھذا مما یعرف ولا یعرف which means that the question under discussion is sensitive, therefore, a scholar should limit it to his comprehension and refrain from broadcasting it in public. It is reported that the Holy Prophet ﷺ has said: لا تمنعوا الحکمۃ اھلھا فتظلموھم ولاتضعوھافی غیر اھلھا فتظلموھا "Do not withhold wisdom from those who deserve it, for if you do so, you will be unjust to them; and do not place it before those who do not deserve it, for if you do so, you will be unjust to it." In view of these details, Imam al-Qurtubi (رح) has deduced the ruling that an infidel who appears in polemics against Muslims - or a heresiarch (mubtadi' مبتدی) who, being a combination of the heretic and the schismatic, invites people to his misleading ideas - should not be initiated into the Islamic disciplines unless it is absolutely ascertained that such teaching would correct his thinking. Similarly, the executive authority of a time should not be given rulings which they could misuse to unleash a reign of terror over their citizens. Similarly again, the 'leaves' (rukhsah رُخصہ ) given in religious injunctions and the stratagems (hilah, plural: hiyal) should not be brought forth in public unnecessarily lest people get used to being 'excuse-seekers' while acting upon the injunctions of the faith. (Qurtubi) The Hadith is equal to the Qur'an by implication The blessed Companion Abu Hurayrah ؓ ، as reported in the Sahih of Al-Bukhari, has said: 'If this verse of the Qur'an was not there, I would have not related a single hadith before you.' The verse referred to here is the present verse which carries the warning of curse on concealment of knowledge. Some other Companions, may Allah be pleased with them, have been reported to have used similar words while narrating Hadith. These narrations tell us that in the view of the blessed Companions, the Hadith of the Holy Prophet ﷺ enjoys some privileges mentioned in relation to the Qur'an. It may be noted that the verse in question warns those who may conceal what has been revealed in the Holy Qur'an; it does not mention Hadith as such. But, the blessed Companions ruled that the Hadith of the Holy Prophet ﷺ was covered under this reference to the Qur'an and that is why they thought that concealing the Hadith would also put them under this warning. The evil consequences of some sins The exact words of the Holy Qur'an in وَيَلْعَنُهُمُ اللَّاعِنُونَ :'And curse them those who curse', as obvious, have not identified those who do that. Commentators Mujahid and ` Ikrimah have said that this absence of specification suggests that they are cursed by everything and every living being, so much so, that all animals and insects join in since their misdeeds hurt all created life forms. This is supported by a hadith from the blessed Companion, Bard' ibn ` Azib where the Holy Prophet ﷺ has been reported to have said that the word al-la` inun اللَّاعِنُون ('those who curse' ) refers to all animal life that moves on the earth. (Qurtubi quoting Ibn Majah)

As part of the debated issue of Qiblah قبلہ several verses earlier, the text has pointed out how the people of the Book went about concealing the truth concerning the prophethood of the Holy Prophet for whom the Ka'bah کعبہ was appointed as the Qiblah قبلہ . It was Verse 146, where it was said: الَّذِينَ آتَيْنَاهُمُ الْكِتَابَ يَعْرِ‌فُونَهُ كَمَا يَعْرِ‌فُونَ أَبْنَاءَهُمْ ۖ وَإِنَّ فَرِ‌يقًا مِّنْهُمْ لَيَكْتُمُونَ الْحَقَّ وَهُمْ يَعْلَمُونَ ﴿146﴾ "Those whom We have given the Book recognize him (The Holy Prophet) as they recognize their own sons. And, in fact, a group of them does conceal the truth while they know." Now the text, in order to conclude the subject, warns those who not only conceal the truth but, going further ahead in obstinacy, persist in their effort. The ultimate fate of this senseless persistence being all too obvious, Allah Almighty still extends the promise of His mercy and forgiveness to those who repent and reflect on what they did, retrace their steps and correct their negative attitude towards divine truth and, in order to demonstrate their positive stand, come forward and state the truth clearly and publicly. The natural consequence of such a reformed attitude would be that they will enter the fold of Islam believing in Allah and His prophet, which is the touchstone for any disbeliever's honest change of heart. The duty of spreading the Islamic Knowledge Verse 159 above stated that concealing from people clear signs and guidance revealed by Allah Almighty is a terrible crime which earns the curse of Allah Almighty Himself, as well as that of His entire creation. Let us point out to some injunctions that issue forth from this verse: 1. It is forbidden to conceal knowledge which must be disclosed and disseminated widely. The Holy Prophet ﷺ said: من سٔل عن علم یعلمہ فکتمہ الجمہ اللہ یوم القیامہ بلجام من النار "Anyone who is asked about something (of religion) which he knows would, in the event that he conceals it, be brought forth by Allah on the Doomsday harnessed with a rein of fire." (Narrated by Abu Hurayrah and ` Amr ibn al-'As and reported by Ibn Majah - Qurtubi) According to the fuqaha' فقہاء (Muslim jurists), this warning applies to a person who is the only one available in a given situation. If there are other knowledgeable persons present, he has the option of suggesting that the issue may be discussed with an ` alim who knows. (Qurtubi and Jassas) 2. Another very important rule that emerges from here is that one who himself does not possess the sound knowledge of religious injunctions and rulings should not try to explain them. 3. The third rule we find out is that answers to religious questions which are intricate, deeply involved and way beyond the comprehension level of common people should not be offered before them lest they fall a prey to some misunderstanding. This will not be considered as 'concealment of knowledge' since what is not allowed is the concealment of clear guidance given in the Qur'an and Sunnah which it is rather necessary to disclose and disseminate widely. The expression مِنَ الْبَيِّنَاتِ وَالْهُدَى of clear signs and guidance" in this verse releases a strong suggestion to this effect. It was about such questions that the blessed Companion ` Abdullah ibn Masud ؓ had said: 'If you recite ahadith which people do not understand fully, you will be throwing them into a nest of discord.' (Qurtubi) As reported in Sahih al-Bukhari, Sayyidna ` Ali ؓ has said: 'Disclose to the common people only that much of knowledge as they have the capacity to understand. Do you want them to deny Allah and His Messenger ﷺ ?' For, anything beyond their comprehension would breed doubts in their minds and the possibility is there that they may refuse to accept it. This leads us to the rule that it is the responsibility of an alim عالِم ، a religious scholar or a guide, to talk to people after he has assessed their ability to receive what is to be communicated. Such questions should not be brought up before a person who is likely to fall in error or misunderstanding. It is for this reason that Muslim jurists, while discussing such questions in writing, conclude with a standard warning tag of ھذا مما یعرف ولا یعرف which means that the question under discussion is sensitive, therefore, a scholar should limit it to his comprehension and refrain from broadcasting it in public. It is reported that the Holy Prophet ﷺ has said: لا تمنعوا الحکمۃ اھلھا فتظلموھم ولاتضعوھافی غیر اھلھا فتظلموھا "Do not withhold wisdom from those who deserve it, for if you do so, you will be unjust to them; and do not place it before those who do not deserve it, for if you do so, you will be unjust to it." In view of these details, Imam al-Qurtubi (رح) has deduced the ruling that an infidel who appears in polemics against Muslims - or a heresiarch (mubtadi' مبتدی) who, being a combination of the heretic and the schismatic, invites people to his misleading ideas - should not be initiated into the Islamic disciplines unless it is absolutely ascertained that such teaching would correct his thinking. Similarly, the executive authority of a time should not be given rulings which they could misuse to unleash a reign of terror over their citizens. Similarly again, the 'leaves' (rukhsah رُخصہ ) given in religious injunctions and the stratagems (hilah, plural: hiyal) should not be brought forth in public unnecessarily lest people get used to being 'excuse-seekers' while acting upon the injunctions of the faith. (Qurtubi) The Hadith is equal to the Qur'an by implication The blessed Companion Abu Hurayrah ؓ ، as reported in the Sahih of Al-Bukhari, has said: 'If this verse of the Qur'an was not there, I would have not related a single hadith before you.' The verse referred to here is the present verse which carries the warning of curse on concealment of knowledge. Some other Companions, may Allah be pleased with them, have been reported to have used similar words while narrating Hadith. These narrations tell us that in the view of the blessed Companions, the Hadith of the Holy Prophet ﷺ enjoys some privileges mentioned in relation to the Qur'an. It may be noted that the verse in question warns those who may conceal what has been revealed in the Holy Qur'an; it does not mention Hadith as such. But, the blessed Companions ruled that the Hadith of the Holy Prophet ﷺ was covered under this reference to the Qur'an and that is why they thought that concealing the Hadith would also put them under this warning. The evil consequences of some sins The exact words of the Holy Qur'an in وَيَلْعَنُهُمُ اللَّاعِنُونَ :'And curse them those who curse', as obvious, have not identified those who do that. Commentators Mujahid and ` Ikrimah have said that this absence of specification suggests that they are cursed by everything and every living being, so much so, that all animals and insects join in since their misdeeds hurt all created life forms. This is supported by a hadith from the blessed Companion, Bard' ibn ` Azib where the Holy Prophet ﷺ has been reported to have said that the word al-la` inun اللَّاعِنُون ('those who curse' ) refers to all animal life that moves on the earth. (Qurtubi quoting Ibn Majah)

Cursing an individual is not permissible From the words of the text :'and died while they were disbelievers', commentators al-Jassas, al-Qurtubi and some others have formulated the view that it is not permissible to curse an infidel about whom it is not certain that he is to die in a state of infidelity. Now that we have no way of finding out for sure that a person will die in a given state, we are bound to obey the ruling that it is not permissible to curse an infidel by name. That the Holy Prophet ﷺ has. Cursed some infidels by name is explained by the fact that their death in a state of infidelity was divinely revealed to him. As far as the infidels as a whole are concerned, including the tyrants and the unjust, it is technically correct, if cursed without any particularization. From this we also find out that the act of cursing is so grave that it has been disallowed even if the target be an infidel about whom it is not certain that he is going to die as one. If so, how can this become permissible if the target is a Muslim or, even if it is directed at an animal? Common people in Muslim societies seem to neglect this aspect of standard Muslim behaviour, specially our Muslim sisters who are prone to use very hard language about those they do not like among the circle of their acquaintances. It should be clearly understood that the act of cursing becomes effective not only by using the word, 'curse' but all synonyms used are subject to the same ruling. The word 'La` nah لعنہ ' (curse) means: to remove away from the mercy of Allah Almighty'. Therefore, all damnatory swearing and cursing, whatever the shade, circumstance or language, falls under the purview of "la` nah" لعنہ or 'curse'.

Cursing an individual is not permissible From the words of the text :'and died while they were disbelievers', commentators al-Jassas, al-Qurtubi and some others have formulated the view that it is not permissible to curse an infidel about whom it is not certain that he is to die in a state of infidelity. Now that we have no way of finding out for sure that a person will die in a given state, we are bound to obey the ruling that it is not permissible to curse an infidel by name. That the Holy Prophet ﷺ has. Cursed some infidels by name is explained by the fact that their death in a state of infidelity was divinely revealed to him. As far as the infidels as a whole are concerned, including the tyrants and the unjust, it is technically correct, if cursed without any particularization. From this we also find out that the act of cursing is so grave that it has been disallowed even if the target be an infidel about whom it is not certain that he is going to die as one. If so, how can this become permissible if the target is a Muslim or, even if it is directed at an animal? Common people in Muslim societies seem to neglect this aspect of standard Muslim behaviour, specially our Muslim sisters who are prone to use very hard language about those they do not like among the circle of their acquaintances. It should be clearly understood that the act of cursing becomes effective not only by using the word, 'curse' but all synonyms used are subject to the same ruling. The word 'La` nah لعنہ ' (curse) means: to remove away from the mercy of Allah Almighty'. Therefore, all damnatory swearing and cursing, whatever the shade, circumstance or language, falls under the purview of "la` nah" لعنہ or 'curse'.

When the mushrikin مشرکین ، (the associators) of Arabia heard the verse وَإِلَـٰهُكُمْ إِلَـٰهٌ وَاحِدٌ 'And your god is one God', all against their own belief, they were puzzled thinking how could there be just one single object of worship for the whole wide world. If this was a serious claim, there has to be some proof in support. That proof has been tersely encased in the present two verses. Understanding Tauhid, the Oneness of Allah, in the wider sense: Tauhid توحید ، the cardinal principle of Muslim faith as stated in Verse 163 has been proved repeatedly and variously, therefore, we limit ourselves at this point to a summary view of the principle as follows: 1. He is One in the state of His being, that is, there exists in the universe of His creation no entity like Him. He is without any duplicate or replica and without any equal or parallel. Such unshared and pristine is His station that He alone is deserving of being called the Wahid واحد ، the One. 2. He is One in claiming the right of being worshipped, that is, in view of the nature of His Being, the comprehensiveness of His most perfect attributes and the great charisma of His creation and its nurture, all human obedience, all ` ibadah عبادہ ، all worship has to be for Him alone. 3. He is One in being free of any conceivable composition, that is, He is free of segments and fragments, units and organs, substances and elements, atoms and particles. There is just no way He can be analyzed or divided or resolved. 4. He is One in being the anterior and the posterior, that is, He existed when nothing did and He will remain existing when nothing will. Who then, if not Him, shall be called the Wahid, the only One? (Jassas)

Now in Verse 164, there is a series of signs and proofs in support of the premise that Allah Almighty is really One. Stated simply, these can be grasped by the learned and the ignorant alike. How can one bypass the wonder of the creation of the heavens and the earth? Who can ignore the constant alternation of the night and the day? The message is simple and clear. Their origination and their perpetuity is the work of His perfect power alone and that there is absolutely no being other than Him who can take that credit. Similarly, the movement of boats on the surface of waters, is a formidable indicator of Allah's power which gave water, a substance so liquid and fluid, the property of lifting on its back ships which carry tons and tons of weight all the way from the East to the West. Then, there is the movement of winds which Allah harnesses into the service of man, and in His wisdom, keeps changing their direction. These are great signs; they tell us that they were created and operated by a supreme being, the One who is All-Knowing, All-Aware, All-Wise. If the substance of water was not given a state in which the molecules move freely among themselves while remaining in one mass, a functional fluidity in other words, all this maritime activity would not be there. Even if this fluidity of sea-surface was there, help from winds was still needed in order to cover all those thousands of nautical miles across the seas of the world. The Holy Qur'an has summarized the subject by saying: إِن يَشَأْ يُسْكِنِ الرِّ‌يحَ فَيَظْلَلْنَ رَ‌وَاكِدَ عَلَىٰ ظَهْرِ‌هِ "If He wills, He can still the winds, then, ships shall remain standing on the back of the seas." (42:33) The use of the expression بِمَا يَنفَعُ النَّاسَ :'with what benefits men' points out to the countless benefits that accrue to human beings when they mutually trade their goods through sea freighters. It is interesting to keep in mind the variations these benefits take from country to country and from age to age. Then comes the marvel of water descending from the sky, drop by drop, released in a measure and manner that it hurts nothing. If it always came in the form of a flood, nothing would have survived, man or animal or things. Then, the raining of water is not all; it is the storage of water on earth that baffles the human ingenuity. Risking a simplicity, let us imagine if everyone was asked to store for personal use a quota of water for six month, how would everyone manage that? Even if such an impossible storage was somehow done, how could it be made to remain potable and hygienic all this time? Allah Almighty, in His infinite mercy, took care of this too. The Holy Qur'an says: فَأَسْكَنَّاهُ فِي الْأَرْ‌ضِ ۖ وَإِنَّا عَلَىٰ ذَهَابٍ بِهِ لَقَادِرُ‌ونَ 'Then, We made water stay in the earth, although, We were capable of letting it flow away' (23:18) But, nature did not allow this to happen. For the inhabitants of the earth, human and animal, water was stored in ponds and lakes openly. Then, the same water was lowered into the earth under the mountains and valleys in the form of an unsensed network of hidden pipelines of water accessible to everyone taking the trouble of digging and finding water. Further still, is it not that a huge sea of ice was stored out on top of the mountain ranges which is secure against spoilage and melts out slowly reaching all over the world through nature's own water lines. To sum up, it can be said that Allah's Oneness has been proved in these verses with the citation of some manifestations of His perfect power. Commentators of the Qur'an have taken up this subject in great details. Those interested may see al-Jassas, al-Qurtubi and others.

In the verses that appeared earlier, there was a strong and positive view of Allah's Oneness. Now the present verse points out to the error made by those who associate others in the divinity of Allah and think that they are caretakers of their needs. Their attachment to them reaches the proportions of love that is due for Allah alone. In direct contrast to this profile of the polytheists, there are the true believers who love Allah alone, and very staunchly too, for a poly-theist may turn away from his self-made god in the event of an impending loss, but a true believer reposes his total confidence in Allah, in gain and loss alike, retaining His love and pleasure as his lasting possession, never leaving his Creator whatever the odds against him be. Now, returning back to the 'unjust', the Holy Qur'an makes a subtle suggestion that the opportunity to correct their position was there; they could have recognized through their frustrations with their gods that they were helpless and that real power rested with Allah. But, they missed the opportunity and must now learn the hard way. So, the stern warning.

Towards the end of the preceding verse it was said that the punishment of the Hereafter is severe. How severe it will be is now the subject of the present verse. The severity of the punishment against which the polytheists have been warned will unfold itself when their leaders whom they followed will disown them as their votaries; and they both, the leaders and the led, will witness the punishment, and whatever bonds of leading and following may have existed between them would be snapped apart, very much like it happens in our mortal world when people share in the illegal but wriggle out when apprehended, so much so, that they would even go to the limit of refusing to recognize their accomplices! When the so-called 'people' of their leaders will see this turnabout of theirs, they will fret and fume but will be unable to do anything about it except wishing that there be a return for them to the mortal world where they could, at least, square up with their greasy leaders - 'May be this time they come back to us seeking our allegiance which would be a perfect time to say no to them and to distance ourselves from them and to do to them what they did to us.' But, what price are these dreams now? They are not going anywhere. They are stuck with 'their deeds which they see as remorse', and they all, the leaders and their followers, 'are not to come out from the Fire', since the punishment for shirk, the grave sin of associating partners with Allah, is to remain in the Fire for ever.

Towards the end of the preceding verse it was said that the punishment of the Hereafter is severe. How severe it will be is now the subject of the present verse. The severity of the punishment against which the polytheists have been warned will unfold itself when their leaders whom they followed will disown them as their votaries; and they both, the leaders and the led, will witness the punishment, and whatever bonds of leading and following may have existed between them would be snapped apart, very much like it happens in our mortal world when people share in the illegal but wriggle out when apprehended, so much so, that they would even go to the limit of refusing to recognize their accomplices! When the so-called 'people' of their leaders will see this turnabout of theirs, they will fret and fume but will be unable to do anything about it except wishing that there be a return for them to the mortal world where they could, at least, square up with their greasy leaders - 'May be this time they come back to us seeking our allegiance which would be a perfect time to say no to them and to distance ourselves from them and to do to them what they did to us.' But, what price are these dreams now? They are not going anywhere. They are stuck with 'their deeds which they see as remorse', and they all, the leaders and their followers, 'are not to come out from the Fire', since the punishment for shirk, the grave sin of associating partners with Allah, is to remain in the Fire for ever.

The meaning of the words The real meaning of the root word حلَّ (halla) in (halalan tayyiban: حَلَاً طَیِّباً : permissible and good) is 'to open a knot'. In that sense, what has been made halal حلال means that a knot has been opened and the restriction has been removed. The blessed Companion Sahl ibn ` Abdullah ؓ has said: "Salvation depends on three things - eating halal حلال ، fulfilling (Divine) obligations and following the Sunnah of the Holy Prophet ﷺ ." The word طَیَّب (tayyib) means 'good' as inclusive of the clean and the pure and covers the twin aspects of being lawful, permissible or halal حلال and being naturally desirable. The word حُطُوَات (khutuwat) is the plural form of خُطوہ (khutwah) which is the distance between the two feet when striding. Here the khutuwat of Shaytan means Satanic deeds. Injunctions and Rulings 1. Polytheistic practices, such as releasing animals in the name of idols or dedicating them, whether big or small, to a saint or to anyone other than Allah has been declared unlawful in Verse 173 which follows. The present Verse (168) is not negating the unlawfulness of such an animal as wrongly conceived by some people. The objective of the verse is to stress that animals which Allah has made lawful should not be made unlawful by dedicating them to idols. Let them be what they are and use them for personal benefit. Why go about making things unlawful on your own which is a grave sin, and when it is dedicated to someone other than Allah it becomes impure and what is impure is unlawful. 2. If anyone dedicates an animal to anyone other than Allah out of ignorance or carelessness and wishes to make amends, he should resolve to retreat from his misdeed and repent on what he did, in which case, the meat of that animal will become lawful for him.

The word ‘su' in السُّوءِ وَالْفَحْشَاءِ means something which bothers somebody good and reasonable. The word fahsha covers what is immodest. Some commentators have said that su' here signifies sin as such, and fahsha' فَاحْشَا signifies major sins. The expression إِنَّمَا يَأْمُرُ‌كُم (innama ya'murukum: he only orders you' ) means instigating a suggestion in the heart. The meaning can be seen more clearly in a hadith from the blessed Companion ` Abdullah ibn Masud ؓ who said that the Holy Prophet ﷺ has said: The son of Adam آدم is influenced by a suggestion from the Satan شیطان and a suggestion from the angel. The Satanic suggestion has the effect of bringing forth the expedient gains in evil deeds and thereby opening the avenues of negating the truth, while the angelic suggestion promises reward and success for good deeds and leaves the happy effect of a heart in peace at its attestation of the truth."

When these mushrik people were asked to follow the injunctions revealed by Allah through His Messenger, they refused to do so and insisted that they would rather follow the customary practice they had inherited from their fathers because, as they assumed, their models were divinely appointed to follow the way they adopted. Allah Almighty refutes this position of theirs by asking how could they go on following the ways of their fathers, under all conditions, to the exclusion of all other ways, even if their fathers did not understand much about the true faith, nor were they blessed with guidance given by their Lord? In their lack of understanding, the verse says that the disbelievers resemble the scenario of a person shouting his call to an animal who hears nothing meaningful or significant except a bland cry. The disbelievers, in that state, do hear but not what is intended to correct them, so they are called 'deaf; and they are tight-lipped when it comes to accepting the truth, therefore, they are 'dumb'; and since they do not see their benefit or loss, they are 'blind'. Consequently, with their vital senses so dulled, they seem to understand nothing. Comments on the nature of Taqlid: No doubt, this verse (170) does censure the blind following of forefathers, but at the same time, it provides a rule and its attending conditions proving that following has its permissible aspect which has been indicated in لَا يَعْقِلُونَ (even though their forefathers used to understand nothing) and لَا يَهْتَدُونَ (nor had they been on the right path). It is from here that we find out that following the forefathers mentioned in the text of the Qur'an was censured because they lacked reason and guidance. 'Guidance' or the right path signifies injunctions revealed by Allah Almighty, openly and clearly, while ` aql عقل or reason stands for imperative guidance deduced by the great armed vision of Ijtihad اجتھاد from the recognized sources of Islamic Shari'ah. Now we can see that following the model of those identified in the text cannot be permitted because they do not have a revealed set of laws from Allah, nor do they have the ability to deduce injunctions from the Word of Allah. There is a subtle hint here which we would do well to note. In case, we are satisfied that a certain ` alim عالِم has the perfect knowledge of the Qur'an and Sunnah and in the absence of a clear and direct instruction of the two sacred sources, he has the great expertise of a mujtahid مجتھد so that he can, by analogical deduction, arrive at rulings from the texts of the Qur'an and Sunnah - then. it is permissible to follow such mujtahid مجتھد alim عالِم . It does not mean that one has to obey 'his' injunctions and follow 'his person.' Instead, it means that one has to obey the injunctions of Allah alone to the total exclusion of others. But, since a direct and trustworthy knowledge of the injunctions of Allah (in all their ramifications) is not readily available to us due to our ignorance, we have to follow a mujtahid مجتھد alim عالِم in order to act in accordance with the injunctions of Allah Almighty. From what has been said above, it becomes clear that those who hasten to quote verses of this nature against following the great mujtahid imams, are themselves unaware of the proven meaning of these verses. In his comments on this verse, the great commentator, al-Qurtubi has said that the prohibition of following forefathers mentioned in this verse refers to. following them in false beliefs and deeds. The aspect of following correct beliefs and good deeds is not included here as it has been very clearly projected in Surah Yusuf in the words of Sayyidna Yusuf (علیہ السلام) : إِنِّي تَرَ‌كْتُ مِلَّةَ قَوْمٍ لَّا يُؤْمِنُونَ بِاللَّـهِ وَهُم بِالْآخِرَ‌ةِ هُمْ كَافِرُ‌ونَ ﴿37﴾ وَاتَّبَعْتُ مِلَّةَ آبَائِي إِبْرَ‌اهِيمَ وَإِسْحَاقَ وَيَعْقُوبَ I have disassociated myself from the community of people who do not believe in Allah and who deny the Hereafter and I have chosen to follow the community of my fathers, Ibrahim and Ishaq and Ya` qub. (12:37-38) This is good enough to prove that following forefathers in what is false is forbidden while it is permissible, rather desirable, in what is true. Al-Qurtubi has taken up the issue of following the mujtahid imams within his comments on this verse. He says: تعلق قوم بھذہ الآیہ فی ذمً التقلید (الی) وھذا فی الباطل صحیح اما التقلید فی الحق فاصل من اصول الدین وعصمۃ من عصم المسلمین یلجأ اِلیھا الجاھل المقصرعن درک النظر "Some people have quoted this verse to support their criticism against Taqlid (following). As far as following the false is concerned, this is correct. But, this has nothing to do with following what is true which is, in fact, a basic religious principle, and a great means of protecting the religion of Muslims in as much as one who does not have the ability to do Ijtihad must rely on 'following' in matters of religion." (volume 2, page 194)

When these mushrik people were asked to follow the injunctions revealed by Allah through His Messenger, they refused to do so and insisted that they would rather follow the customary practice they had inherited from their fathers because, as they assumed, their models were divinely appointed to follow the way they adopted. Allah Almighty refutes this position of theirs by asking how could they go on following the ways of their fathers, under all conditions, to the exclusion of all other ways, even if their fathers did not understand much about the true faith, nor were they blessed with guidance given by their Lord? In their lack of understanding, the verse says that the disbelievers resemble the scenario of a person shouting his call to an animal who hears nothing meaningful or significant except a bland cry. The disbelievers, in that state, do hear but not what is intended to correct them, so they are called 'deaf; and they are tight-lipped when it comes to accepting the truth, therefore, they are 'dumb'; and since they do not see their benefit or loss, they are 'blind'. Consequently, with their vital senses so dulled, they seem to understand nothing. Comments on the nature of Taqlid: No doubt, this verse (170) does censure the blind following of forefathers, but at the same time, it provides a rule and its attending conditions proving that following has its permissible aspect which has been indicated in لَا يَعْقِلُونَ (even though their forefathers used to understand nothing) and لَا يَهْتَدُونَ (nor had they been on the right path). It is from here that we find out that following the forefathers mentioned in the text of the Qur'an was censured because they lacked reason and guidance. 'Guidance' or the right path signifies injunctions revealed by Allah Almighty, openly and clearly, while ` aql عقل or reason stands for imperative guidance deduced by the great armed vision of Ijtihad اجتھاد from the recognized sources of Islamic Shari'ah. Now we can see that following the model of those identified in the text cannot be permitted because they do not have a revealed set of laws from Allah, nor do they have the ability to deduce injunctions from the Word of Allah. There is a subtle hint here which we would do well to note. In case, we are satisfied that a certain ` alim عالِم has the perfect knowledge of the Qur'an and Sunnah and in the absence of a clear and direct instruction of the two sacred sources, he has the great expertise of a mujtahid مجتھد so that he can, by analogical deduction, arrive at rulings from the texts of the Qur'an and Sunnah - then. it is permissible to follow such mujtahid مجتھد alim عالِم . It does not mean that one has to obey 'his' injunctions and follow 'his person.' Instead, it means that one has to obey the injunctions of Allah alone to the total exclusion of others. But, since a direct and trustworthy knowledge of the injunctions of Allah (in all their ramifications) is not readily available to us due to our ignorance, we have to follow a mujtahid مجتھد alim عالِم in order to act in accordance with the injunctions of Allah Almighty. From what has been said above, it becomes clear that those who hasten to quote verses of this nature against following the great mujtahid imams, are themselves unaware of the proven meaning of these verses. In his comments on this verse, the great commentator, al-Qurtubi has said that the prohibition of following forefathers mentioned in this verse refers to. following them in false beliefs and deeds. The aspect of following correct beliefs and good deeds is not included here as it has been very clearly projected in Surah Yusuf in the words of Sayyidna Yusuf (علیہ السلام) : إِنِّي تَرَ‌كْتُ مِلَّةَ قَوْمٍ لَّا يُؤْمِنُونَ بِاللَّـهِ وَهُم بِالْآخِرَ‌ةِ هُمْ كَافِرُ‌ونَ ﴿37﴾ وَاتَّبَعْتُ مِلَّةَ آبَائِي إِبْرَ‌اهِيمَ وَإِسْحَاقَ وَيَعْقُوبَ I have disassociated myself from the community of people who do not believe in Allah and who deny the Hereafter and I have chosen to follow the community of my fathers, Ibrahim and Ishaq and Ya` qub. (12:37-38) This is good enough to prove that following forefathers in what is false is forbidden while it is permissible, rather desirable, in what is true. Al-Qurtubi has taken up the issue of following the mujtahid imams within his comments on this verse. He says: تعلق قوم بھذہ الآیہ فی ذمً التقلید (الی) وھذا فی الباطل صحیح اما التقلید فی الحق فاصل من اصول الدین وعصمۃ من عصم المسلمین یلجأ اِلیھا الجاھل المقصرعن درک النظر "Some people have quoted this verse to support their criticism against Taqlid (following). As far as following the false is concerned, this is correct. But, this has nothing to do with following what is true which is, in fact, a basic religious principle, and a great means of protecting the religion of Muslims in as much as one who does not have the ability to do Ijtihad must rely on 'following' in matters of religion." (volume 2, page 194)

Earlier, the aim was to correct the error made by the mushrikin مشرکین when they made unlawful what was good and permissible. Now, in the present Verse (172), the believers are being warned against falling into the same error. As a corollary, they are reminded of Allah's blessings and are taught to be grateful to Him. Later, in Verse 173 it is said that the prohibited must remain prohibited and should never be treated as lawful, something the mushrikin used to do when they ate carrion or animals slaughtered in a name other than that of Allah. Also implied is the warning that it is an error to declare any animal, other than those specified, as unlawful. Comments on juristic details follow. The effects of eating Halal حلال and Haram حرام Verse 172 forbids eating that which is Karam and along with it, allows eating that which is halal in all gratefulness to Allah. The reason is that the act of eating haram promotes evil instincts, kills the taste of ` ibadah and makes the prayers ineffective. In contrast, eating halal generates inner light, creates a distaste for evil deeds, leads towards high morals, and creates a state in which the heart welcomes ` ibadah and finds the very thought of sin sickening and of course, prayers are answered. Therefore, Allah Almighty has told all his prophets to eat from what is good and do what is righteous: یأَيُّهَا الرُّ‌سُلُ كُلُوا مِنَ الطَّيِّبَاتِ وَاعْمَلُوا صَالِحًاً 0 Messengers, eat of the good things and do the righteous. (23:51) This shows that eating and using what is halal حلال plays a vital role in doing what is good and virtuous. Similarly, living by the halal حلال helps the chances of a prayer being answered while living by the haram حرام kills those chances. The Holy Prophet has said that there are many people, tired and distressed, who stretch their hands in prayer before Allah fervently calling '0 Lord, 0 Lord, yet haram حرام is what they eat, haram حرام is what they drink and haram حرام is what they wear, how then, under these conditions, could they hope to have their prayers answered?' (The Sahih, Muslim, and Tirmidhi as quoted by Ibn Kathir)

The wordإِنَّمَا حَرَّ‌مَ (innama harrama) is a restrictive particle, therefore, the sense of the verse is that Allah Almighty has forbidden only those things which have been mentioned later, other than which, nothing else is forbidden. So, in this verse, it is the word, innama إِنَّمَا which points out to the given sense, while in another verse (6:145): قُل لَّا أَجِدُ فِي مَا أُوحِيَ إِلَيَّ مُحَرَّ‌مًا عَلَىٰ طَاعِمٍ the same thing has been stated more clearly. Here, the Holy Prophet ﷺ has been asked to proclaim that, in what has been revealed to him, there is nothing haram حرام except the few things mentioned later on. At this stage, we have a problem on our hands. The fact is that the unlawfulness of many things stands proved on the authority of other verses from the Qur'an, and also from ahadith. If so, what would be the meaning of this 'restriction' and how are we to explain the negation of 'there is nothing haram حرام except the few things mentioned later on'? For an answer, we can say that halal حلال and haram حرام are not being discussed here in the absolute sense. Rather, they are discussed here with reference to those particular animals only which the polytheists of Makkah took as halal حلال or haram حرام on the basis of their pagan beliefs. This has been pointed out in the previous verse where it is said that the polytheists of Makkah were used to declaring some halal حلال animals as haram حرام for them and this practice was censured there. Now, it is in contrast to that situation that they are being told here as to how they do not stay away from certain animals which have been declared haram حرام for them, while, at the same time, they stay away from those that are halal حلال in the sight of Allah. Therefore, the presence of the 'restriction' here should not be taken in the absolute sense as it is relative, especially in opposition to the polytheistic beliefs. Now, the things that have been made unlawful (haram) in verse 173 are four in number: 1. Dead animal (Maitah مَیتَہ) 2. Blood (Dam دم ) 3. The flesh of Swine (Lahm al-khinzir لحم الخنزیر ) 4. An animal on which the name of anyone other than Allah has been called (Wa ma uhilla bihi lighayrillah وَمَا أُهِلَّ بِهِ لِغَيْرِ‌ اللَّـہ). These four things have been further explained in other verses of the Holy Qur'an, and in authentic ahadith. Seen as a correlated whole, the following injunctions emerge from them, and they are being taken up here in some detail:makhan41 Injunctions about the dead animal The dead animal is known in English as 'carrion' or carcass. In Islamic terminology, it means an animal not slaughtered in accordance with the requirements of the Shari'ah. If it dies its own death without having been slaughtered or is killed by choking or aggressive hitting, it falls under the category of 'dead' and remains haram حرام . But, in accordance with another verse of the Holy Qur'an: أُحِلَّ لَكُمْ صَيْدُ الْبَحْرِ‌ وَطَعَامُهُ 'Allowed to you is the game of the sea and its eating.' (5:96), slaughtering sea-life is not necessary as a condition; it is permissible even without it. It is on this basis that, in authentic ahadith, fish and locust have been determined as exceptions to the category of maitah مَیتَہ (unslaughtered) and thus made halal حلال . The Holy Prophet ﷺ has said: 'Two dead things have been made lawful for us - the fish and the locust; and two forms of blood have been made lawful for us - the liver and the spleen [ Organ in abdomen ].' (Ibn Kathir from Ahmad, Ibn Majah and Darqutni) So, among animals, the fish and the locust are halal without slaughtering, even if they die their own death or get killed by somebody. However, fish that gets decomposed and starts floating on the surface is haram حرام . (Jassas) Similarly, an animal not within range for the hunter to slaughter can become halal حلال without having been slaughtered if the hunter, after saying Bismillah بِسْمِ اللَّـهِ , inflicts a wound on it by means of a sharp-edged weapon such as an arrow. Merely being wounded is not enough; it is necessary as a condition that it be wounded with some sharp-edged weapon. Injunctions and Rulings 1. If an animal wounded by a gunshot dies before it could be slaughtered, it would be taken as an animal that dies from a fatal strike with a baton or rock. This has been called' (mawqudhah موقوذہ) in another verse of the Holy Qur'an (5:3) where it has been classed as haram حرام . However, if the animal is slaughtered before it dies, it would become halal حلال . 2. Some ` ulama' are of the opinion that the common bullet with a conical nose-top falls under the category of an arrow, but the view of the majority is that this too is not an arrow-like weapon, instead, it bores the flesh and tears it apart by the force of the explosive mixture inside the bullet, otherwise, the weapon itself has no sharp edge which could inflict a wound on the animal. Therefore, an animal hunted with a bullet of this kind will not be permissible without slaughtering it. 3. In Verse 173, maitah مَیتَہ or the dead animal has been declared haram حرام in an absolute sense, therefore, everything about it is haram حرام ; eating its flesh, buying it or selling it, all included. The same injunction applies to all impurities (Anjas). Their use, buying and selling, even deriving any benefit from them are all haram حرام ، so much so, that it is impermissible to voluntarily feed even an animal with carrion or anything else impure. However, should this be placed somewhere and be eaten by a dog or cat on its own, that would, then be permissible. What is not permissible is to feed them personally. (Jassas, Qurtubi) 4. In this particular verse the injunction declaring maitah مَیتَہ or the dead animal as haram حرام appears to be general which includes all parts of maitah مَیتَہ . But, this has been clarified in another verse (6:145) by the words: عَلَىٰ طَاعِمٍ يَطْعَمُهُ which tells us that the eatable parts of the dead animal are forbidden. Therefore, the bones of the dead animal and the hair, which are not eatables, are clean and their use is permissible. The Holy Qur'an in verse (16:86): وَمِنْ أَصْوَافِهَا وَأَوْبَارِ‌هَا وَأَشْعَارِ‌هَا أَثَاثًا وَمَتَاعًا إِلَىٰ حِينٍ has permitted the use of hair of such animals in an absolute sense. The condition of slaughter is not there (Jassas). Since the skin or hide of an animal carries impurities such as blood it is forbidden unless tanned. When tanned, it is permissible. Further clarifications can be seen in authentic ahadith. (Jassas) 5. The fat of the dead animal and everything made with it is forbidden. There is no way they can be used. Even buying and selling them are forbidden. 6. Avoiding the use of soap made from animal fat is good precautionary practice. However, it is not easy to find out for sure that fat from dead animals has been used in a particular product, therefore, some leeway exists. Another reason for its permissibility is that some of the blessed Companions such as, Ibn ` Umar, Abu Said al-Khudri and Abu Musa al-Ash` ari ؓ have ruled that the fat of the dead animal is forbidden as far as eating is concerned, while they have permitted its use externally, and therefore, they have allowed its buying and selling. (Jassas) 7. Cheese made from milk contains an ingredient called infaha in Arabic and 'rennet' in English. It is a mucous membrane lining taken out from the stomachs of suckling lambs or kids. It is used to coagulate or curdle milk. If rennet is taken out of the stomach of an animal slaughtered in the name of Allah, there is no harm in using it. The meat, fat etc. of an Islamically slaughtered animal are permissible. But, in the event they are taken from the stomach of an animal slaughtered un-Islamically, there is difference of views among Muslim jurists. Imams Abu Hanifah and Malik رحمۃ اللہ علیہما consider it clean while Imams Abu Yusuf, Muhammad and Thawri رحمۃ اللہ علیہما and others call it unclean and impure. (Jassas, Qurtubi) There is a strong likelihood that rennet from un-Islamically slaughtered animals is used in cheese made in non-Islamic countries, therefore, relying on the consensus of Muslim jurists, one must avoid using it. Under the juristic position taken by Imam Abu Hanifah and Imam Malik رحمۃ اللہ علیہما ، leeway exists. Some cheeses made in western countries have pork-fat as one of their ingredients which, hopefully, can be seen on the wrapper or tin. All these are absolutely haram حرام and impure. The blood The second thing forbidden in the verse is blood. The word, dam دم ، (pronounced a, 'sum' in English) meaning 'blood' has been used here in the absolute sense, but, in verse (6:145) of Surah al-An` am, it has been subjected to a qualification, that is: مَّسْفُوحًاً (that which flows). Therefore, fuqaha' agree that congealed blood such as, the kidney or spleen, are clean and permissible. 1. Since flowing blood is what is forbidden, the blood that remains on the flesh after slaughtering the animal is clean. The Muslim jurists, the blessed Companions and their successors and the Ummah in general agree on this. On the same analogy, the blood of mosquitoes, flies and bed bugs is not unclean. But, should this be significant, it has to be washed clean. (Jassas) 46. In bio-chemistry, the enzyme rennin in present is rennet and is a milk-curdling agent. 2. As eating or drinking blood is forbidden, its external use is also forbidden. As the buying and selling and seeking any benefit from impurities is forbidden, the buying and selling of blood is forbidden and all income derived from it is also forbidden. This is because dam or blood in the words of the Holy Qur'an has been forbidden in the absolute sense which includes all possible ways in which it can be used. Blood Transfusion Actually, human blood is a part of human body. When taken out of the body, it is rated as najis نجس or 'impure’, which would require that transfusion of blood from one human body to another be regarded as haram حرام for two reasons: a) Since respecting the human body is necessary and this act is contrary to that respect. b) Blood is heavy impurity (al-najasah al-ghalizah النجسہ الغلیظہ ) and the use of things impure is not permissible. But, looking into the conveniences allowed by the Shari'ah of Islam under conditions of compulsion and in general treatment of diseases, we come to the following conclusions: To begin with, blood is no doubt a part of the human body but its transfusion into the body of another person requires no surgery. Blood is drawn out by means of a syringe from one human body and transferred to another by the same process. Therefore, it is like milk which forms in the human body and goes on to become the part of another human being. The Shari'ah of Islam, in view of the need of the human child, has made nothing but milk as his or her initial food, making it obligatory on mothers to feed their children as far as they stay married to their respective husbands. After divorce, mothers cannot be forced to feed their children. To provide sustenance to children is the responsibility of the father; it is he who must arrange to have the child suckled by a wet-nurse, or request the mother to continue feeding the baby against payment. The Holy Qur'an is very clear on this subject when it says: فَإِنْ أَرْ‌ضَعْنَ لَكُمْ فَآتُوهُنَّ أُجُورَ‌هُنَّ "If they (your divorced wives) suckle (your children) for you, then, pay for their services." (65:6) In short, milk which is a part of the human body has still been made permissible for children in view of their need. It is even permissible to use it medically for elders as well. It appears in Alamgiriah: ولا باس باَن یسعط الرجل بلبن المراۃ ویشربہ للدواء (عالمگیری ص 4) "There is no harm if female milk is dropped in the nose of a man to cure him of some disease, or even if it is given orally as medicine." (For further details on this subject see Al-Mughni by ibn Qudamah, Kitab al-Sayd, volume 8, page 602.) If blood is dealt with on the analogy of milk, the analogy would not be too far-fetched, since milk is also an altered form of blood and shares with it the common factor of being a part of the human person. The only difference between them is that milk is clean while blood is not. So, the first reason of unlawfulness, that is, being a part of human body, is no more operative here. What remains is the aspect of its impurity. In this case too, some fuqaha' have permitted the use of blood on medical grounds. Therefore, the correct position is that the transfer of human blood to another body does not seem to be permissible in Shari` ah under normal conditions, but doing so under compulsive conditions on medical grounds is doubtlessly permissible. Compulsive conditions mean that the patient faces a life or death situation and no life-saving drug turns out to be effective or is just not available and there is a strong likelihood that the patient's life would be saved through the blood transfusion. If these conditions are met, giving of blood will be permissible under the authority of this Qur'anic text which clearly permits the saving of one's life by eating the flesh of a dead animal, if compelled by neces-sity. However, in the event that there be no condition of compulsion or other medicines and treatments could work, the problem has been dealt with differently by different jurists; some say that it is permissible while others maintain that it is not. Details are available in books of fiqh فقہ . Those interested in the subject may wish to see my Urdu treatise entitled, 'The Transplanting of Human Limbs'. The swine is forbiddan The third thing forbidden in this verse is the flesh of the swine. It will be noted that it is the 'flesh' of swine which has been mentioned here as unlawful. Al-Qurtubi explains this by saying that the aim here is not to restrict or particularize 'flesh' as such. In fact, all parts of the swine, the bones, the skin, the hair, the ligaments, are forbidden by the consensus of the Muslim community. The introduction of the word (lahm لحم : flesh) is to point out that the swine is not like other prohibited animals which can be purified by slaughtering, even if eating of them stays prohibited. The reason is that the flesh of the swine does not get purified even if the swine is slaughtered, as it is absolutely impure and unlawful. However, the use of its bristles to sow leather has been permitted in Hadith. (Jassas, Qurtubi) The consecrated animals The fourth thing forbidden in this verse is an animal dedicated to anyone other than Allah. This takes three known forms: (1) The slaughtering of an animal to seek the pleasure of anyone other than Allah and calling the name of that 'anyone' while slaughtering it, is unanimously forbidden with the consensus of the Muslim community. This animal is maitah مَیتَہ : dead. It is not permissible to derive any benefit from any of its parts because this is what the verse, مَا أُهِلَّ بِهِ لِغَيْرِ‌ اللَّـهِ (173) clearly means without any difference of opnion. (2) The slaughtering of an animal to seek the pleasure of anyone other than Allah, despite the fact that the animal was slaughtered by calling the name of Allah, is also forbidden in the Shari'ah. This is something a large number of ignorant Muslims do when they slaughter goats and sheep, even chicken, to seek the pleasure of elders and leaders, and they do this by calling the name of Allah at the time of slaughter. The fuqaha-' agree that all such forms are haram حرام and the animal slaughtered in this manner is a dead animal, a carcass. However, there is some difference of opinion about the reason. Some commentators and jurists maintain that this second situation is also what the verse مَا أُهِلَّ بِهِ لِغَيْرِ‌ اللَّـهِ (173) means to cover. It appears in the Hawashi of al-Baydawi: فکل مانودی علیہ بغیر اسم اللہ فھو حرام وان ذبح باسم اللہ تعالیٰ حیث اجمع العلماء لوان مسلما ذبح ذبیحۃ وقصد بذبحہ التقرب الٰی غیر اللہ صار مرتدا و ذبیحتہ ذبیحۃ مرتد Every animal on which a name other than that of Allah was called is Haram , even though it was slaughtered in the name of Allah. Therefore, ` ulama علماء ' agree that a Muslim, who slaughters an animal and intends to seek the pleasure of anyone other than Allah through it, will become an apostate, and the animal he slaughters will be taken as one slaughtered by an apostate. In addition to this, it is said in Al-Durr al-Mukhtar, Kitab al-dhaba'ih: ذبح لقدوم الامیر و نحوہ کو احد من العظماء یحرم لانہ اھل بہ لغیر اللہ ولوذکراسم اللہ Slaughtering an animal to celebrate the visit of a dignitary is haram حرام because that comes under ma uhilla bihi lighayrillah أُهِلَّ بِهِ لِغَيْرِ‌ اللَّـه ما even though the name of Allah has been mentioned at the time of slaughter. (Volume 5, page 214) Al-Shami concurs with this view. There are others who have not gone to the extent of declaring that this situation is what ma uhilla bihi lighayrillah ما اُهِلَّ بِهِ لِغَيْرِ‌ اللَّـه means clearly since it would be a little burdened Arabic-wise to import the phrase for this situation, but it is on the basis of the commonality of cause, that is, because of the intention of seeking the pleasure of anyone other than Allah, that they have tied this too with ma uhilla bihi lighayrillah مَا أُهِلَّ بِهِ لِغَيْرِ‌ اللَّـهِ and have declared it to be haram حرام . In the view of this humble writer, this view is the most sound, cautious and safe. Nevertheless, there is a regular verse of the Holy Qur'an which supports the unlawfulness of this situation, that is, وَمَا ذُبِحَ عَلَى النُّصُبِ. The word, nusub نُّصُبِ here means everything worshipped falsely. So, it signifies animals that have been slaughtered for false gods. Since, wa ma uhilla bihi lighayrillah وَمَا أُهِلَّ بِهِ لِغَيْرِ‌ اللَّـهِ has been mentioned earlier, it tells us that ma uhilla وَمَا أُهِلَّ clearly means the animal on which a name other than that of Allah has been recited at the time of its slaughter, and that dhubiha ala n'nusub ذُبِحَ عَلَى النُّصُبِ appears in contrast to it where the reciting of a name other than that of Allah has not been mentioned. It simply means the act of slaughtering with the intention of pleasing idols. Included here are animals which have been, in fact, slaughtered to seek the pleasure of somebody other than Allah even though the name of Allah has been recited at the time of slaughtering them. (This special note is from my teacher, Hakim al-ummah Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanavi.) Imam Al-Qurtubi (رح) has taken the same approach in his Tafsir where he has said: وجرت عادہ العرب بالصیاح باسم المقصود بالذبیحۃ وغلب ذلک فی استعمالھم حتی عبربہ عن النیۃ التی ھی علۃ التحریم It was a customary practice of the Arabs that, at the time they were to slaughter, they would call aloud the name of the entity the slaughter was intended for. That was so much in vogue among them, that in this verse, their intention, that is, their seeking of the pleasure of one other than Allah, which is the real cause of forbiddance, was identified as ihlal or call. (Tafsir al-Qurtubi, volume 2, page 307. Imam AI-Qurtubi has based his findings on the fatawa فتٰوٰی or religious rulings of Sayyidna ` Ali and Sayyidah ` A'ishah, may Allah be pleased with them both) During the days of Sayyidna Ali ؓ ، Ghalib, the father of poet Farazdaq had slaughtered a camel and there is no report to con-firm that the name of someone other than Allah was mentioned on it at the time of its slaughter. But, Sayyidna Sayyidna Ali ؓ decided that this too fell under the category of ma uhilla bihi lighayrillah وَمَا أُهِلَّ بِهِ لِغَيْرِ‌ اللَّـهِ and was haram حرام . The Companions, may Allah bless them all, accepted the verdict. Similarly, Al-Qurtubi reports a lengthy hadith from Sayyidah ` A'ishah ؓ ، on the authority of Yahya ibn Yahya (رح) ، the teacher of Imam Muslim. Towards the end, it says that a certain woman asked her: '0 umm al-mu'minin اے اُم المؤمنین ، some of our foster relatives are non-Arabs and they have one or the other festival going for them all the time. On these festivals, they send us gifts. Should we eat them or should we not?' Thereupon, Sayyidah ` A'ishah ؓ said: اما ما ذبح لذلک الیوم فلا تاکلوا ولکن کلوا من اشجارھم Do not eat what has been slaughtered for that day, but you can eat (fruits) from their trees. (Qurtubi, volume 2, page 207) To sum up, it can be said that the second situation in which the intention is to seek the favour of an entity other than Allah even though Allah's name is called at the time of slaughtering the animal comes under the purview of the prohibition relating to ma uhilla bihi lighayrillah وَمَا أُهِلَّ بِهِ لِغَيْرِ‌ اللَّـهِ for two reasons: a. The commonness of cause, that is, because of the intention to seek the favour of an entity other than Allah. b. It is also covered by the verse (5:3), and therefore, this too is forbidden. 3. There is a third situation also where an animal is released after cutting off its ear lobe or branding it in some other manner and this is done to seek the pleasure of an entity other than Allah and to make it an object of reverence paid to the same entity. The animal in this case was neither used in its normal functions nor intended to be slaughtered. Rather, slaughtering such an animal used to be held as unlawful. Such animals are not covered under the prohibition envisaged in verse 173 (Ma uhilla bihi lighayrillah مَا أُهِلَّ بِهِ لِغَيْرِ‌ اللَّـهِ ) or in verse 5:3 (Ma dhubiha ` ala n'nusub ما ذُبِحَ عَلَى النُّصُبِ ), instead, animals of this kind are known as bahirah or sa'ibah and according to the injunction of the Qur'an the practice of releasing them in that manner is haram as it would appear later under the verse: مَا جَعَلَ اللَّـهُ مِن بَحِيرَ‌ةٍ وَلَا سَائِبَةٍ However, it should be borne in mind that their practice of releasing an animal in this unlawful manner or their false beliefs about it do not render the animal itself unlawful. Rather, if such animals are held to be forbidden, it will amount to supporting their false beliefs. Therefore, this animal is lawful like any other animal. But, in accordance with the principles of Muslim law, this animal does not go out of the ownership of its owner. It continues to be owned by him, even though, he thinks that it is no more his property and has been dedicated to someone other than Allah. This belief of the owner of the animal is false and, in accordance with the dictate of the Shari'ah, the animal continues to be in his ownership. Now, if this person sells this animal or gives it as gift to someone, then, this animal will be lawful for the assignee. This is what people in some countries do when they endow goats or cows in the name of their idols or gods and leave them with the management of the temples to do what they like with them. Some of them sell these animals to Muslims as well. Similarly, some ignorant Muslims also do things like that at shrines or graveyards. There they would leave a goat or a full-grown male domestic foul in the hands of the keepers who sell these out. So, those who buy such livestock or poultry from the keepers authorized by owners, for them, it is perfectly lawful if they buy, slaughter, eat or sell them onwards. Nadhr lighayrillah نذر لغیرللہ : Offering for anyone other than Allah Here we have a fourth situation on our hands which does not relate to animals but to things other than these. For instance, food or sweets offered against vows in the name of someone other than Allah by Hindus in their temples and by ignorant Muslims in shrines. This kind of nadhr نذر or mannat مَنَّت in the name of someone other than Allah has also been declared haram حرام because of the commonness of cause, that is, because of the intention to seek the favour of one other than Allah and which comes under the same prohibition as contemplated in ma uhilla bihi lighayrillah مَا أُهِلَّ بِهِ لِغَيْرِ‌ اللَّـہ as a result of which its eating, feeding, buying and selling all become haram حرام . Details can be seen in the books of fiqh فقہ such as Al-Bahr al-Ra'iq البحر الرعیق and others. This injunction is based on the analogy of the animals mentioned expressly in the text of the Holy Qur'an. Injunctions in situations of compulsion In the verse under comment, after four things have been declared unlawful, the fifth injunction comes as an exception. The text says: فَمَنِ اضْطُرَّ‌ غَيْرَ‌ بَاغٍ وَلَا عَادٍ فَلَا إِثْمَ عَلَيْهِ ۚ إِنَّ اللَّـهَ غَفُورٌ‌ رَّ‌حِيمٌ which means that the injunction has been relaxed for a person who is extremely compelled by hunger, and is not looking towards enjoying his food, nor is likely to go beyond the level of his need, then he, in that situation, will not incur any sin if he eats what is unlawful. There is no doubt about it that Allah Almighty is Most-Forgiving, Very-Merciful. It will be observed that the burden of sin which accrues from eating the unlawful has been removed from the mudtar مُضْطُر‌: the one who is compelled by necessity and must save his life, if he fulfils two attending conditions. In the terminology of the Shar` iah, the word, mudtar مُضْطُر is applied to a person whose life is in danger. Ordinary pain or need cannot qualify a person to be known as mudtar مُضْطُر . So, for a person whose hunger has driven him to a point beyond which he must either eat or die, there is an option; he can eat things made unlawful on two conditions. Firstly, the aim should be to save life and not to enjoy eating. Secondly, he must eat only as much as would serve to save his life; eating to fill up one's stomach or eating much more than one needs remain prohibited even at that time. Special Note Here, the eating of things forbidden even under a situation of compulsion (idtirar اِضْطُرارَ‌) has not been made lawful as such by the noble Qur'an, instead, the expression used is لااثمَ علیہ (there is no sin on him) which means that these things continue to be haram حرام as they are, but the sin of using what is haram حرام has been forgiven because the eater has done so under the compulsion of necessity. There is a world of difference between making something lawful and the forgiving of sin. If the objective was to make these things lawful under compulsive need, a simple exception from the injunction of unlawfulness would have been enough. But, here the text does not rest at the simple exception, it rather elects to add the statement: لااثمَ علیہ . By doing so, it makes a point, that is, what is haram حرام remains haram حرام as it is, and using it is nothing but sin, however, the mudtar (مُضْطُر), the compelled one, has been forgiven this sin. Using the forbidden as a cure, in dire necessity A person whose life is in danger can use what is forbidden as medicine to save his life. This too is proved by the verse under comment, but there seem to be some conditions as well which have been hinted there. To begin with, there should be a state of compulsion, and a danger of losing life. This injunction does not cover ordinary pain or sickness. Then, there is the situation when no treatment or medicine works, or is just not available - the unlawful thing to be used as life-saving drug is the only option open. This is like the exception made in a state of extreme hunger which is valid only when something lawful is not available or affordable. The third condition is that it should be made certain that by using the unlawful, life will be saved. This is like the eating of a couple of morsels from unlawful meat by one compelled fatally by hunger should be enough to save his life. If there is a medicine which appears to be useful but there is no certainty that it would cure the ailing patient, then, the use of this unlawful medicine will not fall under the purview of the exception made in this verse and therefore, it will not be permissible. Along with these three, there are two additional conditions which have been set forth in the verse, that is, one should not aim to enjoy it and use no more than one needs to use. Given the restrictions and conditions that emerge from clear statements and subtle hints in the verse, every unlawful and impure medicine can be used internally or externally. It is permissible by the consensus of the jurists of the Muslim ummah. In a nutshell, these five conditions are as follows: 1. There be a state of extreme necessity, that is, one's life be in danger. 2. Another lawful medicine does not work, or is not available. 3. It should be normally certain that the disease will be cured by such medicine. 4. Enjoying the use of the medicine should not be the aim. 5. It should not be used any more than it is needed. Using the forbidden as a cure without necessity As far as situations of extreme necessity are concerned, the relevant injunction has been given in the text of the Holy Qur'an and there is total agreement on that. But, about the question of using impure or haram حرام medicine even in common diseases, the jurists differ. Most of them say that, barring compulsion, and all those conditions mentioned above, it is not permissible to use haram حرام medicine, because the Holy Prophet $ as reported in al-Bukhari has said that Allah Almighty has placed no cure for the Muslims in haram حرام . Some other jurists have used a particular episode reported in Hadith to declare it as permissible. That episode relates to people of the ` Uraynah عُرینہ tribe and has been reported in all books of Hadith where it is said that some villagers came to the Holy Prophet ﷺ . They suffered from several diseases. He permitted them the use of camel milk and urine, which cured them. But, this episode has several possibilities which make the use of prohibited things doubtful. Therefore, the correct original position is: Unless the conditions of extreme necessity exist in common diseases, the use of haram medicine is not permissible. However, later-day jurists, keeping in view the influx of unlawful and impure medicines in modern times, the general climate of suffering, and the weakness of people against it, have permitted the use of prohibited medicine on the condition that another lawful and pure medicine is not effective, or is not available. It is mentioned in Al-Durr al-Mukhtar, the well-known book of Fiqh فقہ : اَختلف فی التداوی بالمحرم وظاھر المذھب المنع کما فی رضاع البحر ولکن نقل المصنف ثم وھھنا عن الحاوی قبل یرخص اذا علم فیہ الشفاء ولم یعلم دواء آخر کما رخص فی الخمر للعطشان (علیہ الفتوی، ومثلہ فی العالمگیریہ ص 355 ج 05) There is difference of opinion in medication through the unlawful. Apparent religious ruling forbids it, as is mentioned in Al-Bahr al-Ra'iq, Kitab al-Rida' but the author has, at that point in al-Rida`, as well as here, reported from al-Hawi al-Qudsi that some ` ulama' عُلماء have permitted the use of the prohibited on medical grounds, if the cure is certain and there is no alternate available, which is like the permission granted to the critically thirsty to take a sip of liquor. The conclusion The details given above help us find out what we should do about modern medicines that originate mostly from Europe and America, especially those in which the use of alcohol as base or solvent, or the introduction of other impure ingredients, is known and certain. As for medicines in which the presence of unlawful and impure ingredients cannot be ascertained with any degree of certainty, their use would have a little more technical leeway, however, there is nothing like precaution, especially when the need is not that pressing. Allah Almighty knows best.

Mentioned in the earlier verses were unlawful things which are tangible. Now, the verses that follow take up the intangible deeds that have been made unlawful. These are evil deeds, inner and outer. For instance, religious scholars among the Jews were addicted to giving out false verdicts in favour of people who bribed them. They would go to the limit of distorting the verses of the Torah to suit the desire of their client. In this, there is a veiled warning given to the ` ulama', the religious scholars of the community of the Last of the prophets, that they should keep away from such practices and never fall short in disclosing the true injunctions of Allah for any material reason or vested interest of their own. Earning money against the Faith There is no doubt that people who conceal the contents of the Book of Allah and in return for this breach of trust, collect insignificant worldly gains are simply eating fire. When comes the Qiyamah (Doomsday), Allah Almighty will not speak to them affectionately, nor will He purify them by forgiving their sins. Their punishment will be terrible for they are the kind of people who, during their mortal life, chose to abandon guidance and adopt error, and in the Hereafter, they missed forgiveness and became deserving of punishment. They must be very courageous in that they are all set to go into Hell. All these punishments to them are because they elected to stray away from the Book of Allah, something so clear and true. It is evident that they must be victims of serious intransigence and are far out in schism, as a result of which they can expect to deserve a matching punishment. Verse 175 tells us that a person who changes the injunction of Shari'ah in his greed for worldly gains, he should know that these worldly gains he consumes are like embers of fire he is storing in his stomach because that is the ultimate end of his deeds. Some perceptive ` Ulama' have said that unlawful wealth is, in reality, the very fire of Hell, even though we do not sense it as such during our lifetime in the mortal world, but once one dies, his or her deeds will appear in the form of fire.

Mentioned in the earlier verses were unlawful things which are tangible. Now, the verses that follow take up the intangible deeds that have been made unlawful. These are evil deeds, inner and outer. For instance, religious scholars among the Jews were addicted to giving out false verdicts in favour of people who bribed them. They would go to the limit of distorting the verses of the Torah to suit the desire of their client. In this, there is a veiled warning given to the ` ulama', the religious scholars of the community of the Last of the prophets, that they should keep away from such practices and never fall short in disclosing the true injunctions of Allah for any material reason or vested interest of their own. Earning money against the Faith There is no doubt that people who conceal the contents of the Book of Allah and in return for this breach of trust, collect insignificant worldly gains are simply eating fire. When comes the Qiyamah (Doomsday), Allah Almighty will not speak to them affectionately, nor will He purify them by forgiving their sins. Their punishment will be terrible for they are the kind of people who, during their mortal life, chose to abandon guidance and adopt error, and in the Hereafter, they missed forgiveness and became deserving of punishment. They must be very courageous in that they are all set to go into Hell. All these punishments to them are because they elected to stray away from the Book of Allah, something so clear and true. It is evident that they must be victims of serious intransigence and are far out in schism, as a result of which they can expect to deserve a matching punishment. Verse 175 tells us that a person who changes the injunction of Shari'ah in his greed for worldly gains, he should know that these worldly gains he consumes are like embers of fire he is storing in his stomach because that is the ultimate end of his deeds. Some perceptive ` Ulama' have said that unlawful wealth is, in reality, the very fire of Hell, even though we do not sense it as such during our lifetime in the mortal world, but once one dies, his or her deeds will appear in the form of fire.

Mentioned in the earlier verses were unlawful things which are tangible. Now, the verses that follow take up the intangible deeds that have been made unlawful. These are evil deeds, inner and outer. For instance, religious scholars among the Jews were addicted to giving out false verdicts in favour of people who bribed them. They would go to the limit of distorting the verses of the Torah to suit the desire of their client. In this, there is a veiled warning given to the ` ulama', the religious scholars of the community of the Last of the prophets, that they should keep away from such practices and never fall short in disclosing the true injunctions of Allah for any material reason or vested interest of their own. Earning money against the Faith There is no doubt that people who conceal the contents of the Book of Allah and in return for this breach of trust, collect insignificant worldly gains are simply eating fire. When comes the Qiyamah (Doomsday), Allah Almighty will not speak to them affectionately, nor will He purify them by forgiving their sins. Their punishment will be terrible for they are the kind of people who, during their mortal life, chose to abandon guidance and adopt error, and in the Hereafter, they missed forgiveness and became deserving of punishment. They must be very courageous in that they are all set to go into Hell. All these punishments to them are because they elected to stray away from the Book of Allah, something so clear and true. It is evident that they must be victims of serious intransigence and are far out in schism, as a result of which they can expect to deserve a matching punishment. Verse 175 tells us that a person who changes the injunction of Shari'ah in his greed for worldly gains, he should know that these worldly gains he consumes are like embers of fire he is storing in his stomach because that is the ultimate end of his deeds. Some perceptive ` Ulama' have said that unlawful wealth is, in reality, the very fire of Hell, even though we do not sense it as such during our lifetime in the mortal world, but once one dies, his or her deeds will appear in the form of fire.

From the beginning to this point, the Sarah al-Baqarah is reaching its half-way mark. Until now, the message was addressed mostly to its deniers since the truth of the Holy Qur'an was the first thing to be established. In that context, mention was made of those who accepted it and those who rejected it, which was followed by providing proof of Allah's Oneness and the Prophethood. Then, recounted were Allah's blessings and favours on the progeny of Ibrahim (علیہ السلام) right through the verse وَإِذِ ابْتَلَىٰ إِبْرَ‌اهِيمَ رَ‌بُّهُ (2:124). Thenceforth started the issue of the Qiblah قبلہ which continued until it was resolved when the status of Safa صفاء and Marwah مروہ was identified as a sign from Allah (Verse 158). Then, the affirmation of Allah's Oneness was rightfully followed by a refutation of the principles and subsidiaries of Shirk شرک ، the act of associating others with Allah. The approach this far is full of warning mostly given to the deniers of the message of the Qur'an; any reference to Muslims was only as a corollary. The verses that follow contain nearly the other half of Sarah al-Baqarah where the primary purpose is to educate Muslims in the principles and the subsidiaries of their religion and any address to non-Muslims is by implication only. This subject which continues through the end of the Sarah has been unfolded by presenting and explaining the cardinal concept of birr بِرَّ‌, an umbrella word in Arabic used for what is good in the absolute sense and which combines in itself all acts of righteousness and obedience, inward or outward. So, when the verse begins, basic principles such as belief in the Book, spending of wealth in charity, fulfillment of promises and patience in distress have been stressed upon which, incidentally, include the basic principles behind all injunctions of the Holy Qur'an. The fact is that the articles of belief, the deeds in accordance with them and the morals are the essence of all religious injunctions while all details fall under these basics. Thus, the verse actually houses all these three major departments. The chapters of 'Birr' بِرَّ‌ (the virtues) From this point onwards, the reader will find details of this comprehensive attribute of birr بِرَّ‌, the essence of which is 'obedience'. Many injunctions, in unison with suitable time and place, have been taken up as needed. Some of these are about Equal Retaliation, Will, Fasting, Jihad, Hajj, Spending, Menstruation,’ Ila’ Oath, Divorce, Marriage, Post-divorce waiting period for women ('Iddah عِدَّہ ), Dower (Mahr مھر), while Jihad جہاد and Infaq انفاق (spending) in the way of Allah find re-stress, and some aspects of buying and selling and witnessing appear proportionate to their need. The finale is good tidings and the promise of mercy and forgiveness. Commentary When Baytullah بیت اللہ ، the House of Allah at Makkah was made the Qiblah قبلہ of the Muslims in place of Baytul-Maqdis بیت المقدس ، the Jews and Christians and the Mushrikin مشرکین ، who were much too eager to find fault with Islam and Muslims, were stirred and they started coming up with all sorts of objections against Islam and the Holy Prophet ﷺ ، detailed answers to which have been given in verses that have appeared earlier. In the present verse, this debated issue has been closed in a unique manner when it was said that Faith cannot be restricted to the single aspect of turning to the West or the East when praying. These are directions in an absolute sense and thus cannot be turned into the very object of Faith to the total exclusion of other injunctions of the Shari'ah. It is also possible that this is addressed to Jews, Christians and Muslims at the same time, the sense being that real birr (righteousness) and thawab ثواب (merit) lies in obedience to Allah Almighty. The direction in which He wants us to turn automatically becomes merit-worthy and correct. In itself, the East or the West, or any other direction or orientation has no importance or merit. Instead, the real merit comes out of one's obedience to the injunctions of Allah, no matter what the direction be. Upto the time the command was to turn towards the Baytul-Maqdis بیت المقدس ، the obedience to that command was an act deserving of merit, and now, when the command to turn towards the House of Allah بیت اللہ at Makkah has come, obeying this command has become deserving of merit. As stated earlier during the discussion of linkage of verses, a new sequence begins from this verse where the main body of the text comprises of teachings and instructions for Muslims with answers to antagonists appearing there by implication. This is why this particular verse has been identified as very comprehensive in presenting Islamic injunctions. What follows through the end of Surah al-Baqarah is an explanation or elaboration of this verse. Given below is a detailed account of what the verse presents as a gist of the articles of faith, the modes of Allah's worship, dealings with people, and the moral principles. , Foremost are the articles of faith. These were covered under مَنْ آمَنَ بِاللَّـهِ : "That one believes in Allah." Then comes the act of following the articles of faith in one's deeds, that is, in Allah's worship and in dealings with people. Allah's worship is mentioned upto the end of وَآتَى الزَّکٰوۃ : "And pays the Zakah زَّكَاةَ ", then, dealings with people were covered under وَالْمُوفُونَ بِعَهْدِهِمْ : "And those who fulfill their promise'', concluding with the mention of morals under وَالصَّابِرِ‌ينَ "The patient". The final statement is that those who follow all these injunctions are true Muslims and they are the ones who can be called God-fearing. While mentioning these injunctions, the verse has given a number of subtle but eloquent indications, for instance, the spending of wealth has been tied up with: ` ala hubbihi عَلَىٰ حُبِّهِ which has three possible meanings. Firstly, the pronoun in 'hubbihi حُبِّهِ ' may refer to Allah Almighty, in which case, it would mean that in spending wealth one should not be guided by material motives or the desire to show off. Such spending should rather be done out of love for Allah Almighty, whose exalted majesty requires that this be done with perfectly un-alloyed sincerity (in the sense of the genuine ikhlas اخلاص of Arabic and not in the sense of some modern casual nicety). The second possibility is that this pronoun refers to wealth, in which case, it would mean that, while spending in the way of Allah, only that part of one's wealth and possessions which one loves will be deserving of merit. Giving out throw-aways in the name of charity is no charity, barring the option of giving it to somebody who can use it, which is better than simply throwing things away. The third possibility is that the pronoun refers to the infinitive آتَى: ata which emerges from the word ایتاءِ 'ita' of the text, in which case, the meaning could be that one should be fully satisfied in the heart with what one spends, not that hands spend and the heart aches. Imam Al-Jassas (رح) has suggested the likelihood that all three meanings may be inclusive in the statement. It may be noted that, at this place, two forms of spending have been stated earlier which are other than Zakah زَّكَاةَ . Zakah زَّكَاةَ has been taken up after these two. Perhaps, the reason for this earlier mention could be the general negligence practiced in the liquidation of these rights on the assumption that the payment of Zakah زَّكَاةَ is sufficient. This proves that financial obligations do not end at the simple payment of Zakah زَّكَاةَ . There are occasions, other than those of paying Zakah زَّكَاةَ , where spending out of one's wealth becomes obligatory and necessary (Jassas and Qurtubi). For instance, spending on your kin, when they have a valid excuse of not being able to earn their own living, is necessary; or there may be some needy person dying in poverty while you have already paid your Zakah زَّكَاةَ , then, it becomes obligatory for you to save his life by spending your wealth on the spot. Similarly, building mosques and schools for religious education are all included in financial obligations. The difference is that Zakah زَّكَاةَ has a special law of its own and it is obligatory to take full care in paying the Zakah زَّكَاةَ in accordance with that law, under all conditions. While these other obligations depend on necessity and need; where needed, spending would become obligatory and where not needed, it will not be obligatory. Special Note A careful look at the text of the verse will show that those on whom wealth has to be spent, that is, the relatives, orphans, the needy, the wayfarer and those who ask, have all been described in one distinct manner, while the last head on the list has been introduced in another manner. It is clear that by adding فی : fi in وَفِي الرِّ‌قَابِ "And (spends) in (freeing) slaves" the purpose is to point out that the amount spent will not reach the hands of the slaves owned by somebody as their personal amount which they can spend at will. Instead, the amount has to be spent in buying slaves from their masters and setting them free. Hence, the translation: 'And (spends) in (freeing) slaves.' After that, the statement, أَقَامَ الصَّلَاةَ وَآتَى الزَّكَاةَ "And observes the prayers and pays the Zakah زَّكَاةَ " appears in the same manner as everything else has been mentioned earlier. Now, in order to introduce the chapter of dealings, the style has been changed. And instead of using verbs, the nouns have been used. This denotes that one should have a continuing habit of fulfilling promises made. A chance fulfillment of a compact, something even a disbeliever or a sinner would accomplish once in a while is not enough to qualify a person for being included in the list. The reason why the keeping of promises has been chosen to represent dealings with people is simple. A little thought would show that staying by a contract entered into or the fulfilling of a promise made, is the essence of all dealings, such as buying and selling, leasing, renting and partnership. Similarly, while referring to the moral principles or the inner deeds, only sabr صبر (patience) is mentioned in the verse, because sabr صبر means to control the human self and guard it against evil. Even a little reflection can lead to the conclusion that sabr صبر is the very essence of all inner deeds; through it, high morals can be achieved and through it, low morals can be eliminated. Yet another change in style made here concerns the use of the word, والصَّابِرِ‌ينَ and not والصَّابِرِ‌ونَ on the pattern of والْمُوفُونَ which appeared immediately earlier. Commentators call it نصب علی المدح : nasb ala l'madh which means that the word madh مدح (praise) is understood here and the word al-sabirin الصَّابِرِ‌ينَ is its object. This means that among the righteous, the sabirin صَّابِرِ‌ينَ (the patient) are worthy of special praise since sabr صبر gives one special power to perform righteous deeds. In short, this verse holds in its fold important principles of all departments of Faith and its eloquent hints tell us the degree of importance of each one of them.

From the brief introduction to the nature of righteousness appearing in verses before this, the text now enters into the description of related subsidiary injunctions. Under the first injunction in this connection, the verse prescribes the law of Qisas (even retaliation), that is, the killer will be killed, irrespective of the status of the parties involved. If the aggrieved party somewhat relents on its own and forgives the Qisas قصاص ، but does not forgive the offence totally, it will become necessary for the killer to pay diyah (دیۃ) or blood-money as fixed, in a fair manner, and promptly. The claimant too, should pursue the matter in a recognized manner causing no harassment to the defendant. This law of blood-money and pardon is a relief granted by Allah Almighty in His grace, otherwise, there would have been no choice but to face the punishment of death. If, after all that, anyone crosses the limit set by Allah, such as, the filing of a false or doubtful case of murder, or a post-pardon re-opening of a murder case, he will be severely punished. In the end, the verse points out that wise people should have no difficulty in seeing that the law of even retaliation does not take life, instead, it gives life, for such a deterrent law will make people fear the punishment of killing somebody and thus lives will be saved. There is life in 'Qisas' قصاص Literally, the word, Qisas means likeness. In usage, it denotes 'even retaliation' or to return like for like. In Islamic juristic terminology, Qisas means the equal retaliation of an aggression committed against the body of a person. This retaliation is allowed only with a condition that the principle of "like for like" is strictly observed. This has been explained more clearly later on in verse 194 of this very Sarah which says: فَاعْتَدُوا عَلَيْهِ بِمِثْلِ مَا اعْتَدَىٰ عَلَيْكُمْ So, agress against him in the like manner as he did against you. And also in the concluding verses of Surah al-Nahl, the same rule has been covered: وَإِنْ عَاقَبْتُمْ فَعَاقِبُوا بِمِثْلِ مَا عُوقِبْتُم بِهِ And, if you retaliate, then retaliate just as you have been oppressed against. (16:126) Therefore, as a term of the Shari'ah, the Qisas قصاص is a punishment for killing or wounding in which the principle of equality or likeness is taken into full consideration. Rulings 1. The principle of even retaliation is applied exclusively in cases of culpable homicide when someone has been killed intentionally with a lethal weapon causing injury and blood-loss. 2. In a homicide of this nature, the killer is killed in even retaliation - free man for a free man, slave for a slave, and female for a female - and similarly, a man for a woman. The mention of 'free man for a free man' and 'female for a female' in this verse refers to a specific event in the background of which it was revealed. On the authority of Ibn Abi Hatim ؓ 1, Ibn Kathir (رح) has reported that, just before the advent of Islam, war broke out between two tribes. Many men and women, free and slaves, belonging to both, were killed. Their case was still undecided when the Islamic period set in and the two tribes entered the fold of Islam. Now that they were Muslims, they started talking about retaliation for those killed on each side. One of the tribes which was more powerful insisted that they would not agree to anything less than that a free man for their slave and a man for their woman be killed from the other side. It was to refute this barbaric demand on their part that this verse was revealed. By saying 'free man for a free man, slave for a slave and female for a female' it is intended to negate their absurd demand that a free man for a slave and man for a woman should be killed in retaliation, even though he may not be the killer. The just law that Islam enforced was that the killer is the one who has to be killed in Qisas قصاص . If a woman is the killer why should an innocent man be killed in retaliation? Similarly, if the killer is a slave, there is no sense in retaliating against an innocent free man. This is an injustice which can never be tolerated in Islam. This verse means nothing but what has been stated earlier, and we repeat, that the one who has killed will be the one to be killed in Qisas قصاص . It is not permissible to kill an innocent man or someone free for a killer, woman or slave. Let us hasten to clarify that the verse does not mean that Qisas قصاص will not be taken from a man who kills a woman or from a free man who kills a slave. In the very beginning of this verse the words الْقِصَاصُ فِي الْقَتْلَى: "The Qisas قصاص has been enjoined upon you in the case of those murdered" are a clear proof of this universality of application. There are other verses where this aspect has been stated more explicitly, for instance, in النَّفْسَ بِالنَّفْسِ (the person for the person). 3. If, in a case of intentional killing the murderer is given full pardon, for instance, should both of the two surviving sons of the deceased pardon and forego their right of retaliation, the killer is free of any claim against him. In case the pardon is not that full, for instance, as illustrated above, one of the two surviving sons does pardon the killer while the other does not, the result will be that the killer will stand released right there from the retaliatory punishment, but the one who has not pardoned the killer will be entitled to half of the blood-money (diyah). In Shari'ah, this diyah amounts to one hundred camels or one thousand dinars or ten thousand dirhams درھم or approximately nineteen pounds of silver according to current weights and measures. 4. The way an incomplete pardon makes payment of blood-money necessary, in the same manner, a mutual settlement between parties concerned on a certain amount makes retaliation inapplicable and payment of the agreed amount becomes necessary. This, however, is governed by some conditions which appear in books of fiqh فقہ . 5. Under the Islamic law, the inheritors of the person killed, whatever their number, will inherit and own the right of retaliation and blood-money in accordance with their share in the inheritance. If blood-money is taken, it will be distributed among the inheritors in accordance with their share in the inheritance. And should Qisas قصاص (even retaliation) become the choice, the right of Qisas قصاص will also be commonly shared by all. Since Qisas is indivisible, the pardon given by any one of the inheritors will hold good and the pardon will become inclusive of the right of retaliation held by other inheritors. However, they shall receive the blood-money amount according to their share. 6. It is true that the right of even retaliation is vested in the legal heirs of the persons killed but, in accordance with the consensus of the Muslim community, they do not have the right to settle the score all by themselves, in other words, they cannot kill the killer on their own, instead, they have to seek the help of a Muslim ruler or his deputy to realize their right. The reason is that Qisas قصاص is an intricate issue when it comes to details which are simply out of reach for an average person. Therefore, the legal heirs of the person killed, not knowing the particular circumstances when retaliation does, or does not become necessary, may commit some sort of excess under the heat of their anger. So, by a unanimous agreement of the scholars of the Muslim community, it is necessary that the right of retaliation be secured and made effective through the agency of an Islamic government. (Qurtubi)

From the brief introduction to the nature of righteousness appearing in verses before this, the text now enters into the description of related subsidiary injunctions. Under the first injunction in this connection, the verse prescribes the law of Qisas (even retaliation), that is, the killer will be killed, irrespective of the status of the parties involved. If the aggrieved party somewhat relents on its own and forgives the Qisas قصاص ، but does not forgive the offence totally, it will become necessary for the killer to pay diyah (دیۃ) or blood-money as fixed, in a fair manner, and promptly. The claimant too, should pursue the matter in a recognized manner causing no harassment to the defendant. This law of blood-money and pardon is a relief granted by Allah Almighty in His grace, otherwise, there would have been no choice but to face the punishment of death. If, after all that, anyone crosses the limit set by Allah, such as, the filing of a false or doubtful case of murder, or a post-pardon re-opening of a murder case, he will be severely punished. In the end, the verse points out that wise people should have no difficulty in seeing that the law of even retaliation does not take life, instead, it gives life, for such a deterrent law will make people fear the punishment of killing somebody and thus lives will be saved. There is life in 'Qisas' قصاص Literally, the word, Qisas means likeness. In usage, it denotes 'even retaliation' or to return like for like. In Islamic juristic terminology, Qisas means the equal retaliation of an aggression committed against the body of a person. This retaliation is allowed only with a condition that the principle of "like for like" is strictly observed. This has been explained more clearly later on in verse 194 of this very Sarah which says: فَاعْتَدُوا عَلَيْهِ بِمِثْلِ مَا اعْتَدَىٰ عَلَيْكُمْ So, agress against him in the like manner as he did against you. And also in the concluding verses of Surah al-Nahl, the same rule has been covered: وَإِنْ عَاقَبْتُمْ فَعَاقِبُوا بِمِثْلِ مَا عُوقِبْتُم بِهِ And, if you retaliate, then retaliate just as you have been oppressed against. (16:126) Therefore, as a term of the Shari'ah, the Qisas قصاص is a punishment for killing or wounding in which the principle of equality or likeness is taken into full consideration. Rulings 1. The principle of even retaliation is applied exclusively in cases of culpable homicide when someone has been killed intentionally with a lethal weapon causing injury and blood-loss. 2. In a homicide of this nature, the killer is killed in even retaliation - free man for a free man, slave for a slave, and female for a female - and similarly, a man for a woman. The mention of 'free man for a free man' and 'female for a female' in this verse refers to a specific event in the background of which it was revealed. On the authority of Ibn Abi Hatim ؓ 1, Ibn Kathir (رح) has reported that, just before the advent of Islam, war broke out between two tribes. Many men and women, free and slaves, belonging to both, were killed. Their case was still undecided when the Islamic period set in and the two tribes entered the fold of Islam. Now that they were Muslims, they started talking about retaliation for those killed on each side. One of the tribes which was more powerful insisted that they would not agree to anything less than that a free man for their slave and a man for their woman be killed from the other side. It was to refute this barbaric demand on their part that this verse was revealed. By saying 'free man for a free man, slave for a slave and female for a female' it is intended to negate their absurd demand that a free man for a slave and man for a woman should be killed in retaliation, even though he may not be the killer. The just law that Islam enforced was that the killer is the one who has to be killed in Qisas قصاص . If a woman is the killer why should an innocent man be killed in retaliation? Similarly, if the killer is a slave, there is no sense in retaliating against an innocent free man. This is an injustice which can never be tolerated in Islam. This verse means nothing but what has been stated earlier, and we repeat, that the one who has killed will be the one to be killed in Qisas قصاص . It is not permissible to kill an innocent man or someone free for a killer, woman or slave. Let us hasten to clarify that the verse does not mean that Qisas قصاص will not be taken from a man who kills a woman or from a free man who kills a slave. In the very beginning of this verse the words الْقِصَاصُ فِي الْقَتْلَى: "The Qisas قصاص has been enjoined upon you in the case of those murdered" are a clear proof of this universality of application. There are other verses where this aspect has been stated more explicitly, for instance, in النَّفْسَ بِالنَّفْسِ (the person for the person). 3. If, in a case of intentional killing the murderer is given full pardon, for instance, should both of the two surviving sons of the deceased pardon and forego their right of retaliation, the killer is free of any claim against him. In case the pardon is not that full, for instance, as illustrated above, one of the two surviving sons does pardon the killer while the other does not, the result will be that the killer will stand released right there from the retaliatory punishment, but the one who has not pardoned the killer will be entitled to half of the blood-money (diyah). In Shari'ah, this diyah amounts to one hundred camels or one thousand dinars or ten thousand dirhams درھم or approximately nineteen pounds of silver according to current weights and measures. 4. The way an incomplete pardon makes payment of blood-money necessary, in the same manner, a mutual settlement between parties concerned on a certain amount makes retaliation inapplicable and payment of the agreed amount becomes necessary. This, however, is governed by some conditions which appear in books of fiqh فقہ . 5. Under the Islamic law, the inheritors of the person killed, whatever their number, will inherit and own the right of retaliation and blood-money in accordance with their share in the inheritance. If blood-money is taken, it will be distributed among the inheritors in accordance with their share in the inheritance. And should Qisas قصاص (even retaliation) become the choice, the right of Qisas قصاص will also be commonly shared by all. Since Qisas is indivisible, the pardon given by any one of the inheritors will hold good and the pardon will become inclusive of the right of retaliation held by other inheritors. However, they shall receive the blood-money amount according to their share. 6. It is true that the right of even retaliation is vested in the legal heirs of the persons killed but, in accordance with the consensus of the Muslim community, they do not have the right to settle the score all by themselves, in other words, they cannot kill the killer on their own, instead, they have to seek the help of a Muslim ruler or his deputy to realize their right. The reason is that Qisas قصاص is an intricate issue when it comes to details which are simply out of reach for an average person. Therefore, the legal heirs of the person killed, not knowing the particular circumstances when retaliation does, or does not become necessary, may commit some sort of excess under the heat of their anger. So, by a unanimous agreement of the scholars of the Muslim community, it is necessary that the right of retaliation be secured and made effective through the agency of an Islamic government. (Qurtubi)

The Qur'anic view of making will وصیّت Literally, al-wasiyyah الوَصِیّہ means an order to do something, either in the lifetime of the maker of wasiyyah or after his death. But, in commonly accepted usage, it refers to what must be done after death. It can be translated as the will or bequest. Out of the many meanings the word خیر khayr has in Arabic, 'wealth' happens to be one of them, for instance, in the verse وَإِنَّهُ لِحُبِّ الْخَيْرِ‌ لَشَدِيدٌ (Surely he is passionate in his love for good things) where, according to the unanimous agreement of commentators, خیر 'khayr' means 'wealth'. In early Islam, when shares in inheritance: were not fixed by the Shari'ah, the rule was that a dying person could make a will within the one third of inheritance, leaving behind in the name of his parents and relatives in whatever proportion he chose. This much was their right; the rest went to children. This injunction appears here in this verse. The making of a will made obligatory for one who is leaving behind some wealth has three aspects: 1. No shares except those of children are fixed for any other inheritors in what is being left by the dying person. These are to be determined through the will made by him. 2. Making a will for such relatives is obligatory on the dying person. 3. Making a will for more than one third of the inheritance is not permissible. Out of these three injunctions, the first one was abrogated by the 'verse of inheritance' as determined by most of the Companions and their immediate successors. Ibn Kathir has reported from the blessed Companion, ` Abdullahibn ` Abbas that this injunction was abrogated by the 'verse of inheritance' which is as follows: لِّلرِّ‌جَالِ نَصِيبٌ مِّمَّا تَرَ‌كَ الْوَالِدَانِ وَالْأَقْرَ‌بُونَ وَلِلنِّسَاءِ نَصِيبٌ مِّمَّا تَرَ‌كَ الْوَالِدَانِ وَالْأَقْرَ‌بُونَ مِمَّا قَلَّ مِنْهُ أَوْ كَثُرَ‌ ۚ نَصِيبًا مَّفْرُ‌وضًا ﴿7﴾ For men there is a share in what the parents and the nearest of kin have left, and for women there is a share in what the parents and the nearest of kin have left, be it is small or large - a determined share. (4:7) In another narration of the hadith from him it has been said that the 'verse of inheritance' has abrogated the making of will in the name of those who have a fixed share in the inheritance, while the injunction to make a will in favour of those relatives who do not have a share in the inheritance still holds good. (Jasss, Qurtubi) It should, however, be borne in mind that according to the consensus of the Muslim Ummah it is not obligatory on the dying person to necessarily make a will in favour of relatives who have no fixed shares in the inheritance. Therefore, the obligatory character of a wasiyyah in their favour is also abrogated (Jassas, Qurtubi). Now, making a will in favour of such relatives is only a desired (mustahabb) مستحب act, and that, too, is subject to their need. Now the second injunction regarding the obligation of making a will also stands abrogated in accordance with the consensus of the Muslim ummah. It was abrogated by that famous hadith (al-hadith al-mutawatir الحدیث المتواتر : the veracity of which stands ensured through an uninterrupted chain of transmitters from many sides who are unlikely to agree on a lie) which was part of the sermon delivered before some one hundred and fifty thousand Companions on the occasion of his last Hajj when he said: ان اللہ اعطی کل ذی حق حقہ فلاوصیۃ لوارث (اخرجہ الترمذی وقال حدیث حسن صحیح) Allah has Himself given everyone, who has a right, his right. So, there is no will for any inheritor. (Tirmidhi) The same hadith, as narrated by Sayyidna ibn ` Abbas ؓ ، has the following additional words: لا وصیۃ الوارث الا ان تجیزہ الوارثۃ There is no will for any inheritor unless all inheritors permit. The essence of the hadith is that Allah Almighty has Himself fixed the shares of the inheritors, therefore, the executor need not make a will anymore, in fact, he does not even have the permission to make a will in favour of an heir; however, should other inheritors allow the enforcement of such a will, it will then be permissible. Imam Al-Jassas (رح) says that this hadith has been reported from a group of the blessed Companions and the jurists of the Muslim community have accepted it unanimously, therefore, this is an uninterruptedly ensured hadith which makes the abrogation of the verse of the Qur'an permissible. Imam Al-Qurtubi (رح) has said that the scholars of the Muslim community unanimously agree that an injunction which comes to us through the Holy Prophet ﷺ and we know about it with full certitude, as is the case with mutawatir متواتر and mashhur مشھور reports, it will be at par with the injunction of the Holy Qur'an and will have to be taken as the command of Allah Almighty. Therefore, the abrogation of some verse of the Holy Qur'an from a hadith of this kind is no case for doubt. Although the hadith which invalidates a will in favour of an heir is a solitary report, (Al-Khabar al-Wahid), however, the fact that this hadith comes from the sermon of the last Hajj of the Holy Prophet g when he openly proclaimed this before the largest ever gathering of the blessed Companions, and then their consensus and the consensus of the Muslim community make it clear that this hadith is, according to them, absolutely proven, otherwise in the presence of the slightest doubt, they would have never abandoned the verse of the Qur'an and agreed to this abrogating command through the hadith. The third injunction stills holds good with the unanimous approval of the Muslim ummah in which it is not permissible to bequeath more than one-third of what one leaves behind. However, should the inheritors allow the bequest of more than one third, even the whole of what one leaves behind, it shall be permissible. Rulings 1. As stated earlier, now making a will is not necessary to cover relatives whose shares have been fixed by the Holy Qur'an. In fact, this is not permissible without the permission of other inheritors. However, relatives who do not hold a legal share in the inheritance can be bequeathed upto one third of the total. 2. In this verse a particular will was mentioned which was to be made by a dying person about what he left behind. This stands abrogated. But, making a will is still necessary, specially for a person who owes to others or holds something in trust. He should make sure that these are taken care of in his will. The Holy Prophet ﷺ has said in a hadith that a person who has some rights of other people due against him, then, he should not let three nights pass on him by which he does not have his written will with him. 3. As for the right to make a will covering the one-third of his property, one has the right to make some change in this will or cancel it totally during his life time.

The Qur'anic view of making will وصیّت Literally, al-wasiyyah الوَصِیّہ means an order to do something, either in the lifetime of the maker of wasiyyah or after his death. But, in commonly accepted usage, it refers to what must be done after death. It can be translated as the will or bequest. Out of the many meanings the word خیر khayr has in Arabic, 'wealth' happens to be one of them, for instance, in the verse وَإِنَّهُ لِحُبِّ الْخَيْرِ‌ لَشَدِيدٌ (Surely he is passionate in his love for good things) where, according to the unanimous agreement of commentators, خیر 'khayr' means 'wealth'. In early Islam, when shares in inheritance: were not fixed by the Shari'ah, the rule was that a dying person could make a will within the one third of inheritance, leaving behind in the name of his parents and relatives in whatever proportion he chose. This much was their right; the rest went to children. This injunction appears here in this verse. The making of a will made obligatory for one who is leaving behind some wealth has three aspects: 1. No shares except those of children are fixed for any other inheritors in what is being left by the dying person. These are to be determined through the will made by him. 2. Making a will for such relatives is obligatory on the dying person. 3. Making a will for more than one third of the inheritance is not permissible. Out of these three injunctions, the first one was abrogated by the 'verse of inheritance' as determined by most of the Companions and their immediate successors. Ibn Kathir has reported from the blessed Companion, ` Abdullahibn ` Abbas that this injunction was abrogated by the 'verse of inheritance' which is as follows: لِّلرِّ‌جَالِ نَصِيبٌ مِّمَّا تَرَ‌كَ الْوَالِدَانِ وَالْأَقْرَ‌بُونَ وَلِلنِّسَاءِ نَصِيبٌ مِّمَّا تَرَ‌كَ الْوَالِدَانِ وَالْأَقْرَ‌بُونَ مِمَّا قَلَّ مِنْهُ أَوْ كَثُرَ‌ ۚ نَصِيبًا مَّفْرُ‌وضًا ﴿7﴾ For men there is a share in what the parents and the nearest of kin have left, and for women there is a share in what the parents and the nearest of kin have left, be it is small or large - a determined share. (4:7) In another narration of the hadith from him it has been said that the 'verse of inheritance' has abrogated the making of will in the name of those who have a fixed share in the inheritance, while the injunction to make a will in favour of those relatives who do not have a share in the inheritance still holds good. (Jasss, Qurtubi) It should, however, be borne in mind that according to the consensus of the Muslim Ummah it is not obligatory on the dying person to necessarily make a will in favour of relatives who have no fixed shares in the inheritance. Therefore, the obligatory character of a wasiyyah in their favour is also abrogated (Jassas, Qurtubi). Now, making a will in favour of such relatives is only a desired (mustahabb) مستحب act, and that, too, is subject to their need. Now the second injunction regarding the obligation of making a will also stands abrogated in accordance with the consensus of the Muslim ummah. It was abrogated by that famous hadith (al-hadith al-mutawatir الحدیث المتواتر : the veracity of which stands ensured through an uninterrupted chain of transmitters from many sides who are unlikely to agree on a lie) which was part of the sermon delivered before some one hundred and fifty thousand Companions on the occasion of his last Hajj when he said: ان اللہ اعطی کل ذی حق حقہ فلاوصیۃ لوارث (اخرجہ الترمذی وقال حدیث حسن صحیح) Allah has Himself given everyone, who has a right, his right. So, there is no will for any inheritor. (Tirmidhi) The same hadith, as narrated by Sayyidna ibn ` Abbas ؓ ، has the following additional words: لا وصیۃ الوارث الا ان تجیزہ الوارثۃ There is no will for any inheritor unless all inheritors permit. The essence of the hadith is that Allah Almighty has Himself fixed the shares of the inheritors, therefore, the executor need not make a will anymore, in fact, he does not even have the permission to make a will in favour of an heir; however, should other inheritors allow the enforcement of such a will, it will then be permissible. Imam Al-Jassas (رح) says that this hadith has been reported from a group of the blessed Companions and the jurists of the Muslim community have accepted it unanimously, therefore, this is an uninterruptedly ensured hadith which makes the abrogation of the verse of the Qur'an permissible. Imam Al-Qurtubi (رح) has said that the scholars of the Muslim community unanimously agree that an injunction which comes to us through the Holy Prophet ﷺ and we know about it with full certitude, as is the case with mutawatir متواتر and mashhur مشھور reports, it will be at par with the injunction of the Holy Qur'an and will have to be taken as the command of Allah Almighty. Therefore, the abrogation of some verse of the Holy Qur'an from a hadith of this kind is no case for doubt. Although the hadith which invalidates a will in favour of an heir is a solitary report, (Al-Khabar al-Wahid), however, the fact that this hadith comes from the sermon of the last Hajj of the Holy Prophet g when he openly proclaimed this before the largest ever gathering of the blessed Companions, and then their consensus and the consensus of the Muslim community make it clear that this hadith is, according to them, absolutely proven, otherwise in the presence of the slightest doubt, they would have never abandoned the verse of the Qur'an and agreed to this abrogating command through the hadith. The third injunction stills holds good with the unanimous approval of the Muslim ummah in which it is not permissible to bequeath more than one-third of what one leaves behind. However, should the inheritors allow the bequest of more than one third, even the whole of what one leaves behind, it shall be permissible. Rulings 1. As stated earlier, now making a will is not necessary to cover relatives whose shares have been fixed by the Holy Qur'an. In fact, this is not permissible without the permission of other inheritors. However, relatives who do not hold a legal share in the inheritance can be bequeathed upto one third of the total. 2. In this verse a particular will was mentioned which was to be made by a dying person about what he left behind. This stands abrogated. But, making a will is still necessary, specially for a person who owes to others or holds something in trust. He should make sure that these are taken care of in his will. The Holy Prophet ﷺ has said in a hadith that a person who has some rights of other people due against him, then, he should not let three nights pass on him by which he does not have his written will with him. 3. As for the right to make a will covering the one-third of his property, one has the right to make some change in this will or cancel it totally during his life time.

The Qur'anic view of making will وصیّت Literally, al-wasiyyah الوَصِیّہ means an order to do something, either in the lifetime of the maker of wasiyyah or after his death. But, in commonly accepted usage, it refers to what must be done after death. It can be translated as the will or bequest. Out of the many meanings the word خیر khayr has in Arabic, 'wealth' happens to be one of them, for instance, in the verse وَإِنَّهُ لِحُبِّ الْخَيْرِ‌ لَشَدِيدٌ (Surely he is passionate in his love for good things) where, according to the unanimous agreement of commentators, خیر 'khayr' means 'wealth'. In early Islam, when shares in inheritance: were not fixed by the Shari'ah, the rule was that a dying person could make a will within the one third of inheritance, leaving behind in the name of his parents and relatives in whatever proportion he chose. This much was their right; the rest went to children. This injunction appears here in this verse. The making of a will made obligatory for one who is leaving behind some wealth has three aspects: 1. No shares except those of children are fixed for any other inheritors in what is being left by the dying person. These are to be determined through the will made by him. 2. Making a will for such relatives is obligatory on the dying person. 3. Making a will for more than one third of the inheritance is not permissible. Out of these three injunctions, the first one was abrogated by the 'verse of inheritance' as determined by most of the Companions and their immediate successors. Ibn Kathir has reported from the blessed Companion, ` Abdullahibn ` Abbas that this injunction was abrogated by the 'verse of inheritance' which is as follows: لِّلرِّ‌جَالِ نَصِيبٌ مِّمَّا تَرَ‌كَ الْوَالِدَانِ وَالْأَقْرَ‌بُونَ وَلِلنِّسَاءِ نَصِيبٌ مِّمَّا تَرَ‌كَ الْوَالِدَانِ وَالْأَقْرَ‌بُونَ مِمَّا قَلَّ مِنْهُ أَوْ كَثُرَ‌ ۚ نَصِيبًا مَّفْرُ‌وضًا ﴿7﴾ For men there is a share in what the parents and the nearest of kin have left, and for women there is a share in what the parents and the nearest of kin have left, be it is small or large - a determined share. (4:7) In another narration of the hadith from him it has been said that the 'verse of inheritance' has abrogated the making of will in the name of those who have a fixed share in the inheritance, while the injunction to make a will in favour of those relatives who do not have a share in the inheritance still holds good. (Jasss, Qurtubi) It should, however, be borne in mind that according to the consensus of the Muslim Ummah it is not obligatory on the dying person to necessarily make a will in favour of relatives who have no fixed shares in the inheritance. Therefore, the obligatory character of a wasiyyah in their favour is also abrogated (Jassas, Qurtubi). Now, making a will in favour of such relatives is only a desired (mustahabb) مستحب act, and that, too, is subject to their need. Now the second injunction regarding the obligation of making a will also stands abrogated in accordance with the consensus of the Muslim ummah. It was abrogated by that famous hadith (al-hadith al-mutawatir الحدیث المتواتر : the veracity of which stands ensured through an uninterrupted chain of transmitters from many sides who are unlikely to agree on a lie) which was part of the sermon delivered before some one hundred and fifty thousand Companions on the occasion of his last Hajj when he said: ان اللہ اعطی کل ذی حق حقہ فلاوصیۃ لوارث (اخرجہ الترمذی وقال حدیث حسن صحیح) Allah has Himself given everyone, who has a right, his right. So, there is no will for any inheritor. (Tirmidhi) The same hadith, as narrated by Sayyidna ibn ` Abbas ؓ ، has the following additional words: لا وصیۃ الوارث الا ان تجیزہ الوارثۃ There is no will for any inheritor unless all inheritors permit. The essence of the hadith is that Allah Almighty has Himself fixed the shares of the inheritors, therefore, the executor need not make a will anymore, in fact, he does not even have the permission to make a will in favour of an heir; however, should other inheritors allow the enforcement of such a will, it will then be permissible. Imam Al-Jassas (رح) says that this hadith has been reported from a group of the blessed Companions and the jurists of the Muslim community have accepted it unanimously, therefore, this is an uninterruptedly ensured hadith which makes the abrogation of the verse of the Qur'an permissible. Imam Al-Qurtubi (رح) has said that the scholars of the Muslim community unanimously agree that an injunction which comes to us through the Holy Prophet ﷺ and we know about it with full certitude, as is the case with mutawatir متواتر and mashhur مشھور reports, it will be at par with the injunction of the Holy Qur'an and will have to be taken as the command of Allah Almighty. Therefore, the abrogation of some verse of the Holy Qur'an from a hadith of this kind is no case for doubt. Although the hadith which invalidates a will in favour of an heir is a solitary report, (Al-Khabar al-Wahid), however, the fact that this hadith comes from the sermon of the last Hajj of the Holy Prophet g when he openly proclaimed this before the largest ever gathering of the blessed Companions, and then their consensus and the consensus of the Muslim community make it clear that this hadith is, according to them, absolutely proven, otherwise in the presence of the slightest doubt, they would have never abandoned the verse of the Qur'an and agreed to this abrogating command through the hadith. The third injunction stills holds good with the unanimous approval of the Muslim ummah in which it is not permissible to bequeath more than one-third of what one leaves behind. However, should the inheritors allow the bequest of more than one third, even the whole of what one leaves behind, it shall be permissible. Rulings 1. As stated earlier, now making a will is not necessary to cover relatives whose shares have been fixed by the Holy Qur'an. In fact, this is not permissible without the permission of other inheritors. However, relatives who do not hold a legal share in the inheritance can be bequeathed upto one third of the total. 2. In this verse a particular will was mentioned which was to be made by a dying person about what he left behind. This stands abrogated. But, making a will is still necessary, specially for a person who owes to others or holds something in trust. He should make sure that these are taken care of in his will. The Holy Prophet ﷺ has said in a hadith that a person who has some rights of other people due against him, then, he should not let three nights pass on him by which he does not have his written will with him. 3. As for the right to make a will covering the one-third of his property, one has the right to make some change in this will or cancel it totally during his life time.

Commentary Literally, Sawm صوم means to abstain'. In the terminology of Islamic law, Sawm صوم means 'to abstain from eating, drinking and sexual inter-course; with the conditions that one abstains continuously from dawn to sunset and that there is an intention to fast'. Therefore, should one eat or drink anything even a minute before sunset, the fast will not be valid. Similarly, if one abstained from all these things throughout the day but made no intention to fast, there will be no fast here too. Sawm or 'fasting' is an ` ibadah, an act of worship in Islam, regarded as its pillar and sign. The merits of fasting are too numerous to be taken up at this point. Past communities and the injunction to fast The verse makes it obligatory for the Muslims to fast in a specified period, but the command in this respect has been accompanied by the statement that the obligation of fasting is not peculiar to them. The fasting had also been enjoined upon the earlier Ummahs (communities of the past prophets). The reference to the earlier Ummahs in the verse shows the importance of fasting on the one hand, and gives an encouragement to the Muslims on the other. It indicates that although there may be some inconvenience in fasting but the same inconvenience was also faced by the earlier communities. This brings a psycho-logical comfort to the Muslims, because if an inconvenience is faced by a large number of people, it becomes easier to bear. (Rub al-Ma` am) The words of the Qur'an, لَّذِينَ مِن قَبْلِكُمْ (those before you) have been used in a general sense including all religious communities from Sayyidna Adam (علیہ السلام) to the last of the Prophets ﷺ . This tells us that, like Salah, fasting has also been enjoined upon every .Ummah of every prophet without an exception. Commentators who interpret مِن قَبْلِكُمْ (before you) to mean the Christians' take it just as an example, not aiming to exclude other communities. (Ruh al-Ma` ani) The verse simply says that fasts have been enjoined on Muslims as were enjoined on past communities. From this it does not necessarily follow that the fasts enjoined upon the earlier communities were fully identical in all respects with the fasts enjoined upon this Ummah. There may have been differences in the number and the timings of the fasts etc. and, actually, there has been such a difference. (Ruh al Ma’ ani) By saying لَعَلَّكُمْ تَتَّقُونَ (so that you be God-fearing), the text has pointed out to the inherent quality of fasting which contributes significantly to one's ability to become abstaining from the sins and God-fearing. Fasting grows into man a power which helps him control his desires, which is really the foundation of Taqwa تقویٰ , the very special term of the Holy Qur'an which has been tentatively translated as fear of God, abstinence, and the warding of evil.

Fasting When Sick Verse 184 gives concession in the matter of fasting to a 'sick' person and to a person on journey'. The word 'sick' used here refers to a person who cannot fast without an unbearable hardship or has strong apprehension that his illness will be aggravated. The words "and (Allah) does not want hardship for you"occuring in the following verse (185) have a clear indication to this effect. This position is also accepted by the consensus of the Muslim jurists. Fasting When In Travel It will be noticed that while giving concession to a traveller, the Qur'anic text elects to use the phrase أَوْ عَلَىٰ سَفَرٍ‌ (or on a journey) rather than the word, musafir مسا افر or 'traveller'. This is to point out that leaving home and going out is not enough to claim the exemption. The duration of the travel should be somewhat longer since the expression, ` ala safarin عَلَىٰ سَفَرٍ‌ means that one should have 'embarked' on a journey which does not mean going five or ten miles away from home. But, the precise duration of this journey has not been mentioned in the words of the Holy Qur'an. Guided by the statement of the Holy Prophet ﷺ and the subsequent practice of his blessed Companions, the great Imam, Abu Hanifah (رح) and many jurists have fixed this distance to be what can be covered in three days by walking in three daily stages. The later-day jurists have put it as 48 miles. The other ruling that comes out from the same phrase, ` ala safarin عَلَىٰ سَفَر is that a traveller who leaves his home shall be entitled to having been exempted from fasting only upto the time his travel continues. It is obvious that stopping in between to rest or take care of something does not cut off his onward travel in the absolute sense, unless his stay be for a considerable period of time. This very considerable period of time has been set at fifteen days following a statement of the Holy Prophet ﷺ . Anyone who intends to stay at a given place for fifteen days shall not come under the umbrella of ` ala safarin, therefore, he shall not be deserving of the leave granted to one on 'a journey'. Ruling. Right from here comes the ruling that anyone who intends to stay out for fifteen days, not at one place but at different places and towns, he shall continue to remain in the status of a 'traveller' and thereby shall continue to enjoy the concession of being 'on a journey' because he is in the state of ` ala safarin. Making Qada' قضاء of the missed fast The words of the text, فَعِدَّةٌ مِّنْ أَيَّامٍ أُخَرَ‌ literally translated as 'then, a number from other days' mean that a sick person or a traveller is obligated to fast during other days making the number match the number of days he could not fast. The purpose is to tell people that fasts abandoned because of the compulsion of sickness or journey must be replaced by making qada قضاء ' of them. Rather than using a simple statement to the effect that 'their replacement is on them', the Qur'anic text has said. فَعِدَّةٌ مِّنْ أَيَّامٍ أُخَرَ‌ which suggests that a sick person or a traveller will have to make qada' only when the sick person becomes healthy and the traveller returns home and gets to live on for the number of days he is required to replace the fasts he missed. So, one who dies before this happens, qada قضاء ' of fasts will not remain obligatory on him, nor will he be required to make a will for the payment of ransom (Fidyah فدیہ). Ruling. In the Qur'anic provision, 'a number from other days', there is no restriction on qada قضاء 'fasts, they could be seriatim or random; the choice is open. Therefore, a person who has missed his fasts for the first ten days of Ramadan, could first fast in lieu of his tenth or ninth fast of Ramadan and replace the earlier ones missed later on; this brings no harm. Similarly, one can fast with gaps at his convenience which would be quite permissible since the wordings of the Qur'an in فَعِدَّةٌ مِّنْ أَيَّامٍ أُخَرَ‌ (then, a number from other days) leave the possibility open. The Fidyah or Ransom for a Missed Fast The verse وَعَلَى الَّذِينَ يُطِيقُونَهُ means that those who have the strength to fast and are not restricted by sickness or travel, but do not wish to do it for some reason, they have the option of paying, in lieu of a fast, ransom in the form of charity. However, along with this leave, it was simply added: 'And that you fast that is better for you'. This injunction was valid in the early days of Islam when the purpose was to familiarize people to fasting. In the verse that follows, that is, فَعِدَّةٌ مِّنْ أَيَّامٍ أُخَرَ‌ (so, those of you who witness the month must fast therein), this injunction was abrogated for normal people. However, according to the consensus of the Ummah, it remained applicable to the people of very old age and to those who suffer from a permanent illness with no hope of recovery (Jassas and Mazhari). All Imams of Hadith, such as, al-Bukhari, Muslim, Abu Dawud, al-Nasa'i, al-Tirmidhi, al-Tabarani and others have reported from the blessed Companion Salma ibn Akwa': When the verse, وَعَلَى الَّذِينَ يُطِيقُونَهُ (and on those who have the strength) was revealed, we were given the choice of either fasting or paying fidyah for each fast. However, when the other verse, فَمَن شَهِدَ مِنكُمُ الشَّهْرَ‌ فَلْيَصُمْهُ (those of you who witness the month must fast therein), was revealed, this choice was withdrawn and fasting alone became necessary for those who had the strength. A long hadith from the blessed Companion, Mu` adh ibn Jabal ؓ reported in the Musnad of Ahmad describes three changes that came in Salah نماز during the early period of Islam, as well as, three changes in Sawm صوم . The three changes brought in the injunctions of fasting are as follows: When the Holy Prophet came to Madinah, he used to fast for three days in a month, and on the tenth of Muharram. Then the command to observe fasts in the month of Ramadan was revealed. Under the verse كُتِبَ عَلَيْكُمُ الصِّيَامُ (the fasts have been enjoined upon you), there was an option either to fast or to pay ransom, with a preference given to fasting. Then, Allah Almighty revealed the other verse, (those of you who witness the month must fast therein), which took away the option given to those who had the strength, and ordained fasting as the only alternative. However, the command remained valid for the very old who could pay ransom for fasts they missed. After these two changes, there was a third change. In the beginning, the permission to eat, drink and have marital intimacy after اِفطار iftar was valid only if one did not sleep after breaking his fast Sleeping was taken to be an indicator of the beginning of the next fast in which, naturally, eating and drinking and marital intimacy are prohibited. Then, Allah Almighty revealed the verse, أُحِلَّ لَكُمْ لَيْلَةَ الصِّيَامِ الرَّ‌فَثُ إِلَىٰ نِسَائِكُمْ (It is made lawful for you, in the nights of fast, to have sex with your women), which made it permissible to eat, drink and have sex during the night until the break of dawn. The eating of suhur سُحُر or sahri سَحری soon after getting up in the early hours of dawn was declared to be the sunnah. This is corroborated by ahadith in al-Bukhari, Muslim and AbU Dawud. (Ibn Kathir) The amount of Ransom and other rulings The ransom of one missed fast is half sa` of wheat, or its cost. Half sa` is equivalent to approximately 1.632 kilograms. After finding out the correct market price of wheat, the amount should be given to a poor person which will be the ransom of one missed fast. It should be borne in mind that this amount should not be given as part of wages given to those engaged in the service of a mosque or madrasah مدرسہ . Ruling 1. The amount of ransom for one fast should not be distributed between two recipients. Similarly, it is not correct to give the ransom amount for several fasts to one person on a single date. Although, some scholars permit this, yet, as a matter of precaution, it is better not to give the ransom amount of several fasts to one person on one single date. However, if someone does not observe this precaution, the ransom may be treated as valid. (See Shmi, Bayan al-Qur'an, Imdad al-Fatawa) Ruling 2. Should someone be in a position that he cannot even pay the ransom due, he should simply seek forgiveness from Allah through istighfar اِستِغفار and have an intention in his heart that he would pay it when he can. (Bayan al-Qur'an)

The merits of the month of Ramadan The present verse is an extension of the previous brief verse and also an assertion of the great merit the month of Ramadan holds in its fold. This is an extension because the expression أَيَّامًا مَّعْدُودَاتٍ (Days few in number) in Verse 184 is a bit vague and which has been explained out in the present verse by saying that those counted number of days mean the days of the month of Ramadan. As far as the merit of this month is concerned, it has been said that Allah Almighty has chosen this month to reveal Scriptures. Consequently, the Holy Qur'an was revealed in this very month. According to a narration from the blessed Companion Wathilah ibn Asga' appearing in the Musnad of Ahmad, the Holy Prophet ﷺ said that Abrahamic scriptures were revealed on the first of Ramadan, the Torah on the sixth, the Evangel on the thirteenth and the Qur'an on the twenty fourth of Ramadan. In another narration from the blessed Companion Sayyidna Jabir ؓ ، it appears that Zabur (the Book of Psalms) was revealed on the twelfth of Ramadan and the Evangel on the eighteenth. (Ibn Kathir) All previous Books mentioned in the hadith cited above were revealed on dates given in their entirety. It is a peculiarity of the Holy Qur'an that it was sent from the Preserved Tablet down to the Firmament of the Earth in one night of the month of Ramadan, all of it. But, it was revealed to the Holy Prophet ﷺ gradually during a period of twenty three years. The night of Ramadan when the Qur'an was revealed was the Night of Power as mentioned by the Qur'an itself when it said: إِنَّا أَنزَلْنَاهُ فِي لَيْلَةِ الْقَدْرِ‌ (We have revealed it in the Laylatul 'Qadr, the Night of Power). The hadith cited above places it on the twenty fourth of Ramadan and according to Sayyidna Hasan, the Night of Power falls on the night of twenty fourth which aligns this hadith with the statement of the Qur'an. Should this alignment be unacceptable, the fact remains that the statement of the Qur'an is above everything else, in which case, whatever night is the Night of Power that shall be regarded to be what the Qur'an intends. The next sentence مَن شَهِدَ مِنكُمُ الشَّهْرَ‌ فَلْيَصُمْهُ ' (those of you who witness the month must fast therein) carries many pointers to injunctions relating to fasting. The word, shahida is derived from shuhud شُهود which means presence. The word, al-shahr الشَّهْرَ‌means the month. It denotes the month of Ramadan here which has been identified above. The sentence, therefore, means that it is obligatory for one who is 'present' in the month of Ramadan that he fasts throughout that month. The general choice of paying ransom for not fasting, mentioned in the previous verse, was cancelled by this sentence and fasting is now the only alternative in force. As for the 'witnessing' of the month or being 'present' in the month of Ramadan, it simply means that a person finds the blessed month of Ramadan with ability to fast. In other words, he or she should be a Muslim, sane, pubert, resident and well-purified from all impurities including those of menstruation and childbed. Therefore, the persons who lacked the initial ability to fast throughout the month, such as, the disbelievers, the minor, the insane, they are not subject to the obligation of fasting, because the verse obligating the fasts did not intend them. As for those who did have the personal ability but were compelled at some time by a legally acceptable excuse, such as, a woman in menstruation or childbed, or a sick person or one on a journey, these have, in a way, found the month of Ramadan in a state of ability, therefore, the injunction in the verse applies to them. However, because of temporal compulsion, relief from fasting has been granted at that particular time, but qada’ قضاء will be necessary later on. Rulings 1. The verse tells us that fasts of Ramadan become obligatory only on the condition that one finds the month of Ramadan in a state of ability to fulfill the obligation. Therefore, anyone who 'finds' the whole of Ramadan will come under obligation to fast during the entire month of Ramadan. Anyone who 'finds' somewhat less of it, he will fast for the number of days he finds in Ramadan. So, should a disbeliever embrace Islam in the middle of Ramadan, or a minor becomes pubert, they will have to fast from that point onwards; they will not do gada' قضاء fasts for the previous days of Ramadan. However, the insane person, being a Muslim adult, does have the personal ability to observe fasts; so, should he regain his sanity during any part of Ramadan, he shall become obligated to do qada' قضاء fasts for the previous days of Ramadan. Similarly, should a woman in menstruation or childbed become purified in the middle of Ramadan, or a sick person becomes healthy, or a traveller becomes a resident, qada قضاء fasts for the previous days of Ramadan will become obligatory on them. 2. How does one 'find' or 'witness' the month of Ramadan? According to Islamic law, it is proved in either of the three ways: a) One gets to have a sighting of the Ramadan moon with his own eyes. b) The sighting of the moon is proved through some trustworthy witness. c) In the absence of the two conditions cited above, thirty days of the month of Sha'ban will be completed following which the month of Ramadan will set in. 3. If, on the eve of the twenty ninth of Sha` ban, the new moon is not visible on the horizon because of clouds or bad weather conditions, and at the same time, there comes no witness of moon-sighting as admissible under Islamic law, the next day will be known as the 'day of doubt' یوم الشک (yawm al-shakk) because the possibility exists that the moon may have really been there on the horizon but could not become visible due to unclear horizon as it is also possible that the moon was just not there on the horizon. On such a day, since 'the presence of the month' or the 'finding of Ramadan' or being a 'witness' to it does not apply, therefore, fasting for that day is not obligatory, instead, it is makruh مکروہ (reprehensible) to fast on that day. It has been forbidden in the hadith so that fard فرض and nafl نفل ، (the obligatory and the supererogatory) do not get mixed up with each other (Jasss). 4. In countries where days and nights extend over months, the 'finding of Ramadan' does not, obviously, seem to apply. The situation would require that people living there should not fast. As far as Salah is concerned, al-Huluwani and al-Qabali from among the Hanafi jurists have ruled that such people will be bound to observe Salah in accordance with the timings of their own day and night. For instance, in a country where dawn follows immediately after maghrib, there the Salah of ` Isha' will just not be obligatory. (shami) This makes it necessary that in an area where the day lasts for six months, people would have only five Salahs in six months and, for that matter, they will witness no Ramadan coming there, therefore, fasting will not become obligatory for them. Maulana Ashraf ` Ali-Thanavi (رح) has, in Imdad al-Fatawa, taken this very position. Note: In the sentence وَمَن كَانَ مَرِ‌يضًا أَوْ عَلَىٰ سَفَرٍ‌ فَعِدَّةٌ مِّنْ أَيَّامٍ أُخَر (should anyone be sick, or on a journey, then, a number from other days), the sick and the travelling have been granted leave that they may not fast at that time. When the sick person regains his health and the traveller returns home, they can make up for the days they missed by doing qada' قضاء fasts. It will be recalled that this injunction had appeared in the previous verse, but now that the choice of paying fidyah (ransom) for not fasting has been cancelled, a doubt could creep up in relation to the concession granted to the sick and the travelling, that it may have been abrogated as well, therefore, the provision was positively repeated.

Allah is near His servants Injunctions and merits concerning fasting and Ramadan were mentioned in three previous verses. This strain continues even after the present verse when details of fasting and I` tikaf اعتکاف appear in a long verse. In between, this brief verse has been introduced to persuade servants of Allah to obey the commands of Allah by recognizing how He, in His special grace, hears and answers their prayers. There is no doubt about fasting being a difficult obligation despite many concessions and permissions. It is to make the trial bearable that special grace has been mentioned إِنِّي قَرِ‌يبٌ '1 am near My servants. When they pray, I answer their prayers and take care of what they need.' Under these conditions, it is befitting that servants of Allah should bear by hardships that come during the performance of given injunctions. Ibn Kathir has pointed out to another wisdom behind this sentence appearing in the middle of injunctions of fasting. According to him, this verse gives a hint that a prayer (دعاء : du'a) made at the completion of a fast is accepted, therefore, one should be very particular about making prayers at that time. The Holy Prophet ﷺ has said: للصایٔم عند فطرہ دعوۃ مستجابۃ The prayer made by one who is fasting at the time of his iftar is accepted. This is why the blessed Companion, ` Abdullah ibn ` Urnar ؓ would assemble his family members around him at the time of iftar and would pray. Ruling By saying إِنِّي قَرِ‌يبٌ (I am near) in this verse, it has been hinted that prayer should be made slowly and quietly; to raise voice while praying is not desirable. This is confirmed by the background in which this verse was revealed. According to Ibn Kathir, a visitor from a village asked the Holy Prophet ﷺ : "Tell me if our Lord is near us, then we shall pray in a lowered voice; and if He is far, we shall call Him with raised voices." Thereupon, this verse was revealed.

Explained here in this verse are the remaining injunctions of fasting including the injunction relating to I` tikaf اعتکاف . Commentary The opening words of the verse, أُحِلَّ لَكُمْ (uhilla lakum: 'It is made lawful for you' ) tell us that the act made lawful through this verse was unlawful before. According to a narration by the blessed Companion, Bar-a' ibn ` Azib براء بن عازب appearing in Sahib al-Bukhari, in the early days when the fasts of Ramadan were made obligatory, the permission to eat, drink and have marital intimacy with wives was subjected to the condition that one does not sleep after breaking of the fast. So, as the practice was, a post-iftar nap rendered all these conveniences unlawful. Some Companions ran into difficulties due to this restriction. The blessed Companion, Qays ibn Sarma al-Ansari قہس بن سرما انصاری is reported to have reached home after a hard day's labour. The time of iftar was near and there was nothing to eat. His wife said that she would go out and somehow get him something to eat. When she returned she found her husband asleep, obviously because he was so tired from his day-long work. Now, when he got up, eating had become unlawful. He went on to fast for the next day in the same condition with the result that by afternoon, he fainted (ibn Kathir). Similarly, some Companions, may Allah be pleased with them, were embarrassed getting involved in marital relations with their wives after they had taken a post-iftar nap. It was after such happenings that the present verse was revealed in which the first rule was cancelled and permission was given to eat, drink and have marital relations, even if this was after getting up from the post-iftar nap. In fact, the permission was extended much further when the eating of suhur or sehri towards the fag??? ماکھن end of the night, after getting up from the night's sleep, was declared to be a sunnah. This has been clearly stated in Hadith narrations. The present verse outlines this very injunction. The literal meaning of the Qur'anic word رَفَث (rafath) is, no doubt, general and covers everything a husband suggests, says or does in making his wife consent to his desire, but there is a total agreement of the Muslim Ummah that, at this place, it means sexual intercourse. It is important to bear in mind that the order or rule which has been abrogated by this verse, that is, the unlawfulness of eating and drinking after having taken a nap, has not appeared in the text of the Holy Qur'an anywhere. The noble Companions acted in accordance with this rule as set by the Holy Prophet ﷺ (as narrated by Ahmad in his Musnad). This rule is abrogated by the verse only after giving it the authenticity of a divine command. In other words, the verse first establishes the rule in force as the divine command and then, it was for the sake of convenience that it was abrogated. From here we find out that some rules provenly set proven by the Sunnah can also be abrogated through the Qur'an. So, in the Islamic law, the decision of the Messenger ﷺ of Allah has the same authority as the injunction of the Holy Qur'an. Eating Sahri: The correct time when fasting begins and all eating and drinking turns unlawful has been fixed through a delicate similitude in the verse حَتَّىٰ يَتَبَيَّنَ لَكُمُ الْخَيْطُ الْأَبْيَضُ مِنَ الْخَيْطِ الْأَسْوَدِ ('until the white thread of the dawn becomes distinct from the black thread' ). Here, the darkness of the night has been likened to the black thread and the light of the dawn to the white thread. In order to eliminate the chances of extremism, the qualifier حَتَّىٰ يَتَبَيَّنَ (becomes distinct) was added which means that one should not act like the chronically skeptical to believe all eating and drinking to be unlawful earlier than the break of dawn, nor should one become so heedless as to go on eating and drinking even after having become certain of the light of dawn. In fact, the certainty of the break of dawn is the line of demarcation between eating and drinking and the intended fast. Before one arrives at this certainty, it is not correct to take eating and drinking as haram حرام . Similarly, after the certainty, any indulgence in eating and drinking shall be haram حرام ، and is a source which may lead to the spoiling of the fast, even if it exceeds the limit for a minute. The latitude and leeway allowed in eating suhur remains valid only upto the time one is not certain of the break of dawn. Particular incidents of this nature attributed to some blessed Companions have been reported when they continued eating and drinking well past the break of dawn. This was because they were not yet 'certain' of the dawn and refused to listen to those who favoured to stop much earlier. In a hadith, the Holy Prophet g is reported to have said: 'The adhan اذان of Bilal ؓ should not stop you from eating suhur because he calls the adhan اذان well ahead in the night. Therefore, you continue eating and drinking, even after having heard Bilal's adhan اذان ، until such time that you hear the adhan اذان called by Ibn Umm Maktum because he calls the adhan اذان precisely at the break of dawn' (Bukhari and Muslim). Because of the partial reporting of this hadith, some contemporaries misunderstood its provision when they suggested that there is no harm if eating and drinking is continued for a little while even after the adhan اذان of Fajr فجر and consequently, made it permissible for a person, who woke up late while the adhan اذان of Fajr فجر was being called, that he can hasten to eat something. The fact is that the hadith quoted above has very clearly said that it was necessary to stop eating or drinking with the adhan اذان of Ibn Umm Maktum ؓ which was called precisely at the break of dawn. In addition to that, the Holy Qur'an has itself established the deadline which is the 'certainty' of the break of dawn. Giving people the permission to eat and drink even one minute beyond that is a contravention of the textual imperative of the Holy Qur'an. As for the narrations reported from the noble Companions and early elders of the community regarding the subject of convenience in iftar and suhur, these can be explained, keeping the text of the Holy Qur'an in view, by saying that they aim to avoid excessive precautionary self-restriction well before one becomes certain of the break of dawn. Imam Ibn Kathir (رح) has also explained these narrations as based on the factor mentioned above. Otherwise, how could even a common Muslim tolerate an open contravention of the Qur'anic command? One could not even dream of something like this coming from the blessed Companions, specially so, when the Holy Qur'an has right here at the end of this verse, emphasized special precaution in this respect. Notice how فَلَا تَقْرَ‌بُوهَا (so, do not go near them) has been added to تِلْكَ حُدُودُ اللَّـهِ (These are the limits set by Allah) which explains the point made earlier. Ruling: All that has been said here is about people who are at a place from where they could see the break of the dawn with their own eyes and thus become 'certain' of it, moreover, if they have the additional advantage of a clear horizon and the personal ability to recognize the initial light of the dawn, then, it is necessary that they should act directly by looking at the horizon. Where the case is other than this, for example, the horizon is not in open view, or it is not clear, or one does not know how to identify the break of dawn, people determine its time by other signs or calculations. Obviously, for them there will be a time when the certain break of dawn would not be that certain. If it remains doubtful, what should people do then? Imam al-Jassas (رح) ، in his Ahkam al-Qur'an, has answered this question by saying that, in a condition such as this, it will be desirable not to go ahead and eat or drink with considered volition, but, should anyone eat or drink something in a state of doubt, well ahead of becoming certain of the break of dawn, he will not be a sinner. However, should it prove later that dawn had set in at that time, keeping a fast as qada' قضاء will become necessary. For instance, if moon is not sighted on the eve of Ramadan Observe the limits of and people do not fast, but the sighting of the new moon on the 29th was proved later on through witnesses, then, in that case, those who did not fast that day under the impression that it was the 30th of Sha` ban did not become sinners thereby, however, the qada' قضاء of that particular fast will become due on them, a position on which there is a unanimous agreement of the community. Similarly, if someone breaks his fast close to sunset on a cloudy day and the sun turns out to be still there on the horizon later on, then such a person, for that matter, will not be a sinner but he has to do the necessary qada' قضاء for the spoiled fast. The explanation given by Imam al-Jassas (رح) makes it clear that one who wakes up late and the usual calls of adhan اذان were being made, which necessarily makes it certain that dawn has appeared, then if such a person eats anything knowingly, he will not only be a sinner but also be bound to do gads' قضاء . If he eats in a state of doubt, the sin will be committed but qada' قضاء will still be due with the added factor of reprehensibility in a certain degree. The worship of I` tikaf Literally, I` tikaf اعتکاف means to stay at some place in seclusion. In the terminology of the Qur'an and Sunnah, I` tikaf is the act of staying in a mosque under particular conditions. The universality of the word فِي الْمَسَاجِدِ ('in mosques' ) proves that I` tikaf اعتکاف can be performed in every masjid (mosque). The juristic condition that I` tikaf اعتکاف can be done only in a masjid where congregational prayers are regularly held and that I` tikaf اعتکاف is not correct in a desolate masjid where congregational prayers are not held, is really a derivation from the very sense of a masjid since Salah with jams ah (prayer in congregation) is the main purpose of making a masjid, otherwise, individual Salah can be offered in a house, a shop, anywhere. Ruling That eating, drinking and marital intimacy are all lawful in the night of fasts has been stated earlier in the verse. In the state of I` tikaf اعتکاف ، the permission to eat and drink in the night remains the same as it is for everybody else, but it is different when it comes to intimacy with women which is not permissible in the state of I` tikaf, not even in the night. Therefore, the verse gives the necessary injunction in this connection. The rules of I` tikaf اعتکاف ، such as, doing I'tikdf اعتکاف while fasting and not coming out of the masjid without pressing needs recognized by Islamic law, are partly derived from the very word of I` tikaf اعتکاف and partly from the sayings and acts of the Holy Prophet ﷺ . Observe the limits of Allah Towards the end of the verse, by saying تِلْكَ حُدُودُ اللَّـهِ فَلَا تَقْرَ‌بُوهَا ('These are the limits set by Allah, so do not go near them' ), it has been hinted that the forbiddance of eating, drinking and marital intimacy while fasting are the limits set by Allah. One should not even go near them because, if you go near them, you may cross those limits. This is why overindulgence in gargling while fasting is makruh مکروہ (reprehensible) as it holds the danger of water slipping into the throat; also makruh مکروہ is the use of some medicine inside the mouth; again, equally makruh مکروہ is the kissing and hugging of one's wife. Similarly, it is better to stop eating and drinking a couple of minutes ahead of the time allowed for sahri or suhur just as a matter of precaution, and also, delaying the if-tar a couple of minutes. Becoming heedless and ease-prone in these matters is against this command from Allah.

Previous verses dealt with injunctions relating to fasting in which the use of lawful things has been forbidden during a fixed period and fixed timings. Now in this verse, the acquisition and use of Haram or unlawful wealth or property has been forbidden. This has a thematic congruity since the real purpose behind fasting, an act of worship, is nothing but to make man get used to abstaining from what is lawful for him. If he can do that, there is every likelihood that abstaining from what is totally unlawful will become all the more easier for him. There is yet another correspondence here. It is necessary that one must make an effort to break his or her fast with what is halal. Anyone who goes through the rigours of fasting throughout the day but ends up breaking his fast in the evening with what is Haram shall only find his fast unacceptable in the sight of Allah. Commentary This verse forbids the acquisition and use of wealth and property by unlawful means. It will be recalled that the acquisition and use of things by lawful means has been stressed upon in Verse 168 of Sarah al-Baqarah as follows: يَا أَيُّهَا النَّاسُ كُلُوا مِمَّا فِي الْأَرْ‌ضِ حَلَالًا طَيِّبًا وَلَا تَتَّبِعُوا خُطُوَاتِ الشَّيْطَانِ ۚ إِنَّهُ لَكُمْ عَدُوٌّ مُّبِينٌ ﴿168﴾ O mankind, eat from whatever is on earth [ that is ] lawful and good and do not follow the footsteps of Satan. Indeed, he is to you a clear enemy. Again, the same command appears in Surah al-Nahl: فَكُلُوا مِمَّا رَ‌زَقَكُمُ اللَّـهُ حَلَالًا طَيِّبًا وَاشْكُرُ‌وا نِعْمَتَ اللَّـهِ إِن كُنتُمْ إِيَّاهُ تَعْبُدُونَ ﴿114﴾ So, eat from what Allah has provided for you, permissible and good, and be grateful for the blessing of Allah, if it is Him you worship. (16:114) The criterion of good and evil in earning The whole world agrees that money and materials are needed and that life depends on them. So does it agree that there are favoured and permissible ways of acquiring them and there are undesirable and forbidden ways as well. Virtually the whole world looks down upon theft, robbery, and fraud, but people do not generally have some sound criterion to determine if these means are permissible or impermissible, may be this is just not possible since it relates to the well-being of the peoples of the entire world and affects humanity as such. Therefore, a universal criterion, sound and reasonable, can only come from the Lord-Creator of all the worlds through the medium of revelation. Otherwise, if human beings were themselves given the choice of forging their own criterion, naturally, those who give it a legal framework will think more about their nation, country or community and, as customary, this would be different from what would be thought about other nations and countries. Even if this exercise was done through an international body representing the whole world, that too, as experience shows, cannot satisfy all human beings. As a result, there will be legal injustice ending up in nothing but wars and chaos. The virtues of the Islamic economic system The Law of the permissible and the forbidden enforced by the Shari'ah of Islam comes clearly through divine revelation, or is derived from it. That law - reasonable, natural and comprehensive - is the only law that can work for every nation, country and community and could be the much wanted guarantee of peace. The reason is that everything of common utility has been left as such under this divine law, specially things to which all human beings claim equal rights, such as, the air, water, vegetation, heat, un-owned forests and the produce of uninhabited mountain growth. These are the commonly shared property of all human beings; it is not permissible for anyone to take these over as an owner. Then there are things which, if shared, would disturb human society, or generate conflict and violence. For these the law of private ownership is promulgated. The law that governs the initial ownership of a land or its produce is different from the law of the transfer of ownership. The law has been so formulated that no human being shall be left deprived of the necessities of life, of course, on condition that he puts in his effort to acquire these. Special attention has been given to the consideration that no man usurps the rights of others, or brings loss to them, and thereby, concentrates capital in the hands of a few individuals. Under the law of the transfer of ownership - whether it is in accordance with the divine injunctions relating to post-death inheritance or takes effect through buying and selling as agreed upon by parties concerned - it was made binding that there should be absolutely no fraud or deception in the transaction and also, there should remain no such ambiguity or insufficiency which might lead to mutual bickering and dispute in the future. Also taken into consideration is the factor of consent in transactions. It has to be made sure that the consent given by parties concerned is genuine and that such consent has not been extracted under pressure. In Islamic law, all transactions known as void, invalid or sinful have some defect inherent in the deal. At places, it could be plain fraud, at others, a return for some unknown thing or act. On occasions, someone's rights are usurped or self-interest is promoted by bringing loss upon others, or the rights of the general public are illegally disposed off. A very important reason why interest, gambling and their likes have been prohibited is that they are harmful to public interest. As a result of their evil presence in a society, some individuals get to grow as parasites while the whole community is thrown into poverty. Even if such transactions were to be carried out by a mutual consent of the parties involved, such transactions shall not be permissible because they are nothing but a formalized crime against the whole community. The present verse covers all such impermissible situations and aspects. It is interesting to note that the Holy Qur'an uses the word' أَمْوَالَكُم : (amwalakum) in وَلَا تَأْكُلُوا أَمْوَالَكُم بَيْنَكُم ، translated as 'and do not eat up each other's property by false means' which basically means 'your property'. This expression has a subtle indication to the fact that those who encroach upon the property of others must think that the other person would also have the same sort of love and concern for his property as the encroacher has for his own. If the defendant was to encroach upon the offender's property unlawfully, he would certainly be hurt. In addition to this, the verse may be releasing yet another suggestion. When someone encroaches upon the property of someone else, and if everybody else started doing this as common practice, the natural consequence would be that others would encroach upon his property, giving him what he gave to others. Looked at from this angle, encroaching upon someone's property unlawfully is really an invitation to others to come and encroach upon the encroacher's property, equally unlawfully. For a moment, imagine what would happen to a society where the cult of adulteration in articles of daily use becomes a common practice. There will be a dealer, who earns a little more by adulterating butter with cheaper oil or fat, who will then go to a milk shop and the milkman will give him milk adulterated with water. If he needs spices, these will be adulterated. The same experience will be repeated when he goes to buy medicines. So, one person earns more by adulteration while the other person takes that extra earning out of his pocket and the third person does the same to the second and the vicious circle goes on and on add nauseas nausea. Makhan38The adulterer feels good about what extra he puts in his coffers but he never looks at the hole under it for he keeps nothing of that extra in reality. Therefore, anyone who snatches the other person's money or property by false means, in fact, opens the door to the unlawful plundering of his money and property. In relation to this verse, there is yet another point one should bear in mind. The words of this divine injunction are general: And do not eat up each other's property by false means'. This includes the usurping of someone's property, and theft, and robbery, through which money or property belonging to someone is taken away by force. Then, there is interest, gambling, bribery and all defective sales and transactions which are also impermissible under the dictates of the Islamic law, even though, there be the certitude of consent given by concerned parties. Again, any money or property acquired through lying or a false oath, or earnings which have been prohibited by Islamic law, even though one has personally sweated out to earn it, are all haram, unlawful and false. Though the words of the Qur'an forbid 'eating' quite clearly, but the drive of the meaning here is not restricted to 'eating' as such, instead, it means 'using' in the absolute sense; it could be by eating, drinking, wearing or by any other mode of use. Metaphorically, all such uses are covered under the expression 'to eat,' for instance, A ate up the property of B, which is only a manner of saying, even though all that may not be what can be 'eaten'. The Background of Revelation This verse was revealed in the background of a particular event which relates to a land dispute between two of the noble Companions. The case came up for hearing in the court of the Holy Prophet ﷺ . The plaintiff had no witnesses. The Holy Prophet ﷺ asked the defendant to take an oath in accordance with Islamic legal norm. He was all set to take the oath when the Holy Prophet ﷺ recited the following verse before him as a matter of good counsel: إِنَّ الَّذِينَ يَشْتَرُ‌ونَ بِعَهْدِ اللَّـهِ وَأَيْمَانِهِمْ ثَمَنًا قَلِيلًا أُولَـٰئِكَ لَا خَلَاقَ لَهُمْ فِي الْآخِرَ‌ةِ Surely, those who take a small price out of the covenant of Allah and out of their oaths, for them there is no share in the Hereafter. (3:77) When the Companion heard this verse which warns those who try to take over someone's property through a false oath, he abandoned his intention to take that oath and surrendered the land to the plaintiff. (Ruh al-Ma'ani) So, this was the background under which this verse was revealed. To begin with, it forbids the acquiring of someone's property by unlawful means, then towards the later part, it warns against the filing of false cases, taking of false oaths and the giving or commission-ing of false witnesses. Forbidding all these, it has been said: وَتُدْلُوا بِهَا إِلَى الْحُكَّامِ لِتَأْكُلُوا فَرِ‌يقًا مِّنْ أَمْوَالِ النَّاسِ بِالْإِثْمِ وَأَنتُمْ تَعْلَمُونَ which means: 'Do not take property cases to the authorities, so that through them, you eat up some portion of the property of the people sinfully while you do know that you have no right therein and you are simply putting up a false case.' The words وَأَنتُمْ تَعْلَمُونَ (while you know) at the end of the verse tell us that a person, who claims something on the basis of misunderstanding and files a suit in the court to acquire it, will not be covered by this warning. In an event of this nature, the Holy Prophet has said: انما انا بشر و انتم تختصمون الی و لعل بعضکم ان یکون الحن بحجتہ من بعض فاقضی لہ علی نحوما اسمع منہ فمن قضیت لہ بشٔی من حق اخیہ فلا یاخذنہ فانما اقطع لہ قطیۃ من النار (رواہ البخاری و مسلم عن ام سلمہ ؓ) I am human and you bring your disputes to me. May be one of you is more eloquent with his case than the other and I decide in his favour on the basis of what I hear from him. So, should he get anything from what is the right of his brother, he should not take it because, in that case, I shall be alloting him a plot from Hell. (Bukhri and Muslim from Umm Salmah (رضی اللہ تعالیٰ عنہا The Holy Prophet ﷺ has made it clear in his saying quoted above that a Muslim judge may give a judgment under some misunderstanding in which the legal right of one party is being unlawfully given to the other, then, such a court judgment will not make the thing lawful for him. Also true is the converse, that is, it does not become un-lawful for one to whom it is lawful. In short, the judgment of a court does not make the lawful unlawful, or the unlawful lawful. If anyone succeeds in grabbing something belonging to somebody else through a court by means of fraud, false witness or oath, the curse of having done that will weigh heavy on his shoulders and he should, thinking of the ultimate accountability in the Hereafter and appearance in the court of Allah, the A11-knowing, the All-Aware, leave it off. However, according to Imam Abu Hanifah (رح) ، if in transactions involving a contract or an annulment where the Qadi or judge have authority under Islamic law, the Qadi قاضی gives a judgment, even if it be on the basis of a false oath or witness, that judgment will render the contract or the annulment valid under the Islamic law. The rules of lawful and unlawful will stand imposed on it, although, the curse of lying and engineering false witnesses will hang round his neck. Halal brings blessings; Haram produces evil: There are several places in the Holy Qur'an where the abstention from the unlawful and the acquisition of the lawful has been stressed upon in many different ways. It has also been pointed out in a verse that human deeds and morals are enormously affected by eating what is lawful. If one does not eat and drink halal things, it is almost impossible to expect good moral and righteous deeds coming from that person. It was said in the Holy Qur'an: يَا أَيُّهَا الرُّ‌سُلُ كُلُوا مِنَ الطَّيِّبَاتِ وَاعْمَلُوا صَالِحًا ۖ إِنِّي بِمَا تَعْمَلُونَ عَلِيمٌ ﴿51﴾ 0 messengers, eat of the good things and be righteous in deeds. I am aware of what you do. (23:51) In this verse, it will be noted that eating of the lawful has been combined with the command to do what is righteous. The hint is that righteous deeds can issue forth only when man eats and drinks what is lawful. The Holy Prophet has himself made it clear in a hadith that the address in this verse is, no doubt, to prophets, but this command is not restricted to them alone, instead, all Muslims are charged with it. Towards the end of this hadith, he also said that the prayer of a person who eats what is unlawful is not answered. The Holy Prophet a adds that there are many people who take great pains in their acts of worship, then raise their hands in prayer before Allah Almighty and say, '0 Lord, 0 Lord' but what they eat is haram حرام ، what they drink is haram حرام ، what they wear is haram حرام ، if so, how can this prayer of theirs be answered? A great portion of the teachings of the Holy Prophet ﷺ has been devoted to the great task of saving his ummah from the unlawful and calling it to the use of what is lawful. He said: 'One who ate halal حلال ، followed the sunnah and people were not hurt by him, he will go to Paradise.' The blessed Companions ﷺ said, '0 Messenger of Allah, right now these things are common in your community. Most Muslims observe these strictly.' He said:' Yes! In future too, in every age, there will be people who shall abide by these rules.' (This hadith has been reported by Tirmidhi and he calls it sahih) In another hadith, the Holy Prophet $ is reported to have said to the blessed Companion ` Abdullah ibn ` Umar: There are four traits, if these are in you and you have nothing else in the world, they shall suffice you. Those four traits are: Guarding a trust, telling the truth, good morals and being particular in eating what is halal حلال . The blessed Companion Sa'd ibn Abi Waqqas ؓ requested the Holy Prophet ﷺ to pray for him so that he may become one of those whose prayers are accepted. He said: O Sa'd سعد ، make what you eat permissible and pure, and you shall become one whose prayers are responded to. And by Him in Whose hands rests the life of Muhammad ﷺ ، when the servant of Allah slips a morsel of what is Haram into his stomach, no deed of his is accepted for the next forty days. And a person whose flesh is made of unlawful acquisitions, for that flesh the fire of Hell is the only recipient. The blessed Companion ` Abdullah ibn Masud ؓ reports that the.Holy Prophet ﷺ said: By him in whose hands rests my life, no servant of Allah becomes a Muslim unless his heart and tongue become Muslim and until his neighbours become secure from his distressing deeds. And when a servant acquires the unlawful and then gives it in charity, that is not accepted; and if he spends out of it, it stays deprived of blessings; and if he leaves it behind for his inheritors, it becomes his wherewithal for the trip to Hell. Surely, Allah Almighty does not help an evil wash off another evil, but He does help the washing away of an evil deed with a good deed. The Questions; man must answer on the Day of Resurrection The blessed Companion Mu` adh ibn Jabal ؓ reports that the Holy Prophet ﷺ said: ما تزال قدما عبد یوم القیامہ حتی یسال عن اربع عن عمرہ فیما افناہ و عن شبابہ فیما ابلاہ وعن مالہ من این اکتسبہ وفیما انفقہ وعن علمہ ماذا عمل فیہ (البیہقی۔ ترغیب) No servant of Allah shall move a step on Doomsday unless he is made to answer four questions; firstly, about his life, in what did he spend it out; secondly, about his youth, in what did he consume it; thirdly, about his wealth, where from did he earn it and in what did he spend it; and fourthly, about his knowledge, how far did he act in line with it.' (Al-Bayhaqi, Targhib) The blessed Companion, ` Abdullah ibn ` Umar ؓ reports that the Holy Prophet ﷺ once gave a sermon in which he said: O Emigrants, I seek the refuge of Allah Almighty against five traits of character lest they should grow into you: firstly, against immodesty, for when immodesty prevails in a people they are hit by plagues, epidemics and ever-new diseases not even heard of by their elders; and secondly, against cheating in weights and measures, for when this disease grips a people, they are hit by famine, price-hikes, rigorous labour and overwork and oppressive rulers; and thirdly, against nonpayment of Zakah زکوٰۃ ، for when people do not pay Zakah زکوٰۃ ، rains are stopped; and fourthly, against the religious apathy of people, for when a community breaks its covenant with Allah and His Messenger, then Allah Almighty makes alien enemies sit over them who snatch away what belongs to them without any justification; and fifthly, against the apathy of ruling authority, for when the rulers of a people fail to decide matters in accordance with the Book of Allah, because the injunctions revealed by Allah Almighty do not suit their fancies, then Allah Almighty causes mutual hatred and disputations descend upon them. (This narration has been reported by Ibn Majah, al-Bayhaqi and others and al-Hakim has called it 'Sahih' according to the standard set by Muslim.) May Allah Almighty give us and all Muslims the most perfect ability to stay safe against such unfortunate happenings.

The theme of righteousness which started from Verse 177 still continues. The six injunctions that have appeared so far relate to even retaliation, bequest, fasting, I` tikaf اعتکاف and abstention from the unlawful. Now come those of Hajj حج and Jihad جہاد prior to which it was clarified that lunar months and days will be followed in Hajj and in other religious obligations. Also erased here is a custom of jahiliyyah جاھلیہ (days of ignorance) which required people in Ihram احرام to go into their houses, if needed, from the back even if it had to be through a hole in the wall bored (made a hole) punctured for this purpose, as they thought it was prohibited to enter houses from the front door when in Ihram احرام . They even rated it as 'righteousness'. So, it is immediately after the mention of Hajj that Allah Almighty tells them that entering the houses from the backs is no righteousness. Real righteousness lies in abstaining from what has been made unlawful by Allah. Since coming into houses through their doors is not forbidden, the question of abstaining from it does not arise. So, those who wish to go into their houses should enter through their doors, but the center-piece of all principles is that people must keep fearing Allah so that they can hope to have the best of both the worlds. Verse 190-191 carry the injunction relating to fighting with disbelievers. It was the month of Dhul-Qa'dah ذوالقعدہ in the year 6 A.H. that the Holy Prophet ﷺ began his journey to the sacred city of Makkah in order to perform ` Umrah عمرہ . Makkah was still controlled by the mushrikin مشرکین (the infidels). They did not allow him and his Companions to go into the city and ` Umrah عمرہ could not be performed as intended. It took a great deal of negotiating to arrive at the agreement that the Muslims would perform ` Umrah عمرہ next year. This pact is known as the 'Peace of Hudaybiyyah'; a detailed explanation of the verse in this context will appear later. Commentary Reported in the first Verse (189) there is a question asked by the noble Companions and its answer given by Allah Almighty. Sayyidna ` Abdullah ibn ` Abbas ؓ says that the Companions of the Holy Prophet ﷺ had a distinct mannerliness of their own. On account of the great respect they had for him, they asked very few questions from their Prophet ﷺ . This is contrary to the practice of the communities of the past prophets who asked many questions and thus failed to observe the etiquette due before a prophet. Sayyidna ` Abdullah ibn ` Abbas ؓ adds that the total number of questions asked by the noble Companions as mentioned in the Holy Qur'an is fourteen, one of which has just appeared above: إِذَا سَأَلَكَ عِبَادِي ' And when My servants ask you...' (186). The other question is right here. Other than these, there are six more questions appearing in Surah al-Baqarah itself. The rest of the six questions come up in various other Surahs. It is mentioned in the present verse that the noble Companions asked the Messenger of Allah about the new moon as it appears in the early part of the month, having a shape different from the sun. The new moon begins as a thin crescent slowly growing into full circle, then, it starts reducing itself in the same manner. So, they asked either about its cause or about the wisdom underlying its gradual growth. Both possibilities exist. But the answer given states the wisdom and benefit behind it. Now, if the question itself was concerned with the wisdom and benefit behind the waning and waxing of the new moon, then the answer obviously synchronizes with the question. But, if the question aimed at finding out the cause of the waning and waxing of the new moon, which is far away from the mannerliness of the noble Companions, then the answer, by electing to state its wisdom and benefit rather than its reality, simply hints that finding out the reality of the heavenly bodies is not an area under man's control anyway, and then, for that matter, the knowledge of its reality is not necessary for any practical purpose, neither in this world nor in the Hereafter. Therefore, the question of reality is absurd. What could be asked and what could be explained is that there are certain benefits that accrue to us through the waning and waxing, the setting and the rising of the moon in this manner. Therefore, in response to this, the Holy Prophet g was told that he should tell them that their benefits tied to the moon are that they will find it easy to determine the time factor in their transactions and contracts, and to know about the days of the Hajj. The Lunar Calendar is the Islamic choice This verse tells us no more than that the moon will help identify the count of months and days on which rest transactions and acts of worship, such as, the Hajj. The same subject has been dealt with in Sarah Yanus in the following manner: وَقَدَّرَ‌هُ مَنَازِلَ لِتَعْلَمُوا عَدَدَ السِّنِينَ وَالْحِسَابَ And determined it (the moon) by stations, that you might know the number of the years and the reckoning. (10:5) This tells us that the benefit of having the moon pass through different stages and conditions is that people may find out through it the count of years, months and days. But, in a verse of Sarah Bani Isra'il, this count has been connected to the sun as well in the following words: فَمَحَوْنَا آيَةَ اللَّيْلِ وَجَعَلْنَا آيَةَ النَّهَارِ‌ مُبْصِرَ‌ةً لِّتَبْتَغُوا فَضْلًا مِّن رَّ‌بِّكُمْ وَلِتَعْلَمُوا عَدَدَ السِّنِينَ وَالْحِسَابَ Then We erased the sign of the night and brought out the sign of the day to see, so that you seek the blessing from your Lord and get to know the number of years and the reckoning. (17:12) Although this third verse proves that years and months can be counted with the help of a solar calendar also, yet the words used by the Holy Qur'an with regard to the moon very clearly indicate that the lunar calendar is a fixed choice in the Shari` ah of Islam, specially in prescribed acts of worship which relate to a particular month and its dates; for instance, the months of Ramadan and Hajj, as well as injunctions related to the days of Hajj, Muharram and Lailatul-Qadr لیلۃ القدر are all tied to the sighting of the new moon, all this because in this verse, by saying هِيَ مَوَاقِيتُ لِلنَّاسِ وَالْحَجِّ (They are indicative of time for the people and of the Hajj), it has been established that the lunar calendar is the one to be trusted upon in the sight of Allah, although, the count of months can come out of a solar calendar as well. The Shari'ah of Islam has opted for the lunar calendar because it is based on something which every sighted person can see on the horizon and be informed accordingly; the knowledge of it is equally easy for the scholars, the ignorant, the villagers, the islanders and the dwellers of the mountains. This stands in contrast with the solar calendar which depends on meteorological equipment and mathematical computations which cannot become the common personal experience of everybody so easily. Then comes the matter of religious observances, the ` ibadat عبادات ، where the lunar calendar has been fixed as an obligation. This has also been favoured in social and business transactions because it serves as a basis for the acts of Islamic worship, and a symbol of Islamic identity, notwithstanding the position of the solar calendar which has not been prohibited juristically, the only condition being that the use of the solar calendar should not become so widespread that people forget all about the lunar calendar. If this happens, it would necessarily affect the obligatory ` ibadat عبادات like Fasting and Hajj adversely, a sampling of which is visible in our time, in offices and businesses, government and private, where the solar calendar is being used with such frequency that many people do not seem to even remember all Islamic months by name. Apart from the juristic position of the lunar system, this situation is a deplorable demonstration of our lack of will to approach and uphold such a matter of national and religious identity with a sense of self-respect. It is not difficult to use the solar calendar only in office situations where one has to deal with non-Muslims as well, but for the rest of office correspondence, private dealings and daily requirements the lunar calendar may be used with advantage, that is, if this is done, the user will earn the thawab ثواب of performing a fard ` ala al-kifayah فرض علی الکفایہ (an obligation which, if performed by some, suffices for others), and of course, national identity will be preserved. Ruling From the verse لَيْسَ الْبِرُّ‌ بِأَن تَأْتُوا الْبُيُوتَ مِن ظُهُورِ‌هَا (And it is not righteousness that you come into your houses from their backs) comes the ruling that something which the Shari'ah of Islam has not classed as 'necessary' (wajib واجب ) or has not given it the status of an act of ` Ibadah عباداہ ، should not be taken as 'necessary' or an act of ` Ibadah عباداہ on one's own. This is not permissible. Similarly, taking something to be a sin while it is permissible under Islamic law is a sin in itself. This is exactly what those people had done. Entering houses through doors was permissible under religious law, yet they made it out to be a sin, while coming into the house from its back by breaking through the wall was not 'necessary' under the religious law, yet they made it out to be necessary. This was why they were admonished. The reason why bid` at بدعت (innovations in religious matters) are not permissible is that unnecessary things are taken to be necessary like the obligatory - fard, or wajib. Or, things permissible are taken to be forbidden or unlawful. This verse makes it very clear that doing so is prohibited, and incidentally, this gives us the guiding rule in thousands of acts in vogue. The expression وَلَا تَعْتَدُوا (and do not transgress) towards the end of the verse, according to the majority of the commentators means - 'do not go beyond the limit in fighting as to start killing women and children'.

Jihad: To fight in the way of Allah That Jihad and Qital or fighting against disbelievers was prohibited prior to the emigration to Madinah is a fact the entire Muslim community agrees upon. All verses revealed during that time advised Muslims to be patient against pains inflicted on them by disbelievers, even to ignore and forgive when they can. It was after the emigration to Madinah that the first command to fight against them came through this verse (as said by al-Rabi' ibn Anas and others). Another narration from Sayyidna Abu Bakr al-Siddiq ؓ says that the first verse relating to this subject is: أُذِنَ لِلَّذِينَ يُقَاتَلُونَ بِأَنَّهُمْ ظُلِمُوا Leave is' given to those who are fought against because they were wronged", but according to a majority of the blessed Companions and their successors, the first verse commanding to fight the disbelievers is this very verse from Surah al-Baqarah while the verse which has been identified as the first verse on this subject by Sayyidna Abu Bakr al-Siddiq ؓ ، that too being among the very initial verses revealed, could be called the first. The command in this verse is that Muslims should fight only those disbelievers who come to fight against them. It means that there are other people too who do not take part in fighting, such as, the women, the children, the very old, the priests and monks and others devoting themselves to quiet religious pursuits, and the physically handicapped, and those casual labourers who work for disbelievers and do not go to fight along with them; it is not permissible to kill such people in a Jihad. The reason is that the command in the verse is restricted to fighting those who come to fight Muslims. The kind of people mentioned above are not all fighters. That is why Muslim Jurists رحمۃ اللہ علیہم have also ruled that should a woman, an old man or, religious person take part in actual fighting along with disbelievers or be helping them in any manner in their fight against the Muslims, then, killing them is permissible because they come under the purview of الَّذِينَ يُقَاتِلُونَكُمْ those who fight you'. (Mazhari, Qurtubi and Jassas) The battle orders of the Holy Prophet ﷺ given to the mujahidin of Islam at the time of Jihad carry a good explanation of this injunction. In a hadith from al-Bukhari and Muslim, as narrated by the blessed Companion ` Abdullah ibn ` Umar ؓ ، it is said: نھی رسول اللہ ﷺ عن قتل النساء والصبیان The Holy Prophet ﷺ has prohibited the killing of women and children.' The following instructions from the Holy Prophet ﷺ given to the Companions going on Jihad have been narrated in a hadith from Sayyidna Anas ؓ which appears in Abu Dawud: 'Go for Jihad in the name of Allah adhering to the community of the Messenger of Allah. Do not kill anyone old and weak, any young child or any woman.' (Mazhari) When Sayyidna Abu Bakr al-Siddiq ؓ sent Yazid ibn Abi Sufyan ؓ to Syria, he gave him the same instructions. Also added there is the prohibition of killing the religiously-devoted, the monks and priests, and the labourers employed by disbelievers, especially when they do not take part in fighting (Qurtubi).

As already explained briefly in the opening remarks, the verse 191, that is, وَاقْتُلُوهُمْ حَيْثُ ثَقِفْتُمُوهُمْ وَأَخْرِ‌جُوهُم (And kill them; wherever you find them and drive them out from where they drove you out...), was revealed after the happening at Hudaybiyyah حُدیبیہ at a time when the Holy Prophet ﷺ decided, in accordance with the condition agreed upon in the Peace Treaty of Hudaybiyyah حُدیبیہ ، to embark on a journey to Makkah to perform the qada' قضاء of ` Umrah along with his Companions, something he was stopped from doing a year before by the disbelievers of Makkah. The noble Companions ؓ ، on the eve of this projected journey, had started to worry about the disbelievers who could not be trusted upon in a peace treaty. If they chose to be aggressive, as they did a year before, what option are they going to take? Thereupon, the words used in the present verse gave them the permission to meet the challenge of their aggression and kill them where they find them. And if they could, it was permissible for them to drive the disbelievers out from where they had driven the believers out. Since Muslims, during their entire Makkan period, were made to stay away from fighting against the disbelievers and were repeatedly asked to forego and forgive, so much so, that the noble Companions were, before the revelation of this verse, under the impression that killing disbelievers was bad, and prohibited. It was to remove this misconception that it was said: وَالْفِتْنَةُ أَشَدُّ مِنَ الْقَتْلِ "And Fitnah فِتْنَہ is more severe than to kill," that is, it is true that to kill someone is a terribly evil act, but more terrible and severe is what the disbelievers of Makkah have done by insisting on their kufr and shirk شرک (infidelity and the associating of others with Allah) and by stopping Muslims from fulfilling their religious obligations, and from performing Hajj and ` Umrah. It is to avoid this greater evil that killing them has been permitted. The word, Fitnah فِتْنَہ in the verse (not translated for want of a perfect equivalent in English) inescapably means kufr کفر and shirk شرک and to prevent Muslims from fulfilling their religious obligations of ` ibadah.(Jassas, Qurtubi and others) Since the generality of the words 'kill them wherever you find them' might lead to the misconception that killing the disbelievers is allowed even in the precincts of Haram, this generality has been particularized in the next sentence of the verse by saying: وَلَا تُقَاتِلُوهُمْ عِندَ الْمَسْجِدِ الْحَرَ‌امِ حَتَّىٰ يُقَاتِلُوكُمْ فِيهِ And do not fight them near Al-Masjid al-Haram unless they fight you there. That is, 'you should not fight them close to Al-Masjid al-Haram, which includes all its environs in Makkah, unless they themselves start fighting you there.' Rulings 1. In the Haram حرم (the sacred precincts) of Makkah, it is just not permissible to kill even a bird or animal, let alone the human beings. However, this same verse tells us that in the event someone starts killing somebody else within the sacred precincts, then, that other person is permitted to fight back in defence. There is a consensus of the jurists on this point. 2. It also comes out from this verse that the prohibition of initiating Jihad جھاد or Qital قتال is restricted to Al-Masjid al-Haram المسجد الحرام and its environs to which the sacred precincts extend in Makkah. At other places, just as the defensive Jihad جھاد is necessary, the initiating of Jihad جھاد and Qital قتال is also valid.

Commentary 1. When the Holy Prophet decided to travel to Makkah in the year 7 A.H. to perform his qada"Umrah as envisaged in the peace treaty of Hudaybiyyah; his Companions ؓ who were to accompany him knew that disbelievers could not be trusted with treaties, or peace. It was quite possible that they may start fighting. Now, the blessed Companions had a problem before them. They thought if this fighting came, it would have to be within the sacred precincts of Makkah, which is not permissible in Islam. This doubt was answered in Verse 191 by stating that the sanctity of the sacred precincts of Makkah must certainly be observed by Muslims, but should the disbelievers start to fight within the sacred limits, then, it is permissible for them to fight back in defence. 2. The second problem that bothered the noble Companions was about the month, which was Dhul-Qa'dah ذوالقعدہ ، being one of the four known as the 'sacred months' wherein fighting anyone anywhere was not permissible. Now, the Muslims thought if the disbelievers of Makkah started fighting against them how could Muslims fight a defensive battle during a 'sacred month'? The verse under reference (194) was revealed to answer this doubt. The answer is that, the way a state of defence grants an exception to observing the sanctity of the Haram of Makkah, in the same manner, it allows an exception to observing the sanctity of the 'sacred months' also.

Commentary 1. When the Holy Prophet decided to travel to Makkah in the year 7 A.H. to perform his qada"Umrah as envisaged in the peace treaty of Hudaybiyyah; his Companions ؓ who were to accompany him knew that disbelievers could not be trusted with treaties, or peace. It was quite possible that they may start fighting. Now, the blessed Companions had a problem before them. They thought if this fighting came, it would have to be within the sacred precincts of Makkah, which is not permissible in Islam. This doubt was answered in Verse 191 by stating that the sanctity of the sacred precincts of Makkah must certainly be observed by Muslims, but should the disbelievers start to fight within the sacred limits, then, it is permissible for them to fight back in defence. 2. The second problem that bothered the noble Companions was about the month, which was Dhul-Qa'dah ذوالقعدہ ، being one of the four known as the 'sacred months' wherein fighting anyone anywhere was not permissible. Now, the Muslims thought if the disbelievers of Makkah started fighting against them how could Muslims fight a defensive battle during a 'sacred month'? The verse under reference (194) was revealed to answer this doubt. The answer is that, the way a state of defence grants an exception to observing the sanctity of the Haram of Makkah, in the same manner, it allows an exception to observing the sanctity of the 'sacred months' also.

Ruling There are four 'sacred months': Dhul-Qa'dah, Dhul-Hijjah, Muharram which are consecutive and the fourth is Rajab. Even before Islam, fighting in these months was considered unlawful and the disbelievers of Makkah too used to observe their sanctity. Even in the early days of Islam, right through the year 7 A.H., this law was in force which is why the noble Companions were perplexed. Later, according to the consensus of the Ummah, this unlawfulness of fighting was abrogated and the permission to fight was given, but it is still preferable not to initiate fighting in these four months without the need to defend. Therefore, it can be said that the sanctity of the 'sacred months' has not been abrogated totally, but it holds good like the sanctity of Haram. Both of them have been subjected to an exception for the sake of defence.

Spending for Jihad The verse 195 introduces the tenth injunction under the theme of 'righteousness' which began in Verse 177. So, in وَأَنفِقُوا فِي سَبِيلِ اللَّـهِ (And spend in the way of Allah...), Muslims have been obligated to spend money and materials according to the need of Jihad ordered in the way of Allah. From here, jurists have deduced the ruling that Muslims have some other financial obligations as well in addition to the mandatory obligation of Zakah, but these are neither permanent nor bound by a 'threshold' or quantity, instead, it is obligatory on all Muslims to provide everything as and when needed. Of course, should there be no need, nothing remains obligatory. The expenditure on Jihad is included under this provision. The literal meaning of the next sentence in this verse وَلَا تُلْقُوا بِأَيْدِيكُمْ إِلَى التَّهْلُكَةِ as translated in the text are obvious. The verse forbids Muslims from throwing themselves into destruction by their own choice. However, the question remains: What does the expression, 'put yourselves into destruction', mean here? Commentators have explained it in different ways. The blessed Companion, Abu Ayyub al-Ansari ؓ said: 'This verse was revealed about us. We can explain it best. It was when Allah gave Islam authority and power, we started talking that 'Jihad' was not necessary any more, and that we could stay home and take care of our wealth and property'. Thereupon, this verse was revealed which made it clear that 'destruction' at this place means 'the abandonment of Jihad'. This proves that the banishing of Jihad from Muslim lives is the cause of their degradation and destruction. This is why the blessed Companion Abu Ayyub al-Ansari spent his entire life in Jihad, out of Madinah, his home, so much so, that he met the end of his life in Constantinople (Istanbul), Turkey and was buried there. The same approach to the meaning of this verse has been reported from the earliest authorities in Tafsir, such as, Sayyidna Ibn ` Abbas, Hudhayfah, Qatadah, Mujahid and Dahhak. Sayyidna Bar-a' ibn 'Azib ؓ said that to lose hope in the mercy and forgiveness of Allah is to go for personal destruction voluntarily; therefore, to lose hope in Forgiveness is forbidden. Others say that exceeding the limit while spending in the way of Allah so much so that the rights of the family are compromised thereby, is the act identified as 'putting yourself into destruction'; so, such excess in expenditure is not permissible. Still others think that the verse makes it unlawful to throw oneself into an offensive fighting in a situation when it is already obvious that one will be unable to do anything against the enemy other than dying at their hands. Notwithstanding the apparently various interpretations of this verse, al-Jassas synthesizes these by saying that all these rules can be inferred from this verse. The last sentence of the verse (195):' وَأَحْسِنُوا ۛ إِنَّ اللَّـهَ يُحِبُّ الْمُحْسِنِي : (And do good. Of course, Allah loves those who do good), gives an incentive to do everything nicely. The Holy Qur'an calls this Ihsan احسان . Now, doing something nicely, can take two forms. When ihsan relates to ` Ibadah عبادہ (worship), its meaning has been explained by the Holy Prophet ﷺ himself in the well-known hadith of Jibra'il (علیہ السلام) where he said that 'you should worship Allah as if you are seeing Him, and if you cannot achieve that degree of perception, then you should, at the least, believe that Allah Almighty is seeing you'. And when it (ihsan احسان) relates to social transactions and dealings, the Holy Prophet ﷺ has explained Ihsan by saying (as reported in the Musnad of Ahmad on the authority of the noble Companion Mu` adh ؓ ) that 'you should like for others what you like for yourselves, and in the same manner, you should dislike for others what you dislike for yourselves' (Mazhari).

Injunctions concerning Hajj and ` Umrah In the series of injunctions appearing under the theme of 'righteousness' which has started from verse 177, the eleventh injunction relates to the Hajj. Since it is tied to Makkah al-Mukarramah and Ka'bah, the House of Allah, therefore, some relevant questions have been covered partly under the subject of Qiblah قبلہ from verse 125 to 128 of Surah al-Baqarah. They begin from وَإِذْ جَعَلْنَا الْبَيْتَ مَثَابَةً and end, at وَأَرِ‌نَا مَنَاسِكَنَا ، then, at the conclusion of the discussion on Qiblah, the injunction of Sa` y سَعِی between Said and Marwah has been taken up in verse 158, إِنَّ الصَّفَا وَالْمَرْ‌وَةَ as a corollary. Now, Verse 196 - 203, from وَأَتِمُّوا الْحَجَّ وَالْعُمْرَ‌ةَ to, the eight consecutive verses, present injunctions and questions about Hajj and ` Umrah. The Hajj, with the strong consensus of the entire Muslim Ummah, is a pillar among the cardinal pillars of Islam and an important obligation. It has been clearly emphasised in the many verses of the Holy Qur'an and in numerous authentic ahadith. According to the majority opinion, the Hajj became an obligation in the third year of Hijrah, that is, in the year the battle of Uhud was fought, through the verse وَلِلَّـهِ عَلَى النَّاسِ حِجُّ الْبَيْتِ (and as a right of Allah, it is obligatory on the people to perform Hajj of the House) of Surah Al ` Imran آلِ عمران (Ibn Kathir). In this verse, conditions of the obligation of Hajj have been stated and a stern warning has been given to those who do not perform Hajj in spite of having the ability to do that. Out of the eight verses before us, the first verse وَأَتِمُّوا الْحَجَّ وَالْعُمْرَ‌ةَ (And accomplish the Hajj, and the ` Umrah for Allah) was revealed, as agreed upon by the commentators, pertaining to the event of Hudaybiyyah حدیبیہ which took place in the year 7 A.H. This tells us that the purpose of the verse is not to declare the initial obligation of the Hajj; that has been stated already. Instead, the intention here is to convey some special injunctions governing Hajj and ` Umrah. The Injunction about ` Umrah However, Surah Al ` Imran which declares Hajj as an obligation restricts itself to Hajj alone; ` Umrah عمرہ is not mentioned there, while the present verse mentions ` Umrah, but does not state whether it is basically 'necessary' or 'obligatory'. It rather says that a person who begins Hajj or ` Umrah by going into Ihram, then, it becomes wajib or necessary for him to complete that, very much like voluntary prayers or fasting where the rule is that after one starts them, their completion becomes necessary. Therefore, we do not find out from this verse the answer to the question: Is ` Umrah wajib, or is it not? It simply tells us that once one starts it, it becomes wajib or necessary for him to complete it. Ibn Kathir cites, with reference to al-Tirmidhi, Ahmad and al-Bayhaqi, a report from the blessed Companion Jabir that he asked the Holy Prophet ﷺ : 'Is ` Umrah wajib?' He said: 'Well, not wajib, but that you do it is better and merit worthy.' (According to al-Tirmidhi, this hadith is hasan sahih). This is why Imam Abu Hanifah, Imam Malik and others say that ` Umrah is not wajib, but a sunnah. Looking back at the statement in the present verse that completing Hajj and ` Umrah after one has gone into Ihram becomes wajib or necessary, we face the question as to what happens if, after entering into the state of Ihram, there comes up some sort of compulsion which -makes it impossible to complete the Hajj and ` Umrah. at has to be done in such cases has been clarified in the succeeding sentence which begins with "but if you are restricted." Rules concerning Ihram احرام As this verse pertains to the event of Hudaybiyyah where the Holy Prophet ﷺ and his Companions ؓ were in a state of Ihram and the disbelievers of Makkah had stopped them from entering Makkah and performing ` Umrah, thereupon came the injunction that the fidyah or ransom to get released from the Ihram is to offer the sacrifice of an animal, such as, a goat, cow or camel whichever is easy to get. After the sacrifice has been offered, Warn can be removed, but within the next sentence وَلَا تَحْلِقُوا رُ‌ءُوسَكُمْ : (And shave not your heads) it has also been pointed out that removing the Ihram, which is legally possible only after having shaved or close-trimmed the hair on the head, is not permissible until the sacrificial animal of the person in a state of Ihram reaches its destined spot and is actually slaughtered. The expression 'reaching its place', according to Imam Abu Hanifah (رح) ، means that it should be taken into the sacred precincts of the Haram and slaughtered there. If one cannot do it personally, he can authorise someone else to do it on his behalf. The situation of being 'restricted' by an enemy is clearly mentioned in this verse. Imam Abu Hanifah (رح) and some other jurists are of the view that if somebody is unable to complete Hajj or ` Umrah (after wearing Ihram احرام ) because of sickness, he can also avail of the concession given by this verse, because the words if you are restricted' are so general that they include the restriction imposed by sickness also. The manner in which the Holy Prophet ﷺ has practiced the instructions given in the Holy Verse is sufficient to disclose that although it is allowed in such an emergent situation to remove the Ihram after offering a sacrifice, yet it will remaih obligatory to perform the Hajj or the 'Umrah afresh as a qada' قضاء (whenever the circumstances allow to do so). That is why the Holy Prophet ﷺ and his Companions did perform the ` Umrah next year as a qada' قضاء for the ` Umrah missed by them at Hudaybiyyah. In this verse, the shaving of the head has been indentified as the signal for removing the Ihram which proves that shaving the head (halq حلق) or trimming the hair qasr قصر) in a state of Ihram is forbidden. In view of this, the next injunction tells us the way out for one who faces a compelling need to shave his head in a state of Ihram. Shaving in the state of Ihram احرام ? In the text of the Holy Qur'an, it is said: فَمَن كَانَ مِنكُم مَّرِ‌يضًا أَوْ بِهِ أَذًى مِّن رَّ‌أْسِهِ that is, if one is forced to shave hair on the head, or any other part of the body, because of some ailment or irritating lice, one can do so in proportion to the need, but it has to be redeemed by giving fidyah فدیہ in the form of fasting, charity or sacrifice. The place for sacrifice is fixed; it has to be offered within the limits of Haram حرم . There is no such fixed place for fasting and charity; these obligations can be accomplished anywhere. The number of fasts and the amount of charity find no mention in the words of the Holy Qur'an, but in a hadith of Sahih al-Bukhari, the Holy Prophet ﷺ prescribed in a similar situation faced by the noble Companion Ka'b ibn ` Ujrah ؓ that he should fast for three days or give 1/2 sa' of wheat as charity to six needy persons. This 1/2 sa` comes to approximately 1.632 kilograms of wheat or its price in cash. Combining Hajj and ` Umrah during Hajj months Before the appearance of Islam, the Arabs in Jahiliyyah would not combine Hajj and ` Umrah during Hajj months, that is, after the advent of Shawwal. They thought it was a sin. Towards the end of this verse, their misconception was corrected by restricting the prohibition on combining Hajj and ` Umrah during the months of Hajj to only those who live within the limits of Miqat because it is not difficult for them to return for ` Umrah after the Hajj months. But, for those coming from outside the Miqat میقات limits, it was declared permissible because it is not easy for them to make a special trip exclusively for ` Umrah all the way from such distances. Miqat is one of the several stations appointed by Allah Almighty on every route leading to Makkah from all over the world and it has been made obligatory on everyone proceeding to Makkah to wear Ihram at this point to perform Hajj or ` Umrah. Going beyond this appointed place without Ihram is a sin. The verse لِمَن لَّمْ يَكُنْ أَهْلُهُ حَاضِرِ‌ي الْمَسْجِدِ الْحَرَ‌امِ means just this, that is, combining Hajj and ` Umrah is permissible only for a person whose family does not live within the environs of al-Masjid al-Haram, or in other words, within the limits of the appointed stations known as Miqat میقات . However, those who combine the Hajj and ` Umrah during the Hajj months are obligated to demonstrate their gratefulness for having been allowed to combine two acts of ` Ibadah. This gratitude is expressed by offering a sacrifice, if one is capable of that. This sacrifice may be offered by slaughtering a goat, cow or camel whichever is easy. But, one who is financially incapable of doing so, he is obligated to fast for ten days, the first three within the Hajj days completing them by the ninth of Dhul-Hijjah, the rest of seven fasts he can complete after the Hajj at a place and time of his choice. He could do so while living in Makkah or when.he returns home. If a person fails to fast for three days during the Hajj days, for him, in the view of revered Companions, and Imam Abu Hanifah (رح) ، offering a sacrifice is mandatory. As soon as it is possible, he can have the sacrifice offered in the Haram through someone he knows (Jassas). Al-Tamattu` التمتع and Al-Qirn القرن ; the two kinds of Hajj Combining the Hajj and ` Urnrah during Hajj days takes two forms. The first method is to enter into Ihram for Hajj and ` Umrah both right from the Miqat. This is known as Al-Qirn القرن in the terminology of hadith. Under this method the release from the Ihram is tied with the release from the Ihram of Hajj. The pilgrim has to stay in a state of Ihram until the last day of Hajj. Under the second method it is possible to enter into Ihram exclusively for ` Umrah from a Miqat and after reaching Makkah al-Mukarramah, and performing the fixed rites of ` Umrah one can get out of the Ihram. After that, when getting ready to go to Mina on the eighth of Dhul-Hijjah, he should enter again into the Ihram of Hajj right within the Haram. This is technically known as Al-Tamattu`. Literally, the word Tamattu' covers both methods since it means to have the benefit of combining Hajj and ` Umrah both' which is equally applicable to both the methods detailed above. The words' فَمَن تَمَتَّعَ (Then, whoever avails of the advantage) in the present verse of the Holy Qur'an have been used in this general sense. The warning against violation of rules The verse 196 ends up with the words 'Fear Allah' which is a command to adopt Taqwa تقویٰ - a Qur'anic term which has no equivalent in the English language, and denotes the attitude of fearing and abstaining from doing anything against rules set by Allah Almighty. This command has been followed by a warning: وَاعْلَمُوا أَنَّ اللَّـهَ شَدِيدُ الْعِقَابِ (and be aware that Allah is severe at punishment) which means that anyone who knowingly acts against the injunctions revealed by Allah Almighty, for him the punishment of Allah is severe. The people who go in our days for Hajj or ` Umrah are widely negligent of this warning. To begin with, they do not make the necessary effort to find out the rules of Hajj and 'Umrah. Then a good many do not follow the rules strictly, even if they have the knowledge. Bad guides or careless fellow pilgrims sometimes make one miss the obligatory acts, let alone the sunnah and the proper etiquette of the pilgrimage. May Allah bless all of us with the ability to correct what we do.

The Hajj Months: Prohibitions We now move to the second verse out of the eight that deal with the rules of Hajj, which is: الْحَجُّ أَشْهُرٌ‌ مَّعْلُومَاتٌ: The Hajj is (in) the months well-known'. The word, ashhur أَشْهُرٌ‌is the plural of shahr شَھَر meaning the month. It will be recalled that in the previous verse it was said that one who enters into Ihram with the intention of doing Hajj or ` Umrah must complete it as prescribed. Out of these two, there is no fixed date or month for ` Umrah which could be done anytime during a year. But, for Hajj, the months and the dates and timings of what one must do are all fixed. It is for this reason that the verse opens with the clarification that the Hajj (unlike ` Umrah) has some fixed months which are already known. The months of Hajj have been the same from Jahiliyyah also; they are Shawwal, Dhul-Qa'dah and the first ten days of Dhul-Hijjah as it appears in the hadith as narrated by the blessed Companions Abu Umamah and Ibn ` Umar ؓ (Mazhari). That the Hajj months begin from Shawwal means that it is not permissible to enter into the Ihram احرام of Hajj before it. According to some Imams, the Hajj would simply not be valid with a pre-Shawwal Ihram. Imam Abu Hanifah (رح) rules that the Hajj thus performed will be considered valid, but it will be makruh مکروہ (reprehensible) (Mazhar). The verse 197, that فَمَن فَرَ‌ضَ فِيهِنَّ الْحَجَّ فَلَا رَ‌فَثَ وَلَا فُسُوقَ وَلَا جِدَالَ فِي الْحَجِّ ; stresses upon the etiquette of Hajj and makes it necessary for everyone in the state of Ihram to strictly abstain from three things: rafath رَ‌فَثَ , fusuq فُسُوقَ and jidal جِدَالَ , which are being explained here in some detail. A comprehensive word, Rafath رفَثَ includes marital intercourse, its preliminaries, including an open talk about love-making. All these things are forbidden in the state of Ihram. However, an indirect or implied reference to the act of love-making is not prohibited. Literally fusuq means "transgression". In the terminology of the Holy Qur'an, it means 'disobedience', the general sense of which includes all sins. Early commentators have taken it here in this general sense of the word but the blessed Companion ` Abdullah ibn ` Umar ؓ has interpreted the word 'fusuq' here to mean only the acts which are prohibited and impermissible in the state of Ihram. It is obvious that this interpretation is more suitable to the occasion because the prohibition of sins as such is not peculiar to Ihram; they are forbidden under all conditions. Things which are not sins in themselves but do become impermissible because of the Ihram are six in number. (1) Marital intercourse, its preliminaries, even love talk. (2) Hunting land game, either hunting personally or guiding a hunter. (3) Cutting hair or nail. (4) Using perfume. These four things are equally impermissible for men and women both when in a state of Ihram. The remaining two basically concern men: (5) Wearing stitched clothes. (6) Covering the head and the face. According to Imam Abu Hanifah and Imam Malik رحمۃ اللہ علیہما ، it is also not permissible for women to cover their face while in a state of Ihram, therefore, this too is included in the common Ihram prohibitions. The first of the above six things, that is, intercourse and its correlatives, though included under fusuq, has yet been separated from it, and has been introduced separately through the word Rafath, stressing thereby the importance of abstaining from it when in a state of Ihram. This is because 'amends' can be made for the contravention of other Ihram prohibitions through kaffarah کَفَّارہ (expiation). But, should one fall into the misfortune of indulging in intercourse before the Wuquf وقوف of ` Arafat (stay in ` Arafat) Hajj itself becomes null and void and a fine in the form of a sacrifice of a cow or camel becomes obligatory and the Hajj will have to be performed all over again. Because this aspect was so important, the text has mentioned it expressly. The word jidal' means an effort to upturn the adversary, therefore, a rough altercation or quarrel is known as jidal. This word being very general, some commentators have taken it in the usual general sense, while others, keeping in view the place of Hajj and the importance of Ihram, have particularized the sense of jidal here with a specific quarrel. In the age of ignorance, people differed about the prescribed place of Wuquf وقوف (staying). Some thought staying in ` Arafat was necessary, while others insisted that Muzdalifah was the prescribed place to stay and, therefore, did not consider going to ` Arafat as necessary. They even claimed that it was where Sayyidna Ibrahim (علیہ السلام) had stayed, Similarly, they differed in the timings of the Hajj as well. Some would do their Hajj in Dhul-Hijjah while some others would do it earlier in Dhul-Qa'dah and then, they would all quarrel among themselves around the subject and charge each other of having gone astray. The Holy Qur'an said La jidal لاجدال ، no quarrel, and put an end to all quarrels. What was proclaimed was the truth - the obligatory stay has to be made in ` Arafat, then, the necessary stay in Muzdalifah, and Hajj has to be performed in no other days but those of Dhul-Hijjah. Once the divine command is there, quarreling is forbidden. According to this interpretation, the prohibition given in the verse is restricted to those acts only which are normally permissible, yet, they have been forbidden because of the Ihram, just as the permissible acts of eating and drinking are forbidden in the state of Fasting and Salah only. But some commentators have taken fusuq and jidal in the general sense. According to them even though the fisq فِسق and jidal are sins, and deplorable at all places and under all conditions, but their sin becomes all the more grave in the state of Ihram. If one could think about the blessed days and the sacred land of the Haram where everyone comes to perform ` ibadah at its best with fervent chants of labbayk لَبَّیک ، telling their Lord 'Here we are at Your call', with the garment of Ihram reminding them all the time that the pilgrim is devoted to his act of ` ibadah within the sight of Allah, how could one stoop to do what is prohibited by Allah; obviously, under such condition, any act of sin or any act of entanglement with dispute turns into sinfulness at its worst. Taking this general sense into account, one can see the wisdom behind the prohibition of obscenity, sin and quarrel as the place and time of Hajj have their peculiar conditions in which one might fall a victim to these three. There are times when one has to stay away from his family and children for a long time in a state of Ihram. Then, men and women perform Hajj rites at Mataf مطاف (the place around the Ka'bah where tawaf طواف is made) and Mas’ a مسعیٰ (place between Safa صفاء and Marwah were Sayee سعی is made) and at ` Arafat, Muzdalifah and Mina منٰی with hundreds and thousands of people coming in contact with each other. In such an enormous gathering of men and women, it is not so easy to control one's inner desires, therefore, Allah Almighty has first taken up the prohibition of obscenity. Then, since so many people are around at a given time, all deeply devoted to performing their prescribed rites, there are also occasions where sins such as theft creep in, therefore, came the instruction: la fusuq لا فسوق (no sin). Similarly, during the entire Hajj trip, there are many incidents where people could get to quarrel with each other because they are cramped for space or for some other reason. The injunction: la jidal لا جدال (no quarrel) is to eliminate such possibilities. The eloquence of the Qur'an The words in the verse: فَلَا رَ‌فَثَ وَلَا فُسُوقَ وَلَا جِدَالَ translated literally as 'then there is no obscenity, no sin, no quarrel ...' are all words of negation, that is, all these things are not there in Hajj, although the object is to forbid them, which could have taken the form close to saying - do not be obscene, do not be sinful and do not quarrel. But, the possible prohibitive imperative has been replaced here by words of negation and thereby the hint has been given that such doings have no place in Hajj and cannot even be imagined in that context. After proclaiming basic Ihram prohibitions, the sentence: وَمَا تَفْعَلُوا مِنْ خَيْرٍ‌ يَعْلَمْهُ اللَّـهُ (And whatever good you do, Allah shall know it) instructs that abstaining from sins and the contravention of the Ihram during the blessed days of Hajj and at sacred places is not enough. Taking a step farther, one should consider this occasion to be something that comes once in a lifetime, therefore, it is all the more necessary that one should make an effort to stay devoted to ` ibadah عبادہ ، the Dhikr ذِکر also transliterated as 'Thikr', or 'Zikr', meaning 'remembrance' ) of Allah and good deeds. The assurance given is that every act of virtue and every demonstration of goodness from a servant of Allah shall be in the knowledge of Allah and, of course, shall be rewarded generously. The sentence that follows immediately: وَتَزَوَّدُوا فَإِنَّ خَيْرَ‌ الزَّادِ التَّقْوَىٰ : 'And take provisions along, for the merit of provision is to abstain (from asking) ' aims to correct those who leave their homes for Hajj and ` Umrah without adequate preparation claiming that they do so because they have trust in Allah. Obviously, they have to ask for help on their way, or worse still, they themselves go through privation and suffering and in the process, bother others as well. Hence, the instruction has been given that provisions needed for the proposed trip for Hajj should be taken along. This is not against tawakkul تَوکُّل or trust in Allah; it is rather, the very essence of tawakkul تَوکُّل ، which conveys the sense that one should first acquire and collect the means and resources provided by Allah Almighty to the best of one's capability and, then, place his trust (tawakkul تَوکُّل) in Allah. This is the exact explanation of tawakkul reported from the Holy Prophet ﷺ . Forsaking all efforts to acquire means of subsistence (tark al-asbab ترک الاسباب ) and calling it tawakkul is sheer ignorance.

Trading or earning during the Hajj Verse 198: لَيْسَ عَلَيْكُمْ جُنَاحٌ أَن تَبْتَغُوا فَضْلًا مِّن رَّ‌بِّكُمْ : There is no sin on you that you seek the bounty of your Lord (by trading) ' was revealed in a particular background of the Jahiliyyah when the people of Arabia had distorted all rules of worship and social dealings by injecting in them all sorts of absurd customs rendering acts of devotion into amusement. They would not even spare the sacred rites of Hajj when they added to them ridiculous doings out of their wild imagination. In the great gathering at Mina, they would set up special bazaars, hold exhibitions, and put up trade promotion devices. But after the appearance of Islam when Muslims were obligated with Hajj, all these absurd customs were eliminated. The noble Companions ؓ ، who would stake anything to seek the pleasure of Allah and to follow the teachings of His Messenger ﷺ ، started suspecting the validity of even the acts of trading or working for wages during Hajj days. They thought that earning in this manner is an outgrowth of the age of ignorance, may be Islam shall forbid it absolutely, so much so, that a certain person came to the blessed Companion ` Abdullah ibn ` Umar ؓ and asked: 'We are in the business of renting our camels. We have been doing it since long. People hire our camels to go for their Hajj. We go with them and perform our Hajj. Is it that our Hajj will not be valid?' Sayyidna ` Abdullah ibn ` Umar ؓ said: 'Some one came to the Holy Prophet ﷺ and asked the same question you are asking me. The Holy Prophet ﷺ did not reply to his question at that particular time until the verse لَيْسَ عَلَيْكُمْ جُنَاحٌ أَن تَبْتَغُوا فَضْلًا مِّن رَّ‌بِّكُمْ was revealed. Then, he called for that person and said, 'Yes, your Hajj is valid.' In short, this verse makes it clear that a person, who earns some profit by trading, or wages by working, incurs no sin. However, the practice of the disbelievers of Arabia whereby they had turned the Hajj into a trade fair was reformed through two simple words of the Qur'an to the effect that they can earn if they have to, but let them earn what they do as a favour and blessing of Allah Almighty, and be grateful for it, never making it a material exercise of minting money. The words فضْلًا مِّن رَّ‌بِّكُمْ ,: 'the bounty of your Lord' point out to this factor. Then, the expression: لَّا جُنَاحَ عَلَيْكُمْ preceding the words referred to above means that 'there is no sin on you' in this indulgence in earning which has a built-in hint that avoiding this indulgence too, if possible, is still better because it affects the ideal of perfect sincerity so desirable in the Hajj. This whole issue, in fact, revolves round the original intention of a person. If his basic intention is to earn money through trading or employment but he has decided to perform the Hajj as an adjunct, or both the intentions are equally kept in mind, then, this is contrary to the ideal of sincerity and it will reduce the reward of Hajj and the blessings of Hajj would not fall to his lot as they normally would. And should it be that he leaves his home with the basic intention to perform his Hajj, but runs into unforeseen problems accidentally resulting in a shortage of Hajj expenses or needs of subsistence, he then, could go for a little earning through trading or employment to offset his shortage of need-oriented funds. This is, in no way, contrary to the ideal of sincerity. However, for one who has to do so, it is much better that he leaves the five special days of Hajj rites free of any engagement in trading or employment. Instead, he should devote these days to nothing but ` ibadah عبادہ and dhikr ذِکر of Allah. This is the reason why some ` ulama' عُلما have ruled that trading or employments during these special days of Hajj are forbidden. Staying in ` Arafat and Muzdalifah: The next statement in the same verse (198) is: لَيْسَ عَلَيْكُمْ جُنَاحٌ أَن تَبْتَغُوا فَضْلًا مِّن رَّ‌بِّكُمْ ۚ فَإِذَا أَفَضْتُم مِّنْ عَرَ‌فَاتٍ فَاذْكُرُ‌وا اللَّـهَ عِندَ الْمَشْعَرِ‌ الْحَرَ‌امِ ۖ وَاذْكُرُ‌وهُ كَمَا هَدَاكُمْ وَإِن كُنتُم مِّن قَبْلِهِ لَمِنَ الضَّالِّينَ ﴿198﴾ Later, when you flow down from ` Arafat, recite the name of Allah near al-Mash'ar al-Haram (the Sacred Monument) and recite His name as He has guided you, while before it, you were among the astray. The verse tells us that, on the way back from ` Arafat, it is necessary (wajib) to stay overnight in Muzdalifah and to recite the name of Allah there, especially as taught. Literally, ` Arafat is plural in number. This is the name of a particular plain. Its geographical boundaries are well-known. This plain is located outside the limits of Haram حرم . All hujjaj حَجَّاج (Hajj pilgrims) must reach and stay there between noon (zawal زوال) and sunset (ghurub غروب) hours. This is the most important obligation of Hajj for which, if missed out, there is no alternative in the form of kaffarah کَفَّارہ (expiation) or fidyah فدیہ (ransom). Several causes have been cited for the name, ` Arafat. Out of these, the clearer explanation is that ` Arafat is a plain where man gets to know his Lord and, through his ` ibadah عبادہ and dhikr ذِکر ، learns how to get closer to Him, and in addition to that, Muslims from the East and the West meet and know each other by direct contact. Emphasis has been laid in the text on the stay near al-Mash'ar al-Haram المشاعر الحرم on the way back from ` Arafat after having spent the day there and after having departed the plain soon after sunset. Al-Masha’ r Al-Haram الحرم المشاعر is the name of a mountain which is located in Muzdalifah. The word, 'al-mash` ar' المشاعر means 'sign' or 'symbol', and 'haram حرم ' being 'sacred', the name signifies that this mountain is a sacred monument to Islam. The plain adjacent is called Muzdalifah. It is necessary (wajib) to spend the night on this plain and offer the combined prayers of Maghrib and ` Isha' at one time in Muzdalifah. The Qur'anic expression: فَاذْكُرُ‌وا اللَّـهَ عِندَ الْمَشْعَرِ‌ الْحَرَ‌ام ; translated as 'recite the name of Allah near al-Mash'ar al-Haram' certainly includes all kinds of the remembrances of Allah, but here it particularly means the offering of two prayers at one time, that is, offering Maghrib with ` Isha'. This is the special act of ` ibadah peculiar to the plain of Muzdalifah. Perhaps, the sentence that follows: وَاذْكُرُ‌وهُ كَمَا هَدَاكُمْ (recite his name as He has guided you) is indicative of this aspect. It is said that one should remember Allah and recite His name in the manner He has taught without adulterating it with personal opinions because personal deduction would have demanded that the Salah Maghrib be offered at the time set for it and the Salah of ` Isha' at its own time. But, on that day, Allah Almighty favours that the Salah of Maghrib be delayed and offered along with ` Isha'. From the Qur'anic statement cited above, recite His name as He has guided you', we see the emergence of yet another basic ruling that man is not independent in worshipping and remembering Allah, that is, he cannot worship Him as he wishes and he cannot remember Him as he chooses. Instead, every ` ibadah and dhikr of Allah demands the observance of special rules of etiquette. These have to be performed as stipulated; doing it otherwise is not permissible. Then, Allah Almighty does not like any substraction or addition, nor any change in its prescribed time or place, even though the change may lead to an increase in the act of worship. It is observed that people tend to add some features in voluntary prayers and acts of charity from their side without having any reason approved by the Shari'ah, and going a step farther, they take it upon themselves as something necessary while Allah and His blessed Messenger did not declare it as necessary, and last but not the least, such people have the audacity to regard those who do not do all that as in error. This verse exposes their false position by saying that such additional forms of worship reflect the practice of Jahiliyyah when the disbelievers had used their personal opinions and choices to concoct forms of worship and had limited the serious act to few customs.

The third verse (199): ثُمَّ أَفِيضُوا مِنْ حَيْثُ أَفَاضَ النَّاسُ وَاسْتَغْفِرُ‌وا اللَّـهَ ۚ إِنَّ اللَّـهَ غَفُورٌ‌ رَّ‌حِيمٌ,(Then, flow down from where the people flowed, and seek forgiveness from Allah. Certainly, Allah is Most-Forgiving, Very-Merciful) was revealed in a particular background. The Quraysh of Arabia being the custodians of the Ka'bah کعبہ enjoyed a unique position of influence and distinction in the country. During the days of Jahiliyyah, while every-one went to ` Arafat, the Quraysh would, in order to demonstrate their unusual importance, stop at Muzdalifah and stay there. They said that, being the custodian of the Ka'bah کعبہ and the care-takers of the Har-am حرم ، it was not proper for them to go out of the limits of the, Haram حرم . Since Muzdalifah is located within the sacred limits of the Haram حرم and ` Arafat is out of it, they would seize upon the excuse, stay in Muzdalifah and it was from there that they came back. The truth was that they loved to show off their pride and arrogance and made it a point to keep common people at a distance. Their erroneous conduct thus apprehended, Allah Almighty commanded them to go where everyone goes, that is, into the plain of ` Arafat, and then, return from there with everyone else (it will be noted that in the accompanying translation of the text, the Qur'anic word afidu أَفِيضُوا has been rendered into English liter-ally with the word, 'flow' which succinctly suggests mingling with the multitude, something shunned by the Quraysh of Jahiliyyah جاھلیہ). To begin with, behaving special and staying disconnected from others is a standing act of arrogance which must almost always be avoided, particularly during the days of Hajj where the garment of Ihram and the homogeneity of place and purpose teach the lesson that all human beings are equal, the distinction of rich and poor, learned and ignorant, big and small does not exist here, therefore, such display of assumed distinction, and that too in a state of Ihram احرام ، further increases the degree of crime. Human equality in practice This statement of the Holy Qur'an teaches us an important principle of social living which demands that the people of a higher status should not cut off their relations with those of a lower status; they should rather behave like members of a large family in their different forms of subsistence, stay and movement. This creates mutual brotherhood, concern and love, removes the walls between the rich and the poor, the employer and the employee. It was during his last sermon of Hajj that the Holy Prophet openly declared for all times to come that no Arab is superior to non-Arab and no white person is superior to a black person. Superiority depends on Taqwa and Ita` ah اِطاعت (the fear of Allah and the obedience to His command). Therefore, those who wanted to establish a distinct status for themselves by staying at Muzdalifah, contrary to the rest, were told that this act of theirs was a sin and they must seek forgiveness for it so that Allah Almighty may forgive them and bless them with His mercy.

The prohibition of Jahili customs at Mina In the verses 199 to 201, some Jahili جاھلی customs have been corrected. One of these was that the Arabs of the Jahiliyyah جاھلیہ would, once they had finished their rites at ` Arafat and Muzdalifah and performed their tawaf طواف and sacrifice and stay in Mina منٰی ، hold gatherings to recite poetry and to eulogize the achievements of their forefathers. Such gatherings were obviously devoid of the remembrance of Allah. It was strange that they elected to waste such blessed days in activities which were of no consequence in relation to what they were supposed to do there. Therefore, they were told that, as soon as they have completed their Ihram احرام rites and come to stay at Mina منٰی ، they should dedicate their stay to the remembrance of Allah and leave out the practice of indulging in the reminiscences of their forefathers, specially the boastful claims about their achievements. Better still was to remember Allah, not them, and that too with greater attachment and fervor. There was nothing like being engaged in the dhikr ذکر of Allah. So, the Holy Qur an guides Muslims to shun the customs coming from the age of ignorance, especially in the great days of Hajj they have been blessed with, which are exclusively reserved for ` ibadah عبادہ and dhikr ذکر and have merits and blessings of their own, a gift from Allah which may not be available again if lost through carelessness. In addition to that, the Hajj is a special act of worship which one gets to perform only after a long and generally exacting journey, separation from family and business and great expense of money and time. That unforeseen circumstances prevail is not a far-out prospect. It is quite possible that one fails to achieve the long-cherished objective of Hajj, in spite of all efforts and expenses. Now, if Allah Almighty has, in His infinite grace, removed all impediments and one has accomplished his Hajj obligation by successfully performing all required rites, then, the occasion calls for gratitude which further demands that one should keep busy in remembering Allah, avoid wasteful gatherings, engagements or conversations. Compared with the time spent by the people of Jahiliyyah in forefather tale-telling which brought them no benefit here, or there, the thing to do here is the dhikr of Allah which is all radiance and benefit for this world, and for the Hereafter. No doubt, contemporary Muslims do not follow the custom of Jahiliyyah any more by holding poetic recitals to eulogize their family trees, but there are thousands of Muslims from all over the world who still spend out these precious days of Hajj in wasteful gatherings, entertainments, amusements, shoppings and similar other pursuits of personal satisfaction. This verse is enough to warn them. Some commentators have explained this verse by dwelling upon the analogy of 'father' used here, in some detail. They say that one should remember Allah as one remembered his father during his childhood when he was dependant on his father for everything. If man were to think when he is young, adult and rational, is he not far more dependent on Allah Almighty at all times and under all conditions, certainly much more than a child was on his father? As for the boastful claims about the honour of their fathers, something the people of Jdhiliyyah used to make, this verse eliminates that too by saying that real honour comes through the dhikr of Allah. (Ruh; at-Bayan) Moderation in religious and worldly pursuits Besides what the people of Jahiliyyah used to do during their stay at Mina, some of them had another habit during the Hajj. Normally, they would be engaged in acts of devotion to Allah, yet when it came to making a prayer, they would focus all their attention to praying for worldly needs, such as, comfort, wealth, honour and their likes, showing no concern for the life to come. It was to correct this sort of approach in supplication that it was said that there are people who would use the great occasion of Hajj to pray for the insignificant gains of the present life and forget the Hereafter. For such people the Hereafter holds nothing because their conduct shows that they have gone through the obligation of Hajj merely in a formal manner, or have done it to earn prestige in their society. To please Allah and to earn salvation in the Hereafter are objectives alien to them.

It may be noted at this point that the verse mentions those who pray by saying: رَ‌بَّنَا آتِنَا فِي الدُّنْيَا (Our Lord, give to us in this world...) which does not include the word, حَسَنَةً ; (good). This indicates that they do not care to have what is really good even in this mortal world, on the contrary, they are so drunk with their craze for material things that nothing short of a constant fulfillment of their desires would satisfy them. They just do not bother to check if it is good or bad, procured rightly or wrongly or what people think about them. This verse extends a serious warning to those Muslims as well who prefer to pray for their material ends only even at the unique time of Hajj and at places so sacred, devoting most of their concerns towards that goal. There are many rich people who themselves pray, or request others they hold in esteem to pray for them, not for deliverance from the accounting of the Akhirah آخیرہ ، but for increase in their wealth, growth in business, and for other worldly concerns. There are many who, by their profusion in waza'if وظایف and nawafil نوافل (voluntary acts of worship), come to believe that they are very devoted, pious and special. In reality, hidden behind this facade is the same love of the mundane life. Then, there are respected people who maintain relations with pious elders of their time, as well as show their regard for deceased saints and walis اولیاء ، but the prevailing aim of such relationships is the vague hope that their دعاء and ta'widh تعویذ (prayers and spiritual charms) will work for them, worldly hardships will stay away, and their belongings shall be blessed. For such people too, this verse has special instructions. Stressed here is the fact that this whole affair rests in the hands of Allah who is All-Knowing and All-Aware. Everyone must assess his or her deeds, specially the intention behind whatever is done during the Hajj or Zia-rah زیارہ ، which includes all وظایٔف waza-'if, nawafil, du 'a- and salah. Then, towards the later part of the verse, Allah Almighty refers to His virtuous and favoured servants - may be some of them are less prosperous in a material way - by saying: مَّن يَقُولُ رَ‌بَّنَا آتِنَا فِي الدُّنْيَا حَسَنَةً وَفِي الْآخِرَ‌ةِ حَسَنَةً وَقِنَا عَذَابَ النَّارِ‌ And there is another among them who says: "0 our Lord, give us good in this world and good in the Hereafter and save us from the punishment of Fire." The word, (hasanah حَسَنَۃ) used here is inclusive of all that is good, inwardly or outwardly. For instance, hasanah حَسَنَۃ or 'good in this world' shall include personal and family health, increase and benedictory sufficiency (barakah بَرَکَۃ) in lawful livelihood, the fulfillment of all needs, virtuous deeds, desirable morals, beneficial knowledge, honour and prestige, strength of faith, guidance into the straight path and perfect sincerity in ` ibadat عبادہ . Similarly, hasanah حَسَنَۃ or 'good in the Hereafter' shall cover everything from the Paradise, with its countless and endless blessings to the pleasure of Allah Almighty and the privilege of seeing Him. In short, this du` a دعاء is a compendium of all prayers in as much as it encompasses the entire range of man's worldly and other-worldly objectives. Apart from enjoying peace in the world, and peace in the Hereafter, the verse, refers in the end to the safety from 'the punishment of Fire' as well. It was for this reason that the Holy Prophet ﷺ used to pray with these words very frequently: رَ‌بَّنَا آتِنَا فِي الدُّنْيَا حَسَنَةً وَفِي الْآخِرَ‌ةِ حَسَنَةً وَقِنَا عَذَابَ النَّارِ‌ Our Lord, give us good in this world and good in the Hereafter and save us from the punishment of Fire. It is masnun to make this prayer particularly while making tawaf. This verse also corrects those ignorant dervishes (so called mystics) who think that real ` ibadah عبادہ lies in praying for the Hereafter alone and claim that they do not, on that count, care much about the mortal world. In reality, such a claim is false, for man depends on fulfilling his worldly needs not only for his life and sustenance, but also for performing the acts of worship and obedience. Without these, serving the objectives of faith would become impossible. Therefore, the blessed practice of the prophets of Allah has been that they prayed to Allah for the good of both the worlds. One who thinks that praying to Allah for the fulfillment of his worldly needs is against the norms of piety and spiritual dignity is unaware of the great station of prophet hood, and ignorant of man's own role in this mortal world. So, what is required is that one should not focus all his attention on his material needs as if they were the very purpose of life, but he should, along with it, show far more concern for what would happen to him in the Hereafter, and pray for it. In the concluding part of this verse, the end of the other class of people who pray for the good of the dunya دنیا (mortal world) and akhirah آخِرَ‌ةِ (Hereafter) both has been stated by saying that they will be rewarded in both the worlds for their correct and righteous conduct and for their prayers. Following that, it has been said: وَاللَّـهُ سَرِ‌يعُ الْحِسَابِ (And Allah is swift at reckoning) because His all-pervading knowledge and most perfect power is sufficient to assess the life-long deeds of each and every person who ever breathed in His creation; for this He needs none of those computing mechanisms and means on which only man depends. So, the time will soon come when He shall make man account for what he did, and it will be on the basis of that accounting that he will spread out His reward and punishment.

It may be noted at this point that the verse mentions those who pray by saying: رَ‌بَّنَا آتِنَا فِي الدُّنْيَا (Our Lord, give to us in this world...) which does not include the word, حَسَنَةً ; (good). This indicates that they do not care to have what is really good even in this mortal world, on the contrary, they are so drunk with their craze for material things that nothing short of a constant fulfillment of their desires would satisfy them. They just do not bother to check if it is good or bad, procured rightly or wrongly or what people think about them. This verse extends a serious warning to those Muslims as well who prefer to pray for their material ends only even at the unique time of Hajj and at places so sacred, devoting most of their concerns towards that goal. There are many rich people who themselves pray, or request others they hold in esteem to pray for them, not for deliverance from the accounting of the Akhirah آخیرہ ، but for increase in their wealth, growth in business, and for other worldly concerns. There are many who, by their profusion in waza'if وظایف and nawafil نوافل (voluntary acts of worship), come to believe that they are very devoted, pious and special. In reality, hidden behind this facade is the same love of the mundane life. Then, there are respected people who maintain relations with pious elders of their time, as well as show their regard for deceased saints and walis اولیاء ، but the prevailing aim of such relationships is the vague hope that their دعاء and ta'widh تعویذ (prayers and spiritual charms) will work for them, worldly hardships will stay away, and their belongings shall be blessed. For such people too, this verse has special instructions. Stressed here is the fact that this whole affair rests in the hands of Allah who is All-Knowing and All-Aware. Everyone must assess his or her deeds, specially the intention behind whatever is done during the Hajj or Zia-rah زیارہ ، which includes all وظایٔف waza-'if, nawafil, du 'a- and salah. Then, towards the later part of the verse, Allah Almighty refers to His virtuous and favoured servants - may be some of them are less prosperous in a material way - by saying: مَّن يَقُولُ رَ‌بَّنَا آتِنَا فِي الدُّنْيَا حَسَنَةً وَفِي الْآخِرَ‌ةِ حَسَنَةً وَقِنَا عَذَابَ النَّارِ‌ And there is another among them who says: "0 our Lord, give us good in this world and good in the Hereafter and save us from the punishment of Fire." The word, (hasanah حَسَنَۃ) used here is inclusive of all that is good, inwardly or outwardly. For instance, hasanah حَسَنَۃ or 'good in this world' shall include personal and family health, increase and benedictory sufficiency (barakah بَرَکَۃ) in lawful livelihood, the fulfillment of all needs, virtuous deeds, desirable morals, beneficial knowledge, honour and prestige, strength of faith, guidance into the straight path and perfect sincerity in ` ibadat عبادہ . Similarly, hasanah حَسَنَۃ or 'good in the Hereafter' shall cover everything from the Paradise, with its countless and endless blessings to the pleasure of Allah Almighty and the privilege of seeing Him. In short, this du` a دعاء is a compendium of all prayers in as much as it encompasses the entire range of man's worldly and other-worldly objectives. Apart from enjoying peace in the world, and peace in the Hereafter, the verse, refers in the end to the safety from 'the punishment of Fire' as well. It was for this reason that the Holy Prophet ﷺ used to pray with these words very frequently: رَ‌بَّنَا آتِنَا فِي الدُّنْيَا حَسَنَةً وَفِي الْآخِرَ‌ةِ حَسَنَةً وَقِنَا عَذَابَ النَّارِ‌ Our Lord, give us good in this world and good in the Hereafter and save us from the punishment of Fire. It is masnun to make this prayer particularly while making tawaf. This verse also corrects those ignorant dervishes (so called mystics) who think that real ` ibadah عبادہ lies in praying for the Hereafter alone and claim that they do not, on that count, care much about the mortal world. In reality, such a claim is false, for man depends on fulfilling his worldly needs not only for his life and sustenance, but also for performing the acts of worship and obedience. Without these, serving the objectives of faith would become impossible. Therefore, the blessed practice of the prophets of Allah has been that they prayed to Allah for the good of both the worlds. One who thinks that praying to Allah for the fulfillment of his worldly needs is against the norms of piety and spiritual dignity is unaware of the great station of prophet hood, and ignorant of man's own role in this mortal world. So, what is required is that one should not focus all his attention on his material needs as if they were the very purpose of life, but he should, along with it, show far more concern for what would happen to him in the Hereafter, and pray for it. In the concluding part of this verse, the end of the other class of people who pray for the good of the dunya دنیا (mortal world) and akhirah آخِرَ‌ةِ (Hereafter) both has been stated by saying that they will be rewarded in both the worlds for their correct and righteous conduct and for their prayers. Following that, it has been said: وَاللَّـهُ سَرِ‌يعُ الْحِسَابِ (And Allah is swift at reckoning) because His all-pervading knowledge and most perfect power is sufficient to assess the life-long deeds of each and every person who ever breathed in His creation; for this He needs none of those computing mechanisms and means on which only man depends. So, the time will soon come when He shall make man account for what he did, and it will be on the basis of that accounting that he will spread out His reward and punishment.

The emphasis on remembering Allah in Mina In the last of the eight verses relating to injunctions about Hajj, that is, وَاذْكُرُ‌وا اللَّـهَ فِي أَيَّامٍ مَّعْدُودَاتٍ (And recite the name of Allah in the given number of days), the Hajj pilgrims have been asked to engage themselves in the remembrance of Allah so that their Hajj meets a perfect ending and their post-Hajj life becomes correct and fruitful. These 'given number of days' refer to (ayyam al-tashriq) ایام التشریق during which it is necessary (wajib) to say takbir (which is, اللہ اکبر اللہ اکبر لا الہ الا اللہ واللہ اکبر اللہ اکبر وللہ الحمد). Immediately following is a clarification of the duration of stay at Mina منٰی and the deadline for throwing pebbles at the three Pillars. This was an issue debated by the people of Jahiliyyah. Some thought it was necessary to stay at Mina منٰی upto the 13th of Dhul-Hijjah and throw pebbles at the three Pillars. According to them, to come back from Mina منٰی on the 12th was impermissible and those who did so were sinners. Similarly, others regarded coming back on the 12th necessary and staying there through the 13th, a sin. Both were corrected in this verse by saying: فَمَن تَعَجَّلَ فِي يَوْمَيْنِ فَلَا إِثْمَ عَلَيْهِ وَمَن تَأَخَّرَ‌ فَلَا إِثْمَ عَلَيْهِ : 'Then whoever is early (in leaving) after two days there is no sin on him and whoever remains behind, there is no sin on him ...' thereby proving that both parties calling each other sinners are involved in excess and error. The correct position is that Hajj pilgrims have the option of acting on either of the two permissions. However, it is better and preferable to stay there through the third day (that is, 13th of Dhul-Hijjah). Jurists say that one who leaves Mina before sunset on the second day (i.e. 12th of Dhul-Hijjah), it is not necessary for him to do his ramy رَمِی (throwing of pebbles on the three Pillars) for the third day. But, should the sun set while he is still in Mina, it does not remain anymore permissible for him to leave Mina until he has done his ramy رَمِی for the third day. However, the ramy رَمِی for the third day has a special concession that it can also be done between the post-morning and pre-noon hours. If we look at the manner in which the choice of returning from Mina has been given to the Hujjaj حَجَّاج - no sin if they return on the second day and no sin if they return on the third day - we shall realize that all this is for the convenience of one who fears Allah and obeys His commands, for he really deserves the Hajj, as said elsewhere in the Holy Qur'an إِنَّمَا يَتَقَبَّلُ اللَّـهُ مِنَ الْمُتَّقِينَ ﴿27﴾which means that Allah Almighty accepts (acts of prayer and worship) only from those who are God-fearing and obedient. Now, one who has been involved in sins much before Hajj, continued being negligent even during the Hajj and was callous enough not to abstain from sins even after Hajj, his Hajj is certainly not going to be of any good to him, although, the formal obligation has been validly fulfilled, releasing him from the possible crime of not having performed the Hajj. Closing this eight-verse unit, it was said: وَاتَّقُوا اللَّـهَ وَاعْلَمُوا أَنَّكُمْ إِلَيْهِ تُحْشَرُ‌ونَ (And fear Allah and be sure that you are going to be gathered before Him), where He shall make you account for all your open and hidden deeds and give you the reward and punishment for these. This last line is really the essence of all Hajj injunctions given in these verses. It means that one should keep fearing Allah during the special days of the Hajj guarding oneself from any shortcoming in the prescribed acts of Hajj, as he should keep fearing Allah after the Hajj guarding himself against any pride of performance, and keep abstaining from sins because, on the day human deeds shall be weighed on the Balance, his sins will eat away his good deeds, that is, they will nullify the effect and weight of the good deeds. In a hadith about the great ` ibadah عبادہ of Hajj, it has been said that one who returns after having accomplished his Hajj, is so cleansed of his sins as if he was born on that day. This is why those performing Hajj have been instructed to maintain the quality of Taqwa, (that vital sense of responsibility before Allah). Being one who has been purified from sins, it is necessary to take all possible precautions against what tempts man to fall into sin so that one can earn the best of both the worlds, the dunya دنیا and the akhirah آخِرَ‌ةِ. If this is not done and the performer of Hajj goes back to a life of sin, even after such a cathartic experience, he shall find that the elimination of his past sins by forgiveness is not going to be of any use to him. Contrary to this, the ` ulama' have said that one who returns from his Hajj with his heart free from the love of dunya دنیا and attracted to the concern for the akhirah آخِرَ‌ةِ , his Hajj is accepted and his sins are forgiven and his prayers are answered. From place to place during the Hajj, people pledge their obedience to Allah before His House, how can these pledges be thoughtlessly broken after the Hajj? If those who are lucky to perform their Hajj are a little more mindful of this factor, they might stay by their solemn pledge later on. A pious elder said: When I returned from Hajj, it was by chance that a suggestion of sin crept into my heart whereupon I heard a voice from the Unseen: Didn't you perform the Hajj? Didn't you perform the Hajj? This voice became a wall between me and that sin. Allah Almighty protected me.' As against this, there is the case of another pious man from Turkey, who was a disciple of the famous Maulana Jami. He was in such an unusual state of spiritual excellence in his normal life that he used to observe a halo of radiance over his head. He went to perform his Hajj, but after his return he discovered that he has lost that unusual state totally. He talked about it to his master, Maulana Jami. He said: 'Before your Hajj, you had the gift of humbleness, you wept before Allah thinking of yourself as a sinner. After your Hajj, you became proud and picked up the airs of someone righteous, spiritually elevated. Therefore, this very Hajj of yours became the cause of your pride and that is why you lost that state of radiance.' The emphasis on Taqwa (the fear of Allah) towards the conclusion of Hajj injunctions has yet another secret. It goes without saying that Hajj is a great act of ` ibadah. Once it has been accomplished, that eternal adversary of man, the Satan شیطان ، generally injects into man's heart the thought of self-righteousness which simply ruins all his deeds. Therefore, the final word said was about the need to fear Allah and the necessity to obey Him, not only before the Hajj and during the Hajj, but also after the Hajj when one must become much more particular in fearing Allah and alert in abstaining from sins by conscious effort, lest all that one has done in the form of the ` ibadah of Hajj goes waste. اللھم وفقنا لما تحب وترضی من القول والعمل والنیہ O Allah, give us the ability to do what You love and are pleased with - in word, deed and intention.

In the previous verses, it was said that there are two kinds of those who make prayers. Some wish to have everything right here in this world, others pray for the good of both worlds, the mortal and the eternal. In the present verse, the same two kinds have been identified as those who are hypocritical and those who are sincere. Verses 204-206 refer to a hypocrite, Akhnas ibn Shurayq known for his eloquence. He would come to the Holy Prophet ﷺ and try to impress him with his sworn allegiance to Islam, but no sooner did he walk out of his company than he would get busy with his anti-Muslim mischief-making. Any effort to make such a person fear Allah takes him to the other extreme when he pleases his pride through sin. So, the Hell is enough for him.' Commentary The last verse (207) portrays the true, the sincere Muslim who would stake his very life to achieve the good pleasure of Allah Almighty. This verse has been revealed to honour the sincere Companions who offered unmatched sacrifices in the way of Allah. It has been reported by Hakim, Ibn Jarir and Ibn Abi Hatim ؓ ، with sound authorities, that this verse was revealed in connection with a particular event relating to the blessed Companion Suhayb al-Rumi ؓ . It has been reported that soon after he left Makkah on his emigration route to Madinah, he was accosted on his way by a group of disbelievers of the Quraysh. Seeing this, Companion Suhayb dismounted, took position, pulled out all the arrows from his quiver and said to the group: '0 tribe of Quraysh, you all know that I am far better in archery than any of you here. My arrow never misses its target. Now, I swear by Allah that you shall not reach me until there remains even one arrow in my quiver. Then, after arrows, I shall use my sword as long as I can. Only after that you can do what you can. However, if you want to make a deal, I can tell you where my money is in Makkah. You go and take that and let me go my way.' The confronting group of Quraysh agreed to do so. When Companion Suhayb reached Madinah, safe and unharmed, he went to the Holy Prophet ﷺ and told him everything about the incident. Upon this, he said twice: ربح البیع ابا یحییٰ ربح البیع ابا یحییٰ Profitable was your deal Abu Yahya, profitable was your deal Abu Yahya! The revelation of the verse under reference in connection with this particular event confirms the blessed comment made by the Holy Prophet ﷺ . However, some commentators cite similar events relating to other noble Companions as the background of the verse's revelation (Mazhari).

In the previous verses, it was said that there are two kinds of those who make prayers. Some wish to have everything right here in this world, others pray for the good of both worlds, the mortal and the eternal. In the present verse, the same two kinds have been identified as those who are hypocritical and those who are sincere. Verses 204-206 refer to a hypocrite, Akhnas ibn Shurayq known for his eloquence. He would come to the Holy Prophet ﷺ and try to impress him with his sworn allegiance to Islam, but no sooner did he walk out of his company than he would get busy with his anti-Muslim mischief-making. Any effort to make such a person fear Allah takes him to the other extreme when he pleases his pride through sin. So, the Hell is enough for him.' Commentary The last verse (207) portrays the true, the sincere Muslim who would stake his very life to achieve the good pleasure of Allah Almighty. This verse has been revealed to honour the sincere Companions who offered unmatched sacrifices in the way of Allah. It has been reported by Hakim, Ibn Jarir and Ibn Abi Hatim ؓ ، with sound authorities, that this verse was revealed in connection with a particular event relating to the blessed Companion Suhayb al-Rumi ؓ . It has been reported that soon after he left Makkah on his emigration route to Madinah, he was accosted on his way by a group of disbelievers of the Quraysh. Seeing this, Companion Suhayb dismounted, took position, pulled out all the arrows from his quiver and said to the group: '0 tribe of Quraysh, you all know that I am far better in archery than any of you here. My arrow never misses its target. Now, I swear by Allah that you shall not reach me until there remains even one arrow in my quiver. Then, after arrows, I shall use my sword as long as I can. Only after that you can do what you can. However, if you want to make a deal, I can tell you where my money is in Makkah. You go and take that and let me go my way.' The confronting group of Quraysh agreed to do so. When Companion Suhayb reached Madinah, safe and unharmed, he went to the Holy Prophet ﷺ and told him everything about the incident. Upon this, he said twice: ربح البیع ابا یحییٰ ربح البیع ابا یحییٰ Profitable was your deal Abu Yahya, profitable was your deal Abu Yahya! The revelation of the verse under reference in connection with this particular event confirms the blessed comment made by the Holy Prophet ﷺ . However, some commentators cite similar events relating to other noble Companions as the background of the verse's revelation (Mazhari).

In the previous verses, it was said that there are two kinds of those who make prayers. Some wish to have everything right here in this world, others pray for the good of both worlds, the mortal and the eternal. In the present verse, the same two kinds have been identified as those who are hypocritical and those who are sincere. Verses 204-206 refer to a hypocrite, Akhnas ibn Shurayq known for his eloquence. He would come to the Holy Prophet ﷺ and try to impress him with his sworn allegiance to Islam, but no sooner did he walk out of his company than he would get busy with his anti-Muslim mischief-making. Any effort to make such a person fear Allah takes him to the other extreme when he pleases his pride through sin. So, the Hell is enough for him.' Commentary The last verse (207) portrays the true, the sincere Muslim who would stake his very life to achieve the good pleasure of Allah Almighty. This verse has been revealed to honour the sincere Companions who offered unmatched sacrifices in the way of Allah. It has been reported by Hakim, Ibn Jarir and Ibn Abi Hatim ؓ ، with sound authorities, that this verse was revealed in connection with a particular event relating to the blessed Companion Suhayb al-Rumi ؓ . It has been reported that soon after he left Makkah on his emigration route to Madinah, he was accosted on his way by a group of disbelievers of the Quraysh. Seeing this, Companion Suhayb dismounted, took position, pulled out all the arrows from his quiver and said to the group: '0 tribe of Quraysh, you all know that I am far better in archery than any of you here. My arrow never misses its target. Now, I swear by Allah that you shall not reach me until there remains even one arrow in my quiver. Then, after arrows, I shall use my sword as long as I can. Only after that you can do what you can. However, if you want to make a deal, I can tell you where my money is in Makkah. You go and take that and let me go my way.' The confronting group of Quraysh agreed to do so. When Companion Suhayb reached Madinah, safe and unharmed, he went to the Holy Prophet ﷺ and told him everything about the incident. Upon this, he said twice: ربح البیع ابا یحییٰ ربح البیع ابا یحییٰ Profitable was your deal Abu Yahya, profitable was your deal Abu Yahya! The revelation of the verse under reference in connection with this particular event confirms the blessed comment made by the Holy Prophet ﷺ . However, some commentators cite similar events relating to other noble Companions as the background of the verse's revelation (Mazhari).

In the previous verses, it was said that there are two kinds of those who make prayers. Some wish to have everything right here in this world, others pray for the good of both worlds, the mortal and the eternal. In the present verse, the same two kinds have been identified as those who are hypocritical and those who are sincere. Verses 204-206 refer to a hypocrite, Akhnas ibn Shurayq known for his eloquence. He would come to the Holy Prophet ﷺ and try to impress him with his sworn allegiance to Islam, but no sooner did he walk out of his company than he would get busy with his anti-Muslim mischief-making. Any effort to make such a person fear Allah takes him to the other extreme when he pleases his pride through sin. So, the Hell is enough for him.' Commentary The last verse (207) portrays the true, the sincere Muslim who would stake his very life to achieve the good pleasure of Allah Almighty. This verse has been revealed to honour the sincere Companions who offered unmatched sacrifices in the way of Allah. It has been reported by Hakim, Ibn Jarir and Ibn Abi Hatim ؓ ، with sound authorities, that this verse was revealed in connection with a particular event relating to the blessed Companion Suhayb al-Rumi ؓ . It has been reported that soon after he left Makkah on his emigration route to Madinah, he was accosted on his way by a group of disbelievers of the Quraysh. Seeing this, Companion Suhayb dismounted, took position, pulled out all the arrows from his quiver and said to the group: '0 tribe of Quraysh, you all know that I am far better in archery than any of you here. My arrow never misses its target. Now, I swear by Allah that you shall not reach me until there remains even one arrow in my quiver. Then, after arrows, I shall use my sword as long as I can. Only after that you can do what you can. However, if you want to make a deal, I can tell you where my money is in Makkah. You go and take that and let me go my way.' The confronting group of Quraysh agreed to do so. When Companion Suhayb reached Madinah, safe and unharmed, he went to the Holy Prophet ﷺ and told him everything about the incident. Upon this, he said twice: ربح البیع ابا یحییٰ ربح البیع ابا یحییٰ Profitable was your deal Abu Yahya, profitable was your deal Abu Yahya! The revelation of the verse under reference in connection with this particular event confirms the blessed comment made by the Holy Prophet ﷺ . However, some commentators cite similar events relating to other noble Companions as the background of the verse's revelation (Mazhari).

The previous verses ended with a word of praise for the sincere. As sincerity (ikhlas اخلاص) can sometimes touch the limits of excess inadvertently, that is, one does intend to come up with more obedience, but that obedience, when observed carefully, turns out to be exceeding the limits set by the Shari'ah and Sunnah. This is called bid'ah بدعت . This can be explained through the example of the blessed Companion ` Abdullah ibn Salam ؓ and others who were, previous to their Islam, known scholars among the Jews. Since Saturday was the sacred day of rest (the Sabbath اَسَّبت) in Judaism, and camel-meat was unlawful, they thought, once they were in Islam, to bring about some sort of a synthesis between the two faiths, through which they could continue to honour Sabbath سَبِّت as it was necessary under the law of Moses while Islam did not require dishonouring it; and similarly, they could simply avoid eating camel-meat in practice while believing that it was lawful, for it was unlawful in the law of Moses but Islam does not make it obligatory to eat it. Thus, they thought that they would stay in touch with the law of Moses and still not go against the Shari'ah of Muhammad ﷺ ، something that appealed to them as a stronger demonstration of obedience to divine laws and a closer approach to matters of faith. Allah Almighty corrects this thought in the present verse which aims to establish that Islam is an obligation in its totality. It is total and perfect only when what is not necessary in Islam is not considered to be a part of it. To take such thought or practice as part of the Faith is a Satanic slip which may bring far more severe a punishment than common sins would. It is in this background of the verse's revelation, that believers have been asked to 'enter Islam completely', not making allowances for a faith other than Islam - a divisive approach which makes one an easy target of Satan. Therefore, the prohibition 'do not follow the footsteps of Satan', an enemy who would cheat you into taking to something which obviously looks very much like your Faith, but happens to be totally contrary to it in reality. After having received clear laws and rules that lead to the straight path, there is no justification left for any deviation. Those who still slip, they must remember that Allah is Mighty, having the power to punish, and Wise too, lest one should misread any delay in punishment which comes when His Wisdom so dictates. Using an eloquent image, the text goes on to question the ultimate acceptance of truth at a time when it shall no longer remain worth accepting and al'_ matters of reward and punishment shall revert to Allah with no power existing other than Him, why then would anyone become quixotic enough to stand against a Power so obvious, the result of which could be nothing but destruction. Commentary The word, سِلم : (silm) in; ادْخُلُوا فِي السِّلْمِ كَافَّةً translated here as 'enter Islam completely', is used to convey two meanings, 'peace' and 'Islam'. At this place, according to the consensus of the Companions and their successors, it means Islam (Ibn xathir). The word كَافَّة : (kaffah) means 'totally' and 'universally'. In the structural scheme of the sentence, this word appears as hal (an adverb, qualifying the verb before it with a particular state). There are two possibilities here. Firstly, the word be taken as the hal of the pronoun in (udkhulu ادْخُلُوا) in which case the translation would be referring to the condition of the believers while entering Islam, which must be 'complete'. This would mean that their entire person, hands and feet, eyes and ears, feeling and thinking, after having embraced the Faith should all be within the parameters of Islam and the obedience to Allah. This is to warn against a state of being in which one may be physically carrying out the dictates of Islam while the heart and the mind are not fully satisfied, or in case, the heart and the mind are satisfied, yet what one does physically remains outside the pale of Islam. Secondly, it is possible to take the word, silm سِلم as the hal or indicated state of the Faith in Islam, in which case, the translation would be referring to the perfect and complete state of Islam in which the believers must enter. So, 'entering Islam completely' would mean that one must accept all injunctions of Islam, not that one accepts some and hesitates about others. Since Islam is the name of that particular way of life which has been given through the Qur'an and Sunnah, there-fore, it does not matter, which facet of life it concerns, it may be beliefs and acts of worship or social dealings or business transactions or government and politics or trade and industry or any other field; what matters is one's entry into Islam as a complete system, an organic whole, unified, indivisible. The gist of the two approaches given above is that no Muslim shall be deserving of calling himself a Muslim unless he accepts all Islamic injunctions truly and sincerely from the deep recesses of his heart, irrespective of the department of life they belong to, irrespective of whether they concern the outward physique of the body or the heart and the mind. The background of the verse's revelation mentioned earlier in the introductory remarks also shows that one must keep nothing but the teachings of Islam in sight, practice it in its entirety which will, in consequence, make Muslims independent of all religions and nations. Special Note The verse holds out a stern warning to those who have got Islam all tied up with Masjid and ` ibadat عبادت (mosque and the performance of acts of prescribed worship) neglecting injunctions relating to social living and business and personal dealings as if they were no part of religion. This negligence is wide-spread among the 'technically' religious people who do not seem to care much about rights and dealings, especially social rights. It appears that they do not regard these injunctions to be the injunctions of Islam, neither do they make an effort to find out what they are, or try to learn them in an orderly manner, nor think of acting in accordance with these injunctions. We seek refuge with Allah. As regards the possibility of 'Allah Almighty and the angels coming upon them in canopies of clouds,' this will be on Doomsday. The correct position is that such coming of Allah Almighty belongs to the Mutashabihat متاشابھا ات ، statements of hidden meaning, about which there is a standard policy practiced by the majority of the blessed Companions, the Tabi` in تابعین ، their successors, and the revered elders of the Muslim ummah, that is, one must believe in its truth and avoid worrying about as to how this would happen because it is beyond human reason to find out the reality and the nature, the whats and the hows of the 'Being' and the Attributes of Allah Almighty, and this too is included therein.

The previous verses ended with a word of praise for the sincere. As sincerity (ikhlas اخلاص) can sometimes touch the limits of excess inadvertently, that is, one does intend to come up with more obedience, but that obedience, when observed carefully, turns out to be exceeding the limits set by the Shari'ah and Sunnah. This is called bid'ah بدعت . This can be explained through the example of the blessed Companion ` Abdullah ibn Salam ؓ and others who were, previous to their Islam, known scholars among the Jews. Since Saturday was the sacred day of rest (the Sabbath اَسَّبت) in Judaism, and camel-meat was unlawful, they thought, once they were in Islam, to bring about some sort of a synthesis between the two faiths, through which they could continue to honour Sabbath سَبِّت as it was necessary under the law of Moses while Islam did not require dishonouring it; and similarly, they could simply avoid eating camel-meat in practice while believing that it was lawful, for it was unlawful in the law of Moses but Islam does not make it obligatory to eat it. Thus, they thought that they would stay in touch with the law of Moses and still not go against the Shari'ah of Muhammad ﷺ ، something that appealed to them as a stronger demonstration of obedience to divine laws and a closer approach to matters of faith. Allah Almighty corrects this thought in the present verse which aims to establish that Islam is an obligation in its totality. It is total and perfect only when what is not necessary in Islam is not considered to be a part of it. To take such thought or practice as part of the Faith is a Satanic slip which may bring far more severe a punishment than common sins would. It is in this background of the verse's revelation, that believers have been asked to 'enter Islam completely', not making allowances for a faith other than Islam - a divisive approach which makes one an easy target of Satan. Therefore, the prohibition 'do not follow the footsteps of Satan', an enemy who would cheat you into taking to something which obviously looks very much like your Faith, but happens to be totally contrary to it in reality. After having received clear laws and rules that lead to the straight path, there is no justification left for any deviation. Those who still slip, they must remember that Allah is Mighty, having the power to punish, and Wise too, lest one should misread any delay in punishment which comes when His Wisdom so dictates. Using an eloquent image, the text goes on to question the ultimate acceptance of truth at a time when it shall no longer remain worth accepting and al'_ matters of reward and punishment shall revert to Allah with no power existing other than Him, why then would anyone become quixotic enough to stand against a Power so obvious, the result of which could be nothing but destruction. Commentary The word, سِلم : (silm) in; ادْخُلُوا فِي السِّلْمِ كَافَّةً translated here as 'enter Islam completely', is used to convey two meanings, 'peace' and 'Islam'. At this place, according to the consensus of the Companions and their successors, it means Islam (Ibn xathir). The word كَافَّة : (kaffah) means 'totally' and 'universally'. In the structural scheme of the sentence, this word appears as hal (an adverb, qualifying the verb before it with a particular state). There are two possibilities here. Firstly, the word be taken as the hal of the pronoun in (udkhulu ادْخُلُوا) in which case the translation would be referring to the condition of the believers while entering Islam, which must be 'complete'. This would mean that their entire person, hands and feet, eyes and ears, feeling and thinking, after having embraced the Faith should all be within the parameters of Islam and the obedience to Allah. This is to warn against a state of being in which one may be physically carrying out the dictates of Islam while the heart and the mind are not fully satisfied, or in case, the heart and the mind are satisfied, yet what one does physically remains outside the pale of Islam. Secondly, it is possible to take the word, silm سِلم as the hal or indicated state of the Faith in Islam, in which case, the translation would be referring to the perfect and complete state of Islam in which the believers must enter. So, 'entering Islam completely' would mean that one must accept all injunctions of Islam, not that one accepts some and hesitates about others. Since Islam is the name of that particular way of life which has been given through the Qur'an and Sunnah, there-fore, it does not matter, which facet of life it concerns, it may be beliefs and acts of worship or social dealings or business transactions or government and politics or trade and industry or any other field; what matters is one's entry into Islam as a complete system, an organic whole, unified, indivisible. The gist of the two approaches given above is that no Muslim shall be deserving of calling himself a Muslim unless he accepts all Islamic injunctions truly and sincerely from the deep recesses of his heart, irrespective of the department of life they belong to, irrespective of whether they concern the outward physique of the body or the heart and the mind. The background of the verse's revelation mentioned earlier in the introductory remarks also shows that one must keep nothing but the teachings of Islam in sight, practice it in its entirety which will, in consequence, make Muslims independent of all religions and nations. Special Note The verse holds out a stern warning to those who have got Islam all tied up with Masjid and ` ibadat عبادت (mosque and the performance of acts of prescribed worship) neglecting injunctions relating to social living and business and personal dealings as if they were no part of religion. This negligence is wide-spread among the 'technically' religious people who do not seem to care much about rights and dealings, especially social rights. It appears that they do not regard these injunctions to be the injunctions of Islam, neither do they make an effort to find out what they are, or try to learn them in an orderly manner, nor think of acting in accordance with these injunctions. We seek refuge with Allah. As regards the possibility of 'Allah Almighty and the angels coming upon them in canopies of clouds,' this will be on Doomsday. The correct position is that such coming of Allah Almighty belongs to the Mutashabihat متاشابھا ات ، statements of hidden meaning, about which there is a standard policy practiced by the majority of the blessed Companions, the Tabi` in تابعین ، their successors, and the revered elders of the Muslim ummah, that is, one must believe in its truth and avoid worrying about as to how this would happen because it is beyond human reason to find out the reality and the nature, the whats and the hows of the 'Being' and the Attributes of Allah Almighty, and this too is included therein.

The previous verses ended with a word of praise for the sincere. As sincerity (ikhlas اخلاص) can sometimes touch the limits of excess inadvertently, that is, one does intend to come up with more obedience, but that obedience, when observed carefully, turns out to be exceeding the limits set by the Shari'ah and Sunnah. This is called bid'ah بدعت . This can be explained through the example of the blessed Companion ` Abdullah ibn Salam ؓ and others who were, previous to their Islam, known scholars among the Jews. Since Saturday was the sacred day of rest (the Sabbath اَسَّبت) in Judaism, and camel-meat was unlawful, they thought, once they were in Islam, to bring about some sort of a synthesis between the two faiths, through which they could continue to honour Sabbath سَبِّت as it was necessary under the law of Moses while Islam did not require dishonouring it; and similarly, they could simply avoid eating camel-meat in practice while believing that it was lawful, for it was unlawful in the law of Moses but Islam does not make it obligatory to eat it. Thus, they thought that they would stay in touch with the law of Moses and still not go against the Shari'ah of Muhammad ﷺ ، something that appealed to them as a stronger demonstration of obedience to divine laws and a closer approach to matters of faith. Allah Almighty corrects this thought in the present verse which aims to establish that Islam is an obligation in its totality. It is total and perfect only when what is not necessary in Islam is not considered to be a part of it. To take such thought or practice as part of the Faith is a Satanic slip which may bring far more severe a punishment than common sins would. It is in this background of the verse's revelation, that believers have been asked to 'enter Islam completely', not making allowances for a faith other than Islam - a divisive approach which makes one an easy target of Satan. Therefore, the prohibition 'do not follow the footsteps of Satan', an enemy who would cheat you into taking to something which obviously looks very much like your Faith, but happens to be totally contrary to it in reality. After having received clear laws and rules that lead to the straight path, there is no justification left for any deviation. Those who still slip, they must remember that Allah is Mighty, having the power to punish, and Wise too, lest one should misread any delay in punishment which comes when His Wisdom so dictates. Using an eloquent image, the text goes on to question the ultimate acceptance of truth at a time when it shall no longer remain worth accepting and al'_ matters of reward and punishment shall revert to Allah with no power existing other than Him, why then would anyone become quixotic enough to stand against a Power so obvious, the result of which could be nothing but destruction. Commentary The word, سِلم : (silm) in; ادْخُلُوا فِي السِّلْمِ كَافَّةً translated here as 'enter Islam completely', is used to convey two meanings, 'peace' and 'Islam'. At this place, according to the consensus of the Companions and their successors, it means Islam (Ibn xathir). The word كَافَّة : (kaffah) means 'totally' and 'universally'. In the structural scheme of the sentence, this word appears as hal (an adverb, qualifying the verb before it with a particular state). There are two possibilities here. Firstly, the word be taken as the hal of the pronoun in (udkhulu ادْخُلُوا) in which case the translation would be referring to the condition of the believers while entering Islam, which must be 'complete'. This would mean that their entire person, hands and feet, eyes and ears, feeling and thinking, after having embraced the Faith should all be within the parameters of Islam and the obedience to Allah. This is to warn against a state of being in which one may be physically carrying out the dictates of Islam while the heart and the mind are not fully satisfied, or in case, the heart and the mind are satisfied, yet what one does physically remains outside the pale of Islam. Secondly, it is possible to take the word, silm سِلم as the hal or indicated state of the Faith in Islam, in which case, the translation would be referring to the perfect and complete state of Islam in which the believers must enter. So, 'entering Islam completely' would mean that one must accept all injunctions of Islam, not that one accepts some and hesitates about others. Since Islam is the name of that particular way of life which has been given through the Qur'an and Sunnah, there-fore, it does not matter, which facet of life it concerns, it may be beliefs and acts of worship or social dealings or business transactions or government and politics or trade and industry or any other field; what matters is one's entry into Islam as a complete system, an organic whole, unified, indivisible. The gist of the two approaches given above is that no Muslim shall be deserving of calling himself a Muslim unless he accepts all Islamic injunctions truly and sincerely from the deep recesses of his heart, irrespective of the department of life they belong to, irrespective of whether they concern the outward physique of the body or the heart and the mind. The background of the verse's revelation mentioned earlier in the introductory remarks also shows that one must keep nothing but the teachings of Islam in sight, practice it in its entirety which will, in consequence, make Muslims independent of all religions and nations. Special Note The verse holds out a stern warning to those who have got Islam all tied up with Masjid and ` ibadat عبادت (mosque and the performance of acts of prescribed worship) neglecting injunctions relating to social living and business and personal dealings as if they were no part of religion. This negligence is wide-spread among the 'technically' religious people who do not seem to care much about rights and dealings, especially social rights. It appears that they do not regard these injunctions to be the injunctions of Islam, neither do they make an effort to find out what they are, or try to learn them in an orderly manner, nor think of acting in accordance with these injunctions. We seek refuge with Allah. As regards the possibility of 'Allah Almighty and the angels coming upon them in canopies of clouds,' this will be on Doomsday. The correct position is that such coming of Allah Almighty belongs to the Mutashabihat متاشابھا ات ، statements of hidden meaning, about which there is a standard policy practiced by the majority of the blessed Companions, the Tabi` in تابعین ، their successors, and the revered elders of the Muslim ummah, that is, one must believe in its truth and avoid worrying about as to how this would happen because it is beyond human reason to find out the reality and the nature, the whats and the hows of the 'Being' and the Attributes of Allah Almighty, and this too is included therein.

Immediately earlier, it was said that opposing truth after clear signs have come, deserves punishment. The first verse here (211) cites the case of the elders of Bani Isra'il who were punished for their hostility to truth despite clear signs given to them. Rather than follow the blessed guidance given to them, they chose to stray away from it and, as a result, underwent punishments, for instance, they received the Torah which deserved being accepted but they denied it, consequent to which, they were threatened with Mount Sinai coming down upon them. Again, they heard the Word of Allah which they should have loved and respected but they tinkered with doubts in it and consequently, were struck dead by lightening. Then, again, they were delivered from the Pharaoh through a passage-way made by parting the river, but they showed no gratitude, instead, took to the calf for which they were killed. Further again, they should have been grateful when Mann مَنّ and Salwa سلوا was sent for them but they disobeyed and spoilage set in. When they showed their distaste for it, it stopped coming, throwing them into the toil of growing their own food. Lastly, the chain of prophets that appeared among them from time to time should have been a matter of great satisfaction for them, yet they started killing them for which they were punished, having been deprived of power. In the wake of such misdeeds, some of which find mention in the earlier part of Sarah al-Baqarah, the divine law is that one who changes the blessings or clear signs of Allah, especially after it has come to him when he should have followed its guidance rather than turn back and go astray, then, the ultimate must come to pass, that is, Allah Almighty punishes such a deviant severely. In the second verse (212), the real cause of the opposition to truth has been identified as the love of dunya دنیا (the worldly life) and its material gains. One of the effects of this attitude shows up in the derogatory stance taken against those who love their faith. The reason is simple. When materialism overpowers, the urge for faith evaporates. In fact, people would go to the limit of abandoning their faith when it happens to be against their worldly interests and would even have the audacity to laugh at those who love and practice it. So, it should not be strange that many chiefs among the Israelites and the ignorant among polytheists would make fun of poor Muslims. It is in this context that the Holy Qur'an says: 'Adorned is the present life for those who disbelieve' because of which 'they laugh at those who believe', although, these Muslims who have said no to kufr کفر and shirk shall be in a state better than that of the disbelievers on the day of Qiyamah (Doomsday), for the disbelievers will be in Jahannam جَھَنَّم (Hell) and the believers, in Jannah جَنَّت (Paradise). The last sentence carries a warning for those who pride on their brute economic strength because it is Allah who 'gives, to whom He wills, without measure'. So, all this depends on divinely-ordained destiny and not on personal excellence or influence. As such, it is not necessary that one who is respected for personal possessions happens to be a recipient of honour with Allah as well. The truth is that real honour cannot be anything other than what turns out to be valid in the sight of Allah. That being that, would it not be a plain 'absence of sense' if one stands on the crutches of worldly riches and claims honour for himself and looks down upon the less fortunate as mean? The real consequence of such attitude shall be unravelled on the Last Day. It has been reported that Sayyidna ` Ali ؓ said: 'Anyone who takes a Muslim man or woman low in status because of his or her hunger, Allah Almighty will put him to disgrace before a gathering of all, from the first to the last. And anyone who falsely accuses a Muslim man or woman of a weakness, Allah Almighty would put him on a high mound until he falsifies himself.' (a1-Qurtubi)

Immediately earlier, it was said that opposing truth after clear signs have come, deserves punishment. The first verse here (211) cites the case of the elders of Bani Isra'il who were punished for their hostility to truth despite clear signs given to them. Rather than follow the blessed guidance given to them, they chose to stray away from it and, as a result, underwent punishments, for instance, they received the Torah which deserved being accepted but they denied it, consequent to which, they were threatened with Mount Sinai coming down upon them. Again, they heard the Word of Allah which they should have loved and respected but they tinkered with doubts in it and consequently, were struck dead by lightening. Then, again, they were delivered from the Pharaoh through a passage-way made by parting the river, but they showed no gratitude, instead, took to the calf for which they were killed. Further again, they should have been grateful when Mann مَنّ and Salwa سلوا was sent for them but they disobeyed and spoilage set in. When they showed their distaste for it, it stopped coming, throwing them into the toil of growing their own food. Lastly, the chain of prophets that appeared among them from time to time should have been a matter of great satisfaction for them, yet they started killing them for which they were punished, having been deprived of power. In the wake of such misdeeds, some of which find mention in the earlier part of Sarah al-Baqarah, the divine law is that one who changes the blessings or clear signs of Allah, especially after it has come to him when he should have followed its guidance rather than turn back and go astray, then, the ultimate must come to pass, that is, Allah Almighty punishes such a deviant severely. In the second verse (212), the real cause of the opposition to truth has been identified as the love of dunya دنیا (the worldly life) and its material gains. One of the effects of this attitude shows up in the derogatory stance taken against those who love their faith. The reason is simple. When materialism overpowers, the urge for faith evaporates. In fact, people would go to the limit of abandoning their faith when it happens to be against their worldly interests and would even have the audacity to laugh at those who love and practice it. So, it should not be strange that many chiefs among the Israelites and the ignorant among polytheists would make fun of poor Muslims. It is in this context that the Holy Qur'an says: 'Adorned is the present life for those who disbelieve' because of which 'they laugh at those who believe', although, these Muslims who have said no to kufr کفر and shirk shall be in a state better than that of the disbelievers on the day of Qiyamah (Doomsday), for the disbelievers will be in Jahannam جَھَنَّم (Hell) and the believers, in Jannah جَنَّت (Paradise). The last sentence carries a warning for those who pride on their brute economic strength because it is Allah who 'gives, to whom He wills, without measure'. So, all this depends on divinely-ordained destiny and not on personal excellence or influence. As such, it is not necessary that one who is respected for personal possessions happens to be a recipient of honour with Allah as well. The truth is that real honour cannot be anything other than what turns out to be valid in the sight of Allah. That being that, would it not be a plain 'absence of sense' if one stands on the crutches of worldly riches and claims honour for himself and looks down upon the less fortunate as mean? The real consequence of such attitude shall be unravelled on the Last Day. It has been reported that Sayyidna ` Ali ؓ said: 'Anyone who takes a Muslim man or woman low in status because of his or her hunger, Allah Almighty will put him to disgrace before a gathering of all, from the first to the last. And anyone who falsely accuses a Muslim man or woman of a weakness, Allah Almighty would put him on a high mound until he falsifies himself.' (a1-Qurtubi)

Earlier, the real cause of the opposition to truth has been identified as the love of the worldly life. Now, the present verses point out that, all along the lanes of time, Allah has been showing clear signs to establish the true faith, yet the seekers of the mundane benefits have been working against it to safeguard their material interests. Commentary Stated in the verse is the fact that there was a time when all Human beings used to belong to one single community having common religion and belief - a faith, true and natural. Then came differences in temperaments and tastes, opinions and thoughts, consequently giving birth to contradicting beliefs, making it impossible to distinguish the true from the false. It was in order to make truth distinct from error and to show people the straight path of truth that Allah Almighty sent prophets with Books and revelations. After what the prophets (علیہم السلام) did by way of moral education, people split apart in two groups. The first group welcomed the guidance sent by Allah Almighty and accepted to follow the prophets (علیہم السلام) . These are known as true Muslims. The second group belied the Scriptures and the prophets and refused to follow them. These are known as kafirs کُفَّار or disbelievers. The opening statement in the كَانَ النَّاسُ أُمَّةً وَاحِدَةً translated as 'all men used to be a single ummah', needs some explanation. Imam Raghib al-Isfahani has said in his al-Mufradat المُفَردات that the word, ummah signifies a set of people gathered together for reasons of faith, time or place. This element of unicity could be that of beliefs and ideas, or that of presence in a geographical area at a given time, or that of heredity, language, colour and its likes. So, the sense of the statement is that there was a time when all human beings used to be a composite group. Two considerations emerge here which need elaboration: Makhan36 Firstly, what sort of unity is stipulated in this verse? Secondly, what was the time when this unity existed? The first question was settled by the last sentence of this very verse which mentions the differences that came up later on, and that the prophets were sent to determine the true way out of the multiplicity of ways. It is obvious that the prophets and Scriptures sent to resolve these differences were not dealing with the differences in issues of heredity, language, colour, country or period. Instead, it was the difference of ideas and beliefs. This comparative examination tells us that the unity mentioned in this verse means the unity of ideas and the unity of beliefs. So, as the sense of the verse appears now, there was a time when all human beings belonged to one set of beliefs. What was that set of beliefs? Two possibilities exist here. Either they were united under the belief of God's Oneness, or lived together under a state of disbelief and error. However, according to the majority of commentators, the weightier opinion is that all of them were united under the belief of God's Oneness. A verse to this effect appears in Surah Yunus as well: وَمَا كَانَ النَّاسُ إِلَّا أُمَّةً وَاحِدَةً فَاخْتَلَفُوا ۚ وَلَوْلَا كَلِمَةٌ سَبَقَتْ مِن رَّ‌بِّكَ لَقُضِيَ بَيْنَهُمْ فِيمَا فِيهِ يَخْتَلِفُونَ ﴿19﴾ All men used to be a single ummah. Then, they split. Had it not been the initial will of your Lord (that the true and false and the good and bad shall exist simultaneously in this mortal world) all their disputes would have been settled once for all (leaving no trace of the enemies of truth). (10:19) In Sarah al-Anbiya', it was said: إِنَّ هَـٰذِهِ أُمَّتُكُمْ أُمَّةً وَاحِدَةً وَأَنَا رَ‌بُّكُمْ فَاعْبُدُونِ ﴿92﴾ This ummah of yours is a single ummah and I am your Lord. So, worship Me. (21:92) Also in Sarah al-Mu'minun, it was said: وَإِنَّ هَـٰذِهِ أُمَّتُكُمْ أُمَّةً وَاحِدَةً وَأَنَا رَ‌بُّكُمْ فَاتَّقُونِ ﴿52﴾ This ummah of yours is a single ummah and I am your Lord. So, fear Me. (23:52) All these verses indicate that the unity referred to here is the unity of belief and faith in the true religion. Now, we have to determine the period of this universal human unity. The commentators of the Holy Qur'an among the blessed Companions, Ubayy ibn Ka'b and Ibn Zayd ؓ said that the period refers to the period of ' 'Azal ازل ' (eternity without beginning) when the spirits of all human beings were created and asked أَلَسْتُ بِرَ‌بِّكُم (Am I not your Lord?) to which every soul without exception said, 'Yes, You are our Lord'. That was the time when all human beings were on one true belief the name of which is Islam, the Faith. (Qurtub) The blessed Companion ` Abdullah ibn ` Abbas ؓ said that the period of this unity of belief dates back to the time when Sayyidna Adam (علیہ السلام) came into this world with his wife. They had children who multiplied. All of them believed in the religion of Adam and followed his teachings, especially that of God's Oneness. All of them, except Qabil قابیل (Cain), were obedient to the religious law. In the Musnad of al-Bazzar, there appears an addition to the statement of Sayyidna Ibn ` Abbas ؓ cited above which says that this unity of belief prevailed from the time of Sayyidna Adam (علیہ السلام) to that of Sayyidna Idris (علیہ السلام) . Upto that time all of them followed Islam and Tauhid توحید and the period in between them is that of ten qarns قرن . Probably, qarn قرن means a century which sets the period at one thousand years. Some others have said that the period dates back to the time of the deluge in the days of Sayyidna Nuh نوح (علیہ السلام) in which all living were swept away except those who had boarded the ark with Sayyidna Nu-h (علیہ السلام) . When the flood subsided, those who survived were all Muslims, monotheists and followers of the true faith. In reality, all these three statements are not contradictory; all three periods were such that people were one community and followed the true faith. The second sentence in the verse says: فَبَعَثَ اللَّـهُ النَّبِيِّينَ مُبَشِّرِ‌ينَ وَمُنذِرِ‌ينَ وَأَنزَلَ مَعَهُمُ الْكِتَابَ بِالْحَقِّ لِيَحْكُمَ بَيْنَ النَّاسِ فِيمَا اخْتَلَفُوا فِيهِ ۚ Then Allah sent prophets carrying glad-tidings and warning and sent down with them the Book with the Truth to judge between people in what they disputed. It is worth noting that the first sentence said that all men used to be a single ummah, and in the second, this statement has been ramified by saying that Allah sent prophets and Books to resolve disputes. Obviously, the two sentences do not seem to synchronize because the cause of sending prophets and Books is the disputation of people, which did not exist at that time. However, the answer is very clear. The verse means that during the early period of human life, people adhered to one true faith, later on differences crept in, which led to disputations following which came the need to send prophets (علیہم السلام) and Books. Something still remains. When mention has been made of a single ummah above, why is it that the incidence of differences has not been mentioned? Those who are blessed with some insight into the wisdom behind the style of the Holy Qur'an would not find it difficult to answer the question, for the Holy Qur'an, while relating past events, does not report the whole story- anywhere, instead, it eliminates parts in between, which could be understood contextually. For instance, there is the prisoner in the story about Sayyidna Yusuf (علیہ السلام) who, after his release, came to the king and asked that he be sent to Sayyidna Yusuf (علیہ السلام) in order to seek an interpretation of the royal dream. This proposal of the prisoner is all that the Holy Qur'an relates, then, the conversation begins with يُوسُفُ أَيُّهَا الصِّدِّيق The text does not say that the king liked his proposal and sent him to the prison-house to see Sayyidna Yusuf (علیہ السلام) and that he reached there, then, addressed him. The fact is that reading the text with sentences earlier and later makes all this simple to understand. Similarly, the mention of differences after the mention of a united community in this verse was not considered necessary because the advent of disputes is something known by the whole world all the time. What needed to be expressed was that, before all these overflowing disputes, there was a time when all human beings used to follow one true religion. This is what was stated. Now, the disputes visible all over the world were not something that should have been expressly identified. This was unnecessary. Nevertheless, very pointedly it was said that Allah Almighty did provide for the removal of these disputes through guidance. The words of the text say: فَبَعَثَ اللَّـهُ :that is, 'Allah Almighty sent prophets (علیہم السلام) ، who were to carry glad-tidings of eternal peace and bliss to those who follow the true Faith and to give warning of the punishment of Hell to those who turn away from it. Then, Allah helped prophets through His revelations and Books which were to make truth distinct from error in matters of beliefs and ideas. The text, after that, points out to the outcome. Inspite of the prophets (علیہم السلام) and Books with open truths, the world split itself into two groups. There were some who did not accept this clear guidance, and strangely enough, the first to deny this guidance were those to whom these prophets and verses were sent, that is, the Jews and the Christians. Far more astonishing is the fact that there was no possibility of any doubt or misgiving in Scriptures which were neither beyond their understanding nor were likely to throw them into confusion. In fact, these people knew and understood it, yet it was their lust for taking an opposite stand which made them deny it. Then, there was the second group who were enabled to follow the straight path by Allah Almighty and they became the ones to say yes to the lead given by prophets, messengers and divine books sincerely and whole-heartedly. These very two groups have been identified in Surah al-Taghabun تغابن as follows: خَلَقَكُمْ فَمِنكُمْ كَافِرٌ‌ وَمِنكُم مُّؤْمِنٌ Allah Almighty created you, then, some of you became disbelievers and some of you, believers. (64:2) To sum up, the gist of the sense in the verse كَانَ النَّاسُ إِلَّا أُمَّةً وَاحِدَة (All men used to be a single ummah) is that all human beings were initially and universally followers of the true faith. Then, temperamental multiplicity gave way to the promotion of self-interest which caused disputes to surface, so much so that a time came when beliefs too were disputed which in turn reached a point when the very root, the fine line of distinction between the true and the false, got all mixed up. Thereupon, Allah Almighty sent prophets (علیہم السلام) and His Books to guide people to the right path and to bring them back to the same true faith on which human beings already were. But, despite all guidance and very clear signs, there were some who dutifully followed these and there were others who, out of their obstinacy and hostility, took the road of denial and deviation. Injunctions and related considerations 1. The verse tells us that Allah Almighty sent His prophets and Books into this mortal world for no other purpose but that people, who had left the single ummah following the true faith and branched out into different sects, should again be assembled into the same one community. Whenever people wavered from the right path, Allah sent a prophet, and a Book so that they act accordingly. The coming of prophets as a medium of reform and salvation continued when they again deviated which resulted in the coming of another prophet and another Book with the express purpose of putting people back on the right track, that is, on the straight path shown by their Lord. This is like health, a single fact of life as compared to diseases which are too many. When a certain disease showed up, Allah prescribed the appropriate medicine and regimen. Another disease brought another set of treatment. Finally, came the most comprehensive of all prescriptions, one that will be ideally successful against all diseases until such time that Allah wills to keep this world going. This perfect prescription, a comprehensive blueprint of all diagnostic considerations, treatment par excellence, the most complete of all previous prescriptions which pre-empts all future possibilities of treatment, is none but that of Islam. For this came the last of the prophets (علیہم السلام) ، and with him came the Qur'an. There used to be the recurring problem of Scriptures being interpolated, prophetic teachings being lost which necessitated the sending of new prophets and new Books in the past. This was set right when Allah Almighty Himself took the responsibility of seeing that the Holy Qur'an remains protected against interpolations or changes. Then, to make sure that the teachings of the Holy Qur'an remain intact in their original form and live right through the Day of Doom (Dooms’ Day), Allah Almighty promised to create and sustain a set of people from the community of Muhammad ﷺ ، a group which will always adhere to the true Faith, keep circulating the correct teachings of the Qur'an and Sunnah among Muslims all over the world without ever flinching against any opposition or hostility. Therefore, after this, it was inevitable that the doors of prophet hood and the coming of revelation be closed for ever. So, came the final proclamation, that of the end of prophet hood. Let there be no misgiving that during the course of history the coming of prophets and Books were ever a source of division or dissension between people. What is true, as stated earlier, is that all prophets and divine Books aimed at assembling people around one true faith to which they initially adhered. 2. We also discover here that the two-nation theory of Muslim and non-Muslim, the identification of nationhood on the basis of religion is exactly what the Qur'an aims to support in فَمِنكُمْ كَافِرٌ‌ وَمِنكُم مُّؤْمِنٌ;, cited above. Along with it, we can also clearly see that the real foundation of the two-nation theory stands on raising a united nationhood, which flourished in the very beginning and which was based, not on the factor of the country of origin, but on believing in the Truth and following the straight path. The Qur'anic statement: كَانَ النَّاسُ إِلَّا أُمَّةً وَاحِدَة (All men used to be a single ummah) stresses that there used to be real national unity in the beginning of the world when people followed the true faith. Disputes came later. Then came the prophets who invited them to that real unity. Those who rejected their call cut themselves off from this united nationhood and were known as a separate nation. 3. The third lesson we learn from this verse is that evil people have always elected to oppose every prophet and every divine Book and have been even eager to line up their maximum forces against them. This being the customary situation allowed to prevail by Allah Almighty, people who have the strength of faith in their hearts should not feel bad about the chronic pursuit of intrigues and hostility by the evil ones against them. Very simply, just as the disbelievers took to the ways of their elders in the form of denial, hostility and prophet-bashing, all true Muslims on the straight path should take to the consistent practice of their elders, the great prophets (علیہم السلام) ، by staying patient against injuries inflicted on them, nevertheless, keep calling them to the true Faith with wisdom, sound advice and good grace. Perhaps, it is because of this congruity of purpose, that the next verse counsels Muslims to maintain a stance of forbearance and patience against all situations of distress.

The previous verse has said how hostile the disbelievers have been to prophets (علیہم السلام) and believers and, in a way, has comforted Muslims hurt by the mockery of disbelievers that there is nothing new about this antagonism. This has been there all the time. Further from this point, the present verse recounts the enormous amount of suffering faced by past prophets and believers at the hands of hostile disbelievers. This too is to console Muslims that they should be patient against the hostility of disbelievers as ideal happiness can only be achieved by getting ready and working hard for the Hereafter. Commentary There are two things worth serious attention in this verse: 1. Apparently, this verse seems to indicate that nobody shall enter Paradise unless he goes through hardships and sufferings, although, Qur'anic statements and sayings of the Holy Prophet ﷺ prove that many sinners will enter Paradise simply because of the grace, mercy and forgiveness of Allah Almighty, and that they shall undergo no hardship either. This is because hardship and suffering have different levels. The lowest degree is to resist against one's own desiring self and the Satan, or to strengthen the bases of one's beliefs by countering the forces working against the true Faith. This degree of achievement is within the grasp of every Muslim. Further on, there are the middle and the higher levels. The degree of one's strenuous effort shall be the degree of one's entry in to Paradise. Thus, nobody remains untried by effort and struggle and the resulting hardship and suffering. In a hadith, the Holy Prophet ﷺ has said: اشد الناس بلاء الانبیاء ثم الامثل فالامثل The hardships faced by the prophets are the hardest faced by men, after that, by those closer to them. 2. The second point one must note here concerns the prophets and their followers. That they reached a point of suffering when they cried out as to when will the help of Allah come, was not because of any doubt since that would be against the dignity of their station. In fact, the call was made in the background of Allah's promised help for which the time and place was left undetermined. As such, using these words in a state of distress indicated the desire for early help. Making such a prayer is not against one's trust in Allah (tawakkul تَوَکَّل) or against the station of prophet hood. On the contrary, the fact is that Allah Almighty favours the earnest supplication of his servants. Who else other than the prophets and the pious of the community would be more deserving of what Allah likes?

Commentary Imperatives such as - 'leave disbelief and hypocrisy and enter Islam completely', 'listen to none when it comes to obeying the command of Allah', 'spend your wealth and give your life to seek the pleasure of Allah' and 'show fortitude against all sorts of hardships and sufferings' - have been emphatically mentioned in previous verses. Now, from this point onwards, there appear some details concerning this obedience which relate to one's wealth, life and other matters of marriage and divorce. All these form part of the general theme of righteousness which continues. This statement of details is very special as these come in answer to questions raised by the noble Companions before the Holy Prophet ﷺ . The answer to questions asked came directly from Allah through the medium of the Holy Prophet ﷺ . If this were to be said in other words, one could say that the Fatwa فتوٰی (religious ruling) was given by Allah Almighty Himself. This too , is correct because Allah Almighty has, in the Qur'nic verse, قُلِ اللَّـهُ يُفْتِيكُمْ فِيهِنَّ : Say: "Allah decides for you concerning them,,,, ' (4:127) attributed the act of giving Fatwa to Himself. Therefore, there is nothing strange about this attribution. It is also possible to say that these fatawa فتاوٰی (plural of fatwa) come from the Holy Prophet ﷺ which have been communicated to him through revelation. Anyway, what has to be realized is that the religious injunctions described in this section as answers to some questions asked by the noble Companions carry a significance of their own. Throughout the Holy Qur'an, such special injunctions in the form of questions and answers appear at nearly seventeen places. Seven out of these happen to be right here in the Surah al-Baqarah, one in Surah al-Ma'idah and one in Surah al-Anfal. These nine questions are from the noble Companions. Then come two questions in Surah al-A` raf and one each in Surah Ban' Isra'il, Surah al-Kahf, Surah Ta-Ha and Surah al-Nazi` at making a total of six questions, which were asked by the disbelievers. All these have been answered in the Holy Qur'an. The blessed Companion and commentator of the Holy Qur'an, ` Abdullah ibn ` Abbas ؓ has said: 'I have not seen a set of people better than the Companions of the Holy Prophet ﷺ who, (despite their great attachment to matters of Faith and their deep love for and close relationship with the Holy Prophet ﷺ ) asked very few questions.' The questions asked relate to a total of thirteen problems only, which have been answered in the Holy Qur'an because these noble souls never asked a question unless absolutely necessary (Qurtubi). In the present verse (215), the istifta' or questions asked by the noble Companions has been reported in the words, يَسْأَلُونَكَ مَاذَا يُنفِقُونَ 'They ask you as to what they should spend'. The same question has been repeated in verse 219 in the same words يَسْأَلُونَكَ مَاذَا يُنفِقُونَ : but the answer to this one question has been given differently in the present verse (215) and later on, in verse 219. Therefore, it is necessary to first understand the wisdom behind the two answers to one single question. This wisdom becomes clear by looking at the background in which these verses were revealed. For instance, the present verse was revealed in a particular situation when the Companion, ` Amr ibn Jamuh ؓ had asked the Holy Prophet ﷺ the question: ما ننفق من اموالنا واین نضعھا ؟ (Ibn al-Mundhir - Mazhari) that is, 'what do we spend from our wealth, and where?' According to a narration reported by Ibn Jarir ؓ ، this question was not that of Ibn Jamuh alone, rather, it was from Muslims in general. The question has two parts, that is, what and how much should be spent, and where should it go or who should be the recipients. Let us now look at the second verse (219) which begins with the same question. The background of its revelation as narrated by Ibn Abi Hatim ؓ is as follows. When the Holy Qur'an commanded Muslims to spend in the way of Allah, some Companions ؓ came to the Holy Prophet ﷺ and requested an elaboration of the injunction. They wished to find out what 'money' or which 'thing' they should spend in the way of Allah. This question has one simple unit of inquiry, that is, what should they spend. Thus, the two questions somewhat differ in their approach. The first question consisted of the 'what' and 'where’ of spending. The second question is restricted to what' only. The Qur'anic answer to the first question shows that the second part of the question, that is, where should they spend, has been given more importance and answered frontally and clearly. However, the first part of the question, that is, what should they spend, was answered as a corollary, and considered sufficient. Now let us go back to the two parts as they appear in the words of the Holy Qur'an. About the first part, that is, where should they spend, it has been said: مَا أَنفَقْتُم مِّنْ خَيْرٍ‌ فَلِلْوَالِدَيْنِ وَالْأَقْرَ‌بِينَ وَالْيَتَامَىٰ وَالْمَسَاكِينِ وَابْنِ السَّبِيلِ Whatever good you spend is for parents, kins, orphans, the needy and the wayfarer. Then, the other part of the question, that is, what should they spend, was answered as a corollary through the words, وَمَا تَفْعَلُوا مِنْ خَيْرٍ‌ فَإِنَّ اللَّـهَ بِهِ عَلِيمٌ 'And whatever good you do, Allah is all-aware of that'. The hint is that Allah Almighty has not placed any restriction on you as to the amount of what you should spend. The fact is whatever you spend in accordance with your capability will become deserving of a matching reward with Allah. In short, the considered explanation of the heads of expenditure was given in the first verse (215), perhaps, in view of the real concern of the questioner about where to spend. Then, the question, what should they spend, was answered as a corollary and considered sufficient. The later verse (219) where the question was limited to what 'money' or what 'thing' should they spend was answered by saying: قُلِ الْعَفْوَ (Say: "The surplus" ). These two verses yield some rules of guidance about spending in the way of Allah. Rulings 1. These two verses are not concerned with the obligatory zakah زکاۃ because the threshold of holdings for the obligatory Zakah زکاۃ is fixed, and the obligatory ratio of spending under it has also been fully determined through the Holy Prophet ﷺ . None of these two have been specified in the verses under discussion. This tells us that the two verses refer to voluntary charities (al-Sadagat al-nafilah الصدقۃ النافلہ ). This also removes the doubt about the inclusion of parents as recepients of spending under verse 215, although, giving Zakah زکاۃ to parents is not permissible under the teaching of the Holy Prophet ﷺ . The reason is simple. These two verses have nothing to do with the obligation of Zakah زکاۃ . 2. Another rule of conduct which emerges from this verse is that even the gift given or food served to parents and other near of kin, if the intention is to obey Allah Almighty in doing so, will be included under spending in the way of Allah and will deserve reward with Him. 3. Consideration should be given, while making voluntary charities, to spending only what is extra to personal needs. Spending while hurting one's own family, over-riding their due rights and subjecting them to straightened circumstances is no act of merit. Similarly, one who does not pay back his debt yet goes on squandering money in voluntary charities is not liked in the sight of Allah. The statement about spending the surplus' العفو (al-'afw), that which is extra to needs, has been interpreted as an obligatory injunction by the blessed Companion Abu Dharr al-Ghifari and others ؓ . According to them, it is not permissible to hold in one's possession any money or materials surplus to needs even after paying of zakah and fulfilling all rights due; it is necessary (wajib) to give everything extra to needs as charity (sadaqah). However, the majority of Companions, their successors (the Tabi` in) and the great imams of the Faith interpret the Qur'anic verses in question to mean that whatever has to be spent in the way of Allah should be surplus to needs. It does not mean that one has to give in charity (sadaqah) everything surplus to need as something necessary or wajib. Moreover, this later position is what the consistent practice of the blessed Companions proves.

Explanation in brief: Verse 216 establishes the obligatory nature of Jihad even though it may be burdensome for some temperaments. In this case, the truth is that it is Allah Almighty who knows the reality of everything while man does not possess the full range of that knowledge. Therefore, one should not decide on things being good or bad as prompted by personal desires, rather, one must say yes to the command of Allah and follow it consistently as the most expedient course of action. Verse 217 begins with a question which was asked by some disbelievers from the tribe of Quraysh. It has been reported that some Companions ؓ of the Holy Prophet ﷺ were by chance confronted by disbelievers while on a journey. During the engagement, one disbeliever got killed at their hands. The day this happened was the first of the month of Rajab which, according to the calculation of the Companions ؓ ، was the 30th of the Jumada al-Ukhirah جماد الآخرہ . It may be noted that Rajab is one of the 'sacred' months. So, the disbelievers taunted Muslims by saying that they did not even honour the sanctity of the 'sacred' month. The Muslims were worried and asked the Holy Prophet ﷺ about it. According to some narrations, as stated above, some disbelievers themselves came to the Holy Prophet ﷺ and raised the question as a matter of objection. The answer given is that 'fighting in a sacred month, is something grave' (but, Muslims did not do so intentionally, instead, this came to pass inadvertently because of a misunderstanding about the date). Moreover, what the disbelievers have committed is graver than this, because the disbelief, the placing of idols in the Holy Mosque and the expelling of Muslims from there is a greater evil than killing a disbeliever in a state of war. Injunctions and related considerations 1. The injunction declaring Jihad as obligatory appears in the first of the three verses under comment in the words: كُتِبَ عَلَيْكُمُ الْقِتَالُ "Fighting is enjoined upon you..." which means that 'Jihad. has been made obligatory on you'. These words apparently seem to say that Jihad is obligatory on every Muslim in every condition. Some other verses of the Qur'an and the sayings of the Holy Prophet ﷺ ، however, have clarified that this obligation is not absolute, that is, every Muslim is not charged to perform it as Fard ` Ayn فرضِ عین ، (absolute and mandatory obligation on every Muslim) instead, it is Fard ` ala al-Kifayah فرض علی الکفایہ whereby, should a group of Muslims come forward to discharge this obligation, other Muslims would be considered absolved from it. However, should there remain just no group ready to discharge the obligation of Jihad at any time or in any country, the result will be that all Muslims will fall into the sin of abandoning an obligation. The saying of the Holy Prophet ﷺ in the hadith: الجھاد ماض الی یوم القیامہ means that it is necessary that there be, right upto the Day of Doom, a group of Muslims which keeps discharging the obligation of Jihad. Another verse of the Holy Qur'an says: فَضَّلَ اللَّـهُ الْمُجَاهِدِينَ بِأَمْوَالِهِمْ وَأَنفُسِهِمْ عَلَى الْقَاعِدِينَ دَرَ‌جَةً And Allah has given precedence to mujahidin, who carry out jihad with their properties and lives, over those who sit away, and Allah has promised good for both. (4:95) Here, the promise of good has been extended to those also who may not be able to take part in Jihad because of some compulsive excuse or because of engagement in some other religious service. It is obvious that the promise of good would have never been made for those who are absent from Jihad, in the event that it were an absolute obligation on every individual Muslim. Similarly, this is what appears in another فَلَوْلَا نَفَرَ‌ مِن كُلِّ فِرْ‌قَةٍ مِّنْهُمْ طَائِفَةٌ لِّيَتَفَقَّهُوا فِي الدِّينِ Why could a small group from every large community of yours not come forward so that they pursue understanding in religion? (9:122) Here, the Holy Qur'an itself suggests a division of work whereby some Muslims carry out Jihad and some keep serving the cause of religious education. This can be done only when Jihad is Fard ` alit al-Kifayah فرض علی الکفایہ and not Fard ` Ayn فرضِ عین . In a hadith appearing in al-Bukhari and Muslim, it is said that a person sought the permission of the Holy Prophet ﷺ to take part in Jihad. He asked him: 'Are your parents alive?' He said, 'Yes, they are alive.' He said: 'Then, go. Serve your parents and earn the reward of Jihad'. Incidentally, this also tells that Jihad is a Fard ` ala al Kifayah فرض علی الکفایہ . When a group from among the Muslims is staunchly discharging the obligation of Jihad, remaining Muslims can engage themselves in other services and duties. But, should there come a time when the 'Imam' or the leader of Muslims gives a general call under the compulsion of need and invites all Muslims to take part in Jihad, then, Jihad becomes an absolute obligation on everybody. In Surah al-Taubah, the Holy Qur'an says: يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا مَا لَكُمْ إِذَا قِيلَ لَكُمُ انفِرُ‌وا فِي سَبِيلِ اللَّـهِ اثَّاقَلْتُمْ O those who believe, what has happened to you that, when you are asked to come out in the way of Allah, you become heavy? (9:38) This verse carries the injunction relating to the general call of Jihad mentioned above. In the same way, should it be that disbelievers, God forbid, invade an Islamic country and the group engaged in defence is not fully capable of it, being weak or insufficient in number, then, at that time as well, this obligation becomes 'contagious', passing on from that first group to all Muslims close by, as an equally effective obligation. And in case, they too are weak or incapable, the obligation will pass on to Muslims close to them. This situation may reach a point when Jihad becomes an absolute obligation on each and every individual Muslim all over the world. It is in view of these verses from the Holy Qur'an that the majority of Muslim jurists and scholars of hadith have set up the rule that Jihad is Fard ala al-Kifdyah فرض علی الکفایہ under normal conditions. 2. Therefore, as far as Jihad remains a Fard Kifayah, it is not permissible for the off-spring to go for Jihad without the permission of their parents. 3. It is not correct for one who has a debt to pay to take part in this Fard Kifayah فرض علی الکفایہ until such time that he clears his debt off. But, should there come a time when, either due to a general call for Jihad or an aggressive encirclement of Muslims by the disbelievers, Jihad becomes Fard ` Ayn فرضِ عین ، an absolute obligation on all, then, no condition such as that of the permission of parents or of the husband or of the creditor remains operative. Towards the end of this verse, it is as a mode of persuasion that Jihad has been identified as something which may, temperamentally, appear 'hard' but one must remember that human intelligence and effort fails so many times when it comes to the outcome. It is not at all surprising that the most intelligent person around may take the beneficial to be harmful and vice versa. If everyone was to look back into the events of his or her life, it will be noticed right there that there was something they were going after as beneficial turned out ultimately to be very harmful, or there was something they were avoiding as harmful which later on proved to be very beneficial. This scenario of human reasoning and planning failing time and again is a matter of repeated experience, therefore, it was said that fighting in the way of Allah may obviously appear to be a loss of life and property, yet the time will come when realities will be unveiled and we shall find out that this loss was no loss, instead, it was the ultimate in gain, and a source of eternal peace.

The injunction relating to fighting in the 'sacred' months: The second of the three verses under comment here proves that fighting is forbidden in Rajab, Dhul-Qa'dah, Dhul-Hijjah and Muharram, the four 'sacred' months. In the same way, there are several verses of the Holy Qur'an where fighting has been very clearly forbid-den during the sacred months, for instance:' ذَٰلِكَ الدِّينُ الْقَيِّمُ ۚ فَلَا تَظْلِمُوا فِيهِنَّ أَنفُسَكُمْ :'Four of them are sacred. That is the right religion' (9:36). Then there is the saying of the Holy Prophet ﷺ in the famous address of the Last Hajj: نھا اربعہ حُرم ثلات متوالیات و رجب مضر 'Four (months) from among them are sacred, out of which three are consecutive and the (fourth) is Rajab of Mudar'. These Qur'anic verses and hadith narrations prove that fighting is haram حرام prohibited in the four months mentioned and this forbiddance is good for ever. In this connection, ` Ata ibn Abi Rabah, a leading early exponent of Qur'anic exegesis declared on oath that this injunction is there to stay forever. Several others among the respected Successors (Tabi'in) regard this injunction as provenly un-abrogated, but in accordance with the ruling of the majority of Muslim jurists as stated by al-Jassas, this injunction is one of the abrogated ones as maintained by a consensus of jurists and fighting is no more forbidden in any month. Now comes the question as to which verse of the Holy Qur'an abrogates this injunction. Jurists have taken different positions in this respect. Some say the verse وَقَاتِلُوا الْمُشْرِ‌كِينَ كَافَّةً :'And fight the disbelievers, all of them' (9:36) abrogates it. Many others regard the verse فَاقْتُلُوا الْمُشْرِ‌كِينَ حَيْثُ وَجَدتُّمُوهُمْ :'Slay the disbelievers wherever you find them' (9:5) as its abrogator. They have taken the word: حَيْثُ here in the sense of 'anytime' meaning thereby that the disbelievers should be killed in whatever month or time they are found. Some have said that the abrogator of this injunction is the very conduct of the Holy Prophet ﷺ since he himself besieged the city of Ta'if during the 'sacred months' and it was during the 'sacred months' that he sent the noble Companion ` Amir al-Ash'ari ؓ on the military expedition of Awtas اوطاس . On these grounds, Jurists in general, regard this injunction as abrogated, al-Jassas calls it وھو قول فقھاء الأنصار : 'This is what the majority of the jurists says'. Ruh al-Ma` ani, under comments on this verse, and al-Baydawi, under the explanation of the first section of Surah al-Bara'ah have reported a consensus of the community on the abrogation of the forbiddance of fighting during the 'sacred months' (Bayan al-Qur'an). However, al-Tafsir al-Mazhari answers all these arguments by saying that the sanctity of the 'sacred months' is clearly present in the verse known as Ayah al-sayf or the Verse of the Sword, that is : إِنَّ عِدَّةَ الشُّهُورِ‌ عِندَ اللَّـهِ اثْنَا عَشَرَ‌ شَهْرً‌ا فِي كِتَابِ اللَّـهِ يَوْمَ خَلَقَ السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالْأَرْ‌ضَ مِنْهَا أَرْ‌بَعَةٌ حُرُ‌مٌ' The number of months, with God, is twelve (mentioned) in the book of Allah, the day that he created the heavens and the earth; four of them are sacred' (9:36). Of the verse relating to fighting, this verse was the last one to be revealed and the Address of the Last Hajj which was delivered only 80 days before the Holy Prophet ﷺ passed away clearly indicates the sanctity of the 'sacred months'. For this reason, the verses quoted cannot be regarded as abrogative of this injunction. Moreover, the siege of Ta'if did not take place in the month of Dhul-Qa'dah. It was in Shawwal, therefore, this too cannot be regarded as its abrogator. But, it can certainly be conceded that the absolute forbiddance of fighting in the 'sacred months' which seems to reflect from the verse referred to holds an exception whereby it would become permissible for Muslims to defend themselves, or counter attack the aggressor if disbelievers themselves start the fighting during these months. This much, then, can be termed as abrogated, which finds a clarification in the verse الشَّهْرُ‌ الْحَرَ‌امُ بِالشَّهْرِ‌ الْحَرَ‌امِ : The holy month for the holy month' (2:194). The gist of the discussion is that initiating a fight during these months is forbidden forever, but in the event that disbelievers mount an attack on Muslims, then Muslims are permitted to fight back in their defence. A1-Jassas has reported the narration of the blessed Companion Jabir ibn ` Abdullah ؓ who said that the Holy Prophet ﷺ did not fight in any of the 'sacred months' until such time that the initial fighting was started by the disbelievers. The evil consequences of Apostasy Towards the end of the verse (217), it has been said that the act of turning into an apostate after having become a Muslim shall be dealt with under the injunction: حَبِطَتْ أَعْمَالُهُمْ فِي الدُّنْيَا وَالْآخِرَ‌ةِ that is, they shall be those whose deeds have gone waste in this world and in the Hereafter. Here are some injunctions relating to the apostates: 1. Some examples of 'deeds going waste in this world' are that the wife of an apostate goes out of the bond of marriage; if a relative of an apostate dies as Muslim, he gets no share in the inheritance; all obligations such as prayers and fasting fulfilled in one's state of Islam are reduced to nothing; for such a person funeral prayers are not offered and he or she is not buried in the graveyard meant for Muslims. 'Deeds going waste in the Hereafter' means that one gets no reward for acts of worship and enters the Hell to stay there forever. 2. Should an apostate become a Muslim once again, at least this much is certain that he could hope to salvage himself away from Hell in the Hereafter, while during the remaining tenure of his life in the mortal world, the injunctions of Islam will be operative for him. But, there is a difference of opinion among jurists about what would happen to a person who has already done his Hajj - would it be obligatory on him, given the capability, to do it all over again, or would it not? Similarly, in the Hereafter, would the reward for his previous religious performances, such as prayers and fasting, revert back to him, or would they not? Imam Abu Hanifah (رح) says that it is obligatory on him to do his Hajj again and he does not subscribe to the opinion that he will be rewarded for his previous prayers and fasting while Imam Shafi` I شافعی (رح) differs on both issues. 3. For one who is basically a disbeliever, the position is that the reward for his good deeds in a state of disbelief is held in abeyance. If there comes the time when he embraces Islam, he gets a matching reward for all such deeds, but in the event that he dies an infidel, everything goes waste. The Hadith statement: اسلمت علی ما اسلفت من خیر : 'You have embraced Islam with all the good deeds which you have performed earlier' means just this. 4. In short, the fate of an apostate is worse than that of an original disbeliever. This is why Jizyah جزیہ can be accepted from an original disbeliever while a male apostate who does not return to Islam is killed. If the apostate is a woman, she is imprisoned for life. The reason is that their conduct insults Islam and the insult of such a binding authority deserves no less a punishment.

The injunction relating to fighting in the 'sacred' months: The second of the three verses under comment here proves that fighting is forbidden in Rajab, Dhul-Qa'dah, Dhul-Hijjah and Muharram, the four 'sacred' months. In the same way, there are several verses of the Holy Qur'an where fighting has been very clearly forbid-den during the sacred months, for instance:' ذَٰلِكَ الدِّينُ الْقَيِّمُ ۚ فَلَا تَظْلِمُوا فِيهِنَّ أَنفُسَكُمْ :'Four of them are sacred. That is the right religion' (9:36). Then there is the saying of the Holy Prophet ﷺ in the famous address of the Last Hajj: نھا اربعہ حُرم ثلات متوالیات و رجب مضر 'Four (months) from among them are sacred, out of which three are consecutive and the (fourth) is Rajab of Mudar'. These Qur'anic verses and hadith narrations prove that fighting is haram حرام prohibited in the four months mentioned and this forbiddance is good for ever. In this connection, ` Ata ibn Abi Rabah, a leading early exponent of Qur'anic exegesis declared on oath that this injunction is there to stay forever. Several others among the respected Successors (Tabi'in) regard this injunction as provenly un-abrogated, but in accordance with the ruling of the majority of Muslim jurists as stated by al-Jassas, this injunction is one of the abrogated ones as maintained by a consensus of jurists and fighting is no more forbidden in any month. Now comes the question as to which verse of the Holy Qur'an abrogates this injunction. Jurists have taken different positions in this respect. Some say the verse وَقَاتِلُوا الْمُشْرِ‌كِينَ كَافَّةً :'And fight the disbelievers, all of them' (9:36) abrogates it. Many others regard the verse فَاقْتُلُوا الْمُشْرِ‌كِينَ حَيْثُ وَجَدتُّمُوهُمْ :'Slay the disbelievers wherever you find them' (9:5) as its abrogator. They have taken the word: حَيْثُ here in the sense of 'anytime' meaning thereby that the disbelievers should be killed in whatever month or time they are found. Some have said that the abrogator of this injunction is the very conduct of the Holy Prophet ﷺ since he himself besieged the city of Ta'if during the 'sacred months' and it was during the 'sacred months' that he sent the noble Companion ` Amir al-Ash'ari ؓ on the military expedition of Awtas اوطاس . On these grounds, Jurists in general, regard this injunction as abrogated, al-Jassas calls it وھو قول فقھاء الأنصار : 'This is what the majority of the jurists says'. Ruh al-Ma` ani, under comments on this verse, and al-Baydawi, under the explanation of the first section of Surah al-Bara'ah have reported a consensus of the community on the abrogation of the forbiddance of fighting during the 'sacred months' (Bayan al-Qur'an). However, al-Tafsir al-Mazhari answers all these arguments by saying that the sanctity of the 'sacred months' is clearly present in the verse known as Ayah al-sayf or the Verse of the Sword, that is : إِنَّ عِدَّةَ الشُّهُورِ‌ عِندَ اللَّـهِ اثْنَا عَشَرَ‌ شَهْرً‌ا فِي كِتَابِ اللَّـهِ يَوْمَ خَلَقَ السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالْأَرْ‌ضَ مِنْهَا أَرْ‌بَعَةٌ حُرُ‌مٌ' The number of months, with God, is twelve (mentioned) in the book of Allah, the day that he created the heavens and the earth; four of them are sacred' (9:36). Of the verse relating to fighting, this verse was the last one to be revealed and the Address of the Last Hajj which was delivered only 80 days before the Holy Prophet ﷺ passed away clearly indicates the sanctity of the 'sacred months'. For this reason, the verses quoted cannot be regarded as abrogative of this injunction. Moreover, the siege of Ta'if did not take place in the month of Dhul-Qa'dah. It was in Shawwal, therefore, this too cannot be regarded as its abrogator. But, it can certainly be conceded that the absolute forbiddance of fighting in the 'sacred months' which seems to reflect from the verse referred to holds an exception whereby it would become permissible for Muslims to defend themselves, or counter attack the aggressor if disbelievers themselves start the fighting during these months. This much, then, can be termed as abrogated, which finds a clarification in the verse الشَّهْرُ‌ الْحَرَ‌امُ بِالشَّهْرِ‌ الْحَرَ‌امِ : The holy month for the holy month' (2:194). The gist of the discussion is that initiating a fight during these months is forbidden forever, but in the event that disbelievers mount an attack on Muslims, then Muslims are permitted to fight back in their defence. A1-Jassas has reported the narration of the blessed Companion Jabir ibn ` Abdullah ؓ who said that the Holy Prophet ﷺ did not fight in any of the 'sacred months' until such time that the initial fighting was started by the disbelievers. The evil consequences of Apostasy Towards the end of the verse (217), it has been said that the act of turning into an apostate after having become a Muslim shall be dealt with under the injunction: حَبِطَتْ أَعْمَالُهُمْ فِي الدُّنْيَا وَالْآخِرَ‌ةِ that is, they shall be those whose deeds have gone waste in this world and in the Hereafter. Here are some injunctions relating to the apostates: 1. Some examples of 'deeds going waste in this world' are that the wife of an apostate goes out of the bond of marriage; if a relative of an apostate dies as Muslim, he gets no share in the inheritance; all obligations such as prayers and fasting fulfilled in one's state of Islam are reduced to nothing; for such a person funeral prayers are not offered and he or she is not buried in the graveyard meant for Muslims. 'Deeds going waste in the Hereafter' means that one gets no reward for acts of worship and enters the Hell to stay there forever. 2. Should an apostate become a Muslim once again, at least this much is certain that he could hope to salvage himself away from Hell in the Hereafter, while during the remaining tenure of his life in the mortal world, the injunctions of Islam will be operative for him. But, there is a difference of opinion among jurists about what would happen to a person who has already done his Hajj - would it be obligatory on him, given the capability, to do it all over again, or would it not? Similarly, in the Hereafter, would the reward for his previous religious performances, such as prayers and fasting, revert back to him, or would they not? Imam Abu Hanifah (رح) says that it is obligatory on him to do his Hajj again and he does not subscribe to the opinion that he will be rewarded for his previous prayers and fasting while Imam Shafi` I شافعی (رح) differs on both issues. 3. For one who is basically a disbeliever, the position is that the reward for his good deeds in a state of disbelief is held in abeyance. If there comes the time when he embraces Islam, he gets a matching reward for all such deeds, but in the event that he dies an infidel, everything goes waste. The Hadith statement: اسلمت علی ما اسلفت من خیر : 'You have embraced Islam with all the good deeds which you have performed earlier' means just this. 4. In short, the fate of an apostate is worse than that of an original disbeliever. This is why Jizyah جزیہ can be accepted from an original disbeliever while a male apostate who does not return to Islam is killed. If the apostate is a woman, she is imprisoned for life. The reason is that their conduct insults Islam and the insult of such a binding authority deserves no less a punishment.

Commentary: This verse forms part of the series of questions asked by the noble Companions. These are as they appear in this Surah along with the answers given. Here, the question is about wine and gambling which has been answered by Allah Almighty by pointing out that the use and practice of these two things breeds major sins while people may also get some benefits from them, but the sin they release is far too grave than the benefit they give, implying that both these are worth abandoning. Since these two issues are very serious, they need a somewhat detailed inquiry into their nature and the injunctions relating to them. The prohibition of wine, and related injunctions: When Islam came, drinking was common practice as part of the general state of Jahili جاھلی customs. When the Holy Prophet ﷺ emigrated to Madinah, people of that city were also accustomed to wine and gambling. Common people were infatuated with these in view of their obvious benefits. They had no idea of the evils inherent in these practices. However, it is the usual practice of Allah that there are, in every nation and in every country, sensible people who use reason to control their temperaments. They would not go near an emotional urge if it goes against the dictates of reason. In this regard, the station of the noble Prophet ﷺ was way high, for he had a built-in distaste for things which were going to be declared haram حرام later on. Even among the blessed Companions ؓ there were some who had not touched wine during the days it was an open practice. It was after reaching Madinah al-Tayyibah that some Companions ؓ became deeply concerned about the evil effects of these two involvements. It was due to this concern that Sayyidna ` Umar al-Faruq and Mu` adh ibn Jabal ؓ along with some Ansari Companions presented themselves before the Holy Prophet ﷺ and told him how wine and gambling not only spoil man's reason but also cause financial loss and sought his advice in this connection. It was in answer to their question that the present verse was revealed. This is the first verse in which the elementary step to stop Muslim from wine and gambling was taken. What the verse says is clear from its translation, and its explanation which follows immediately. It may be added here that the word, 'Ithm إِثْمٌ ' or sin includes everything that may become a preliminary to sin. For instance, wine dulls senses and weakens the power of reason, something basic to human excellence. Human reason acts as a brake against human indulgence in evil deeds. Once reason is blocked out, the door is opened for all sorts of evil deeds. It will be noted that drinking has not been clearly identified as something unlawful in this verse, but its evils has certainly been pointed out, which may lead man into many sinful activities. In a way, this takes the form of a good counsel urging man to abandon it. That is why, soon after the revelation of this verse, some noble Companions took this good counsel of the Holy Qur'an so seriously that they stopped drinking then and there. There were some others among them who thought that the verse, in fact, has not declared wine as Haram; it has, instead, identified it as a cause of sin in as much as it does lead to evils religiously undesirable, so, if they can manage to keep themselves immune from such evils, what harm could there be if they continued drinking? Consequently, so they did, until came a day when the blessed Companion, ` Abd al-Rahman ibn ` Awf invited some of his friends from among the noble Companions ؓ at his home. When dinner was over, everybody started drinking wine as usual. In the meantime, came the time for Maghrib salah. Everybody stood up for salah and selected one of them to lead the prayers. The Imam began his recitation from the Holy Qur'an, but drunk as he was, he recited the Surah al-Kafirun all wrong. Thereupon, the second step against drinking was taken and the following verse was revealed: يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا لَا تَقْرَ‌بُوا الصَّلَاةَ وَأَنتُمْ سُكَارَ‌ىٰ O those who believe, do not go near Salah when you are intoxicated. (4:43) Here, drinking was declared to be absolutely unlawful at the time of the Salah. Other times remained open. Some of the noble Companions ؓ had totally stopped drinking following the revelation of the first verse deducing from it that something which stops one from Salah cannot hold any good at all. And now that Salah has been prohibited in a state of intoxication, one should keep his distance from that which deprives one from Salah. However, since wine was not forbidden clearly and explicitly during hours other than those of Salah, there were some who continued drinking during other hours until when there occurred yet another incident. This time it was the blessed Companion, ` Itban ibn Malik ؓ who invited some Companions ؓ ، Sa'd ibn Abi Waqqas ؓ being one of them. Once the dinner was over, wine was served in accordance with the custom. Then, turning to another customary Arab practice at that time, the intoxicated party started talking poetry and began reciting their respective accomplishments and excellences. The Companion Sa'd ibn Abi Waqqas ؓ recited a Qasidah49 poem in which he satirized the Ansar (helpers) of Madinah and eulogized his own tribal affinities. This made an Ansari young man angry and he hit Sa'd with a jaw-bone from a camel causing severe injury on his head. Sayyidna Sa'd came to the Holy Prophet ﷺ and complained against that Ansari young man. At that time, the Holy Prophet ﷺ raised his hands in prayer and said: الھم بین لنا فی الخمر بیانا شافیا that is, '0 Allah, give us a clear and conclusive guidance in the matter of wine'. Thereupon, the third verse regarding wine, that of Surah al-Ma'idah, was revealed with details declaring wine to be absolutely unlawful. The verse is as follows: يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا إِنَّمَا الْخَمْرُ‌ وَالْمَيْسِرُ‌ وَالْأَنصَابُ وَالْأَزْلَامُ رِ‌جْسٌ مِّنْ عَمَلِ الشَّيْطَانِ فَاجْتَنِبُوهُ لَعَلَّكُمْ تُفْلِحُونَ ﴿90﴾ O you who believe! wine and gambling and stone altars and drawing of lots with arrows are only an abomination, a work of Satan; so shun it, that haply you may prosper. (5:90) The gradual forbiddance of wine Being supreme in His authority, Allah alone knows the real wisdom behind all divine imperatives, but a close look into the Islamic legal code reveals that the Shari'ah of Islam has left ample room for human emotions when following its dictates. This is to give man the least possible inconvenience. The Holy Qur'an has itself said: لَا يُكَلِّفُ اللَّـهُ نَفْسًا إِلَّا وُسْعَهَا :'Allah does not obligate anyone beyond his or her capacity' (2:286). It was the demand of this mercy and wisdom that made Islam go slow on forbidding wine. 49. An Arab poetical form introduced by the modern poet, Garcia Lorca in the West. The gist of the Qur'anic history of forbidding wine through a gradual process is that it has revealed four verses on the subject. As said earlier, one of these verses belongs to Surah al-Baqarah, the explanation of which you are reading through now. Here, wine has been identified as sin-prone, a corrupting agent. The mention of wine has been left at that point. It has not been 'forbidden'. This, in a way, is a manner of saying that the habit of drinking is worth leaving, but the direct command to quit drinking was not given. The second verse لَا تَقْرَ‌بُوا الصَّلَاةَ وَأَنتُمْ سُكَارَ‌ىٰ : 'do not go near salah نماز when you are intoxicated' (4:43) appears in Surah al-Nis-a'. Here, wine was declared to be unlawful during salah hours. At other times, the choice remained open. The third and the fourth verses belong to Surah al-Ma'idah. In these two, as mentioned earlier, wine was declared to be unlawful clearly and absolutely. The Shari'ah of Islam used the method of gradual prohibition of wine for the simple reason that it would have been much too hard on human temperament to cut away from the habit of a life-time, specially so the habit of addiction to intoxicants. Scholars have said: فطام العادہ اشد من فطام الفضاعۃ : that is, it is harder to change an ongoing habit for man than it is for a child used to suckling at his mother's breast. So, moving wisely, Islam first stressed on its evil, then prohibited it only at the time of salah and finally after the passage of a certain time, it was absolutely forbidden. However, the wisdom that required a gradual process before the prohibition had equally required that once the prohibition is promulgated, it should be implemented with its full force. That is why the Holy Prophet ﷺ ، in the early stages, warned people against the use of wine and told them how it invited divine punishment. He said that wine was the source of evils and indecencies and one who indulges in it can go on to commit even the worst possible sins. In a hadith, he said 'Wine and Faith cannot be combined.' These narrations appear in al-Nisa'i. In the Jami` of al-Tirmidhi, there is a narration from the blessed Companion Anas ؓ which reports that the Holy Prophet ﷺ has cursed ten people in relation to wine, being the crusher or presser or squeezer, the distiller, the user, the server, the carrier, the receiver (the one for whom it is carried), the seller, the buyer, the giver (as gift), and the one who uses the income arising from it. This verbal teaching and persuasion was not all that he stopped at, he took practical steps and made a legally binding proclamation that whosoever has any wine in possession should deposit it at an appointed place. The matchless obedience of the blessed Companions As soon as the first order came to them, the noble Companions ؓ ، obedient and responsive as they were, lost no time and took out all wine stored in their homes for personal use and poured it out on the streets there and then. Sayyidna ` Abdullah ibn ` Umar ؓ has reported that at the time when the proclaimer appointed by the Holy Prophet ﷺ went around the streets of Madinah announcing that wine was forbidden, whoever had a vessel of wine in his hands, threw it away right where he was and whoever had cups or goblets or flasks of wine in the house, brought these out and smashed them off. Sayyidna Anas ؓ was happily busy serving wine to a gathering of friends at that time. Present there were great Companions ؓ like Abu Talha, Abu ` Ubaydah ibn Jarrah, Ubaiyy ibn Ka'b and Suhayl ؓ . When the voice of the proclaimer struck their ears, everybody present said, 'Now, pour all this wine down on the ground and break all cups and goblets and ewers and pitchers.' In some narrations it is said that it was immediately with the announcement that wine had become unlawful that everyone who had a cup of wine reaching close to his lips was electrified and threw it away right there. That day, wine was flowing down the streets of Madinah like a stream of rainwater, and as a result of that, it remained usual in the streets of Madinah for a long time that rains would reactivate the smell of wine soaked in the ground, as well as its colour, which would show up on the surface. When people were ordered to deposit whatever wine they had at a given place, not much was left there to deposit except the limited stock, of wine casks and bags, available in the market for commercial sales. So obedient were the noble Companions ؓ that they deposited those too at the designated place without the least hesitation. The Holy Prophet ﷺ went there personally and slit many leather wine-bags with his own blessed hands and let the rest be slit apart by the Companions ؓ . Another Companion, a businessman who imported wine from Syria happened to be on a business trip in Syria. He had taken his entire capital with him against which he bought a stock of wine for commercial sales. When he returned with his cargo, he came to know that wine had been declared haram حرام before he could enter the city limits of Madinah. Having heard about the ban on wine, the Companion who was a model of devotion and sacrifice, and who was also returning home after investing all his capital and labour hoping to make a big profit out of it, quietly stacked it on a wayside hillock, came down to see the Holy Prophet ﷺ asking him about this stock of his: 'What should I do?' The Holy Prophet ﷺ ordered him, in accordance with the Divine command, that he should tear out all those leather bags and pour the wine in them down on the ground. This wonderful lover of Allah and His Messenger did not hesitate for a moment. Using his own hands, he poured forth all his invested capital on the sands of that hill-slope. This too is a great miracle of Islam, and a demonstration of mind-boggling and virtually unrivalled obedience that came about during this episode. Imagine how difficult it is to shake off the habit of being used to something while these people were chronically habituated to consuming wine and could not stay away from it even for a little while. For them, it was just that command from their Lord proclaimed by His Prophet ﷺ which brought about such an instant change in their habits that they started hating the same wine and gambling they were so addicted to. Islamic strategy for a social change The verses above and the events connected with them present before us a model of active Muslim response to the law making wine unlawful. One may call it a miracle of Islam or a unique outcome of prophetic teaching and training or the inevitable end-product of Islamic methodology of social change, the fact is that its effectiveness was phenomenal. Compared to this was the attempt at prohibition made in the United States with the support of experts, lobbies, law, media and constitutional amendment which failed in the face of much increased use of liquor making the authorities cancel their plans. What is the secret behind this enormous difference? The secret is that Islam has never depended on law alone as the tool of social reform. Law not being sufficient, it has first prepared and fine tuned the minds of its people tempering their attitudes with the golden prescription of a deep devotion to and worship of their Creator, moderation in worldly living and a genuine concern for the life to come. The great revolution brought in this manner produced matchless men who would eagerly come forward to sacrifice their life, property, honour, anything and everything at one call from their Prophet ﷺ . This task of preparing men who would match the mission continued throughout the Makkan period by means of rigorous spiritual training. Once such a devoted group of people was ready, and then came the law. No doubt, the Americans too did their best utilizing the vast powers of the media, but they had everything with them except the concern for the life to come while the concern for the Hereafter was the very life-blood of Muslims. The golden prescription is still there, very much valid, waiting for peaceless people round the world to use it. Let the wise think. The good and evil of wine The 'good' in wine is popularly known as a certain taste and a feeling of well-being, professed increase of temporary energy, and a given glow on the face. Being transient, these benefits hardly stand against the array of evils it breeds. Take the human body first. Drinking causes mal-function of the stomach, reduces desire to eat, affects facial con-tours, inflates the waistline, hurts the liver and the kidneys and be-comes a contributor to all sorts of diseases. Reason does not work under the influence of hard drinks which goes beyond the time one claims to have become sober. The hangover turns out to be as bad. Wine, a tempting stimulant and a much romanticized poison works slowly, inspite of the spirited defence put up by its users. The fact is that drinking not only harms them but affects their children as well. Socially, drinking may become the cause of mutual malice and enmity which is a great evil in the sight of Islamic law. It is for this reason that the Holy Qur'an particularly mentions this evil in Surah al-Ma'idah: إِنَّمَا يُرِ‌يدُ الشَّيْطَانُ أَن يُوقِعَ بَيْنَكُمُ الْعَدَاوَةَ وَالْبَغْضَاءَ فِي الْخَمْرِ‌ وَالْمَيْسِر The Satan only wants that hositility and hatred come to stay between you through wine and gambling. (5:91) One of the most harmful drawbacks of drinking shows up when a person under its influence lets out his guarded secrets. It becomes much more disastrous if the culprit happens to be a state functionary in possession of vital government secrets. Passing these out to an enemy agent can cause great damage to the state through a coup, a political loss or a challenge to national defence. Clever spies are always on the look out for such opportunities. So, the habit of drinking is not only an evil in itself but a mother of other evils as well making men ready to commit the worst possible crimes against their fellow-beings. The physical evils of drinking are too well-known to recount here while its spiritual evils are equally obvious. Wine is harmful because the Holy Qur'an says: وَيَصُدَّكُمْ عَن ذِكْرِ‌ اللَّـهِ وَعَنِ الصَّلَاةِ : 'It prevents you from remembering Allah and from the Salah'. Then, the question asked by the Holy Qur'an is: فَهَلْ أَنتُم مُّنتَهُونَ 'Would you then desist?' The forbiddance of wine: A complete view Upto this point, we have discussed four verses of the Holy Qur'an which deal with the unlawfulness of wine, and its forbiddance. It seems appropriate that yet another mention of intoxicants made by the Holy Qur'an in Surah Al-Nahl النحل in a different context should be brought into focus here so that we have all Qur'anic statements concerning wine and intoxicants in one complete frame of reference. The said verse is as follows: وَمِن ثَمَرَ‌اتِ النَّخِيلِ وَالْأَعْنَابِ تَتَّخِذُونَ مِنْهُ سَكَرً‌ا وَرِ‌زْقًا حَسَنًا ۗ إِنَّ فِي ذَٰلِكَ لَآيَةً لِّقَوْمٍ يَعْقِلُونَ ﴿67﴾ And of the fruits of the palms and the vines, you take there-from an intoxicant and a good provision. Surely, in that there is a sign for a people who understand. (16:67) In verses preceding the one above, mention was made of Allah's blessings which cause production of human food through unique mechanisms. It was said: وَإِنَّ لَكُمْ فِي الْأَنْعَامِ لَعِبْرَ‌ةً ۖ نُّسْقِيكُم مِّمَّا فِي بُطُونِهِ مِن بَيْنِ فَرْ‌ثٍ وَدَمٍ لَّبَنًا خَالِصًا سَائِغًا لِّلشَّارِ‌بِينَ ﴿66﴾ And surely in the cattle there is a lesson for you; We give you to drink of what is in their bellies, between filth and blood, pure milk, sweet to drinkers. (16:66) The text uses the word, 'nusqikum' نُّسْقِيكُم which means We gave you milk to drink' implying that it needs no further human processing. Following this, it was said that man procures things to eat, as well as, makes things which benefit him. Here, the hint is that human processing plays some part in procuring what he eats and in making what, he uses to his advantage. And it is as a result of the entry of the human factor that two types of things were produced. One of these is an intoxicant known as wine while the other is 'a good provision', such as the dates and the grapes which can be used fresh off the palms and vines or can be dried and stored for later use. In short, Allah Almighty, in His perfect creativity, gave man fruits such as dates and grapes and gave him the added right to use them as food. Now what he makes out of them is his choice, either make intoxicants out of them and thereby spoil his reason, or use them for food and energy. According to this explanation, this verse cannot be used to argue in support of the lawfulness of intoxicating wine. The reason is simple. Here, the purpose is to describe the gifts of nature and to point out to the different forms in which they could be used which is all part of the same Divine blessing. For instance, consider all that man eats and things man uses to his advantage. There are many who use these in ways that are impermissible but, the incidence of someone using things wrongfully does not preclude a blessing from remaining a blessing. So, the context of the statement needs no details as to which use is permissible or impermissible, however, there is a subtle indication embedded here too. If we look at how 'sakar: intoxicant' has been counter-poised by 'rizqan hasana': رِ‌زْقًا حَسَنًا 'a good provision', we would realize that an intoxicant is not a good provision. The majority of commentators take sakar to mean something that intoxicates. (Ruh al-Ma'ani, Qurtubi and Jassas) There is a consensus of the Ummah that these verses are Makkan while the unlawfulness of wine was revealed later on in Madinah al-Tayyibah. Even though wine was lawful at the time these verses were revealed and Muslims used to indulge in wine generally yet, even at that stage, a hint was made in the verse that indulging in wine is not good. Later on, came the Qur'anic command which clearly and forcefully made wine unlawful. The prohibition of Gambling The word, maisir مَيْسِر is an infinitive and lexically means to distribute'. One who distributes is called yasir یاسِر . During the days of Jahiliyyah, several types of games of chance were common in Arabia. In one of such games, they used to slaughter a camel following which they would gamble while distributing shares from the meat. Some used to get more than one share while others remained deprived of even one. The one who thus remained deprived had to pay for the whole camel. The meat was, of course, distributed among the poor; the gamblers did not use it themselves. The catch in this particular game of chance was that it benefited the poor while, at the same time, it demonstrated the philanthropy of the gamblers. That is why this game was considered a matter of pride by them. Anyone who would not participate in it was chided as miserly and wretched. It is because of the relevance of distribution that Qimar قمار is given the name of Maisir. All Companions, and Successors to them, hold the unanimous view that the word, Maisir includes all forms of Qimar or gambling and that all of them are Haram حرام or unlawful. Ibn Kathir (رح) in his Tafsir and al-Jassas (رح) in Ahkam al-Qur'an report that the blessed Companions ` Abdullah ibn ` Abbas, Ibn ` Umar, Qatadah, Mu'awiyah ibn Salih, 'Ata and Ta'wus ؓ said: المیسر القمار حتی لعب الصبیان بالکعاب والجوز that is, Qimar (of all kinds) is Maisir - even the games of children with dices and walnuts. Sayyidna Ibn ` Abbas ؓ said ألمخاطرۃ من القمار that is, Mukhatarah مخاطرۃ (to put something on stake) falls under Qimar (Jassas). Ibn Sirin ؓ said: 'That which involves stakes is included in Maisir' (Ruh al-Bayn). Mukhatarah مخاطرۃ or 'stake' is a deal which revolves between profit and loss, that is, there may be a chance that one gets a lot, and also, that one gets nothing. This is very much like what we find in all sorts of modern lotteries. All these types are included under Qimar and Maisir or gambling, and are haram حرام . Therefore, Maisir or Qimar or gambling has been defined as a deal in which the act of making a person the owner of something of value depends on a contingency the two sides of which are equal, and consequently, there are two equal possibilities of taking total profit or absorbing total loss (shami, Kitab al-Khatar wa Fibahah, volume 5, page 355). For instance, it is quite possible that the penalty falls on A, and it is also possible that it falls on B. To sum up, the rule is that all kinds and forms in vogue - in the past or current today or likely to emerge in the future - shall all be called Maisir and Qimar and gambling. Prize-awarding cross-word puzzles (in which the participants are charged a fee) and commercial lotteries, the generally known among whatever other forms they may have, are all included under gambling. However, should there be a prize offered by one side only, stipulating that it will be given to one who performs a certain feat, that would not matter subject to the condition that no fee is taken from that person. The reason is that, in this case, the deal does not hang between benefit and harm, but hangs between benefit and no benefit. Therefore, in authentic ahadith, chess and backgammon and their likes have been declared unlawful where money or property is staked in a win or lose situation. Should there be money staked in playing cards, that too will be included under Maisir. In Sahih Muslim, there is a report from the blessed Companion Buraydah ؓ which states that the Holy Prophet ﷺ said that one who plays backgammon is like one who dyes his hands in the flesh and blood of pork. Sayyidna ` Ali ؓ said that chess is included in Maisir, that is gambling. Sayyidna ` Abdullah ibn ` Umar ؓ said that chess is much worse than backgammon. (Tafsir Ibn Kathir) During the early days of Islam, gambling was permissible like drinking. When the verses beginning غُلِبَتِ الرُّ‌ومُ ﴿2﴾ in Surah al-Rum were revealed where the Holy Qur'an foretold that the Byzantines have no doubt lost to their rivals - the Persians, but, after a few years, the Byzantines will prevail once again. When the disbelievers of Makkah denied the prophecy, Sayyidna Abu Bakr al-Siddiq ؓ ، challenged them with a bet, something like Qimar, proposing that should the Byzantines prevail in so many years the disbelievers will have to pay a certain amount. The bet was approved. When this prophecy of the Qur'an actually came to pass, Sayyidna Abu Bakr ؓ made sure that he got the waged amount from the disbelievers and brought it to the Holy Prophet ﷺ who expressed his pleasure with what had happened but asked him to give away the bet-money in charity. This is significant because Allah had kept His Messenger ﷺ protected from something that was permissible at that time but was going to be made impermissible later on. This is why he always kept aloof from wine and gambling, and there were particular ones among the noble Companions ؓ who also remained protected against these. It appears in a narration that the angel Jibra'il (علیہ السلام) told the Holy Prophet ﷺ that Allah Almighty likes four character-traits in Ja'far al-Tayyar. He ﷺ asked Sayyidna Ja'far al-Tayyar ؓ as to what these four traits were. He said, 'Till now, I have never talked about these before anyone. Now that Allah Almighty has told you about them, I submit and relate these four to you. I saw that wine ruins reason, so I never went near it. I saw that idols cause no benefit or harm to anyone, so I never indulged in idol-worship even during the days of Jahiliyyah. Since I have an acute sense of honour concerning my wife and daughters, so I never committed adultery. Then, I realized that lying is unbridled meanness, and a terrible disgrace, so I never told a lie even in Jahiliyyah'. (Ruh al-Bayan) Social ill-effects of gambling The Holy Qur'an has said the same thing about Qimar or gambling as it has said about wine, that is, in it there are some benefits as well, but the harm it brings is greater than its benefits. Everyone knows this sort of benefit can make a pauper an overnight millionaire, but there are very few people who know how evil the practice is economically, socially and spiritually. In gambling, speaking briefly, the gain of one person is dependent upon the loss of the other. The total gain of the winner is an outcome of the total loss of the loser because this transaction does not increase the (national) wealth or production. The amount of wealth remains as it was. What happens through this game of chance is that one is sucked dry of his wealth which then reaches the other, therefore, Qimar is a blanket undoing of a people, and the death of human morality. Isn't it that man, who should be an agent of public good, a model of sympathy and sacrifice, stoops to the level of a beast while gambling, and starts seeing his life in the death of his brother, and finding delight in his distress, and searching for gain in his loss, and goes about harnessing all his abilities to promote his selfishness? Contrary to this are the permissible forms of transactions in trade where parties buy and sell releasing profits for both. Then, wealth circulates and increases through exchange of commercial commodities and the buyer and seller both find it beneficial. To begin with, gambling is harmful because the addicted gambler comes to be deprived of the very habit of earning his livelihood, because he always keeps dreaming that he will simply sit and grab what belongs to the other person in no time through a bet, specially so as it involves no hard work. Some scholars have said that gambling has been called Maisir (as derived from the word 'yusr یُسر ' meaning 'easiness' ) because one can easily take possession of what belongs to the other through it. Even if gambling deals revolve around a small number of people such as two or four, their harmful effects mentioned above show up very clearly. But, here we are in this modern age, called 'the age of progress' by those handicapped by superficial vision and lack of insight into its aftermath, where we see wine of all sorts given new names and labels, where ever-new kinds of interest and ever-innovative corporate methods to promote it have been invented, commandeered and given the safe name of 'banking'; so it is with gambling where thousands of dubious forms have found currency. Some of these are so highly collective that the amount of contribution from a whole nation keeps adding up bit by bit, and in case there is a loss, that gets spread out over everybody and thus does not become conspicuous. When an amount from this total 'take' reaches the hands of one person, his gain appears to be prominent, therefore, people tend to look at his personal gain but pay no heed to the collective loss of their nation or country. Consequently, they are trapped into believing that these new kinds may as well be valid, although present here are all those harmful effects which are found in gambling confined to a small group of two or four people. Looked at from another angle, the harm brought by this large-scale gambling is much worse than that released by the older form of gambling, for its evil effects are far-reaching and spell out the ruin of a whole nation. As evident, the natural result of this practice will be that wealth belonging to the common people of the community will go on decreasing while the capital of some capitalists will go on increasing further. Inevitably then, the entire wealth of the nation will shrink and come to be concentrated into the hands of a limited number of individuals and a limited number of families. This can be witnessed everyday in stock markets and in other forms of Qimar. Now, Islamic economic strategy has an important principle of its own. It declares that every deal which siphons the wealth of a whole community out into the coffers of a few capitalists is haram, unlawful and forbidden. The Holy Qur'an itself, while stating the principle of the distribution of wealth, has proclaimed: كَيْ لَا يَكُونَ دُولَةً بَيْنَ الْأَغْنِيَاءِ مِنكُمْ. It means that the principle of distributing spoils of war among different segments of the society given by the Holy Qur'an aims to make sure that wealth does not shrink and concentrate in the hands of a few capitalists. Gambling, like wine, becomes the cause of mutual disputes reaching the limits of hatred and animosity, so fatal in a civilized society. To quote once again, the Holy Qur'an mentions the evil of gambling in the following words: إِنَّمَا يُرِ‌يدُ الشَّيْطَانُ أَن يُوقِعَ بَيْنَكُمُ الْعَدَاوَةَ وَالْبَغْضَاءَ فِي الْخَمْرِ‌ وَالْمَيْسِرِ‌ وَيَصُدَّكُمْ عَن ذِكْرِ‌ اللَّـهِ وَعَنِ الصَّلَاةِ The Satan only wants hostility and hatred to come to stay between you through wine and gambling, and to prevent you from remembering Allah and from the Salah. (5:91) The effect of gambling, like that of wine, is that one gets recklessly involved in it, becoming unable to attend to the remembrance of Allah, and the prayer. Perhaps, this is why the Holy Qur'an has elected to mention wine and gambling side by side in an identical manner since Qimar or gambling has an intoxicating pull of its own which makes one ignore the concern of what is good or bad for him. As partly mentioned earlier, the basic evil in gambling is that one can falsely devour what belongs to others through this method without any reasonable compensation or brotherly consideration. This is what the Holy Qur'an prohibits in the following words: لَا تَأْكُلُوا أَمْوَالَكُم بَيْنَكُم بِالْبَاطِلِ (And do not eat up each other's property by false means) (2:188). The destroyer of many a home, the ill effects of gambling do not remain restricted to the gambler alone. They affect his whole family and become contagious to a much larger social circle because people may have entered into transactions, contracts and 'loan deals with him which will hurt all concerned in the event of his becoming insolvent. Finally, in the background of rising social addiction to various Qimar forms, it is useful to keep in view that this evil distorts one's natural attitude to work and rivets it on imagined gains. Rather than concentrate on his physical or mental skills to increase his earnings steadily, one starts getting fixed on finding ways and means to usurp the earnings of others. That is why the Holy Qur'an has said: وَإِثْمُهُمَا أَكْبَرُ‌ مِن نَّفْعِهِمَا that is, the evils of wine and gambling are greater than their benefits. Some juristic rules and related notes: In this verse, the acknowledgement of some benefits of wine and gambling has been combined with the instruction to desist from them which helps us deduce the rule that the presence of material benefits in something or act is not contrary to its being declared haram حرام under the Islamic law. We know that a certain medicine or food item is called harmful if its harmful effects are far stronger than 'its benefits. If this was not so, nothing in this world, not even the worst, would turn out to be totally devoid of any benefit. A deadly poison, the snake and the scorpion and the wild beasts, they all have their benefits but, speaking generally, they are called harmful and people are told to watch out against them. Similarly, keeping in view the essential sense, things the evils of which are greater than their benefits are declared haram or unlawful under the Shari'ah. None of the crimes such as theft, robbery, adultery, kidnapping and fraud are devoid of some benefit, for had they been totally benefitless no sane person would ever go near them, even though the most perfect people in all such crimes are those known for their tact and intelligence. This tells us that some or the other benefit does show up in all crimes but, since their harmfulness is greater than their benefit, no sane person stands up to declare them as useful and permissible. It is under this principle that the Shari'ah of Islam has made wine and gambling unlawful. 2. This verse also provides the rule that the elimination of evil takes precedence over the acquisition of benefit, that is, should something give a certain benefit along with causing some harm, it becomes necessary to abandon the benefit in order to stay safe against the harm. In other words, a benefit which comes with harmfulness attached to it is ignored. The first part of verse 219 related to the question asked about wine and gambling, a detailed explanation of which appears in previous pages. The second part of the verse appearing here relates to another question -- about how much should be spent in charity. The answer given is 'al-` afw' العفو which has been translated here as 'the surplus'. It means that one should not, by such spending, get into personal trouble in the material life of this world, or by wasting away somebody's due right, get into the pain of answerability in the life to come.

Verse 220 features yet another question in a series of several posed by the noble Companions. This question relates to the combining of the cost of maintenance of orphans. Since there was general lack of carefulness about the rights of orphans in pagan Arabia, as elsewhere, warning was given that consuming what belongs to the orphans is like filling bellies with embers of Hell. Consequently, the recipients of this warning were so scared that they, out of preventive measure, started preparing and storing meals given to orphans separately. In case the child ate less, food was left over and, naturally so, got decomposed. The reason: It was not permissible for them to use food which belonged to the orphans, nor did they have the right to give what belonged to the orphans in charity. This was a matter of sheer discomfort and a source of loss to the orphans as well. Therefore, the situation was brought to the notice of the Holy Prophet ﷺ following which came the guidance given in this verse. It is being said here that the purpose is not to compromise the welfare of the orphaned children. Since their welfare is served better through a joint expense system, there is nothing to worry about, for they are brothers-in-faith and brothers do share. The above permission has been hemmed by a warning that Allah watches over the performance of guardians in this matter. He could have, by setting up a harder code of conduct, put them in trouble because He is All-Powerful. But, He has provided an easier code of conduct because He is All-Wise and does not obligate people with what they cannot do.

Verse 221 carries an injunction relating to marriage with Mushrikin (those who associate partners with Allah). The commentary which follows explains the injunction in some detail. Inter-Marriage between Muslims and Kafirs is Prohibited In the verses under discussion an important ruling has been given. It states that the marriage of Muslim males with Kafir کافر (disbelieving in Islam) females and the marriage of Kafir کافر females with Muslim males is not permissible. The reason is: Kafir کافر males and females become the cause that leads man into the Hell. Marital relations demand mutual love and harmony and without these the real purpose behind such relationship remains unrealized. If such close relations of love and affection are established with Mushrikin مشرکین or disbelievers, the inevitable effect will be that Muslims may emotionally tilt towards Kufr کُفُر and Shirk or, in a lesser degree, the very abhorrence of Kufr کُفُر and Shirk may just not remain there in their hearts. Consequently, they too, may get involved with Kufr کُفُر and Shirk and thereby end up in Hell. Therefore, it was said that these people call everyone to come to Hell while Allah Almighty calls man to Paradise and to His forgiveness and, for this purpose, states His injunctions openly and clearly so that people follow the wise counsel. Let us consider a few points at this stage: 1. If the word, Mushrik مشرک in this verse is taken to mean non-Muslims as a whole it would be necessary to exempt non-Muslim women of the Ahl al-Kitab اھل الکتاب (the people of the Book) from the purview of this injunction, because it is expressly stated in another verse that: وَالْمُحْصَنَاتُ مِنَ الْمُؤْمِنَاتِ وَالْمُحْصَنَاتُ مِنَ الَّذِينَ أُوتُوا الْكِتَابَ مِن قَبْلِكُمْ And good women from among those given the Book before you (marriage with whom is lawful for you). (5:5) But if the word Mushrik is taken to mean specially those non-Muslims who are not from amongst the Ahl al-Kitab اھل الکتاب (People of the Book i.e. the Jews and the Christians), this verse needs no exception, because it covers only those non-Muslims who do not believe in any prophet and scripture. 2. Let us take the second important point. The Qur'an forbids marital relations between Muslims and disbelievers for the reason that such close relations could become the source of involvement in Kufr کُفُر and Shirk شرک . Now this is apparently true of all non-Muslim groups. Why then, the women from amongst the Ahl al-Kitab اھل الکتاب (the Jews and the Christians) have been excluded? The answer is obvious. The difference the people of the Book have with Islam is relatively lesser and lighter as compared with other non-Muslims. Islamic belief is tri-polar, that is, Tauhid توحید (Oneness of God), Akhirah (Hereafter) and Risalah (Prophethood). Out of these, if we consider the belief in Akhirah آخرت ، even the Jews and Christians from amongst the people of the Book agree with Muslims in accordance with their original faith, wherein, very similarly, it is kufr کُفُر (infidelity) even in their original faith to attribute partners with God. That the Christians, in their love for Sayyidna ` Isa (علیہ السلام) ، and in their over-enthusiasm towards respecting him, entered the borders of Shirk شرک ، is a different matter. Now the basic difference that remains is that they do not believe in Muhammad ﷺ as His Messenger . In Islam, this belief is cardinal. Without it, no one can become a true Muslim. However, the fact remains that the difference the people of the Book have is lesser and lighter as compared with other non-Muslim groups. Therefore, the danger of corruptibility is not that great here۔ 3. A question may be raised here that the difference between the people of the Book having been declared lighter, it was made permissible for Muslim men to marry their women. So the converse of this proposition, that is, the marriage of Muslim women with non-Muslim people of the Book, should also be permissible. But a little reflection will be sufficient to establish the basic difference between the two situations. Women are somewhat weaker by nature. Then the husband has been given a controlling and care-taking role. So the likelihood of a woman being impressed by his beliefs and views is not that remote. Therefore, should a Muslim woman stay in a marriage relationship with a non-Muslim Kitabi, (Christian or Jew) the chances of her belief being spoiled are strong. Contrary to this, should a non-Muslim Kitabi woman (Jew or Christian) live married to a Muslim man, it is unlikely in principle that her ideas will impress the husband. Is someone takes to a converse position in total disregard of the normal principles and falls prey to his wife's instigation, it will be because of his own fault. 4. Let us clarify another doubt which may be raised here. The marital relations may influence both the parties equally. Therefore, if there is an apprehension that a Muslim spouse will be influenced by his or her counterpart in the matter of faith, there is also a counter possibility that the non-Muslim spouse will be influenced by his or her Muslim spouse, whereupon he or she will embrace Islam. Both possibilities being equally open, the marital relations between Muslims and non-Muslims should not have been prohibited. But the wisdom behind this prohibition is that where the danger of a harm and the hope of a benefit are equally applicable, then the reasonable attitude will be to pay more attention to preventing harm than to seeking benefit. There is a well-known Persian saying: عقلمند تریاق بیقین وزھر بگمانخورد . A wise man does not eat the antidote with certainty and the poison with doubt. On the basis of this principle, the hope of the non-Muslim spouse embracing Islam has been ignored, and the apprehension of a Muslim spouse being impressed by the anti-Islamic faith or behaviour has been effectively taken care of. 5. The fifth point worth considering is that the meaning of the permission to Muslim men to marry Jewish and Christian women under formal Nikah (marriage contract) is simply to state that such Nikah if made, will become valid and the children born out of this wedlock will be ligitimate. But there are statements in ahadith which prove that even this Nikah is not viewed with favour. The Holy Prophet has said that a Muslim should seek to marry a woman who fully observes Islamic faith and conduct -- so that she becomes for him a source of strength in their joint pursuit of their faith, and their progeny may have the opportunity to grow up under their care as practising Muslims. When marriage with a non-practising Muslim woman was not looked at with favour, how would it become favourable in the case of some non-Muslim woman? This is why Sayyidna ` Umar al-Faruq ؓ ، on learning that such marriages are finding alarming currency in Iraq and Syria, stopped these with an executive order which pointed out that such marital relations cause corruption in Muslim families both religiously and politically. (Kitab al-Athar-lil-Imam Muhammad). The effect of such marriages in contemporary times when non-Muslim people of the Book, the Jews and the Christians, have a record of political deception, political marriages, entry into Muslim families with persuasion techniques and spying objectives is too obvious and has been admitted by Christian writers themselves as reported in some details by Major General Akbar in his book, حدیثِ دفاع Hadith-e-Difa`, Specially in our days, there is another important reason for avoiding marital relations with the People of the Book. If the lives of a majority of contemporary Europeans (and Americans), who are called Jews and Christians, and are registered as such in their census records, were researched it will be discovered that an enormous lot of them have nothing to do with Christianity or Judaism. They are atheistically irreligious. They do not believe in Sayyidna ` Isa (علیہ السلام) or in the Bible. They do not believe in Sayyidna Musa (علیہ السلام) or in the Torah -- not even in God or a Day of Judgment. It is obvious that such people do not come under the purview of the Qur'anic injunction permitting marriage (with the people of the Book). Nikah (marriage) with their women is absolutely haram (unlawful). It is clear that such people do not qualify for the exception given in the Qur'anic verse: وَالْمُحْصَنَاتُ مِنَ الَّذِينَ أُوتُوا الْكِتَابَ And good women from among those given the Book before you (marriage with whom is lawful for you). Therefore, Nikah (marriage) with their women, like those of other non-Muslims, is absolutely haram (unlawful). Special notes from Bayern al-Qur'an by Maulana Ashraf Thanavi 1. It is not correct to marry women from among the group of people who, on the basis of their name and identity, are considered from among the people of the Book but are not proved to be so after a scrutiny of beliefs. For instance, common people these days take white westerners to be generally Christians although some of their beliefs have turned out to be totally atheistic under critical observation. How can people who do not believe in God, in the prophethood of Jesus Christ and in the Bible as revealed scripture be Christians? Marrying a woman from such a group of people is not correct. Those who marry women from the West without finding out what is involved therein make a gross mistake. 2. Similarly, it is not correct to give a Muslim woman in marriage to a man who, in his outward status, is supposed to be a Muslim but whose beliefs are identical with those of a non-Muslim. And should such corruption of beliefs occur after having been married, the nikah or the marriage-contract breaks ipso facto. For instance, a large number of Muslims, in ignorance of their religion and under the influence of the so-called ` modern thinking', ruin their beliefs. It is, therefore, obligatory for the guardians of a girl that they should first investigate into the beliefs of the proposer before they accept the proposal.

No sexual intercourse during menstruation The basic purpose of these verses is to declare the prohibition of having sexual intercourse with a woman in a state of menstruation. If someone committed sexual intercourse in such a state either unknowingly or carelessly, he has to make Taubah (repentance). In this context it has been said in the verse 222 that "Allah loves those who are most repenting." The verse 223 points out to the lawful ways of having sexual intercourse with one's woman. The permission of such intercourse has been subjected to two conditions. Firstly, it should take place at a time when the woman is pure from her menstruation. Secondly, carnal intercourse is not allowed at all. This verse begins with a comprehensive remark: "Your women are for you a soil to cultivate." Here the woman has been compared with a soil, while the husband has been compared with a cultivator. This is to indicate that the sexual intercourse has not been allowed for satisfying the sexual lust only, but also to make it a valid source for having children. By using this expression the Holy Qur'an has given a subtle indication to the prohibition of carnal intercourse, even with one's wife, because it can never be a productive act, and there is no question of 'cultivation' therein. Subject to these two conditions (namely, the purity of the woman from her menses, and avoiding the carnal intercourse) one can enjoy whatever way he wishes to have sexual intimacy with his wife. In this context, it has been said, "Come to your soil from where you will". It indicates that in so far as the ultimate place (of penetration) is a 'soil' (which stands for the female vagina which is productive like a soil), one can elect whatever way he likes to reach this ultimate place. Thus, lying over the woman or beside her or beneath her, acceding to the vagina from any side, front or back, sitting or kneeling -- all these and similar other positions are allowed while performing sexual intercourse subject to the two conditions mentioned above.

No sexual intercourse during menstruation The basic purpose of these verses is to declare the prohibition of having sexual intercourse with a woman in a state of menstruation. If someone committed sexual intercourse in such a state either unknowingly or carelessly, he has to make Taubah (repentance). In this context it has been said in the verse 222 that "Allah loves those who are most repenting." The verse 223 points out to the lawful ways of having sexual intercourse with one's woman. The permission of such intercourse has been subjected to two conditions. Firstly, it should take place at a time when the woman is pure from her menstruation. Secondly, carnal intercourse is not allowed at all. This verse begins with a comprehensive remark: "Your women are for you a soil to cultivate." Here the woman has been compared with a soil, while the husband has been compared with a cultivator. This is to indicate that the sexual intercourse has not been allowed for satisfying the sexual lust only, but also to make it a valid source for having children. By using this expression the Holy Qur'an has given a subtle indication to the prohibition of carnal intercourse, even with one's wife, because it can never be a productive act, and there is no question of 'cultivation' therein. Subject to these two conditions (namely, the purity of the woman from her menses, and avoiding the carnal intercourse) one can enjoy whatever way he wishes to have sexual intimacy with his wife. In this context, it has been said, "Come to your soil from where you will". It indicates that in so far as the ultimate place (of penetration) is a 'soil' (which stands for the female vagina which is productive like a soil), one can elect whatever way he likes to reach this ultimate place. Thus, lying over the woman or beside her or beneath her, acceding to the vagina from any side, front or back, sitting or kneeling -- all these and similar other positions are allowed while performing sexual intercourse subject to the two conditions mentioned above.

The Verse warns those who swear in the name of Allah that they will not do some vituous deeds or that they will not effect a compromise between two groups. The Verse reminds them that by this behaviour they are using the name of Allah as a barrier against the good deeds, which is a severe violation of the sanctity of the name of Allah, and they must avoid it in any case,

Note: The laghw لغو or ineffectual oath has two meanings: I. In the first case it means a false oath sworn without volition over something in the past, or it could have been sworn with volition while the oath-taker considers it to be true in his supposition. For ex-ample, guided by his information and supposition, one ends up declaring on oath that a certain person has arrived while that person had not arrived in reality. Similarly, if someone swears on oath for some-thing in future unintentionally, while he has been actually wanting to say something else, but the words of oath come out of his lips mistakenly, this type of oath also falls in this category. All these three types are not an act of sin and that is why they are called laghw لغو or ineffectual. This act will not be reprehensible in the Hereafter (Akhirah). As compared to this, the oath which has been declared reprehensible is the one that has been uttered intentionally knowing it to be false. This is known as ghamus (perjury), and is an act of sin, but according to the Hanafiyyah, it does not require kaffarah or expiation. Therefore, لغو laghw, in the sense explained earlier, involves no kaffarah more obviously, (because it is not a sinful act). The verse under discussion exclusively takes up these two categories that carry no کَفَّارہ kaffarah. II. Laghw لغو also means that which has no kaffarah کَفَّارہ . It will be called as laghw because it does not entail the liability of Kaffarah کَفَّارہ in this world. III. Given this meaning, the word, laghw لغو is inclusive of ghamus, which being an act of sin, however, does not require kaffarah کَفَّارہ . As compared to this, the oath that requires kaffarah کَفَّارہ is called mun'aqidah منعقدہ (that which is established, confirmed: fait accompli). For instance, if someone intentionally declares on oath to the effect that he or she would or would not perform a certain act, then, acting contrarily requires kaffarah. (Bayan al-Qur'an)

Note: If someone takes an oath that he will not have sexual intercourse with his wife, the case has four situations: (A) No time-limit was fixed. (B) A time-limit of four months was fixed. (C) A time-limit of more than four months was fixed. (D) The limit was identified as less than four months. So, situations A, B and C are termed in Shari` ah as 'Ild' (ایلاء ). The injunction covering these situations is: If the oath-taker breaks his oath within four months and resumes sexual intercourse with his wife, he will have to come up with kaffarah کَفَّارہ for his oath while his nikah (marriage) remains intact. And should it be that the time-limit of four months did expire and the oath-taker did not break his oath, an irrevocable divorce on his wife will become effective, that is, taking her back without remarriage does not remain correct any more. However, if they, by mutual consent, enter into marriage this will be correct. Halalah حلالہ (an intermediary marriage of the woman with a third person) is not required. The injunction in the fourth situation is: If the oath is broken, kaffarah کَفَّارہ will be required and if the oath is completed, the marriage, even then, will remain valid. (Bayan al-Qur°an)

Note: If someone takes an oath that he will not have sexual intercourse with his wife, the case has four situations: (A) No time-limit was fixed. (B) A time-limit of four months was fixed. (C) A time-limit of more than four months was fixed. (D) The limit was identified as less than four months. So, situations A, B and C are termed in Shari` ah as 'Ild' (ایلاء ). The injunction covering these situations is: If the oath-taker breaks his oath within four months and resumes sexual intercourse with his wife, he will have to come up with kaffarah کَفَّارہ for his oath while his nikah (marriage) remains intact. And should it be that the time-limit of four months did expire and the oath-taker did not break his oath, an irrevocable divorce on his wife will become effective, that is, taking her back without remarriage does not remain correct any more. However, if they, by mutual consent, enter into marriage this will be correct. Halalah حلالہ (an intermediary marriage of the woman with a third person) is not required. The injunction in the fourth situation is: If the oath is broken, kaffarah کَفَّارہ will be required and if the oath is completed, the marriage, even then, will remain valid. (Bayan al-Qur°an)

A great verse defining the status of man and woman This verse contains a rule of Shari` ah concerning the mutual rights and duties enjoined upon men and women and explains the degree of their role. Important details of this very rule appear before this verse, and again, after the verse, through several sections. The place of women in Islam At this point, it seems pertinent to explain to some extent the status given by Islam to women. If understood in its full perspective, it will certainly lead to the conclusion that a just and moderate social system would not have required more than this. It may be noted that this is the crucial place, any deviation or departure from which becomes a great danger for man's life here and in the Hereafter. Deliberation would reveal that two things serve as the necessary basis for the survival and development of this world. These are: woman and wealth. But, a look at the other side of the coin shows that this twosome is also a source of disturbance, bloodshed and tribulation. Further deliberation would easily help one reach the conclusion that although these two, given their real place in life, are instrumental in the progress of this world, yet, as and when, they are aimlessly moved away from their real place, they are capable of shaking the world like an earthquake. The Qur'an has given man a way of life, a system. Both these human factors have been assigned their correct respective places in a way that they yield the maximum benefits to the total exclusion of peacelessness. The proper place of wealth, the sources of its acquisition and the ways of spending it, as well as, a just system of the distribution of wealth is a regular field of knowledge. Detailed discussions of this subject will Insha Allah appear on some other occasion. My published treatise entitled, 'The Distribution of Wealth' could serve as an indicator of basics. Being discussed here, at this point, is woman and her rights and duties. About this, the verse under reference states: As there are rights of men over women which must be given, so there are rights of women over men which must be given. However, the quantum of difference that must be recognized here is: Men have a 'step' above women. Almost the same subject has appeared in Surah Al-Nisa' in this manner: الرِّ‌جَالُ قَوَّامُونَ عَلَى النِّسَاءِ بِمَا فَضَّلَ اللَّـهُ بَعْضَهُمْ عَلَىٰ بَعْضٍ وَبِمَا أَنفَقُوا مِنْ أَمْوَالِهِمْ Men stand care-takers of women, since Allah has made some of them excel the other, and because they have spent of their wealth. (4:34) The status of women in pre-Islamic society Before Islam, in the age of ignorance (Jahiliyyah جاھلیہ ), it was common practice that women were equated with articles of home use. They would be bought and sold like cattle. She had no right whatsoever in relation to her marriage. She had to go where she was sent by her guardians. Far from being entitled to some share in the inheritance from her relatives, she herself was treated as a piece of inheritance like any other household item. She was considered as something owned by men while she owned nothing. And, even that which she allegedly owned she could not spend without the permission of men. However, her husband had all the right in the world to spend that which belonged to her as and how he elected to do so. She did not even have the right to question. So much so that some groups from amongst the European countries which are considered to be among the most civilized in the world today had reached the limit where they did not even accept that women were human beings! Women had no place in religion. They were considered unfit for worship, and for Paradise. In some synods of Rome, it was decided after mutual consultations that she was a dirty animal which had no soul. Usually, it was considered permissible for a father to kill, or even, bury her daughter alive. In fact, this act was judged to be a mark of honour and a standard of nobility. There were some who held the opinion that anybody who killed a woman did not have to pay blood-money or be charged with retaliatory action. And should the husband die, the wife too was burnt alive with his dead body. Following the birth of the noble Prophet ﷺ and before his prophethood, in the year 586, France showed its compassion for women by passing a resolution, of course after great deliberation and controversy, that woman is after all a human being, but she has been created for the sole purpose of serving man! In short, the whole world, and all nations and religions that inhabited it, had been treating women with callousness that makes one tremble with fear. For this poor creature, there was no reason, no justice, anywhere. Ransomed be our lives for him who came as mercy for the worlds (ﷺ), and for the true religion which opened the eyes of the people of this world, taught man to respect man, made justice and equity the law, men were made responsible for the rights of women parallel to their own rights on them. Woman was made free and independent. She became the owner of her life and property, similar to men. No man can, even if he be a father or grandfather, force a woman to marry someone. Should she be given in marriage without her consent, the act remains dangling on her consent. If she says no, it stands annulled. No man has any right to spend anything from that which belongs to her, without her consent and approval. After the death of her husband or after having been divorced by him, she becomes independent and she cannot be compelled by anyone for anything. She gets a share in the inheritance of her relatives just like men. To spend on her and to keep her happy has been declared an act of ` ibadah (worship) under the blessed law of Muhammad ﷺ ، on him be peace and blessing. Should the husband fail to give the due rights, she could, through an Islamic court, force him to do so or to divorce her. Man's guardianship is essential for peace and order Not giving women their due rights was ranked as injustice, oppression, stinginess and villainy which was erased by Islam. Similarly, leaving them to go their way with an unbridled liberty from the guardianship and care of men, and to make them earn their own sustenance and life support amounts to wasting her rights and destroying her genius. Neither does she deserve that fate in view of her physique nor does that great mission of bringing up children and the charge of family management, which has been naturally entrusted to her, deserve it. In addition to that, women are, when deprived of the guardianship and care of men, a great danger for the whole human society, a situation that is bound to create all sorts of disturbances, including riots and bloodshed, as a matter of daily routine. That is why the noble Qur'an, while stating the mandatory rights of women, also declared وَلِلرِّ‌جَالِ عَلَيْهِنَّ دَرَ‌جَةٌ that is, men are a step above women which, in still other words, amounts to saying that men are responsible for them as their caretakers. As it was in the first age of ignorance before Islam, all nations of the world, by keeping women as a household item or a dumb animal, had fallen prey to this mistake. So it came to pass that, following Islam's age of decadence, there started a later age of ignorance. Here the first mistake is being matched by yet another mistake, as a reaction in the opposite direction, when efforts are being made continuously to get rid of even this much degree of precedence men have over women. As a result, obscenity and shamelessness became common, the world became a home of conflicts and disorder, and bloodshed became so cheap that the first age of ignorance remained no match anymore. There is an Arab saying: الجاھل اما مفرط او مفرط which means: The ignorant man never stays on moderation. If he decides to stay from acting excessively, he slides into a behaviour of neglect. This is the prevailing attitude in the world of today. There was that time when they were not even prepared to call or understand women as a member of the human race. Now they have advanced to the limit that the 'yoke' of man's guardianship and caretaking of women, which is perfectly wise and suitable universally for men and women, is being thrown away, the ill consequences of which are becoming visible every day. And believe it, unless they bow down before this noble statement of the Qur'an, such disorders will go on increasing day by day. Governments today make new laws incessantly to bring peace into the world. New institutions are established for this purpose. Millions are spent but the source of disorders goes unnoticed by them. If a Commission of Inquiry was to be established to determine the causes of disorder, bloodshed and internecine wars, it is likely that the cause of more than fifty percent of such crimes will turn out to be woman and her unbridled freedom. But, in the contemporary world, the prevailing pursuit of desires has confounded even the best of minds. No corrective check against the worship of desires is even entertained. May Allah Almighty enlighten our hearts with the light of faith and help us act according to the guidance given in His Book and in the conduct of the Holy Prophet because that is our blessed capital both in this world and in the Hereafter. A Conflict and its Resolution We find out from this verse that the Qur'an tells the husband and wife about duties assigned to each, whereby men have been placed under obligation to give women their rights, in the same manner as women have been placed under obligation to give men their rights. This indicates that each party should watch out on the fulfillment of its respective duties rather than go after demanding rights. And should they succeed in doing so, the very issue of demanding rights will cease to exist, because the duties of men are the rights of women and the duties of women are the rights of men. When duties are taken care of, rights will be automatically fulfilled. These days the root of all troubles lies in the attitude of people who are alert to their rights but negligent of their duties. As a result, rights are demanded on a war footing as is evident from the current confrontation between governments and masses, husbands and wives and between other authorities and their challengers. This indicator of the Qur'an has modified the confrontational aspect of the issue by stressing that everyone should make all possible effort to fulfill his or her duties and when it comes to his or her own rights try to overlook any infringements gently, forego and forgive. If this teaching of the Qur'an could become common universal practice, homes, families, even countries and governments will find that most of their conflicts have been resolved for good. Man's higher position over woman is for discipline only A universal system in the world, the human nature and the best interests of women themselves required that men be not only given a particular sort of controlling and care-taking right over women, but that it be rather made incumbent on them. This is what has been stated in the verse الرِّ‌جَالُ قَوَّامُونَ عَلَى النِّسَاءِ : Men stand care-takers of women.' But, this does not necessarily entail that all men are superior to all women because being superior in the sight of Allah wholly depends on belief and good conduct. In Divine dispension, the increase or decrease in degrees operates in synchronization with the degrees of belief and conduct. Therefore, in matters relating to the Hereafter, it is not necessary that men alone should continue to have that step or degree above women. This too is possible and, as elaborated in Qur'anic verses and Hadith narrations, this is what would come to pass -- that some women, through their obedience to and worship of Allah, will become superior to many men with their degree of precedence raising higher than many men. Although the Holy Qur'an, while describing the injunctions of Shari` ah, according to its own clear stress, declares that men and women are absolutely equal and the injunctions where there is some difference have been expressly explained, but the address is generally to men and the gender used is masculine. This treatment, however, is not peculiar to the noble Qur'an. Governments too, use the masculine gender in their laws fairly commonly, although the law is universally applicable to men and women both. One immediate reason for this is the very difference identified in the verses of the noble Qur'an, that is, for men there is a step above women. The second consideration, perhaps implied here as well, may be that satr ستر (concealment) is better even when there is a discussion about masturat مستورات (women: the concealed ones). But, when women realized that the noble Qur'an does not address them directly at various places like it does address men, the venerated mother of the faithful, Sayyidah Umm Salmah ؓ اُم سلمہ سیدہ pointed this out to the Holy Prophet ﷺ and thereupon the following verse of the Surah Al-Ahzab was revealed: إِنَّ الْمُسْلِمِينَ وَالْمُسْلِمَاتِ وَالْمُؤْمِنِينَ وَالْمُؤْمِنَاتِ وَالْقَانِتِينَ وَالْقَانِتَاتِ Submitting men and submitting women, believing men and believing women, obedient men and obedient women ... (This appears in details in Nasa i, Musnad Ahmad and Tafsir Ibn Jarir etc.) where women were clearly and expressly identified along with men which implies that the status of women is no less than men in obedience to Allah and in His worship, in being near Him and His approval, and in the ranks of Paradise, According to a report in Tafsir Ibn Kathir, some Muslim women came to the the blessed wives of the Holy Prophet and asked about the general absence of any mention of Muslim women in the Holy Qur'an, while it does mention men at several places, and also refers to the blessed wives of the Holy Prophet ﷺ from among women. Thereupon, the verse referred to above was revealed. To sum up, it can be said that a certain measure of precedence and authority in regulating the affairs of worldly life is for the good of women and that wisdom so dictates. Other than that, there is no difference in the reward and retribution for deeds, good or bad, and in the degree of merit attained in the Hereafter. The same subject appears in the noble Qur'an with much more clarity in the following manner: مَنْ عَمِلَ صَالِحًا مِّن ذَكَرٍ‌ أَوْ أُنثَىٰ وَهُوَ مُؤْمِنٌ فَلَنُحْيِيَنَّهُ حَيَاةً طَيِّبَةً And whosoever male or female, does a righteous deed, while he (or she) is a believer, we shall assuredly get him (or her) to live a goodly life. (16:97) After these preliminary remarks let's ponder over the words of the original verse under discussion. It was said: وَلَهُنَّ مِثْلُ الَّذِي عَلَيْهِنَّ "And women have rights similar to what they owe" that is, their rights are incumbent upon men similarly as the rights of men are incumbent upon them. Here the rights of women were mentioned before the rights of men, one reason for which is that man after all, given his physical power and God-given precedence, manages to wrest his rights from women anyway. The concern should be for the rights of women since they cannot habitually wrest their rights by force. There is yet another hint here which suggests that men should take the first step to give the rights of women. However, the similarity and equivalency declared by the use of the word mithl مِثْلُ : like, similar) in the text here could just never mean that the kind of job men do should also be done by women, or vice versa, because the distribution of work and respective duties for men and women are naturally different. In fact, it means that it is obligatory that rights belonging to both be observed equally and mutually and that the punishment for any negligence or shortcoming be also equal. It is worth observing at this point how the noble Qur'an has, in a sentence so small, miniaturized a whole roster of rights and duties since all rights women have over men and all rights men have over women are included under the sense of this verse. (Muhit) Simply by adding one more word (bi l'ma` ruf بالمَعروف . justly, uprightly, kindly, courteously, according to the practice approved by the Shari'ah, or simply - "as recognized", a closer expression used in the accompanying translation of the verse) the possible occurrence of mutual controversies was eliminated. It was established that rights should be given using the ma` ruf مَعروف method because the meaning of مَعروف ma` ruf includes that which is neither prohibited nor impermissible under the dictates of the Shari'ah nor does it have any element of hardship or excess under common habit or custom or ` urf عُرف . The purport is that observing the routine of legal provisions is not enough, instead, it will be examined that, according to ` urf عُرف or customarily approved practice, the other party does not in any case suffer from pain or loss. That which is judged to be a source of pain and loss, in view of ` urf عُرف ، will be forbidden and remain impermissible, for instance, coldness, indifference or such behaviour or conduct which causes pain. These can hardly be covered under an article of law but the word bi l'ma` ruf بالمَعروف does encompass them. After that it was said: وَلِلرِّ‌جَالِ عَلَيْهِنَّ دَرَ‌جَةٌ:'Though for men there is a step above them.' The well-known meaning and sense of this verse is that despite the rights of the parties being equal, Allah Almighty has bestowed upon men a certain degree of precedence and authority over women. That there is great wisdom in doing so has been hinted at by the use of the words` وَاللَّـهُ عَزِيزٌ حَكِيمٌ :"And Allah is Mighty, Wise" towards the end of the verse. Giving the meaning of this sentence, Sayyidna ` Abdullah ibn ` Abbas ؓ has added that Allah Almighty has given men a degree of precedence as compared to women, therefore they should act with much more forbearance. Even if women fall short of giving them their rights, the degree of their precedence is such that they should bear by it, be patient and do nothing to desist from giving them their rights. (Qurtubi)

Commentary The injunctions governing talaq طلاق (divorce) and nikah نکاح (marriage) appear in several verses throughout the Qur'an but the verses mentioned here consist of cardinal rules of procedure in cases of divorce. To understand these, it is necessary to know the status of Nikah نکاح in the Shari'ah of Islam. Marriage, divorce and the rules governing them One commonly known aspect of Nikah نکاح (marriage) is that of a mutual transaction and contract similar to transactions in buying and selling and in loans and payments. The second aspect is that of Sunnah and ` Ibadah عبادہ . On this, there is a consensus of the whole ummah that nikah نکاح ، being far above ordinary transactions and contracts, has the status of ` Ibadah عبادہ and Sunnah (the act of worshipping Allah and following in the footsteps of the Prophet ﷺ ). Therefore, in order that nikah نکاح be duly solemnized, there are, by the consensus of the ummah, some peculiar conditions which are not found in ordinary transactions of buying and selling. First of all, nikah نکاح cannot take place between any man and any woman. Governing this, there is an absolute law of the Shari'ah under which several categories of men and women cannot be joined together in the bond of marriage. Secondly, for all transactions and contracts, in order that they be concluded and finalized, witness is no condition. A witness is needed when parties differ, but nikah نکاح is not such a transaction. Here, in order that it be concluded, the physical presence of witnesses is a pre-condition. If a man and woman, the two of them mutually agree to have their marriage solemnized without witnesses, and even if, any one of the two never differs or retreats, that marriage is, according to the Shari'ah, still invalid, unless both respond to the proposal and acceptance before witnesses. However, the Sunnah is that 'nikah نکاح ' must be solemnized with a public announcement. Similarly, there are many other conditions and rules of decorum that are either necessary or masnun مسنون in marriage.makhan38 According to Imam Abu Hanifah (رح) ، and several other leading Muslim jurists, the aspect of ` Ibadah عبادہ (worship) and Sunnah in nikah نکاح dominates over the aspect of transaction and contract. Evidences from the Qur'an and Sunnah support it. After this brief familiarity with the real nature of marriage, let us understand divorce. The outcome of talaq طلاق (divorce) is to terminate the transaction and contract of nikah نکاح (marriage). Just as the Shari` ah of Islam, by giving nikah the status of an act of ` Ibadah عبادہ ، has kept it at a level higher than common transactions and contracts and has imposed on it several restrictions, very similarly, the termination of this deal has not been left free, as in common transactions, where the parties may terminate the deal as and when they elect to do so, and go on to make a fresh deal with someone else. It has rather made a pointedly wise legal framework which has been described in the verses under reference. According to the drift of Islamic teachings, the transaction and contract of nikah نکاح should be for the whole life-span. The point of departure where it has to be broken or terminated should never be reached because the discontinuation of this deal affects not only the parties involved but goes on to destroy children, and their children, and at times, it may even cause whole families and tribes to end up with disturbed relations, which in turn, badly infects the whole society. Therefore, the teachings of the Qur'an and Sunnah have taken all necessary steps to remove impediments that may cause the breaking of this deal. The focal drive of instructions given in the Qur'an and Sunnah covering all problems and situations relating to the married couples is that this relationship should always keep on becoming stronger and stronger and may just never break. Should disagreements crop up, instructions were given to first try and understand each other's point of view and talk it out, and in the event of failure, ways of restraint, hard advice and warning were identified. Should the tussle become serious and these elementary steps do not bring a resolution of crisis, the parties were then expected to set up a panel for arbitration comprising of the members of their immediate families who could help patch up the differences. The emphasis on making members of the family as sole arbitrators in the verse حَكَمًا مِّنْ أَهْلِهِ وَحَكَمًا مِّنْ أَهْلِهَا :'Then send one arbitrator from his people and one from her people' is certainly very wise since the tussle, if it escapes the immediate family circle, will only aggravate the situation and the parties may draw further apart. But there are occasions and situations when all efforts for reconciliation fail and the parties in conflict rather than benefit by the desired results of the nikah نکاح relationship, feel that being married together is a mutual punishment. Under such conditions, terminating this husband-wife relationship becomes, in itself, a way-out promising comfort and peace for the parties. Therefore, the Shari'ah of Islam did not, as did some other religions, patently confirm that the marriage relationship must remain unbreakable under all conditions. Going a step ahead, it has framed a specific law for divorce and the dissolution of marriage. The right of divorce was given to man alone in whom the ingredients of thought, end-perception and forbearance were more pronounced than in a woman. This free choice was not given in the hands of women so that the disposition of being overtaken by transitory emotions, which is more pronounced in women as compared to men, may not become the cause of divorce. But women too, were riot totally deprived of this right lest they are left with no alternative but to keep groaning under the cruelty of her husband. She was given the right to take her case to a court presided by a judge who qualifies as such under the rules of Shari'ah, present her complaint, prove her case, and get the marriage annulled, or secure a divorce. Then, as it is, Allah Almighty did entrust man with the free choice of divorce, but at the very first instance, it was declared that the use of this choice was very much detested and disapproved in the sight of Allah. It was permitted only in extreme situations of compulsion. It appears in Hadith: ابغض الحلال الی اللہ الطلاق : Divorce is the most detested of lawful things with Allah. The second restriction placed stipulated that this choice should not be used in extreme anger or fleeting displeasure. It was due to this wisdom that the pronouncing of divorce was forbidden during the period of menstruation, as well as, during a’ tuhr اطہُر (the state of purity) in which the husband has had sexual intercourse with the wife. The pronouncing of divorce during menstruation and in a’ tuhr اطہُر marked by intimacy was forbidden on the basis that it would become the contributing reason to elongate the ` iddah عِدَّہ or 'waiting period' of the woman, which will aggravate her pain and worry. For these two situations, the noble Qur'an has this to say: فَطَلِّقُوهُنَّ لِعِدَّتِهِنَّ that is, divorce -- if it has to be given -- should be given at a time when the ` iddah عِدَّہ of the woman does not become longer without any reason. If divorce became effective during menstruation, that particular menstruation will not be counted in ` iddah عِدَّہ . The count of ` iddah عِدَّہ will begin from the next menstruation. And in a’ tuhr اطہُر marked with intimacy, the chances of pregnancy exist, which would elongate the period of ` iddah عِدَّہ ، upto the time of delivery. Another reason for fixing the time of tuhr طہُر ، mentioned earlier for the pronouncement of divorce is that it is quite possible that in the meantime the anger goes away, forgiveness and recompense follow and the very idea of divorce is withdrawn. Now under the third restriction, the method adopted in breaking the marriage- contract and its annulment was not kept identical with that of the transactions and contracts of common buying and selling activity which releases the parties concerned of all obligations instantly once the contract is annulled. The first deal is all over and everybody gets the option to enter into another contract with some other party. In fact, in order to sever the marriage-relationship, talaq طلاق has been subjected to three stages. Then it was topped with the restriction of ` iddah عِدَّہ since a lot of residual effects of the nikah نکاح -relationship will remain active until the completion of ` iddah عِدَّہ . Another marriage will not be lawful for the woman. Some restriction on the man would also continue. The fourth restriction stipulates if divorce was given once or twice in clear and unambiguous words, nikah نکاح did not break instantly on the pronouncement of talaq طلاق ; the marriage relationship continues till the completion of ` iddah عِدَّہ . If the husband revokes the talaq طلاق ، the previous nikah نکاح will remain valid. This choice of ruju` رَجُوع (revocation or the act of taking back one's divorced wife) was restricted to only one or two talaqs طلاقین ، so that some cruel husband may not make a practice of giving talaqs طلاقین ، and then take her back and keep her as some captive. Therefore, came the injunction: If someone pronounces the third talaq طلاق as well, he now has no choice of ruju رَجُوع (revocation), that is, he cannot take his wife back. In fact, even if they wish to remarry after mutual agreement, their being joined together in marriage a second time is not lawful, except in a peculiar manner which has been described later on. The verses under study consist of important injunctions relating to this system of divorce. Now let us ponder over the words, of these verses. In the beginning of the verse it was first said: الطَّلَاقُ مَرَّ‌تَانِ : that is, 'talaq طلاق is twice'. Then, in the process of these two talaqs طلاقین ، a certain flexibility was provided by virtue of which the marriage was not totally annulled; instead, the man has the choice to return to his wife and retain her in his marriage. Or, he may elect not to do his ruju-` رَجُوع (revocation) from the earlier pronouncements, allow the ` iddah عِدَّہ to be completed and once the ` iddah عِدَّہ is over, the marriage relationship will be terminated. This subject was stated in the words فَإِمْسَاكٌ بِمَعْرُ‌وفٍ أَوْ تَسْرِ‌يحٌ بِإِحْسَانٍ , (then either to retain in the recognized manner or to release in fairness) that is, either, one must revoke divorce and retain his wife in his marriage, or, allow her ` iddah عِدَّہ or the waiting period to be completed nicely and generously so that she can become free. The third talaq طلاق (pronouncement of divorce) still remains unmentioned while the text takes up another problem in between, which generally comes up for. discussion under such conditions. The problem is that there are some cruel husbands who neither wish to retain their wives, nor care about their rights, nor give them divorce. The wife is placed in a situation of duress while the husband, taking advantage of her helplessness, demands some money or property from her, or as a last resort, demands that the mahr (dower) be forgiven, or returned in lieu of divorce. The Qur'an declares this to be haram حرام (unlawful). It was said: وَلَا يَحِلُّ لَكُمْ أَن تَأْخُذُوا مِمَّا آتَيْتُمُوهُنَّ شَيْئًا that is, it is not halal حلال (lawful) for you that, in return for talaq طلاق ، you take back from them money or mahr مھر (dower) or anything else given by you. However, one exception was made in which forgiveness or return of mahr مھر (dower) was made permissible. Where the woman feels that she cannot do justice to the rights of her husband because of difference in temperaments and the man too, feels the same way, then this becomes a situation in which it is also permissible that divorce be given or taken in lieu of the forgiveness or return of mahr مھر (dower).

After dealing with the above problem, the third talaq was mentioned in this manner فَإِن طَلَّقَهَا فَلَا تَحِلُّ لَهُ مِن بَعْدُ حَتَّىٰ تَنكِحَ زَوْجًا غَيْرَ‌هُ that is, if that person goes on to pronounce the third talaq as well (something not liked by the Shari'ah), the transaction of nikah shall stand totally annulled. He has exhausted his choice to revoke his divorce and take his wife back. And since he transgressed the limits of Shari'ah by unnecessarily giving the third talaq, he must now have his punishment whereby it is not possible for them to remarry each other even if both of them agree to do so. Now, in order that they could remarry each other, the condition of such nikah is that the woman (after completing her period of ` iddah following talaq) should enter into marriage with another man, fulfill matrimonial obligations and live with this other husband. Thereafter, if by chance that other husband also divorces her (or dies), she could remarry the first husband after completing her ` iddah. The last sentence of the verse says: فَإِن طَلَّقَهَا فَلَا جُنَاحَ عَلَيْهِمَا أَن يَتَرَ‌اجَعَا Should he too divorce her, then there is no sin on them in their returning to each other. Detailed injunctions regarding three divorces at a time A close look at the style of the noble Qur'an makes it explicitly clear that the right method of pronouncing talaq stipulated by the Shari'ah is that one should, at the most, reach the limit of two talaqs and it is not appropriate to reach to the extent of a third talaq. After the use of words الطَّلَاقُ مَرَّ‌تَانِ in verse 229, the third talaq is identified in the words فَإِن طَلَّقَهَا (Then, if he divorces her) wherein the letter إِن (if) is note-worthy. Here the hint in question is visibly present. Otherwise, the third talaq could simply be expressed by saying الطَّلَاقُ ثُلث 'The divorces are three.' Now the text, to the exclusion of expressions to this effect, has an expression of its own which carries a clear hint that one should not reach the stage of the third talaq. This is why Imam Malik (رح) and several other jurists did not just permit the third talaq. They call it talaq al-bid'ah الطَّلَاقُ (the innovated talaq: divorce without the authority of the Qur'an and Sunnah). Some other jurists have ruled that three talaqs are permissible only on condition that these three talaqs be pronounced separately in three tuhrs (the state of post-menstrual purity). In the terminology used by these jurists this too has been termed as talaq al-sunnah. But none of them are proposing by this term that giving three talaqs in this manner is desirable, and is according to the Sunnah. In fact, this was given the name of talaq al-sunnah as opposed to talaq al-bid'ah for the simple reason that this form does not amount to bid'ah (an innovation in settled religious practice). The gist of that which stands proved regarding the talaq count, on the authority of the guidance given by the Qur'an and Sunnah, and the practice of the Companions of the Holy Prophet ﷺ and their followers is this: When no option, except that of talaq is left, the best method of pronouncing talaq is to pronounce one talaq during the state of tuhr تُہر (purity) in which sexual intercourse has not taken place. Then, let this one talaq stay as such. As soon as the ` iddah finishes, the nikah relationship will automatically be finished with it. The Muslim Jurists have called it al-talaq al-ahsan الطَّلَاقُ الاحسان and the respected Companions of the Holy Prophet ﷺ have declared it as the best method of talaq. Ibn Abi Shaybah has reported from Sayyidna Ibrahim al-Nakha` i that the noble sahabah ؓ favoured the method in which, after giving one talaq, nothing is done thereafter and the ` iddah of talaq -- three menstruation periods -- are allowed to expire so that the woman would become free. From the words of the noble Qur'an mentioned earlier, the permission to pronounce upto two talaqs can also be deduced, but by the use of the word ,' (twice) it has been pointed out that two talaqs should not be given in one utterance and at one time but should be given separately in two tuhrs (states of purity). The use of مَرَّ‌تَانِ (Two talaqs are permissible) could also have helped prove the permission of two talaqs but the word مَرَّ‌تَانِ suggests that the two talaqs should be given at two separate occasions, that is in two separate tuhrs (states of purity).50 (Ruh al-Ma'ani) 50-The use of the adverb, 'twice' to stand for the Qur'anic word, 'marratan' in the accompanying translation is to cover this element of sequence and deferment for, lexically, 'twice' means -- on two occasions or two times. In short, the limit of two talaqs stands proved from the words of the Qur'an. Therefore, by consensus of Imams and fuqaha' (Muslim Jurists), this talaq is included in Sunnah, that is, it is not a bid'ah (innovation). That the third talaq is undesirable is clearly indicated in the Qur'anic diction itself. That this is undesirable has not been questioned by anyone. As to how detested and reprehensible the third talaq is stands proved by a hadith of the Holy Prophet ﷺ . Imam al-Nasa'i reports on the authority of Mahmud ibn Labid that: آخبرَ رسول اللہ ﷺ عن رجل طلق امراتہ ثلاث تطلیقات جمیعاً فقامَ غضباناً ، ثم قال : ایلعب بکتاب اللہ و انا بین اظھرکم حتی قام رجل و قال : یا رسول اللہ ﷺ الا اقتلہ ؟ The noble Prophet ﷺ was told about a man who had divorced his wife by pronouncing three talaqs simultaneously. He rose in anger, then said: 'What is this game being played with Allah's Book while I am present amongst you?' In the meantime, a man stood up and said: Ya Rasulallah! should I not kill him? (Nasa'i, Kitab al-Talaq, vol.2, p. 98)51 51-Hafiz Ibn al-Qaiyyim has ruled that the isnad of this hadith is sahib according to the conditions prescribed by Muslim (Zad al-Ma'ad). ` Allamah al-Mardini, in his al-Jauhar al-Naqi, calls the sanad of this hadith -- sahih, Ibn Kathir terms the isnad as excellent and Ibn Hajar finds this 'narrated by the reliable'. Based on this, Imam Malik and some other leading fugaha ' فقہاء (jurists) have ruled that the third talaq is absolutely impermissible and that it is talaq al-bid'ah (a divorce based on innovation in religious practice and not supported by the Qur'an and Sunnah). Other Imams, by saying that three talaqs given in three tuhrs (states of purity) are included under sunnah talaq, have though excluded it from the purview of talaq al-bid'ah, but there is no difference of opinion as to its being undesirable. To summarize, it can be said that the three stages of talaq (divorce) established by the Shari'ah of Islam in the form of three talaqs, do never mean that crossing these three stages are necessary or better. Instead, the intent of the Shari'ah is that the very initial step towards divorce is a detestable and reprehensible act. If such a step has to be taken under dire compulsion, it is only proper that its lowest possible stage, that is, one (pronouncement of) talaq be considered sufficient, allowing ` iddah (the waiting period) to take its course. Once the ` iddah is over, this very one talaq will become sufficient to sever the husband-wife relationship and the woman shall become free to marry another person. This method of talaq is called ahsan, that is, the best. In this method there is wisdom, and an element of advantage as well, since the option of reconciliation will remain open for the parties concerned in the event only one talaq has been given in clear words to that effect. Only taking the talaq back before the expiry of ` iddah will be sufficient to sustain the nikah. And after the ` iddah has expired, the nikah will, no doubt, be broken and the woman set free, but there still will remain room for reconciliation between them, and should they reconcile and wish to remarry each other, the fresh nikah could be solemnized immediately. But, should a person who does not stick with this method of ahsan talaq احسن طلاق and goes on to pronounce one more talaq in clear and unambiguous words during the period of ` iddah, he then, completes two stages of the severance of nikah, which was unnecessary, and certainly not approved by the Shari'ah. However, two stages stand completed anyway. But the position, inspite of the completion of these two stages, stays where it was, that is, the choice of raj’ ah (revocation) or return (to one's wife) during the period of ` iddah remains open and a fresh nikah could be made by the mutual agreement of the parties concerned after the expiry of the period of ` iddah. The only difference is that the husband has, by reaching the count of two talaqs, broken one more chain of his choices and arrived at the borderline from where the pronouncement of just one more talaq by him would end the matter for ever. For one who has gone through these two stages of talaq, the instruction given later is: فَإِمْسَاكٌ بِمَعْرُ‌وفٍ أَوْ تَسْرِ‌يحٌ بِإِحْسَانٍ :'Then either to retain in the recognized manner or to release in fairness.' Here two injunctions have been communicated through the words Firstly, revocation during ` iddah does not require fresh nikah; instead, only imsak إِمْسَاكٌ, that is, retaining one's wife by revoking the talaq is sufficient. If this was done, the marriage relationship will stand reinstated on the very basis of the previous nikah. Secondly, through this, the husband was instructed to take steps to effect his raj’ ah (revocation) only if he intends to correct the situation and looks forward to living in peace and harmony; if not, he should pass this option so that the marriage relationship ends following the completion of ` iddah. The concern here is that raj’ ah (revocation) may not be done just to harass the woman without any intention of correcting the situation. To match this, it was said: أَوْ تَسْرِ‌يحٌ بِإِحْسَانٍ. The word, Tasrih تَسْرِ‌يحٌ means to untie, to free, to release. Through this, it was pointed out that in order to sever relations, no additional talaq, or for that matter, no other action is necessary. That the ` iddah (waiting period) expires without revocation is, in itself, sufficient to end the marriage relationship. Abu Dawud reports on the authority of Abu Razin al-Asadi that, following the revelation of this verse, a man asked the Holy Prophet ﷺ 'Allah Almighty has said: الطَّلَاقُ مَرَّ‌تَانِ (Divorce is twice). Why the third talaq was not mentioned here?' He said: 'The expression تَسْرِ‌يحٌ بِإِحْسَانٍ (To release in fairness) which follows immediately is the third talaq.' (Ruh al-Ma'ani). It means, according to the consensus of ` ulama', that the act of the total severance of marriage relationship which would come out of the third talaq, would be taken care of by this mode of action, that is, by not revoking the divorce during the period of ` iddah. Now, just as, by placing the restrictive condition of بِمَعْرُ‌وفٍ (in recognized manner) along with إِمْسَاكٌ (retaining), the instruction was given that the wife, if retained after the revocation of talaq pronouncement (raj’ a), should be retained in good grace. Very similarly, by placing the restrictive condition of بِإِحْسَانٍ (in fairness) along with تَسْرِ‌يحٌ (release), the instruction was given that talaq is the dissolution of transaction and gentlemen go through their transactions and contracts in good taste and manners and in the event dissolution of contract becomes necessary, that too, should not be done with anger or altercation, instead, that should be done with charity, kindness and grace, for instance, while saying goodbye to the divorced wife, let her depart with some presents, such as clothing and its likes. This is mentioned in the Qur'an: وَمَتِّعُوهُنَّ عَلَى الْمُوسِعِ قَدَرُ‌هُ وَعَلَى الْمُقْتِرِ‌ قَدَرُ‌هُ So, give them benefit -- the rich man according to his means and the poor one according to his means. (2:236) And, if he, in spite of this, elects not to do so, rather, going a step farther, pronounces the third talaq as well, he now has reached a dead end where he has, quite unreasonably and unnecessarily, done away with all his options, ignoring in that process, graces allowed by the Shari'ah. The punishment he now deserves is that raj’ ah (revocation) will not be possible, and without the wife marrying someone else, the couple's being re-united in marriage will also be not possible. Three divorces given unlawfully are effective The immediate, rational and conventional answer to this question is that the nature of an act in being a crime and a sin does not stop it from taking effect anywhere. Killing unjustly is a crime and a sin. But one who is shot with a bullet, or struck with a sword, gets killed after all. His death does not wait to discover if the bullet was fired legally or illegally. Stealing is a crime and a sin by the consensus of all religions, but that which has been stolen as such leaves the possession of the owner anyway. Similarly, all sins and crimes are hemmed in by the same situation -- that their being sin and crime does not stop them from taking effect. In accordance with the dictates of this principle, the false steps taken., such as, the ignoring of concessions given by the Shari'ah and shooting upto three talaqs unnecessarily, bypassing all choices of talaq one has, no doubt, became a cause of anger for the Holy Prophet ﷺ as stated in the previous report, and for this reason, this act was considered ` undesirable' by the consensus of the ummah, and 'impermissible' by some; but, if inspite of all this, someone has taken such a step, it should bring forth the same effect as would be that of a permissible talaq, that is, three talaqs become effective and not only the choice of raj’ ah (revocation) but also the very choice of fresh nikah stands negated. And the decision of the Holy Prophet is a testimony that he, in spite of his showing anger against giving three divorces, enforced the three talaqs, several incidents relating to which appear in books of ahadith. The ` ulama' who have written regular books on this subject have collected these incidents therein. Recently, "Umdah al-Athath عمدہ الاثاث ', a book written on this subject by Maulana Abu al-Zahid Muhammad Sarfaraz has been published and is sufficient enough. Quoted here are only three ahadith. The report by Mahmud ibn Labid mentioned earlier with reference to al-Nasa'i does record the expression of extreme anger by the Messenger of Allah ﷺ on the giving of three talaqs at one time, so much so, that some sahabah ؓ (Companions) thought that the person deserved being killed. But this is not reported anywhere that he ruled the man's talaq to be a revocable قابل للإلغاء talaq and let the man have his wife back. On the contrary, the second report that follows clearly indicates that the Holy Prophet ﷺ has enforced the three simultaneous talaqs of Sayyidna ` Uwaymir in spite of displeasure. Very similarly, Qadi Abu Bakr ibn al-Arabi has, in relation to the previously quoted hadith of Mahmud ibn Labid, reported that the Holy Prophet ﷺ had enforced his three talaqs similar to the three talaqs of Sayyidna ` Uwaymir. His words are: فلم یردہ النبی ﷺ بل امضاہ کما فی حدیث عویمر الجعلانی فی اللعان حیث امضیٰ طلاقہ الثلاث ولم یردہ So, the Holy Prophet s did not reject it. He enforced it in-stead. As it appears in ` Uwaymir al ` Ajlani's hadith of li` an, the Holy Prophet s had enforced his three talaqs and had not rejected it. The second hadith, that of Sayyidah A'ishah ؓ ، appears in Sahih al-Bukhari in the following words: ان رجلاً طلق امراتہ ثلاثا فتزوجت فطلق فسٔل النبی ﷺ اتحل للاول قال یذوق عسیل تھا کما ذاقھا الاول A man pronounced three talaqs on his wife. When the woman married elsewhere, the other husband also divorced her. The noble Prophet s was asked: 'Is this woman halal (lawful)?' He said: 'Not unless the other husband has had intimacy with her as was done by the first husband.' The words of the the report indicate that the three talaqs were given at the same time. Commentaries on Hadith, such as Fath al-Bari, ` Umdah al-Qari, al-Qastalani, confirm this reading of the report, that is, three talaqs were given at the same time. And the hadith carries the decision thereupon, that the Holy Prophet ﷺ made these three talaqs effective and ruled that, unless there occurs marital intimacy with the second husband, she will not become lawful for the first husband, simply by having been divorced by the former. The third report is that of Sayyidna ` Uwaymir al-` Ajlani ؓ ، who did his li'an) لعان : sworn allegation of adultery) against his wife in the presence of the Holy Prophet ﷺ ، and following that, he said: فلما فرغا قال عویمر کذبت علیھا یا رسول اللہ ﷺ ان امسک تھا فطلقھا ثلاثا قبل ان یامرہ النبی ﷺ So when they were through with li an لعان ، 'Uwaymir ؓ said: 'I shall be telling a lie if I retained her. Then, he gave her three talaqs before the Holy Prophet ﷺ could give his verdict. (Sahib al-Bukhari including Bath al-Bari Sahib Muslim page 289, volume-l) And Abu Dharr ؓ has, on the authority of Sayyidnd Sahl ibn Sa'd ؓ ، reported this incident in the following words: فانقذہ رسول اللہ ﷺ وکان ما صنع عند رسول اللہ ﷺ سنۃ قال سعد حضرت ھٰذا عند عند رسول اللہ ﷺ قبضت السنۃ بعد فی المتلاعنین ان یفرق بینھما ثم لا یجتمعان ابداً Then the Holy Prophet ﷺ enforced it, and that which happened in the presence of the Holy Prophet became established as Sunnah. Sa'd says: 'On this occasion, I was present when this occurred before the Holy Prophet ﷺ . So, following that, the practice became common that they should be separated after which the two should never be united. (Abu Dawud) In this hadith, it 1s proved with full clarity that the Holy Prophet ﷺ has enforced the three simultaneously pronounced talaqs of Sayyidna 'Uwaymir ؓ ruling these as three. And in the previous report of Mahmud ibn Labid as well, as corroborated by the report of Abu Bakr ibn al-` Arabi, it is mentioned that three talaqs were enforced but, even if this was not so, at least this much is not reported anywhere that the Holy Prophet ﷺ ruled it to be one revocable divorce pronouncement, and allowed the husband to retain his wife. To sum up, the three ahadith under reference prove that, despite the fact of three simultaneous talaqs which invited the extreme anger of the Holy Prophet ﷺ ، their consequence, in any case, was that all three talaqs were ruled effective. The action taken by Sayyidna Faruq Al-A` zams Now the above discussion proves this much that holding three talaqs as three was a decision of the Holy Prophet ﷺ himself However, at this point, an incident related to Sayyidna Faruq A` zam رضی اللہ تعالیٰ عنہ ، which has been reported in Sahih Muslim and :several other books of Hadith, raises a problem. The words are: عن ابن عباس ؓ قال : کان الطلاق علی عھد رسول اللہ ﷺ و ابی بکر ؓ و سِنتین من خلافۃ عمر ؓ طلاق الثلث واحدۃ فقال عمر بن الخطاب : ان الناس قد استعجلوا فی امر کانت لھم فیہ اناۃ فلو امضیناہ علیھم۔ فأمڈاہ علیھم، (صحیح مسلم ج 1 ص 477) It has been reported from Sayyidna ibn ` Abbas ؓ that during the times of the Holy Prophet ﷺ and during the first two years of the caliphate of Sayyidna ` Umar ؓ three talaqs were taken as one. So, Sayyidna ` Umar ؓ said: 'People are becoming haste-prone in a matter in which there was a room for deferment for them. Therefore, it would be appropriate if we enforce it on them.' Then he enforced it on them. (Sahih Muslim, page 477, volume 1) This declaration of Sayyidna ` Umar al-Faruq ؓ was made publicly in the presence of Sahabah ؓ (Companions) and Tabi` in تابعین (their successors) --after consultation with Sahabah having expertise in Fiqh. Rejection or hesitation by any one of them has not been reported. Therefore, Imam Ibn ` Abd al-Barr al-Maliki (رح) has reported a consensus on this; the following words appear in al-Zurgani Sharh al-Mu'atta: والجمھور علی وقوع الثلاث بل حکی ابن عبدالبرالاِجماع قأٌیلاً : ان خلافہ لا یلتفت الیہ۔ (زرقانی شرح مؤطا ج 3 ص 167) The overwhelming majority of the scholars of Shari'ah is of the view that three simultaneous talaqs become effective. In fact, Ibn 'Abd al-Barr, while reporting ijma` اجمع (consensus) on this, has said: 'The contrary of this is not worth consideration.' (al-Zurgani: Shark al-Mu'atta: page 167, v.3) قال شافعی (رح) ومالک وابو حنیفہ و احمد و جماھیر العلماء من السلف و الخلف رحمۃ اللہ علیہم اجمعین یقع الثلاث ۔ و قال طاؤس و بعض اھل الظاھر : لا یقع بذلک الا واحدۃ (شرح مسلم ج 1 ص 478) Imam al-Shafi` i, Imam Malik, Imam Abu Hanifah, Imam Ahmad and a large number of earlier and later ` ulama' have said that three talaqs do become effective. And Taw'us and some Zahiri adherents have said what becomes effective with this is one talaq only. (Sharh Muslim, page 475, volume 1) Imam al-Tahawi (رح) says in Sharh Ma` ani al-Athar: فخاطب عمر ؓ بذلک الناس جمیعاً ، وفیھم اصحاب رسول ﷺ ۔ ؓ الذین قد علموا ما تقدم من ذلک فی زمن رسول ﷺ ، فلم ینکر علیہ منھم منکر و لم یدرعنہ دافع۔ (شرح معنی الاثار ج۔2 ص۔29) So, Sayyidna ` Umar ؓ addressed people on this subject publicly, and present among those were Companions of the Holy Prophet ﷺ who knew about the method practiced prior to this during the time of the Holy Prophet ﷺ . But no one from among them challenged it and no one from among them rejected it. In the event cited above, no doubt, the course of action for the Muslim community has been laid down with the consensus of Sahabah صحابہ ؓ and Tabi` in تابعین ، warning that giving three talaqs simultaneously is certainly a cause of the anger of the Holy Prophet ﷺ ، and therefore undesirable, but despite this, anyone who commits this mistake will end up finding that his wife has become unlawful for him, and thereafter, not to become lawful again, unless she goes through the process of marriage and divorce with another man. Intellectually and theoretically, two questions arise here. First: As stated earlier with the support of several hadith reports, it stands proved that the Holy Prophet has himself enforced three talaqs on those who gave three talaqs simultaneously. They were not permitted by him to revoke the divorce pronouncements or enter into a fresh marriage contract. What would then be the meaning of what Sayyidna ` Abdullah ibn ` Abbas ؓ said in relation to this incident, that is, during the times of the Prophet ﷺ ، during the Siddiqi caliphate, and upto to two years during the Faruqi caliphate, three talaqs were taken as one when Sayyidna Faruq al-A` zam ؓ gave the ruling about three talaqs. The second question is that if it is accepted that three talaqs were taken as one during the times of the Holy Prophet ﷺ and the Siddiqi caliphate, how it was that Sayyidna Faruq al-A` zam ؓ changed this decision? And even if, supposedly, a mistake was made by him, how did all the Sahabah ؓ present there accept it? Both these questions have been answered variously by respected fuqaha' and muhaddithin محدثین The most clear and unburdened answer given is the one by Imam Nawawi (رح) which he has reported in Sharh Muslim calling it 'the most authentic (اصح) suggesting that this executive order of Sayyidna Faruq al-A` zam ؓ and the total agreement (اجمع) of the noble Sahabah upon it, should be related to a particular form of three talaqs in which someone might say three times: °You are divorced, you are divorced, you are divorced -- or he might say: 'I divorce you, I divorce you, I divorce you°. This situation, meaning-wise, has two possibilities. (1) The pronouncer may have said these words with the intention of giving three ؓ . (2) The three repeated pronouncements were simply for the sake of emphasis without any intention of giving three talaqs, and it is obvious that the knowledge of intention can come only through the statement of the pronouncer. During the blessed times of the Holy Prophet ﷺ truth and honesty were common and dominant. If, after using such words, someone stated that he did not intend to give three talaqs, instead, the words were said repeatedly just for the sake of emphasis, the Holy Prophet ﷺ would then confirm his sworn statement and rule that this was only one talaq. This is corroborated by the hadith of Sayyidna Rukana ؓ ، which says that he had divorced his wife with the word, 'albattah' البتہ . This word was spoken for three talaqs in common Arab usage but the sense of three was not clear in it. Sayyidna Rukana ؓ ، said: 'I never intended three talaqs with this word. In fact, I wanted to give one talaq'. The Holy Prophet ﷺ put him on oath to which he swore. Then, he ruled it to be only one talaq. This hadith appears in al-Tirmidhi, Abu Dawud, Ibn Majah and al-Darimi with different chains of authorities and in different words. Some of the words also indicate that Sayyidna Rukana ؓ had given three talaqs to his wife. But, Abu Dawud has preferred the position that Sayyidna Rukana ؓ ، in reality, had given talaq by using the word 'albatah' البتہ (i). Since this word was used for three talaqs in common usage, some narrator has interpreted it as three talaqs. In any case, this hadith proves, as generally agreed upon, that the Holy Prophet ruled Sayyidna Rukana's talaq to be one only when he declared on oath that he did not intend to give three talaqs. This too, indeed, proves that he had not pronounced the words of three talaqs explicitly and clearly, otherwise there would have remained no possibility of his having not intended three talaqs and consequently, there would have been no need to question him. The incident clarifies that if the words of talaq had two possibilities about whether the husband had actually intended to give three talaqs or he had used the words of divorce thrice just for the sake of emphasis, and had actually intended to give one talaq only, the Holy Prophet ﷺ ruled only after a solemn declaration under oath, that it was one because those were the days of truth and honesty and the chance that someone would take a false oath was far too remote. This practice continued during the caliphate of Sayyidna Siddiq al-Akbar ؓ and during the first two years of the caliphate of Sayyidna Faruq al-A` zam ؓ . It was during his time that Sayyidna Faruq al-A` zam ؓ realized that the standard of truth and honesty was on the decline now, and according to the prophecy made in hadith will further decline in the future. On the other hand, incidents became numerous wherein those who pronounced the words of divorce three times started declaring that their intention was that of one talaq only. It was then realized that should the practice of ruling (three talaqs as) one talaq following confirmation of the statement of intent by the pronouncer of talaq continue like this into the future, it will not be too far when people start misusing this concession given by the Shari'ah and go about lying that their intention was for one talaq just to take a wife back. All Sababah, finding the intelligence and far-sightedness of Sayyidna Faruq al-A` zam ؓ in the management, of religion (din دین ) as correct, agreed with him. These were blessed people who knew the thinking of the Holy Prophet ﷺ . They came to the conclusion that, should he be present in their particular time, surely he too, would not rule on the basis of the intention hidden in hearts and on the statement given by the person concerned. Therefore, the law he made for this purpose declared that whosoever repeats the word of talaq three times will find his very three talaqs ruled as effective. His contention -- that he had intended to give only one talaq -- would not be considered (in the courts) as valid. In the foregoing incident related to Sayyidna Faruq al-A` zam ؓ ، the words of the report themselves confirm the subject under discussion. He said: اِن النسان قد استعجلوا فی امر کانت لھم فیہ اناۃ فلو امضینا علیھم People are becoming haste-prone in a matter in which there was a room for deferment for them. Therefore, it would be appropriate if we enforce it on them. This explanation of the executive order of Sayyidna Faruq al-A` zam ؓ ، and the consensus of the noble Shari` ah on it, is confirmed by Hadith reports as well. It automatically supplies answers to the two questions referred to above. The problem is resolved as we know that a particular talaq (divorce) given by the word 'three', or the repetition of the word talaq with the intention of 'three', were ruled as three after all -- even during the time of the Holy Prophet ﷺ . The ruling of 'one' concerns a talaq in which thalath or 'three' is not mentioned clearly or in which the act of giving three talaqs is not admitted and instead, it is claimed that the count of three was for emphasis only. Then the other question -- when the Holy Prophet ﷺ had already ruled three divorce pronouncements to be one, why did Sayyidna ` Umar ؓ act otherwise and how did the noble Companion ؓ agree with it? -- is also eliminated because, in this particular situation, Sayyidna ` Umar ؓ has blocked the indiscriminate use of the leave given by the Holy Prophets ﷺ . God forbid, there is no trace of doubt here about any decision of the Holy Prophet ﷺ having been reversed. Now that all doubts have been removed, let Allah be praised. The purpose here does not warrant going into comprehensive and exhaustive details on the subject of three talaqs. That appears in extensive details in Hadith commentaries and several ` ulama have explained it in detailed treatises. Here, this much is sufficient to understand the subject. And Allah is our supporter and helper.

Commentary: In the previous two verses, it will be recalled, important rules of the law of talaq (divorce) were given. Also delineated there was the just and moderate system of divorce in Islam. Now some other relevant injunctions and rulings have been mentioned in the verses under discussion (231 - 232). Special instructions for revocation of divorce or annulment of marriage The first rule given in the first verse is: When women divorced revocably reach near the completion of their ` iddah (waiting period), the husband has two choices; either he may revoke his divorce and let her continue to be married to him or he may not revoke his divorce, discontinue the nikah relationship and release her totally. But along with both these choices, the noble Qur'an places a restriction which requires that a wife, if retained, must be retained in accordance with a manner well-recognized and should it come to a parting of ways, even then, the parting should be in accordance with the rule as approved by the Shari'ah. Here, the word (in fairness), which appears separately at both the places, suggests that there are some conditions and rules governing the choice of retaining, similarly as there are, in the choice of releasing. When choice is made from either of the two options, it must be done in accordance with the method prescribed by the Shari` ah and not under the heat of spot anger or sentiments. Some of these rules of Islamic law appear in the Qur'an itself. Rest of the details have been given by the Holy Prophet ﷺ For instance, should the thought of ugly consequences of separation after the incident of divorce produce a change of heart in favour of revoking it and keeping the marriage intact, then the Shari'ah has a method. It stipulates that the purpose in doing so should be to wash out past anger and displeasure and resolve to live anew in good family relationship with intention to give her the due rights. The purpose should not be to hold the woman in captivity or to harass and torture her. Therefore, the following words were said in the verse under reference: وَلَا تُمْسِكُوهُنَّ ضِرَ‌ارً‌ا لِّتَعْتَدُوا ، that is, 'do not retain them with intent to harm them unjustly'. The other method of rajah (revocation) has been mentioned in Surah Al-Talaq: وَأَشْهِدُوا ذَوَيْ عَدْلٍ مِّنكُمْ وَأَقِيمُوا الشَّهَادَةَ لِلَّـهِ And let two trustworthy persons from amongst you be witnesses; then, let witness be given if needed, precisely for the sake of Allah, (without fear or favour). (65:2) It means that anyone intending to take his wife back by raj'a راجع (revocation) should invite two trustworthy Muslims to act as witnesses. Out of the many advantages it has, one is the possible use of these witnesses in case there is a legal claim against raj’ a راجع filed by the woman. Moreover, if the rule of having witnesses on raj’ a راجع is not observed there is a possibility that someone, out of selfishness or Satanic instigation, comes up with a claim, even after the ` iddah has expired, that he had already done his raj’ a راجع (revocation) before the expiry of ` iddah (waiting period). In Order to eradicate these evils, the Holy Qur'an has directed that the act of revocation should have two trustworthy witnesses. Looking at the other side of the matter, it is also possible that hearts remain heavy and anger does not go away even after the long span of ` iddah which has given them sufficient time for thinking. So, a termination of relationship may seem to be the choice, in which case the danger of hostile emotions flaring up is acute, which again may become contagious -- starting from two persons, it could envelope two families and could become, for both, a danger for both this world and the Hereafter. To offset this danger, it was briefly said: أَوْ سَرِّ‌حُوهُنَّ بِمَعْرُ‌وفٍ ‘Or release them in fairness,' that is, if you have to leave or free a wife and sever your relationship with her, that too, must be done in accordance with the recognised method. Some details of this method are given in the noble Qur'an itself; rest of the details stand proved through what the Holy Prophet ﷺ said and did. For instance, in the preceding verse, it was said: وَلَا يَحِلُّ لَكُمْ أَن تَأْخُذُوا مِمَّا آتَيْتُمُوهُنَّ شَيْئًا that is, do not take back (without a valid ground admitted by the Islamic Law) that which you have already given to the woman as mahr (dower), in return for the divorce, or go about demanding some other compensation. Then, in the following verse, it was said: وَلِلْمُطَلَّقَاتِ مَتَاعٌ بِالْمَعْرُ‌وفِ ۖ حَقًّا عَلَى الْمُتَّقِينَ ﴿241﴾, that is, 'for all divorced women, there is some benefit as recognized rightly due on those who fear Allah'. The explanation of: مَتَاعٌ mata` or compensatory benefit to be given to a divorced wife is that she should be given some present or cash or a set of clothing at the least. Thus the fulfillment of some rights of the divorced wife has been made mandatory for the divorcing husband while the fulfillment of some others has been assigned to him in the form of kind treatment and good conduct. This is a chaste lesson in high morals and social manners which points to the fact that, just as the marriage was a transaction and mutual contract, the divorce is the termination of a transaction. There is no reason why the termination of this transaction should be a hotbed of enmity and hostility. The final annulment of the transaction should also be done decently and compassionately, that is, following talaq, the divorced wife should be given some benefits. The details of this 'benefit° are that he should allow her to stay in the family house during ` iddah, pay for her total sustenance, pay the full amount of mahr (dower) if still unpaid while intercourse has already occurred; and in case the incident of divorce has occurred before intercourse, then half of the dower should be paid in good cheer. All these are obligatory rights which have to be given to a divorced woman necessarily; however, it is not only desirable but excellent as well, if the divorced wife, on her parting day, goes with some cash or at the least, with a set of clothing as parting gift. Subhan Allah سبحان اللہ ، what a decent teaching it is -- all that customarily causes quarrels and fights and takes families to ruin has been so wisely transformed into everlasting goodwill and peace. After all these injunctions, it was said: وَمَن يَفْعَلْ ذَٰلِكَ فَقَدْ ظَلَمَ نَفْسَهُ that is, anyone who acts against these divine commands will harm none but himself. It is obvious that Hereafter (the life to come) will be the place where every injustice and cruelty will be avenged in the sight of Allah and the oppressor is not going to move one step forward unless the oppressed is avenged. If we ponder with discernment and hindsight, we shall discover that, if some oppressor gets away with his cruelty against the oppressed, the evil consequences of this act do disgrace him, more than often, right here in this world. He may or may not comprehend it, but fairly often, he is overtaken by misfortunes which make him taste at least some retribution of his oppression during his life of the mortal world. This is what Shaykh Sa'di, mercy be on him, said in a Persian couplet: پیداشت ستمگر کہ جفا برما کرد برگردنِ ---- بماند و برما بگزشت The oppressor presumed that he had hit me. But his weapon boomeranged back into his neck while it sailed past me! The noble Qur'an has an approach which is wise, and a style that is special, when it does not describe law in the manner penal laws of the world are described. It rather explains its injunctions in a sympathetic and persuasive manner, showing its wisdom and describing the series of losses man suffers while acting against it, which, if duly understood, will render one incapable of embarking on such crimes. So, behind every law there comes the reminder that man must fear Allah and that man should never forget his accountability in the Hereafter. Do not make a marriage and divorce a plaything The second rule presented in this verse is that the word of Allah should not be taken lightly as some amusement: وَلَا تَتَّخِذُوا آيَاتِ اللَّـهِ هُزُوًا ‘And do not take the verses of Allah in jest.' According to one explanation of the expression -- playing games with the verses of Allah or making a mockery of it -- means acting against Divine ordinances in matters of marriage and divorce. The second explanation reported from Sayyidna Abu al-Darda' ؓ is that some people during pre-Islam Arabia would give divorce or free a slave, then they would go back on their word and start saying that this was all in fun; talaq (divorce) or ` itaq (to free a slave) was not intended. Thereupon, this verse was revealed which gave the ruling that anyone going through divorce and marriage, even if it be playfully or jokingly, would find these enforced and the plea of 'having no intention' will not be accepted as valid. The Holy Prophet ﷺ has said that there are three things in which acting seriously, or in jest, are both equal: One -- talaq (divorce); two - ` itaq (to free a slave); three -- nikah (marriage) (reported by Ibn Marduwayh from Ibn al-'Abbas and Ibn a1-Mundhir from ` Ubadah ibn al-Samit). This hadith has been reported from Sayyidna Abu Hurayrah ؓ in the following words: ثلاث جدھن جَد و ھزلھن جَد : النکاح و الطلاق والرجعۃ It means that there are three things which take effect equally whether done seriously or jokingly. These are: The marriage, the divorce and the revocation of divorce. (Mazhari) The Islamic law governing these three is: Should a man and a woman go through the process of offer and acceptance before witnesses, even if it be without any intention or just in jest, the marriage stands solemnized anyway. Similarly, if divorce is given in clear words, without any intention, or just in jest, divorce takes effect; or revocation, if done, becomes valid too. Similarly again, if a slave is playfully declared to be free, the slave becomes free. Jest or fun are not taken as valid excuses. After stating this injunction, the noble Qur'an then educates man, in its unique style, how he should obey Allah Almighty and fear the consequences of the life to come (akhirah). It was said: وَاذْكُرُ‌وا نِعْمَتَ اللَّـهِ عَلَيْكُمْ وَمَا أَنزَلَ عَلَيْكُم مِّنَ الْكِتَابِ وَالْحِكْمَةِ يَعِظُكُم بِهِ ۚ وَاتَّقُوا اللَّـهَ وَاعْلَمُوا أَنَّ اللَّـهَ بِكُلِّ شَيْءٍ عَلِيمٌ ﴿231﴾ That is, And remember the grace of Allah on you and what He has revealed to you of the Book and the wisdom giving you good counsel thereby. And fear Allah, and be sure that Allah is all-knowing in respect of everything' It means: He knows the secrets hidden in your hearts, your intentions and your purposes. Therefore, when you have to release your wife from your marriage bond by giving divorce, you should do so with the intention of avoiding mutual disputes, loss of mutual rights and doing injustice, and not with the intention of releasing anger on your wife or disgracing or hurting her. The basic rules of giving a divorce The third rule identified in this verse is: Should a man be left with no other option but divorce, then the basic and true method in the view of Shari'ah and Sunnah is that he should give one revocable divorce in clear and unambiguous words so that the choice of taking the wife back remains open. Words that cause sudden severance of marriage relationship should not be spoken. This is known as al-talaq al-ba` in الطلاق الباین ، the divorce that cannot be revoked. In addition to this, reaching three talaqs must be avoided following which even fresh marriage between the couple becomes haram (unlawful). This point is indicated by the use of the universal and unqualified words in طَلَّقْتُمُ النِّسَاءَ (when you have divorced women), because the injunction contained in this verse covers only one or two revocable talaqs. It does not concern the irrevocable three talaqs; but the Holy Qur'an, by not mentioning any related qualification, has suggested that the real talaq (divorce) is none other than the revocable talaq as approved by the Shari'ah. Other forms are not devoid of repugnance or undesirability.

Rules of the remarriage of the divorced women The second verse stops the unjust treatment meted out to divorced women, that is, they are discouraged to marry again. In some cases the first husband generally opposes the idea of his divorced wife marrying someone else and considers this to be a violation of his honour. In some families, even guardians of the divorced woman stop her from marrying a second time -- some of them often do that out of greed hoping to let her marry only when there is some financial gain for them. There are times when the divorced woman agrees to remarry her former husband but the guardians and relatives develop a sort of hostility towards him after the incident of divorce. As such, they oppose their remarriage even after both of them agree to it. Stopping free women, without any valid reason admitted by Islamic law, from marrying at their choice, is a grave injustice whether it comes from the former husband or from the guardians of the woman. This injustice has been prevented through this verse. This verse was revealed in the background of an incident of this nature. It appears in Sahih al-Bukhari that Sayyidna Ma'qil ibn Yasar رضی اللہ تعالیٰ عنہ had given his sister in marriage to someone. He divorced her and the period of ` iddah expired as well. Following that, this man was sorry for what he did and wished to remarry her. His wife, that is, the sister of Ma'qil ibn Yasar ؓ also agreed to it. When this man talked to Ma'qil about it, he said, of course, in anger against the man's act of divorce: 'I did you an honour. I gave you the hand of my sister and you did this to me. You divorced her. Now you have come again to me so that I can let you marry her once again. By Allah, she will not go back in your nikah now.' There was another incident concerning a cousin of Sayyidna Jabir ibn ` Abdullah ؓ similar to the one above. Thereupon, this verse was revealed in which the approach of Ma'qil and Jabir ؓ was declared to be undesirable and impermissible. The noble Sahabah (Companions) were true lovers of Allah Almighty and His Messenger g . Such was the beneficence of the verse that Ma'qil ibn Yasar's anger cooled down as he heard it. He himself went to his former brother-in-law and gave his sister in his marriage once again and then gave kaffarah کَفَّارہ (expiation) for his oath. Similarly, Jabir also carried out the instruction. Keeping in view the form of address used here, this verse includes husbands who have given a divorce as well as the guardians of the women. Both have been commanded: فَلَا تَعْضُلُوهُنَّ أَن يَنكِحْنَ أَزْوَاجَهُنَّ إِذَا تَرَ‌اضَوْا بَيْنَهُم بِالْمَعْرُ‌وفِ is, 'do not prevent them from marrying their husbands when they mutually agree with fairness.' They may even be their previous husbands who had divorced them or they may be others. But a condition has been imposed here which is: بِالْمَعْرُ‌وفِ تَرَ‌اضَوْا بَيْنَهُم ، that is, 'when they mutually agree with fairness.' It means: When a man and woman agree to marry in accordance with the rules set by the Shari'ah, then, do not stop them from getting married. Here it was hinted that the absence of an agreement between the two, or compulsion from any quarter, is a valid reason for people around to stop them. Or, it may be that there is mutual agreement of the couple but it is not in accordance with the method prescribed by the Shari'ah. For instance, the couple may agree to live together without marrying; or may, in be-tween them, enter into a new nikah illegitimately after three talaqs. Still more, should there be an intention to marry another husband during the period of ` iddah, every Muslim, especially those closely related to the man and woman concerned, have a right to stop them from doing so. In fact, it is wajib or obligatory to stop them within the limits of one's ability. Similarly, if a girl wishes to marry outside her kaf (کفو : equal, like) without the permission of her guardians, or wishes to enter into nikah (marriage) on a dower which is less than her mahr al-mithl (a dower approximately similar to the one customary in her family) then this affects the family. Since she has no right to do this, her consent is also not in accordance with the method prescribed by the SharT'ah. In this situation, the guardians of the girl have a right to stop her from this marriage. However, the words :'When they mutually agree' do point out that a sane and pubert girl cannot be given in marriage without her consent or permission. Towards the end of verse 232 there are three sentences appearing one after the other. The first one is. يُوعَظُ بِهِ مَن كَانَ مِنكُمْ يُؤْمِنُ بِاللَّـهِ وَالْيَوْمِ الْآخِرِ‌: It means: 'These injunctions are for those who believe in Allah and the Last Day.' Here it was hinted that the necessary outcome of believing in Allah and the Last Day, (the Day of Judgment) is that man should observe, practice and be bound by these Divine injunctions in toto. Those who fall short in following these injunctions should realize that their ` Iman ایمان or belief is in disarray. In the second sentence, it was said: ذَٰلِكُمْ أَزْكَىٰ لَكُمْ وَأَطْهَرُ‌, that is, 'adherence to these injunctions is for you a modality of purity and cleanliness.' It has been suggested here that the result of acting contrary to these injunctions is defilement with the pollution of sin, and involvement in discord and strife; for instance, if sane, pubert and young girls were categorically prevented from marriage, it would, on one hand, be an act of cruelty to them and a denial of their rights and on the other, this would put their modesty and chastity in danger. Thirdly, if God forbid, they get involved in sin, the resulting curse will also fall on those who prevented them from marrying. And it is quite possible that, much before the curse of the life to come (the akhirah), the misfortune of these helpless women may drive men to the outside limits of wars and murders, as is not uncommon even now. If that happens, much before the curse of the akhirah, their deeds will become a curse for them right here in this world. And if they were not, categorically at least, prevented from marriage, but were forced to enter into marriage with a person not of their choice and liking, that too will result in perpetual hostility, discord and strife, or talaq (divorce) and khul' خلع Divorce at the instance of wife against compensation). Its unpleasant effects are obvious. It was, therefore, said that in not preventing them from marrying the husbands of their choice there is for you easy access to purity and cleanliness. In the third sentence it was said: وَاللَّـهُ يَعْلَمُ وَأَنتُمْ لَا تَعْلَمُونَ , that is, 'and Allah knows (that which is good for you) and you do not know'. The purpose of this statement is that people who prevent divorced women from marrying see some benefits coming to them according to their conjecture, for instance, the notion of retaining honour and prestige or the hope of extracting some money on the pretext of their marriage. In order to remove this Satanic deception and unjust expediency, it was said: Allah Almighty knows very well what is suitable or beneficial for you -- so, when injunctions are given, these considerations are already taken care of. Since you do not know the reality of things and the end of affairs, you go ahead with your imperfect thoughts and faulty opinions, taking such things to be suitable or beneficial at times, while in them there is nothing but ruin and destruction for you. The assumed honour and prestige that you uphold will be rolling in dust if divorced women were to go out of control. And when you think of illegitimate monetary gains, it is likely that these may get you involved in intrigues and conflicts which may become dangerous not only for your money but also for your life. The Qur'aniic strategy about the enforcement of a law At this point here, the Holy Qur'an presents a law to the effect that preventing divorced women from marrying as they choose is prohibited. Now, in order that acting in accordance with this law becomes easy, and that a climate of acceptance is generated in the public mind, these three sentences have followed after the initial declaration of the law. In the first sentence man is induced to be ready for action in accordance with this law by warning him against the accountability of the Day of Judgment and the subsequent punishment of crimes. In the second sentence, man is persuaded to abide by the law by telling him about evils caused by acting against it and many a harm that such contravention may bring to humanity. In the third sentence it was said that your own betterment lies in abiding by the law given by Allah Almighty. If, in acting against it, you have some expedient gain in mind, that then, is an outcome of your short-sightedness and insensitivity to consequences. This manner and style of the Holy Qur'an does not end here; in fact, it runs throughout all injunctions. When a law is identified, along with it comes the warning that Allah is Almighty and that there is accountability and punishment in the Hereafter. With the beginning and the end of each law there are affixes and suffixes like اتَّقُوا اللَّـهَ (Fearllah) and إِنَّ اللَّـهَ خَبِيرٌ‌ بِمَا تَعْمَلُونَ (Allah is All-Aware of what you do) and بِمَا تَعْمَلُونَ بَصِي (Allah is watchful of what you do). The Qur'an is. For the whole world, and for the generations to come till the Day of Doom (Qiyamah), a complete code of life, and a law covering all aspects of living. Of course, it does describe restrictive ordinances and legal punishments, but the manner in which these are handled is unique, not to be found in the law books of the whole world. The diction it has is more sympathetic than authoritarian. In the description of each law, there is an objective approach that no man should, by disobeying it, become deserving of punishment. This is not something like the governments of the contemporary world which make a law, publish it and then anyone who acts against it is left out to go through his punishment. Moreover, a rather long-term benefit that comes out of this method of Qur'an and its special style, is that man, once he has sensed it, does not start abiding by the law simply because he knows that acting against it would bring some sort of punishment in the mortal world; much contrary to this, he starts worrying about the displeasure of Allah Almighty and the punishment that would come in the Hereafter (akhirah) and this very concern of his renders his outside and inside, his open and his secret, all even -- one and indivisible. He cannot act against the law even at a place where there are no chances at all of his being policed, openly or secretly, because he believes that Allah Almighty, great is His Majesty, is present everywhere, watching and knowing everything down to the minutest particle. This is the reason why every Muslim abided by the law considering it to be an ideal of his life as a result of the principles of clean social living taught by the Qur'an. Aside from identifying limits and restrictions of law, the distinction of a Qur'anic system of government is that by using the tools of persuasion and warning, it raises the standards of human morals and character to heights where legal limits and restrictions become second nature to him, before which he makes his personal desires and preferences take the back seat. A hard look into the history and governments of nations and the roster of crimes and punishments they offer would show that law alone has never reformed any nation or individual. The police and the army alone have never succeeded in rooting crimes out unless the fear of Allah Almighty and the realization of His supreme greatness is impinged on human hearts. That which helps prevent crimes is, in reality, the fear of Allah and the fear of accountability on the Day of Judgment. If this is not there, nobody can keep anybody away from crimes.

The injunctions of suckling the children by the mothers This verse contains injunctions relating to rada` ah (رضاعۃ) or the suckling of children. It will be recalled that in verses appearing earlier and later than this, the injunctions of talaq (divorce) have been taken up. In between, there appear injunctions relating to the suckling of children, because it generally happens that issues concerning the feeding and upbringing of children are disputed following a divorce. Since these disputations lead to violence, this verse offers moderate injunctions which can be carried out easily and appropriately by man and woman both. For the two situations of suckling and weaning, whether these show up during the period of marriage, or after divorce, a system was suggested which helps stop mutual bickering, or injustice to any of the parties. For instance, it was said in the first sentence of the verse: وَالْوَالِدَاتُ يُرْ‌ضِعْنَ أَوْلَادَهُنَّ حَوْلَيْنِ كَامِلَيْنِ ۖ لِمَنْ أَرَ‌ادَ أَن يُتِمَّ الرَّ‌ضَاعَةَ that is, 'And mothers suckle their children for full two years' -- unless there be some strong compelling reason which leads to weaning before that time. Some rules concerning rada` ah or suckling of children come out from this verse; these are: Suckling of children is an obligation of the mother Naturally suckling is an obligation of the mother. If she does not feed without a valid reason or because of some hostility or displeasure, she will be a sinner. And she cannot accept any payment for suckling from her husband, as long as she is married to him because that is her own duty. The total period of suckling The second rule is about the total period of suckling which is two years. Unless there be some special reason, it is the right of the child that this period be completed. From this we also know that the total time given for suckling is full two years after which suckling should not be done. However, on the basis of some verses of the Qur'an and reports from ahadith, Imam Abu Hanifah (رح) ruled that if it was carried on over a period of 30 months or two and a half years, all the legal effects of suckling shall be applicable and if this was done because of the weakness of the child, a legitimate excuse, it would then be no sin either. But breast-feeding a child after completing two and a half years is unanimously haram (forbidden). In the second sentence of this verse, it was said: وَعَلَى الْمَوْلُودِ لَهُ رِ‌زْقُهُنَّ وَكِسْوَتُهُنَّ بِالْمَعْرُ‌وفِ ۚ لَا تُكَلَّفُ نَفْسٌ إِلَّا وُسْعَهَا And on him, to whom the child is born, falls the provision of food and clothing for them (the mothers) with fairness. No-body is obligated beyond his capacity. The first point that must be noted here is that the Qur'an uses the word وَالْوَالِدَاتُ , for mothers but while referring to the father, it opts for الْمَوْلُودِ لَهُ : to whom the child is born' leaving out the smaller word although the said word, 'walid' والد (father) does appear elsewhere in the Qur'an, for instance: لَّا يَجْزِي وَالِدٌ عَن وَلَدِهِ ' (Fear the Day) when no father shall be of avail to his child' (31:33). But the use of al-mawludi lahu الْمَوْلُودِ لَهُ in place of walid والد in this setting.has a secret behind it. The whole of Qur'an has a unique method and style so it does not describe any law in the way governments of the mortal world do. It rather presents it in a sympathetic and affectionate manner, a manner in which it could become easy for human beings to accept it and act accordingly. Since the father has been obligated to pay for the expenses of the child, even though the child belongs to the father and the mother both, it was possible that the father could take this injunction to be somewhat burdensome, therefore, the expression al-mawludi lahu (°tc to whom the child is born' ) was preferred over walid ('father' ). The meaning of this expression -- 'to whom the child is born’ -- suggests that, no doubt both father and mother share in the birth of the child, but the child is, however, ascribed to the father. The lineage comes from the father. Now that the child is his, the responsibility of the child's expenses should not be heavy on him. Responsibilities of mothers and fathers The third rule of Islamic law given in this verse is: While suckling the child is certainly the responsibility of the mother but the sustenance of the mother, inclusive of all necessities of life, is the responsibility of the father and this responsibility continues as far as the marriage or the post-divorce waiting period of wife ('iddah) continues. When divorce and ` iddah have matured, the responsibility of the husband towards the expenses of his wife will end, but the father will con tinue to be obligated to pay for the suckling of the child. (Mazhari) The standard of wife's liabilities When the husband and wife are both affluent, matching expenses will be obligatory. When both are poor, correspondingly matching expenses will be obligatory. On this much there is total agreement. However, the Muslim jurists differ if both have a different financial status. Following al-Khassaf, the author of Hidayah has ruled that should the woman be poor and the man rich, her expenses will be medial, that is, higher than those of the poor and lower than those of the rich. According to al-Karkhi, the status of the husband will be the criterion. In Fath al-Qadir, fatwa has been reported on this position from many jurists. (Fath al-Qadir, pp 422, v.3) In the verse under discussion, after stating injunctions, the Qur'an r D says: لَا تُضَارَّ‌ وَالِدَةٌ بِوَلَدِهَا وَلَا مَوْلُودٌ لَّهُ بِوَلَدِهِ that is, 'no mother shall be made to suffer on account of her child, nor a man to whom the child is born, on account of his child.' It means that the father and mother of the child should not stonewall each other. For instance, the mother may be unable to suckle the child due to some excuse but the father may start forcing her to do so, hoping that she being the mother of the child would finally melt down and suckle the child. Or, take the case of a mother who has no excuse, yet she refuses to suckle the child hoping that the poor husband, being the father of the child would, in one way or the other, find the means to have the child suckled elsewhere. Forcing or not forcing a mother for suckling The fifth rule deduced from (No mother shall be made to suffer on account of her child) appearing above is that it is not permissible for the father to compel the mother to suckle the child if she refuses to do so under some excuse, or need. And if the child refuses to be suckled by another woman, or also refuses to feed on any milk other than that of his or her mother, the mother will then be compelled to feed the child. This rule we know from لَا تُضَارَّ‌ وَالِدَةٌ بِوَلَدِهَا ; (nor a man to whom the child is born, on account of his child). Wages of suckling for a divorced woman The sixth rule that we learn about is: If the mother demands wages to suckle, she has no right to do that as long as she is married to her husband or is within the post-divorce waiting period. Here her maintenance, which is the responsibility of the child's father, is enough in itself. Asking for additional wages amounts to harming the father. The situation changes if the post-divorce waiting period has expired and the responsibility of maintenance is all over. Now, if this divorced woman demands from the father wages to suckle her child, the father will have to pay it -- since not doing so amounts to a loss to the mother. However, the condition is that she should ask for the same amount of wages as is taken by some other woman. If she asks for more, the father will have the right to engage a wet-nurse to suckle the child in her place. The responsibilities of suckling an orphan Later in the subject verse, it is said: وَعَلَى الْوَارِ‌ثِ مِثْلُ ذَٰلِكَ. It means: If the father is not alive, the responsibility for arranging to have the child suckled falls on the person who is the legal heir (warith) of the child and a mahram محرم (person with whom marriage is prohibited for ever); that is, those who are entitled to be inheritors of the child. if he dies, would be the ones responsible for his sustenance in the absence of the father. If, there be more than one heir like him, everyone will share that responsibility in proportion to their share in the inheritance. Imam Abu Hanifah (رح) explained that assigning the responsibility of having the orphaned child suckled to the heirs also tells us that the sustenance of a minor child will continue to be, even after weaning, a charge of the heirs since there is nothing special about milk, the purpose is to have the expenses of the child covered. For instance, if the mother of the orphaned child and his grandfather are both alive, these two then, are his mahram محرم ، and heirs as well. Therefore, the maintenance of the child shall be borne by both of them in proportion to their share in the inheritance, that is, the mother will bear one-third and the grandfather, two-thirds. Here from we also know that the right of the orphaned grandson on his grandfather is much stronger than the rights of his own adult sons, since he is not responsible for the sustenance of his adult child, while the sustenance of the orphaned grandson is obligatory on him. However, a grandson has not been given a share in inheritance in the presence of sons, because it is against the principle of inheritance and justice, as giving a share to the farther in presence of the nearer children is not rational in itself and is certainly, against the hadith لا ولی رجل ذکر (for the nearest male) in Sahih al-Bukhari. Nevertheless, the grandfather does have the right to make some provision in his will for the orphaned grandson, if he feels there is need to do that. This could even turn out to be higher than the share of sons. Thus the need of the orphaned grandson was taken care of, while at the same time, the principle of inheritance -- that in the presence of the nearer, the farther should not receive -- remained intact. The injunctions of weaning After that, it is said in the subject verse: فَإِنْ أَرَ‌ادَا فِصَالًا عَن تَرَ‌اضٍ مِّنْهُمَا وَتَشَاوُرٍ‌ فَلَا جُنَاحَ عَلَيْهِمَا that is, if the mother and father of the child, after mutual consultation and agreement, decide that they have to wean the child earlier than two years, because of the inability of the mother or some sickness of the child, then there is no sin involved here as well. The condition of 'mutual consultation and agreement' was placed for the reason that in weaning the child, his or her welfare should be the paramount concern. Making the child a target-board of mutual differences and quarrels is undesirable. Injunctions of suckling by a nurse In the end, it is said: وَإِنْ أَرَ‌دتُّمْ أَن تَسْتَرْ‌ضِعُوا أَوْلَادَكُمْ فَلَا جُنَاحَ عَلَيْكُمْ إِذَا سَلَّمْتُم مَّا آتَيْتُم بِالْمَعْرُ‌وفِ It means: If you wish, for some expedient reason, to have your children suckled by a wet-nurse in place of the mother, even then there is no sin in doing so. However, the condition is that the wages settled with the wet-nurse be paid in full. If the wages were not paid as settled, the sin thereof will rest with the parents. From this we learn that should a father realize that the feed of the mother, who is willing to suckle, is not good for the child, he has the right to stop the mother from suckling and get a wet-nurse to do that. From this we also learn that the wages or salary of the woman employed for suckling should be negotiated and settled clearly so that there is no dispute later on; and then let the settled wages be handed over to her at the appointed time and let there be no postponement or evasion. After stating all these injunctions relating to rada` ah (suckling) رضاعہ ، the Qur'an once again returns to its special manner and style whereby it brings into focus the fear of Allah Almighty and the concept of His all-encompassing Knowledge so that acting in accordance with law becomes easy, and one remains bound by it under all conditions, seen or unseen. It is said: وَاتَّقُوا اللَّـهَ وَاعْلَمُوا أَنَّ اللَّـهَ بِمَا تَعْمَلُونَ بَصِي that is, 'keep fearing Allah and know for sure that Allah Almighty is fully watching over your open and secret, and your seen and unseen, and He is aware of all intents and purposes hidden in your hearts.' Any party that acts against these injunctions of suckling and weaning or takes a decision in this connection disregarding the welfare of the child, shall deserve punishment.

Some injunctions relating to 'Iddah 1. For one whose husband dies, it is not correct to wear perfume or make-up or use kohl52 or hair oil, beauty-treat unnecessarily, apply henna and dress gaudily. It is also not correct to talk about the second marriage in clear and unambiguous words as appears in the succeeding verse. In addition to this it is also incorrect to stay overnight in homes other than one's own. The text's "yatarabbasna bi anfusihinna" يَتَرَ‌بَّصْنَ بِأَنفُسِهِنَّ translated as "keep themselves waiting" hint towards these avoidances. And this is also the injunction for the woman who has received an irrevocable divorce, that is, in which revocation is not possible. However, it is not right for her to go out of the house even during the daytime unless there is an extreme compulsion. 2. Another rule most people are not aware of is: If the husband dies on the night of the new moon, these months will be completed in accordance with the lunar calendar. Their being of 29 or 30 days makes no difference. But, if he died after the night of the new moon, all these months will be completed as of 30 days each. In all, 130 days will be completed. And when this period expires, and the same time when the death occurred comes, ` iddah will be over. And now a word concerning what was said about women -- "There is no sin on you in what they do for themselves as recognized."This teaches us that it becomes obligatory on others to stop one who acts against the Shari'ah, of course, if they have the ability or power to do so. Otherwise, these people too become sinners. And the expression, bi l'ma` ruf بِالْمَعْرُ‌وفِ ("with fairness' or 'as recognized' ) means that the marriage solemnized should be correct, and permissible according to the Shari'ah; all conditions of its being lawful should be observed. 52. Surma: collorium, claimed to be an inorganic lead compound -- 'Galena', which has been erroneously translated as 'Antimony' by Western writers. Since 'Antimony' is a known ingredient of modern sophisticated explosives, this age-old eye-cosmetic has gone out of fashion and favour.

Some injunctions relating to 'Iddah 1. For one whose husband dies, it is not correct to wear perfume or make-up or use kohl52 or hair oil, beauty-treat unnecessarily, apply henna and dress gaudily. It is also not correct to talk about the second marriage in clear and unambiguous words as appears in the succeeding verse. In addition to this it is also incorrect to stay overnight in homes other than one's own. The text's "yatarabbasna bi anfusihinna" يَتَرَ‌بَّصْنَ بِأَنفُسِهِنَّ translated as "keep themselves waiting" hint towards these avoidances. And this is also the injunction for the woman who has received an irrevocable divorce, that is, in which revocation is not possible. However, it is not right for her to go out of the house even during the daytime unless there is an extreme compulsion. 2. Another rule most people are not aware of is: If the husband dies on the night of the new moon, these months will be completed in accordance with the lunar calendar. Their being of 29 or 30 days makes no difference. But, if he died after the night of the new moon, all these months will be completed as of 30 days each. In all, 130 days will be completed. And when this period expires, and the same time when the death occurred comes, ` iddah will be over. And now a word concerning what was said about women -- "There is no sin on you in what they do for themselves as recognized."This teaches us that it becomes obligatory on others to stop one who acts against the Shari'ah, of course, if they have the ability or power to do so. Otherwise, these people too become sinners. And the expression, bi l'ma` ruf بِالْمَعْرُ‌وفِ ("with fairness' or 'as recognized' ) means that the marriage solemnized should be correct, and permissible according to the Shari'ah; all conditions of its being lawful should be observed. 52. Surma: collorium, claimed to be an inorganic lead compound -- 'Galena', which has been erroneously translated as 'Antimony' by Western writers. Since 'Antimony' is a known ingredient of modern sophisticated explosives, this age-old eye-cosmetic has gone out of fashion and favour.

Commentary Keeping dower and consummation in view, divorce can be of four situations. The injunction concerning the first two of these has been stated in these verses. (1) Dower is not fixed and consummation has not taken place. (2) Dower is fixed but consummation has not taken place. (3) Dower is fixed and consummation has taken place. Here the fixed dower will have to be paid in full. This injunction appears elsewhere in the Holy Qur'an. (4) Dower has not been pre-fixed but divorce was given after consummation. Here full mahr al-mithl مھر المثل (a dower as in the divorcees' family) will have to be paid. It means the amount of the dower will be the same as customarily given in the immediate family circle of the woman. This too has been taken up in yet another verse of the Holy Qur'an. The injunction related to the first two situations has been stated in the verses appearing here. Out of the two, the injunction for the first situation is: No dower is due but it is obligatory for the husband to give something on his own to the woman -- the least being a set of clothes. In fact, the Holy Qur'an has not fixed any amount for this gift. However, it does indicate that the affluent should give in accordance with their capacity, which carries an element of persuasion for the man of means who should not behave tight-fisted in this act of grace. Sayyidna Hasan ؓ ، in a situation like this, gave a gift of twenty thousand dirhams to the divorced woman, and Qadi Shurayh, that of five hundred dirhams; and Sayyidna Ibn ` Abbas ؓ has said that the lowest degree here is to give one set of clothes. (Qurtubi)

In the second situation, when the woman's dower has been fixed before marriage and divorce occurs before actual consummation, the injunction says that the man shall be obligated to pay half of the dower already fixed. However, should the woman forgive, or should the man pay the whole, this will be a matter of free choice, as is evident from the verse: إِلَّا أَن يَعْفُونَ أَوْ يَعْفُوَ الَّذِي بِيَدِهِ عُقْدَةُ النِّكَاحِ Unless they (the women) forgive, or forgives the one in whose hand lies the marriage tie. (2:237) The use of the word ya` fu يَعْفُوَ ('forgives' ) to cover even the payment of full dower, perhaps, reflects the customary Arab practice of the payment of dower amount simultaneously with the marriage. If so, the husband has become, in the event of a pre-consummation divorce, deserving of taking half of the dower back. Now, if he yields voluntarily and does not take his half back, this too, would virtually be an act of forgiving. And the act of forgiving has been declared more merit-worthy, and closer to Tagwa (the sense of being responsible to Allah, commonly rendered as piety or fear or righteousness in absence of an exact equivalent); because this forgiveness symbolically indicates that the severance of the bond of marriage was also done with magnanimity and good grace, which is the objective of the Shari'ah and certainly, deserving of great merit -- the forgiveness could come from the woman, or from the man, it does not matter. Explaining the words of the verse الَّذِي بِيَدِهِ عُقْدَةُ النِّكَاحِ whose hands lies the marriage tie), the Holy Prophet ﷺ has himself said: ولی عُقْدَةُ النِّكَاحِ , that is, 'the husband is the guardian (wali) of the bond of marriage.' This hadith appears in Darqutni as narrated by ` Amr ibn Shu'ayb from his father on the authority of his grandfather, and also from Sayyidna ` Aii ؓ and Sayyidna ibn ` Abbas ؓ (Qurtubi). This also proves that the authority to continue or terminate the bond of marriage rests with the husband. It is he who can pronounce talaq (divorce). The woman cannot divorce her husband.

Commentary Based on the authority of some ahadith, a very large number of ` ulama', have said that al-salat al-wusta َالصَّلَاةِ الْوُسْطَىٰ or the middle salah is the salah of ` Asr because there are before it, two Salahs during the day, that of Fajr and Zuhr; and after these come two evening Salahs, that of Maghrib and ` Isha'. Special emphasis has been placed on it because this is a time in which most of the people are busy in their professional work. Incidentally, the Qur'anic word, Qanitin قَانِتِينَ meaning obedient or submitting, rendered here as 'stand before Allah in total devotion', has been explained in Hadith as denoting sukut سکوت or motion-less silence. It was through this very verse that talking in salah was forbidden. Earlier, talking was permissible. The verse 239 has allowed a special way of offering prayers in the state of 'fear' i.e. the state of war. In such a state, one can offer salah نماز (prayer) while standing, with a condition that he can stand in one place without moving, and can make the gesture of sajdah سجدہ in a lower position than he makes in ruku' رکوع . However, salah cannot be performed while walking. If it is not possible to perform the prayer in the said manner, such as at the time of actual fighting, then, it is permissible to delay the prayer and to offer it later as qada' قضاء .