Appearance
Summaries of Sūrat al-Nisāʾ
The summary with which Āyatullāh Jawādī Āmulī opens his commentary on each verse of Sūrat al-Nisāʾ, in the order of the verses. To read the summary of one verse, type it on the Summary page.
4:1 — O mankind! Be wary of your Lord who created you from a single soul
O mankind! Be wary of your Lord who created you from a single soul, and created its mate from it, and from the two of them scattered numerous men and women. Be wary of Allah, in whose Name you adjure one another and [of severing ties with] blood relations. Indeed Allah is watchful over you.
Sūrat al-Nisāʾ contains rulings and matters most of which concern the family and society. For this reason the sūrah begins by pointing to the creation of people from a single soul. This is an all-embracing principle meant to teach human beings the falsity of boasting, arrogance and ranking themselves above one another.
The generality of the word “people” in the verse is evidence of the necessity of Godwariness (that is, the proof from Lordship and the proof from creation), and of the necessity for all human beings (not the people of Mecca in particular) to follow Godwariness, and also of the generality and universality of the matters mentioned in the verse. All of that bears witness that the phrase “O people” is an address to all human beings and not to the people of Mecca, as we said.
In this verse Lordship and creation represent the middle term of the proof establishing Godwariness and its necessity. These two attributes, which point to the active Origin, each entail the other and cannot be separated. But creation guarantees the very existence of a thing, that is, bringing into being what was at first non-existent; while Lordship is responsible for managing the existing thing, granting it further perfections and bringing it to its perfections.
On the basis of the two proofs mentioned, God (s.w.t.) is the Creator and Nurturer of the human being, and the human being ought to be wary of his Lord and Creator alone, and to dread and fear Him alone. On this basis Godwariness of God is necessary and essential. According to those two proofs too, no human creature has any argument for not submitting to the Creator and Lord. For his disobedience would have to be caused either by God (s.w.t.) not deserving that submission, or by people thinking they are better than Him, Mighty and Majestic is He. Since the human being is God’s (s.w.t.) creature and in need of Him, and has taken his existence and his perfections from Him, he is in no way better than his Lord and Creator, nor His equal.
This noble verse orders the human being’s relationship with his Lord, just as it strengthens the relationship among human beings themselves. God (s.w.t.) created all people from a single soul (the root, the essence, the origin, the reality, the substance). All men and women, even our father Adam and our mother Ḥawwāʾ (a.s.), spring from one reality, and the reality of each of them is one. So the active origin of all people is one, just as their receptive origin is also one. Their relationship with one another must be on the basis of Godwariness (according to the active origin) and on the basis of brotherhood and equality (according to the receptive origin), so that they may enjoy a calm and good life.
Since all human beings are created from a single soul and a shared reality, the relationship that binds them to one another rests on something real in creation, not something conventional. This means that keeping up cooperation, rights and mutual respect, and keeping away from boasting, opportunism and vaunting oneself over others, is necessary and essential; especially since the origin of all human beings goes back to our father Adam (a.s.), who was created from dust.
Adam (a.s.) is a prominent example, indeed the first example, of the single soul and the origin of all human beings; and he too is included in this verse, which commands Godwariness. Adam (a.s.) is the first created of the progeny of present human beings. The “single soul” mentioned in this noble verse points to a reality shared between him and others. But he is not the first human God (s.w.t.) created, nor is the world we see today the first world God, Mighty and Majestic, created; and at the same time this world, and Adam (a.s.) and his progeny, are not God’s (s.w.t.) last creatures.
Our master Adam (a.s.), who is mentioned in the Qur’an as a particular person and individual, not as the human kind, is not the son of two unaccountable parents from earlier humans. The claim that the human being appeared through some animal developments is false, because the theory of evolution studies the development of the individuals of a single species, not the evolution of species. And even if we suppose that the transformation of species is correct, experiment establishes only what is under experiment, without being exclusive; so it cannot, for example, deny the creation of the human being by another way, such as miraculous creation.
God (s.w.t.) created Adam (a.s.) directly from dust. As for his passing through stages and ranks of creation from dust, and crossing the vegetable and animal stages and the weak ranks of the human creature, perhaps it was quick and out of the ordinary, or slow and according to the ordinary course. However that may be, his body was created from clay, then the spirit was brought into this clay body until it gave it the human reality we see. So the human being is a reality made up of clay and soul.
The prophet Adam (a.s.) is the first person to appear from the single human reality; in other words, the first appearance of that reality was in the form of our master Adam (a.s.). Then God (s.w.t.) created Adam’s (a.s.) wife from that same single reality; that is, the single reality is the receptive origin of the creation of Adam and his wife (a.s.). Woman was not created from man, so that man would have a superiority and nobility over her in creation. Rather, the body and spirit of Ḥawwāʾ (a.s.) are of the same nature as the body and spirit of Adam (a.s.). The body of Adam (a.s.) was created from one portion of clay, and the body of Ḥawwāʾ (a.s.) from another portion of the same clay; then the spirits of Adam and Ḥawwāʾ (a.s.) were breathed directly into their bodies, separately and independently.
Then God (s.w.t.) created many descendants from the single soul whose examples were Adam and his wife Ḥawwāʾ (a.s.), and not from other individuals. On the basis of the verse under discussion, it points to the unity of human beings in kind and their all sharing the one human reality, just as it points to the unity of human descent going back to one father and one mother, and then its spreading and multiplying. So all human beings belong to one foundation in creation, and the existence of such a foundation is a guarantee of moral and social conduct. Accordingly, no human being has the right to boast over others; rather, they are all brothers and sisters.
In view of what has been said, present human beings all belong to one father and one mother, Adam and Ḥawwāʾ (a.s.), who are counted the origin of the existence of all present human beings, and from whom human beings have spread and multiplied to this day. Adam and Ḥawwāʾ (a.s.) are the original and first father and mother of human beings, and their descendants are their real, not figurative, children. Had anything else had a role in the existence of the descendants, God (s.w.t.) would have said: “and spread from the two of them and from others…”. Since there is no decisive rational proof or reliable transmitted proof pointing to the role of another source or origin in that, it cannot be said that the phrase “and spread from the two of them” is meant by way of giving the larger part the name of the whole, or the like.
The existence of present human beings from many parents is not impossible rationally; but no proof has so far been established showing it to be so, such that one could rely on it and give up the apparent meaning of the verses and narrations. As for the difference of human races and kinds and the colours of human beings, its cause is the difference of environment, and it appeared in the form we see today only after a long time had passed. Likewise the discovery of human fossils going back millions of years has no negative effect on the matter of present human beings existing, spreading and multiplying from Adam and Ḥawwāʾ (a.s.); for God (s.w.t.) created many human creatures before Adam (a.s.), who afterwards became extinct. Present human beings on earth are of the line of Adam and Ḥawwāʾ (a.s.).
The adjective “many” points to absolute, not relative, abundance, and so it has no counterpart. The meaning is that God (s.w.t.) created from Adam and Ḥawwāʾ (a.s.) many individuals, women and men, and that all of them are created from the two of them; not that many of them are, so that some might think that some of those men and women are created from other than Adam and Ḥawwāʾ (a.s.). The proof of that is His (s.w.t.) words “O people”, which is an address to all human beings, and likewise the command to Godwariness and the matter of God’s (s.w.t.) creating and His Lordship in the same verse; and this is not meant for a particular group or party.
In His (s.w.t.) words “and spread from the two of them many men and women”, what is meant is the abundance of men and women themselves, not their being equal, nor the relative abundance of men compared with women. Nor does the expression mentioned convey that men come before women, because that is a verbal precedence, not one of meaning. The verb “spread” conveys the meaning of abundance, for spreading does not happen without abundance.
In the phrase mentioned, men and women are pointed to as the progeny of the single soul, rather than males and females, because God’s (s.w.t.) rulings and commands in this verse concern those charged with the law, who have reached the stage of maturity of manhood or womanhood, without focusing on the quality of maleness or femaleness.
We conclude from what has gone before that all present human beings are created from the prophet Adam and his wife Ḥawwāʾ (a.s.). Marriage among the children of Adam (a.s.) was permitted according to the law of that time, then forbidden after it as the religious rulings came down gradually. It is well known that the body of religious rulings, made up of general and secondary lines, matches the primordial nature (fiṭrah) of people in every age and time. Since the forbidden things matched the nature of people then, when they were permitted, the marriage of brother and sister, forbidden at present, was permitted at that time, because it suited the nature of people and was not considered ugly. For legal good and ugliness both rest only on benefit and harm, in which time, place and some other circumstances play a main role. So perhaps the marriage of a brother to his sister was lawful in the law of the prophet Adam (a.s.) and at that time, and was not outwardly ugly, because the complete cause of prohibition and ugliness had not then come about.
As for the claim that the children of Adam (a.s.) may have intermarried with creatures that remained from before them, or that the progeny of Adam (a.s.) married houris and daughters of the jinn: first, that goes against the apparent meaning of the verse, which states plainly that present human progeny is of the line of Adam and Ḥawwāʾ (a.s.); and as we mentioned, God (s.w.t.) did not say “from the two of them and from others”. Second, the talk in this verse is about the creation of human beings from a “single soul”, not from two souls or several souls. Third, the verse addresses people alone, not people, houris and jinn. Fourth, that claim conflicts with the narrations that state plainly that all people were born of Adam (a.s.), and that Adam (a.s.) was created from dust.
The noble verse under discussion commands Godwariness of the Lord and Godwariness of God, Mighty and Majestic. Godwariness of the Lord and Godwariness of God (s.w.t.) go back to one root, and mean carefully observing the bounds of what He (s.w.t.) has made lawful and unlawful, and avoiding defilement and disobedience.
As for asking one another by God (s.w.t.) and by the ties of kinship, it may sometimes be by oath and at other times by way of a cause. For the name “God” (Allāh) was also held sacred among people in the Age of Ignorance, and they would swear to one another by it, or ask things of one another out of respect for that name and its sanctity among them. The noble Qur’an commands people to be wary of God (s.w.t.), whom they respect and by whose name they swear to settle their problems.
The noble verse also commands being wary concerning the ties of kinship, that is, not cutting off one’s kin. To show the importance of kinship, God (s.w.t.) mentioned being wary of it alongside being wary of Him, saying: “Be wary of God, who has prepared for the faithless a burning fire with no kindness or mercy in it; and be wary also of the ties of kinship, so do not cut them off and do not ignore them.” God, Mighty and Majestic, commanded joining the ties of kinship and forbade cutting off relations between kin; indeed, He also cursed the one who cuts off his kin.
Because of the command in it to be wary concerning the ties of kinship, this verse is counted among the proofs of the obligation to join the ties of kinship. As we pointed out just now, this verse shows the importance of being wary concerning the ties of kinship and observing them, through the unity of context (that is, the mention of the command to observe Godwariness concerning kinship alongside the command to be wary of God (s.w.t.)), and also through the unity of root (that is, the use of the root of Godwariness shared by both commands). The word “the ties of kinship” (al-arḥām) in this verse is joined to the Majestic Name (God) and is in the position of the accusative as an object; that is, “be wary of God and be wary of the ties of kinship”. This way of parsing “the ties of kinship” does not conflict with the courtesy of tawḥīd; for since it comes in two separate phrases, the word “the ties of kinship” is not counted as an equal of God (s.w.t.).
Besides God (s.w.t.) repeating the word “Godwariness” and commanding it twice in this verse, at the end of the verse He pointed, gently and softly, to an implicit threat: that He (s.w.t.) is watching over you if you disobey and are not Godwary.
Notice that this verse attributes the watching over of the human being to God (s.w.t.) directly, and not to His angels or others. That is because watching over is one of the concerns of Lordship, and one of God’s continuous and unbroken acts of governance, which is never confined to a past, present or future time. He watches over the human being always and continually.
God’s (s.w.t.) watching over means that He is the absolute Guardian, overseeing everything, and does not allow others to interfere in this matter; and that it is He who repairs deficiency and mends it. The perfection of divine watchfulness is shown in His alerting the servant at once with what is in his interest, to stop him from committing sins and acts of disobedience, and letting him know that he is turning from his right course. God (s.w.t.) lies in wait to close the way before the tyrants and the corrupt, and to take the righteous Godwary by the hand.
4:2 — Give the orphans their property
Give the orphans their property, and do not replace the good with the bad, and do not eat up their property [by mingling it] with your own property, for that is indeed a great sin.
Observing the matters of rights and feeling, and the personal affairs particular to orphans, is one of the general and basic lines of the religion of Islam. For this reason the noble verse attacks the conduct of the people of the Age of Ignorance and criticises their treatment and exploitation of orphans, depriving them of inheritance, consuming their wealth without right and spending it where it should not be spent. The verse forbids everyone, including the guardians and executors of the orphan and others, to hold back his wealth and to betray it in the manner and amount of spending that wealth. It also establishes three important rulings concerning the orphan:
The obligation to return the orphan’s wealth to him and place it at his disposal: “And give the orphans their wealth.” There is no doubt that the unrestrictedness of this ruling clearly indicates that pushing the orphan away and consuming his wealth is forbidden, and that holding back the wealth of the orphan is a forbidden and irresponsible act. It is known that the giving mentioned does not mean immediate giving, that is, before the orphan comes of age; but in the future, when he reaches maturity and it is guaranteed that he meets the required conditions, that is, after legal coming of age (natural maturity) and coming of age and financial (economic) maturity. For giving the orphan his wealth in the time of his orphanhood (when there is no one to look after him and bring him up) may lead to that wealth being destroyed instead of preserved.
The prohibition of exchanging the bad for the good: “and do not exchange the bad for the good.” What is meant by “bad” and “good” in the verse is the bad and good in meaning, of which God’s lawful and unlawful is one example. Every wrong choice in preferring the bad over the good is included in the unrestricted prohibition and is an example of exchanging the bad for the good; so too spending what is unlawful instead of what is lawful, and turning away from the lawful and heading towards the unlawful. If those responsible for the orphan and his executors betray the trust and are careless in keeping it, this work of theirs is of the nature of the unlawful. In short, the noble verse says plainly: Do not mix your good and lawful wealth with the wealth of the orphans, which counts as bad and forbidden for you and which you have no right to dispose of, wishing by that to increase your wealth; and do not exchange bad wealth for good wealth, giving what is lawful and taking what is unlawful. On this basis it makes no difference whether the aim of the exchange is desirable or undesirable; both are blameworthy and forbidden. What is meant by bad and good in the verse is not what concerns material things, of which the desirable and undesirable are instances.
The prohibition of encroaching in spending and outlay by a person mixing his wealth with the orphan’s wealth, joining them together and disposing of all of it, where the aim of that is nothing but encroaching on the wealth of the orphans: “and do not consume their wealth along with your wealth.” Consuming, which is the most important conduct and effect that comes from the human being, is used here figuratively for any disposal. This is the common denominator of the three rulings mentioned in the verse.
The qualification “along with your wealth” indicates joining one wealth to another. So those addressed by the third sentence are the rich and wealthy, whose disposing of the orphan’s wealth is counted uglier than the orphan’s guardian disposing of the orphan’s wealth. Added to that, the guardians of orphans taking for themselves a wage greater than the customary amount from the orphans, who need wealth more than they do, is forbidden and included in the prohibition of the last sentence.
Likewise, taking some of the things and wealth belonging to the orphans freely and without account, exchanging their wealth, joining it, or encroaching and trespassing on it: all that is an instance of false and forbidden disposal. Since such an ugly act and disposal of the wealth of orphans is one of the great sins, He (s.w.t.) made clear its reason by saying: “surely that is a great crime.”
4:3 — If you fear that you may not deal justly with the orphans
If you fear that you may not deal justly with the orphans, then marry [other] women that you like, two, three, or four. But if you fear that you may not treat them fairly, then [marry only] one, or [marry from among] your slave-women. That makes it likelier that you will not be unfair.
Some men used to marry orphan girls in order to take over their wealth, but they did not observe their rights in dower or in securing the needs of life and the like. Rather, some of them did not shrink from driving out their orphan wife after seizing all she owned, leaving her without wealth with which to support herself and manage her affairs; and there was no one who wished to marry her after she had been stripped of her wealth and property.
To fight such wrongful conduct, the noble Qur’an forbade people, in severe terms and with violent rebuke, from disposing of the wealth of orphans and wasting their rights. At the beginning of this verse it started with them in a tone of guidance and upbringing, in view of the importance of keeping good relations with orphans spiritually and emotionally, since that is greater and more important than the ruling on preserving the wealth of orphans. So the noble Qur’an prevented marriage to orphan girls if the husband feared he would not observe equity and justice in their rights. If a man is not confident of treating his orphan wife with equity and justice, he should never think of marrying her, and should marry other pure women who are not orphans. It is known that the husband and the wife each have mutual rights, both financial and moral; and when marrying an orphan woman, the husband ought to observe those rights with her as well.
The answer to the condition “And if you fear…” is the sentence “then do not marry them!”, which is left out, as is permissible, and replaced with the sentence “then marry such of the women as are good for you.”
As for what is meant by “the orphans” in this verse, it is girls or females who have come of age, not young girls who have not yet reached the age of maturity. For the word “orphan” is also applied to those who have come of age; perhaps one who was known before for his orphanhood is called an orphan too, even if he has reached the age of maturity. But, as we said before, the ruling of orphanhood does not apply to an orphan who has come of age.
Then comes the second axis of the verse, which is the permission of permanent marriage with two, three and four women if the husband is able to apply justice with them; otherwise he will not be excused: “then marry such of the women as are good for you, two, three and four; but if you fear that you will not be just, then one.” Taking one wife needs no reminder; even so, the verse pointed at its end to not taking more than one wife if a person fears he will not follow justice and equity among his wives: “but if you fear that you will not be just, then one.”
As for the Qur’anic command “then marry…”, it points to the permissibility of marriage and the lifting of the prohibition, not to obligation; because this command comes after the fear of what was prohibited.
The basis of marriage and of having more than one wife, when one is confident of applying justice, is permitted and not obligatory. Permitting more than one wife is a social necessity, like permitting the basis of marriage, which is counted a social necessity. That is for several reasons, among them:
The strength of sexual desire in men is greater than in women, so this overwhelming desire must be satisfied by correct and lawful ways, so that men are not swept along after immorality, indecency and corruption.
It is known that the number of men becomes less than that of women because of certain events, wars and crimes.
The man’s capacity to have children is greater and lasts longer than the capacity of women for that.
Mental capacity, sexual maturity, and readiness and preparation for marriage are greater and earlier in females compared with males; and so the number of females ready for marriage is greater than the number of males.
Added to that, some points must be observed:
Islam has built the edifice of life and society on rational foundations, not on emotional matters alone. It takes care to bring up woman with a correct Islamic upbringing, and establishes a fitting balance and precise harmony between instinctive and natural jealousy in her on the one hand and her primordial nature on the other, so that she does not suffer from the matter of more than one wife (or what is known as the ailment of co-wives), or feel lessened and envious towards them, if she is treated with complete justice and equity.
Godwariness, not having more than one wife, is the basic measure of worth and honour in Islam. The worth of a man is not measured by the number of wives he has; and marriage is not a commodity sold and bought, so that the two sides are compared by value, price and number.
Marriage with good and pure women is permitted: “then marry such of the women as are good for you.” What is meant by the good among women in this verse is not the beautiful and fair; rather, what is meant is the lawful, which stands against the bad, which is the unlawful.
The relative pronoun “what” (mā) in this verse points to the kind of lawful women, not to their persons. Since the speech turns on the quality, not the person, the meaning of His (s.w.t.) words “then marry what is good…” is “then marry the good”; and for this reason the quality required the use of “what” in the sentence. So let no one think that this is a kind of slight to woman because of the use of the relative pronoun “what”; for the noble Qur’an has often used this noun for rational beings, and even with the Majestic Name as well.
As for the “and” in His (s.w.t.) words “two, three and four”, it is for variety, since it divides having more than one wife into kinds and groups. It also points to the permissibility of combining what is joined and what it is joined to, unlike “or”, which is used only for initial choice. So the meaning is: “whoever has two wives can marry a third and a fourth if he meets the required conditions.”
It is clear that the verse points to a limit, and so the number mentioned has a particular implication; just as the reliable hadiths have made clear that marrying more than four free women is forbidden. Added to that, the noble verse points to the permissibility of combining two, three or four women, not two and three and four of them so that the total would be nine.
Every Muslim must observe justice and fairness in any work he does. In view of the great importance of forming a family, whoever intends marriage, especially a second marriage or more, must observe general justice (that is, carrying out obligations and leaving forbidden things), and ought to apply the principle of justice among his wives. Since justice is a condition to be secured beforehand, not one that merely happens, no one is permitted to marry more than one if he is not able to apply justice and equity: “but if you fear that you will not be just, then one.” The man must observe justice and fair dealing with his wives in the field of material things and marital rights, such as providing the needs of life and living, housing and clothing, and also observing marital matters (not in what concerns inclinations, emotions and love), and spending on the wife in a way that suits her rank and standing, in the customary way (bi-l-maʿrūf); that is, not less than the customary (according to reason and transmission). There is no doubt that observing justice and equality in treating wives, without discrimination or preference, especially in material matters, is within one’s power, and is what the man is charged with. As for love of the heart, the man is not charged with it, since it is outside his will and ability.
Then comes the third axis of the noble verse: if the man is unable to observe the rights of a free woman, he must marry slave-women or those owned, because their rights are less than the rights of free women; otherwise there would have been no need to mention slave-women in the verse. Putting the word “one” first is to show the importance of the free woman in relation to the slave-woman; but that does not mean the man need not observe the rights of the slave-woman as well; rather, the opposite.
It is worth mentioning that owning slave-women is in the ruling of the marriage contract; on this basis the talk here is not about the owner of slave-women marrying them.
His (s.w.t.) words “but if you fear that you will not be just, then one, or what your right hands own” mean that if a man fears he will not apply justice and fairness among his wives, he must marry one free woman or one slave-woman, no more; because having more than one wife is, for such a man, not permitted, whether his wives are free, slave, or free and slave together.
The noble Qur’an is the Book of guidance and upbringing for all people, and so it has ordered the laws of society in keeping with moral rulings. For this reason the end of the verse makes clear that the wisdom in legislating the rulings mentioned is protection from the deviation of individuals and the fear of their wronging and inclining unjustly: “that is more likely that you will not incline unjustly.”
4:4 — Give women their dowries, handing it over to them
Give women their dowries, handing it over to them; but if they remit anything of it of their own accord, then consume it as [something] lawful and wholesome.
Every husband ought to pay the dower (mahr) to his wife, because it is part of her financial rights and is her property. The marriage contract is counted the cause of the wife’s owning that dower, even though half the dower is counted an unsettled ownership before consummation.
The dower confirms the marriage and is the symbol of truthfulness and faithfulness, and for that reason it is called ṣadāq. A niḥlah is “a gift without material return”; and the dower is expressed as a niḥlah because it is a divine gift which God (s.w.t.) made obligatory on men, to be given to women as a present.
The use of the words ṣadāq and niḥlah expresses the courtesy and modesty in the speech of divine revelation. It is also a kind of honouring and dignifying of woman, her nobility and her honour, so that no one thinks that marriage is a transaction of selling and buying. Rather, it is something sacred, and the woman places herself in the choice of her husband in return for the dower she receives from him. The woman’s person and the man’s honour are both matters that belong to God (s.w.t.), and the woman does not make the husband the owner of anything in marriage, so that the dower would be a return for that thing. The dower is a pillar of the contract and is not like the price in a sale; and the man owns nothing in return for that dower.
Men in the Age of Ignorance used to harm their wives deliberately to escape paying their financial rights, or to stop them from claiming them. For this reason God (s.w.t.) warned men against committing those ugly acts. After He, Mighty and Majestic, commanded men to pay the woman’s rights in full and with respect, “And give the women their dowers as a free gift”, He addressed them, saying: “If the woman gives part or all of her dower to her husband with the consent of her heart, without any doubt or uncertainty inside her, that is lawful and permitted for her: ‘but if they are pleased to give you something of it of themselves, then eat it with enjoyment and pleasure.’”
At times a woman’s giving her dower may not be with the full consent of her heart, but the result of feelings and emotions that soon pass. For this reason God (s.w.t.) said: “but if they are pleased to give you something of it of themselves”, where the preposition “of” (ʿan), which is used for passing beyond an act, points to the wife’s full pardon and consent.
As for the preposition “of” (min) in “something of it”, if it is for a part, it is a reminder and alert to the woman not to give away the whole dower. From the imperative “then eat it” is understood the permission to dispose of it, not obligation, because it comes after a supposed prohibition. And what is meant by “eating” too is disposal in general.
4:5 — Do not give the feeble-minded your property
Do not give the feeble-minded your property, which Allah has assigned you to manage: provide for them out of it and clothe them, and speak to them honourable words.
There are two possibilities as to who is addressed by this noble verse:
God (s.w.t.) addresses the guardians of the feeble-minded (al-sufahāʾ), saying: “Do not hand over to the feeble-minded their wealth deposited with you until you know that their feeble-mindedness has lifted and gone.” The sentence “and provide for them out of it and clothe them” is an indication that what is meant by “your wealth” is the wealth of the feeble-minded in your hands; that is, that wealth is placed at your disposal, and so He said “your wealth” and did not say “their wealth”.
The noble verse addresses the Muslims and the Islamic society in general, saying: “Do not hand over your wealth, or the wealth of the feeble-minded, or the public treasury, to the feeble-minded.”
The meaning of using the word “your wealth” may be that wealth is the property of the whole Islamic society, which has the same legal features and qualities as the individual; so riches are the property of all the members of society. For this reason using personal wealth is not permitted if it clashes with the interests of society as a whole. Since wealth is the property of society, the verse addresses society and commands it to preserve its riches in a way that suits its interests.
On the basis of the reason given and the descriptive clause in His (s.w.t.) words “which God has made for you a means of support”, wealth and riches are counted the cause of the support of the individual and of society alike, and of their continuance and economic revival; they are like the backbone for them. If wealth goes, and riches and the economy of society are wasted, its members are in certain danger and will be struck by helplessness and paralysis. On this basis everyone is responsible for not handing that wealth and those riches to the feeble-minded; just as no one ought to give his own wealth, or wealth from the public treasury, or the wealth of the feeble-minded person himself, to the feeble-minded, because they will naturally squander that wealth. Whoever gives his wealth to the feeble-minded, and the latter destroys and squanders it, is liable for that wealth and must make it good, besides the legal prohibition that falls on him.
Material feeble-mindedness is one of the factors that lead to financial restriction on a person and preventing him from disposing of his wealth. Whenever feeble-mindedness turns into economic maturity, the restriction is lifted. The economically mature and rational person is the one who can invest his wealth in the right place and avoid spending it in vain.
The guardians of the feeble-minded, as channels of divine provision, ought to secure the living of the feeble-minded: “and provide for them out of it and clothe them.” What is meant by provision and clothing in the verse is everything the feeble-minded person needs in his life; and mentioning these two in particular is because they are the two most important vital elements of a person’s living.
Some commentators said about the preposition “out of it” (literally “in it”) in the verse that it means that the guardian of the feeble-minded should put the feeble-minded person’s wealth to work and invest it in trade (for example), and spend on him from the profits of that wealth; not that he spend on him from the capital of the riches or the wealth itself, so that all the wealth runs out little by little, and that leads to the feeble-minded person needing others.
As is known, the feeble-minded person is restricted financially and needs someone to watch over him and look after his interests. But he is almost like any ordinary person in feelings and social relations, and can understand many matters; so he must be treated with respect and dignity. Observing courtesy with everyone, whether Muslim or non-Muslim, is one of the human rights in Islam. As for the counsel about the feeble-minded in particular, it is because, first, the feeble-minded person may feel grief and sorrow because his wealth is not handed over to him to dispose of as he wishes; so the guardians of the feeble-minded must make him understand this matter with all care, skill and respect, so that he feels secure and confident. Second, the feeble-minded in general are afflicted with some psychological problems and a lack of affection and tenderness; so they ought to be dealt with kindly, with love and tenderness. And God’s (s.w.t.) words “and speak to them words of kindness” point to the most important conduct of the human being being speech.
4:6 — Test the orphans when they reach the age of marriage
Test the orphans when they reach the age of marriage. Then if you discern in them maturity, deliver to them their property. And do not consume it lavishly and hastily lest they should grow up. As for him who is well-off, let him be abstemious, and as for him who is poor, let him eat in an honourable manner. And when you deliver to them their property, take witnesses over them, and Allah suffices as reckoner.
Orphans, like the feeble-minded, are under restriction and cannot dispose of their wealth. For the restriction to be lifted and for orphans to recover their wealth, for which the orphan’s reaching the age of natural and economic maturity is a condition, their economic maturity must be tested. Since one test is not enough to be confident that the orphan has reached economic maturity, the tests ought to be repeated in practical matters, but by following the way of friendliness and love. It is known that such a test differs from age to age, from land to land and from generation to generation, and also for male and female. On this basis this test must be carried out before sexual maturity, so that the orphan is not restricted after coming of age: “And test the orphans until, when they reach marriageable age, if you perceive in them maturity…”
One of the most important signs of sexual maturity is the wet dream; but according to the apparent meaning of the verse, its measure is reaching marriageable age and being able to marry, not the wet dream.
In view of the fit between the ruling and its subject:
What is meant by “maturity” is economic maturity (as against economic feeble-mindedness), not spiritual maturity (as against error, misguidance and transgression). So one who is economically mature is not restricted if he is known for spiritual feeble-mindedness.
With large amounts of wealth, the orphan ought to reach full maturity as a condition for receiving his wealth, not merely the basis of maturity; but in ordinary cases economic maturity in general is enough (the ability to support oneself economically and spend for living). As for the word “maturity” coming in the indefinite form, it may be to show the fit between maturity and the amount of wealth, and also that the orphan need not reach all the stages of economic maturity.
The command to hand over to orphans their wealth, “then hand over to them their wealth”, conveys permission and allowance, not obligation; because it comes after the prohibition mentioned in the previous verse, “And do not give the feeble-minded your wealth.” That is, it is merely letting the orphan know that he has wealth with his guardian, and the lifting of the obstacle is enough for him to be able to dispose of that wealth.
As for the fāʾ (for consequence) in His (s.w.t.) words “then hand over to them their wealth”, it is an indication of the speed of what this command conveys; that is, the guardian must inform the orphan and hand the wealth over to him when he asks for it, as soon as coming of age and maturity come about.
Interfering with the wealth of the orphan is gravely forbidden, and so He (s.w.t.) says after that: “and do not consume it wastefully and hastily, before they grow up.” The content of this phrase is that the basis of disposal is not permitted, and the forbidding of extravagance; for a human being’s extravagance is forbidden even in his own personal wealth. So the phrase “wastefully and hastily, before they grow up” is not the reason for the prohibition in the phrase “and do not consume it”, so that its meaning would be: “Do not consume the wealth of orphans if there is any extravagance or destruction of it in that.” Rather, it is a qualification of the consuming, and what is meant is: “Do not encroach on the orphan’s wealth, because merely encroaching on it is extravagance and forbidden. And if your wealth is mixed with the wealth of orphans, do not separate them in haste and hurry, for fear of the orphan’s possible objection in the future after he comes of age, taking the good part of the wealth and leaving him the poor part, and then claiming that the poorness of his wealth was because a long time had passed over it, so that he does not object to you!”
The verse continues in counsel and guidance, commanding the guardian to be strictly chaste and keep far from trespassing on the orphan’s wealth, saying to him: “and whoever is rich, let him abstain”; that is, if you are rich and not in need, do not interfere with the orphan’s wealth or take a wage from it for preserving his wealth. Even though there is no link between taking a wage and poverty, for it is not required to serve others for nothing, His (s.w.t.) command “let him abstain” is moral, guiding and recommended, and does not point to obligation; because of His (s.w.t.) words on the other side, “and whoever is poor, let him eat in the customary way”, that is, let him take his wage and what he needs in return for his services fairly. This is if the guardian provides various services to the orphan, or invests his wealth in trade and the like, or does some tiring services to preserve the orphan’s wealth, and so deserves the required wage.
The meaning of His (s.w.t.) words “let him eat in the customary way” is not that the orphan’s guardian should be stingy with himself from his own wealth and avoid the orphan’s wealth completely; rather, its meaning is that he should take a fair wage from the orphan’s wealth in return for his services, and no more than that.
After the orphan reaches sexual maturity and economic maturity, his wealth ought to be given to him before witnesses: “and when you hand over to them their wealth, call witnesses over them”, by whom unjust accusations directed at the orphan’s guardian will be warded off in the future. In the case of dispute and litigation in the courts, the presence of clear evidence will end any dispute; and although the oath of the orphan’s guardian establishes his word, the presence of evidence will increase the strength of that proof. Thus the command to bring witnesses is a command of guidance and recommendation.
There is no doubt that the noble Qur’an is a Book of light and guidance for society, through setting out rulings of jurisprudence and rights and pointing to the roots and sources of matters. Even so, God (s.w.t.) says: “and God is enough as a Reckoner”; because God (s.w.t.) knows the outward and the inward and is the Reckoner over all things; so that no one thinks he can seize the wealth of orphans with witnesses and sham and forged documents, and that this will be hidden from God (s.w.t.).
4:7 — Men have a share in the heritage left by parents and near relatives
Men have a share in the heritage left by parents and near relatives, and women have a share in the heritage left by parents and near relatives, whether it be little or much, a share ordained [by Allah].
This noble verse is counted among the pivotal and principal verses of the noble Qur’an that deal with the general rulings of inheritance. It is like the basic law and all-embracing principle of inheritance, since it sets out that both man and woman inherit, and that neither of them is deprived of inheritance.
Depriving woman of inheritance in the Age of Ignorance was a custom known and familiar among the people of that age. This noble verse took up the subject of the inheritance of man and woman in two independent sentences, in a direct and open challenge to the hateful custom of the Age of Ignorance, which is depriving woman of inheritance; for a general law and address do not have the required effect, especially in very important matters.
The measure and all-embracing principle of the matter of inheritance is that inheritance is the right of those who are tied to the deceased by the relationship of birth, that is, his children and the persons who are nearer to him than others: “For men is a share of what parents and the nearest relatives leave, and for women is a share of what parents and the nearest relatives leave”; while others have no portion of that inheritance, even if they are counted among the relatives.
What is meant by “men” in this verse is males, and by “women” females; and that includes all the age groups of males and females, young and old. As for the woman’s inheriting from her husband, it is mentioned in other verses than this one.
This verse makes clear that birth, nearness and kinship are the axis of dividing inheritance, and that this law of inheritance includes man and woman alike; that is, the equality of man and woman in inheriting according to this law, not the equality of the inheritance given to man and woman. For this reason this verse is counted a proof of the falsity of the ruling called taʿṣīb (giving the residue to the male paternal relatives).
Kinship and nearness also include “birth”; but to show the importance of birth this title came independently. So mentioning “the nearest relatives” after “parents”, that is, mentioning the general after the particular, points to these two titles being two causes of inheriting: (birth) and (kinship and nearness). That is, either the heir and the one inherited from are tied by the relationship of parent and child, or by an all-embracing root relationship, such as the grandfather.
As for the word “parents”, it is unrestricted and also includes the grandfather; and it is restricted by a particular text, which is that if the father is alive, the grandfather has no inheritance. The word “the nearest relatives” supports this restriction. “The nearest relatives” have customary bounds, as has come in some verses and narrations, where the heirs are divided into three classes; with the existence of the earlier class, the later class has no inheritance, and so on.
As for stating the phrase “parents and the nearest relatives” explicitly and repeating it in the second sentence, although it would have been possible to mention it once or use the pronoun, it is either because of its importance or because it is particular to this case.
The wealth of the deceased ought to be divided among the heirs according to the divine statement mentioned, whether the inheritance is little or much: “whether it is little or much.” This explicitness and generality deny any discrimination. It is not permitted to deprive men or women of the inheritance of the deceased on the pretext that it is small, or to claim that the law of inheritance is particular to the rich, so that the poor are excepted from this law.
The shares set out for the relatives of the deceased are decisive and binding with God (s.w.t.), and no one has the right to violate or oppose them: “an appointed share.” This phrase is not merely moral counsel, so that it would be non-binding and anyone could fall short in the right of women and so deprive them of inheritance, or go to excess by dividing the inheritance equally between men and women.
4:8 — And when the division is attended by relatives
And when the division is attended by relatives, the orphans and the needy, provide for them out of it, and speak to them honourable words.
The noble verse counsels the heirs (not the one dying) that if some relatives and kin, especially the orphans and the needy among them, are present at the dividing of the inheritance, they ought to set aside something for them and provide for them from the wealth of the deceased, either from the wealth being divided or from the surplus wealth, in order to create closeness and mutual support in the family order, to respect the pure feelings of the needy kin, the orphans and the needy, and to soothe their hearts: “And when the relatives, the orphans and the needy are present at the dividing, provide for them out of it.” There is no doubt that the presence of those needy people at the dividing is to obtain some financial help; so it is not fitting to deprive them of their wish. If some of the heirs are young, absent or under restriction, the adult heirs who are present and not under restriction can give help to the needy from their shares after the inheritance is divided.
What is meant by His (s.w.t.) words “the relatives” in this verse is needy kin who are not among the heirs of the dead person; and what is meant by His words “the orphans and the needy” is orphans and the needy in general, whether they are relatives or not. Putting “orphan” before “needy” is to show the orphan’s great need of help and tenderness.
As for the command in His (s.w.t.) words “provide for them out of it”, it does not indicate obligation; rather, helping the persons mentioned from the inheritance is recommended and not obligatory. The qualification of presence, “And when … are present at the dividing”, and the absence of mention of a particular share of the inheritance, point to this ruling not being binding, and rather to the moral dimension in the matter; for their presence at the dividing prepares the ground for its being preferable.
The person who is not in need has no reason to be present at the dividing; but the needy kin may be present at the dividing in the hope of getting some help from the heirs. Since one of the heirs might utter some word that hurts the feelings and sensibilities of those needy kin, the noble Qur’an commanded all those present at the dividing, especially the heirs, to say to those people nothing but what is kind and good words, “and speak to them words of kindness”, whether they deprive them of a gift or provide for them unwillingly. The noble verse has made clear the necessity of giving them something willingly and dealing with them gently, far from any belittling, humiliation or reproach of favour, so that they leave the place content and satisfied.
4:9 — Let those fear [the result of mistreating orphans] who
Let those fear [the result of mistreating orphans] who, were they to leave behind weak offspring, would be concerned on their account. So let them be wary of Allah, and let them speak upright words.
A human being’s love for his child and grandchild, and his striving to provide the means of comfort for them and his pain at their suffering, is a matter of primordial nature. In this noble verse the noble Qur’an alerts people to this natural matter and warns them against making a will in which there is a violation of the right of the orphan, who has no refuge, or doing what leads to that when dividing the inheritance. For this wrong they commit will without fail reach their own children too, and their fear and concern for their progeny over the unknown fate awaiting them will turn into a real, actual and certain fear.
The fear mentioned is a reasonable fear, and God (s.w.t.) has endorsed it; so they must fear and dread. Since a warning before good news is effective with many individuals, this verse and the one after it contain a warning to everyone, especially those who seize the wealth of orphans, conveying that if they do not observe the right of the orphan, worldly punishment will strike them (which is the setting over them of someone who encroaches on their wealth and their orphans, and so their falling into poverty, hunger and need), and also punishment in the Hereafter. These two dangers that threaten them are the result of two acts: 1) their wronging the orphan, the punishment of which is eating fire and falling into the fire of Hell; 2) the hurt to the orphan’s guardians, because they see the suffering of their own children in this world and the wrong done to them, from the time they die until the Day of Resurrection.
Since progeny includes direct children and also grandchildren, what is meant by this warning includes those who have no young direct offspring: “And let those fear who, if they left behind them weak offspring…” and likewise the childless. It is by way of explanation through giving a reason and a rational proof, which is that the work of any living person is directly linked to him, through a likeness drawn in speech. That is: put yourselves in the place of those who leave behind them young and weak offspring, and do not encroach on the rights of the orphan, by picturing the feeling of worry and fear, and imagining the torment your seizing the orphan’s wealth may cause after your death.
The children falling into problems and dangers because of their fathers’ wronging the orphans of others does not conflict with some verses that say: “And no soul earns except against itself, and no bearer of burden bears the burden of another.” For besides the actions of the human being being alive and everlasting, they are linked to their doer and never separate from him. On the other side, the past, present and coming generations of a family or household are one reality and one chain, because of the unity of womb, blood, food and so on. In reality the child is counted a continuation of the bodily existence of the parents; and from here the effects of the deeds of those who have gone appear in their children, just as the results of the children’s actions affect those who have gone. Because of this sharing and these ties, the human being is affected by and sensitive to the fate of his progeny after his death, rejoicing at their joy and grieving at their grief.
The effect of the parents’ wrongdoing on the children does not mean it is permitted to inflict wrong on the children and deprive them of their reward and their right to complain. The child is rewarded for bearing the wrong; while the parent will see the consequence of his own sin and wrong, and his child’s suffering is another form of the punishment the father meets.
What this noble verse means is not that through the parents’ wrongdoing it will become a way and custom in society, and that their children will be affected by this evil way because they live in the same society. Rather, what is meant is that the effects of the parents’ wrongdoing will be reflected on the children, even if it is not a way followed. On the other side, if wrongdoing became a way and a custom, it would not strike only the children of the wrongdoers but would become general and universal; while the noble verse speaks of a particular threat that reaches the orphans of the wrongdoers, not society in general.
So one must be wary of God (s.w.t.) concerning orphans, treat them well and speak to them gently: “so let them be wary of God and let them speak right words.” Since “words” also includes deeds, the meaning of the verse is: deal carefully, soundly and rightly with the wealth of orphans, and beware of coming near their wealth and rights, or treating them with roughness, contempt and violence.
The command to Godwariness and right words is a stress on the prohibition drawn from the start of the verse: “And let those fear who…”
4:10 — Indeed those who consume the property of orphans wrongfully
Indeed those who consume the property of orphans wrongfully, only ingest fire into their bellies, and soon they will enter the Blaze.
The previous verse explained to us the worldly punishment for encroaching on the wealth and rights of orphans; this noble verse makes clear the inner torment and the punishment in the Hereafter for this encroachment.
The verse points to the punishment of those who dispose of the wealth of orphans wrongfully being their eating fire in their bellies in place of that wealth: “Surely those who consume the wealth of orphans wrongfully only consume fire into their bellies.” For the way these people go about wrongdoing and continuous encroachment, which is understood from the present-tense verb “consume”, shows that the act of the wrongdoer will leave him nothing of what is right and lawful. On the other side, the orphan cannot defend his right, since he has no refuge and there is no one to defend him except God (s.w.t.); and so his prayer is sincere, effective and answered at the same time. For all this, the wrong the orphan is exposed to differs completely from other forms of wrong, because it is bigger and greater, and its punishment is a fire that burns the outward and the inward of the wrongdoer as well: “only consume fire into their bellies.”
The prohibition of consuming the orphan’s wealth is not confined to food and drink; rather, the prohibition and prevention include every wrongful disposal of his wealth and right. On this basis “only consume fire into their bellies” is not particular to the punishment of eating alone.
The circumstantial “wrongfully” is in the position of limiting and conveys restriction; so trade and correct and just transactions with the orphan’s wealth are permitted, since there is no wrong or encroachment on it.
The qualification “into their bellies” is, first, for emphasis, since it is clear that what is eaten enters the inside of the human being. Second, it points to the encroachers and wrongdoers eating nothing in their bellies but fire that fills their insides; otherwise it would have been said, for example, “they eat in part of their bellies”. Third, it contains a pointer to the way of those individuals and their focus on their bellies.
However it may be, the noble verse makes clear the real form of encroaching on the orphan’s wealth, which is eating fire in the belly. It is worth mentioning that the verse does not point, by way of figure and likeness, to consuming the orphan’s wealth being a great sin whose punishment is entering Hell. Rather, according to the apparent meaning of the verse, any wrongful disposal of the orphan’s wealth is in reality eating fire. So one must hold to this apparent meaning, even though we do not know its secrets and codes.
The one who encroaches on the orphan’s wealth began eating fire in his belly from the first moment of the wrong, and became joined to the fire, even though he does not feel that in the world of nature. But after his death, when his ties with this world are cut and he wakes from his drunkenness and recklessness, he will taste that fire openly and feel the painful burning.
Certainly the wrongdoers who encroach on the wealth of orphans will soon be branded with fire at the Return: “and they will soon burn in a blaze.” This painful torment of the Hereafter is the real manifestation of the fire they were eating in this world because of their wrongful disposal of the orphan’s wealth.
The sudden death of the one who encroaches on the orphan’s wealth, or the shortness of his life compared with eternity in the Hereafter, confirms the truth of the nearness of the Return and the precision of the expression with the present-future verb “they will soon burn”.
4:11 — Allah enjoins you concerning your children
Allah enjoins you concerning your children: for the male shall be the like of the share of two females, and if there be [two or] more than two females, then for them shall be two-thirds of what he leaves; but if she be alone, then for her shall be a half; and for each of his parents a sixth of what he leaves, if he has children; but if he has no children, and his parents are his [sole] heirs, then it shall be a third for his mother; but if he has brothers, then a sixth for his mother, after [paying off] any bequest he may have made or any debt [he may have incurred]. Your parents and your children—you do not know which of them is likelier to be beneficial for you. This is an ordinance from Allah. Indeed Allah is all-knowing, all-wise.
The seventh verse of this sūrah gives the general ruling of inheritance, and this noble verse is an explanation and unfolding of that verse; it opens the verses of inheritance.
The rulings of the verse of inheritance are decisive, binding and obligatory to follow, “an ordinance from God”, and not merely recommended. So it is not right, for example, to rely on the word “counsels you” and say that this counsel points to those rulings being merely preferable and ordinary (and not binding, unchangeable rulings); for the noble Qur’an uses the words waṣiyyah, tawṣiyah and īṣāʾ (counsel, enjoining) to point to a binding ruling too.
In this verse God, Mighty and Majestic, addresses people in general (not the heirs of the deceased in particular) about heirs in general. But since the children are the persons nearest to the deceased, He (s.w.t.) begins the counsel with them first: “God counsels you concerning your children.” The word “children” includes the grandchildren as well. However, some particular narrations indicate that the word “your children” means the direct children from the first class of heirs, and that “your children” does not include the grandchildren. On this basis, “children” in the matter of inheritance is not “children” in the matter of endowment, of those one may not marry, or of the prohibition of marriage. In inheritance, grandchildren take the place of their fathers only in certain cases.
The verse of inheritance is general and includes the prophets and their children too, just like ordinary individuals. But the verse, in its general meaning that shows a son inheriting from his father and mother, is restricted by the narrations that set out the impediments to inheritance; so some children do not inherit from their parents.
When the children of the deceased are male and female, the share of the male in the inheritance is twice the share of the female: “for the male the like of the portion of two females.”
To abolish the customs and deposits of the Age of Ignorance that deprived woman of her inheritance, and because woman’s inheritance needs an explicit statement and special stress (unlike man, who does not need it, because he used to get his share in the Age of Ignorance), and also to answer all the questions about the subject, woman in this sentence is counted the basic axis, and her share of the inheritance is stressed and made obligatory. On the basis of this measure the other shares are measured; that is, the share of the man equals the share of two females: “for the male the like of the portion of two females.” Then the verse goes on to set out the share of the father and mother from the inheritance of their child who has no children; and the mother’s share is counted the axis of the division, and by it the share of the father is known: “but if he has no child and his parents inherit him, then for his mother is a third.”
It is worth mentioning that man and woman may sometimes inherit an equal share; indeed, at other times the woman may inherit twice the share of the man.
In any case, if the heirs are all females and there are more than two, their share is two thirds of the inheritance; and if the heir is one daughter, she has half her father’s wealth: “but if they are women more than two, then for them is two thirds of what he left; and if she is one, then for her is half.” On the basis of some narrations, the ruling for two daughters or more is the same.
Since the inheritance does not reach anyone other than the members of the first class of heirs, the shares mentioned in principle, and the rest and the surplus of the wealth by return, go back to the first class itself.
The father and mother of the deceased and his children are classed in one class. If they are all present, the share of each of the father and the mother is a sixth of the wealth of the deceased: “and for his parents, for each one of them is a sixth of what he left, if he has a child.” And if the parents are the only heirs, the mother’s share of the inheritance is a third, “but if he has no child and his parents inherit him, then for his mother is a third”, and the remaining two thirds are given to the father.
If the deceased has no child, and his parents and his brothers are present, the mother’s share is a sixth of the inheritance and the father’s five sixths: “but if he has brothers, then for his mother is a sixth.” The narrations state the following:
What is meant by “brothers” in the verse is two brothers or more.
One brother and two sisters are treated as equal to four sisters.
Although the word “brothers” is unrestricted, including brothers of both parents, brothers of the father only and brothers of the mother only, priority is for the first two groups.
However that may be, the brothers of the deceased do not inherit, because they are in the second class of heirs; but they reduce the mother’s higher inheritance (which is a third).
Thus the dividing of the inheritance according to the portions and shares mentioned, and the disposal of the wealth of the deceased, is only after paying what is due to the deceased (such as preparing his shroud, the work of burial and so on), and paying his debts and his bequest: “after a bequest he may have made or a debt.” So first what is due to the deceased must be paid, and the rites of his shrouding and burial paid for from the capital of the wealth; this matter is mentioned explicitly in the verse because of its importance. Then the debts that were on him are paid, since the debts of the deceased after his death are taken from the very substance of his wealth. Then the bequests of the deceased are carried out, if he left a bequest, in what does not exceed a third of his wealth. After that the remaining wealth is divided among the heirs according to the law mentioned. So the heirs are not permitted to take their shares of the wealth of the deceased except after the dues, debts and bequests have been paid.
As for putting the word “bequest” before “debt” and stressing it with His (s.w.t.) words “he may have made”, it is for several reasons. The most important of them is that the basis of a Muslim’s debt and its payment is decisive, and the creditors must take it; but the bequest of a third (and not more than that) is the right of the deceased, who will not be able to secure it himself, and his bequest may not be acted on. Also, the bequest is one of the rights of the deceased (like shrouding, burial and so on), and this right comes before the rights of others. Added to that, the noble Qur’an’s stress on the bequest and the importance of keeping to it is because the bequest was not important in the Age of Ignorance, and no one cared about it.
From here, one must submit to the rulings of the noble Qur’an in dividing the inheritance according to the shares mentioned, and keep to them precisely. For a person does not know who is nearer to him in benefit, “your fathers and your sons, you do not know which of them is nearer to you in benefit”, nor to whom his wealth will go or how it will be spent. No one knows what his heirs will do with the wealth or what course they will take after him, who is righteous and who is wicked, or who will be a cause of his intercession on the Day of Resurrection. Added to this, the dividing of inheritance does not rest only on material and worldly benefits; rather, it also aims at the good of humanity and the interest of human society.
The legislating of divine rulings rests on the element of benefit and harm, even though the human being does not know those benefits and harms. Because of this ignorance of his, and his not knowing which of the heirs is more beneficial and more righteous, he cannot divide the inheritance or distribute the shares rightly and correctly. He needs heavenly guidance, as in all the other matters whose essence he does not know, and he has no right to object to the divine rulings and bounds. God (s.w.t.) is the Knowing, the Wise, who knows the secrets of the world and of people; it is He who divided the inheritance and fixed the shares and portions according to His wisdom and the interests of the individual and society: “surely God is Knowing, Wise.”
It is to be noticed that the words “sons” and “fathers” come at the end of the verse and not at its start, so as to include the direct children and also the grandfather and grandmother.
4:12 — For you shall be a half of what your wives leave
For you shall be a half of what your wives leave, if they have no children; but if they have children, then for you shall be a fourth of what they leave, after [paying off] any bequest they may have made or any debt [they may have incurred]. And for them [it shall be] a fourth of what you leave, if you have no children; but if you have children, then for them shall be an eighth of what you leave, after [paying off] any bequest you may have made or any debt [you may have incurred]. If a man or woman is inherited by siblings and has a brother or a sister, then each of them shall receive a sixth; but if they are more than that, then they shall share in one third, after [paying off] any bequest he may have made or any debt [he may have incurred] without prejudice. [This is] an enjoinment from Allah, and Allah is all-knowing, all-forbearing.
This noble verse completes the previous verse and contains a statement of the shares of a number of other heirs. The husband or wife is present in all the classes of heirs. Here God (s.w.t.) addresses men, saying: If the wife dies and has no child (or they have no children, even from other husbands), then you, O men, inherit half; and if they have children, even if they are from other husbands, you have a quarter of the estate: “And for you is half of what your wives leave, if they have no child; but if they have a child, then for you is a quarter of what they leave.”
The noble Qur’an, by its way of speaking that rests on courtesy, modesty and chastity, usually avoids addressing women directly, and prefers to use pronouns of the absent rather than stating openly, as part of teaching the Muslim how to address others with courtesy, modesty and chastity. In this noble verse the noble Qur’an refers to women indirectly and not in a direct form, and addresses men, saying: If you die and have no children, even from other wives, your permanent wives inherit a quarter; and if you have children, even from other wives, the share of your wives is an eighth: “And for them is a quarter of what you leave, if you have no child; but if you have a child, then for them is an eighth of what you leave.” If the deceased has more than one wife, the quarter or the eighth is divided among them.
As for what is meant by the word “child” in the verse, it is the direct and indirect child. So if a person dies and has a grandchild, each of the husband and wife inherits a reduced share, not the full one. Naturally, what is meant in the verse generally is every child who is not barred from inheritance.
It is worth mentioning that giving the shares mentioned, whether to the husband or the wife, is only after carrying out the bequest of the deceased and paying his debts: “… after a bequest they may have made or a debt … after a bequest you may have made or a debt.” The qualification “after a bequest” concerns the inheritance of both husband and wife.
If the deceased, man or woman, has no father, mother or children, that is, no one from the first class to inherit from him, and has a brother or sister from his mother, he is then called kalālah, and is one who is inherited from, and those inherit from him. If he has one brother or one sister, either of them inherits a sixth of the inheritance. If they are more than one, whether they are all brothers, all sisters, or brothers and sisters together, they share equally in a third of the inheritance; that is, the third of the inheritance is divided among them all, and there is no difference in that between male and female: “And if a man or a woman is inherited from as kalālah, and has a brother or a sister, then for each one of them is a sixth; but if they are more than that, then they are partners in a third.”
On the basis of the explicit statement in the narrations of the People of the House (a.s.), what is meant by kalālah in the verse is kalālah from the mother; while in the last verse of Sūrat al-Nisāʾ what is meant by it is kalālah from the father and mother, and from the father only.
As has passed in the cases mentioned, the brother and sister of the deceased also inherit from the estate, but after paying the debts of the deceased and carrying out his bequest: “… after a bequest that is made or a debt, without causing harm.” The qualification “without causing harm” concerns both titles (the bequest and the debt). If the debt is harmful, it will harm the right of the heir: either because there is no debt at all, or it is not of the amount the creditor claims; and such a debt, as we said, will harm the heir. The same is said if the deceased made a bequest of more than his right (which is a third), or falsely claimed in his bequest that he owed others, so as to deprive some heirs of inheritance. Such a bequest is harmful, and the bequest of the deceased ought not to be carried out in more than a third.
The secret of mentioning the qualification “without causing harm” here is that the deceased may have given his estate to a charitable institution or the like, if he had no heir from the first class and his relations with the members of the second and third classes of heirs were not friendly. Here, of course, his bequest is not effective in more than a third except with the agreement of the heirs; unless he has no heir and the Imam does not prevent his bequest from being carried out.
The rulings on dividing inheritance on the basis of lineage and marriage are divine rulings, “a counsel from God”, just as they are an ordinance from Him (s.w.t.), “an ordinance from God”. The word “counsel” shows the obligation to observe the shares of inheritance, according to the Qur’anic evidence.
As for the phrase “and God is Knowing, Forbearing”, it holds a threat; because “forbearance” is not “pardon” and “forgiveness”, but a pointer to divine pursuit in its time, and sending down punishment at the fitting moment in keeping with the breach of God’s (s.w.t.) positive ruling.
4:13–14 — These are Allah’s bounds, and whoever obeys Allah and His Apostle
(13) These are Allah’s bounds, and whoever obeys Allah and His Apostle, He shall admit him to gardens with streams running in them, to remain in them [forever]. That is the great success. (14) But whoever disobeys Allah and His Apostle and transgresses the bounds set by Allah, He shall make him enter a Fire, to remain in it [forever], and there will be a humiliating punishment for him.
All of God’s rulings are His bounds, including the rulings of inheritance and others; and these two verses are general and are not confined to the rulings and laws of inheritance. Although they speak of the importance of the rulings of inheritance, of the promise of the Garden to those who keep to God’s bounds, and of the threat of everlasting painful punishment to those who transgress them, they make clear, first, that the rulings particular to dividing inheritance by lineage and by marriage are obligatory and binding rulings, not recommended ones; and second, that dividing the wealth of the deceased contrary to God’s rulings and bounds expresses the testator’s contempt for the rulings of the law and his great boldness in not refraining from committing sins even after his death. For this reason the noble Qur’an threatened him with humiliating punishment: “And whoever disobeys God and His Messenger and transgresses His bounds, He will bring him into a fire, to remain in it, and for him is a humiliating punishment.”
The ruling in these two verses turns on obedience or disobedience to God and His Messenger (s.a.w.). Obedience to the Supreme Messenger (s.a.w.) is obedience to God (s.w.t.), and opposing him means opposing God, Mighty and Majestic; for the noble Prophet (s.a.w.) does not bring rulings from himself, but everything he makes clear, whether through the sunnah, guardianship or leadership of society, is from God (s.w.t.) and according to what divine revelation dictates to him. For this reason He (s.w.t.) says in the first verse, “These are the bounds of God”, and did not say “These are the bounds of God and His Messenger”; then He says in the second verse, “and transgresses His bounds”, and did not say “their bounds”; because God (s.w.t.) alone has the right to fix the bounds, and all rulings are divine bounds.
About the reward and recompense for the obedient, and the disgrace and punishment for the disobedient, God (s.w.t.) says: “And whoever obeys God and His Messenger, He will bring him into gardens beneath which rivers flow, to remain in them; and that is the great triumph. And whoever disobeys God and His Messenger and transgresses His bounds, He will bring him into a fire, to remain in it, and for him is a humiliating punishment.” Apart from the word “great” with which the reward of those who obey God’s (s.w.t.) commands is described, the demonstrative “that”, which shows spiritual distance and the loftiness of the station of those people in the Garden, points to the greatness of that reward and good recompense; and what God (s.w.t.) describes as “great” is without doubt very great.
The second verse contains a clear threat to whoever disobeys God and His Messenger (s.a.w.) and transgresses the divine bounds, which is remaining in the Fire and humiliating punishment. So the divine rulings, among them the shares of inheritance that God, Mighty and Majestic, has fixed, are divine commands on which severe punishment follows for whoever disobeys them.
If that disobedience expresses a denial of the ruling of God and His Messenger (s.a.w.), God forbid, about a decisive Islamic ruling such as inheritance, that counts as a kind of apostasy and unbelief, and its recompense is nothing but remaining forever in the fire of Hell. But if it is merely not carrying out the command of God and His Messenger (s.a.w.), it is a great sin, but its recompense is not remaining forever in the Fire; and the word “remaining” in the verse on this supposition is staying long, or for a long time, in the Fire; because one who truly believes in God and His Messenger does not remain forever in the Fire.
Perhaps the secret of using the plural form of the word “remaining” in the case of obedience and the reward of the Garden, “He will bring him into gardens … to remain (plural) in them”, and using it in the singular form in the case of disobedience and the recompense of punishment, “He will bring him into a fire, to remain (singular) in it”, is the breadth of God’s (s.w.t.) mercy and its going before His anger; alongside other reasons, among them: 1) remaining forever in Hell is established only for some individuals, and they are few; 2) all the people of the Fire are scattered and there is no fellowship among them, and so each of them is addressed alone; unlike the people of the Garden, whom we see gathered together and joined in fellowship, rejoicing at meeting one another.
4:15 — Should any of your women commit an indecent act
Should any of your women commit an indecent act, produce against them four witnesses from yourselves, and if they testify, detain them in [their] houses until death finishes them, or Allah decrees a course for them.
The verse does not contain a statement of the ruling of forbidding the evil; rather, it contains the legal punishment (ḥadd) for the woman who commits an ugly act contrary to chastity by her own will and choice, such as fornication and lesbian relations (musāḥaqah). Qur’anic courtesy requires, as is familiar, speaking of every ugly and shameful act by allusion without stating it plainly; and for this reason fornication in this verse is expressed as “indecency” (al-fāḥishah): “And those of your women who commit indecency.” Fāḥish means much, and faḥshāʾ is every ugly act or great sin whose ugliness is great and which transgresses the divine bounds. Al-fāḥishah includes all sins and ugly deeds, since it is a description of the act, or of the trait and quality (and not a description of the doer). In this verse what is meant is the ugly act contrary to chastity, that is, fornication and musāḥaqah, by the witness of the context. It is well known that the word al-fāḥishah also includes sodomy, but that is not meant here, because the noble verse speaks of the act women do. On the basis of the ruling in the verse, the woman who commits musāḥaqah or fornication, whether married or unmarried, is confined in her house for life until she dies or another ruling comes down about her: “or God makes for them a way.” On the basis of another verse and some narrations of the Family of the House (a.s.), God (s.w.t.) has made another way, a path of release, for the four cases.
The ruling of the verse includes the married woman and the unmarried, the free and the slave; and the meaning of “your women” is the women in the Islamic society. But of course the unrestricted wording in “And those who commit indecency” includes all corrupt women, Muslim and non-Muslim among them, and the ruling in the verse is not confined to Muslim women alone. But because it was impossible to apply the legal punishments outside the borders of the Islamic state in the early days of Islam, the address of the verse is particular to the Islamic community. To prevent chaos and disorder, the guardian of the affairs of the Muslims is the one responsible for applying the legal punishments: in the first place the Infallible Imam (a.s.), then the jurist who fulfils the conditions, then the just faithful, and finally the faithful who are not just.
In this verse God (s.w.t.) commands us to call four witnesses to the woman’s committing fornication or musāḥaqah; and if those witnesses testify to that, the woman is confined in the house for the rest of her life: “And those of your women who commit indecency, call four of you to witness against them; then if they testify, confine them in the houses until death takes them.” Calling witnesses in this verse differs from calling witnesses in the verse of debt, whose obligation has not been established, and by which is meant two just witnesses who testify to the debt. As for calling witnesses in this verse, it means summoning the witnesses to give their testimony in the court of justice, not being present at the scene of the crime, knowing of it and witnessing it. So His (s.w.t.) words “call four of you to witness against them” mean: summon four witnesses to the court to testify to that woman’s committing indecency.
By the indication of the word “four” and the (masculine) verb “testify” in His (s.w.t.) words “call four of you to witness against them; then if they testify”, the witnesses must be male (men). Likewise, by the proof of the word “of you”, only four of the Muslims ought to be called to witness, even if the woman who committed indecency is a protected non-Muslim (dhimmī), and the witnesses must not be non-Muslims or a mixture of Muslims and non-Muslims; for the testimony of a non-Muslim is not accepted in the Islamic court of justice except in exceptional cases. As for the necessity of the witnesses being just, it is drawn from the narrations of the Family of the House (a.s.).
The outcome is that it is not permitted to confine a woman in the house merely on learning of her indecency. Rather, the matter requires recourse to the Islamic court of justice, the testimony of four witnesses, and finally the issuing of the ruling by the judge of the law. These preliminaries concern the matter of legal punishments, judgment and applying the legal punishment, and not the subject of forbidding the evil; especially since the noble verse stresses calling four men as witnesses, whereas for forbidding the evil the knowledge of the one who forbids is enough, even if that is by the testimony of women. Likewise, forbidding the evil needs no court, calling witnesses or legal ruling; rather, every Muslim, as soon as he knows and learns of the sin, ought to alert the one who does the evil in ignorance, and forbid the one who commits the sin knowingly and deliberately.
This verse points to keeping the sinful woman and confining her in the house for the length of her life, by His (s.w.t.) words “until death takes them”, after the command to confine them, “confine them in the houses”. As is known, death does not take anyone; rather, God (s.w.t.) is the first and last Taker of souls, and it is He who commands the angel of death (a.s.) and his helpers to take them.
So the initial ruling on the sinful woman is life confinement in the house, until God decrees His command concerning her confinement: “confine them in the houses until death takes them, or God makes for them a way.” The phrase “or God makes for them a way” points to the ruling of confinement in the house being, naturally, temporary, and that another new ruling is about to be issued, which is the ruling that brings about the promised way out for that woman. In such cases the issuing of another ruling is not technically called abrogation (naskh). So the ruling of confinement in the house is not continuous and everlasting, just as it is not technically abrogated; rather, it is like a temporary ruling.
The awaited new ruling and the solution to this problem do not consist in death, repentance, old age, disability or finding a fitting husband; rather, they are the release of the sinful woman from her confinement by flogging (for the unmarried) and stoning (for the married).
The lām in “for them” conveys particularity; and the meaning of the sentence mentioned is “until God (s.w.t.) makes clear His ruling particular to them”, not “in their interest”, so that the meaning would be “until God (s.w.t.) issues His ruling in their interest”. For if it were in their interest, the difficulty would remain in respect of those who commit indecency after the new ruling is issued, and whether the ruling of execution or flogging serves the interest of the new offenders.
The new ruling becomes applicable from the time it is made known to new offenders. As for what concerns the old offenders, according to the practice of reasonable people, which the holy Lawgiver has not rejected, the law does not have retroactive effect; the previous law remains valid and in force on those sentenced by it in its time, and they are not pardoned after the new law is issued unless the new law contains what conveys that. Indeed, it can be said that the verse is unrestricted and the new ruling includes both the earlier and the new offenders together; and that the earlier offenders bear the burden of the new ruling, not that they are pardoned and set free without recompense; especially since the text of the previous law decrees confining these sinners for life until another way is brought or a new ruling is issued: “confine them in the houses until death takes them, or God makes for them a way.”
4:16 — Should two among you commit it
Should two among you commit it, chastise them both; but if they repent and reform, let them alone. Indeed Allah is all-clement, all-merciful.
God (s.w.t.), completing the ruling of the previous verse, commands that men and women who commit fornication be punished with hurt by tongue and hand, and rebuked and reproached, until they repent to God and set their affair right. If they repent and set themselves right, it becomes obligatory to stop hurting them and leave them alone.
After the previous verse made clear the punishment particular to the sinful woman, this verse points to the punishment of both the sinful man and woman together. As for the secret of putting the ruling and punishment of the woman first, it is: first, that a woman’s controlling herself, governing her conduct and keeping away from fornication is not something hard; and for this reason a woman’s fornication is uglier and greater than a man’s fornication. Second, the woman is usually the one who begins, by drawing the man towards her and tempting him to commit fornication; and for this reason the sinful woman is confined, to prevent the spread of corruption: “confine them in the houses until death takes them.” As for men, life imprisonment is not ruled for them, especially when we know that such confinement would lead to economic stagnation for the family and for society as a whole.
Even when the sinful man and woman repent and set themselves right, and the hurting and rebuking of them stops, the woman remains sentenced to life confinement in the house; for repentance removes from them only the hurt and rebuke: “then hurt them both; but if they repent and set themselves right, then leave them alone.” But the ruling of keeping the fornicating woman in the house remains in force until she dies: “confine them in the houses until death takes them.”
As for the dual pronouns in each of “and the two who”, “commit it”, “repent” and “set themselves right”, using them here is by way of giving the masculine precedence. The verse points to the man and woman who commit fornication, not to sodomy; because the verse commands leaving alone the sinner who repents, while the harsh punishment of sodomy cannot be overlooked.
The feminine pronoun in the verb “commit it” refers back to “indecency” in the previous verse, which includes fornication and musāḥaqah; and musāḥaqah, the other instance of indecency, has been excluded from the second verse because of the masculine form of “the two who”.
The coming of “and set themselves right” after the verb “repent” is because repentance has no worth if it is the result of fear of the legal punishment being applied. Rather, it must aim at setting the self right, so that the sinner strives to set himself right and become a sound human being again.
As for the last sentence, in which He (s.w.t.) says “surely God is Oft-returning, Merciful”, it is counted a proof of the content of the verse. There is no doubt that the effect of these two attributes (the Oft-returning and the Merciful) and their application are only on the basis of the knowledge and wisdom of God (s.w.t.), like all His other beautiful Names.
It should be said:
After the ruling on fornication and musāḥaqah was made clear in the second verse of Sūrat al-Nūr and also in the narrations, the application of this verse and the previous verse came to an end; or, as it is said, the way mentioned in His (s.w.t.) words “or God makes for them a way” was made.
To act on the content of this verse, as in the previous verse, the act must be proven in the court of justice so that the legal punishment or discretionary punishment (taʿzīr) may be carried out. As for there being no mention here of calling witnesses (that is, asking for witnesses), perhaps that is understood from the previous verse.
The attribution of indecency to its two parties may not be alike in respect of knowledge, ignorance and the like. On this basis, applying the legal or discretionary punishment, and likewise repentance, setting right and ceasing the hurt: each of these is independent of the other in every one of those matters.
4:17 — [Acceptance of] repentance by Allah is only for those who commit evil out of ignorance…
[Acceptance of] repentance by Allah is only for those who commit evil out of ignorance and then repent promptly. It is such whose repentance Allah will accept, and Allah is all-knowing, all-wise.
The previous verse was about the repentance of sinners and God’s (s.w.t.) accepting their repentance, and this verse followed it to make clear that accepting repentance is binding on God, the conditions for accepting repentance, and whose repentance is accepted. Repentance is a return of God’s kindness to the penitent after he had gone out of it. It is the duty of the servant: he must return from opposition to agreement and from disobedience to obedience, and the One returned to is God (s.w.t.). God’s turning to the servant means His (s.w.t.) turning back from punishing him, out of His kindness and grace. God’s turning does not mean turning back from sin, because sin has no meaning in His (s.w.t.) case. Rather, it means that He (s.w.t.) begins the kindness by granting the sinner success to repent; and the servant’s repentance is his returning to God (s.w.t.) by drawing near to Him.
The Infallible Imams are always in a state of returning to God and drawing near to Him (s.w.t.). Not every repentance is necessarily preceded by a sin; rather, what is taken into the meaning of repentance is turning from distance from Him (s.w.t.), even if it is not from a sin. God’s vicegerent, when he sees himself far from Him (s.w.t.), turns to Him and asks His forgiveness.
The servant’s repentance falls between two turnings of God (s.w.t.): the first is His (s.w.t.) turning with initial kindness; and after the servant repents of his sin and returns to his Lord, He (s.w.t.) is kind to him once again by accepting his repentance and bringing him near. This is stated plainly so that no one thinks that turning back from sin is an independent act of the sinner, which he began on his own; rather, it is preceded by divine kindness. This second turning is what is meant in His (s.w.t.) words “Repentance with God is only…”, and it is the repentance which He (s.w.t.) has written on Himself, and the acceptance of which from the servant God has pledged.
The definite article in the word “repentance” refers to something known, and its meaning is “accepting repentance is only with God”. According to God’s (s.w.t.) pledge and promise, accepting repentance is binding and certain; for the meaning of His (s.w.t.) pledging a thing is His making it binding on Himself.
Explaining “Repentance is upon God” as “accepting repentance is from God” is an emphasis on God’s accepting repentance, and does not mean a duty laid on Him (s.w.t.). In other words, repentance is binding from God, not upon God. The like of this is what is said: punishing the sinner after accepting his repentance and forgiving his sin is injustice; and the meaning is that it is impossible for God (s.w.t.), because injustice is ugly, not that He is unable to do it.
In other words, repentance is binding on God (s.w.t.) by way of the kindness and mercy He has written on Himself, through some of His Names governing others, such as the governance of His mercy and goodness over His justice and anger; not by way of obligation and duty laid on Him (s.w.t.) by another, because nothing is binding on Him, and nothing has the right to rule on God in anything.
The servant’s repentance is stated plainly to be surrounded by two turnings of God (s.w.t.), so that no one thinks that repentance from sin is an act the servant does alone and independently.
God (s.w.t.) has confined to Himself the promise of accepting the repentance of the penitent, but on two conditions:
That the sin be out of ignorance: “for those who do evil in ignorance”, and not out of obstinacy and boldness, or hypocrisy. Ignorance here means foolishness, whose opposite is right guidance and reason; it does not mean the opposite of knowledge, even though knowledge without action is in the ruling of ignorance. Otherwise the repentance of the learned would not be accepted; whereas repentance is a legal duty shared by the learned and the ignorant, and since being charged with it entails its acceptance, it cannot be made general for them while its acceptance is restricted to the repentance of the ignorant.
That the sinner hasten to repent, and not put it off out of carelessness until his term comes and the calamity of death strikes him.
Repentance is accepted if the sinner returns by his own will and choice. Returning at the time of dying is a return out of compulsion, not out of remorse and choice, and so it is not accepted.
The phrase “then repent soon after” does not show precisely the time limit for accepting repentance; and the next verse shows that it is accepted up until the time of dying.
Repentance from sins is one of the legal duties that must be done at once; it is not tied to a set time or limited to a period. The one who puts it off commits another sin, and the longer he delays it, the more sin he adds to sin.
It is possible that the degrees of the nearness and distance of repentance have an effect on the degree of its acceptance, and that the difference of the verses on this matter goes back to the difference in the degrees of repentance. Yes, repentance must be soon after; but its acceptance is not restricted to that.
God (s.w.t.) has written on Himself that He will accept the repentance of the one who sins in ignorance, if he repents before the time of dying and before death comes upon him; and God’s promise does not fail, because breaking a promise is impossible for God. The phrase “Repentance with God is only” is a statement of that promise mentioned at the start of the verse.
God (s.w.t.) turns towards (ʿalā) the servant, not merely returns to the servant; God’s turning is an outpouring coming down from God the High to the servant. The pointer to distance in the phrase “those are they to whom God turns” shows the loftiness of the degree of the penitent.
The duty to repent is general, and so its possibility and conditions are made easy for everyone without exception. But only some of the sinners are granted success in it, by a special success that lordly wisdom required; God’s grace included them, and they desired what is with Him (s.w.t.), through the insight they were given that returned them to their Lord; so He turned to them.
When God (s.w.t.) accepts or rejects repentance, it is out of wisdom and a hidden benefit which no one knows. The two names “Knowing, Wise” contain the content of the verse: He (s.w.t.) knows the one who sinned in ignorance and repented without carelessness and delay, so God includes him in His wise kindness and accepts his repentance; and He knows the one who sinned out of obstinacy and stubbornness and put off repentance.
4:18 — But [acceptance of] repentance is not for those who go on committing misdeeds
But [acceptance of] repentance is not for those who go on committing misdeeds: when death approaches any of them, he says, ‘I repent now.’ Nor is it for those who die while they are faithless. For such We have prepared a painful punishment.
After the previous verse made clear the condition of repentance, and God’s promise to accept it under the conditions mentioned in it, this verse came to make clear what repentance is rejected.
What is meant by repentance in this verse is the second divine turning, by which He accepts the sinner’s repentance; not the first divine turning, by which the servant is granted success to return. So the meaning is: “Repentance is not upon God for those who…”; and the words “upon God” are left out because the previous verse indicates them.
This verse makes clear the rejection of the repentance of two groups:
- Those who deprive themselves of God’s (s.w.t.) kindness in accepting repentance through their ignorance, their boldness towards God (s.w.t.) and their carelessness in disobedience, so that sins and wrongs pile up on them, and they put off repentance until the time of dying, seeing the signs of the approach of the decreed term and entering the world of the barzakh. They are sinners who died before repenting, out of delay and making light of it; but they are Muslims, and were not faithless towards God, because repentance has no meaning for one who denies the Origin and the Return. The Muslim may regret and repent at the time of dying, but his repentance is rejected. The phrase “nor those who die while they are faithless” is also an indication that the first group are not faithless, because distinguishing cuts off sharing. And the previous verse showed, by the indication of the singular word “evil”, that the sin had not yet become a settled disposition; but in this verse the word comes as “evil deeds” in the plural, so what is meant is the sinner of many sins.
God (s.w.t.) accepts the repentance of every penitent before his death is present, whether he repents of transgression or of unbelief and polytheism; but repentance at the time of dying is rejected. God (s.w.t.) has not promised to accept the repentance of one who persists in disobedience until the last moments of life, because he did not repent out of remorse and choice, because of the ugliness of sin and the goodness of obedience, but out of panic and fear of punishment. Just as repentance after death has no effect, so repentance at the time of dying, through the loss of choice, likewise has none. The verse here has joined the repentance of the dying, which is a strong repentance, in its not being accepted, to a stronger repentance, which is the repentance of those who die while they are faithless. In the word “now” there is the sinner’s implicit admission that his repentance is not fit to be accepted; and though it is the penitent’s word, it carries a hint of the reason his repentance is rejected, because the ruling is tied to a quality that hints at its cause.
This is a repentance that is not accepted from its owner, because despair of the life of this world and the terror of what lies ahead are what forced him to regret his act and resolve to return to his Lord; but it is no time for return, since there is no worldly life and no practical choice.
What is meant by “when death comes to one of them” is the time of dying, not the last days of life. For the time of dying is the time when the legal rulings are lifted, among them the duty to repent; in it no work is accepted or has any legal effect, because the human being then loses his worldly awareness and his choice, and all the ways of deliverance are closed before him. But in the last part of his life, while he still has his awareness and his power of perception and action, he is charged with duties, his bequests are valid, and his repentance is accepted if he repents.
- Those who die faithless and atheist. Their state is the state of the sinning faithful who die without repenting; and the reason is that there is no repentance after death, and regret does not help after it. Whoever dies faithless, his deeds are scattered dust, even if he was a Muslim when he did them and repented of his sins; for unbelief wipes out everything before it.
For the faithless and the sinners there is a punishment of severe bitterness, as He (s.w.t.) said: “For those We have prepared a painful punishment.” The word “those” here shows the depth of their levels in the punishment, unlike its use in the previous verse. This verse mentions the faithful who leave this world without repentance together with the faithless, which means that they share some of the levels of punishment, not all of them; because the faithful do not share with the faithless the degree of remaining forever in the Fire.
The rejection of the repentance of the dying is a threat and warning; and not carrying out a threat, which is a performative and not a report, does not go against wisdom, rather it suits pardon and goodness. What is impossible for God (s.w.t.) is breaking a promise, because that goes against divine honour and generosity.
4:19 — O you who have faith! It is not lawful for you to inherit women forcibly
O you who have faith! It is not lawful for you to inherit women forcibly, and do not press them to take away part of what you have given them, unless they commit a gross indecency. Consort with them in an honourable manner; and should you dislike them, maybe you dislike something while Allah invests it with an abundant good.
This verse forbids the faithful a custom of the Age of Ignorance that was followed concerning women. It is a prohibition for all people; and addressing it to the faithful in particular is because they alone act on the rulings of Islam in inheritance.
In the Age of Ignorance the marriage of a woman was an inheritance that was passed on, and God (s.w.t.) sent down, to abolish it: “It is not lawful for you to inherit women”; that is, it is not lawful for you to inherit women. The ruling of inheritance here is tied to women; and when an act is tied to an external thing, what is meant is the effect of that thing and what follows from it, not the thing itself. For inheritance is a legislative, legal ruling tied to wealth and rights, not to the human being, unless the human being is property, like male and female slaves. What is meant here is inheriting the right of marriage and marrying women, not their persons; and this is also shown by the people of the Age of Ignorance inheriting the marriage of women, not their persons.
The qualification “against their will” describes the usual case; meaning that most women dislike being married by inheritance. The ruling of prohibition is not conditional on dislike; rather, it is forbidden even with consent. It is not a purely explanatory or limiting qualification, so that the verse would be forbidding inheriting their wealth by compulsion.
The unrestrictedness of the verse may include inheriting marriage, and keeping them by not divorcing them, with the aim of seizing their inheritance after their death. On this reading the axis of the verse is forbidding inheriting their wealth against their will; and what is meant by the inheritance is the woman’s wealth, not her marriage. On this reading an omitted word, “wealth”, must be supplied, and the prohibition of inheriting them is addressed to those other than their husbands; or it is said that there is a figure of attribution in the verse, and the address in it is to their husbands.
In any case, the first part of the verse is not setting out the legal prohibition of hurting women and keeping them until they die so that men may inherit their wealth. Rather, its focus is a ruling of status: that it is not permitted to inherit the marriage of women, and that it is not owned by inheritance. Following this ruling of status is a legal ruling, which is the prohibition of disposing of the right of marriage. The man may divorce his wife, and the wife can free herself from the marriage either by a khulʿ divorce, by giving her dower or part of it to the husband. But among men there are some who make things hard for their wife until she is forced to give him her dower, or give up the maintenance due to her, to be rid of his harm. And among them are some who make the situation hard for their wife: he neither divorces her nor lives with her the life of a husband with his wife, until she dies of her oppression and grief, and he inherits her wealth. God (s.w.t.) has forbidden men these acts, just as He has forbidden the woman’s guardian, who reckons he has the right to hinder her and prevent her marriage. So too in the matter of a man preventing his divorced wife, and preventing the widow of the deceased, from marrying.
What is meant by the phrase “some of what you have given them” is their wealth taken from their husbands, such as the dower and maintenance, not the personal wealth they owned before marriage.
So the verse in this part sets out the legal ruling and the ruling of status for the financial rights of women, and forbids husbands to press them and harm them with the aim of seizing their dowers or the maintenance due to them; unless they commit an act of gross evil that harms the married life, such as defiance (nushūz), and what is meant is not the great sins. In that case the husband has the right to take away part of her dower.
The word “indecency” in this place plainly means disobedience in matters of married life; it does not have an unrestricted scope including every great sin. Rather, what the context and the fit between ruling and subject require is that what is meant by it is the woman’s disobedience in the sphere of the intimate matters which the husband wants from his wife, and for which he gave her the wealth, intercourse and the like. If the wife refuses that, the man has the right to take back his wealth and to refuse to spend on her; because just as bodily punishment has its effect in defiance, financial punishment has its effect too.
What is meant by describing the indecency as “open” is that its ugliness and shamefulness are clear and plain to all, so that no one doubts it is disobedience; it does not mean flaunting transgression. For the woman at fault does not wish to show people the ugliness of her act, so that it would be “open” and her indecency “open”. So this word has no link with the level of proof. On this basis open indecency includes defiance, because it is a great and clear sin, even if no one knows of it but the husband.
The word “indecency” has come in other verses meaning clear disobedience, not open disobedience flaunted, as He (s.w.t.) said: “O Prophet, when you divorce women, divorce them for their waiting period, and count the waiting period, and be wary of God your Lord. Do not turn them out of their houses, nor should they go out, unless they commit open indecency.”
Living with them in kindness
In the third part of this verse God (s.w.t.) mentioned to the faithful what they ought to do in social and moral conduct with the family, saying: “And live with them in kindness; and if you dislike them, perhaps you dislike something and God puts much good in it.” For you may be given, through what you dislike, a righteous son of fine character, who is the abundance (al-kawthar) and much good.
The address in the phrase “And live with them in kindness” is directed, as at the start of the verse, to men, and is not particular to husbands; the pronoun in it refers back to the word “women”. The “kindness” (al-maʿrūf) commanded is what reason approves and what reliable transmission indicates, because they are the two that disclose heavenly revelation; and what they find ugly is the evil (al-munkar). Munkar does not mean the unknown, as against the known; rather, it means that whose doing is ugly and which reason does not accept.
The verse here, just as it includes the marital relationship, also includes other relationships. The brother must treat his sister with kindness and goodness, and the employer must behave well with the women who work for him and are his employees, and be gentle with them.
In the phrase “if you dislike them”, the dislike is attributed to their persons, so what is meant is dislike of the class and kind of woman, not her character and outward appearance.
The word “perhaps” (ʿasā) means hope. This expression is used of God’s acts and His attributes of action, not of His essential attributes.
4:20–21 — If you desire to take a wife in place of another
(20) If you desire to take a wife in place of another, and you have given one of them a quintal [of gold], do not take anything away from it. Would you take it by way of calumny and flagrant sin?! (21) How could you take it back, when you have known each other, and they have taken from you a solemn covenant?
After the previous verse forbade making things hard for women and commanded living with them well and being gentle with them, these two verses set out rulings of jurisprudence and morals, in the course of explaining how to treat the wife in kindness, whether the husband wishes to keep the marriage bond or to exchange his wife for another. Those rulings have their effect in strengthening the marital and family bond, and are a guarantee that the legal rulings on the woman’s dower are carried out.
He (s.w.t.) forbade the husband to take back anything, however little, of his wife’s dower if he resolves to part from her, or to refuse to give it to her if he wishes to exchange her for another.
Joining the word “exchange”, which means seeking a substitute, with the word “you wish” conveys that if you intend to part from your wife for another, you must first pay what you owe of dower to the first: the whole dower if the divorce is after consummation, and half of it if it is before.
The dower is an obligatory right of the wife on the man, and he is not permitted to take it or part of it back. If it is a particular thing, he is not permitted to dispose of anything of it, even if he accuses her of something, and whether he wishes to exchange her or not. The unrestrictedness of the phrase “and you have given one of them a heap of gold (qinṭār)” includes what is other than the dower too; but what is meant in the verse, by the fit between ruling and subject, is the dower. The phrase “then take nothing from it” conveys generality, because an indefinite noun in the context of negation indicates it.
Yes; the unrestrictedness of this verse in not permitting taking anything from the dower is restricted by the two verses of Sūrat al-Baqarah; for this unrestrictedness applies when there has been no intimacy and consummation with the wife, or when she does not consent to return the dower to the husband. Although this verse begins with a conditional particle, what it conveys is not a conditional proposition but a supposed one (not a conditional one). So the meaning of the phrase “And if you wish… and you have given one of them a heap of gold, then take nothing from it” is: do not take anything from it, even if it is a heap of gold.
And even if the proposition is conditional, it is one of those conditional propositions with a legally valid consequent because its antecedent is legally valid; and from the validity of its consequent (the impermissibility of disposing of the dower) the validity of the antecedent (the permissibility of a large dower) is inferred. So the meaning of the verse is: what the woman took as dower is her right and her legal property, however much it is, and the husband is not permitted to dispose of it or take anything from it, however little.
A qinṭār is much wealth, and expressing it so is a figure for a large dower. This shows that it is permitted to make the dower high, and that it has no fixed limit or amount.
This is shown too by the prohibition of disposing of it, and the woman’s ownership of it, being expressed through slander, manifest sin and a firm covenant. If it were permitted to take anything from it, there would be no sense in forbidding it absolutely with such severe words; because if it were permitted, the husband would only be taking his own wealth, not the wealth of the wife, whether he divorced her or not.
Yes; the permissibility of high dowers does not show that it is preferable or encouraged. Rather, the narrations encourage making it small, and the less it is, the better; and it is recommended that it be the amount of the dower of the sunnah. Taking the dower is slander (buhtān), because it is a wrong and an injustice that stuns the wife and makes her feel estranged, when they have gone in to one another and she has taken from him a firm covenant. Every act that stuns a person and strikes him with bewilderment is buhtān, whether by word and speech, by writing, or by deed. The verse expresses the act of taking itself as buhtān; so it is not because of slander, but is itself slander. So the meaning of the verse is: you falsely claim that you owned it, and so you take it back. The unrestrictedness of the verse here is not to be taken as something like accusing the woman and throwing a lie at her in order to take some of her dower. And if slander were said to be the cause of the taking (an efficient cause), the sin would not follow from the taking and be its final cause (an object of purpose); rather, the taking itself, as an act, is a manifest sin and an open disobedience.
In other words, taking the dower is itself slander and manifest sin; not that slander is the cause of the taking and the taking the cause of the sin. The thing described, which is “the taking”, is left out in the phrase “Would you take it by slander and manifest sin?”, and the sense is: would you take it, a taking described as slander and manifest sin?
In His (s.w.t.) forbidding taking the wife’s dower, He drew attention to a moral and educational matter, and recalled the beautiful past and the former love and affection that was between the spouses, which made them like two bodies with one heart; in a way that stirs the man’s feeling and tenderness towards the woman.
This gentle speech and the expression “going in to one another” (ifḍāʾ) picture the intimacy of the marital bond and the strong feeling between the spouses; and it is higher and stronger than sexual matters. When the sexual relationship and private seclusion are expressed by ifḍāʾ, it is an expression of one of the manifestations of harmony between the spouses.
Mentioning these emotional and educational pointers is one of the features of the Qur’an. It is not content with setting out family laws, what is obligatory in them and what is forbidden, and does not confine itself to proofs when it mentions the roots of the teachings, tawḥīd, prophethood and acts of worship. Rather, it accompanies that with social and moral alerting and direction, and makes clear the moral and legal sides for people in an easy statement understood by all: “Thus God makes clear to you the signs”; “and He teaches them the Book and wisdom.”
In this verse the Qur’an stirs the man’s feelings towards his wife and inclines him to justice and to acting on the legal ruling when he wishes to divorce her, so that he does not press her to take something of her dower. Expressing each of the spouses with the word “spouse” and the word “one another” shows that each of them alone is “the sum of the two”; meaning that they are in such harmony and agreement that they have become like one person with one heart, so that each is the spouse of the other and a part of him. Ifḍāʾ in the phrase “when you have gone in to one another” does not mean intercourse and the known sexual matters, as some commentators mentioned. For then the meaning would be setting out a ruling of pure obedience, establishing the dower as the woman’s property after sexual intimacy; and it is clear that the reason given for not permitting the taking of the dower must be something rooted in common understanding which people know in their lives, not a matter of pure obedience which they know only when the Lawgiver explains it to them. It is not wise for the Lawgiver to say to people: How can you pray when a cat’s hair has stuck to your clothes or your bodies! That would not be right, because people have no knowledge that prayer in the hair of an animal whose meat is not eaten is invalid unless the Lawgiver himself teaches them that; for it is a ruling of pure obedience, known only from him, so giving it as the reason for invalidity is not right. But if he said to them, How can you pray while you are drunk, not understanding what you say…, that would be right from him, because he has proved the invalidity by something they know in themselves and need not be taught.
Giving reasons from matters rooted in common understanding is mentioned in the narrations, as in the Prophetic hadith: “Twenty years of companionship is kinship.” Meaning: companionship stretching over twenty years has the ruling of womb and kinship by lineage, and requires not trespassing on the right of the companion. People know the sanctity and affection that belong to womb and kinship, so it is right to argue for the right of long companionship from the right of near kinship.
Ifḍāʾ is a statement of the wisdom, not of the complete cause; and what is meant by it is the usual state, not the permanent one. So it also includes cases where there is no harmony and love; for what goes against the rule of conversation is taking the proof to refer to the rare individual, while explaining a word so that the rare individual is included is no difficulty. The difference between the two cases is clear from this example: if one were commanded to honour the learned, taking the title “learned” to mean the great scholar in many sciences in particular would be an error, because it takes it to refer to an individual rare among the learned; and the right thing is that the honouring includes everyone to whom the title “learned” applies, even if he is a rare individual. The reason given in the verse here is of this kind. So the husband is not permitted to take the dower even if they never entered into one space of mutual love and feeling.
Keeping the covenant of marriage
The marriage contract is a firmly bound covenant, and an undertaking of responsibility that binds men not to trespass on the dowers of women; and according to this legal and customary undertaking they must give them their dowers at divorce. What is meant by the firm covenant in the verse is this marriage contract, not the verbal undertaking taken from the man when the contract is made, that he will look after his wife and live with her well or divorce her with goodness. The expression “firm covenant” and “manifest sin” goes back to two things: the basis of the covenant, and its being firm and confirmed. Covenants have degrees, and describing it as firm here is proof of the strength of its binding and its soundness.
Some commentators transmitted a narration of Imam al-Bāqir (a.s.) on the meaning of “the firm covenant”, which is: “keeping in kindness or releasing with goodness”. The marriage contract was concluded by God’s (s.w.t.) word and by a command from Him; so it is a pledge and a firm covenant in which God took from men that they obey Him and follow His ruling in it. This, though right in itself, does not fit the apparent meaning of the verse, because the subject of “they have taken” is the women, not God (s.w.t.).
4:22 — Do not marry any of the women whom your fathers had married
Do not marry any of the women whom your fathers had married, excluding what is already past. That is indeed an indecency, an outrage and an evil course.
The previous verse forbade what they used to do in the Age of Ignorance, a son inheriting the marriage of his father’s wife; and this verse followed it to forbid them marrying those whom their fathers had married, which is a shameful custom of the Age of Ignorance. This is a prohibition both legal and of status. So marrying the father’s wife is not permitted, because she is among those forbidden by marriage ties; and if it took place after the prohibition, it was void. The phrase “except what has already passed” shows that this did happen among them; God has pardoned what came of it, and lifted its effect in status, such as counting the child born of it as illegitimate.
4:23 — Forbidden to you are your mothers
Forbidden to you are your mothers, your daughters and your sisters, your paternal aunts and your maternal aunts, your brother’s daughters and your sister’s daughters, your [foster-]mothers who have suckled you and your sisters through fosterage, your wives’ mothers, and your stepdaughters who are under your care [born] of the wives whom you have gone into—but if you have not gone into them there is no sin upon you—and the wives of your sons who are from your own loins, and that you should marry two sisters at one time—excluding what is already past; indeed Allah is all-forgiving, all-merciful—
The women whom it is forbidden to marry are of several kinds, because they are forbidden either by lineage or by a cause, and the cause is either nursing or marriage ties. The previous verse set out one kind, which is marrying the father’s wife; and this verse followed it to set out the prohibition of marrying thirteen women.
The unrestrictedness or generality of the lawfulness of other women in the verse “and lawful for you is what is beyond that” is restricted or narrowed by other verses which forbade marrying kinds of women other than the thirteen mentioned in the verse under discussion. This verse is setting out the prohibition of marrying thirteen women, not listing the women within the forbidden degrees (maḥārim); as is shown by its mentioning the wife’s sister, for she is forbidden only when combined with her sister, not in herself.
Being within the forbidden degrees entails the prohibition of marriage; but the prohibition of marriage does not entail being within the forbidden degrees and the permission to look. What is meant by the prohibition in this verse is the marital relationship, whether by permanent or temporary contract, by ownership, or by other causes of intercourse.
The verse does not mention the title “marriage”. If that is what is meant, then keeping agreement of meaning between what is excepted in the phrase “except what your right hands own” in the following verse and what it is excepted from in this verse requires that what is meant by marriage be its linguistic meaning, which is intercourse and sexual contact, not its technical legal meaning, which is the contract; because ownership is not a contract. In that case the bare contract is not forbidden legally, even if it is void in status.
If what is meant by the prohibition is marriage in both its linguistic and legal meanings, the contract is forbidden legally and void in status. If what is meant is the legal prohibition, whichever of the spouses knows of it is sinful; and if what is meant is voidness, the contract is void, with knowledge or without it. Directing the address in the verse to men rather than women is part of the courtesy of the Qur’an and a regard for the chastity and modesty of women; and in it there is a call to men to chastity as well, and because the usual custom is that men are the ones who seek marriage with women.
The prohibition here is tied to the persons of the women, “Forbidden to you are your mothers and your daughters”, and what is meant is marriage. For when a ruling is attributed to a person, the mind moves to its most prominent expected effect, of quality or act; because the tying of a prohibition to any subject looks to the effect sought from it, and in women that is marriage. Besides, it is known from the context of the noble Qur’an that the prohibition is only in respect of marriage. The verse mentions seven forbidden by lineage: mothers, sisters (full and half), daughters, paternal aunts, maternal aunts, brother’s daughters and sister’s daughters.
The reason for using the plural for them is:
The address in the verse is to everyone, and everyone is many, so their mothers, daughters and sisters are necessarily many too. For these titles apply to all women: there is none of them who is not a mother, sister or daughter, and so on. To cover the distribution they are mentioned in the plural; that is, forbidden to each one of you is to marry his own mother and daughter, and so on. It does not mean forbidding every mother and daughter of every man to every man, because forbidding the whole to the whole has no meaning. What the verse comes to is that every man is forbidden to marry his own mother and his own daughter.
Some of those titles apply at times through an intermediary and at times without one, so their individuals multiply; and they are put in the plural to cover them all. The title “mothers” includes the mother and the grandmothers on the mother’s and father’s side, in a vertical line; the title “sisters” includes full and half sisters on one level. So too in kinship by nursing: the nursing woman is a mother, and her mother is a grandmother to the nursed child, so marrying her is forbidden. Likewise with the wives of sons: they include sons of one’s own loins and grandsons, because they are sons through an intermediary. The title “wives” is also many in its individuals according to the number of a man’s sons.
The aim of putting those titles in the plural may be both these reasons; so what is meant by the phrase “your mothers who nursed you” is the direct nursing mother and through an intermediary. Prohibition by nursing is something particular to the Islamic law, and one of its founding rulings.
Before the verse sets out the ruling of nursing, it mentioned the subject of the prohibition under the title of “mothers and sisters”, not under the title of “women”, saying: “and your mothers who nursed you and your sisters by nursing”; to show the importance of the ruling of nursing and the prohibition that spreads through it. The nursing woman is in the position of the nursed child’s mother by lineage, and the girl who shares the milk with him is in the position of his sister by lineage; and the nursed child is forbidden to marry his mother and his sister by nursing.
Those forbidden by nursing are seven kinds, on the pattern of those forbidden by lineage; and the mention of the mother and sister is by way of example, not limitation, as the reliable hadith shows: “What is forbidden by lineage is forbidden by nursing.” This verse has an unrestrictedness and an implied meaning through silence about those by nursing other than the mother and sister; so the default for others besides them is that marriage is lawful. And joining the phrase “and lawful for you is what is beyond that” increases its unrestrictedness and verbal apparent meaning in that.
The result would be the confining of the prohibition by nursing to the mother and sister, without the five other kinds. But the hadith “What is forbidden by lineage is forbidden by nursing” narrows or restricts it, because it explains and makes it clear and does not conflict with it; so the five other kinds come into the prohibition by nursing.
The hadith puts nursing in the position of lineage; and since the hadith did not detail the ruling of what it is likened to, which is lineage, the hadith alone bears no fruit; its fruit appears when the verse is joined to it. And the verse is not what narrows or restricts the hadith; otherwise it would require narrowing or restricting the greater part, which is five kinds by lineage out of seven. The unrestrictedness of the verse in respect of the number of nursings, their time and their conditions for spreading the prohibition is restricted by what has come in the narrations of restrictions and narrowing.
After the verse set out the prohibition of the seven kinds, it turned to set out the ruling of four other kinds forbidden by a cause: the wife’s mother, the stepdaughter, the son’s wife and the wife’s sister.
Whoever marries a woman by any kind of marriage, even by something like ownership or permission, her mother is forbidden to him forever because of the marriage tie.
The stepdaughter (rabībah) is the daughter of a man’s wife by another, and the daughter of a woman’s husband by another. What is meant by it here, by the fit between ruling and subject, is the woman’s daughter by her former husband. She is called rabībah because she is usually under the care and upbringing (tarbiyah) of her mother’s husband. The ruling is the prohibition of a man marrying his wife’s daughter by another, if he has consummated the marriage with her mother.
The expression “in your care” is not a qualification meant to restrict the prohibition to the title “stepdaughter” applying to the wife’s daughter; rather, it is a qualification describing the usual case and has no implied contrary meaning. The prohibition is unrestricted, whether the girl was brought up in the care of her mother’s husband or not, and whether she was born before her mother’s divorce from her father or after it.
The condition for the prohibition of the stepdaughter is intercourse with her mother and consummation with her, by His (s.w.t.) words “of your wives with whom you have consummated; but if you have not consummated with them, there is no sin on you.” This is a qualification with a conditional implied meaning, and the verse itself has stated it plainly. If he concluded the marriage contract with her mother and did not consummate with her, her daughter is forbidden to him in combination and remains lawful in herself; so if he wishes to marry her, he must part from her mother, because combining mother and daughter is forbidden.
The qualification “you have consummated” is tied to the second word “your wives”, meaning the wives, not to what came before it meaning the mother of the wives; the proof is the phrase “of your wives with whom”. Marrying the wife’s mother is forbidden in every case, whether he consummated with her daughter or not. Among those forbidden in marriage forever are the wives of sons, whether of one’s own loins or not, grandsons and daughters’ sons. The qualification “of your own loins” is to exclude the adopted son, so that marrying his wife after he divorces her is permitted; not to exclude the son by nursing. For the son of one’s loins does not stand against the son by nursing, so that restricting it to the loins would exclude the son by nursing; rather, his ruling is the ruling of the son by lineage. In marriage, combining two sisters is forbidden, by any kind of marriage, even by something like ownership or permission; because the bond of marriage, by whatever cause, spreads the prohibition or makes it general.
What is meant by the prohibition of combining in ownership, by the indication of the fit between ruling and subject, is the prohibition of combining them in marriage and intercourse, not in ownership. And what is meant by the prohibition of combining two sisters is not the prohibition of contracting with them at one time, but the prohibition of having them both together in the bond of marriage, even if one comes before the other. It appears that the exception in the phrase “except what has already passed” refers to combining two sisters in particular, not to the thirteen forbidden women. Its meaning is pardon for what happened in the Age of Ignorance of combining two sisters: if their marriage remained until the prohibition came down, it must be cut off and one of them parted from; and if it had ended for any reason, God has pardoned and forgiven it, and confirmed the lineage of what was born of it. On this basis the exception is properly connected, because the law has made valid what remained of the effects of this void marriage. This meaning is strengthened by the reason given at the end of the verse, that God is Forgiving, Merciful; for it is a validation of lineage.
4:24 — and married women, excepting your slave-women
and married women, excepting your slave-women. This is Allah’s ordinance for you. As to others than these, it is lawful for you to seek [temporary union with them] with your wealth, in wedlock, not in license. For the enjoyment you have had from them thereby, give them their dowries, by way of settlement, and there is no sin upon you in what you may agree upon after the settlement. Indeed Allah is all-knowing, all-wise.
The previous verse set out fourteen women whom it is forbidden to marry, and the fifteenth came in this verse: the protected woman (muḥṣanah) who has a husband. In the narrations, the woman in the waiting period after death, or in the waiting period of a revocable divorce, is in the ruling of a wife; it is not permitted to marry her until her waiting period ends.
Iḥṣān means guarding and protecting. A woman with a husband is called muḥṣanah because her husband guards her and protects her from falling into sin and forbidden acts.
What is meant by “the protected women” in this verse is not chaste women, since it is permitted to marry a Muslim woman whether chaste or not, so long as there is no incidental obstacle. Nor are free women meant, since it is permitted to marry them. What is meant by them is women who have husbands, whether Muslim or not; for iḥṣān also comes with the meaning of Islam, so the word “women” was brought to show the generality of the prohibition, including Muslim women and others, except slave-women, intercourse with whom is permitted by ownership after their waiting period ends. What is meant by “what your right hands own” is not a man’s own slave-woman, for she is lawful to him; rather, what is meant is the slave-woman with a husband who is bought, marrying whom becomes lawful after her waiting period ends. Or what may be meant by it are the free, married polytheist women whom the Muslims capture in wars. They were forbidden in marriage before capture, because they were married; but just as sale, freeing, inheritance, gift and permission are in the ruling of divorce for a slave-woman, and intercourse with her is permitted after the waiting period ends, so too married polytheist women, if captured in a lawful war led by the Prophet or the Infallible Imam, have their enslavement in the ruling of their divorce. The unrestrictedness of “except what your right hands own”, like the unrestrictedness of “and lawful for you is what is beyond that”, is restricted by verses and narrations, such as the verse “And do not marry polytheist women until they believe”; for it restricts the unrestrictedness of both verses, forbidding marriage with polytheist women and forbidding intercourse with them by ownership.
In other words, the ruling on marrying a polytheist woman is prohibition and forbidding, and it shows the voidness of marriage and the marital bond between a Muslim and a polytheist woman under any name, whether by permanent or temporary contract, by ownership or by permission. So the clearest title for what is excepted in the verse is the Muslim slave-woman owned by Muslims.
The expression “God’s ordinance (kitāb) upon you” is to show the importance of the prohibition. What puts the word kitāb in the accusative is an implied verb, “He ordained”, that is, God ordained for you an ordinance; by the indication of the phrase “Forbidden to you”. The main verb at the start of the previous verse came in the passive form, but the doer of the prohibition of marriage is stated plainly at the end of the verse, as He (s.w.t.) said: “God’s ordinance upon you”, that is, He ordained for you the prohibition of marriage. Putting the mention of the doer later removes the vagueness of the doer in the preceding verses, and its vagueness in what comes after in His (s.w.t.) words “and lawful for you is”.
Marrying every woman, by marriage or by ownership, is lawful, except these fifteen forbidden women. This is shown by the phrase “and lawful for you is what is beyond that”, which is unrestricted in respect of individuals and those forbidden in themselves; meaning that apart from the fifteen mentioned, marrying every woman is lawful for you by the primary title, even though there are other qualifications and conditions to be taken into account. And it is unrestricted in respect of states, circumstances, qualities, and conditions of amount and manner. So the phrase has an unrestrictedness of individuals and of states. This unrestrictedness or generality is restricted or narrowed by verses and narrations containing qualities and conditions, such as verse 221 of Sūrat al-Baqarah, verse 50 of Sūrat al-Aḥzāb, and verse 230 of Sūrat al-Baqarah. The phrase “that you seek with your wealth” is a substitute of inclusion for the relative noun “what” in the phrase “what is beyond that”.
Seeking women with wealth in ownership is by buying them; in permanent marriage by giving the dower; and in temporary marriage by the payment. The apparent meaning of the phrase “that you seek with your wealth” is temporary marriage, which is constituted by financial payment; unlike permanent marriage, which is not void if the dower is not mentioned in it. By this expression the verse prepares for the legitimacy of temporary marriage, which is the counterpart of permanent marriage.
The word “wealth” is put in the plural because those addressed are all the Muslims. So the meaning is: the lawfulness of every marriage and every ownership with wealth; and anyone may marry with his wealth whom he wishes, except the fifteen forbidden women. Marriage in both its kinds, permanent and temporary, is with wealth, whether little or much; it is not that every marriage must be with much wealth, so that the doubt would arise that the least plural is three, and that marriage is only valid with three or more.
The phrase “as protected men, not fornicators” is a description joined with emphasis, as you say: a faithful man, not faithless.
The muḥṣan in it does not mean the married man, because iḥṣān here means chastity, not marriage, by the indication of setting iḥṣān against sifāḥ (fornication). Sifāḥ means a thing not being guarded in itself and going out of the bound of purity and chastity; sifāḥ is immorality and fornication. So the word “protected” in the verse here means those of chastity from fornication and purity from immorality. The muḥṣan who is not a fornicator is the one who is fortified by the fortress of chastity, to guard himself from sin, and does not tear the veil of chastity by fornication.
What is meant by enjoyment in the phrase “so for whatever you have enjoyed of them by it” is temporary marriage in particular, because it is surrounded by two phrases that mention wealth: the phrase “that you seek with your wealth” before it, and the phrase “give them their wages” after it. Of permanent and temporary marriage, we find that the temporary is the one whose validity is constituted by wealth and the mention of the payment at the time of the contract. In it the husband must give the woman her payment, whether he has had intimacy with her or not. As for permanent marriage, mentioning the dower is not a condition of its validity, so it is valid even if it is not mentioned.
What is meant by enjoyment here is its technical meaning, which is temporary marriage, not its linguistic meaning, which is benefit. For this sentence came, in what it states and what it implies, for limiting, and to make clear that taking the dower follows on the contract of temporary marriage (mutʿah), by which the woman deserves the whole dower, and otherwise not. This is unlike permanent marriage, for the whole dower is only deserved there by intercourse; if he divorces before the enjoyment of intimacy, the woman deserves only half the dower.
So the verse here is setting out a new ruling, and is not a repetition of rulings that came before, such as the basic obligation to give the dower. The new ruling in it is the legislation of temporary marriage; for there is no proof that rulings of jurisprudence mentioned before are repeated.
Likewise, setting out this ruling with the particle of consequence (fāʾ) is an indication that temporary marriage is being founded; for the phrase “and lawful for you is what is beyond that” in its unrestrictedness includes permanent and temporary marriage, and so the ruling on enjoyment came as a branch of the root and the joining of the particular to the whole.
The word “obligation” (farīḍah) in the phrase “give them their wages as an obligation” means what is binding, which each of the spouses bound on the other; not the initial ordaining from God (s.w.t.). So the meaning of the verse is: act on what you have bound on yourselves and agreed on in the amount of the dower, for it is a pledge that must be fulfilled, like other contracts.
God (s.w.t.) has entrusted to the spouses the matter of the payment in temporary marriage; they may increase it and decrease it, and may change by mutual consent what they agreed on. It is permitted to shorten the term and lower the payment even after the contract, and it is permitted for the man to release the woman from what remains of the term; because these are among the rights of people which they may give up. God (s.w.t.) knows what sets His servants right, and legislates only with far-reaching wisdom; there is no divine legislation without a benefit for people in it. For this reason He (s.w.t.) closed this verse with His words: “surely God is Knowing, Wise.”
4:25 — As for those of you who cannot afford to marry faithful free women
As for those of you who cannot afford to marry faithful free women, then [let them marry] from what you own, from among your faithful slave-women. Your faith is best known [only] to Allah; you are all [on a] similar [footing]. So marry them with their masters’ permission, and give them their dowries in an honourable manner—[such of them] as are chaste women, not licentious ones or those who take paramours. But should they commit an indecent act on marrying, there shall be for them [only] half the punishment for free women. This is for those of you who fear falling into fornication; but it is better that you be continent, and Allah is all-forgiving, all-merciful.
After setting out the kinds of women whom it is forbidden to marry, this verse came to guide to the ways of sexual chastity and moral purity, so that no one has an excuse for staining himself with the stain of fornication and indecencies. Whoever does not have enough wealth to marry a free woman, let him marry a slave-woman, because her dower is smaller and her conditions and the cost of living with her are easier.
The free woman expects much more of her husband in maintenance and other matters of life than the slave-woman expects. So what is meant by “means” (ṭawl) in the verse is not only the ability to pay the dower, but the financial ability for it and for providing the costs and needs of a comfortable living. And if in a narration ṭawl is explained as the dower, it is by way of example.
This verse narrows or restricts the verse “and lawful for you is what is beyond that” with respect to slave-women. It permits marrying slave-women on two conditions:
Lacking the ability to marry a free woman.
Fearing hardship (ʿanat). ʿAnat is the hardship of leaving marriage, which leads to sin; and fear is a state of the soul, not the hardship itself.
The context of the verses here, plain from the fit between ruling and subject, intends the ruling of status, validity and voidness, not the moral meaning: that marrying a slave-woman is void and has no legal effect if marrying a free woman is possible, and that the condition of the validity of marrying a slave-woman is the financial inability to marry a free woman.
So what is meant by lawful and unlawful here is validity and voidness as a ruling of status, not sin and disobedience as a legal ruling; so that marrying a slave-woman would be valid in status for one with ample means even if he disobeyed and committed a sin. And some narrations do indicate that marrying a slave-woman is permitted unconditionally.
Nor is marrying a slave-woman valid so long as one does not fear hardship. So the generality or unrestrictedness of the verse “And marry the unmarried among you and the righteous among your male and female slaves”, and the verse “And do not marry polytheist women until they believe; a faithful slave-woman is better than a polytheist woman, even if she pleases you”, in permitting marriage with a faithful slave-woman, is restricted or narrowed by this verse, because it mentions two conditions for it.
It is not right to take the verse here as dislike, reconciling it with the two verses of Sūrat al-Nūr and al-Baqarah, so that the ruling in it would be dislike, such that marrying a slave-woman while able to marry a free woman would be neither void nor forbidden.
“The protected women” here are free women, not women with husbands, because marrying married women is forbidden and void, whether they are Muslim or not. For that reason the protected women are described here as faithful.
It seems that the description “faithful” here stands against women of the People of the Book, not polytheist women. So whoever cannot marry a faithful free woman may validly marry a slave-woman, whether or not he is able to marry a woman of the People of the Book.
The meaning of “what your right hands own” is not the man’s own slave-woman and possession; because she is lawful to him by ownership without need of a marriage contract, and because one who owns a slave-woman is usually not poor and is able to marry a free woman, so marrying a slave-woman is not valid for him. In the expression “what your right hands own”, regard is had to the unity in kind of the Islamic community, because they are its slave-women; so it is as though your slave-women are the slave-women of the Muslims, and theirs are yours.
Describing slave-women as “maidens” (fatayāt) carries meanings of dignity, nobility and freedom in slave-women, raising them above abasement and servitude. In respecting them and bringing out their personality, and in expressing their owners as their “people”, there is honour for them and the planting of moral values in their souls. The pronouns in “your maidens” and in “your faith” refer to the individuals of the society being addressed, not to their families in particular; that is, the maidens of the community and what the right hands of the faithful own. The wisdom of attaching “maidens” to the faithful as a whole is putting the Islamic community in the position of one person in the ruling, since they all go back to one root and reality. Faith is a condition in the wife of a Muslim, so he may not marry a polytheist woman. Faith is a binding condition in the slave-woman too; unlike the conditions of protection, not fornicating and not taking secret lovers (meaning moral chastity, not committing fornication, and not taking a lover or paramour), for these are guiding qualifications, preferable and not obligatory, and their absence does not void the marriage contract.
The apparent meaning of qualifying the maidens here by faith is to set it against polytheism. So, when the two conditions of fear of hardship and inability to marry a free woman are met, it is permitted to marry a slave-woman of the People of the Book, permanently or temporarily, unless there are particular narrations that distinguish in the ruling between permanent and temporary. In marriage there must be compatibility between the spouses, and the basis of faith is enough for it; and it is established by what appears of them both, and there is no need to inquire about secrets, because God alone knows what is in the breasts: “and God knows best your faith.” This verse is an emphasis on faith and a warning against making light of it.
The phrase “you are from one another” is a denial of false distinction and hollow material superiority, such as the distinction between poor and rich on one side, the owner of a slave-woman and the one financially unable to marry a free woman on another, and free and slave on a third, in the verse under discussion.
If marrying a free woman is possible, marrying slave-women is not permitted. After God (s.w.t.) forbade that, He said, “then marry them”; and the meaning of this command is the permission to marry them when the conditions are present, not its obligation, because the command comes after a prohibition. The unrestrictedness of the command to marry slave-women includes permanent and temporary marriage, as in the unrestrictedness of the phrase “to marry protected faithful women”. So whoever is financially unable to marry a free woman permanently or temporarily, and fears hardship for himself, may marry a slave-woman.
In marrying a slave-woman the explicit permission of her master is a condition; consent, or permission by implication, is not enough, because the verse states permission, not consent: “with the permission of their people.” God named their masters their “people” as a call to their masters to respect them, be kind to them and treat them as family. The word “their people” also shows that slave-women are worthy of being in the position of family for their masters and owners; and in this there is honour for faithful slave-women, making them like daughters to their masters.
What appears from attaching the wage and dower to the slave-women in the word “their wages” is that they own it; so the word “and give them” is a command to hand it over to her and make her its owner. These two words show her ownership of her dower, and that she has more right to her dower than her master. But other proofs show the opposite of that, either because the slave is legally deprived of ownership and what is in his hand belongs to his master, or because he is not independent in what he owns, except the slave under a contract of manumission (mukātab). So the dower of the slave-woman is the property of her master, and she may not waive it or receive it except with the permission and authorisation of her master.
The word “in kindness” means in a way the religion approves; and what discloses its approval is either reason or text. Giving the dower in kindness is handing it over complete and undiminished, in its amount, its kind and the way of giving it, without ill-treatment, hurt, putting off or delay.
In the course of these rulings of jurisprudence God (s.w.t.) drew attention to a moral meaning, which is marrying chaste slave-women. For among them are those who go in and out freely mixing with men, who do not refrain from any vice and are known for prostitution and fornication; and among them are those who take secret companions and keep lovers in hiding. The verse here forbids these two kinds of slave-women and commands marrying those of pure garments, not fornicators nor keepers of lovers.
What is meant by “protected women” in the phrase “protected, not fornicating” is chaste slave-women of pure honour, not free women nor women with husbands. In the condition of chastity there is moral guidance, not a binding ruling of jurisprudence in marriage. Chastity is a lofty trait everyone seeks; and the verse stressed it here only because some slave-women may have grown used to immorality and prostitution because their masters forced them to it, greedy for wealth and seeking the goods of this world.
The chaste slave-woman, who has protected herself from obscenity and guarded her honour from fornication, and whom her master has not forced to any of that: if she commits indecency by choice, her punishment is half the punishment of the free woman; and if she was forced, there is no punishment on her, according to the Prophetic hadith: “Lifted from my community… is what they are forced to do.” Those of little religious education, and those who live on the margin of life and work for the lowest wages, have their punishment lightened for what they fall short in of the rights of God (s.w.t.); but in the rights of people there is no lightening. The definite article in the word “the punishment” refers to something known, the hundred lashes mentioned in the second verse of Sūrat al-Nūr; because stoning cannot be halved, and the punishment that can be halved is flogging, so that is what is meant here.
Besides the condition of financial inability to marry a free woman, another condition is required in marrying a slave-woman, otherwise it is void: the need for marriage and the fear of falling into the hardship of being unmarried. The hardship here is not confined to sexual matters, so that hardship in the verse would be explained as the fear of falling into fornication; rather, it includes need and necessity for any cause.
What is meant by the phrase “and to be patient is better for you” is a moral ruling: that leaving marriage with slave-women, after the conditions of its permissibility are present, is better for you. For the slave-woman is under the command and prohibition of her master, her divorce is in his hand, and she is exposed to corruption because of her low social position and weak moral restraint.
Whoever is afflicted with this error and repents, God turns to him: “and God is Forgiving, Merciful.”
If what is meant is patience in hardship and difficulty, and not patience in refraining from marrying a slave-woman, so that the meaning of ʿanat is fornication, then the meaning of “and to be patient is better for you” will be: patience in refraining from fornication is obligatory on you; so the “better” is obligatory and binding, and not merely a recommended preference, because leaving fornication is obligatory, not merely preferable. On this reading the verse’s condition of inability to marry a free woman for marrying a slave-woman is not moral guidance and educational direction, and the word “better” does not show that the ruling is non-binding; just as the condition of inability at the start of the verse is not merely preferable, so that the ruling of marrying a slave-woman while able to marry a free woman would be guiding dislike, and not legal prohibition nor voidness in status.
There is no contradiction between the ruling that marrying a slave-woman is void at the start of the verse and the phrase “and to be patient is better for you” being guidance that bearing the cost of marrying a free woman and patience with its financial burden is better for you than marrying a slave-woman, even though that is permitted in itself. For her master has over her the right of obedience, and it is hard for her to combine the right of her husband and the right of her master. The phrase “and God is Forgiving, Merciful” is not proof that the ruling mentioned is recommended or permitted; and since what requires the prohibition of marrying a slave-woman is present at the start of the verse, this phrase at its end does not convey its permissibility.
4:26–28 — Allah desires to explain [the laws] to you
(26) Allah desires to explain [the laws] to you, and to guide you to the customs of those who were before you, and to turn toward you clemently, and Allah is all-knowing, all-wise. (27) Allah desires to turn toward you clemently, but those who pursue their [base] appetites desire that you fall into gross waywardness. (28) Allah desires to lighten your burden, for man was created weak.
These verses make clear the aim of legislating what came in the previous verses, the rulings of permanent and temporary marriage and of marrying a free woman and a slave-woman, on the one hand; and on the other, they make clear the weakness of the human being in facing the sexual instinct. They may be setting out the aim of all the rulings and wisdoms of the Qur’an; but what is certain is the first meaning.
The object of the verb “wills” in the phrase “God wills to make clear to you” is left out. If we supply its meaning as “God wills to give you insight so as to make clear to you”, the meaning is: God wills to give you insight so as to make clear to you the teachings; because there is no benefit in making them clear before the breast is opened with insight and the readiness to understand the teachings is unlocked.
If the word “ways” (sunan) is the object of both verbs, “to make clear” and “to guide you”, the meaning is that He (s.w.t.) wills to make clear to the faithful the ways of the righteous who went before, and to guide them to them.
If it is the object of the second verb only, the meaning is that He (s.w.t.) makes clear the teachings and rulings of His religion for two aims: 1) making them clear to the faithful; 2) guiding them to the ways of the righteous of the past and keeping them away from false ways. Making clear, guiding and turning, in His (s.w.t.) words “to make clear to you, and guide you to the ways of those before you, and turn to you”, are teaching the Book and purifying; and these are the sublime aim of sending the messengers and sending down revelation. Making clear is the knowledge and theory side of revelation; and guiding, turning, and divine kindness, in which lie the success and righteousness of the servants, are its practical side.
Since the end of the first verse concerns all the matters mentioned, and not turning in particular, this verse is closed with the two attributes “Knowing, Wise”, and not with “Forgiving, Merciful”. The expression in this verse of guidance to the ways of those before us, after mentioning the kinds of marriage and the matter of marrying a free woman and a slave-woman, is not proof that the earlier laws match the Islamic law in these rulings.
The phrase “and turn to you” at the end of the first verse came at the start of the second verse. If the turning in the first is other than that in the second, the repetition is not for emphasis. The repetition of turning in the phrase “And God wills to turn to you” shows that the phrase “but those who follow lusts wish” is connected with the end of the previous verse, and not with all of it.
God (s.w.t.) has made clear to people the ways of chastity and purity, so that the Muslims may be guided and be people of purity and chastity, by acting on the teachings of these verses, applying their rulings and turning to the way of permanent or temporary marriage, with a free woman or a slave-woman. And God (s.w.t.) is kind to them by accepting their repentance, and this is the second divine turning. But those who follow lusts, and the enemies of God’s religion, wish you to incline with them into sins and lusts, as they have inclined greatly.
They wish to corrupt the Muslims and lead them astray from the upright path of their religion, and they strive hard to draw them to indecencies and keep them from chastity and purity. Their being described as “those who follow lusts” is witness to this will and urgent striving. God (s.w.t.) has lightened things for the faithful by legislating these rulings and made their duty easy for them, because the human being was created weak in resisting lusts; and if lustful inclinations overwhelm him and he has no religion to hold him back, nothing will stop them.
4:29 — O you who have faith! Do not eat up your wealth among yourselves unrightfully
O you who have faith! Do not eat up your wealth among yourselves unrightfully, but it should be trade by mutual consent. And do not kill yourselves. Indeed Allah is most merciful to you.
In verses twenty-nine and thirty the Qur’an sets out the general rule for trade and general dealing in wealth, and what disposal of wealth is not permitted; and that none of it is lawful except with two pillars: that it be trade, and that it be by mutual consent.
So financial dealings, selling and buying, are conditional on two conditions: 1) trade, 2) consent.
Disposing of people’s wealth without either of these two conditions is void. Trade by mutual consent is the exchange of wealth for wealth with the consent of the two parties. Without consent the transaction is void and the wealth is usurped; the consent of the guardian in something other than trade is of no use; and consent without a commercial transaction makes the disposal valid, but is not a cause of exchanging wealth. These rulings are general for all people; and addressing them to the faithful in particular is because they alone act on them and benefit from their rulings. The word “consume” in the phrase “do not consume your wealth among yourselves falsely” is a title pointing to every disposal of wealth. The verse expresses by “consuming” disposal in general that destroys and removes the owner’s ownership of the wealth; because consuming is the greatest disposal that removes ownership, and the most important cause cutting off the owner’s power over his wealth.
The word “your wealth” includes personal wealth and the wealth of people. Personal wealth comes under the prohibition of extravagance and spending it on what is false and forbidden. What is meant by the word “among yourselves” is the circulation and turning of capital and trade. The exchange and circulation of wealth falsely drags society to ruin and failure.
The meaning of “falsehood” (bāṭil), as against truth, is clear: it is vain work, which has no aim that God (s.w.t.) and reasonable people approve. But the instances of falsehood are not all plain and clear to reasonable people; the average minds of ordinary people do not grasp the ugliness of usury, for example. Mentioning gambling and the like in explaining “consuming falsely” is by way of example, not limitation.
Falsehood does not admit of exception, and the exception in the phrase “unless it be trade” is a disconnected exception; for trade by mutual consent is not consuming falsely, so as to be included in what is excepted from and taken out by the exception. The word “trade” is a title covering all financial and exchange dealings: selling and buying, hire, crop-sharing and so on. Part of the greatness of the sanctity of wealth in the Islamic law is that the prohibition of consuming it falsely is joined with the prohibition of killing and shedding blood without right. The ruling “and do not kill yourselves” includes a human being killing himself and killing another wrongfully and in aggression, although it may be particular to a human being killing another. The reason for the expression “yourselves” is that all the souls of the religious society are in the ruling of one soul, joined by the bond of faith, so the soul of each is the soul of the other. If the faithful feel that they are one joined body, there is no fear of their scrambling and trespassing on one another’s wealth.
The phrase “and do not kill yourselves” came as a general rule forbidding killing without exception, because what is excepted from it in the law is little.
The verse is closed with the phrase “surely God is Merciful to you”, to show that these rulings and laws are required by divine mercy towards His servants.
4:30 — And whoever does that in aggression and injustice
And whoever does that in aggression and injustice, We will soon make him enter the Fire, and that is easy for Allah.
The God who forbade consuming wealth falsely and forbade killing a soul, and made trade by mutual consent lawful out of mercy from Him, is also the One who threatens, through His power, the aggressors and the wrongdoers with the punishment of the Fire, out of anger from Him (s.w.t.) and to secure justice for the wronged; and that is an act easy for Him (s.w.t.).
The first word “that” points to all the forbidden things mentioned in the previous verses, or to those mentioned in the previous verse in particular, which are consuming wealth falsely and killing a soul, or to killing a soul in particular. Making it general to include all is better, even though particularity to the last is plainer in appearance.
Each of consuming wealth falsely and killing a soul has two forms: aggression and wrongdoing; and both are causes of entering the Fire.
Mentioning aggression alongside wrongdoing is an emphasis on the importance of the prohibition; and it may be to show that each of consuming and killing is a cause of coming to the Fire in any case, whether they happen as aggression or as wrongdoing. “Aggression” and “wrongdoing” are not synonyms; rather, aggression is narrower than wrongdoing. For aggression is reaching out against the right of people, and it has no meaning for a person to commit aggression against his own right. Whoever kills himself or consumes his own wealth is not called an aggressor, but is wronging himself. The title “wrongdoing” includes a person wronging himself and trespassing on others; while “aggression” is said only of a person wronging others. Bringing the first-person pronoun in “We shall burn him” is to show perfect power.
The matter belongs to God (s.w.t.) in bringing the sinner and recompensing him, and there is no difficulty in that, neither from the side of the just doer nor from the side of the one recompensed. For an act done by pure will makes no difference whether it is hard or easy; it is the same to the powerful One who wills, who brings a thing into being by His pure will: “and that is easy for God.”
The mention of the Majestic Name “God” in this phrase is meant to show the reason for the ease; for so long as the doer is God, it is self-evident that the act is easy and simple for Him (s.w.t.).
4:31 — If you avoid the major sins that you are forbidden
If you avoid the major sins that you are forbidden, We will absolve you of your misdeeds and admit you to a noble abode.
The previous verses mentioned some of the great sins, and this verse mentions the effect and benefit of avoiding the great sins.
The meaning of avoiding a sin is keeping far from it, so that you are to one side of it and it is far from you, a distance that keeps you from committing it. The word “avoid” (ijtināb) is used here because whoever intends to leave a thing turns his side (janb) away from it and turns his back on it. Avoidance is not by bare leaving, but by restraining the self and the heart’s turning away, which discloses a settled disposition in the soul showing servanthood to God by that and obedience to His prohibition; and bare leaving does not have these meanings.
Setting “evil deeds” against “great sins” shows that what is forbidden is of two kinds: great sin and small sin. Both are acts forbidden by a binding, authoritative prohibition. What is meant by evil deeds here is the small sin, as shown by the forty-ninth verse of Sūrat al-Kahf. The relation between great and small is one of opposites, with no third between them; so the proposition made up of them is in the ruling of a real disjunction (meaning that a sin is either great or small), and not a disjunction that only forbids combining, such that there would be a middle between them, neither small nor great. Dividing sins into great and small is a correct division; but the measure for marking off the great from the small is not clear. The verses and narrations have set out some of the great sins without limitation, and limiting them to a particular number is a relative limitation. And what is mentioned as a comprehensive and exclusive rule is not a general rule fit to distinguish the small sins from the great; rather, they are signs and approximate indicators that have some effect on the whole.
In every comparison there must be something by which to measure. Since no precise, comprehensive and exclusive limit has been fixed for small and great sins, and there is nothing in between to refer to in measuring, there is no escape from comparing sins with one another, so that some are small in comparison with others. It is not right to measure them by something outside them, as if they were measured by the One who forbids, for example, so that it is said: every sin is great, because it is a deliberate boldness and arrogance towards God (s.w.t.). Although this saying is true in meaning, the comparison in this respect is between the human being and his Lord, not between one sin and another; and it does not fit the indication of the noble verse, because it has divided sins into great and small.
However it may be, rulings follow benefits and harms. If a proof shows, explicitly or plainly, the greatness of the harm of a sin, it is established that it is one of the great sins, whether there is a fixed punishment for it or not, and whether it is threatened with the Fire or not. The verse here is a clear promise of forgiving the small sins on the condition of avoiding the great sins; and this condition includes doing the obligations and leaving the forbidden things, because leaving an obligation is a great sin. And in some verses leaving forbidden things is like a condition for carrying out obligations, because leaving the forbidden is a rational obligation.
In short: if the one charged carries out all the obligations, avoids the great sins of every kind, among them persisting in small sins (because persisting in small sins makes them great), and guards himself from committing the great ruinous sins, but does some of the small sins out of heedlessness or ignorance, he is promised by God (s.w.t.) pardon and the covering over of all his small sins. This is a promised pardon without repentance from the one charged, because by repentance even great sins are pardoned. But it is not easy to know that the condition of this pardon has been met, because:
The individual small sins are vague and not clearly bounded; and this vagueness is a divine kindness, to cut off the causes of boldness and delusion.
The condition of pardoning small sins is carrying out all the obligations and avoiding all the forbidden things, in the past, present and future; and no one can be sure of this as regards his past and his future, for he does not know what he will come to.
So the hope of pardon is spread out for all; but it is not easy to count a sin among the small evil deeds, or to know that doing it is permitted, let alone to be sure that God will pardon it. On this basis the promise of pardon here is not opening the door to boldness towards God (s.w.t.) and luring to disobedience; rather, it is opening the door of hope in God’s mercy and not despairing of His forgiveness.
Kufr means covering, and covering over (takfīr) an evil deed means covering and veiling it, to preserve the dignity of its doer. Covering is not pardon, and pardon is not a necessary consequence of covering; for God may cover the sinner in this world and not expose him, but without forgiveness or pardon.
What is meant in this verse is not covering and covering over only, but pardon and forgiveness too, as shown by His (s.w.t.) words “and admit you to a noble entrance”. God (s.w.t.) covers the sin, then pardons it and brings its doer into the Garden. So avoiding the great sins does not only bring about pardon of the small ones; rather, it is followed by the servant’s entering into God’s (s.w.t.) honour.
The Garden (“an entrance of truth, noble”) has no exit, because everlasting abiding will have no term and no going out from it. This verse declares that avoiding the great sins is a cause of pardoning the small ones. The One who covers over the evil deeds is God; and attributing covering over to Him (s.w.t.) in this verse, while attributing the removing to good deeds in verse 114 of Sūrah Hūd, means that the condition of covering over and pardon is doing good deeds, by obeying His command and being wary of Him by leaving what He forbids.
4:32 — Do not covet the advantage
Do not covet the advantage, which Allah has given some of you over others. To men belongs a share of what they have earned, and to women a share of what they have earned. And ask Allah for His bounty. Indeed Allah has knowledge of all things.
Teaching and upbringing in the Qur’an go inseparably together, and its sciences are joined with benefits of upbringing and morals. In this verse there is an alert to a moral and educational matter before and after setting out the ruling of jurisprudence. This verse makes clear the educational trait for guarding against the forbidden things mentioned before, which is that a person should not wish for what another has, nor covet it; because that leads to consuming what is forbidden and killing souls. The aim of the verse is to treat the disease of aggression against the wealth and blood of people, forbidden in the previous verses. People are not equal in intelligence, talent and skills, mental abilities and bodily skills in acquiring material and spiritual things; rather, they are of different degrees in all of that, men and women. This difference among people is for a wisdom; and the stronger readiness is more beneficial and has more good when effort is spent.
The best order of this world requires such difference and variety in capacities, so that people may serve one another in the varied needs of living. Weakness and strength in that go back to the material causes that establish them; and this individual difference arising from preparatory causes can have its shortfall made up.
In short: the benefit people and peoples gain from divine blessings is not equal. In this difference there is a wisdom of God (s.w.t.), and it is not right to object to it; whether the blessing given is a reward for good the servant or one of his forebears did, or a trial and test for him, or a leading on and a distraction. The word “grace” (faḍl) in this verse has an unrestrictedness that gathers material and spiritual blessings; meaning that God (s.w.t.) divides all His graces as His wisdom requires, not as people deserve, so that God would owe anyone anything. There is no difference in the prohibition of false wishing between personal and public matters, or between outward and inward grace.
Among people are those who believe in God’s (s.w.t.) wisdom in dividing grace, follow this noble verse in their conduct, and replace wishing for what others have with effort and work, and asking grace of others with praying to God (s.w.t.) to grant them from His grace. And among them are those who envy people for the good they have, and wish it to pass from them, objecting to this division. Each of man and woman has the portion of virtues fitting for him; and what anyone attains of good is his, whether he attained it by an outward chosen cause or a hidden unchosen one. No one ought to wish for another’s portion; rather, he must strive and work to attain the like of it.
God (s.w.t.) has forbidden wishing for the very grace given to some of us; He has not forbidden wishing for the like of it, or for something better than it; because wishing for that is part of a praiseworthy high aspiration, and is joined with contentment with God’s grace. The phrase “and ask God of His grace” shows this. This is what is called emulation (ghibṭah); but what is meant is not emulation of the greenery and adornment of this world, for that is blameworthy emulation.
Emulation is other than wishing for the very grace another has. For that is the soul’s greed for what is not its own, wishing to take it from its owner so as to possess it; and this is what is called envy (ḥasad), a vice followed by malice, whose source is ignorance and shortness of sight in knowledge.
All blessings are from God (s.w.t.), who divides them among people by His wisdom. So do not destroy yourself with envy, nor trouble it by quarrelling with the one blessed in His blessings. You have a deliverance and a way out from all this affliction: that you pray to God with your tongue to grant you from His grace what is better and finer, and work with your hand for what will bring you what you ask; and if you are not given it, be thankful, because what you asked was not in your interest, and what does not agree with divine wisdom is not given.
If the cause of envying people for what they have is objecting to God’s division, that is contrary to tawḥīd. If its cause is the whim of the soul, enmity and hatred, it is forbidden or a preliminary to the forbidden. If its cause is love of leadership and adorning oneself with the adornment of life, it is the logic and way of materialists and those greedy for pleasures, not the way of the people of knowledge and reason.
However that may be, wishing for blessings to pass from people is an ugly trait leading to envy; and envy brings the soul to obscenity of tongue and evil intention, and through them comes corruption in the land and the destruction of crops and offspring. In the expression “some of you over others” there is the fragrance of social unity, so that the one over whom another is preferred becomes aware that the preferred one is part of him, and does not envy him.
The phrase “for men is a portion of what they have earned, and for women is a portion of what they have earned” is another proof of the prohibition of false wishing. The meaning is: the fixed general rule in God’s (s.w.t.) decree is that every worker for a thing and striver in it with his effort in knowledge and action attains his aim and reaches his goal. In His measuring He decreed that so-and-so’s attaining a blessing or rank depends on his effort and work for its practical or knowledge preliminaries and conditions; and if the preliminaries and conditions change, the result changes. God (s.w.t.) writes the result of every work as a measure He has measured in His decree written with Him. So the measure of everything with Him (s.w.t.) is tied to its causes and preliminaries. The door of attainment is open to whoever seeks it, and whoever strives finds. So leave wishing for the blessings of workers to pass to the lazy and idle.
Each of man and woman has his material and spiritual independence, and each has what he strove for. The verse’s stating this in two separate sentences shows its importance, and that woman has the wealth she earned, against the custom of the Age of Ignorance of depriving her of her financial rights. “Earning” (iktisāb) in the verse includes chosen and unchosen work, because it does not stand against kasb so as to be particular to the chosen.
The preposition “of” in the phrase “of what they have earned, and for women is a portion of what they have earned” is for a part; and it shows that not all a person earns is of benefit to him, but some of it is benefit and some loss. The phrase “and ask God of His grace” may mean prayer and may mean work; so asking God for grace has two meanings: by prayer and asking with the tongue, and by work and going about in the land. Prayer and work are two causes for acquiring God’s (s.w.t.) blessings and provision and attaining His particular and general graces. They are two doors open to all people, and neither makes the other unnecessary. Work and wealth without Godwariness are a trial and a leading on, not grace from God; and prayer without striving is not answered; the narrations have come with this.
Whoever asks God of His grace, trusting in God’s answer, has no eye of greed for what people have, and does not wish in himself that God’s blessings pass from them. Rather, his heart is attached to the divine grace that does not run out, relying neither on himself nor on any creature. God (s.w.t.) manages the affair of His creation, orders their concerns and guides them to the ways of His grace by His knowledge and wisdom; and He (s.w.t.) knows every way that any of His servants walks.
4:33 — For everyone We have appointed heirs to what the parents and near relatives leave
For everyone We have appointed heirs to what the parents and near relatives leave, as well as those with whom you have made a compact; so give them their share [of the heritage]. Indeed Allah is witness to all things.
This verse and the one before it are a summary and comprehensive digest of the rulings that came in the verses of inheritance, and a general counsel to follow the detailed commands and duties in them. What keeping the unity of context, and the link between the start and end of the verse in its address to all people to give the heirs their portion, requires is that the word added to “each” (kull) be “human being”. So the meaning is: and for each human being, male and female, We have made heirs… and so on.
The structure of creation is ordered so that everyone has heirs; but the apparent meaning of the word “We have made” here is legislation, whether founding or endorsing, not creation and bringing into being. Such making of rulings of inheritance existed in the laws of the earlier prophets; it is not something in which Islam is alone, apart from the other heavenly religions. Since “making” here is more general than founding and endorsing, it applies to those rulings of inheritance which non-Muslims follow and which the religion of Islam confirms; and if it does not confirm them, they have no effect and no right follows from them.
The word mawlā is used of the guardian (walī) and of the one under guardianship, who is under the guardianship and management of the guardian; because the heir is also a guardian, and in the ruling of the deceased from whom he inherits, and takes his place. What is meant by mawālī in this verse is the owners and guardians of the inheritance; they are the heirs of the dead person, who take charge of the affair of his children and his wealth after his death. The pronoun in the phrase “so give them their portion” refers to the mawālī, who are the heirs. By the proof of this phrase, the phrase “and those with whom your right hands have made a pact” should be joined to the phrase “parents and the nearest relatives”; so the three kinds (those with whom right hands made a pact, parents and nearest relatives) are the inheriting mawālī, not those inherited from.
So the verse has counted the causes of inheritance, and mentioned three kinds of inheriting mawālī: parents, nearest relatives, and those with whom right hands made a pact.
The heirs of the deceased do not go outside these three kinds. Heirs by lineage come under the kind “parents and the nearest relatives”, and heirs by a cause come under the kind “and those with whom your right hands have made a pact”. This phrase makes clear who inherits by a cause; and under the pact of the right hand here come all the kinds of the pact of clientage (walāʾ), such as the clientage of freeing, the clientage of guaranteeing liability (ḍamān al-jarīrah), the clientage of the Imamate, and so on. The marriage contract comes under it too, because it is one of the causes of inheriting by a cause; and it is a contract whose affair is in the hands of the husband and the wife or her guardian.
No one inherits by clientage, whether the clientage of freeing, of guaranteeing liability or of the Imamate, except when the three classes by lineage and the class by a cause are lacking. So the guarantor of liability does not inherit while anyone of these classes exists, and he inherits all the wealth if all the classes are lacking.
4:34 — Men are the managers of women
Men are the managers of women, because of the advantage Allah has granted some of them over others, and by virtue of their spending out of their wealth. Righteous women are obedient and watchful in the absence [of their husbands] in guarding what Allah has enjoined [them] to guard. As for those [wives] whose misconduct you fear, [first] advise them, and [if ineffective] keep away from them in the bed, and [as the last resort] beat them. Then if they obey you, do not seek any course [of action] against them. Indeed Allah is all-exalted, all-great.
This verse is part of a broader discussion outlining the complementary roles and responsibilities between wives and husbands, following the previous verses that discussed their mutual rights.
Although this verse pertains specifically to family dynamics and marital rights, the reasoning presented extends its implications to leadership and general guardianship over the community.
In essence, it implies that a guardian should be a man, due to the superiority God has granted him, in terms of innate disposition and biological makeup.
This verse was revealed to explain some of the rulings concerning the relationship between husbands and wives—not general rulings about women and men. This is due to two reasons:
- The latter part of the verse clearly states that it is the husband who is most responsible for advising and correcting his wife if she sins. - It addresses the issue of a wife’s misconduct (nushūz).
The phrase “Men are managers of women” is an informative descriptive sentence, intending to introduce a command. God has assigned men the roles of guardianship (wilāyah), management (qawwāma), and providing for their wives, since the wife is an entrusted responsibility by God under the husband’s care. He must care for her, protect her, provide for her needs, and support her financially.
The use of the hyperbole qawwām emphasizes the importance of the husband’s guardianship and managerial role over his wife. The verse uses the causative particle bāʾ to indicate causation, as in:
"because of the advantage God has granted some of them over others," and "and by virtue of their spending.”
This shows that God has granted men guardianship and domestic leadership for two reasons:
- Superior physical strength and resilience, and solid administrative ability. - Financial responsibility—the obligation to provide financially for the family.
If a man lacks one or both of these two qualifications, or fails to fulfill them, he cannot rightfully be the manager of the family.
When God assigned domestic management to men, and gave them exclusive rights to fulfill crucial roles, it is not because men are inherently closer to God than women. Rather, it is because of their higher physical endurance and administrative skill, while the criteria of human perfection for both women and men is knowledge and God-wariness. In matters of values and standards, masculinity and femininity have no influence.
The value of a human being lies in the spiritual essence, which is neither male nor female. The body is merely a medium and tool for the soul, and it is through it that external differences manifest, and that the criteria of female and male take shape.
To prevent men from thinking that their assigned roles, namely management and guardianship, are a sign of closeness to God, God mentions women with honour and dignity, highlighting their superior qualities:
“So righteous women are obedient, care-taking in the absence [of their husbands] of what God has enjoined [them] to guard.”
This sentence emphasizes the virtue of the righteous woman: she is obedient to God, upholds what He has entrusted her with, and fulfills her marital duties.
Compliance by the wife with her husband is obligatory exclusively in marital matters and does not include anything else. The criterion for compliance is whether the requirement conforms to Islamic law or not; a woman, as God described, adheres to God’s command—she is obedient to God before she is compliant with her husband. If the husband requires something contrary to divine instruction, the wife is not obliged to comply.
A wife may also place conditions in the marriage contract that determine her obligations according to her preferences, and impose restrictions or stipulations on the husband’s rights over her.
The phrase “care-taking in the absence [of their husbands]” describes the wife’s commitment to protecting the honour and privacy of the family, including its secrets and trust. This is the third noble quality of women mentioned in the verse. Righteous women are not merely “care-taking in the absence,” but they also maintain the dignity of their husbands and safeguard the family’s wealth and secrets. All of this is only possible with divine support.
In the verse “of what God has enjoined [them] to guard,” the causative bāʾ (translated as ‘of’) and gerundival mā (translated as ‘what’) indicate this meaning—the qualities of righteous women are the result of God’s support and favour.
Nushūz (misconduct) refers to the wife’s refusal to fulfill her marital duties, particularly by refraining from intimacy with her husband. The term “fear of misconduct” refers to signs of rebellion, such as refusing to comply with her husband or deliberately challenging his authority. The husband is given a three-level approach to address this:
- Admonition and guidance - Keeping away from her in the marital bed as long as it proves to be effective in addressing the misconduct. Multiple explanations have been presented for “keeping away,” including turning his back on her, ceasing physical affection, sleeping in separate beds, or sleeping in separate rooms. - Striking. This is a last-resort disciplinary action used when advising and keeping away are ineffective. It is a form of forbidding wrong, not of vengeance—it is exclusively for preventing misconduct. This striking is a form of God's authority upon the woman, and not a right of the man's managerial role.
Islamic law does not grant the husband absolute authority over the wife. Instead, God grants him a specific kind of corrective leadership (qawwāmiyyah) to fulfill his responsibilities to resolve certain situations justly. This leadership must not become abusive.
The permission to strike is not an open license for violence. Rather, it is a measured step in a graduated process meant to prevent further harm and restore marital harmony, and it is limited to one of the fundamental rules of marital life: “honourable retention, or a kindly release.” The man may not take corrective action that would demean the woman or hurt her feelings, especially through striking. He is forbidden from beating her or striking her in a way that would harm the body, draw blood, break bones, cause organ dysfunction, or cause redness. It is simply an act of warning and must be carried out with restraint.
The approach mentioned here—advising, keeping away, and then striking—is not a chain of punishment, but a process of escalating seriousness, and each step is meant to leave space for repentance and reconciliation. If the wife returns to compliance at any point, the husband is not permitted to escalate further. If the woman complies after the third step, the husband must refrain from further escalation and from verbal or physical harm, as stated in the verse: “Then if they obey you, do not seek any course [of action] against them. Indeed God is all-exalted, all-great.”
This warning at the end of the verse underscores the limits of male authority, emphasizing that reconciliation and justice are paramount. God forgives women if they repent and comply after misconduct, and therefore a man must not overstep the bounds of discipline that God has permitted him.
From the apparent meaning of the verse, the husband may take disciplinary action when he fears misconduct, not when misconduct occurs. Advice is the first course of action because it is effective at the early signs, before misconduct has fully manifested; it allows the husband enough time to think about resolving the problem before the misconduct occurs.
The scope of correction is limited to the bounds allowed by the verse—only when there is a clear and observable fear of misconduct, not simply on the basis of suspicion or a desire for control.
On the Summary page · Read the commentary on 4:34 →
4:35 — If you fear a split between the two of them
If you fear a split between the two of them, then appoint an arbiter from his relatives and an arbiter from her relatives. If they desire reconcilement, Allah shall reconcile them. Indeed Allah is all-knowing, all-aware.
In disagreement between a wife and her husband, the dispute sometimes comes from one of them and at other times from both. The previous verse spoke of the wife’s defiance (nushūz), and this verse followed it to make clear the way of resolving dispute and discord. If the discord comes from both spouses, and both refuse what is due from them to the other, a third party with authority is placed between them, to take from the husband the right of his wife and from the wife the right of her husband. Since the refusal of each of the husband and wife in that is a cause of estrangement, the legal judge is the guardian of the one who refuses, and he may compel him to obey the legal ruling.
This verse shows that if the discord is from both spouses, and the dispute between them is a cause of hardship for both together, there must be the mediation of an arbiter from the husband’s family and another from the wife’s family, who fulfil the conditions of judging, such as maturity, reason, justice and so on, so that they may judge between them in what they differ about.
The subject of the verse is the fear of discord and dispute. If it has happened and become a fact, and reconciling them is not possible, the need for the two arbiters falls away, because sending them would be of no use. That is why the verse speaks of fearing discord, not of knowing it.
The address in the verse is directed to the just among the faithful, if there is no ruling state that manages the affairs of the faithful; especially since preserving the structure of the family home, and founding it on calm, love and mercy, has a great role in social calm and security; and when the family is shaken, society is exposed to many dangers and tragedies.
The apparent meaning of the command in the word “then send” is obligation. Perhaps sending the two arbiters is recommended when discord between them is possible; but when it has actually happened, it is obligatory, either on the just faithful or on the court of the state and its judges. And even on the view that the command to send is one of guidance, there is no conflict between the ruling being guidance and its being obligatory; because the ruling of a command of guidance follows what it guides to: if what it guides to is obligatory, that command becomes obligatory; and if it is recommended, it is recommended. Nor does the worldly nature of reconciling the spouses conflict with the command in “then send” indicating obligation; because Islam sets out the rulings of this world and the Hereafter, and a person is charged with the rulings of both together, and is responsible for that on the Day of Resurrection.
The apparent meaning of the noble verse is arbitration, not agency. For if the ruling of the two arbiters and what they decide were by way of agency, the consent of those who appointed them would be a condition, and the two arbiters would not have the right to agree on one view for reconciliation; because the bounds of the agent’s scope are as much as the principal’s, and each of the spouses can take a decision about himself, not about the other.
And if the ruling of those sent is a kind of arbitration and not agency, the consent of the spouses is not a condition for their ruling to take effect; rather, it is binding on them, unless the ruling is to separate the spouses. For divorce is in the hand of the husband in particular, so it must come from him and with his consent; and if it is a khulʿ divorce, it must be with the consent of both spouses. So too in dropping any right, or binding either of them with a new right towards the other: that is conditional on the consent and permission of both spouses, before or after. Family dispute is only resolved by love of the heart and harmony; and the harmony of hearts, which is the cornerstone of the family, is in the hand of God (s.w.t.), and comes only from Him (s.w.t.). That is why the verse said: “If they both wish to set things right, God will bring about agreement between them.”
The unrestrictedness of the verse permits the two arbiters to be two men, two women, or a man and a woman; and it is not a condition that they be qualified jurists (mujtahid), because what is needed in family matters is experience and wisdom, not ijtihād in its jurisprudential meaning. Discord and family dispute are among subjects, not rulings; and the rights of servants among themselves are the affair of people, not the affair of God (s.w.t.). So whatever dispute happens in them is resolved by consultation and the arbitration of good people of sound judgment who are just.
A condition for the ruling taking effect here is the agreement of views; because the arbiter here does not represent himself alone, and is not sent by the Islamic state to rule, so that the view would be by majority. The fit between ruling and subject requires that the qualifications “from his family” and “from her family” are not limiting but describe the usual case; because those of sound judgment in family matters whom the spouses accept are usually from their families, not because they must be so. If the spouses have no family and relatives, or there is no one fit for arbitration in their families, it does not fall away when discord is feared; rather, two arbiters are sent from the just faithful. It is permitted to appoint any two arbiters whom the spouses accept, even if there is someone fit for arbitration in their families. Indeed, if wisdom requires keeping the secrets of the spouses from relatives and family, the more distant is better for arbitration. In other words, the more fitting distant one comes before the fitting near one.
The dual pronoun in the phrase “If they both wish to set things right, God will bring about agreement between them” may refer to the spouses, meaning that if they are resolved on reconciliation, God will bring about agreement between them, restore love and purity to them, and remove dispute and coldness. The finer possibility is that the pronoun here refers to the two arbiters; meaning that if the two arbiters have a true intention to set things right, God will grant them success in a sound view on which they agree by consultation. This possibility favours the reconcilers being arbiters, not agents. And if the two arbiters agree on one solution, it binds the spouses, and by it the reconciliation between them comes about.
The good and true intention of the two arbiters is not enough; rather, removing discord and bringing agreement requires the pure intention of the spouses themselves.
The contrary implication of the phrase “If they both wish to set things right, God will bring about agreement between them” is that when good intention and the wish to set things right are absent, God (s.w.t.) will not grant success. So if the two arbiters strive for reconciliation and the spouses are not reconciled, that discloses the absence of a good, sincere intention to set things right.
4:36 — Worship Allah and do not ascribe any partners to Him
Worship Allah and do not ascribe any partners to Him, and be good to parents, the relatives, the orphans, the needy, the near neighbour and the distant neighbour, the companion at your side, the traveller, and your slaves. Indeed Allah does not like those who are arrogant and boastful.
This verse is one of the clearest instances and examples of the comprehensive words given to the most noble Messenger (s.a.w.).
The mention of tawḥīd together with matters of rights, morals and feeling is to show the importance of those matters, and to show the success of the one who affirms tawḥīd in carrying out those rights. Denying polytheism at the start of the verse shows that the cause of moral diseases and the wasting of rights is polytheism. By the requirement of the mutual effect between root and branch, and between belief and action, polytheism is the cause of bad morals and ugly deeds; and the more often they are repeated, the stronger and more rooted polytheism becomes.
The phrase “And worship God” makes clear tawḥīd in action, meaning that the one who affirms tawḥīd must be (a servant of God) in every work he does. The one who affirms tawḥīd ought to have goodness of the act and goodness of the doer; and whoever lacks either of these two goodnesses at the level of action is not faithful and lacks tawḥīd in action.
The phrase “And worship God” contains all the degrees of the ranks of tawḥīd, and has made clear the highest of them, which is pure and purified worship for God alone. The loftiness of this rank, in which nothing but God is intended, comes from the loftiness of the rank of knowing God (s.w.t.); meaning that knowledge of Him is tied to His Essence (s.w.t.).
The letter “and” in the phrase “and associate nothing with Him” is a conjunction, but it does not show that what is joined differs from what it is joined to; rather, this phrase is an explanation and unfolding of what is before it. True worship is by denying polytheism, because there is no empty space in it to hold polytheism. So His (s.w.t.) words “And worship God and associate nothing with Him”, though two phrases outwardly, go back in their core to one meaning; and the spirit of worshipping God and not associating anything with Him is one thing: sincerity to Him in tawḥīd. Pure worship does not come together with polytheism, and polytheism does not agree with tawḥīd. The righteous person must affirm the oneness of God and not associate anyone in His worship; indeed, the denial of polytheism is the meaning and reality of tawḥīd. Polytheism is sometimes in belief, in a plurality of creators or in the independence of creatures; and sometimes in action, by doing the whole act for other than God (s.w.t.), as is the state of idol-worshippers, or by intending in part of it the face of other than God (s.w.t.), as is the state of those who show off. The word “nothing” (shayʾan) shows generality because it is an indefinite noun in the context of negation. If it is an object, the meaning is: do not make anything a partner of God; and if it is an absolute object, the meaning is: do not associate with God in any way of association, small or great.
God (s.w.t.) is purely One, and accepts nothing but pure tawḥīd; and this is the secret of the voidness of an act done for show, and the rejection of worship mixed with other than seeking God’s (s.w.t.) face.
The phrase mentioned about worshipping God and not associating anything with Him has as its subject the act of worship, not acts done only for a worldly end (tawaṣṣulī). But if an act done for a worldly end takes on a colour of worship by which one shows off, it too becomes afflicted with polytheism and is included in the prohibition of the verse; because it commands that the servant be sincere to God in belief, morals and all deeds.
In this verse goodness to parents is joined with tawḥīd. Joining the preposition and its object in “to parents” to the preposition and its object in the phrase “and associate nothing with Him” shows that one must not associate others in goodness to them either. The verb “do good”, to which the word “goodness” goes back, is left out to stress the link of rights with worship and show how closely they are interwoven. Bringing in the letter bāʾ on the word “goodness” is to show continuity and permanence; so the meaning is that goodness to parents and those mentioned with them must be kept up; otherwise it would be goodness towards them and not goodness with them.
Just as goodness to parents is not confined to financial goodness but includes emotional feeling and moral courtesy, so it is not confined to the time of their life, but includes goodness to them after their death.
What is meant by goodness in this verse is tenderness, affection and good character, and kind giving without prior desert, such as courtesy, lowering the wing, and a cheerful face and smile; not treating them as fulfilling a legal duty and jurisprudential obligation, such as paying zakāh or what the son must provide of maintenance for needy parents. The proof of this meaning is the counsel to be good to relatives and neighbours, even though it may not be permitted to give them obligatory charity because maintaining them is obligatory, or they may not be in financial need.
The coming of those mentioned here in the verses of obligatory zakāh is not proof that goodness to them in this verse is obligatory as a ruling of jurisprudence and a binding right. Neither unbelief nor wealth is an obstacle to goodness towards those mentioned in this verse, and Islam, faith and poverty are not conditions for it; because it is a social courtesy and trait whose only condition is humanity.
The basis in dealing with people is not indifference and ill-treatment, but goodness and courtesy, except in exceptional places. This moral and emotional counsel does not conflict with the ruling of jurisprudence on the necessity of enjoining the good and forbidding the evil; rather, both must be acted on, and it is not right to leave goodness on the pretext of enjoining the good and forbidding the evil, except in excepted places.
After the counsel of goodness to parents, the verse mentioned goodness to relatives, orphans and the needy. Relatives are kin and those related, whether neighbours or not. The orphan is the one who has no father, and the needy (miskīn) is the one whom poverty has stilled (askana) from movement. Repeating the preposition in the phrase “and to relatives”, besides its emphasis, hints at the variety of goodness; because goodness to parents is other than goodness to kin and relatives.
Since the expression “relatives” (dhī al-qurbā) in the Qur’an means kin and nearness in meaning, not nearness in place, it is not far-fetched that the meaning of “the neighbour who is a relative” is the neighbour near in lineage, and “the stranger neighbour” the foreign neighbour between whom and you there is no kinship.
However that may be, although the verse counselled goodness to relatives, it counselled once again goodness to the neighbours among them, to stress its importance. Whoever is a neighbour, a relative and a Muslim has three rights: the right of neighbourliness, the right of a Muslim over a Muslim, and the right of kinship.
The word janb means nearness, and “the companion at your side” is the familiar companion, whether in the home and dwelling, at work, or in any other field. So one ought to be good to family, kin, relatives, the friendly companion, neighbours, colleagues at work, partners in trade, companions on a journey, and everyone with whom one has any kind of link and bond. From mutual goodness among people come virtuous homes, and from virtuous homes comes the virtuous city, adorned with perfection, in which people live under the shade of security and calm.
What is meant by “the son of the road” (ibn al-sabīl) in this verse is the one stranded away from his land; not in the meaning of one who deserves zakāh, but the stranger traveller, called “the son of the road”, who deserves goodness and help even if he is rich in his own land. Slaves, who are among the poorest social classes, ought not to be deprived of goodness; and the best goodness done for a slave is to free him, and to help him to his freedom by a contract of manumission, so that he becomes free gradually. The expression “what (mā) your right hands own” is a common, current expression, and there is nothing special in the expression “whom (man) they own”. Attributing ownership to the right hand in the phrase “what your right hands own” has a meaning of emphasis, as in their saying: I held it with my hand; besides the custom of shaking right hands when making a deal.
This verse has focused on financial rights, and paying them requires generosity and nobility. The command to goodness in it is unrestricted and is not particular to the well-off and wealthy; rather, everyone must carry it out as far as he is able. Whoever is miserly comes under His (s.w.t.) words: “surely God does not love one who is conceited, boastful.”
This phrase shows that whoever leaves the goodness commanded is either a miser of stingy soul, or one who shows off and boasts if he gives.
In other words, whoever does not worship God and is not good to people is either miserly in the very root of belief and faith, or his seeking of fame and standing drives him to make a show of generosity and worship, to be seen and to boast. That is why the verse said that God (s.w.t.) does not love the conceited, the boastful. Conceit is the quality of misers, and blameworthy boasting is the quality of those who make a show of generosity to be seen and heard. So the end of the verse makes clear the cause of polytheism and of disobeying the commands of the verse. Setting the last phrase against what is before it shows that worship and goodness to creation are loved by God (s.w.t.), just as their opposite, conceit and blameworthy boasting, is hated by Him (s.w.t.).
In the command to be good to people there are two duties: meeting their needs and preserving their dignity. Among people are those who meet their needs and fill their want, but do not preserve their dignity and honour; and among them are those who neither help nor honour. In the phrase “surely God does not love one who is conceited, boastful” there is a pointer to these two forms:
Those who live an imaginary life and think that what they have of material and spiritual things is from themselves. Because they are afflicted with this delusion of the greatness of the self, they are miserly, and so they are deprived of the blessing of being good to people; because conceit and pride do not let their owner do good and kindness.
The conceited miser, if he gives and does good, boasts of it and shows off.
4:37 — —Those who are [themselves] stingy and bid [other] people to be stingy
—Those who are [themselves] stingy and bid [other] people to be stingy, and conceal whatever Allah has given them out of His bounty; and We have prepared for the faithless a humiliating punishment.
This verse mentions the qualities of the conceited and boastful and the punishment prepared for them.
Miserliness is leaving goodness to people; and the verse includes miserliness with wealth, with standing, with knowledge and so on.
The conceited and boastful are not only miserly with what they have and turn away from goodness; rather, they also command people to be miserly and make them desire it.
They are not content with forbidding the good and making people care little for doing kindness and good to people; rather, they go further by commanding the evil, which is miserliness. It is a quality of the soul, and they strive to spread this quality of soul among people. That is why the verse did not express it with the phrase (they command people not to be generous), but said: “and command people to be miserly.”
Forbidding generosity and goodness is, with some of the conceited, no less important than commanding miserliness; so that they are miserly even with the goodness of those who do good, and the generosity of their hands enrages them.
Since the conceited and boastful are pleased with themselves, they reckon their vices and low ugly deeds an approved perfection; and so they call people to them and strive to spread them. They command people to be miserly so as not to be alone in the quality of miserliness, or to lessen its ugliness in souls; for by spreading it among people they find many partners in this low trait, and so lessen its shamefulness and disgrace.
Commanding miserliness need not be by speech or writing. Rather, the conduct and character of one with financial means who is miserly and holds his hand back from goodness is like a call to miserliness and a command to evil, especially if he is someone who is followed. The conceited miser commands miserliness and forbids goodness by word, or by deed and conduct; and in this respect he is a hypocrite in action and has in himself the mark of hypocrisy, because the hypocrites forbid spending on the Muslims and comforting them with wealth. So commanding miserliness is hypocrisy in action, even if the miser and the one who commands it is not a hypocrite of heart or of belief, and is not counted in the ranks of the hypocrites. The conceited person, besides his miserliness and holding back from helping people, hides the blessings God has given him, so that those deprived of them do not see them and hope for help and kindness from him. The verse in its generality or unrestrictedness includes the Jews’ concealing of the signs of the chosen Messenger and his prophethood; but by way of application, not as the cause and occasion of the verse’s revelation, and it is not particular to the Jews.
The verse threatens the faithless with a humiliating punishment and an abasement with no dignity in it. This threat is not one of remaining forever; for what is meant by the faithless in it is not the faithless in belief in the technical sense of jurisprudence, but in a sense that includes ingratitude for blessings (kufrān al-niʿmah); and misers are ungrateful for blessings, like the ingratitude of those who conceal them.
God (s.w.t.) has threatened the misers and those of empty pride and boasting with a humiliating punishment, not a great or painful punishment. Describing it as humiliating shows that it is a punishment of the spirit, not of the body. It is a punishment of abasement and humiliation by which the spirit is crushed, a punishment more severe than the punishment of the body and limbs. Even if there is humiliation in bodily punishment too, disgrace and severe humiliation belong to the spirit in particular.
The secret of punishing the conceited and arrogant in this world with the punishment of spiritual humiliation and abasement is that their rising above people is a false rising. And since for every lie there is a truth facing it, if someone’s greatness and honour is a false honour, then his humiliation and abasement is the true reality. On the Day of Resurrection the lie passes away and is wiped out, and the truth shines and the reality appears.
4:38 — And those who spend their wealth to be seen by people
And those who spend their wealth to be seen by people, and believe neither in Allah nor in the Last Day. As for him who has Satan for his companion—an evil companion is he!
“And those who” is joined to the word “those who” in the previous verse. The conceited person is afflicted with many vices: miserliness, commanding it, concealing God’s blessings, and spending to be seen and heard; and among the conceited are some who are afflicted with all these vices. The cause of those vices is companionship with Satan. The danger of this evil companion is that he steers the intention of the conceited and boastful in spending towards the ego and its desire for display and standing, instead of seeking God’s (s.w.t.) good pleasure by this good deed; and with that satanic intention he will never reach what he hopes for.
If the conceited and boastful believes in God, the One, the Unique, he spends and shows that his spending is worship of God and in His way, while it is for show and fame. If he denies the existence of God, he shows that his spending is to serve people and their welfare, while it is to display the ego and draw eyes to himself under the title of charity and humanity. Satan is an evil companion for the human being, and whoever has Satan as his companion is like him in evil; because the reins of the companionship are in Satan’s hand. Satan is not content with companionship, but brings him into his guardianship and puts him under his command and prohibition; so he does with the human being all that a guardian does with the one in his charge.
Besides the evil effects of Satan’s companionship that appear on the Day of Resurrection, which is a painful punishment, it has in this world crushing dangers and grave harm that surround Satan’s companion. Satan blocks his companion’s way to the truth and keeps him from taking a single step on it. He begins with misleading thought and taking control of the doors of knowledge and understanding, and follows with whispering in action, so that his companionship becomes guardianship, and in his command there is failure and manifest loss.
4:39 — What harm would it have done them had they believed in Allah and the Last Day
What harm would it have done them had they believed in Allah and the Last Day, and spent out of what Allah has provided them? Allah knows them well.
The cause of the conceited and boastful being deprived of right knowledge and righteous deeds, of knowing good and evil, truth and falsehood, and of sincerity in worshipping God (s.w.t.), is not believing in God and the Day of Reckoning. The field of their thinking is imagination only, and their movement is between desire and anger only. That is why this verse began with faith in God and the Last Day before the command to spend from what God (s.w.t.) has provided.
This noble verse asks, in regret or wonder at their confused thinking that dragged them into the evil deeds of miserliness and showing off: what harm would it have done them had they believed in God and the Day of Reckoning, kept steadily to the trait of generosity and spending, and not been afflicted with miserliness or with showing off in spending? The verse guides to the fact that had they not been miserly, and not shown off in what they spent, they would not have been punished, and would have reached the true aims they hoped for.
Faith in God and the Return:
Teaches the human being that he is not the real owner of the blessings and wealth he has, that they are God’s provision and His (s.w.t.) property, and that he is only entrusted with them.
Makes spending from them easy for him.
Makes his intention in spending sincere, seeking God’s (s.w.t.) good pleasure, not boasting, vying and display.
And so widens the scope of spending to include every blessing God has given him, of wealth, knowledge, standing, rank and so on.
God knows everything and is aware of the deeds of the servants. He knows the miserliness of the misers, the showing off of those who show off, and the sincerity of the sincere. The report that God knows the state of the conceited and boastful is a warning to them. The faithful believe that God’s knowledge of their spending from the good things they earned is the cause of all outpourings, and it is what moves them; they have no need for people to see or hear, so that their work would be for show and fame. The phrase “and God knows them well” is a report meant as a performative; it is a promise to the faithful and a threat to others.
4:40 — Indeed Allah does not wrong [anyone] [even to the extent of] an atom’s weight
Indeed Allah does not wrong [anyone] [even to the extent of] an atom’s weight, and if it be a good deed He doubles it[s reward], and gives from Himself a great reward.
This verse stands as the reason for the question in the previous verse: what harm would it have done them had they believed in God and spent from what We provided them? For had they spent even the weight of an atom, God would multiply it for them.
In this verse there are three attributes of God (s.w.t.): one negative, which is: 1) that He (s.w.t.) does not wrong anyone by the weight of an atom; and two positive: 2) that He (s.w.t.) multiplies for the doers of good their good deed, even if it is the weight of an atom; 3) that He (s.w.t.) gives from His presence a great reward.
Injustice is one of the qualities denied of the divine Essence in this world and the Hereafter. He (s.w.t.) wrongs no one, neither by the weight of an atom nor by less and smaller than it; because what drives to injustice is existential deficiency, and He (s.w.t.) is pure perfection and free of all injustice. He (s.w.t.) pours out all good things, and He is the Rich with a richness that has no limit, free of every deficiency: neither in His act, so that it would not bear its fruit and have its effect, nor in His justice, so that He would trespass on the right of any of His servants. And though none of them has a right that God could trespass on, He (s.w.t.) has graciously given them rights over Him and made them promises, and He (s.w.t.) does not break His promise; because breaking a promise contradicts wisdom and is ugly, and God does not do what is ugly, because He is pure good, and nothing comes from Him but what is good and beautiful.
The injustice in this verse is creational injustice, not legislative and conventional; because God (s.w.t.) is pure reality, so conventional matters, such as being charged with truthfulness, justice, goodness and so on, have no meaning in Him. He (s.w.t.) is perfection in every perfection and free of every deficiency. He (s.w.t.) does not do injustice; not that it is forbidden to Him or that He is compelled not to do injustice. Rather, injustice in itself is within His (s.w.t.) power; but it means that no injustice comes from Him by choice and power over it if He willed it. The occurrence of injustice, lying and so on from Him is impossible in occurrence, not in the sense of legislative prohibition; because God is not governed by a law, for the law itself is contingent in existence, His act and from Him, and the contingent has no rule over the Necessary in existence, and nothing overpowers Him. So the correct and precise expression is to say “binding from God”, not “binding upon God”; because will and power are among His attributes and qualities.
It is not only that He (s.w.t.) does no injustice, and that no good remains with Him unrewarded however little; rather, He multiplies the good deed many times, even if in its smallness it is the weight of an atom or finer: “Surely God does not wrong by the weight of an atom; and if it is a good deed, He multiplies it and gives from His presence a great reward.” Multiplying a good deed is one thing, and rewarding with something better than it is another: “Whoever brings a good deed shall have better than it”; or multiplying it tenfold: “Whoever brings a good deed shall have ten like it.” For such expressions show that the reward differs from the deed; while the expression “and if it is a good deed, He multiplies it” shows the multiplying of the deed itself, not its reward. This kind of expression fits the view of the embodiment and taking form of deeds, where reality and unity are preserved in them. “Multiplying”, in its unrestrictedness, includes multiplying by thousands of millions, and shows the multiplying of rewards (the phrase “and if it is a good deed, He multiplies it”); and the phrase “and gives from His presence a great reward” shows a special kind of reward.
What is meant by the multiplied reward may be the reward of the same kind as the deed, which is the delight of the promised Garden; “and as for this great reward which He gives from His presence, it is the delight that comes in meeting God, and in being immersed in the truth and absorbed.”
The whole world of existence is present with God (s.w.t.), but the degrees of presence differ from one being to another, and not all of them are present “in God’s presence” (ladā Allāh). Some beings are “with God” (ʿinda Allāh) and some “in God’s presence” (ladā Allāh); and the word ladun shows an intensity of nearness and presence that the word ʿinda does not show. The phrase “and gives from His presence (ladunhu) a great reward” is good news that the reward comes from His very presence, and a promise of a reward that can only be described as great! Such a reward is not of the kind of the deed the servant did, but of the kind of knowledge of God.
The expression “reward” (ajr, literally wage) is an encouraging expression, used to encourage and stir the faithful; for the servant does not do obedience for the benefit of God (s.w.t.), so as to deserve a wage from Him (s.w.t.); rather, the benefit of his work returns to the servant himself.
4:41 — So how shall it be, when We bring a witness from every nation and We bring you as a…
So how shall it be, when We bring a witness from every nation and We bring you as a witness to them?
Divine justice, His (s.w.t.) wronging no one, and His giving the doers of good a great reward will be on the Day of Resurrection with the witness of the prophets. This increases the regret of the sinners and the joy of the obedient. So this verse is a threat to the faithless included in the previous verse, “Surely God does not wrong by the weight of an atom”, and a promise to the people of obedience promised in the phrase “and if it is a good deed, He multiplies it.”
The Imam of every age is a witness over his community and over their individual and social relations, and he is the witness over their deeds on the Day of Resurrection. If that is so, he without doubt knows the deeds of the limbs, and knows the intentions and the beliefs and morals the hearts hold, so that he may rightly bear witness.
The prophets and the Infallible Imams, who are from among the people themselves and witnesses over them, besides justice are infallible and free of error and forgetfulness; and they are witnesses with knowledge over outward deeds, the states of hearts and beliefs. By their witness, and the witness of other witnesses, on the day when the truth appears and argument is made, the far-reaching argument is established against the creatures, and none of those held to account will have an argument against God (s.w.t.).
The Messenger of God (s.a.w.) has authority over the messengers and prophets, because his revealed Book, the noble Qur’an, has authority over all the heavenly books. So he (s.a.w.) is a witness not only over the people of his time, but over the whole community of Islam, including the prophets and their communities; and he is the witness in favour of the prophets in judging between them and their peoples, because the prophets will be questioned on the Day of Resurrection. Moreover, nothing is mentioned in the verse to show that the people of his (s.a.w.) time are meant, so as to be what the demonstrative “these” points to; and the nations will be asked how they answered their prophets. And if all are questioned, nations and messengers, witness will be required from all.
The witness in this verse under discussion is witness in the real sense, not in the sense of the scale of deeds. Real witness is what takes place in a court of judgment, with the Infallible as the witness to a man’s righteousness and faith or to his disobedience; even though the rightness or falsity of the deeds of nations becomes clear after they are presented to the prophets.
4:42 — On that day those who were faithless and [who] disobeyed the Apostle will wish the earth…
On that day those who were faithless and [who] disobeyed the Apostle will wish the earth were levelled with them, and they will not conceal any matter from Allah.
This verse uncovers the state of the faithless person when the witnesses testify against him on the Day of Resurrection; and it may rightly be the answer to “How then…”.
Whoever disbelieved in God and called His messengers liars in this world will have wishes on the Day of Resurrection, and they will not be as they wish.
Their disobedience to the Messenger is either by opposing his law and its rulings sent down to him from God (s.w.t.), which goes back to unbelief in practice towards Him (s.w.t.); or by opposing the Messenger’s own command.
When they see that all their wishes have gone with the wind and their efforts in them have failed, their last wish will be that the earth be levelled over them, or that they had not been raised from their graves, to escape abasement, humiliation and punishment: “and the faithless will say, ‘Would that I were dust!’”
So in any case they wish not to be present at that hard station, even by becoming dust or being buried in the depths of the earth.
On the meaning of the phrase “and they will not hide from God any word” there is more than one view; some said there are seven views, the most important of them two: 1) that it is a new sentence joined to the verb “will wish”; 2) that it is one of the wishes of the faithless and those who called the messengers liars, joined to the phrase “that the earth were levelled over them”.
Their concealing of realities in this world has several forms: from concealing the signs of the Messenger’s message, to hiding some verses of the Gospel and Torah, to concealing true testimony in the courts and distorting realities.
Because of how deeply they were stamped with lying, they may lie in the first stations of the Resurrection too, and even swear to their lies! But worldly habits soon pass away and realities are uncovered by the witness of the witnesses and the sight of the deeds standing present. Then they will find no escape from confessing and laying out what they hide; and they will wish that they had not hidden any word from God from the first station.
4:43 — O you who have faith! Do not approach prayer when you are intoxicated
O you who have faith! Do not approach prayer when you are intoxicated, [not] until you know what you are saying, nor [enter mosques] in the state of ritual impurity until you have washed yourselves, except while passing through. But if you are sick or on a journey, or any of you has come from the toilet, or you have touched women, and you cannot find water, then make your ablution on clean ground and wipe a part of your faces and your hands. Indeed Allah is all-excusing, all-forgiving.
The reason the address in the noble verse is directed to the faithful in particular is that no one but the faithful and the one who prays carries out God’s (s.w.t.) commands; otherwise the command in the verse is directed to all who are charged with the law, like the prayer that is obligatory on all.
The drunk is not charged with duties while he is drunk, because the address of the verse is particular to those of sound mind. But before the drunk lost his mind he too was addressed by the ruling; so the verse commands us not to do what leads to our drunkenness. Whoever is drunk at the time of prayer, having drunk wine before it, must make up his prayer; because he became drunk by his own will and choice, and he prepared its preliminaries, besides committing the sin. For this reason the voidness of the drunk person’s worship and transactions is only because of the loss of intention, not the loss of reason.
What is meant by “the prayer” in the verse is either the known prayer, by the indication of His (s.w.t.) words “until you know what you are saying”, that is, do not pray except when you are sober, so that you know what you are saying while you are in the presence of God (s.w.t.); or the place of prayer, that is, the mosque. Then the meaning is: do not enter the mosque while you are drunk, by the indication of His (s.w.t.) words “nor when in a state of major impurity (junub), except passing through”; because what a person in major impurity ought not to enter except when passing through is the place of prayer, or the place where one prays, not the prayer. But if we explain “passing through” (ʿābirī sabīl) as the traveller, what is meant is the known prayer and not its place.
What is meant by drunkenness in the verse is the drunkenness that comes from drinking wine, and “drunk” is because of their drinking wine. But in view of the generality of the proof and the reason given in the phrase “until you know what you are saying”, what is meant may be the drunkenness of sleep, that is, severe drowsiness. For this reason this kind of drunkenness in sleep has come in the narrations as one of the examples of drunkenness, not as its conceptual explanation. According to this possibility, the other example of drunkenness (in the verse) is drowsiness; so the meaning is: do not stand for prayer lazy or drowsy, so that you know what you are saying.
It is worth pointing out that what has come in some narrations about the drunkenness of sleep and the like is not taken from “drunk”, but drawn from the reason given, “until you know what you are saying”.
On this basis His words “until you know what you are saying” stand as the reason for forbidding drinking wine such that its drunkenness lasts until one enters prayer. That is, We have forbidden you it so that you may know what you are saying; it is not the limit of the ruling, in the sense of: do not come near until you know what you are saying, and when you know what you are saying there is no harm. In short, the verse does not mean that drinking wine itself is permitted, so long as you do not come to prayer while drunk.
Likewise, one in major impurity may not enter the mosque except when passing or crossing through: “nor when in a state of major impurity, except passing through.” On the basis of the two possibilities mentioned about the word “prayer”: if what is meant by it is the known prayer, the verse forbids prayer in the state of drunkenness and major impurity, and then the meaning of “passing through” is travellers; that is, do not pray in major impurity until you wash, unless you are travellers, in which case the traveller can perform dry ablution (tayammum) instead of washing if he cannot obtain water. But if what is meant by prayer is its place and site, that is, the mosque, the meaning is: “Do not enter the mosque while drunk or in major impurity, unless you are passing through.”
The unrestrictedness of the phrase mentioned does not restrict merely passing through the mosque to the mosque being, for example, a way to reach water, or the water being in the mosque, or the man becoming impure while in the mosque.
We draw out from the phrase “until you wash” that the washing for major impurity suffices in place of ablution (wuḍūʾ), since He (s.w.t.) did not say “until you wash and perform ablution”; rather, He (s.w.t.) makes clear that merely by washing it becomes permitted to enter the mosque or stay in it. This feature, sufficing in place of ablution, is not present in the other kinds of washing; and the ruling of some jurists that they suffice rests on other foundations.
If there is no water for purification from ritual impurity, that is, there is not enough water for washing and ablution, or using water harms the one washing, he may then perform dry ablution in place of ablution: “and if you are sick, or on a journey, or one of you comes from the privy, or you have touched women, and you do not find water, then perform dry ablution.”
Of the four titles mentioned in this phrase and joined to one another, some count as the setting of the ruling and others represent its subject. The minor ritual impurity (urinating or defecating) and the major ritual impurity (janābah) require ablution and washing; while illness and travel are the setting in which they happen. So the titles mentioned are not alike, such that each is joined to the other on an equal footing.
Mere travel or illness is not a cause of the permission to perform dry ablution; rather, it is permitted for the sick person who may be harmed by using water, and the traveller who finds no water at all. Likewise, what is meant by travel is not the legal journey whose distance is no less than eight farsakhs, but even a journey in which no water is found, even if the distance is less than eight farsakhs; then the person can perform dry ablution. It is worth mentioning that the ruling of dry ablution is not confined to the sick and the traveller, and that the qualification mentioned in the verse about illness and travel, “if you are sick or on a journey…”, describes the usual case; since water is usually harmful to the sick, and water may be hard to find during travel, especially in past centuries.
Part of the courtesy of the noble Qur’an is that it does not address individuals with plain words. It did not say “if you come from the privy” or “if one of you comes from the privy”, but said “one of you comes”, which is vagueness wrapped in vagueness. Nor did it say “or excrement comes out of you”, but said “or one of you comes from the privy (al-ghāʾiṭ)”, that is, from the hidden place (the toilet or latrine). Al-ghāʾiṭ is a low, sunken place; people in the past used to go far away to relieve themselves so that no one would see them and they would not be exposed to the winds, so this name became a title for the hidden, covered place. It is a refined expression used in that time for this purpose, and with the passing of time it lost its quality of allusion.
Some words, such as masās, lams and mubāsharah, were used and common among the Arabs at the time of the Qur’an’s revelation, and their linguistic meanings were not considered ugly. Rather, they are beautiful allusive words mixed with courtesy and modesty. Masās means touching; mubāsharah means meeting and the contact of skin; and lams is a thing touching a thing. Each of them is an allusion to intercourse.
The noble verse explains how dry ablution is done, which is wiping the face and hands with clean and pure earth: “then betake yourselves to clean earth and wipe your faces and your hands.” The letter bāʾ in “your faces” points to wiping part of the hands and face with earth in dry ablution; it is not necessary to wipe the whole face and hands.
It is drawn from the unrestrictedness of the verse that dry ablution on a smooth stone with no dust on it is enough. But if the preposition “of” in the phrase mentioned is for part, that means that some earth must stick to the hands so as to wipe it on the face and hands; on this basis there must be some earth on the stone. And by moving the hands and removing the dust, which is recommended, the earth is not completely wiped away; rather, what remains of it is enough for dry ablution. But if the preposition mentioned marks the starting point, so that it points to the beginning, the meaning of the phrase is: you must wipe from the earth to begin with, and there is no need for any dust to remain on the hand; on this basis you can perform dry ablution on a smooth rock with no dust on it.
On the basis of the last phrase of the verse, the person who fails to carry out this ruling, whether out of heedlessness or deliberately, can return and carry out the ruling again; and God (s.w.t.) is Pardoning, Forgiving.
4:44 — Have you not regarded those who were given a share of the Book
Have you not regarded those who were given a share of the Book, who purchase error and desire that you [too] should lose the way?
Those whom this verse, up to verse 58, describes are an instance of the conceited, boastful, miserly hypocrites mentioned just now in verses 36 to 42.
On the basis of verse 175 of Sūrat al-Baqarah, verse 77 of Sūrat al-Māʾidah and verse 6 of Sūrah Luqmān, the verse under discussion speaks of the scholars of the People of the Book, not their common people. It tells us that they were skilled and expert in the trade of misguidance, and that this became something perceptible, so that they moved from the stage of the inward to the stage of the outward, and from intellectual opinion to sight with the eye, even though their work is tied to opinion and belief: “Have you not seen…?” The preposition “to” (ilā), as is known, is used for looking, not seeing; so combining here seeing and the preposition mentioned is meant to express wonder. For the faithful who side with those of the People of the Book among the Jews who sold their religion are as though they go out of the light of the Qur’an and fall into the darkness of misguidance and the wilderness of distortion; and there is no doubt that such a loss cannot be made up and set right. For this reason what the callers to misguidance and loss do truly stirs wonder and astonishment. For they were not content with having deprived themselves of the divine light shining in the real, original Torah; rather, they also tried to lure those who believe in the Supreme Messenger (s.a.w.), to deprive them of the light of the message of Muḥammad.
With this noble verse God (s.w.t.) warns the faithful of the danger of this misleading group, making clear their wicked aims: “Beware of the danger of this group which sold its religion and knew nothing of the religion but a few matters, and even so began to trade with this little, wishing only to take others out of their faith or remove it from them. It aims to take the Muslims out of their Islam, deprive them of the light of the Qur’an and keep them far from the most noble Messenger (s.a.w.), so that they go astray; and to keep whoever has not yet been guided to Islam far from its fold, bewildered and confused.”
That misleading group went astray through selling its religion, and resolved to lead others astray and lure them so that they would become its followers; and it pictures to people that the faithless are better guided than the Muslims and more advanced than them.
The Qur’anic phrase “a portion of the Book”, which points to their share of knowledge, tells us that nothing remained in the distorted Torah that could be relied on or trusted at the time of the Qur’an’s revelation, just as the scholars of the Jews understood only a little of their original heavenly Book. What remained of the Torah may have been more than what they knew; and perhaps those who did not have a great share of knowledge had preserved what they memorised of that little knowledge, but lost a large part of the practical matters (of jurisprudence, morals and rights).
“They buy” means they exchange; that is, they exchange misguidance for guidance and ignore their correct belief. And whoever’s striving is directed to misleading others (the faithful) will have no share of drawing guidance from them.
The noble Qur’an often uses the words “selling and buying” in matters of belief to express leaving belief and faith, not that the faithful take wealth from the faithless and sell them their religion.
The verse under discussion does not speak of the outward selling and buying among the common people of the Jews, and how they would give their scholars wealth to obtain what is called a “certificate of forgiveness”, so that those scholars seized people’s wealth by this means while in reality selling them nothing but misguidance. Rather, the noble verse speaks of spiritual trade and the selling and buying of faith and unbelief; as though people were selling their spiritual goods, that is, their faith and belief, to take in their place false and distorted beliefs and pure unbelief.
4:45 — But Allah knows your enemies better
But Allah knows your enemies better, and Allah suffices as guardian, and Allah suffices as helper.
This verse completes and continues the previous verse; it makes clear the danger of the scholars of the People of the Book. God’s (s.w.t.) telling of what is hidden in their breasts, their secret and their open state, comes to uncover their enmity towards Islam and the Muslims; for God (s.w.t.) knows their secrets, the wickedness of their intentions and the evil of their consciences. He knows best the extent of their enmity, what appears of it and what is hidden, and their scheming and sedition; and He is aware of the ways that guarantee warding off their scheming and sedition and the Muslims’ defending themselves. He is the absolutely Powerful in establishing guardianship and bringing about victory for the Muslims. His guardianship is enough and His help is certain, by the requirement of His Lordship, to guarantee by it the victory of the faithful over all their enemies, inwardly and outwardly, and to protect them from scheming, plotting and sedition. To bring this about, those whom God has described as enemies, and He knows them best, must be counted as our enemies, and we must not be deceived by their scheming and their appearance. We must reject their guardianship and refuse their false help, because guardianship and help are in the hand of God alone; and He is enough as a Helper and a Guardian for the faithful.
Guardianship and help are mentioned in two independent phrases, besides the repetition of the Majestic Name and not being content with the pronoun, because Lordship requires guardianship and help; and mentioning the reason is for firmness and assurance.
As for the bāʾ entering the last two phrases, it is to stress that the sufficiency mentioned is without intermediary; because bāʾ is for attachment, which means that that sufficiency is joined to God (s.w.t.) directly, and no creature has any role in this matter.
4:46 — Among the Jews are those who pervert words from their meanings and say
Among the Jews are those who pervert words from their meanings and say, ‘We hear and disobey’ and ‘Hear without listening!’ and ‘Ra’ina,’ twisting their tongues and reviling the faith. But had they said, ‘We hear and obey’ and ‘Listen’ and ‘Unzurna,’ it would have been better for them and more upright. But Allah has cursed them for their faithlessness, so they will not believe except a few.
In the previous verses we came to know some of the evils of the Jews and their ugly qualities, and here the verse under discussion tells us of their other wickednesses, which are their distorting of the heavenly Book, the Torah. The form of this distortion, which they committed knowingly and deliberately, after they had understood it and known it to be the truth from their Lord, was at times verbal, by changing the words and expressions of the Torah, and at other times in meaning; that is, they explained the verses of the Torah according to their opinions and whims and played with their meanings.
Part of the meanness of their character and the baseness of their souls too was that they did not observe courtesy and decorum when they spoke to the Supreme Messenger (s.a.w.), and did not hide their unbelief and denial. Part of their shamelessness was that, when the most noble Prophet (s.a.w.) spoke, they would say, “We hear and we disobey!”, which is like one who says, “Yours is the command, and ours is not listening!”, meaning by that to mock him, God forbid. And among their evil sayings too was “Hear, may you not be made to hear!”, which is a form of cursing a person or describing him as not understanding (may God curse them and disgrace them), meaning: “You have made us hear; may you not hear!”, or “Say what you like, for you will not be answered!”
Some of the Muslims used to ask the noble Prophet (s.a.w.) to wait for them and give them time, saying rāʿinā (from raʿā, to regard). But the Jews, may God curse them, twisted the word to mean by it its Hebrew sense, to insult the Messenger of God (s.a.w.) in their souls while covering themselves with the outward meaning of regard; by it they meant (folly), God forbid.
So the Muslims were forbidden to say this word and commanded to say unẓurnā instead, that is, wait for us and give us time until we take in and understand your words fully.
The aim of the accursed Jews in that obscene word was contempt, rudeness and attacking the religion. As we pointed out, by their saying “We hear and we disobey” they meant insult and offence; by “Hear, may you not be made to hear” abuse and obscenity; and by rāʿinā insult and reviling. And God (s.w.t.) said: “Had they said, ‘We hear and we obey; hear and give us time until we answer your call’, or ‘treat us with your kindness and love’, it would have been better for them, and an honour to cover them.”
Since the word “had” (law) is used for impossibility, its coming in “Had they said, ‘We hear and we obey, and hear, and look upon us,’ it would have been better for them and more upright” points to the impossibility of faith and righteous deeds coming from an inveterate enemy of evil nature and base clay like the Jews.
As for “better” and “more upright”, they are for fixing, not comparison; for there is no excellence and no good in unbelief, hypocrisy and attacking God’s religion, so that faith and sincerity would be the better. Unless that is set against their corrupt thought and hateful opinion; then the meaning is: even if your contemptible way and evil conduct were good and upright, pure faith is better and more upright.
However that may be, the Jews spared no effort in their unbelief and were not sparing in their denial, and so these obstinate people and bitter enemies deserved God’s curse and anger.
At a time when people were entering God’s religion in crowds, only a small number of the Jews embraced Islam: “so they do not believe except a few”. These were not included in God’s (s.w.t.) curse; for God (s.w.t.) does not curse the faithful, even if his faith is weak. Meanwhile neither the elite of the Jews nor their common people had any excuse or argument for not believing and not joining the ranks of the Muslims and the faithful.
If the word “a few” (qalīlan) is a description of faith, the verse means: even those Jews who embrace Islam, their faith is weak and little, because most of them are hypocrites who become Muslims only for the little enjoyment of this world.
The other possibility is that the word “a little” goes back to what is believed in, so that the meaning of the verse is: “They believe only in a little of the Islamic rulings, of the roots or the branches or both.” Such faith has no effect worth mentioning, because God’s religion contains no dividing, so that a person could believe in some of it and disbelieve in another part.
Finally, supplying an omitted noun described by “a little”, such as time, for example, “they do not believe except a little time”, does not give a precise sense, besides needing an indication.
4:47 — O you who were given the Book
O you who were given the Book! Believe in what We have sent down confirming what is with you, before We blot out the faces and turn them backwards, or curse them as We cursed the People of the Sabbath, and Allah’s command is bound to be fulfilled.
Both the Torah and the Gospel mentioned the truth of the religion of Islam and the rightness of the message of the Seal of the Prophets (s.a.w.). For this reason God (s.w.t.) addresses the People of the Book, saying: “O People of the Book! You know that what the noble Qur’an has brought is written in your heavenly books too.”
God (s.w.t.) did not command the People of the Book directly to believe in the noble Qur’an and acknowledge its rightness; rather, He made clear before that the reason for believing in it (for tying the ruling to a quality points to that), saying: “Believe in the noble Qur’an, which confirms what has come in your heavenly books.” That is, the duty to believe in the Qur’an is not an imposition; rather, it is the result of the Qur’an containing the general principles mentioned in their heavenly books, and because the Qur’an confirms what has come in them. So they ought to believe in the Qur’an by what their heavenly books commanded them, and they have no excuse for opposing it and calling it a lie.
It appears that this verse contains a threat, especially in this world and not in the Hereafter. It contains two threats to the People of the Book:
“Before We obliterate faces and turn them on their backs.” After truth and falsehood have become clear to them without any doubt, they must believe in the truth; otherwise God (s.w.t.) will obliterate their faces, blinding their eyes, stripping them of their insight and awareness and wiping out their features. Then they see the truth as falsehood and falsehood as truth, incline to hold to what is behind them which they were commanded to leave, go back to what is behind them and ignore what is before them. In short, what is meant by His words “obliterate faces and turn them on their backs” is the deforming of their spirit and the sealing of their hearts and conduct, not the obliterating and wiping out of their outward faces and forms.
What may be meant by the curse is that God curses them as He cursed the people of the Sabbath, expels them from His mercy and punishes them with the same punishment that fell on those, when they were transformed into apes. Divine cursing is not a verbal cursing; rather, it is an attribute of His action, meaning distance from His mercy and falling into punishment; and this is merely a verbal report of the driving away and distancing.
There is no doubt that the two threats mentioned will come about by the will of God (s.w.t.), and nothing at all can prevent that. There is no failure and no supposition in God’s (s.w.t.) creational command, nor against His absolute power. God’s command remains as it is, and its coming about depends on His command: “and the command of God is ever done.”
4:48 — Indeed Allah does not forgive that partners should be ascribed to Him
Indeed Allah does not forgive that partners should be ascribed to Him, but He forgives anything besides that to whomever He wishes. Whoever ascribes partners to Allah has indeed fabricated [a lie] in great sinfulness.
The previous verse commanded the People of the Book to believe (in Islam, the Qur’an and the Messenger (s.a.w.)); for it appears from this verse that their not believing means polytheism. The cause of their being cursed and punished is that God (s.w.t.) does not forgive one who associates others with Him. The non-forgiveness includes all kinds of polytheism, whether polytheism in the Essence, in the essential attributes, in creatorship, in Lordship or in divinity.
As for the Jews and Christians who believe that ʿUzayr and ʿĪsā (a.s.) are sons of God, Mighty and Majestic, they are like the polytheists and the other faithless, including the hypocrites and the polytheists, and so they are outside God’s mercy and forgiveness.
Polytheism is not forgiven without repentance, as indicated by the verb “associates” coming in the present tense to show continuity until the end of the polytheist’s life; and also as indicated by the Supreme Messenger (s.a.w.) accepting the polytheist’s repentance and accepting his faith, for repentance is certainly accepted. Thus the context of this verse is a stage: the case where the polytheist does not repent. As for the subject of the noble verse “surely God forgives all sins”, it is that there is repentance and turning back after that; that is, the forgiveness of all sins is conditional on repentance, while that verse is silent about the case of one who does not repent. In any case, the relation between the verse under discussion (neither its start nor its end) and the verse “surely God forgives all sins” is not one of general and particular.
God (s.w.t.) may forgive whom He wills for what is less than polytheism without repentance too: “and He forgives what is less than that to whom He wills.” This verse is the only one that does not set out any condition for forgiveness (such as repentance or avoiding great sins). Because it gives good news of forgiveness without repentance, it can narrow every general statement and restrict every unrestricted one that contains a warning and threat of punishment for committing sin.
On the basis of this Qur’anic phrase, God, the Most Merciful of the merciful and the Last of intercessors, forgives whom He wills by His wise will. But we must not overlook that this promise represents an indefinite proposition which is in the ruling of a particular proposition; that is, only a particular affirmative can be drawn from it. On this basis it is not certain who will be pardoned and who will be punished, because both depend on God’s wise will. And although this verse, according to the relative and comparative (not the absolute) restriction in some narrations, is among the most hope-giving verses of the Qur’an, it carries no cause for being lured and deluded; because safety and deliverance from divine punishment are the share of the faithful who does not stain his faith with polytheism until the last moment of his life. No faithful is sure he is completely safe, because he does not know his end and the details of his close; so he ought to live between the two elements of fear and hope.
Polytheism and ignoring the oneness of God (s.w.t.) are the most severe kinds of sin and wrong: “and whoever associates others with God has invented a great sin”; because it is a denial of the most important root of belief, which is tawḥīd.
The Majestic Name is stated explicitly in this Qur’anic phrase, though it would have been possible to use the pronoun, to show the ugliness and hideousness of polytheism.
4:49 — Have you not regarded those who style themselves as pure
Have you not regarded those who style themselves as pure? Indeed, it is Allah who purifies whomever He wishes, and they will not be wronged [so much as] a single date-thread.
The fanatical, racist Jews who make claims assert that they have many advantages in this world over other people; that they are not bound to keep any pledge or contract with others or to respect their wealth and property; besides that they will be safe from God’s punishment in the Hereafter, and that they alone will enter the Garden on that day.
The human being ought to purify his spirit, instead of deceiving himself, betraying his conscience and claiming to be free of sins out of his excessive self-love and selfishness, or reckoning all his evil deeds to be good deeds, or imagining that he is near to God and that He will certainly forgive his sins. There is no doubt that whoever praises himself and sets himself above others reckons that he is the owner of blessings and the possessor of perfection and spiritual purification; and this in itself counts as wrongdoing, because that claim will lead him to believe in a false independence and self-sufficiency from God (s.w.t.), and then to deny Him. The truth is that all the bounties and blessings that come to us are from God, Mighty and Majestic, and the human being owns nothing at all of himself. So there is no sense in delusion and rising above others in respect of God’s blessings, which He has placed within the human being and outside him.
Mentioning blessings ought to be to make clear the grace of God (s.w.t.), and to know that He alone deserves praise, thanks and commendation; not to rise above others, be deluded and establish an advantage for anyone. The noble verse also includes purifying individuals, or praising them without right, for nothing but to draw attention, for opportunism and to occupy a high position or station; because the Islamic society and human society are like one soul: “yourselves”. For society to be marked by spiritual purification and refinement of soul, the prophets (a.s.) are the channels of divine outpouring. God (s.w.t.) purifies whom He wills of His servants and mentions them with respect and honour. As for the human wayfarer, he ought not to praise himself and commend himself except by God’s (s.w.t.) permission, and on reaching the lofty station of friendship with God (wilāyah), where the Real (s.w.t.) becomes the tongue with which he speaks, so that he says nothing except from God (s.w.t.). In this case his praise of himself is an instance of His (s.w.t.) words: “Rather, God purifies whom He wills.”
In the divine order and lordly authority no one is wronged by the weight of an atom. Whoever does good, or is granted success in purification and attains some perfection, God (s.w.t.) keeps for him its effects in this world and the Hereafter. God will praise him in this world, besides the reward in the Hereafter he will attain; and God’s friends will speak of him and praise him by God’s permission, according to His (s.w.t.) words: “And as for the blessing of your Lord, speak of it.”
4:50 — Look, how they fabricate lies against Allah
Look, how they fabricate lies against Allah! That suffices for a flagrant sin.
In this verse God (s.w.t.) addresses His noble Messenger (s.a.w.), saying: “Look at the Jews, how they weave virtues for themselves and spin good qualities, and falsely claim that it is God (s.w.t.) who gave them that. Even if they had no sin or disobedience, is not this lie against God sin enough?”
These liars’ claim to virtue, their blameworthy delusion and their false saying that it is God who gave them that supposed virtue and purification, are vices piled on them and evil deeds counted in their records; and that is enough as a manifest sin. As for using the form of wonder here, it is to show the gathering of all those sins.
4:51–52 — Have you not regarded those who were given a share of the Book
(51) Have you not regarded those who were given a share of the Book, believing in idols and fake deities and saying of the pagans: ‘These are better guided on the way than the faithful’? (52) They are the ones whom Allah has cursed, and whomever Allah curses, you will never find any helper for him.
Among the other shameful acts of the Jews is their believing in al-jibt and al-ṭāghūt, and preferring the belief of the polytheists and idol-worshippers to the faithful. Although they were people of a heavenly Book and had been given a portion of knowledge, they believed in al-jibt and al-ṭāghūt and openly opposed the Torah, out of their stubbornness and fanaticism; for the Torah acknowledges that tawḥīd is true and polytheism false. And they supported the polytheists and the atheists. The noble verse states plainly that the Jews said to the polytheists: “Your religion and your worship are better than the religion and worship of the Muslims, and you are better than the Muslims who believe in tawḥīd, and better guided in the way.”
So the Jews deserved the divine curse for their worshipping idols and their false saying, were driven far from God’s mercy, and were sentenced to abasement and wretchedness. Since the whole order of creation is God’s army, and the entire world of possibility obeys God (s.w.t.), His (s.w.t.) absolute ruling is in force, whether in help or in curse; and God (s.w.t.) alone is the guardian and helper of the human being. Whoever He curses has no helper, and no one is able to help one who has been deprived of God’s help and on whom abasement has been struck.
4:53 — Do they have a share in sovereignty
Do they have a share in sovereignty? If so, they will not give those people [so much as] a speck on a date-stone!
Whether the conjunction “or” (am) is disconnected and the meaning of the verse is turning away from the previous point, or it is connected and a sentence with the interrogative hamzah is supplied before it, this verse rebukes the Jews and blames them for their judging between the Muslims and the polytheists of Quraysh, and makes clear another ugly quality of the Jews, by His (s.w.t.) words “Or have they a share of the kingdom?”, and that if they were so, “then they would not give people even the speck on a date-stone.”
Since the previous verse pointed to the Jews’ claim of ability to judge against the faithful, the word “kingdom” in this verse includes control over spiritual matters, such as prophethood, guardianship and guidance, besides material matters. The noble verse states plainly that if these Jews had such [spiritual] power, they would have preferred polytheism to tawḥīd and supported the polytheists against the faithful; and that if they had a share of material kingdom, they would have deprived all people and given them nothing, because of the severity of their miserliness.
4:54 — Do they envy those people for what Allah has given them out of His bounty
Do they envy those people for what Allah has given them out of His bounty? We have certainly given the progeny of Abraham the Book and wisdom, and We have given them a great sovereignty.
Another vice of the Jews that the noble Qur’an shows us is envy. God, out of His generosity and kindness, gave His Supreme Messenger (s.a.w.) prophethood, sent down the Book to him and taught him all the teachings of religion, “for what God has given them of His grace”, so that he (s.a.w.) and the People of his House (a.s.) became a clear and complete instance of divine blessing; which drove the Jews to envy them and hate God’s (s.w.t.) blessing on them.
As a result of this envy, the Jews found no other course than to support the polytheists and prefer them to the Muslims. Alongside their wishing for the blessing of guidance the Muslims enjoyed to pass away, the Jews spent all their efforts and used every method to deprive the Muslims of that guidance, drag them into the fold of unbelief and demolish the structure of Islam.
As is known, the hateful envy of the Jews and their plotting against the Supreme Messenger (s.a.w.) in particular, and the Muslims in general, because of divine blessings and worldly, otherworldly and political positions, had no meaning or logical ground. For Ibrāhīm (a.s.) before, and his sons after him, were given many of those divine blessings, and were granted the Book, wisdom, authority and great kingdom in this world.
What is meant by “the family of Ibrāhīm” in this verse is the prophets of the progeny of Ibrāhīm, the Friend of God (a.s.), not all his progeny; for these envious and spiteful Jews (the Children of Israel) belong to this progeny.
4:55 — Of them are some who believe in him
Of them are some who believe in him, and of them are some who deter [others] from him; and hell suffices for a blaze!
The noble verse makes clear that the Children of Israel were two groups in respect of the prophets (a.s.) who were sent to them: a faithful group and a faithless group. So the enmity of some of the Children of Israel is not confined to the enmity of the Jews contemporary with the Supreme Prophet (s.a.w.).
Here faith is set against turning away, since the verse puts the two groups one against the other. But it mentions the faithful group before the faithless, on the basis of priority for the group that enjoyed divine mercy and the authenticity of faith. Then it points to the second (faithless) group with what is greater than bare unbelief, “and of them were some who turned away from him”, instead of saying “and of them were some who disbelieved”; unless what is meant by the verb “turned away” (ṣadda) is the bare meaning of turning aside, in which case the mention of turning away and faith is balanced.
Besides the second group turning away and departing from faith, it was also turning others away from it. That is, it was depriving itself of divine guidance, and so became faithless and astray; and because of its envy it strove to deprive others of the blessing of guidance by dragging them into unbelief and misguidance.
So for this group of the Jews, what awaits them of the blaze of Hell is enough: “and Hell is enough as a blaze.” For moral vices are like a raging fire, and the flame of envy is among the most fiercely burning flames.
It is well known that the envious person is the first to burn in the fires of envy hidden in him. When his envy becomes visible and shows itself, it becomes harmful to others. From here the verse described the punishment of the envious among the Children of Israel as the raging fire of Hell: “and Hell is enough as a blaze.” The fire God (s.w.t.) will kindle in the Hereafter in the hearts of the envious among the Jews is greater and fiercer compared with the outward fire that will burn their bodies and set their frames alight.
It is worth mentioning:
a) The letter bāʾ in “and Hell is enough (kafā bi-jahannam) as a blaze” is not redundant, but for emphasis and to show the strength of the link and connection between the verb and its subject; that is, adding the bāʾ to the subject doubles the close relationship between verb and subject in any sentence.
b) The word “Hell” (jahannam) is figuratively feminine. Since the description saʿīr (blaze) is the same for masculine and feminine, dropping the feminine ending from the word saʿīrah and using the word saʿīran is for emphasis in describing the severity of the Jews’ punishment.
4:56 — Indeed We shall soon make those who deny Our signs enter a Fire
Indeed We shall soon make those who deny Our signs enter a Fire: as often as their skins become scorched, We shall replace them with other skins, so that they may taste the punishment. Indeed Allah is all-mighty, all-wise.
It is known that denying the divine signs, in creation and in scripture, and rejecting their reality and that they are from God (s.w.t.), is only a denial and rejection of God (s.w.t.) and unbelief in Him.
The end that awaits the faithless among the People of the Book, especially the Jews whose qualities and vices passed in the previous verses, is an evil and painful end, represented in the great divine punishment in Hell; and what Hell holds of fires is enough for them: “and Hell is enough as a blaze.”
This noble verse makes clear and explains the sufficiency of Hell: “We shall burn the skins of the faithless and roast them despite their delicacy, then We shall change them for other skins, so that they may taste the painful punishment and feel it.”
The use of the first-person plural in “We shall burn them” may be meant to magnify God (s.w.t.), or to point out that all those commanded and charged with the punishment carry out His (s.w.t.) commands to the letter. Likewise, the expression at times in the first-person singular, attributing the punishment to Him (s.w.t.) directly, as in His words “I shall burn him in Saqar”, may point to the oneness of God (s.w.t.), or mean that He (s.w.t.) Himself punishes the faithless.
The punishment the faithless will meet on the Day of Resurrection is severe and painful, and bearing such a punishment does not conflict with the expression “taste” in His (s.w.t.) words “Whenever their skins are cooked, We shall change them for other skins, that they may taste the punishment.” Rather, the clearest content of the noble verse is the continuance and permanence of the punishment without any lessening in the feeling of it. As for changing the skins after they are cooked and burnt, it is so that the faithless taste the punishment, feel it and sense continuous pain. For when the skin is completely burnt, its owner no longer feels pain or senses punishment; so his skin is changed that he may feel the punishment continually and suffer pain that neither lessens nor is lightened for him. The skins are changed whenever they are cooked, and the fire is kindled whenever it cools.
The person who commits many sins finally has his self become satanic, beastly or predatory, after it was at first rational; and he remains in that state while he is punished. This requires that he be punished continually through his body, which is nothing but a means. Changing the skin does not mean changing the original element, which is the spirit; for the reality belongs to the spirit, and unbelief and faith are two qualities of it. When the spirit leaves the body, the body is neither faithful nor faithless. The sinner is the person of the human being, not his body or the parts of his body, such as the skin. And the spirit, which represents the reality of the human being, is what feels and senses pleasure or punishment, not the body, which is only a means, whether in this world or the Hereafter. Its punishment or its happiness is the punishment and happiness of the spirit.
In short, the skin, which is counted a just witness, must be burnt so that through it the one witnessed against, the sinner, may be punished and tormented. The skin burns but is not tormented; and that is why God (s.w.t.) did not say “that they (the skins) may taste”, but said “that they may taste the punishment”, that is, that those faithless people may taste the punishment and feel it.
The skin has awareness, and it perceives that the one witnessed against is being punished. But the skin’s awareness and feeling do not cause its own punishment, because it glorifies God (s.w.t.) at every moment and time, and it is not a sinner, so that it should be punished. In other words, a thing’s awareness, feeling, knowledge of its Creator and glorifying of Him are other than the feeling of pleasure and pain. For this reason wood and stone, for example, do not feel pain when they are cut, just as cutting is not a wrong to them.
4:57 — As for those who have faith and do righteous deeds
As for those who have faith and do righteous deeds, We shall admit them into gardens with streams running in them, to remain in them forever. In it, there will be chaste mates for them, and We shall admit them into a deep shade.
Continuing the previous verses, this noble verse came to mention the reward prepared for the faithful and the abundant recompense for their believing in the call of the prophets (a.s.). It makes clear the difference between the two parties (the faithful and the faithless), and stresses the happiness of the first party and the wretchedness and misery of the second.
If the delay conveyed by sawfa (“shall”) is greater than that of the letter sa, perhaps the secret of the expression of the punishment of the faithless in the previous verse, “We shall (sawfa) burn them in a fire”, is mercy’s going before anger and giving time for repentance. As for rewarding and recompensing the faithful, speed is what is sought in it: “We shall (sa) bring them into gardens…”. And the mention of the word “forever” in what concerns the reward of the faithful points to the fullness and growth of mercy, against the lessening and fading of vengeance.
The noble verse promises those who believe in God (s.w.t.) and do righteous deeds the Garden, which holds all the divine blessings, of flowing rivers, fruits whose clusters hang near, and pure and purified spouses, besides bringing them into God’s shading shade.
Since the trees in the Garden are intertwined and cover the whole place, the meaning of His (s.w.t.) words “gardens beneath which rivers flow” is the flowing of rivers beneath those intertwined trees, on the surface of the ground of the Garden, not beneath it.
“Shading” (ẓalīl) in His (s.w.t.) words “and We shall bring them into a shading shade” is an emphatic description, meaning lasting and permanent shade, not shade resulting from the presence of the sun; for there is no sun in the Garden, so that it would have a shade. There is only space, air and even, balanced shade; and this is like His (s.w.t.) words “and extended shade”.
If what is meant by shade here is “protection” (kanaf), that means the faithful graze freely in the protection of divine mercy.
4:58 — Indeed Allah commands you to deliver the trusts to their [rightful] owners
Indeed Allah commands you to deliver the trusts to their [rightful] owners, and to judge with fairness when you judge between people. Excellent indeed is what Allah advises you. Indeed Allah is all-hearing, all-seeing.
It has passed before that the Jews betrayed God’s (s.w.t.) trusts and judged falsely when they held the polytheists to be better guided than the faithful. This noble verse has a different context from its sisters before it, since it moves from addressing a particular group to directing a universal address. It commands all people to render trusts and to judge with justice. Rendering trusts and keeping pledges is part of international rights in Islam and an unconditional obligation; indeed, it is no less important than respecting parents, and neither Islam nor unbelief is a condition in it. What is meant by “trust” (amānah) is undertaking and commitment in general, whether the pledge is with God (s.w.t.), with particular individuals, with real persons, with society or with legal persons. It also includes contractual trusts, which are concluded by offer and acceptance in words, in deed or by mutual dealing, and legal trusts, which the Lawgiver assigns to certain individuals, such as found property or legal funds.
The definite article in “the trusts” conveys generality, so that what is meant is all trusts in the economic, jurisprudential, moral, social and individual fields; they are not confined to matters of jurisprudence and wealth. On this basis God’s (s.w.t.) commands and rulings are also part of the trusts and the divine pledge, and must be fulfilled. In short, according to the noble verse, everything that is called a trust, with whatever person, must be returned to its people. On this basis those addressed by the verse are not the Infallible Imams (a.s.) alone, even though the Imamate is the complete instance of the divine trust; since every Infallible Imam must hand on the matter to the Infallible Imam after him, and may not keep it from him. People and the Islamic society, and all their rights and interests, are counted divine trusts deposited with those entrusted with them, who are the pure Imams, to whom the root of the religion has been entrusted and who guarantee the independence and freedom of the community.
By observing justice in jurisprudence, that is, observing the rulings of jurisprudence, among them rendering trusts, there will be no need for a court of rights and judicial justice. Perhaps this is the reason the command to render trusts comes before the command to justice in rights; for the need to form a court of justice comes after the matter of betrayal or accusation is raised.
It is well known that rendering a trust is a general and collective duty with no qualification or condition. As for judging and ruling, they are not within everyone’s reach. So God (s.w.t.) says in a conditional sentence: whenever the opportunity to judge and rule between people (the disputants) is given you, you must judge with justice: “and that when you judge between people you judge with justice.” There are three possibilities about the bāʾ in the word “with justice”: that it is for accompaniment, for circumstance, or the bāʾ of means and instrument. From that three meanings of the phrase appear: 1) speak with justice when issuing the judgment; 2) judge between people justly; 3) judge according to the scale and measure of justice.
The word “people” includes every person, whether Muslim or non-Muslim. The obligation to judge with justice is for the sake of applying justice in society; and on the other side, people must accept just judgment, otherwise the obligation to judge with justice among them falls away.
God (s.w.t.) expressed the matter of rendering trusts and observing justice in judging and ruling, as obligations, as admonition: “surely excellent is what God admonishes you with.” Counsel concerning obligations is admonition, and does not differ from counsel concerning moral matters.
And let the human being know that God (s.w.t.) hears his words and sees his deeds and acts: “surely God is Hearing, Seeing.” He sees betrayal of trust, just as He sees the one who renders it to its people and the one who holds back from rendering it; and He (s.w.t.) hears judging and ruling between people, rightly and falsely. The plain statement that God (s.w.t.) is Hearing and Seeing of the rendering of trusts and judging with justice is a guarantee that these two obligations are applied; and there is no doubt that paying attention to these two divine attributes will take people by the hand and keep them from transgressing God’s rulings.
It is worth mentioning:
“Was” (kāna) in the Qur’anic phrase is not a past-tense verb but a word not bounded by time, meaning nothing but a link. Its meaning is that God (s.w.t.) has always been Hearing and Seeing and will remain so.
“The Hearing” (al-samīʿ) and “the Seeing” (al-baṣīr) are among the eternal and essential attributes of God (s.w.t.). The Hearing is the one able to hear all sounds, whether they have been uttered or not; and the Seeing is the one able to see everything. Whereas “the hearer” (al-sāmiʿ) and “the seer” (al-mubṣir) are among God’s (s.w.t.) attributes of action: the hearer is the one who hears existing sounds, not eternal sounds; and the seer is the one able to see things that are actually visible.
4:59 — O you who have faith! Obey Allah and obey the Apostle and those vested with authority…
O you who have faith! Obey Allah and obey the Apostle and those vested with authority among you. And if you dispute concerning anything, refer it to Allah and the Apostle, if you have faith in Allah and the Last Day. That is better and more favourable in outcome.
The previous verses discussed legislations, systems, governments, and being mindful of God’s bounds. This verse provides the foundation for those verses, as it calls people to obey God, the Messenger, and those vested with authority.
This verse contains fundamental principles, reveals sources of jurisprudence, and represents revealed proof (dalīl naqlī) of the authority of God’s words, the Messenger, and the figures vested with authority (ūlū al-amr). It thus combines commands and prohibitions in God’s commands. It does not reveal a jurisprudence law (ḥukm fiqhī)—the command in the verse Obey Allah and obey… is not guidance or emphasis on previous commands revealed by God, therefore it cannot be said: “Obey” does reveal any new laws. If the previously given command is obligatory (wajib) or recommended (mustahab) they “Obey” directs believers to comply with that command.
Obeying the commands of God, His Messenger, and the infallible (maʿṣūm) authoritative figures is obligatory upon everyone. But since the believers (muʾminūn) are concerned with obedience and are more inclined toward obeying them more than others, they are directly addressed in the verse. Believers must comply with their belief and obey God, the Messenger, and the figures vested with authority.
The repetition of the verb “obey” indicates that the Messenger’s commands are of two types and so is obedience to them: 1) legislative commands that are divine laws the Messenger conveys to people, and obeying these commands is obeying God and fulfills the command in the verse “Obey God…” 2) Governmental commands and commands he gives from his position as the guardian that are particular to the Messenger. Obeying these commands is obligatory as stated in the verse “obey the messenger”. In either type, God is the one and only being ultimately obeyed, while obeying the Messenger and infallible Imam is mandated by Him.
The referents of ‘those vested with authority’ are the infallible Imams since this phrase is linked to “the Messenger” using the conjunction “and”. Given that the command to obey the Messenger is unconditional and unrestricted, then obeying “those vested with authority” is also, especially in the absence of any restrictions in the verse.
The reason obedience to the Prophet is absolute is his infallibility, because obeying him is equivalent to obeying God, and disobeying him is equivalent to disobeying God. Therefore, the authoritative figures must be infallible and protected from erring, inadvertence, and sin. No doubt that this level of protection can only befit an infallible person. Meaning that the person we must obey unconditionally, who comes third to obeying God and the Messenger, must be infallible too. The qualities of this infallible person are, of course, not those of a royal, scholar, companion, or decision-making elite of the society.
The appointment of an authoritative figure can only happen by God’s will, as with the appointment of the Messenger, since the those vested with infallibility are only known to Him. In other words, the condition unconditional obedience is both scholarly and practical infallibility, and knowing whether a person possess this quality or not can only be done through a clear divine declaration revealed by the Messenger. God knows to whom He vested this quality and has protected the Prophet’s household from all wrongdoings (33:73). Thus, obeying the infallible Imams, who are linked in this verse to the obedience of the Messenger without repeating the verb “obey”, is obligatory. Their lives, including their sayings, actions, and tacit approval, have authority over us. They are the guardians of the Prophet’s laws, interpreting them and living by God’s bounds.
As for the infallible Imams, they do not disagree among themselves because they are all protected from wrongdoings, ignorance, and impurities, and they validate each other as with the Prophets. Moreover, people cannot disagree with them after having believed in their infallibility and recognized their status, because fallible individuals cannot argue with the infallible. However, disputes might arise among people themselves over the appointment of the infallible Imam, but in these cases the Qur’an and sunnah are the references for resolving these disputes. The reason those vested with authority were not mentioned among the references in resolving disputes, and if you dispute concerning anything, refer it to Allah and the Messenger, is that the first dispute following the Prophet’s passing was over the appointment of an authoritative figure and determining who qualifies as one. Naturally, this called for a reference that is acceptable by all and cannot be disputed over, namely God and the Messenger.
Thus, after proving through Qur’an (4:81) and Prophet narrations that the infallible Imams are those denoted in the verse “those vested with authority,” they become the reference in resolving disputes related to laws of jurisprudence, people’s rights, and other aspects of religion and life. Whereas for theological questions concerning the Imamate, the appointment of an Imam, and the number of Imams, the reference is to the Qur’an and the Messenger.
In case of disputes regarding obeying God, the Messenger, and the authoritative figures (the infallible Imams), the reference must also be the Qur’an and sunnah. By referring to them, believers ensure a better outcome.
The context of the verse makes it clear that the determiner “That” points back to both preceding phrases, and it refers to the core meaning of the verse.
Regarding the two words “Khair” and “Aḥsan” (Better and More Favorable, respectively), they do not indicate Tafdīl (they are not comparatives), which would change the meaning of the verse to “you have a choice between obedience and disobedience, but choosing to obey is better for you”. Instead, they indicate Taʿyīn (an obligation), as both obedience and the act of referring disputes to God and the Messenger mentioned in the verse is Wājib Taʿyīnī—obligations that have no substitute and must be followed by people. This Taʿyīn is affirmed in other verses (for example, 33:66-67 and 24:51-52) and is validated by the intellect, since otherwise addressing the believer in the verse would be incorrect.
Important remark:
The conditional clause in the last segment of the verse …And if you dispute concerning anything, refer it to Allah and the Messenger which resembles a specific command that succeeds a general one, serves to emphasize the importance of this matter. But even if this segment were not included, we could still infer the command from the meaning implied in the first segment of the verse, that we must refer to God and the Messenger to resolve disputes, which is the generic command, and that we owe unconditional and unrestricted obedience to God, the Messenger, and the authoritative figures regardless of whether it is during disputes or not.
This verse establishes a three-way obedience: to God, to the Messenger, and to the authoritative figures. Then obedience turns dual when resolving disputes, as we must refer to God and the Messenger, ultimately making obedience one-dimensional, and finally leading to monotheism (tawheed), the core of belief (iman): if you have faith in Allah and the Last Day. Thus, God is the sole reference, and the rest only convey his rulings and cannot be compare to him.
On the Summary page · Read the commentary on 4:59 →
4:60 — Have you not regarded those who claim that they believe in what has been sent down to you…
Have you not regarded those who claim that they believe in what has been sent down to you and what was sent down before you? They desire to seek the judgment of fake deities, though they were commanded to reject them, and Satan desires to lead them astray into far error.
On the basis of the previous verse, one must return to divine revelation, which the prophets and the Infallible Imams (a.s.) speak with its tongue, whenever any dispute or disagreement happens in society at any time and place, whether the disagreement is in cultural, doctrinal or economic matters. As for the verse above, it contains a disapproving question, and it blames those who deny the general root of the religion and faults them for seeking judgment from al-ṭāghūt after they were forbidden it; which shows their ignoring of God’s (s.w.t.) commands.
Those who claim faith kept referring to al-ṭāghūt, driven by their material interests, despite the noble Qur’an stating plainly and stressing the necessity of returning to divine revelation and the Infallible (a.s.), and not to any other authority.
According to the verse, from the point of view of theology, even thinking of referring to al-ṭāghūt or its ruler is forbidden, let alone returning to it in practice; and this is what the noble verse blames. For the divine reckoning holds to account the person who intends to commit disobedience, even if its conditions and signs have not appeared on him or the chance to commit the sin has not come to him; and there is no need for the will to disobey to match the outward act.
So returning to other than God (s.w.t.), such as tyrannical rulers, unjust judges, sorcerers, astrologers and soothsayers, or any other authority that does not judge with the truth, is included in the blame of the noble verse, because it is seeking judgment from al-ṭāghūt. Seeking judgment from it means being content with its judgment. All that is false, disobedience and forbidden; and whoever seeks judgment from al-ṭāghūt and acknowledges its judgment has entered into unbelief (in practice), wrongdoing and transgression. For the judgment of an unjust ruler that does not match divine revelation is a judgment of ignorance; and the judge who does not judge by the rulings of revelation and ignores them is faithless, a wrongdoer and a transgressor too.
One must disbelieve in al-ṭāghūt. The most important duty entrusted to all of God’s prophets (a.s.) is guiding people to faith in God (s.w.t.) and rejecting al-ṭāghūt. People too must avoid al-ṭāghūt and oppose it; for there is either God (s.w.t.) or, against Him, al-ṭāghūt, and everything other than God (s.w.t.) is ṭāghūt, whether a human being or an idol. Since transgression (ṭughyān) appears at times in belief and at other times in character or action, and the ṭāghūt of belief, of character and of action are not alike, the levels of transgression differ, and in consequence the levels of ṭāghūt differ. In any case, if what is meant by ṭāghūt in the verse is the idol, those addressed are the idol-worshippers who seek judgment from them to settle dispute and disagreement.
The accursed Satan does not stop at misleading people; rather, he strives hard to take them to the far borders of misguidance and blindness, so as to cut off for them the way back to the straight path. So he drops them into the abyss of misguidance and takes them far from the truth; and then no voice, cry or call for help of theirs is heard, nor do they hear the call of the lordly guides.
4:61 — When they are told, ‘Come to what Allah has sent down and [come] to the Apostle,’ you see…
When they are told, ‘Come to what Allah has sent down and [come] to the Apostle,’ you see the hypocrites keep away from you aversely.
People were commanded to disown al-ṭāghūt and unbelief and avoid them, and to return to God and His Messenger, take them as guardians and obey them. The content of disowning became clear to us in the previous verse, and this verse points to taking as guardian (tawallī).
Through the verse’s stating the name “the hypocrites” plainly, what is meant by “those who claim” in the previous verse becomes clear to us. Both make clear the hypocrites’ desire to return to al-ṭāghūt and seek its judgment, and their dislike of returning to the Supreme Messenger (s.a.w.) and their turning away from him.
God (s.w.t.) calls people to right guidance, perfection and rising; but the hypocrites turn away from the Messenger of God (s.a.w.) and take refuge in al-ṭāghūt instead of him. For in reality they oppose divine revelation (and what God (s.w.t.) has sent down); but because they cannot state their opposition openly and announce their objection, they are content in any case with opposing the Prophet (s.a.w.). The hypocrites do not object to revelation openly; and that is why He (s.w.t.) did not say “they turn away from what God has sent down”, but said “they turn away from you”. The secret of that is that it is the actual, concrete existence of the divine law that guarantees the righteousness of the community and the success of the Islamic society, not its mere existence in knowledge; and this concrete existence finds its embodiment in the perfect and infallible human being (a.s.). What the hypocrites fear above all, and what troubles them, is this concrete existence; and that is why we see them outwardly turning away from the Messenger of God (s.a.w.), and not from the noble Qur’an. There is no doubt that turning away from the noble Messenger (s.a.w.) means turning away from God; and these people do not believe in God, but play the hypocrite and claim faith. The verse points to the hypocrites’ true face being exposed openly and widely known; for what is meant by the verb “you see” is seeing with the eye, not mere insight. The word “turning away” (ṣudūdan) is an emphatic absolute object, whose indefinite form points to extreme objection and turning away. So the hypocrites’ turning away and departing from the call of the noble Messenger (s.a.w.) is plain and clear to see.
There is no doubt that the Supreme Prophet (s.a.w.) utters nothing of the Qur’an except what is revealed to him, by the plain statement of the noble Qur’an itself. The sunnah too is an inspiration of speech; so both (the Qur’an and the sunnah) are from God (s.w.t.): the first is His speech and the second His ruling. The noble Messenger (s.a.w.) brings nothing at all from himself or from another. For this reason the speech of the Messenger (s.a.w.) is divine revelation, and the call to the Messenger is the call to what God (s.w.t.) has sent down. The noble verse has joined the call to the Messenger with the call to God, and called people to believe in both together. It is well known that the call to these two roots (the Qur’an and the sunnah) is from God essentially and from the Messenger (s.a.w.) derivatively. The speaker hidden in the word “it is said” is in reality God (s.w.t.) in His own right, and the most noble Messenger (s.a.w.) by consequence. On this basis the hypocrites’ turning away from the call of the original Caller (who is God (s.w.t.)) means turning away from both the main roots: revelation and the Supreme Messenger (s.a.w.).
4:62 — But how will it be when an affliction visits them because of what their hands have sent…
But how will it be when an affliction visits them because of what their hands have sent ahead? Then they will come to you, swearing by Allah, ‘We desired nothing but to do good and to bring about comity.’
Despite the ugly acts and many sins the hypocrites commit, such as turning away and turning others from the Messenger of God (s.a.w.) and seeking judgment from al-ṭāghūt, when they are struck by a misfortune or a problem they come to the Prophet (s.a.w.) to offer excuses and arguments to justify their shameful conduct. They swear by God that the reason for their opposition, their leaving striving when they are called to it, and their returning to al-ṭāghūt in their disputes, is goodness, setting things right and bringing about agreement, and to observe courtesy in the presence of the Prophet, or to be good to the other party in the dispute.
The hypocrites also try their hardest to conceal their true face and hide their hypocrisy; and when it is uncovered and their affair exposed, they hasten to swear to clear themselves, claiming righteousness and good. Swearing is the habit of the hypocrites; we often see them swearing in sensitive subjects and important matters, until it has become their trade and their pretext for slipping out of duty, hiding their aims behind it so as to be safe from all harm.
4:63 — They are the ones whom Allah knows as to what is in their hearts
They are the ones whom Allah knows as to what is in their hearts. So let them alone, and advise them, and speak to them concerning themselves far-reaching words.
The noble verse calls the hypocrites liars and rejects their excuses and justifications, as came in the previous verse. It stresses that what they say is nothing but a pretext to justify their opposition to the Supreme Messenger (s.a.w.), and that God (s.w.t.) knows what is in their hearts and what goes on in their breasts of corruption, smallness and bewilderment. So their words ought not to be given any importance; but one must not turn away from them completely or leave them to themselves. The noble Qur’an asks the Messenger of God (s.a.w.) to admonish them, and when he is alone with them away from the eyes of others, to convey his message to them in eloquent words and right speech; and to be patient, as his brothers the past messengers were patient, bearing hardships and pains, continuing to convey the messages of their Lord with steady hearts, not slackening for a single moment in guiding people, and not leaving them to themselves despite their rough conduct and utter ignorance, nor turning away from them completely; even if the situation at times required the Prophet to keep away from some people and turn away from them with wisdom: “so turn away from them.”
The special task of the Seal of the Prophets (s.a.w.), such as calling with wisdom, admonition and disputing in the best way, alongside turning away and eloquent speech, all points to the abundance of his knowledge and the greatness of his teachings, besides his basic responsibility, which is reciting the noble Qur’an; and to his right way in dealing with those he addressed, the nature of his address to them, and his mastery of the ways of argument and discourse. So his arguments, which are the essence of his speech to others, overflow with wisdom, admonition and disputing in the best way. For this reason he (s.a.w.) did not put aside admonition and conveying, despite some turning away.
Since “eloquent” describes “speech” in “and say to them concerning themselves an eloquent word”, we draw from the verse that the most noble Prophet (s.a.w.) reached the highest degrees and loftiest ranks of this quality (the art of eloquence and rightness of speech), assisted by the blessings of prophethood and the divine message. He was not so before the mission, nor did his eloquence and articulateness rise to the level of the famous poets and orators of his age.
4:64 — We did not send any apostle but to be obeyed by Allah’s leave
We did not send any apostle but to be obeyed by Allah’s leave. Had they, when they wronged themselves, come to you and pleaded to Allah for forgiveness, and the Apostle had pleaded for them [to Allah]for forgiveness, they would have surely found Allah all-clement, all-merciful.
In this noble verse God (s.w.t.) refutes all the excuses of the hypocrites and their justification of their opposition to the Messenger (s.a.w.), as passed in the previous verses, and stresses the obligation to obey the Prophet without qualification or condition: whether in conveying the message of his Lord and setting out the general rulings and laws of religion, or in carrying out the responsibility of guardianship and leadership, setting out rulings of authority and secondary matters, fixing the instances of general rulings and applying the legal punishments and rulings. Practical obedience to the Messenger (s.a.w.) is obligatory, and so is obedience in knowledge, that is, in his personal acts and particular rulings about which no ruling has come, neither report nor command; and people come to know those rulings through the reports of the Prophet (s.a.w.).
This verse establishes beyond doubt the infallibility of all the prophets (a.s.), and the authority of their speech, their silence, their conduct and their approval; because it makes obedience to them obligatory without qualification or condition. The soundness of this command to absolute obedience depends on the infallible himself and his being protected from error, mistake and forgetfulness; otherwise it would be an instance of luring into ignorance.
In any case, the necessity of people obeying the Prophet (s.a.w.) is one of the core rulings of general prophethood. The prophet who brought the basis of the law, and is the owner of that law, must be obeyed by people in two respects: in accepting legislative rulings and in accepting particular and applied commands.
The messenger who confirms the law of the prophet before him, who brought the basis of the law, must be obeyed; because he tells of the law of the prophets who have gone, and applies the legal punishments and rulings.
It is well known that no prophet calls people to obey him without God’s (s.w.t.) permission; the prophets are obeyed only by God’s (s.w.t.) permission. This permission, legislative permission, is itself God’s command in His words “Obey”, not creational permission; and the context of the verses mentioned supports this.
As for the secret of the legislative permission to people concerning the obligation to obey the Prophet, it is the primary principle of the prohibition of demanding obedience from others. By the ruling of reason, no one may obey another or demand that others obey him. God (s.w.t.) alone is the One obeyed in His own right, as the Creator and Owner of the universe whose speech is an argument over creatures. As for obeying others and submitting to their commands, it must be by His permission; and it is He who has permitted obedience to the prophets (a.s.). On this basis obedience to the prophets is derivative, while essential obedience in its root belongs to God alone.
It is worth mentioning that the phrase “And We did not send any messenger except to be obeyed by God’s permission” is a report meant as a command, and means: the Prophet (s.a.w.) is responsible for conveying revelation and the rulings of religion, and you, O people, are charged with obeying him; you do not have the choice to obey or not.
Since the Supreme Messenger (s.a.w.) is the intermediary of outpouring in teaching, purifying, conveying revelation, setting out matters of knowledge, rulings and legal punishments and applying them in practice, and since obedience to God (s.w.t.) comes about through him (s.a.w.), he likewise represents the channels of mercy and forgiveness. If the sinners came to him and asked him to ask God’s forgiveness for them, he becomes the means and intermediary of that forgiveness; and because he is so, God (s.w.t.) is Oft-returning, Merciful.
Obedience brings the servant near to his Lord, and this nearness is perfection. Against that, opposing God and His Messenger (s.a.w.) is wronging oneself, since the reality of wrongdoing goes back to deficiency. Whoever wrongs himself by his sins only makes a breach in his perfection; and there is no way to close this breach, make up for past errors and win divine pardon and mercy except repentance and seeking forgiveness, not justifying the error and persisting in it. Had the hypocrites hastened to repent and seek forgiveness, instead of justifying their errors and their acts, they would have attained God’s mercy, because He is Oft-returning and Merciful; and after repentance the servant enjoys special mercy. Naturally, pardon for the hypocrites requires seeking a means (tawassul) alongside repentance, that is, returning to the Supreme Prophet (s.a.w.) and asking his intercession, that he ask pardon and forgiveness for him. This verse speaks of the hypocrites’ repentance, their faith in the message of the Prophet (s.a.w.), their asking God (s.w.t.) for forgiveness, and then the noble Messenger’s (s.a.w.) pardoning them, so that after all that they may attain special mercy. But the hypocrites who preferred to remain in the filth of their hypocrisy will not benefit from the Messenger’s (s.a.w.) seeking forgiveness for them.
What is meant by “they came to you” is not only actual presence, but their spiritual presence and their faith in the message and prophethood of the Prophet (s.a.w.). For this reason the verse also includes seeking a means through the Supreme Messenger (s.a.w.) and asking his intercession with God from a distant place; it is not necessary that the person be present at his noble grave.
There is no doubt that the Prophet’s (s.a.w.) seeking forgiveness for the sinner is more complete and greater than the person seeking forgiveness for himself. For this reason the pronoun was replaced with the explicit noun (the Messenger), and the address shifted to the third person; otherwise the more fitting saying would have been “and you sought forgiveness for them”.
God (s.w.t.) is nearer to a thing than anything else, and can do what He wills without an intermediary. But this verse makes clear that seeking a means through the Prophet (s.a.w.) and asking his intercession are a cause of forgiveness of sins. So between God (s.w.t.) and His creation there is an intermediary through whom one may seek a means to obtain God’s forgiveness.
In cases where there is no need for intercession to forgive the sins of the sinner, and God (s.w.t.) wills to forgive him without an intermediary, the verse which stresses that the sinner’s seeking forgiveness is not enough can be taken as denying perfection. It points to the places where the Prophet’s (s.a.w.) intercession is necessary and binding, and where without his mediation and intercession the sinner will not be forgiven. In such cases the unrestrictedness of the verses that point to repentance being enough for forgiving the sins of the sinner is restricted.
The context of the noble verse takes up the subject of intercession and seeking a means. It says plainly: “If the sinners and wrongdoers came to the Prophet (s.a.w.) and sought a means through him, and then the noble Messenger (s.a.w.) asked his Lord to forgive them, God would certainly forgive them.” The talk in the verse is not about whether the Prophet (s.a.w.) gave up his right and pardoned them.
In other words, the noble verse makes clear a feature of the noble Messenger (s.a.w.), which is intercession, seeking a means through him and his special authority; not obtaining the consent of the one whose right was violated, because that is a general matter not particular to him (s.a.w.). The point is that the verse does not speak of the subject of hurting the Prophet (s.a.w.) and obtaining his pardon, consent and giving up of his right, so that it would be said: the hypocrites hurt the Messenger (s.a.w.) and trespassed on his rights by turning away from him and returning to al-ṭāghūt, and they ought to win his consent so that they may be forgiven. In any case, the context of the verses speaks of the hypocrites who hurt the Messenger (s.a.w.); but this feature does not restrict or narrow the unrestrictedness or generality of the verse. Everyone who commits a sin and wrongs himself will attain God’s pardon and mercy by his repentance and his seeking a means through the Supreme Prophet (s.a.w.), whether it is God’s right or people’s right.
And I say:
The intercession mentioned was among the features of all the prophets (a.s.), just as seeking a means and intercession are among the rulings of the message and of general prophethood, and are not confined to the Supreme Messenger (s.a.w.). As for the particular address in the verse, “they came to you”, it too is a statement of the instance and a branch of the general root, and of people’s need at that time for the noble Messenger (s.a.w.).
It cannot be said that the noble verse permits intercession through the noble Prophet (s.a.w.) in his life and forbids it after his death, or that it is polytheism and false; because polytheism does not admit exception, so that it would be permitted at one time and forbidden at another.
4:65 — But no, by your Lord! They will not believe until they make you a judge in their disputes
But no, by your Lord! They will not believe until they make you a judge in their disputes, then do not find within their hearts any dissent to your verdict and submit in full submission.
The hypocrites falsely claim that they truly believe in what God has sent down, but God (s.w.t.) rejects and refutes their claim: “No, by your Lord…”. True faith is by the heart and complete submission to God (s.w.t.) and His Messenger. Among the witnesses of faith is submission in heart and form to the judgment of the Supreme Messenger (s.a.w.), not merely referring to him to settle disputes. The true faithful is bound by his duty: first, to refer only to the court that judges by God’s rulings; and second, to accept God’s judgment and submit to it, whether it is in his interest or not.
Notice the attaching of “Lord” to the pronoun of the noble Prophet (s.a.w.), and the stress on swearing by the Lord of the Messenger of God (s.a.w.), which, as we know, is an oath greater than swearing by the sun and moon and the like of the divine signs, and also greater than swearing by the Lord of the heavens and the earth; so that the greatness of the subject to be discussed and its supreme importance compared with other subjects becomes clear to us. The verse “It is not for a faithful man or a faithful woman, when God and His Messenger have decided a matter, to have a choice in their affair” points to the faithful hastening to accept when the Prophet (s.a.w.) issues a judgment. That verse contains only the denial of choice against the judgment of God and His Messenger (s.a.w.), and is content with warning against disobedience and misguidance, and does not mention the subject of denying inner discomfort and sure submission. But the verse under discussion contains all those matters, because it makes clear the state of the faithful who first make the Prophet (s.a.w.) the judge, then announce their readiness to accept his judgment and arbitration, and do not do without referring to him.
What is meant by His (s.w.t.) words “until they make you judge” is being content with the Messenger’s (s.a.w.) judgment and his rule, not making him an arbitrator whom people choose to settle between them. God (s.w.t.) is the one who chose His Prophet to judge between people. Perhaps the phrase “until they make you judge” contains the meaning of bringing about the acceptance of the Islamic order, and the pointer to people’s obligation to do that; not the legitimacy of the government which the holy Lawgiver orders.
It appears that the occasion of the revelation of this verse was a judicial matter, but the ruling of the verse is unrestricted. The Muslims must make the most noble Messenger (s.a.w.) judge in all their disagreements and disputes, whether in the frame of judgment or of authority, or in financial, legal and judicial disagreements, or in what concerns matters of authority. The only authority is the holy Lawgiver, and the court that judges by divine revelation. Indeed, the faithful must accept all the judgments issued by the noble Prophet (s.a.w.) until the Day of Resurrection; and no faithful has the right to reject any of his judgments issued in his noble lifetime (s.a.w.), or to wish, even in his heart, that the Prophet (s.a.w.) had not issued such a judgment.
Whoever God has opened his breast to faith accepts from the depths of his heart all the judgments of the Seal of the Messengers (s.a.w.) without any doubt, uncertainty or suspicion, whether the judgment is positive or negative: “then they find in themselves no discomfort about what you have decided.” We draw out from not using a conjunction such as fa or wa, and bringing thumma (“then”) instead of them, which conveys delay and order with an interval, that the true judgment may at first be hard and heavy on the one judged against; but he will accept it after his faith that the judgment was issued with the truth.
In short, the three stages of the faithful’s duty when any disagreement or dispute happens, which can be likened to the rising and descending arcs, are:
Practical acceptance of the Prophet’s (s.a.w.) competence to judge, carrying out his judgment and avoiding the courts of al-ṭāghūt.
In the rising arc, moving from the station of action to the station of quality, and hearing and obeying the divine judgment that comes from the Messenger (s.a.w.) without the least discomfort. But this important inner quality, which means accepting the Prophet’s (s.a.w.) judgment in heart and form, does not come easily.
In the descending arc, coming down from the station of quality to the station of action, which means applying the judgment issued and acting on it.
The noble verse states plainly the judicial and governing authority of the Supreme Messenger (s.a.w.) in all people’s disagreements, just as it stresses that his (s.a.w.) judgment is final and people are charged with obeying and carrying it out. No one has the right to object to his opinion and judgment on the pretext of ijtihād and issuing a different judgment; rather, all must obey his judgments without qualification or condition.
From here the verse is counted a proof of the infallibility of the Supreme Prophet (s.a.w.). Although he (s.a.w.) judges on the basis of the roots and rules of jurisprudence and rights of the law, and not according to reality and the Preserved Tablet, if we suppose that a person was skilled in presenting his claim and adept at using words and expressions to mislead, so that he twisted one of the Messenger’s (s.a.w.) judgments and managed to end the case in his favour by taking another’s wealth, he would be included in the noble Prophetic hadith: “I judge between you only by proofs and oaths, and some of you are more eloquent in argument than others. So any man for whom I cut off something of his brother’s wealth, I have only cut off for him a piece of the Fire.”
Judgment is only to settle the dispute, and the Prophet’s (s.a.w.) judgment changes nothing of reality, whether beneficial or harmful. Here lies the meaning of the judge’s infallibility: his observing the rules and rulings completely and committing no breach, neither deliberately nor by oversight.
4:66 — Had We prescribed for them
Had We prescribed for them, [commanding]: ‘Slay [the guilty among] your folks or leave your habitations,’ they would not have done it except a few of them. And if they had done as they were advised, it would have been better for them and stronger in confirming [their faith].
The noble Qur’an is a heavy word because of the hard duties in it: “Surely We shall cast upon you a heavy word.” But learning it, memorising it and acting on it are easy: “And We have certainly made the Qur’an easy for remembrance; so is there anyone who will remember?” Hardship, constraint and being charged with what cannot be borne are not present in the rulings of the religion; rather, the capacity and power of the human being are always greater than the divine duties.
In this verse God (s.w.t.) puts forward a supposition that does not exist: “Had We, supposedly, made obligatory on them hard duties and difficult tasks, none would have submitted to what was imposed on them except a small number of the sincere faithful, whether what was imposed on them was killing and striving, or emigrating and leaving their homes.”
The divine duties are written and binding, but in their manner they are admonitions. Admonition draws creation to the truth; and the divine duties are called admonitions because they draw people to God (s.w.t.) and bring them near to Him.
It is known that accepting God’s admonitions, obeying all His commands and carrying out His rulings contain many blessings and much good fortune, such as: 1) good and righteousness, such as deliverance from punishment and not being afflicted with grave problems; 2) the firmness of a person’s foot in this world and the Hereafter, and the establishing of faith and its rooting in his heart. The explanation of that is that religious teachings are truth, and truth is firm in itself and makes firm everything connected with it. All acts of worship and deeds of good and righteousness are like pure water that waters the existence of the human being, so that he is firm and rooted. As for the duty of the faithful, it lies in watering the roots of faith so that they grow strong in obeying God (s.w.t.); and He (s.w.t.) pours out on the human being right guidance and rising from His grace and brings him to His nearness. All those acts of worship and righteous deeds are means to prepare the ground so that God, Mighty and Majestic, may root faith in the human being and make his foot firm in this world and the Hereafter.
4:67 — Then We would surely have given them from Us a great reward
Then We would surely have given them from Us a great reward,
The reward of those who obey all of God’s commands is a reward “from Our presence” (ladun), and great. The reward from His very presence differs from any other reward, because it is given directly by God (s.w.t.), and it is much greater than reward given through an intermediary. The use of the first-person plural and the phrase “and then We would have given them from Our presence a great reward” point to the importance and greatness of the reward promised to the faithful, especially since God (s.w.t.) has described it as great.
The use of the word “reward” (ajr, wage) in the noble verse is to encourage and stir the faithful, like the use of the expression of selling and buying and the like for encouragement, not real selling and buying. For, first, the human being is not the owner of the goods nor the owner of the work, so as to be able to deal with God, Mighty and Majestic, or sell that to God or hire it to Him. Second, any good work the human being does neither benefits God (s.w.t.) nor harms Him, so that the human being would deserve a wage or price for it. A wage is what is paid to the worker in return for his work; but work and wage here both go back to the human being himself, so he is given the full exchange and what is exchanged, and not to God nor to other people. Nothing of the human being’s work or its wage passes to God (s.w.t.); rather, the benefit of any goods or work, that is, the effect and benefit of religious duty, returns to the person who does it: “If you do good, you do good for yourselves; and if you do evil, it is against them”; and not to God (s.w.t.). Even if others benefit from that good work, they benefit only derivatively; as for the essential benefit, it returns to its owner alone.
4:68 — and We would have guided them to a straight path
and We would have guided them to a straight path.
Among the other blessings of carrying out God’s (s.w.t.) commands and taking heed of His admonitions is guidance to the straight path.
What is meant by this guidance is creational guidance, that is, reaching the goal; not legislative guidance in the sense of showing the way, which all Muslims enjoy.
So guidance, the reward promised in this verse and the like of it, is the heart’s attraction and the inner inclination to obedience, the ease of reaching it by the means of good, the ease of using those means available for virtue, and the removal of all the obstacles and unexpected events hidden in His (s.w.t.) words: “We shall make easy for him the path of ease.”
By virtue of creating inclination and attraction in the heart of the obedient faithful, and making him long for worship and good deeds, it will become possible for him to obey God’s (s.w.t.) commands with ease and desire, even if they seem hard and heavy to others.
It is worth mentioning that “the straight path” is belief, morals and righteous deeds that match revelation. When all those qualities are rooted in the spirit of the faithful, the straight path and the wayfarer become one thing and will never separate. The faithful wayfarer, who has taken on the religion, is formed by religious morals and acts on divine revelation, becomes one with the path, and so travels along it at peace. For the path exists outwardly only through the righteous wayfarers; and the path is sometimes attributed to them, “the path of those You have blessed”, where the way is attached to its traveller, who becomes responsible for it; just as it is also attributed to God (s.w.t.), its active Origin, its Maker and the Maker of guidance.
4:69–70 — Whoever obeys Allah and the Apostle—they are with those whom Allah has blessed
(69) Whoever obeys Allah and the Apostle—they are with those whom Allah has blessed, including the prophets and the truthful, the martyrs and the righteous, and excellent companions are they! (70) That is the grace of Allah, and Allah suffices as knower [of His creatures].
Another reward promised to the faithful who obey God, His Messenger (s.a.w.) and those in authority (the Infallible Imams (a.s.)) is their companionship with the messengers, the truthful (ṣiddīqīn), the witnesses (shuhadāʾ) and the righteous, in this world and the Hereafter.
The nature of “obedience” is realised for a person by at least one instance. But according to the indications in the verse, among them “and whoever obeys”, by which is meant the doer of the act mentioned in His (s.w.t.) words “had they done what they were admonished with”, those included in the verse are those who obey commands and prohibitions in all states; they are those who act on the commands and avoid the prohibitions. On this basis the instance of “whoever obeys” is those for whom obedience to God and His Messenger has become a settled disposition.
God (s.w.t.) joins those who obey God and His noble Messenger (s.a.w.) with constant obedience to those whom He has blessed, who are the prophets, the truthful, the witnesses and the righteous: “they are with those whom God has blessed”. So these people have not yet reached the rank of “those whom God has blessed”; rather, each of them will be joined to one of the four ranks mentioned according to the degree of his faith and his virtues. The righteous wayfarer may be blessed at the beginning of his journey with the blessing of companionship with the ranks mentioned, and then be counted as one of them in the middle of his journey or at its end; except the fortified station of messengership, whose way is closed to wayfarers forever.
The companionship mentioned is not confined to the Day of Resurrection. Rather, according to the unrestrictedness of the verse, all those who obey God and His Messenger are gathered with God’s friends at the present time; and what is meant by gathering in this world is creational companionship and divine success.
Since the subject of the verse is the companionship of the obedient with all the prophets (a.s.), and not with the Seal of the Prophets (s.a.w.) in particular, what is meant by that is all the truthful, witnesses and righteous of all nations, not particular individuals.
When the word “blessing” is mentioned in the noble Qur’an unrestrictedly, what is meant is the blessing of wilāyah (friendship with God and guardianship). In this verse too what is meant by it is the blessing of wilāyah, not outward or material and worldly blessing; especially since many of the prophets, the truthful, the witnesses and the righteous lived in almost complete poverty in this world.
The noble verse also attributes the giving of blessing to God (s.w.t.), “whom God has blessed”. Those blessed, God’s friends, enjoy by God’s grace the blessing of wilāyah, and others are deprived of this blessing by their own bad choice. Every perfection is from God’s (s.w.t.) grace, and every deficiency is from the human being himself.
The prophet (nabī) is the person whose spirit has been purified and who has reached the highest stages of perfection, and has become worthy to take news from God, through an intermediary or without one. Prophethood and receiving news are the divine form of the prophets (a.s.), just as conveying the message is their human form.
The word “truthful” (ṣiddīq) is applied to the faithful who is truthful in report and in reporting, in whom truthfulness has taken root in the substance of his self and become a settled disposition.
The “witness” (shahīd) is the one who witnesses deeds and acts: “How then when We bring from every nation a witness, and bring you as a witness over these?” As for the “righteous” (ṣāliḥ), it is the quality of one in whom righteousness has become a settled disposition by his continuing to do good, and the substance of whose existence and self is righteous. On this basis the measure of righteousness is being marked by the settled disposition of righteousness of soul, not merely doing righteous deeds. So the faithful who obey God’s commands and prohibitions and do righteous deeds are joined to the righteous in the Garden.
Mentioning the prophets, the truthful, the witnesses and the righteous one after another in this verse without using letters that convey order, such as fa or thumma, does not show that any of them comes before another; and there is no proof of the preference of any of the four groups mentioned, except of course the prophets (a.s.), who are of higher rank and loftier degree than the others because they enjoy the lofty station of prophethood and are marked by truthfulness, witnessing and righteousness. As for the Supreme Messenger (s.a.w.), he is the head of the caravan of the prophets, the truthful, the witnesses and the righteous.
The companionship of the wayfarers on the straight path with the prophets, the truthful, the witnesses and the righteous is not confined to the Garden; rather, they are together during their journey and their travel on that path. This is supported by His (s.w.t.) words “and excellent are they as companions (rafīq)”; for the word rafīq is applied to one who accompanies another on the road, holds the same thought and belief, and strives to guide his companions and protect them.
The secret of describing the companionship of the four groups as excellent is, first, that they are aware companions who succeed in travelling that road; and second, that they do not leave their companions in hard trials and do not neglect them. The sign of excellent companionship is the unseen appearance of the effects of prophethood, truthfulness, witnessing and righteousness of the companions in the hearts of the wayfarers, and so their feeling inclination to virtue and lack of desire to commit sins.
The demonstrative “that” points to the importance of the companionship and the greatness of keeping company with the prophets, the truthful, the witnesses and the righteous.
There is no doubt that anyone’s enjoying any of God’s (s.w.t.) blessings is only grace from God. The virtue of being gathered with God’s friends is a blessing with which God favours His obedient servants, not their desert. No faithful servant counts himself as having a right from God for obeying His commands, because this obedience is in the interest of the individual himself, to reach the rank of spiritual perfection.
As we pointed out, the degrees of the faith of the faithful, and the results of each degree in the Garden, differ. Among the faithful are some who are joined to the prophets, some to the truthful, others to the witnesses and others to the righteous. God (s.w.t.) knows the measure of the faithful’s sincerity and their degrees, and who is joined to which of the four groups: “and God is enough as Knower.” Adding the letter bāʾ to the Majestic Name, “by God”, is for emphasis.
4:71 — O you who have faith! Take your precautions
O you who have faith! Take your precautions, then go forth in companies, or go forth en masse.
The command to obey God, His Messenger and those in authority, and the statement of the importance of that obedience, its blessings and its fruits in the previous verses, was a preparation for setting out the matters of striving in the way of God in this verse and the following verses. For the matter of urging the faithful and stirring them to readiness, to fight the enemy and wage war on the faithless, can only come about after obeying God, His Messenger and those in authority as is required.
The verse addresses the faithful, and what is meant by the pronouns “you” and “your precautions” is the true faithful. But the hypocrites are also included in this address, in that they are outwardly Muslims who profess faith and claim it.
In this verse the noble Qur’an first calls the Muslims to caution and alertness before the command to fight is issued: “O you who believe, take your precautions.” It is known that caution is the most important weapon; and using any weapon rightly, keeping it and making the most of it depend on the intelligence and caution of the armed forces. The cautious and wary person is the one who uses his reason and knowledge to face the enemy.
His (s.w.t.) words “take your precautions” are a divine command to use reason and insight to identify and recognise the enemy, especially since there are among the Muslims many hypocrites who whisper evil and strive to destroy Islam.
There is no doubt that caution and prudence contain many advantages, such as identifying the enemy, knowing the extent of the harms and the kind of advanced weapon that should be used, fixing the enemy’s geographical positions and the routes by which strangers can infiltrate, besides the sciences of making weapons, the arts of using them, and so on.
So the comprehensive expression “take your precautions” includes all the points drawn from some verses and narrations in this field, such as caution and wariness in knowledge and in practice towards the enemy, and the ability to face the enemy on the fronts of battle, which contains many matters of knowledge and practice, and caution against the plots of outside enemies and staying safe from the intrigues of inside enemies.
As for the obligation to go forth in the verse, it is at times obligatory on some and at other times obligatory on all; not that going forth itself is obligatory but they have a choice in its manner. It may be in the form of small groups or as a comprehensive collective going forth. If the enemy can be repelled by a few soldiers or a small group, there is no need for general mobilisation: “then go forth in detachments.” But if the enemy’s attack is on all the Islamic fronts, all forces must be mobilised and the Muslims must all go forth to defend themselves: “or go forth all together.”
If “go forth all together” is a command to initiated striving (jihād ibtidāʾī), the word “all” includes only those charged with duties. But if the command mentioned calls to comprehensive and collective defence of Islam and the Muslims, the word “all” means mobilising all men and women, old and young, and even the sick and disabled who are able to defend.
4:72 — Among you is indeed he who drags his feet
Among you is indeed he who drags his feet, and should an affliction visit you, he says, ‘It was certainly Allah’s blessing that I did not accompany them!’
After the previous verse commanded the Muslims to strive, this verse takes up the state of the hypocrites and those weak in faith who cause despair, hopelessness and slackness in the souls of others so that they hold back from striving.
But this slowness and that weakening of resolve are not qualities of the hypocrites only; rather, they may at times be qualities of the comfortable, who have grown used to an easy life. The content of this verse and what follows it points to some qualities of the hypocrites, and also of those weak in faith, on whose tongue He (s.w.t.) said: “God has favoured me.” For the hypocrite, who is in reality counted faithless and does not believe in God’s blessings on him, does not say “God has favoured me” unless he means it hypocritically too; just as these words do not fit the character of the faithful, as the word “among you” does not fit the hypocrite, because he may be with the faithful but he is certainly not of them.
The verb “who lags behind” may also include the rich, who feel no strong desire for striving because of the easy living they are used to; so they preferred to stay behind and sit back, and chose to remain in their houses with the old men, old women and children.
The hypocrites, as is known, are the bitterest enemies of the Muslims, and the end of their wish is the destruction of the Muslims and their annihilation. The word “who lags behind” (la-yubaṭṭiʾanna), with its lām and its doubling, points to that: among you are some who have sworn to delay the movement of the Muslim fighters. Whenever danger came upon the Muslims and the horizon of war appeared, they left the Muslims alone. They were not content with leaving cooperation with the army of Islam and stirring up their brothers in thought and belief not to take part in the fighting; rather, they set about urging those weak in faith to stay away from fighting and sit back. At times they made the heat their pretext and whispered to others not to go to the fronts of fighting; so they kept away from the Messenger of God (s.a.w.) and encouraged others to leave him and stay away from him.
The aim of those who lag and hold others back, and the end of their purpose, was to remain at ease and in comfort and to get more benefits and opportunities. For this reason, whenever harm or setback struck those Muslims in fighting, they rejoiced and were glad that they had not accompanied the Muslims; and, against the divine decree and measure, they claimed: God has favoured us in that we did not go out to fight with the Muslims. But they do not know that taking part in fighting is not a cause of death, just as their staying and lagging behind does not mean their escape from death.
This group, when it thinks that its not taking part in striving and its safety from harm are a blessing, only testifies that martyrdom was an affliction that struck the Muslims.
It is worth mentioning that the existence of this large number of hypocrites among the companions of the most noble Messenger (s.a.w.), whom no one but God (s.w.t.) alone knows, and the many verses that show their plots, some of which we have pointed to, and the stress that not all the companions of the Supreme Prophet (s.a.w.) were people of true faith and righteous deeds, and indeed that some of them fell into the mud of transgression, only establishes that the claim that all the companions are just is not logical at all; even though the general outward state of most of the companions was pure faith.
4:73 — But should a bounty from Allah come to you
But should a bounty from Allah come to you, he will say—as if there were no [tie of friendship and] affection between you and him—‘I wish I were with them so that I had achieved a great success!’
The previous verse mentioned that when the Muslims were struck by a misfortune, those among the hypocrites and the weak in faith who lagged and held others back rejoiced that they had not gone out with the Muslims to strive. But when the Muslims were victorious and returned from war with spoils and wealth, the only thing that occupied the minds of the hypocrites, people of a material outlook, was the spoils, which they counted the basis of victory and success; not the victory that the Muslims had achieved over the faithless.
The noble verse stresses that grace is from God alone, and that God (s.w.t.) is the source of every perfection and good, while every deficiency and fault is from the heedless human being. For this reason the previous verse did not attribute misfortune and problems to God, Mighty and Majestic.
On the one hand the hypocrites asked the Muslims’ leave to sit back; and when they were alone with one another, their souls were consumed with regret for what they had missed of victory and gaining spoils because they had not gone out with the Muslims. The regrets of the hypocrites were nothing but for not getting a share of the spoils, or envy in general.
The entry of the lām and the heavy nūn of emphasis on the verb “they will surely say” shows the hypocrites’ focus and concern with the material side, and their belief that wealth is the main factor of success; whereas in reality it is a means of trial and testing. According to this logic of the hypocrites, getting spoils counts as a great triumph, and spending wealth and charity as loss and a penalty; while martyrdom in the way of God, which is the great triumph, is affliction and calamity.
As for the saying of the hypocrites and the weak in faith among the Muslims, “Would that I had been with them”, it is proof of their greed and opportunism. Only one who was truly unable to take part would say these words; whereas they could have joined the Muslims without any obstacle, but they preferred to be among those who lag and hinder, deliberately and without any excuse. They held back from answering the call of the most noble Messenger (s.a.w.) to fight, as though they were not among the Muslims and had no tie with them, and knew nothing of the aims of the Muslims in their war against the faithless.
In His (s.w.t.) words “as though there had been no affection between you and him”, which is a parenthetical phrase between “they will surely say” and “Would that I had been with them”, there is a pointer to the mutual duty among the members of the Islamic community, and a reminder of the genuine and sensitive social principle: that the Islamic social order cannot stand without unity and solidarity, which are the result of affection and brotherhood among all the members of the community. This noble verse calls to the official Islamic constitution, represented in achieving general affection, guaranteeing social affection, and the effects that follow from it on the affairs of social life.
4:74 — Let those who sell the life of this world for the Hereafter fight in the way of Allah
Let those who sell the life of this world for the Hereafter fight in the way of Allah; and whoever fights in the way of Allah, and then is slain, or he subdues [the enemy], We shall soon give him a great reward.
This verse renews the encouragement to strive in the way of God. It describes the true strivers and the great reward for their striving, in contrast to those who lag behind and hold others back, whose condition the previous verse set out.
In this verse God (s.w.t.) points to fighting (striving) as the measure of virtue, not to being killed. The sacred fighting that pleases God, Exalted, is fighting dyed with the divine dye and in His way.
The phrase “in the way of God” comes before “those who sell the life of this world for the Hereafter” to show the main and worthy aim of war: rising in the way of God and raising His word high. No other aim can equal it. Indeed, all the other secondary aims, such as protecting the homeland and safeguarding people’s lives, property and honour, are achieved only through the blessing of the original aim and the firm establishment of the order of Islamic government.
No one is able to strive in the way of God except one who has sold this world to buy the happiness of the Hereafter, and who has no tie at all binding him to this world. He sees happiness in the everlasting world to come, not in wealth and material things; so he strives with all his effort to reach that aim, and indeed spends his whole being, investing it in that aim.
By contrast, the conquering fighter who holds his fighting as a favour over others and runs after spoils is only a seeker of this world, not one who deals with God. It is not long before he complains and grumbles if he does not achieve his material aims.
As for the one who strives in the way of God, for him there is no difference between martyrdom, captivity, wounds and victory. He will certainly receive the reward of the Hereafter in every case, unless this victorious fighter wastes his reward through self-admiration, arrogance and the desires of the self. For the measure of the reward is carrying out the duty and striving to raise the word of God high and to apply His rulings.
For this reason the phrase “in the way of God” is repeated twice in the verse, to stress this important principle and action done purely for God; especially as the name of God is repeated instead of using the pronoun, “in His way”.
Victory or martyrdom in striving is the first principle in Islam. Captivity, wounds and other events all fall under the heading of martyrdom. For the striver in the way of God, attaining victory or martyrdom means receiving the great reward; so he is the victor whether he kills or is killed. For this reason the noble verse did not describe the one who is killed as defeated, even though the context called for it in contrast to “the one who overcomes”; because the striver who attains one of the two best things is a winner, not defeated.
To magnify the reward of the martyr and of the conquering strivers, the reward is described as “great”, and is given with tanwīn. Besides this, God (s.w.t.) is the giver of that great reward, which He announced in His words “We shall give him a great reward”, in the form of the first person plural.
There is no doubt that the rank and reward of the striver are greater with God (s.w.t.) compared with those who sit back. And comparing the strivers with one another, the conquering victors and the martyrs are on one level of reward and greatness; there is no preference between their rewards except by the degree of sincerity.
The promise of an equal reward for the victorious strivers and the martyrs shows the importance of the work the conquerors do.
The reason the work of the conquering fighter is equal to the work of the martyr stained with his own blood is not merely that the first was present on the battlefronts. It is his victory, which gives the martyr’s blood its value, gives life to God’s religion and raises His word high. The effects of the conquerors’ victory are no less than the martyrdom of the martyrs. The martyrs attain the meeting with God through their martyrdom, which prepares the way for victory; but the enemy is not routed merely by the fighters being martyred, and the religion remains exposed to danger.
Reforming society, uprooting corruption from the earth, humbling the arrogant who dwell in palaces, and giving life to God’s religion: all of this comes from the blessings of the conquerors’ sacrifice in striving, and the blessing of their victory and their overcoming of their enemy.
It may be that the gravity and difficulty of martyrdom are the reason it is given greater weight and is mentioned first in this verse. Mentioning it first may also convey the greatness of its reward and the recompense granted.
4:75 — Why should you not fight in the way of Allah and the oppressed men
Why should you not fight in the way of Allah and the oppressed men, women, and children, who say, ‘Our Lord, bring us out of this town whose people are oppressors, and appoint for us a guardian from Yourself, and appoint for us a helper from Yourself’?
The previous verse gave the strivers the good news of a great reward. This verse asks people, in astonishment, what keeps them from striving in the way of God and for the oppressed, when the reward of all of them is kept safe and secure with God.
Among the examples of striving in the way of God is defending the deprived and rescuing the oppressed (mustaḍʿafīn) from injustice. God (s.w.t.) mentions these two examples after the phrase “in the way of God” to point to their special importance, and to encourage the Islamic community toward praiseworthy zeal, commendable jealousy for what is right, and good partisanship.
The phrase “in the way of God” is enough to urge and spur the complete believer to defend the deprived and the wronged. But for the believer who is not complete, the emotional matter has to be mentioned alongside the rational one. For this reason the verse refers to the oppressed among the men, the women and the children after mentioning “in the way of God”, so that the argument is complete for the believer who is not complete.
“The oppressed” are mentioned next to the name of God to show that the striving mentioned, and the rescue of the oppressed, is in reality striving in the way of God, Exalted, as well as to show the importance of such striving.
Alongside the divine aim (in the way of God) which includes the deliverance of the wronged and their rescue from the injustice of the unjust and the tyrannical, it also includes an innate, human aim and a response to this innate nature (fiṭrah), just like guarding tawḥīd and defending it, which is in harmony with the fiṭrah.
The oppressed whom the noble Qur’an tries to encourage the Muslims to fight the unjust faithless and rescue them from are not the oppressed who are equal in punishment with the arrogant because they are their partners. They are those who cannot tell falsehood from truth, or who know the truth but cannot declare it openly or defend it, besides being unable to emigrate. According to the verse under discussion, these oppressed are people of tawḥīd, because they say “Our Lord, bring us out”. They also do not know a way to emigrate, as was the condition of the Muslims of Mecca in the early days of Islam. Thirdly, they ask for freedom under the shade of divine power, not absolute freedom; they want God to be their guardian and helper.
There is no doubt that these oppressed are among the people of salvation, the leaders and the inheritors on earth. This good news is a creational promise from God (s.w.t.): “And We desired to show favour to those who were abased in the land, and to make them leaders, and to make them the inheritors.” The verse also contains a legislative command to rescue these oppressed, and it addresses all the Muslims: “Be the manifestation of divine guardianship and help, and hasten to help all the wronged.”
The prayer of the oppressed, “Our Lord, bring us out of this town whose people are unjust, and appoint for us from Yourself a guardian, and appoint for us from Yourself a helper”, points in the verse to the nearness of the divine answer; otherwise the noble Qur’an would not have quoted the prayer in full. It becomes clear to us that the cry for help of the oppressed who prayed was pure; for, as we pointed out, they asked God (s.w.t.) alone, and did not ask, for example, the tribe or the clan. The length of their prayer and their humble pleading to God (s.w.t.) can also be drawn from the repetition of the phrase “appoint for us from Yourself” twice in the same verse, and likewise the mention of the children, to draw more divine mercy.
The noble verse points out that the children too ask for deliverance. The children old enough to understand are expressed in the verse as asking with the tongue of speech, and the small children (not yet mature) with the tongue of their state.
The noble verse is not limited to a particular time or place, even though it was originally revealed about the Muslims of Mecca, who were groaning under the injustice of the faithless of Quraysh, suffering the weight of their enslavement and oppression, and unable to emigrate and escape.
On the basis of the verse, Mecca, for all its greatness, had become a prison for the people of tawḥīd because of the injustice of the arrogant toward them. This weighed on them and wore them out, which drove them to plead humbly with God (s.w.t.) to rescue them from that terrible situation, which had made Mecca like a small village after its greatness. The proof of this is the words of the oppressed: “out of this town”. Although the word “town” (qaryah) is also used for a city, calling a place a qaryah is rarely without a reason; and a place that has no room for the greatest Prophet (s.a.w.) and the Muslims deserves to be called no more than a village or a hamlet.
4:76 — Those who have faith fight in the way of Allah
Those who have faith fight in the way of Allah, and those who are faithless fight in the way of fake gods. So fight the friends of Satan; indeed the stratagems of Satan are always flimsy.
Like the verses before it, this noble verse contains encouragement to strive in the way of God. The sentence “Those who have faith fight in the way of God” is a statement of fact made for the purpose of a command: alongside describing the faithful, it encourages them to strive and fight in the way of God. As for the sentence “and those who are faithless fight in the way of al-ṭāghūt”, it is a pure statement of fact; and even if it contains a command, it is certainly a prohibition of this forbidden act.
Just as war is sometimes in the way of God and sometimes in the way of al-ṭāghūt, so the fighters are of two kinds, the faithful and the faithless, and each group fights in the way of its belief: the faithful to raise the word of God high, and the faithless for the sake of al-ṭāghūt. Sometimes victory goes to the faithful and sometimes it falls to the faithless. But the truth is that the faithful who strive in the way of God are the victors in both cases: they enjoy God’s blessings, while the faithless are deprived of those blessings.
The fighting of the faithful differs from the fighting of the faithless in terms of belief, because the certain foundation of the believer is God’s conclusive proof, while the conjectural foundation of the faithless is false conjecture. It differs also in terms of aim and goal, for the believer’s aim is to strengthen God’s religion and give life to His word, and this is expressed as “the way of God”; while the goal of the faithless is to support unbelief, misguidance and error, and that is the way of al-ṭāghūt.
God (s.w.t.) calls the faithless the friends of Satan, and He commanded the faithful to fight them: “So fight the friends of Satan; surely the plot of Satan is weak.” Great plotting and scheming come from Satan the accursed, and every plot and scheme that leads to misguidance is among the deeds of Iblīs the cursed. Even so, if we compare Satan’s plotting with the divine plan, there is no doubt that Satan’s plotting is weak, indeed nothing. However great Satan’s plotting may be, it has no effect at all before God, Mighty and Majestic; because “God encompasses all things”, and He knows the scheming of the devils (“Say: God is swifter in scheming”) and is able to bring it to nothing. All the power and ability the faithless have is in God’s hand and under His choice, because “all power belongs to God”. If the strivers hold fast to God’s rope, do not divide and do not quarrel, God will be their help and will wipe out the plotting and scheming of the faithless: “That is so; and God weakens the plot of the faithless.”
The purpose of contrasting the way of God with the way of al-ṭāghūt, and the faithful who strive in the way of God with the faithless who fight in the way of al-ṭāghūt, is to show the weakness of Satan’s plotting compared with the power and planning of God, Exalted.
4:77 — Have you not regarded those who were told
Have you not regarded those who were told, ‘Keep your hands off [from warfare], and maintain the prayer and give the zakat’? But when fighting was prescribed for them, behold, a part of them feared the people as if fearing Allah, or were even more afraid, and they said, ‘Our Lord! Why did You prescribe fighting for us? Why did You not respite us for a short time?!’ Say, ‘The enjoyments of this world are trifle and the Hereafter is better for the Godwary, and you will not be wronged so much as a single date-thread.
Continuing the previous verses, this verse and the two after it take up the blame of the hypocrites, or of those among the Muslims who were weak in faith.
In this noble verse God (s.w.t.) addresses His noble Messenger (s.a.w.), saying in the form of a question: “Do you not remember those who wanted to fight the unjust and defend themselves, and We said to them: Leave fighting for now, and busy yourselves with keeping up the prayer and giving the zakāh? And when We prescribed fighting and striving for them, a state of fear and alarm took hold of them, like their fear of God (s.w.t.), or perhaps more intense than that. And they started chattering, saying: Why have You prescribed fighting for us, O Lord? Why did You not grant us respite to a near term? Must we die and be killed before our appointed time? These people are only afraid of losing a few days of life and being killed in battle!”
It is clear that the source of this objection, and that insolence in speech, is weakness of faith, which had become a quality shared by the hypocrites and the weak in faith.
If these words and this objection came from the weak in faith, then the word “more” (ashadd) in His words, Exalted, “they fear people as they fear God, or with a greater fear”, is a comparative form. But if the objectors were the hypocrites, then “more” counts as a form of designation, because they did not believe in God (s.w.t.) at all nor fear Him. As for their saying “Our Lord, why have You prescribed fighting for us?”, it is an outward saying, not a real one.
It should be pointed out here that the particle “or” before the phrase “a greater fear” does not convey hesitation on the speaker’s part, but division. For the sentence “as they fear God, or with a greater fear” points to two groups of people: one group fears people “as they fear God”, and another fears them “with a greater fear”. Or else the particle is for equivalence and permission, meaning that those people sometimes fear people “as they fear God”, and at other times fear them “with a greater fear”.
The objection of this group is not to death or killing as such. It is because they think life is limited to this worldly life, and so they fear that death will come to them early and they will be deprived of living out their natural life; and they wish they had been forbidden from fighting as long as they lived. So by their words “a near term” they do not mean being given a chance for one day or even one week; they mean living to the end of their lives a natural life, far from death or killing.
God’s (s.w.t.) reply to their insolence and their objection to the ruling of striving, which arose from their belief that life is confined to this world, was this: all the goods of this world are worth nothing beside what is promised in the Hereafter. For the Hereafter is the most fitting and best place for the Godwary, because it is full of good and happiness, and no one is cheated of his due in it: “and you will not be wronged by so much as a thread”. The secret of the Hereafter being better than this world is that the goods of the life of this world and the blessings in it are few and passing, and no one of sound mind feels secure in such a life. Everything in it is mixed with bitterness and pain, and no one obtains a pure blessing in this world without sorrow, toil or pain; while the blessings of the Hereafter are plentiful (“a gift without break”), lasting (“abiding in it as long as the heavens and the earth endure”) and certain.
A reminder: the counsel to be patient and the ruling of striving do not abrogate one another. Each has its own time, and the individual must act on each in its own time and place: holding to patience when the means of war and fighting are not available, and striving in the way of God when the conditions for it are ready.
4:78 — Wherever you may be death will overtake you
Wherever you may be death will overtake you, even if you were in fortified towers.’ If any good befalls them, they say, ‘This is from Allah;’ and when an ill befalls them, they say, ‘This is from you.’ Say, ‘All is from Allah.’ What is the matter with these people that they would not understand any matter?
If the sentence “Wherever you may be, death will overtake you, even if you are in lofty towers” completes the sentence “Say: The enjoyment of this world is little”, and is not a parenthetical sentence, then it continues the answer to the objectors and their insolence toward the ruling of striving.
Do these people think that fleeing from the fields of battle, or hiding in strong buildings and shelters, will put off their death? Rather, when their term comes, no stratagem will help against a sudden end! Death is God’s decree, which lets no living being escape. No living being is able to flee it or put it off. The sentence does not deal with death as such, for no one of sound mind thinks he could escape death altogether by entering a fortified castle or a strong tower.
Whenever something joyful and happy happened to those objectors, they would say: “This blessing is from God (s.w.t.).” And whenever a misfortune struck them or harm came to them, they took it as a bad omen and said of the most noble Prophet (s.a.w.), God forbid: “He is an ill-omened man.” As for those of them who did not believe in superstitions, they would say: “The cause of these problems is the weak leadership of the Prophet (s.a.w.).”
So God (s.w.t.) answered their slanders against the greatest Messenger (s.a.w.): “O Prophet! Say to these people that every event that happens in the world, whether good or bad, is from God, Mighty and Majestic. All events, beneficial and harmful, are measured out according to the best order, and according to divine management, decree and measure. For everything is contingent in existence and needs a source, and it must end, with or without an intermediary, at the Necessary Being.”
The whole world lives in the shade of God’s kindness, mercy and blessing, and all good things come from Him (s.w.t.). As for blessings being lost and departing, that is because those who have them make bad use of them. Every evil or harm that happens to a human being is known to God (s.w.t.), but it is not from Him; it is from the human being himself: “and whatever evil befalls you is from yourself.”
At the end of the verse God, Mighty and Majestic, blames those liars with His words “What is the matter with these people that they hardly understand any speech?” If “speech” (ḥadīth) here means divine revelation, the meaning is: “Why do these people not understand divine revelation?” And if it means ordinary, familiar speech, the meaning of the verse is: “If these people do not understand ordinary and familiar speech, how can they understand the speech of God, Exalted?”
It is worth mentioning that the verse deals with joyful and sad events in creation, and likewise sweet and bitter events in the outside world, and it stands against the doctrines of compulsion (jabr) and delegation (tafwīḍ) in the order of religious law. It does not point to compulsion at all. On the contrary, it censures and blames those who do not think, do not reflect, do not tell good from evil, and do not understand the meaning of “from God” and the meaning of “from God’s presence” (min ʿind Allāh). The human being is able to think and reflect, and has the right to choose between good and evil deeds. The next verse makes clear that good things are from God (s.w.t.) and evil things are from the human being himself. Good and evil deeds, faith and unbelief, are among the human being’s chosen acts; and in terms of the will they are attributed to God, Exalted, but not directly and not by way of compulsion. The human being is compelled in the very fact of having a will, so he cannot do anything without it; but the will to do this deed or that is in his hand. And since he is a dependent existent and contingent in existence, his act and its description, like his existence, are tied to the Necessary Being, God (s.w.t.); because the act is a branch of the existence of the one who does it. In short, the limit and deficiency of the act are left to the human being, while its very existence, free of limit and label, is attributed to God (s.w.t.).
4:79 — Whatever good befalls you is from Allah
Whatever good befalls you is from Allah; and whatever ill befalls you is from yourself. We sent you as an apostle to mankind, and Allah suffices as witness.
This worldly order is built on events of good and evil and on the crowding of competing interests, so that the human being may reach perfection and rise higher through his good selection and choice. A realm that is entirely good is not called “this world” (dunyā). So joyful events, for example, are said to be good (ḥasanah) for a human being, and bitter events count as evil (sayyiʾah) for him; but these two labels are relative and comparative.
Good and evil are each of two kinds: creational and legislative. Legislative good and evil fall outside the scope of the verse, because its apparent sense points to events in creation, not to legislated acts. Besides this, in the order of religious law God (s.w.t.) commands only good, justice and kindness; the only thing God asks for is good, and He, Exalted, has forbidden evil and made it hateful.
In the order of creation, all good things and evil things are from God (s.w.t.). The truth is that good deeds, good things and joyful events are from God and from His presence, Exalted; for He is the source of all good and mercy. As for evils, harms and bitter events, they are from God’s presence, but they are not from Him; they are from the human being himself, and their direct cause is the human being’s sins. Even so, these too are from God’s (s.w.t.) mercy when seen from the point of view of the design of the world and the whole order, so that the human being may be purified of every vice. In short, God’s grace, mercy and outpouring come from God (s.w.t.) directly and in the first place; while divine vengeance and wrath never come from God, Exalted, at the outset.
Attributing a bitter event to a person and saying that he is an ill omen and bad luck is nothing but superstition and a lie: “and if an evil befalls them, they say: This is from you.” But attributing the same event to the person harmed, because of his bad conduct, is correct, and the noble Qur’an supports it too: “and whatever evil befalls you is from yourself.” So there is no contradiction between the two sayings. But given that the first saying is false and the second is correct, the difference between them is that the first refers the matter to ill omen and bad luck, while the second points to justice being turned into injustice, which leads to being struck by evil, since there is a link between a human being’s deeds and events in creation.
After God (s.w.t.) answers the saying of the hypocrites, or the weak in faith, who attributed bitter events to the presence of the most noble Messenger (s.a.w.), He addresses His Messenger, saying: “And We have sent you to people as a Messenger.” Bitter events are from God’s presence, Exalted, and His noble Messenger (s.a.w.) has no part in them at all. And since a claim to messengership needs a decisive proof before people will accept it, He, Exalted, says in stating the proof: it is enough that God, Mighty and Majestic, is the witness that His message was sent down to you, so that you may call people to it.
4:80 — Whoever obeys the Apostle certainly obeys Allah
Whoever obeys the Apostle certainly obeys Allah; and as for those who turn their backs [on you]; We have not sent you to keep watch over them.
The previous noble verse pointed to God’s (s.w.t.) words to His Messenger (s.a.w.): “And We have sent you to people as a Messenger.” That verse counts as the minor premise of a logical syllogism of the first figure, and the verse under discussion, “Whoever obeys the Messenger has obeyed God”, is the major premise. The conclusion of this syllogism is that obeying the noble Messenger (s.a.w.) means obeying God, Exalted.
Had it been said, “And whoever obeys you has obeyed Me”, the intended meaning would have been understood. But the verse contains a subtle meaning: a pointer to the message. That is, the duty to obey the Messenger is because of his message, not his person. It also contains a general meaning: the message is not confined to you, O Messenger, but includes all the messengers. Likewise the use of the explicit name, “God”, contains both a giving of reasons and a specifying. The giving of reasons lies in the necessity of following the Messenger whom God (s.w.t.) sent, as the Lord who has no partner.
So obeying God and obeying His Messenger go together. The Prophet’s (s.a.w.) conveying is the conveying of God’s command, and is not separate from His (s.w.t.) command. The result of obeying the commands of the Messenger (s.a.w.) is nothing other than obeying God, Mighty and Majestic; it is not a separate obedience. As for attributing some legislative rulings to other than God, Exalted, it means that God’s legislative will, Mighty and Majestic, appears in the will of the perfect, infallible human being. This is not associating partners in Lordship (rubūbiyyah), and it does not conflict with tawḥīd.
Thus all the commands and prohibitions of the greatest Prophet (s.a.w.) are the commands and prohibitions of God, Exalted, and so they must be obeyed. A human being is not obedient to God (s.w.t.) unless he obeys the Prophet (s.a.w.) without condition. This covers what concerns the commands of the message and the religious law, which consist in conveying God’s (s.w.t.) commands, so that agreeing or disagreeing with them means agreeing with or opposing God’s ruling; and also what is specific to commands to do with guardianship (wilāyah), that is, leadership and imāmah, such as appointing commanders and the like. According to the teaching of “nearness through supererogatory acts” (qurb al-nawāfil), the distinction between the most noble Messenger’s (s.a.w.) command as messenger and his command as guardian disappears, for in both cases God, Exalted, speaks fully through the state of the Prophet (s.a.w.).
The verse under discussion also points to the infallibility of the greatest Messenger (s.a.w.) in all his commands and prohibitions, in action, word and tacit approval. For it states in clear terms the extent of his unconditional obedience as being unconditional obedience to God; and this unconditional obedience must cover action, word and tacit approval.
The noble Messenger (s.a.w.) must also convey to people what he receives of divine revelation. The responsibility of guarding the lives of those who oppose the revelation does not fall on him, nor does he have any role in issuing the command to fight them, punish them or pardon them; for making such a decision belongs to God (s.w.t.) alone: “and whoever turns away, We have not sent you as a keeper over them.” The task of the Prophet (s.a.w.) is limited to conveying the clear divine revelation. For he (s.a.w.) is God’s servant and one of His creatures, and plays no role in making the decisions that belong to God, Exalted, nor in the destinies of people. Nor is he independent in the matter of existence and outpouring, and he has no effect from his own self. Divine kindness has embraced him from every side, granted him the station of intercession, and called people to seek a means through him (tawassul); and at the same time God (s.w.t.) made that seeking of a means effective.
It should be pointed out that the verses on fighting do not abrogate this verse. His words, Exalted, “and whoever turns away, We have not sent you as a keeper over them”, point to the duty of the greatest Messenger (s.a.w.) at a particular stage; just as His other commands to His Messenger (s.a.w.) point to particular stages and particular duties as well, and do not abrogate the earlier commands.
4:81 — They profess obedience [to you]
They profess obedience [to you], but when they go out from your presence, a group of them conspire overnight [to do] something other than what you say. But Allah records what they conspire overnight. So disregard them and put your trust in Allah, for Allah suffices as trustee.
This verse and the few after it contain blame and reproach for those who were dismayed when the ruling of striving was issued, as we saw in the previous verses. These people, Muslims in outward appearance, would show obedience to the greatest Messenger (s.a.w.) when he issued a command, and display their submission to him as usual. But when they left his presence, they met with their devils and plotted by night against the Prophet (s.a.w.) something other than what they had shown before him, and set about weaving conspiracies against Islam and the Muslims.
But God (s.w.t.) declares to all that He knows what these people plot by night and is aware of their schemes, and He writes them down against them (“and God writes down what they plot by night”), so that He may call them to account and punish them for it at the proper time.
After describing the conduct of this misguided, hypocritical group and exposing it publicly, God (s.w.t.) commands His noble Prophet (s.a.w.) to put his trust in Him and to turn away from them. The human being by nature is not expert in his complicated affairs, and he is also unable to resolve those matters on his own; so he should rely on a source that is all-aware and all-powerful, and God, Exalted, is the best One to rely on. If the servant puts his trust in his Lord and entrusts all his affairs to Him, God (s.w.t.) will bring to nothing all the conspiracies of the hypocrites. For He knows all the plans they have laid and every detail of them, and He alone is able to bring all those plans to nothing and expose them whenever He wills.
There is no doubt that combining a turning away mixed with deliberate overlooking (not heedlessness) of the conduct and actions of the conspirators on the one hand, with trust in God (s.w.t.) on the other, is a combining of disavowal and allegiance (al-barāʾah wa al-wilāyah); and such a combination represents pure trust in God.
4:82 — Do they not contemplate the Quran
Do they not contemplate the Quran? Had it been from [someone] other than Allah, they would have surely found much discrepancy in it.
This verse branches off from the previous verse. Alongside encouraging reflection on the noble Qur’an, drawing the final conclusion, rebuking the hypocrites and the weak in faith, and expressing astonishment at their insistence on unbelief and hypocrisy despite the abundance of the means of thought and reflection, it contains an implicit reproach for those who have locked the doors of their hearts, deprived themselves of reflecting on the noble Qur’an, and still doubt that it was sent down from God (s.w.t.).
Given the meaning of reflection (tadabbur) and its aim, which is to consider the verses of the noble Qur’an one after another and to examine closely the meaning of a verse in the light of all the verses, the noble verse is saying: “Why do these people not reflect on the verses of the noble Qur’an (not merely one verse or a few verses) so as to understand that there is no discrepancy in them at all? The harmony between the verses and the absence of any discrepancy in them are two proofs that the noble Qur’an is the speech of God (s.w.t.).” The harmony or discrepancy in the whole of the verses of the noble Qur’an cannot be known merely by considering one verse or a number of verses. To be sure that there is no discrepancy in the verses of the Qur’an, there is no escape from sifting its verses one after another, considering the teachings of the noble Qur’an as a whole, and searching and delving into its accounts and reports. But if the aim is to reflect on the content of one particular verse, and not to look into the harmony between all the verses, then considering that verse within its own bounds is enough for this purpose.
God (s.w.t.) set out the proof that the noble Qur’an is the speech of the glorious God in the form of an exceptive syllogism, in His words: “Had it been from other than God” (the antecedent) “they would have found in it much discrepancy” (the consequent). But since the consequent is false, as there is no discrepancy in the noble Qur’an, the antecedent is false too; that is, the Qur’an is not from other than God, but from God.
Had the noble Qur’an not been the speech of God, it would have contained much discrepancy, and some of its verses would not have been in harmony with others; for human beings are not protected from ignorance, error and forgetting. Yet no ignorance, error, forgetting, change or the like is found in any of the verses of the noble Qur’an. There is nothing in it that ever needs perfecting. Nor can distortion and falsehood find a way to it, so that it would need correcting and checking. For this reason there is also no way for abrogation, cancelling, completing or refining in the noble Qur’an; because the whole of it was sent down from God, Exalted, who is the First and the Last, the Manifest and the Hidden, the All-Knowing and the All-Wise, whom neither ignorance nor forgetting overtakes. For this reason the undistorted books of the prophets (a.s.) are in harmony, like five chapters of the noble Qur’an or five verses of one chapter in it. That is, there is no inner discrepancy in any of those books, nor inconsistency between the subjects they contain. Nor is there any outer discrepancy in them, meaning that the subjects of any heavenly book are in harmony with the subjects of another heavenly book, and indeed with all the heavenly books, in their general lines and founding principles in theoretical and practical wisdom. For there was no discrepancy among the prophets (a.s.) themselves, because they drink from the eternal will and knowledge of God, Mighty and Majestic. So every contradiction, inconsistency and discrepancy we see in the earlier heavenly books is only because of their distortion and alteration.
As for the description “much”, it carries no implied meaning that would establish some discrepancy, even if little. It is rather an explanatory qualifier: the norm in speech other than God’s (s.w.t.) is that it contains much discrepancy, while the speech of God, Exalted, has no discrepancy in it at all.
It is worth mentioning that, although there is no rational proof establishing that a certain author who wrote a book over many long years must have had all its contents out of harmony, this is usually impossible in the ordinary course of things. But the miracle breaks this ordinary course, and the pivot of the proof in the matter of the miracle is ordinary impossibility, not rational impossibility such as the plurality of gods. So a book whose verses were sent down over twenty-three years, in many and different circumstances of hardship and ease, war and peace, poverty and wealth, travel and staying at home, victory and defeat, joy and sorrow and the like; whose subject was the eternal past and the everlasting future, the visible realm (al-mulk) and the unseen realm (al-malakūt), what is known by experience and what is known abstractly, the unseen and the witnessed, wrath and mercy, beauty and majesty, wisdom, good counsel and disputing in the best way, story and proof; whose verses were harmonious, consistent and firm, with no verse in it opposing its sister; and the whole of which was protected from error, forgetting, contradiction and ignorance: there is no doubt that such a book counts as a true miracle and a crushing proof.
In short, producing a book like the noble Qur’an is impossible for ordinary human beings; so it was sent down from God, Exalted, alone. For this reason it is a miracle, and the miracle is a decisive proof that must be acted upon.
We draw from the verse under discussion:
a) The noble Qur’an can be understood even by ordinary minds. For this reason the noble Qur’an called all people to reflect on it, each according to his understanding and reasoning; and this is what the noble Qur’an and the pure Household (a.s.) stress.
b) The verses of the Qur’an explain one another. It is clear from the apparent sense of each verse that reflecting on the whole of the verses of the Qur’an removes any imagined discrepancy. And since its verses are connected to one another in subject, merely denying discrepancy, on the assumption of a divided unity, requires establishing agreement; that is, explaining each verse on the basis of another verse. This is what we call explaining the Qur’an by the Qur’an.
c) The possibility of distortion and omission is entirely rejected. For if there were such distortion, and a single word were missing from the noble Qur’an, it would not be possible for everyone to search through all the verses and discover that there is no discrepancy between them.
4:83 — When a report of safety or alarm comes to them
When a report of safety or alarm comes to them, they immediately broadcast it; but had they referred it to the Apostle or to those vested with authority among them, those of them who investigate would have ascertained it. And were it not for Allah’s grace upon you and His mercy, you would have surely followed Satan, [all] except a few.
Among the dangerous schemes the enemies of Islam used in the early days of the religion was kindling psychological warfare. The hypocrites would receive the bad news from the battlefronts through their spies and spread it in Medina by way of the Muslims who were weak in faith, seeking to create worry and fear in the hearts of the fighters’ families and of those concerned with the affairs of war behind the front. On the other side, they spread false rumours and lies among the strivers on the battlefield, telling them of the worry of their families and relatives in Medina, so as to sow panic and unrest in the hearts of the fighters.
This noble verse offers the Muslims the best solution to this problem and the way to guard against this mischief. It does so by blaming and rebuking the hypocrites and the weak in faith for spreading the false news of the faithless and the hypocrites without thinking of the results those rumours and reports could bring about, among them weakening the Muslims and strengthening the camp of unbelief and hypocrisy. It urges the Muslims to keep the secrets of war and not to hurry to spread them, but to convey the reports, reassuring or worrying, news of victory or defeat, first to the people of deduction (istinbāṭ), the religious leaders and those in charge in the Islamic order, before anyone else. Then they can analyse those reports and situations with knowledge and understanding, and prevent whatever would weaken the morale of the fighters. For the experts in the religious order know best what is in the interest of Islamic government, just like the expert in geology who digs wells and channels and draws sweet water from the depths of untouched land. If political and military news is conveyed directly to the leader of the Muslims, he is able to deduce the facts by virtue of his religious thought, and then to make the final decision and acquaint the Muslims with their duties and responsibilities.
In short, those vested with authority (ulū al-amr) alone are able to deduce. The truthful and trustworthy believer does not hurry to spread everything he hears, whether good or bad, nor does he rush to broadcast news when he does not know how true or false it is. Rather, he refers it to those vested with authority so that they may assess it and decide about it. This referring also requires obeying everything those vested with authority say after investigation and sifting; for sometimes the good lies in spreading such news, and at other times in the necessity of concealing it. Following the commands and counsel of the holder of authority (walī al-amr) depends on leaving the decision to him as well; and decision-making is a branch of accurate reports of events on the battlefronts.
As for who is meant by “those vested with authority” in the verse: the verse turns on clarification and enlightenment about outside matters and secondary, passing events. And the wise expert, the holder of authority, who is the pivot of decision-making and of offering fitting solutions to daily events, must be present among the Muslims, so that they can learn their duty after giving him the necessary reports and referring matters to him. For all these reasons, in the age of the Infallibles (a.s.) they are the first and last authority in all those matters, and they are the decisive and clear instance (not the restricted instance) of the phrase “those vested with authority” in the verse. But in the age of the Occultation, the one responsible for this is the just deputy, the technical expert and the capable administrator: that is, the jurist who meets all the conditions (al-faqīh al-jāmiʿ li al-sharāʾiṭ), who is at the heart of government and is able to analyse news of the battle and the enemy’s moves, make political and social decisions, and issue the fitting military orders to confront the enemy and defend the domain of the religion and the good name, lives and property of the Muslims. And this is by the command of the infallible Imams (a.s.) themselves.
Besides all this, hasty measures must be avoided, and one must act according to the counsel of the experts and people of sound opinion. For acting in ignorance, keeping away from close examination and analysis, treating the imitator as a scholar, and setting aside the true scholar, is in itself following the footsteps of Satan: “And were it not for God’s grace upon you and His mercy, you would have followed Satan, except a few.”
After lifting the veil from psychological warfare and offering the fitting solution to face this difficult problem, as an example of divine help and of making the truth known through the noble Qur’an, He (s.w.t.) says: “And were it not for God’s grace upon you and His mercy, you would have followed Satan, except a few.” As is known, this ruling excepts no one. For were it not for God’s grace, care and guidance, no one would have escaped Satan’s snares, not even the sincere, and all of them would have followed him. All the perfections of existence are from God’s grace and mercy, which may take the form of a transmitted proof or a rational one: the first through the sending down of revelation and the sending of the messengers, and the second through God’s (s.w.t.) inspiration to the human soul and its inner self: “By the soul and Him who proportioned it, then inspired it with its wickedness and its Godwariness.” Even so, what is certain is that the exception “except a few” belongs to this last sentence; but what is meant is special guidance, not the general divine guidance that includes everyone and has no exception. So the meaning of the last sentence is: had God (s.w.t.) not lifted the veil from the mischief of the hypocrites, and not commanded that political and military reports and news be referred to “those vested with authority”, many people would have lost their way, and the rumours would have taken a great hold on them, except for the sincere and steadfast faithful.
4:84 — So fight in the way of Allah
So fight in the way of Allah: you are responsible only for yourself, but urge on the faithful [to fight]. Maybe Allah will curb the might of the faithless, for Allah is greatest in might and severest in punishment.
Many of the Muslims had suffered harm and shocks at the battle of Uḥud, and some of them were afraid to take part in (the lesser Badr). So it seemed most likely that the greatest Messenger (s.a.w.) would be left alone. The previous verses exposed the schemes of the hypocrites and the conduct of the weak among the Muslims, and blamed those who hold back from striving. In this verse God (s.w.t.) commands His Messenger (s.a.w.), who, unlike ordinary people, was charged with striving and resistance despite the great number of the polytheists, saying: “Even if people leave you alone and do not fight alongside you, you, O Messenger, should not hold back from striving. Rather, you must strive, even if by yourself alone. Even so, call the faithful to strive and spur them on to fight; for each of them is responsible, and the disobedience of others will not harm you if you do your duty and the Muslims come to the field of battle. Put your trust in God, for He will help you, give you victory over the faithless and destroy them at your hands. God (s.w.t.) has power over all things, and He will punish the faithless and make them a lesson for people, so that they turn back from their ugly deeds and refrain from them.”
The use of the incomplete past-tense verb “may” (ʿasā), one of the verbs of hope, with the name of God relates to the level of His action, Exalted (not His essence), and is tied to the contingent appearances of existence. It points to the state of the one addressed, because the deficiency lies in him, not in the divine outpouring. For God (s.w.t.) is free of all ignorance and incapacity. He knows who will do his duty and who will fall short in it, and He is able to hold back the evil and harm of the faithless from the Muslims, however widespread their evil may be, and He will punish them with the severest punishment.
It is worth mentioning that God’s (Mighty and Majestic) concern with the matter of striving in every circumstance and condition, whether a helper is found or not, whether the means are available or not, and whether outward victory is achieved or not, can all be drawn from the repetition of the name of God three times in this one verse, despite its relative shortness.
It is well known that imposing a duty beyond what can be borne is rationally impossible and forbidden by revealed texts. But spurring the faithful on to what is within their ability, and their carrying out that command, is among the acts of ordinary human beings in this world; and God (s.w.t.) has made striving obligatory on the faithful so that they secure their everlasting happiness by it. And since the greatest Messenger (s.a.w.) was more capable of action than anyone else, his (s.a.w.) duty was likewise greater and weightier than the duties of others; but that duty was not beyond his capacity.
4:85 — Whoever intercedes for a good cause shall receive a share of it
Whoever intercedes for a good cause shall receive a share of it, and whoever intercedes for an evil cause shall share its burden, and Allah is prepotent over all things.
The previous verses exposed the conduct and actions of the hypocrites and showed the shortcomings of the weak in faith in the matter of striving; and the previous verse gave the reason for spurring the faithful on and encouraging them to strive (“and spur on the faithful”). After this, the present verse contains a general ruling: whoever intercedes for people with a good intercession, whether ordinary and material, or not ordinary and spiritual, such as a prayer for example, and by it guides others and sows in them the seed of good action, will have an undiminished share of the good deeds the doer of good performs, because he set out to do good with a noble aim and a pure intention. On the other hand, whoever walks the path of falsehood and intercedes for an evil deed, or helps with it or mediates for it, will receive the evil of that deed as he deserves, without any reduction, because of his evil aim and intention; and so too the doer of evil, and each has his punishment. The same holds for a government or a people: whoever intercedes in good deeds and urges one another to the truth and to patience will reach the ideal civilisation and continuing progress; while whoever falls into the swamp of vice, is stained with sin and cooperates in aggression will end in decline, ignorance (jāhiliyyah) and downfall.
God (s.w.t.) is the One who provides the sustenance of body and soul (“and God has power over all things”, muqīt). He grants strength and ability to all and preserves them, just as He preserves their deeds. So why do some exert themselves and rush to intercede for falsehood without right?
“And God has [ever] been...” points to the continuance of this blessed name and its permanence for all. That is, it carries universality and permanence, so as to be a hope for those who intercede for good and a threat to those who intercede for evil.
4:86 — When you are greeted with a salute
When you are greeted with a salute, greet with a better one than it, or return it; indeed Allah takes account of all things.
The previous verse commanded good intercession and forbade evil intercession. In this verse a person is taught another factor in the ties and relations between people, namely the manners of greeting, in addition to the manners of answering intercessions. But this verse is not limited to the subject of greeting and salām. It sets out one of the comprehensive social manners, whose meaning is the necessity of mutual respect at every level; on that basis every respect should be met with the like of it or with better. The command in this verse points to obligation. Naturally its unrestricted wording covers greetings of every kind. But on the basis of reliable narrations, answering the salām in particular is obligatory; as for other kinds of greeting, they must be answered if not answering would cause harm, in order to avoid mischief.
From the imperative form in the verse we learn that answering a greeting is in principle a specific obligation; from the fāʾ of consequence, that it is immediate; and from the particle “or”, that it is an obligation with a choice between the better and the like.
Some ḥadīths take the choice in the verse to apply to Muslims and non-Muslims: that answering with better relates to Muslims and answering with the like relates to non-Muslims. For Islam’s deep and genuine outlook, as the religion that calls to human unity, requires that the salām of a non-Muslim also be answered with the like. As for the prohibition in other ḥadīths of greeting non-Muslims with salām, what is meant is to warn the Muslims against taking them as friends and allies, because inclining toward the unjust is forbidden. So greeting a non-Muslim with salām is forbidden if it carries the colour of taking the faithless as allies; but if it is to draw people through propagation and bring hearts together, there is no harm in it.
Perhaps the reason for the difference between answering a greeting with better or with the like is the difference between those who greet. The greeting (taḥiyyah), which contains asking God for life for the one addressed, is more general than salām. But salām is higher than taḥiyyah, because the one who gives salām asks God, by his salām, to keep safe the person or group he greets, alongside asking for life for them. Whether or not the salām contains other good words, it is a kind of honouring, reverence and raising of rank; just as the salām upon His messengers and prophets contains the best greetings and divine kindness.
God (s.w.t.) takes account of all things: “Surely God takes account of all things.” So whatever form of salām a person gives or answers is not hidden from God, Exalted; and however a human being answers the greeting and salām of others, God (Mighty and Majestic) will write for him the like of it or better.
On the basis of “Is the reward of goodness anything but goodness?”, one who answers the goodness of another with its like is as though he had not done him good; for the first goodness has a great effect, and for the returned goodness to be true, the reward must be greater than the original.
4:87 — Allah—there is no god except Him—will surely gather you on the Day of Resurrection
Allah—there is no god except Him—will surely gather you on the Day of Resurrection, in which there is no doubt; and who is more truthful in speech than Allah?
It seems that mentioning the attribute “the One who takes account” (al-ḥasīb) in the previous verse serves as a preparation for this verse, which in turn gives the reason for the content of the two previous verses. It explains: O people! Carry out the divine duty concerning good and evil intercession and the matter of greeting, because ahead of you is a day in which there is no doubt, when you will be gathered and God will call you to account for your deeds.
This verse points to the Origin and the Return as its main subject, and to prophethood and messengership as an implied subject. He, Exalted, says: “There is no doubt that God, who has no partner, will gather people to the Day of Resurrection, and will call them to account for their thoughts, character and deeds according to His law, which He conveyed to all people through revelation and on the tongues of His prophets and messengers.”
There is no doubt that faith in the Lord who sent down His laws to the human being, and who will one day call him to account by them, is the cause of the human being’s growth toward perfection and his rise in knowledge, character and righteous deeds. This noble verse is not content to show that the Return is possible, or merely to report it. It stresses its truth and certainty through the lām of oath and the heavy nūn of emphasis, and in a form that rules out all doubt, so that this may cause everyone to awaken and know it.
As for the Return, it can be established by rational proof, apart from some of its features, which count as matters of detail beyond the grasp of the human intellect. It can also be established by transmitted proof: that is, after establishing the existence of God (s.w.t.), revelation, prophethood and the sending down of the Qur’an from God, Exalted, one can say: God (Mighty and Majestic) has told of the Return, and whatever God (s.w.t.) tells of will certainly come to pass; so the Return will certainly come to pass. Certainty about the truth of this report comes from the fact that lying is a fault and a defect, while God, Exalted, is infinite perfection, and lying coming from Him (God forbid) is impossible and utterly ruled out. So God (Mighty and Majestic) is knowing and truthful: “And who is more truthful than God in speech?” Besides, the aim of lying in general is either to gain a benefit or to ward off a harm, and God (s.w.t.) is free of that, just as He is free of error and forgetting. The result of such a truthful informant is complete truth.
The meaning of His words, Exalted, “And who is more truthful than God in speech?”, is that no one is more truthful than God (s.w.t.). And on the basis of the denial of likeness (“There is nothing like Him”), the meaning is: “No one is truthful like God.” So God (Mighty and Majestic) is the most truthful of all who speak, without qualification.
4:88 — Why should you be two groups concerning the hypocrites
Why should you be two groups concerning the hypocrites, while Allah has made them relapse [into unfaith] because of their deeds? Do you desire to guide someone Allah has led astray? Whomever Allah leads astray, you will never find any way for him.
The noble Qur’an forbade the Muslims to differ about the hypocrites. Then it set out the ruling on this by openly declaring the unbelief of that group and its distance from guidance, saying: “God has thrown the hypocrites back, returned them to the ruling of unbelief and forsaken them because of their evil beliefs and thoughts and their ugly deeds. These people do not believe in their hearts; rather, they always want to return to misguidance, polytheism and unbelief (‘and God has thrown them back for what they earned’). Know, O Muslims, that there is no way to purify these people, guide them and rescue them from where they are. Are you more merciful than God (s.w.t.), that you want to guide the hypocrites whom God has led astray?” “Do you want to guide one whom God has led astray?” This is a rhetorical question of denial, and the meaning of “Do you want” in this negative proposition is: you are not able to!
What is meant by God’s leading astray is something negative, the cutting off of the outpouring of guidance, not pushing a person into the abyss of misguidance. That is, a person who deliberately lets slip all the opportunities open to him and shuts all the doors of divine mercy in his own face, God, Exalted, will leave to himself, to stumble about in the depths of darkness as a punishment, and will deprive him of His outpouring, help and kindness. Such a person does not walk the path of truth so that guides might direct and help him. So he has no way and no guide to stand beside him: “and whoever God leads astray, you will never find a way for him.” Accordingly, the meaning of divine leading astray is the cutting off of the special outpouring and the withholding of kindness, not driving them into misguidance.
Thus the only way is the straight path, and the only guide to it is God (s.w.t.). There is no way for one who has chosen the path of misguidance by his own will except repentance and turning back. Then God (Mighty and Majestic) will deal with him according to His words, Exalted, “and if you return, We will return” and “if you return, We will return”, and will include him in the outpouring of His guidance.
As for the shift in the noble verse from the general address (“What is the matter with you... Do you want to guide”) to the particular, singular address (“...you will never find...”), turning the speech with both groups toward the most noble Prophet (s.a.w.), it is because of the importance of the last point.
4:89 — They are eager that you should disbelieve like they have disbelieved
They are eager that you should disbelieve like they have disbelieved, so that you all become alike. So do not make friends [with anyone] from among them, until they migrate in the way of Allah. But if they turn their backs, seize them and kill them wherever you find them, and do not take from among them friends or helpers,
The previous noble verse contained a command to the faithful not to busy themselves with guiding a particular group of the hypocrites, because they will not be guided, and they long for the faithful to return to unbelief.
Here God (s.w.t.) exposes the propaganda schemes of the hypocrites, aimed at spreading unbelief and luring the Muslims to apostasy and a return to their former belief and way of life. He forbids the Muslims to take the hypocrites as allies (wilāyah) or to form any tie of friendship with them, or with any person or group that seeks to wipe out Islam and spread unbelief. And He tells the Muslims that these hypocrites are bound to the polytheists and the faithless by close political ties, and that all of them walk the same path so as to force you to turn back from your religion: so do not take them as allies, never think well of them, and do not make any agreement or treaty of friendship with them until they emigrate with you. Let your relationship with them depend on the greater emigration (faith, repentance, and leaving behind unbelief, hypocrisy and sins) and the lesser emigration (leaving the abode of unbelief and polytheism for the land of Islam). If they do not make the greater emigration after the verses have been recited to them and the Book of God and wisdom explained, then their blood is lawful; kill them wherever you find them, even if they are inside the Meccan sanctuary, because they did not respect its sanctity but practised unbelief and aggression in it.
What this noble verse and the related narrations convey does not stop at refuting any preference for hypocrisy and unbelief, nor do they accept equality between unbelief and faith. Rather, they command the comprehensive superiority of Islam over unbelief and hypocrisy.
4:90 — excepting those who join a people between whom and you there is a treaty
excepting those who join a people between whom and you there is a treaty, or such as come to you with hearts reluctant to fight you, or to fight their own people. Had Allah wished, He would have imposed them upon you, and then they would have surely fought you. So if they keep out of your way and do not fight you, and offer you peace, then Allah does not allow you any course [of action] against them.
Islam is a world religion of peace. It has drawn for us the broad lines of internal and foreign policy within a comprehensive outlook. The foundation of this religion is peace and its basis is peaceful coexistence; and the reality of initiated striving (al-jihād al-ibtidāʾī) lies in defending the rights of the deprived and the oppressed everywhere. God (s.w.t.) loves living together in peace, doing good, and acting justly with the peaceable faithless who seek peace and security: “God does not forbid you from those who have not fought you over religion nor driven you out of your homes, that you be kind to them and act justly toward them; surely God loves the just.” So if the Muslims want to live in peace, they have no choice but to follow the principles of living that the noble Qur’an has set down and that the human being who keeps international treaties has recognised.
The verse points to the importance of mutual covenants in the outlook of the noble Qur’an. It excepts two groups of the hypocrites from the ruling of fighting and grants them security, in addition to the hypocrites who emigrated and repented sincerely:
The warring faithless and hypocrites, if they take refuge with those Muslims who are bound by treaty with them, and repent sincerely; that is, they commit themselves to the general and human laws, principles and conventions, and choose the path of peaceful coexistence. But if after that they begin to provoke the Islamic order, conspire and work sabotage against it, they are hypocrites under the law of refuge as well, and their lives and property then have no sanctity. So the mere flight of a hypocrite and his taking refuge with people bound by treaty to the Islamic government does not mean he is granted security; rather, a political relationship and a treaty of refuge and peaceful coexistence must be set up with them.
The faithless and hypocrites whose breasts are constricted and tight, who were reluctant to fight the Muslims for fear of being defeated, and reluctant to fight their own people for the Muslims’ sake. If these are sincere in their intention, seeking peace and wishing to make a covenant with the Muslims and to stop fighting them or attacking them, and they commit themselves to international laws and to sincere repentance, then the Muslims should accept this from them.
It should be pointed out that after the revelation of the chapter of Barāʾah and the ruling to fight all the polytheists, the first group, the warring people who took refuge with some of the Muslims bound by treaty, kept their protection, because Islam always stresses keeping covenants and pledges, even with the polytheists. As for the second group, the neutral ones who are at war neither with the Muslims nor with their enemies, they must be fought according to the principle of initiated striving.
After excepting these two groups, the noble Qur’an warns extremist Muslims against attacking the peaceable faithless and hypocrites, driven by their own conceit, and commands that they be left alone as long as they have chosen the path of peace. Had God (s.w.t.) willed, He would have given them power over the Muslims and they would have fought them; but they held back their hands from the Muslims, and this is the will of God, whose creational will encompasses everything in the realm of possibility. Everything that comes into view happens according to that will, whether human or not human. He is the One who does what He wills within the human sphere, through the human being’s principles of choice, even when those acts are tied to human beings.
Since God has held back the hands of the enemies, the Muslims should not attack them. If a faithless person lives with the Muslims in peace and calm, a Muslim has no right to attack him: “God has not given you a way against them.” Just as it is not permitted for the faithless to have power over the believer, nor to rule them or command them (“and God will never give the faithless a way over the faithful”), so too it is not permitted for the Muslims to have power over the faithless, except in particular cases.
4:91 — You will find others desiring to be secure from you
You will find others desiring to be secure from you, and secure from their own people; yet whenever they are called back to polytheism, they relapse into it. So if they do not keep out of your way, nor offer you peace, nor keep their hands off [from fighting], then seize them and kill them wherever you confront them, and it is such against whom We have given you a clear sanction.
Hypocrisy is darkness, and darknesses are many; so hypocrisy has many aspects and various kinds, and the hypocrites are of different types. The noble verse speaks of another group of hypocrites who outwardly resemble the hypocrites just mentioned, that is, those who make a show of neutrality, a wish for peace, a love of reconciliation and peaceful coexistence. But the truth is quite different. These are not like those. They are hypocrites in their claim and harbour mischief within. They wait for the right chance to strike a blow at Islam and the Muslims; and because their method differs from that of the others, their ruling differs from the ruling of those before them.
These people raise the slogan of peace falsely and slanderously, to show off to people, and claim that their aim is to secure safety and peace for the Muslims and for their own people. But they plot mischief by night in secret. They are in fact professional hypocrites and opportunists who lie in wait for chances, cry out with every crier and take on every colour. You see them sometimes leaning outwardly toward faith and at other times toward unbelief and polytheism; so their words cannot be trusted. They put on the masks of reconciliation whenever they are afflicted with weakness and incapacity, and they claim faith whenever they meet their people. But when their strength grows and their power increases, they rush to mischief, unbelief and polytheism whenever they are called to it, and plunge deep into conspiracies and intrigues.
By changing the form of the context from the positive (“if they withdraw from you”) in the previous verse to the negative (“if they do not withdraw from you... and do not hold back their hands”) in this verse, the noble Qur’an presses the Muslims to be cautious and alert to the danger of this group, and to keep all its actions and conduct under close watch.
Among the duties that fall on the Muslims in general, and on those in charge in the Islamic order in particular, are sound reasoning, prudence and caution in dealing with friend and enemy, and assessing the likely harms and hardships that may befall the order. The one, united and harmonious Islamic community should strive to possess the necessary strength and power, and to be marked by steadfastness and resolve, so that its enemies do not dare to strike at it and strangers and foreigners do not covet its goods.
What is meant by “authority” (sulṭān) in the verse is the legal proof, which can be uncovered by reason and reliable transmitted evidence; and striving is only by it. Likewise the limits of striving itself are set by the measure of the proof and the necessity.
4:92 — A believer may not kill another believer
A believer may not kill another believer, unless it is by mistake. Anyone who kills a believer by mistake should set free a believing slave, and pay blood-money to his family, unless they remit it in charity. If he belongs to a people that are hostile to you but is a believer, then a believing slave is to be set free. And if he belongs to a people with whom you have a treaty, the blood-money is to be paid to his family and a believing slave is to be set free. He who cannot afford [to pay the blood-money], must fast two successive months as a penance from Allah, and Allah is all-knowing, all-wise.
A believer never stains his hand with the blood of his brother in religion. Indeed, it is not fitting for a believer even to think of killing his Muslim brother, just as there is no motive at all that would call him to do so. But a Muslim may be killed by a human error. His words, Exalted, “It is not for a believer to kill a believer except by mistake”, do not mean that killing by mistake is permitted. They mean that a believer never does anything that might lead to the killing of another believer, except by mistake and without intent. An example of killing by mistake is what happens in a clash between the Muslims and the polytheists, when a believer who had not emigrated and was present in the ranks of the polytheists is killed at the hands of the Muslims, his killer thinking he was one of the polytheists. This is an example of killing by mistake, even though the killer’s intention was deliberate killing. An act done purely by mistake is not counted as forbidden, but both expiation and blood money (diyah) are due from the killer.
Blood money is the right of the heirs of the slain believer (that is, a right of people). Its ruling differs according to the heirs’ relationship with the Islamic government and the Muslims: either the heirs of the slain believer live among the Muslims and share their life; or they are at war with the Islamic government; or there is a treaty of non-aggression between them and the Islamic government. The reason the indefinite form is used for blood money is that its ruling and amount differ according to which of the three cases applies. It falls away if the slain person was in the ranks of polytheists who have no treaty with the Muslims, while the expiation remains, because it is God’s right, Exalted. The expiation does not fall away in any of the three cases, and it is the same in each: freeing a believing male or female slave (“freeing a neck”), whether adult or not. If freeing a slave is not possible, he must fast two consecutive months, thirty-one continuous days for each. The aim of legislating expiation is to open the door of return and turning back so as to set the mistake right. The killer himself must pay the expiation, and it makes no difference whether his act was quasi-deliberate or purely by mistake. As for blood money in killing by mistake, it is due from the ʿāqilah, that is, the killer’s relatives on his father’s side (a brother, a brother’s son, a paternal uncle, a paternal uncle’s son, and those in their position).
Thus in the first case the blood money must be paid to the next of kin: “and blood money handed over to his family”. If the heirs pardon, nothing is due from the killer (in quasi-deliberate killing) nor from the ʿāqilah (in pure mistake): “unless they remit it as charity”. But the expiation remains as it is and does not fall away.
It is worth mentioning that the exception for remitting as charity relates to the first case. There is no reason that would move the other two groups to give up the blood money; indeed the second group may have a desire for revenge, and the heirs in the third case usually demand that the financial terms and clauses of the treaty be applied and the blood money taken. Besides, charity (ṣadaqah) is an act of worship, that is, spending with the intention of drawing near to God, and the faithless person has no such intention. The heirs in the last two cases can give up their financial rights, but that does not count as charity.
The verse does not deal with blood money in the second case. Since it sets out the ruling for the other two cases, its silence about the second case points to the blood money falling away in that case entirely, whether the heirs of the slain believer are faithless or faithful; for if these received the blood money for their slain, it might be spent against the Muslims.
To explain this: killing a believer is enough cause for expiation to be obligatory, but blood money requires two conditions: 1) that the heirs be Muslims; 2) that there be a particular treaty between his heirs and the Muslims. Since neither condition holds in this case, blood money is not obligatory.
As for the third case, one must act according to the agreement and give the blood money to the heirs of the slain. Since they are not hostile to the Islamic government, they will spend it on their own interests and not against the Muslims. In this case it is ordinary blood money, handed to the heirs of the slain according to the reasonable terms of the treaty and covenant, and its amount is not like the well-known legal blood money. Nor is it inheritance; for if it were inheritance it would have fallen away in the second case too, as in the first and third cases. And being inheritance, it may not be given to a faithless person, whether at war or under protection (dhimmī); rather, it must be handed to the Imam of the Muslims. In the third case too it should not be given to the heirs of the slain, because they are faithless. The apparent sense of the verse points to the blood money falling away in the second case, and its being given to the heirs of the slain (his family) in the third case.
On the basis of the apparent sense of the verse and its context, the slain person in the third case is also a Muslim. This is supported by the legislation of expiation here, rather than this case being divided into two sub-cases: one in which the slain is a believer whose blood money is fixed in Islam, and another in which the slain is faithless, so that blood money is given according to the treaty or covenant.
The phrase “of a people” refers to the place of residence, not the family or tribal origin of the slain. So the slain person discussed in the verse is a believer who did not emigrate, lives with the enemies of Islam, and was killed because of a mistake in identifying him.
The ruling on blood money comes before expiation in the last phrase, “then blood money handed over to his family and the freeing of a believing neck”, for harmony in the literary arrangement, and to show the order of the expiation; because of His words after this, “and whoever does not find, then fasting two consecutive months”, which completes the ruling on expiation and does not cancel the blood money. Otherwise the reader might think the meaning of the verse is: whoever cannot pay the blood money, let him fast two consecutive months!
In the expiation for killing, in all three cases, the freed male or female slave must be a believer: “then freeing a believing neck... then freeing a believing neck... and freeing a believing neck”. God (s.w.t.) laid down these rulings by His knowledge and wisdom: “and God is All-Knowing, All-Wise.”
4:93 — Should anyone kill a believer intentionally
Should anyone kill a believer intentionally, his requital shall be hell, to remain in it [forever]; Allah shall be wrathful at him and curse him and He shall prepare for him a great punishment.
The previous verse set out the legal ruling for killing purely by mistake. This verse sets out the theological ruling for killing a Muslim deliberately (with intent), without mentioning its legal ruling. The verse shows that killing a believer is a great sin and one of the major sins.
Abiding in Hell, God’s wrath and curse, and the great punishment prepared for the killer are the theological punishment for killing a believer deliberately. This points to how severely Islam treats such an act, which counts among the greatest sins, on a par with polytheism, and is punished by abiding in Hell.
The unrestricted wording “And whoever kills...” covers the believer as well, though the most important example is one who is not a believer. For it is not for a believer to kill a believer deliberately; and one who kills a believer deliberately because he hates his faith is, most likely, not a believer. God (s.w.t.) has cursed the killer of a believer; and since God, Exalted, does not curse a believer, the killer of a believer meant here is one who is not a believer. That is, either he is faithless in belief, if the cause of the killing is hatred of the believer’s faith; or he is faithless in practice, when the cause of the killing is property and the like.
However that may be, if one who is not a believer kills a believer and does not repent, his punishment is abiding in the Fire and remaining in it forever. If the cause of the killing was a dispute over material matters, this killer will remain forever in the Fire, not because of that, but because of his earlier unbelief. As for the punishment of a killer who is a believer, who rarely commits such a hideous act, it is abiding in the Fire in the sense of remaining in it for a long time, not forever. The exception is if he deems lawful something whose prohibition is a necessary part of the religion, that is, he regards killing a believer as lawful because of his apostasy; or if he kills the believer deliberately because of the slain person’s faith. Outside these cases his remaining in Hell is not forever, and there is no sin of action whose punishment is abiding in the Fire in the sense of eternity.
In short, if the cause of killing a believer is his faith, this is evidence of denying a clear ruling of Islam (the prohibition of killing a believer), and so it points to the killer’s apostasy and unbelief; accordingly, abiding in his punishment means eternity, not remaining in the Fire for a long time. As for one who kills a believer over some financial matters or a dispute over rights, his abiding in the Fire means remaining in it for a long time. In the first case, when the cause of killing the believer is the killer’s unbelief, heresy, obstinacy and warring against Islam and the faithful, and the slain person’s faith is the reason the killer set out to kill him, the sentence “And whoever kills a believer...” is a case of tying a ruling to a description that suggests causation, and its meaning is: “And whoever kills a believer for his faith.” Here the death sentence is not lifted from the killer even if the heirs consent and pardon. Rather, from the legal point of view his blood remains forfeit, even though, from the theological point of view, the way is held to be open for the killer to repent, and his repentance between himself and God (s.w.t.) is accepted.
The sentence “then his recompense is Hell” is a statement in form but a command in content, namely a threat. So it may be joined with divine pardon or with repentance that saves from the great divine punishment, even though it is hard to imagine a killer of a believer being granted success in repenting.
The labels “wrath” and “curse” count among God’s (s.w.t.) names of action. The outward reality of Hell, which represents God’s concrete action, Exalted, can bring together these two labels and be the manifestation of God’s wrath and curse; so that the rulings set out in the sentence “then his recompense is Hell, abiding in it, and God is wrathful with him and has cursed him and prepared for him a great punishment” have one instance and one subject.
4:94 — O you who have faith! When you issue forth in the way of Allah
O you who have faith! When you issue forth in the way of Allah, try to ascertain: do not say to someone who offers you peace, ‘You are not a believer,’ seeking the transitory wares of the life of this world. Yet with Allah are plenteous gains. You too were such earlier, but Allah did you a favour. Therefore, do ascertain. Allah is indeed well aware of what you do.
The previous verses set out part of the rulings on killing and the severe punishment for killing a believer deliberately. This verse came down in the same context. It points to how greatly the holy Lawgiver honours the sanctity of a believer’s life, and to the need for caution and care in this matter. It also commands the strivers: when you go out to strive in the way of God and call the faithless to enter Islam (and your going out is not for trade, seizing spoils or gaining the passing goods of this world), and one of them declares his Islam and claims to be a Muslim, you should not kill him in order to seize his property. The goods of this world are a passing accident, while what is with God (s.w.t.) is an original and lasting substance that does not pass away. The blessings, graces and spoils that God has promised the faithful are lasting and everlasting; and so the human being is on a continuous journey until in the end he hastens to meet his Lord. God (s.w.t.) calls those who strive in His way to wait for what He has prepared for them: “you seek the passing goods of the life of this world, while with God are abundant spoils.”
The importance of investigating and sifting appears in the repetition of the command “then make sure” twice in the verse: you must investigate and sift the matter of the Muslim and the faithless before setting out to strive in the way of God. If you meet people on your way who greet you with salām and declare that they are Muslims, do not call them liars; rather, verify and make sure of their matter. But, taking account of the person’s outward state and hearing the two testimonies (shahādatayn) from him, you should acknowledge his Islam, so that you do not imagine wrongly and kill a Muslim thinking he is faithless. The Muslims must also accept the neutral faithless and hypocrites who wish to live with them in peace, and make treaties of non-aggression with them: “and offer you peace, then God has not given you a way against them.”
What is meant by “peace” (al-salam) in that verse and by “salām” in the verse under discussion is safety, which sometimes takes the form of peaceful coexistence and at other times means Islam.
The noble Qur’an reminds the Muslim strivers that their own life was also one of ignorance (jāhiliyyah) before, and that God (s.w.t.) favoured them and the whole Islamic community by sending His Messenger (s.a.w.) to them. He guided them and protected their lives and property merely on their saying the two testimonies, without anyone knowing their inner selves or whether they were truly faithful or not. So outwardly showing Islam is enough, since no one but God, Exalted, can know what is inside a person, just as no one has been commanded to do so.
In short, you too, O Muslims, were like this in the early days of Islam. So if anyone tells you that he is a Muslim, do not doubt his word, nor accuse him of declaring his faith only out of fear, and of your needing to verify and sift its truth.
God (s.w.t.) knows and is aware of your deeds. Know that He knows your excuses and every argument you put forward for killing one who declares his Islam out of greed for the goods of this world. God knows all of it before you show it: “Surely God is aware of what you do.”
4:95–96 — Not equal are those of the faithful who sit back—excepting those who suffer from some…
(95) Not equal are those of the faithful who sit back—excepting those who suffer from some disability—and those who wage jihad in the way of Allah with their possession and their persons. Allah has graced those who wage jihad with their possessions and their persons by a degree over those who sit back; yet to each Allah has promised the best reward, and Allah has graced those who wage jihad over those who sit back with a great reward: (96) ranks from Him, forgiveness, and mercy, and Allah is all-forgiving, all-merciful.
Continuing the subject of the previous verse, striving in the way of God, these two verses point to two groups of the faithful. 1) Those who strive in the way of God, who come forward to defend the domain of the true religion and hasten to the battlefronts to sacrifice their lives and property with great eagerness; the two verses set out their higher degrees. 2) Those who sit back without disability: Muslims who are not blind and have no illness or disabling defect, but are able to be present on the fields of battle and fight the enemies of Islam, yet do not do so for various reasons and excuses. The meaning of sitting back in the verse is running away from the battlefronts, not ordinary, natural sitting; just as standing means remaining firm on the field of battle, not outward, ordinary standing. Sitting back is sometimes set against going out of the city, not against rising up. As for using the term “striver” in the verse, rather than mentioning “the one who goes out” in contrast to “the one who sits back”, it is to show the holy Lawgiver’s concern with striving.
The verses assess the state of those who sit back without excuse and compare their standing with that of the strivers. They distinguish between the two groups, state that they are not at all equal, explain the rank of the strivers and their superiority over those who sit back. This is so that those who sit back do not think they are equal with the strivers, even if their presence behind the front is important. While making clear that the two groups are not equal, the aim of the noble verse in this comparison is to show the great difference between them and to spur those who sit back without excuse to strive.
The verse points to the superiority of the strivers over those who sit back after plainly denying their equality, in order to show that both sides are faithful and walking the path of truth; but one of them strives and sacrifices, and so has the highest degrees, while the other has preferred ease and withdrawal. So no one should attack the faithful who sit back and hold fast to Islam, and those who sit back should not lose the chance of advancing and growing and fall into despair. Those who deprived themselves of the great reward by not being present on the battlefronts, preferring comfort and an easy life, are in reality not sinners. For taking part in fighting was not an individual obligation; what the verse refers to is striving that is a collective obligation, not an individual one. Otherwise God would not have promised those who sit back the best reward too: “and to each God has promised the best.” It is well known that failing and holding back from an individual obligation is a major sin for which the one who does it deserves punishment.
As for the qualifier “in the way of God”, it shows the aim of striving at the beginning of the verse, and that there is no need to repeat it in the following phrases. The secret of mentioning property before lives (“with their property and their lives”) is that in the thick of action a person first gives up the property he has, and only after that comes the turn of the self.
The feminine tāʾ in “a degree” (darajah) is the tāʾ of genus, and its use fits with “degrees” (darajāt) in the next verse. It is not the tāʾ of oneness, which would raise a suspicion of contradiction with the tāʾ in the word “degrees”, the sign of plurality; so that someone might say, for example: how is the difference between the strivers and those who sit back one degree at first, and then becomes degrees?
The tanwīn on both “a degree” and “degrees” is for magnifying and exalting, and to show that the strivers who sacrifice their property and lives in the way of God are greater by a degree, and indeed by degrees, than the others.
“To each” (meaning each group) comes first to show that the reward is restricted to the root of faith; that is, both the striver and the one who sits back will certainly receive their reward for their faith and righteous deeds, and their difference in other respects does not harm the fulfilment of the reward they were promised.
God (s.w.t.) has promised all the faithful virtue and good; but there is no doubt that they are not equal in the degree of reward. The reward of an ordinary believer differs greatly from the reward of a believer who strives and is ready to defend in the way of God at every moment and hour. It is clear that the reward of this striver is greater and larger, and he has many degrees; and the degrees of the strivers themselves differ and vary, especially the degree of the striver who gives striving its full due.
Likewise God, Mighty and Majestic, has promised forgiveness and mercy to all who walk the path of truth, while He has embraced those who strive in His way with a special kindness and prepared for them an exceptional forgiveness and mercy, by mentioning two of His beautiful names: “Degrees from Him, and forgiveness and mercy; and God is All-Forgiving, All-Merciful.”
4:97 — Indeed, those whom the angels take away while they are wronging themselves
Indeed, those whom the angels take away while they are wronging themselves, they ask, ‘What state were you in?’ They reply, ‘We were oppressed in the land.’ They say, ‘Was not Allah’s earth vast enough so that you might migrate in it?’ The refuge of such shall be hell, and it is an evil destination.
The previous verses spoke of striving, and this verse takes up the subject of emigration (hijrah), because there is a close link between the two subjects. Indeed, emigration may be the preliminary to striving.
Death is not passing away (vanishing, annihilation) in the sense of a separation, a “nothingness”, between the one who moves and his destination. Its meaning is wafāh (taking in full). At death the angels take the human being in full by the command of the angel ʿAzrāʾīl (a.s.); that is, they seize his soul without decrease or increase. This establishes the intermediate realm (barzakh) too, besides the Return.
The human being sees the angels at the time of dying, of being taken in full, of the seizing of the soul and of the questioning in the grave, just as he sees them on the Day of Resurrection; and the questioning begins in the grave right after death.
The noble verse calls some of the people of Mecca, the faithless and the hypocrites, the weak in faith and the transgressors, who had no intention at all of emigrating and did not emigrate, “those who wronged themselves”. For although they were able to emigrate, they refused; so they are among those who sit back without excuse. Sitting back without excuse is an unforgivable sin, whether it concerns striving or emigration; and this can be understood from the sentence “In what state were you?” and the sentence “Those, their refuge is Hell, and evil is it as a destination.”
The effects of unbelief, hypocrisy and sins become manifest in the barzakh. The corrupt human being drowned in sins is disgraced as soon as he dies; with death the disgraces begin. It seems that the sentence “In what state were you?” points to the exposure of the sinner’s inner self and the making public of his deeds and his injustice. The question in this sentence is a question of affirmation. It is not a question about whether the dead person was oppressed or arrogant, faithful or faithless, so that they would be asked, for example: “Are you faithless or Muslims?” Rather, what is meant by the question is: “Where were you? Why have you come empty-handed with blackened faces? How do you stand in religion? Why did you not believe in the root of religion? Why did you not keep it, but turned back on your heels? Why did you not act on its rulings?”
But how far from it! These people have no fitting answers and no convincing proofs. All they say is that they were oppressed in the world and groaning under the weight of the unjust. They neither claimed faith, because that is contrary to their reality, nor dared to say: we were drowned in unbelief, hypocrisy and sins, and in this state we have come here. Notice also that these people did not mention their unbelief, hypocrisy and transgression, for that would mean openly admitting it. Instead they offered the excuse of being oppressed, so as to show themselves as excused: “We were oppressed in the land.” After the angels reject their excuses, they ask them in a tone of rebuke and denial: “Was not God’s earth wide, so that you could emigrate in it?”
Some people may be unable to emigrate because of bodily weakness, lack of money, inability to prepare the necessities of travel and the like. So the reason for holding back from emigration is not the lack of a suitable place to emigrate to, so that the answer would be “Was not God’s earth wide?” The angels’ rejection of these people’s excuse for not emigrating to another land points to their argument for not emigrating being the lack of a suitable land to emigrate to, as shown by the phrase “in the land” in their answer to the angels’ question, and not bodily weakness and the like; for they were in the ranks of the faithless at the battle of Badr.
It should be pointed out that the word “emigration” is used when the place one moves from is separate from the place one moves to. But the verse speaks of emigration in general (“so that you could emigrate in it”) without mentioning the starting point (the place left) or the destination (the place emigrated to). This means the earth in all its breadth and oneness, without mentioning a city or a village or a particular direction, east or west, north or south: it is all God’s (s.w.t.) earth, “God’s earth”, and the emigration is within this earth. There is no difference between starting point and destination. What matters is faith in the oneness of God and obedience to revelation, prophethood and the Return, so much so that emigration from a holy land such as Mecca became obligatory in order to preserve that belief.
In any case, this group had no answer to the angels’ question, “Was not God’s earth wide, so that you could emigrate in it?” They could have emigrated to free themselves from oppression, but by their bad choice they preferred to stay in the lands of unbelief and polytheism, and were deprived of faith in God, of the ability to preserve this faith, and of acting on the rulings of religion.
As shown by their bad state in the barzakh, the angels’ rebuke of them, and His words, Exalted, “Those, their refuge is Hell, and evil is it as a destination”, their failure to emigrate was either because of their lack of faith (their unbelief in belief) or because of their transgression (their unbelief in practice). In the first case they will be sentenced to abide in Hell; in the second they will be punished without abiding in the punishment.
Their refuge is not only in Hell (“their refuge is Hell”); they themselves are a moving, travelling Hell: “and evil is it as a destination” (maṣīr). For becoming (ṣayrūrah) means that the corrupt human being himself turns into Hell. For this reason the preposition “to” is not used in the sentence, and there is no reliable evidence for supposing it understood; besides which, all the rational and transmitted proofs support this apparent meaning. The meaning of “travelling to” goes against the apparent sense of the verse.
4:98–99 — Except the oppressed among men
(98) Except the oppressed among men, women and children, who have neither access to any means nor are guided to any way. (99) Maybe Allah will excuse them, for Allah is all-excusing, all-forgiving.
After the previous verse rebuked those who did not emigrate from Mecca to Medina on the excuse of being oppressed, this verse excepts all the truly oppressed from emigration. It mentions two factors of true oppression: incapacity in knowledge and incapacity in action. It takes the universal and comprehensive measure of oppression to be: 1) inability to remove obstacles; 2) ignorance of the ways of escape. Those who do not know, or who know but cannot flee and free themselves from the yoke of the faithless, are truly oppressed. And oppression, as is well known, has levels and degrees.
As for applying this measure in the verse to three classes of people, that is, old men, old women and children, it is by way of example, not specification. The truly oppressed are not limited to those classes only.
God (s.w.t.) does not punish the truly oppressed, who have no means and cannot find a way out to free themselves from the polytheists. But since Paradise is given only in return for good deeds, and these truly oppressed were excused from carrying out their duties fully because of the harsh conditions they lived in, their ruling with regard to being granted reward and recompense and entering Paradise depends on the will, kindness and grace of God, Exalted. It is to be hoped that they will receive divine pardon: “Those, it may be that God will pardon them.”
The oppressed are not all alike, as is well known. Some of them knew their duties and obligations and wanted to act on them, but were unable to because of compelling obstacles beyond their will; and God (s.w.t.) may treat these with greater kindness.
The coming of the two names “the Pardoning” (al-ʿAfuww) and “the Forgiving” (al-Ghafūr) at the end of the verse is to stir hope in those oppressed, and a pointer to God’s mercy, Exalted, going before His wrath.
One of the commentators remarked on the use of “it may be” (ʿasā), saying: “If you ask: why was it said ‘it may be that God will pardon them’, with a word of raising hope? I say: to show that leaving emigration is a narrow matter with no leeway in it, so that even one whose compulsion is clear has the right only to say: it may be that God will pardon me. So how about anyone else?”
4:100 — Whoever migrates in the way of Allah will find many havens and plenitude in the earth
Whoever migrates in the way of Allah will find many havens and plenitude in the earth. And whoever leaves his home migrating toward Allah and His Apostle, and is then overtaken by death, his reward shall certainly fall on Allah, and Allah is all-forgiving, all-merciful.
Continuing the verses on striving and emigration, this verse gives hope and good cheer to those who emigrate in the way of God.
What is meant by emigration in this verse, as shown by its coming with the verses on striving, is religious emigration. Its aim and cause are sometimes obeying the commands of God (s.w.t.), and at other times learning the rulings and wisdoms of religion, or founding a religious state and government. So the degrees of the emigrants here, their reward and the rulings for individuals, differ across these three kinds. Emigration becomes obligatory on a person once he has the effective ability. Emigration has no fixed time or place; its measure is the ability to carry out the rulings of religion without dividing them up and without hardship and difficulty.
This verse points with reverence and greatness to those who emigrate for the pleasure of God and to preserve religion, after they have freed themselves from all material attachments, left their homes with great hardship and with empty hands. It gives them the good news of a new refuge and a safe, settled homeland suited to their spiritual and human life, and agreeing with their material life too in terms of dwelling and a place fit for living, work and farming (“...will find in the earth many places of refuge”), together with ease in affairs and work and freedom from all the pressures of life (“and abundance”). This promise is for them in this world, besides their reward in the Hereafter.
The emigrant who has no beloved and no goal but God (s.w.t.), who chose emigration to learn the rulings of religion and to be honoured with meeting the noble Messenger (s.a.w.), who sacrificed much and turned his eyes from everything, including the pleasures of life, and who then dies on the path of emigration to God, Exalted, and His Messenger (s.a.w.): no one knows the reward and recompense of this emigrant except God, Mighty and Majestic. No one but God knows the extent of that reward or the measure of that recompense. His recompense is not limited to his intention and to the part of the way he travelled, but is far more than that; and perhaps his reward is greater than the Paradise he was promised. God, Exalted, alone can fix his degree according to His wisdom: “his reward has fallen upon God.”
The verb “has fallen” (waqaʿa) is used in the verse to stress necessity and certainty; though the necessity of the reward in relation to God is of the kind of necessity from God, not necessity upon God, for nothing is necessary upon the holy essence of God, neither in creation nor in legislation. It is well known that each of God’s beautiful names, some of which are great and some greater, governs the name below it. So the necessity of the reward, in relation to some divine names, may be of the kind of necessity “upon” and not necessity “from”. It is also well known that the incomplete verb “was” (kāna) in His words, Exalted, “and God is [lit. was] All-Forgiving, All-Merciful” and the like does not mean the past. This sentence shows that divine mercy and forgiveness are eternal, and that God’s (s.w.t.) kindness, forgiveness and compassion have always existed and will always remain.
4:101 — When you journey in the land
When you journey in the land, there is no sin upon you in shortening the prayers, if you fear that the faithless may trouble you; indeed the faithless are your manifest enemies.
The subject of the previous verses was striving and emigration. And since the prayer should not be left either while striving or while emigrating, this verse speaks of how to perform the prayer of fear (ṣalāt al-khawf) on the battlefronts, and also the shortened prayer (ṣalāt al-qaṣr) on a journey.
The phrase “you travel in the land” means a journey. It is not permitted to perform the shortened prayer merely on resolving to travel, before actually entering the legal journey that is fixed by a particular measure: its criterion is covering a set distance and going beyond what is called the limit of allowance (ḥadd al-tarakhkhuṣ).
The apparent sense of the sentence “there is no blame on you” is permission and allowance, not a firm requirement and obligation. But in the light of other Qur’anic verses in which the same expression occurs, and on the basis of the sunnah of the greatest Prophet (s.a.w.) and the narrations of the Household (a.s.), the ruling of the shortened prayer for the traveller is a firm requirement (ʿazīmah), not an allowance (rukhṣah).
Another possibility is that what is meant by “no blame” here is removing the false impression of a prohibition, in the sense of denying that it is forbidden, not establishing mere permission. For the Muslims were used to performing the prayer in full and thought that shortening might be forbidden.
What is meant by shortening the prayer is reducing it and dropping some of its units (rakʿahs). It is not combining two prayers, nor reducing its manner and form, such as gesturing instead of bowing or prostrating, which is followed in the prayer of fear and not in the traveller’s prayer.
The qualifier in His words, Exalted, “if you fear that those who are faithless may trouble you”, does not mean that fear of the mischief of the faithless is a condition for shortening the prayer, so that one might say, for example: the prayer is performed in full on a journey in which there is no fear. It is a qualifier describing what usually holds (or is for emphasis); that is, it is mentioned because it was usually present, not because it enters into the root of the ruling. Since journeys in that time were surrounded by danger and fear, and this verse deals with setting out the ruling of the traveller’s prayer and not the ruling of the prayer of fear, the sentence “And when you travel in the land” represents a qualifier describing what usually holds.
In short, this qualifier has no part in shortening the prayer. Rather, the legal journey is the subject of the ruling of shortening, so that the shortened prayer should be performed on a journey whether in fear or in safety, and whether there is mischief or not.
Perhaps the ruling of shortening was, when first revealed, conditional on fear, and was then made general to include the state of safety as well.
As for the use of the singular predicate in the verse (“surely the faithless are to you an open enemy”), it may contain a pointer to the faithless being one, like a single man, united in their word against the Muslims and united in hostility to the Muslims and Islam; besides which the word “enemy” (ʿaduww) is used for singular and plural. As for the incomplete past verb “are [lit. were]”, it shows the old hostility of the faithless toward the Muslims.
4:102 — When you are among them, leading them in prayers
When you are among them, leading them in prayers, let a group of them stand with you, carrying their weapons. And when they have done the prostrations, let them withdraw to the rear, then let the other group which has not prayed come and pray with you, taking their precautions and [bearing] their weapons. The faithless are eager that you should be oblivious of your weapons and your baggage, so that they could assault you all at once. But there is no sin upon you, if you are troubled by rain or are sick, to set aside your weapons; but take your precautions. Indeed Allah has prepared for the faithless a humiliating punishment.
The noble verse draws the broad lines of another form of the shortened prayer and sets out the ruling of the prayer of fear. But addressing the speech to the noble Messenger (s.a.w.) does not mean that this prayer was particular to the time of the Prophet (s.a.w.).
The verse addresses the greatest Messenger (s.a.w.), taking him to be the leader (imām) of the prayer of fear, and commands him, when the prayer is held in congregation, to divide the praying fighters into two parts, guarding against the possibility of the enemy launching a raid on them. One part follows him in prayer carrying their weapons, while the other part guards those praying and watches the situation. The first group of those praying performs only one unit (rakʿah) with the congregation and prays the second unit individually. Then it at once hands its places over to the other group, which will perform the second unit with the congregation, armed and on guard.
The verb “take” in His words, Exalted, “and let them take their weapons”, points to actually carrying the weapons, not removing them or putting them aside. This rests on three pieces of evidence that the verse itself mentions:
The phrase “and let them take their precautions” comes alongside the word “and their weapons”.
The warning of the danger of a surprise attack by the faithless if the Muslims are heedless of their weapons: “Those who are faithless wish that you would be heedless of your weapons and your baggage, so that they could fall upon you in a single assault.”
The sentence “and there is no blame on you... that you lay down your weapons” comes in contrast to “take”. That is: if you are ill, or rain pours down on you and carrying weapons becomes hard for you, there is no blame on you if you lay your weapons aside. So the ruling to carry weapons is binding, and the allowance covers illness or harm.
It is well known that a person on the field of battle needs both weapons and full caution together. The use of the verb “take” for caution (“and let them take their precautions”) is literal: the praying fighters must be cautious and alert as well as carrying their weapons, and must perform the prayer with caution while carrying their weapons. In some circumstances, such as illness or rainfall, carrying weapons may not be obligatory; but constant caution is not bound by circumstances or time. Rather, a person must be careful and cautious always and in every state.
At its beginning the verse did not mention caution, but contented itself with saying “and let them take their weapons”. This is because it is known and needs no reminder, or because the faithless did not know why the Muslims lined up in this way in their prayer. Whereas the ruling was mentioned in full at the first opening of the subject in this same chapter: “O you who have faith, take your precautions...”. In the verse under discussion, taking precautions comes once alongside taking weapons and once on its own.
The secret of the command to take precautions can be drawn from the last sentence of the previous verse, “surely the faithless are to you an open enemy”, and from the sentence in this verse, “Those who are faithless wish that you would be heedless of your weapons and your baggage, so that they could fall upon you in a single assault.” When this devotional ruling is analysed rationally, its meaning is: the reason caution, arming and readiness are necessary when the prayer of fear is held is that the enemy may take advantage of your heedlessness, attack you and take you by surprise.
The fighter’s attention to his surroundings during his prayer does not conflict with his humility in the prayer. For what lies outside the prayer is also an act of worship. Attention, caution, watchfulness and care for the ranks of the Muslims, as well as watching the enemy’s movements and taking precautions while praying, all represent presence of heart and humility before God’s commands, even if not all of the worshipper’s attention is directed to the prayer.
As for the last sentence of the verse, “surely God has prepared for the faithless a humiliating punishment”, it is not a purely theological ruling and a threat of punishment in the Hereafter. It is a promise of victory to the Muslims in this world: if they obey God’s commands in the midst of battle and do not forget their prayer in a state of fear, God (s.w.t.) will give them victory by humbling the faithless. Divine punishment is prepared for the faithless without fail, in this world and the Hereafter, and God, Exalted, will make them taste that punishment in this world as in the Hereafter: “and abasement and wretchedness were struck upon them”; “surely God has prepared for the faithless a humiliating punishment.”
4:103 — When you have finished the prayers
When you have finished the prayers, remember Allah, standing, sitting, and lying down, and when you feel secure, perform the [complete] prayers, for the prayer is indeed a timed prescription for the faithful.
The verse continues the explanation of how to perform the prayer of fear.
The apparent meaning of “when you have finished” (qaḍaytum) is completing the prayer and its coming to an end. On this reading, the meaning of His words, Exalted, “then remember God standing, sitting and lying on your sides”, is performing the post-prayer devotions (taʿqībāt) and remembering God (s.w.t.) constantly, while standing, sitting and lying on one’s side. So what is meant by “remembrance” here may be remembrance in general, or particular post-prayer devotions, or saying the four glorifications thirty times after the shortened prayer.
But on the basis of internal evidence, meaning the end of the verse, and external evidence, the context of the verses and the transmitted narrations, the meaning of “when you have finished” is the intention and resolve to perform the prayer; that is, “when you want to perform the prayer” or “when you want to pray”. And what is meant by “remembrance” is specifically the remembrance of the prayer itself, not remembrance in general, nor its post-prayer devotions, nor a particular remembrance to make up for something. On this reading, the noble verse points to different states of prayer in different circumstances of fear. Its meaning is: “When you want to perform the prayer of fear, perform it according to the circumstances and in proportion to the fear, whether standing, sitting or on your sides. And when your fear has gone and passed, and you are in safety and calm, then remember God and perform your prayers in their usual manner: ‘and when you are secure, then establish the prayer.’” The definite article in “the prayer” refers to what is known, that is, the prayer known in ordinary conditions; otherwise the prayer in a state of fear was also called prayer.
The sentence “and when you are secure” does not stand against the sentence “and when you travel in the land”, because there is a long gap between them. What is meant by “and when you are secure” is the return of safety, not being at home. That is, the contrast is between safety and fear, not between travel and being at home. The ruling of the prayer of fear is not limited to fear on a journey, nor is fear limited to battle, even though the verse points to fear on a journey.
As a shared reason for both rulings, that is, how to perform the prayer in a state of fear and how to perform it after fear has passed, He, Mighty and Majestic, says: “surely the prayer is for the faithful a prescription at fixed times.” “Prescription” (kitāb) in this verse means what is prescribed (maktūb). The prayer is obligatory on every responsible person; but since only the faithful value the prayer and its rank, the verse attributes the prayer to them.
Each of the five prayers has a known time: “surely the prayer is for the faithful a prescription at fixed times.” Everything “timed” is an act bounded by a time, so that it should be performed within it. The secret of describing the prayer as “timed” is that the prayer differs from the other acts of worship: the substitute for the prayer in necessity is like what it replaces itself. That is, the prayer under choice is performed in the same time, and it may not be left in any state whatever, whether on a journey or in illness; each state has its own particular duty. By doing the obligation within its time, the need to make it up falls away.
4:104 — Do not slacken in the pursuit of these people
Do not slacken in the pursuit of these people. If you are suffering, they are also suffering like you, but you expect from Allah what they do not expect, and Allah is all-knowing, all-wise.
At the end of this section of verses, which dealt with striving and some rulings of worship, God (s.w.t.) addresses the Islamic community directly and urges it not to weaken in pursuing the faithless and fighting them. In urging the Muslims on and encouraging them to fight, and setting out some truths as a lesson for them, God (s.w.t.) gives them the reason this command was issued, and why God, Exalted, loves it to be obeyed. He says to them: “If you suffer pain in fighting the faithless, the faithless too suffer pain and hardship like you; pain and hardship strike both sides. But you have an advantage over them: you are hopeful of God’s kindness, and God (s.w.t.) helps you against them with strength; while the faithless have no such support, refuge, helper and hope.” So the factor of weakness is shared, while the factor of strength and power belongs to the faithful alone. Because of this advantage, the faithful should not slacken or weaken, nor fear fighting the polytheists.
God, Mighty and Majestic, manages this world according to His knowledge and wisdom and the desired interests. So too His (s.w.t.) command to be steadfast and stand against the enemy rests on divine knowledge and wisdom, and is for the good of the faithful themselves. If they do not weaken or slacken, but remain steadfast and resisting, victory over the enemies will surely be on their side.
4:105 — Indeed We have sent down to you the Book with the truth
Indeed We have sent down to you the Book with the truth, so that you may judge between the people by what Allah has shown you; do not be an advocate for the traitors,
God (s.w.t.) is pure truth and firm in His essence, and all speech that comes from the One firm in His essence matches reality. The angels, the trustees of revelation (a.s.), and the noble Messenger (s.a.w.) receive it just as it matches reality, and they preserve it and convey it. So the four pillars of the noble Qur’an, the speaker, the speech, the trustee of revelation and the receiver of revelation, are all truth. And the Book of God, from its origin and issuing and first descent to the last point it reaches in its descent, is all surrounded by the truth and within the precincts of the truth.
Revelation sets out God’s ruling, Mighty and Majestic, and its aim is to apply that ruling and to end all the disputes of humanity in knowledge and action. So the Messenger of God (s.a.w.) should judge according to the Book of God and His ruling, and be the judge in every dispute that arises, and all disputes must end with his (s.a.w.) counsel: “so that you may judge between people.” Since applying universal laws to individuals and settling secondary disputes needs knowledge of those laws and knowledge of their examples and instances, God, Exalted, sent down the noble Qur’an and commanded that it be taught; then He taught His Messenger (s.a.w.) all the laws that the Book of God contains: “Surely We have sent down to you the Book with the truth.” And to apply those laws to their particular instances precisely, He (s.w.t.) made clear to His Messenger (s.a.w.) the outside events and facts, so as to enable His Messenger (s.a.w.) to judge between people by the divine laws, by virtue of God’s care and His showing, and the Messenger’s faith in those laws, not by personal reasoning (ijtihād) or conjectural deduction. For this reason He (s.w.t.) says: “by what God has shown you”, and not “by what you have seen”. The noble Prophet’s (s.a.w.) knowledge of God’s rulings and all their details, including judging and testimony, springs from divine revelation, not his own reasoning. And since revelation is knowledge by witnessing, not knowledge by concepts, the noble Qur’an used the phrase “by what [God] has shown you”, pointing to the need for seeing and not only conceptual knowing.
The result is that the greatest Messenger (s.a.w.) cannot be made heedless or deceived, neither in matters of establishing facts nor in matters of applying them. He (s.a.w.) is infallible and free of any error in application, because the law he relies on and judges by comes from divine revelation, not personal reasoning; just as judging by those laws and applying them to their instances is done by revelation. The noble Messenger (s.a.w.) is infallible, as we know. His being forbidden to support the betrayer against the wronged (“and do not be an advocate for the betrayers”), and then being commanded to seek forgiveness in the next verse (“and seek God’s forgiveness”), is only by way of warding off sin, not removing it. Through His prohibition, God (s.w.t.) informs His Prophet (s.a.w.) of this conspiracy, and that some people try to defile the purity of the religion and the message and accuse him of protecting the betrayers. And the Messenger (s.a.w.) must be wary of their words and deeds, so that others do not think he defends the betrayers: “and do not be an advocate for the betrayers.” It seems that the lām in “for the betrayers” means “on behalf of”, that is, do not dispute on their behalf; and in this case “advocate” (khaṣīm) means one who disputes and defends.
It is worth mentioning that His words, Exalted, “so that you may judge between people by what God has shown you”, are a statement in form but a command in content, and mean: “Judge between people according to divine revelation.” Likewise, joining the sentence “and do not be an advocate for the betrayers” to “so that you may judge between people by what God has shown you” is joining a command to a command.
4:106 — and plead to Allah for forgiveness
and plead to Allah for forgiveness; indeed Allah is all-forgiving, all-merciful.
Seeking forgiveness (istighfār) means asking for forgiveness to be saved from the consequences of sin. It may be for warding off, that is, not falling into sin, or for removal, in the sense of being purified of sin.
God’s (s.w.t.) command to the noble Prophet (s.a.w.) to seek forgiveness does not mean that he (s.a.w.) committed a sin or that an evil act came from him. For the Infallibles (a.s.) never slacken in the remembrance of God, Exalted; by virtue of the guidance God gave them they are protected from slips and sin, and sin does not come near them at all, and they are free of every impurity and filth. But since they are contingent beings, they are not infallible in essence. That is, their infallibility is not of their essence but is a description of their existence, and, like the root of their existence, it is contingent and capable of passing away. From here we see them taking refuge in worship, turning back to God and seeking forgiveness, in need of divine grace and care, and striving to preserve the means of the continuance of infallibility and purity in themselves by seeking forgiveness and the like. Otherwise they would fall from the peak of servanthood and the summit of ascent in a single moment of heedlessness of prayer and seeking forgiveness.
On this basis, to avoid heedlessness and judging in favour of the usurping, betraying and mistaken party, even the greatest Messenger (s.a.w.) should ask God (s.w.t.) for victory over the desires of the self, and that He grant him success in not supporting the betrayers. By virtue of the Prophet’s (s.a.w.) infallibility he did not defend the betraying thief. Indeed, he (s.a.w.) is free even of inclining or wishing for such a thing; it is not that he wanted to do so or intended to defend the betraying thief and God (s.w.t.) kept him from starting it.
In short, the Prophet’s (s.a.w.) seeking forgiveness is only for warding off and protection, not for removal or purification. Likewise his (s.a.w.) constant seeking of forgiveness and continual repentance mean his continual return to God and his perseverance in journeying and wayfaring toward God’s mercy and care, not a returning after going back to the starting point.
God (s.w.t.) is All-Forgiving, All-Merciful: “surely God is All-Forgiving, All-Merciful.” The incomplete verb “was” (kāna) points to the attributes of God, Exalted, being eternal and lasting, not newly arisen.
4:107 — And do not plead for those who betray themselves
And do not plead for those who betray themselves; indeed Allah does not like someone who is treacherous and sinful.
This noble verse points, in more precise terms, to the prohibition of defending the betrayers and disputing on their behalf. It is more detailed than His words, Exalted, “and do not be an advocate for the betrayers”, and it names them explicitly with a particular description, because of the importance of the matter and as a warning to the corrupt: “And do not dispute on behalf of those who betray themselves.” Whereas, for example, it would have been enough to use the phrase “do not dispute on their behalf” or “on behalf of the betrayers”.
Sin counts as injustice and betrayal of the self, because the pure spirit and the divine innate nature (fiṭrah) are a trust from God deposited with the human being. Sin and overstepping the rulings of the religious law (whether concerning God’s right, Exalted, or people’s right) is harm done to the spirit, for every deed is tied to its doer. For this reason the harm of sin returns to the sinner himself.
What justifies the phrase “betray themselves” in this verse is regarding the Islamic community as one individual: doing injustice to another is injustice to oneself, because of the legal unity of the Islamic community.
The betrayer does not deserve to be defended, because God does not love the betrayers. So no one may protect him or defend him; and even if someone defends him in this world, he will not be able to defend him in the Hereafter.
It is worth mentioning that the person the verse points to (Ṭuʿmah ibn Ubayriq) was accused of many deeds, such as stealing people’s property, unjustly accusing others of theft, and wicked intentions of defiling the sanctity of the message and deceiving the noble Prophet (s.a.w.), until betrayal became a settled trait in him. But the verse shows that betrayal is forbidden however small, and its unrestricted wording covers even a person who has committed only one theft.
4:108 — They try to hide [their real character] from people
They try to hide [their real character] from people, but they do not try to hide from Allah, though He is with them when they conspire overnight with a discourse that He does not approve of. And Allah comprehends whatever they do.
The previous verses forbade defending the betrayers, and this verse lifts the veil from what is in the hearts of the sinners, whether their sin was betrayal, defending a betrayer, or anything else.
The betrayers try to hide their secrets from people’s eyes to preserve their social standing, even though the destinies of the whole world are in God’s (s.w.t.) hand and people can do nothing. The great mistake these betrayers made was thinking that God, Mighty and Majestic, was not with them to see what is in their hearts. Yet they cannot hide any of their secrets from God, Exalted; nor would doing so benefit them, because everything is in God’s hand, and He is with them wherever they are and in whatever state or circumstance, whether they plot something by night or by day (the first proof): “and He is with them when they plot by night what He does not approve of speech.” He (s.w.t.) encompasses them in action (the second proof): “and God encompasses what they do.” And He will expose them at the proper time. He brought all their attempts and conspiracies to nothing by sending down these verses. They were not able to accuse the innocent, stain the sanctity of the message, or show people that the Prophet (s.a.w.) was their protector and defender. Rather, He exposed their plans and disgraced them before all.
Some have argued from the impossibility of hiding anything from God (s.w.t.), and said that “hiding” (istikhfāʾ) is a figure for “being ashamed” (istiḥyāʾ); that is, the betrayers are ashamed before people and not ashamed before God, when they ought rather to be ashamed before God. It must be said that the betraying hypocrite does not believe in God, Exalted, so that it could be said “they are ashamed before God”.
What is meant by “withness” in His words “and He is with them” is the withness of overpowering. For, as we have seen, the talk here is about God’s (s.w.t.) knowledge of their secret conspiracies, and His exposing them and bringing them all to nothing: “when they plot by night what He does not approve of speech.” And because these people plotted by night speech and conspiracy that God does not approve of, the verse described it as unapproved speech.
4:109 — Aha! There you are, pleading for them in the life of this world
Aha! There you are, pleading for them in the life of this world! But who will plead for them with Allah on the Day of Resurrection, or will be their defender?
The previous verses forbade defending the betrayers. And since the most noble Prophet’s (s.a.w.) defending the betrayers in this world is impossible, because he (s.a.w.) is protected from harm and kept safe from trial, and if we take it that disputing on their behalf with God on the Day of Resurrection is impossible, then this verse stands as a hypothetical proposition (not a proposition that is realised and decisive). Through the use of the hāʾ of calling attention twice, “Here you are, these ones”, as a pointer to how very weak the defenders of the betrayers were at that time, the meaning of this verse is: “Even if we suppose that you defend the betrayers in this world, who is there who can defend them on the Day of Resurrection, the day when secrets and intentions are laid bare? There is no doubt that they will be disgraced. There will be no room at all to defend them, and no one will be able to protect them. Indeed, no one will be able to speak except by the leave of God (s.w.t.), nor will anyone dare to become their agent: ‘or who will be a guardian over them?’” “Guardian” (wakīl) here means the one in charge, the master and the protector; for this reason the preposition “over” is used with it.
The reason there can be no disputing on behalf of the betrayer at the Return is that God (s.w.t.) is the other party in the dispute, and no one is able to dispute with God, Mighty and Majestic.
4:110 — Whoever commits evil or wrongs himself and then pleads to Allah for forgiveness
Whoever commits evil or wrongs himself and then pleads to Allah for forgiveness, will find Allah all-forgiving, all-merciful.
After the verses that contained rebuke and threats for the betrayers and their defenders, this verse came down to encourage them to repent and purify themselves of sins and wrongdoing. With the sentence “And whoever does evil” mentioned alongside the phrase “or wrongs himself”, the meaning becomes: an evil deed is an injustice to the one who does it (not an injustice to others), just as wronging oneself is an evil and ugly deed; and doing harm to others or to oneself counts as wronging oneself. No one has the power, in the true sense, to do injustice to others; so even when he outwardly wrongs others, in reality he wrongs himself.
So everyone who does evil and sins harms only himself, and the evil of it returns to him. Even so, the way back to God, Exalted, and to purifying oneself is always open. If the servant seeks forgiveness, even if he has committed major sins such as stealing the property of others, unjustly accusing the innocent, or conspiring to stain the sanctity of the message, he will find God All-Forgiving, All-Merciful: “he will find God All-Forgiving, All-Merciful.” In this noble sentence God (s.w.t.) has made His special mercy the guarantee of accepting the repentance of those who repent.
The subtle meaning contained in His words “he will find God All-Forgiving, All-Merciful” is that repentance is like pure water that cleanses the sinner of his sins. If he turns back to God (s.w.t.) with a broken heart, he will receive the outpouring of some of God’s attributes of action and taste the flavour of forgiveness and mercy. It has been said: “I am with those whose hearts are broken.” The fruit the broken-hearted penitent will gain is the sweet and pleasant feeling of religious witnessing.
4:111 — Whoever commits a sin, commits it only against himself
Whoever commits a sin, commits it only against himself; and Allah is all-knowing, all-wise.
The talk before this was about betrayal and the prohibition of helping and defending the betrayers. The three verses (the previous one, this one and the next) aim to give the reason for this prohibition.
In reality this verse states a law of creation and sets out the universal principle of the close and unbreakable bond between the deed and the doer. On the basis of this verse and similar verses, a sin, from the moment it is committed until it ends, is closely tied to the sinner and stays with him wherever he goes; its burden does not pass from him to anyone else.
So the content of the verse is: keep away from sin, because its effects quickly mix with the spirit of the one who does it, unless he is able to remove it and purify himself through repentance and seeking forgiveness; and the way of repentance is always open to all. As for one who pays no attention to divine kindness and does not care about it, let him know that God is All-Knowing, All-Wise, and deals with each of His servants according to what he deserves.
4:112 — But someone who commits an iniquity or sin and then accuses an innocent person of it
But someone who commits an iniquity or sin and then accuses an innocent person of it, is indeed guilty of calumny and a flagrant sin.
Sin does not pass from its owner to anyone else. No one can cast his ugly deeds and sins onto another merely by accusing him of them. Rather, the results of what the sinner does will return to him, and he will harm only himself; besides which he will carry the burden of accusing another falsely and slanderously.
“Fault” (khaṭīʾah) in the verse means an evil deed and a sin, as shown by its being linked to earning: “And whoever earns a fault”, that is, does what should not be done, a deed full of error and confusion. It is not merely an act that may come about involuntarily and is called a mistake. The word “fault” is an adjective that needs no noun to describe.
The singular masculine pronoun in “with it” refers to “fault” and “sin”, and the commentators have mentioned several ways of explaining the reference of this pronoun:
The pronoun refers to one of them, while the ruling of the other can be understood from the context.
The pronoun refers to “fault” as a figure for “wrongdoing” (dhanb), which is masculine.
It is worth mentioning that the four labels that came in the previous verses, evil, injustice, fault and sin, can all be brought together in one instance, even though the concept of some differs from others. Because the wronged person is displeased with that deed, it is called “evil” (sūʾ). Since it is a reduction of a right and an overstepping of its limits, it is called “injustice” (ẓulm). Because it does not agree with reality, it is called a “fault”. And because it opposes God’s (s.w.t.) command, it is called a “sin” (ithm).
So whoever attributes his sin to another has committed a slander, and must carry the burden of this great sin, even if the innocent person is a Jew or a Christian. The verb “has borne” points to the earlier sin mixing with the existence of the doer, and to his carrying the burden of another sin because of his accusing and casting sin on someone else.
In short, slander and false accusation are among the major sins. False accusation contains two ugly elements: the ugliness of lying, and the ugliness of harm, injustice and damaging the reputation of others.
4:113 — Were it not for Allah’s grace and His mercy on you
Were it not for Allah’s grace and His mercy on you, a group of them were bent on leading you astray; but they do not mislead anyone except themselves, and they cannot do you any harm. Allah has sent down to you the Book and wisdom, and He has taught you what you did not know, and great is Allah’s grace upon you.
The previous verses spoke of those who wanted to conspire to make the Prophet (s.a.w.) appear to be defending the betrayers, and to accuse him of inclining toward them. What is meant by “a party” in the verse is the conspiring group. They intended to conspire against the most noble Prophet (s.a.w.), deceive him and lead him astray; but God (s.w.t.) alerted His Messenger (s.a.w.), brought their conspiracy to nothing and made it fail. So what some report, and their claim that the wicked and their conspiracy had an effect on the greatest Prophet (s.a.w.), contradicts the apparent sense of the verse and also the rest of the Qur’anic teachings.
Although the apparent sense of the verse indicates that this party did not succeed in its efforts, the expression in the verse is meant to show that their ineffective intent and failed effort came to nothing, as though they had intended nothing and resolved on nothing.
One who tries to lead others astray may sometimes succeed and at other times fail; but there is no doubt that he leads himself astray first of all. So too those who wanted to conspire against the Prophet (s.a.w.) and lead him astray were only leading themselves astray without realising it. And God covered His noble Messenger (s.a.w.) with His grace and mercy (“And were it not for God’s grace upon you and His mercy...”), and they were disgraced by their trickery and exposed by their conspiracy, because they cooperated in sin and wanted to stain the sanctity of the message.
As for those whom God has chosen, they do not sin outwardly, do not incline to sin inwardly, and do not think of sin in their minds. Indeed, they do not incline to sin at all, not even a little.
Sin coming from an infallible person counts as impossible in the ordinary course, not impossible in essence; otherwise he would not have been given duties. For the meaning of infallibility is leaving sin, and there is no room for leaving and avoiding sin without duty. So although the infallible person is able to commit sin, he does not do so.
God, Mighty and Majestic, guarantees His noble Messenger (s.a.w.) protection from any slip, especially in what concerns tawḥīd and the denial of polytheism. The verse under discussion addresses the greatest Prophet (s.a.w.) with an indefinite noun in a negative context, saying: “and they will not harm you in anything.” What is meant by harm, as shown by what the verse conveys, which points to the cultural conspiracy that this party wanted to carry out to reach its base aims and its attempt to lead the Messenger (s.a.w.) astray, is intellectual, moral, religious, political and cultural harm, and not, of course, harm in war or military harm. So divine protection covers cultural matters too.
God (s.w.t.) says to His noble Messenger (s.a.w.): “And God has sent down to you the Book and wisdom, and taught you what you did not know”; such as informing him of the secrets and hidden matters of the past prophets, and the many truths and secrets relating to the Origin and the Return, Paradise and the Fire and so on, which can be known only by way of revelation, not by sense experience (the experimental intellect), nor by conceptual proof (the abstract intellect), nor by witnessing intuition (the gnostic heart).
On the basis of this sentence, the most noble Prophet (s.a.w.) learned all the sciences of revelation without a teacher. It was not by study, research and diligent effort, nor by way of spiritual discipline, refinement and purification, nor by virtue of his own abilities, capacity, aptitude and genius.
God (s.w.t.) granted His noble Messenger (s.a.w.) much good (“And God has sent down to you the Book and wisdom”; “and whoever is given wisdom has been given much good”) and great grace: “and God’s grace upon you is great.” Reckoning God’s (s.w.t.) grace upon the Seal of the Prophets (s.a.w.) is no small matter. The greatest of it all is the noble Qur’an, whose greatness nothing else in the realm of possibility equals; which is a clarification of all things, and governs and stands over all the heavenly books; which is a witness to the perfection of the greatest Messenger (s.a.w.), his superiority and comprehensiveness with regard to the three kinds of divine speaking; and which is the means of his (s.a.w.) reaching the highest station and the secure rank of the Seal of prophethood.
His words, Exalted, “and God’s grace upon you is great”, teach the most noble Prophet (s.a.w.) to thank God, to reflect, to remember, to be absolutely upright and the like. They also teach the Islamic community, so that it may reach the threshold of a higher civilisation and become the best community.
4:114 — There is no good in much of their secret talks
There is no good in much of their secret talks, excepting him who enjoins charity or what is right or reconciliation between people, and whoever does that, seeking Allah’s pleasure, soon We shall give him a great reward.
This verse makes clear the ruling contained in His words, Exalted, “when they plot by night what He does not approve of speech”, which points to the faithless plotting conspiracies, especially at night. This verse stresses that there is no good in much of their secret talk and conversation, whether what they plot by night or anything else.
The denial of good is sometimes accompanied by evil in place of good: “There is no good...”, as in the previous verse, where the faithless plotted by night and conspired, or listened to what the polytheists said. This secret talk is without doubt a source of evil, blameworthy, ugly and a forbidden act. No secret talk or secret, whether forbidden or permitted, is hidden from God (s.w.t.), for everything is witnessed by God.
But the verse excepts those who command charity and what is right, and those who bring about reconciliation in society: “except one who commands charity or what is right or reconciliation between people.” If this exception is disconnected, then those excepted are not counted among the corrupt mentioned.
Everything that reason and transmitted texts accept and draw from revelation, and that confirms its goodness and greatness, is called “what is right” (maʿrūf), and its prominent example is charity and reconciliation between people. Since every good, material or spiritual, whether in the form of bringing benefit or warding off evil (such as settling disputes and removing grudges and hatreds), is an instance of what is right, this verse counts as a clear instance of comprehensive words, since it contains all good things.
Although society does not accept the words or advice of just anyone, nor is affected by them, unless he is known for knowledge and action, a person should not hold back from carrying out this duty on the excuse of not having a prominent social standing. For commanding what is right and forbidding what is wrong is a collective duty to bring about general oversight at the level of society, so that its members accept what is right and drive out what is wrong.
As for reconciliation between people, whether a partial reconciliation between two persons or two families, or a general social reconciliation known as social reform, which is what God’s prophets called to in their messages, it is good. The reform of society shows itself in two spheres, the moral sphere and the sphere of rights; and both are instances of what is right and instances of charity, even though these labels are separate from one another in concept.
If reconciliation, individual or social, is joined with goodness on the part of the doer, that is, the faith and sincerity of the one making peace, it deserves a great reward, like any righteous deed aimed at gaining God’s (s.w.t.) pleasure. Paradise and divine reward depend on two basic pillars: the goodness of the act (the righteous deed) and the goodness of the doer (the righteous soul). The verse “except one who commands charity or what is right or reconciliation between people” points to the goodness of the act, while the verse “and whoever does that seeking God’s pleasure” points to the goodness of the doer.
4:115 — Whoever defies the Apostle
Whoever defies the Apostle, after the guidance has become manifest to him, and follows a way other than that of the faithful, We shall abandon him to his devices and We shall make him enter hell, and it is an evil destination.
After mentioning the night plotting and secret talk of the conspirators in the previous verses, this verse points to other ways and forms of hostility toward the greatest Messenger (s.a.w.), namely continual opposition and constant resistance to him after the divine proof has been completed and the straight path has become clear. It then sets out the severe punishment in this world and the Hereafter.
This verse shows the infallibility of the most noble Prophet (s.a.w.), in that opposing him in any form whatever counts as absolutely forbidden. Whoever opposes the Messenger (s.a.w.) after the truth has become clear to him and the proof has been established against him, knowingly, deliberately and intending hostility; who chooses a side opposed to the side of the Prophet (s.a.w.), separates from him, stands against him and shows him enmity, leaves the way of the faithful and takes the way of the opponents: such a person will never be forgiven, whether he is a polytheist or one of the People of the Book. For not following in the Prophet’s (s.a.w.) footsteps means opposing him, and opposing him means opposing God (s.w.t.).
In other words, opposing the noble Messenger (s.a.w.) counts as a kind of associating partners with God, Exalted, in the oneness of Lordship (al-tawḥīd al-rubūbī), and God, Mighty and Majestic, does not forgive that partners be associated with Him. The next verse also states clearly the reason the opponents enter Hell: “Surely God does not forgive that partners be associated with Him.” So those who oppose the Messenger do not harm God and His Messenger; they harm only themselves and deprive themselves of forgiveness, and God will never forgive them.
On the basis of what has been said, the real and forbidden opposition is that which comes after truth and falsehood, the lawful and the forbidden, have become clear. Before that, a person is one who doubts and investigates without obstinacy; this is not opposition, and he is excused for it.
The verb “has become clear” in His words, Exalted, “after guidance has become clear to him”, points to knowledge and guidance, in the sense of the proof. So the sentence does not include the heedless, the incapable ignorant, the oppressed, one who has no knowledge of the matter and is unable to research and investigate, the doubter who is searching, nor the jurist (mujtahid) who goes into the subject according to sound principles and full conditions without reaching the truth. These are not opponents of the Prophet (s.a.w.); they are excused.
Once the way of guidance has become clear, opposing the noble Messenger (s.a.w.) is forbidden. Among the particular ways of guidance and of establishing the proof is the way of the faithful, that is, the practice of the observant (sīrat al-mutasharriʿah), which makes clear the sunnah of the Prophet (s.a.w.), so that the Prophet’s (s.a.w.) not being personally present does not become an excuse or a reason for some not to obey God’s commands. It becomes clear to us from the sentence “and follows other than the way of the faithful” that the way of the faithful is the way of the observant, as it is what uncovers the sunnah of the Messenger of God (s.a.w.). Likewise this sentence does not show that consensus (ijmāʿ) is a proof, for consensus has no meaning in the Prophet’s (s.a.w.) lifetime; while saying that the sentence points to the practice of the observant can hold both in the lifetime of the noble Messenger (s.a.w.) and after him.
Whoever chooses the path of opposing the Prophet (s.a.w.), God will punish according to his deeds, and will turn him to what he has turned to, by his choosing other than the way of the faithful, until he reaches Hell, and evil is that destination. God (s.w.t.) has made the straight path clear for all, and has stated that any other path besides it is the path of misguidance. But the human being is free, in creation, to choose either of the two paths; and whichever path he chooses, whether the path of faith or unbelief, good or evil, God, Exalted, will turn him to it, make it easy for him to walk it, and help him to continue on the path he has chosen: “We shall turn him to what he has turned to.”
The likeness of the sinner is that of a moving Hell and a fire in bodily form; for sin is like fire. Whoever lights the fire and kindles it, and then burns in it, is a sinner; and its flames will grow and engulf him until his reality changes and burns with it. So the sinner, while still a human being, undergoes a becoming marked by burning and being burned.
4:116 — Indeed Allah does not forgive that any partner should be ascribed to Him
Indeed Allah does not forgive that any partner should be ascribed to Him, but He forgives anything besides that to whomever He wishes. And whoever ascribes partners to Allah has certainly strayed into far error.
If this verse gives the reason for the end of the previous verse, its meaning is: opposing the greatest Messenger (s.a.w.) and showing him hostility is an instance of associating partners with God, Exalted, and God never forgives that partners be associated with Him.
This verse brings together promise and threat. The middle sentence, “and He forgives what is less than that for whom He wills”, encourages hope in God’s promise and mercy; while the other two sentences are threat, warning and divine wrath.
The verse also does not refer to repentance and the repentant. First, He, Exalted, says: “Surely God does not forgive that partners be associated with Him”; whereas God (s.w.t.) forgives all sins through repentance, including polytheism, and has mercy on the one who repents even if he was a polytheist. Second, the phrase “for whom He wills”, which is an indefinite proposition within the frame of a particular affirmative proposition, does not fit with repentance; because God (s.w.t.) has mercy on all through repentance. Rather, according to this phrase, He forgives some of the people of tawḥīd even without repentance; but no one knows who they are. It is well known that God’s will, Exalted, is wise; He does not pardon or forgive anyone without a good reason in it, just as He, Mighty and Majestic, does not punish any of His creatures arbitrarily.
No one knows whether he is included in God’s promise, “and He forgives what is less than that for whom He wills”, or not; so the believer must live between fear and hope.
The sinner who is not a polytheist is also astray; but his straying is not far like the straying of the polytheist. Rather, it is near the straight path, guidance, repentance and mercy. As for the polytheist, he is far from what is right and from the straight path: “and whoever associates partners with God has certainly strayed far away”, so that he has no helper, no one to answer him, and no means of rescue left. He is like one who “falls from the sky and the birds snatch him, or the wind sweeps him away to a far-off place.”
4:117 — They invoke none but females besides Him
They invoke none but females besides Him, and invoke none but a froward Satan,
The verse counts as giving the reason for the end of the previous verse. It shows the cause of the polytheists’ far straying, their deviation from the straight path and their not accepting guidance.
Two qualifiers come in this verse: 1) “They call besides Him only on females”; 2) “and they call only on a rebellious Satan.” These two qualifiers run alongside each other and fit together; indeed it seems that one of them is the means to the other. That is, the first qualifier is Satan’s means, and the second is the rebellious, transgressing, misleading Satan himself, who is the pivot of the verse’s subject. For the worship of angels and others comes only through the leading astray and misguiding of the rebellious Satan; it is he who lured the polytheists into worshipping other than God and honouring what is besides Him. And since listening to someone’s words and following his commands is like worshipping him, the polytheists, by choosing to worship and honour idols and angels, were in reality worshipping the rebellious Satan himself.
It is mentioned that the qualifier “only on females” may be relative, since it points to the pagan tradition of the polytheists of the Ḥijāz, who believed that the angels manage affairs. So they worshipped them, held them to be females, and made wooden and stone statues as images of those angels.
As for the word “females”, it does not mean that the polytheists gave female names to their idols; for they also named their idols with male names, such as Wadd and Suwāʿ and others. Nor is it because the idols were heavenly bodies or creatures that do not perceive or feel; for among them were angels, and among them were human persons as well, many of them men. What is meant by “females” is that most of the polytheists worshipped the angels, so the root of their worship was the angels, and they thought the angels were females. It is well known that one of the features of bodies is that they are divided into male and female; while an immaterial creature is not described as male or female, and the angels are immaterial beings in whom there is neither male nor female.
Given the meaning of softness, smoothness and delicacy in the word “females”, some have put the reason the polytheists described the angels as females down to the idols being acted upon rather than acting, since they did not usually get what they needed from the things they worshipped.
One of the commentators said: “What is meant by ‘females’ here is the dead, because the Arabs apply the word ‘females’ to them because of their weakness, or, it is said, their incapacity. Even so, they used to venerate some of the dead and call on them, as many of the People of the Book and the Muslims of these centuries do.”
It is worth mentioning that the far straying mentioned in the previous verse points to the polytheism that was widespread in the age of ignorance, and the worship of idols, images and angels. But it seems that this commentator was greatly influenced by the ill-omened slogan “The Book of God is enough for us!” Because of separating the pure Household (a.s.) from the Qur’an, and indeed dismembering the noble Qur’an itself, he turned the meaning from the living to the dead; and by this deviation he counted praiseworthy seeking of a means (tawassul) and commendable seeking of intercession as blameworthy worship and ill-omened calling!
4:118 — whom Allah has cursed, and who said
whom Allah has cursed, and who said, ‘I will surely take of Your servants a settled share,
After describing Satan as “rebellious” and disobedient in the previous verse, this verse points to another of his qualities: he is cursed and driven out of the mercy of God, the Real, Exalted.
This Iblīs was driven out of the mercy of God (s.w.t.) because he disobeyed God’s commands. As a result of these two qualities, the curse and disobedience, Satan the accursed set about teaching people rebellion and disobedience and deserving the curse. He spent all his effort to drag his followers and lure them onto his path, so that they too become disobedient and driven out of God’s mercy.
After Satan the accursed grew arrogant and disobeyed God, Mighty and Majestic, he burst into the domain of Lordship and counted himself a partner of God (s.w.t.). In a real (not figurative) and creational (not legislative) dialogue, he says to God, Exalted, that he has a share of His servants who will follow him, and that he will separate them from the caravan of the righteous servants. He says boldly and insolently that he has a share of God’s servants and the power to lead them astray. However that may be, Satan the accursed got what he wanted and made many people his followers; but those whom Iblīs lured are under God’s power and authority, because they are His servants first and last.
As for what Satan the accursed means by servants in his words, “I will surely take of Your servants an appointed share”, they are the servants in creation, including the servants in religious law (the people of tawḥīd and the faithful) and those who are not (the heretics). He covets leading them all astray and strives hard to make them his slaves. But of course he has no way over the sincere (al-mukhlaṣīn); his share is limited to others, and he hopes to gain control over these too and enslave them.
Leaving righteous deeds, committing sins and taking pleasure in the forbidden are all preliminaries to Satan’s coveting. From here we see him working hard to make a person fall into doubt and leave righteous deeds. First he enters the human intellect and its channels of knowledge and tries to sow doubts in it; then, through whisperings, he tries to turn him away from his inclinations and drag him toward vices.
On this basis, a human being must make use of his beneficial knowledge, seek the help of his practical intellect, and work hard to strengthen his vision and his inclination toward the truth, so that he does not become Satan’s share.
4:119 — and I will lead them astray and give them [false] hopes
and I will lead them astray and give them [false] hopes, and prompt them to slit the ears of cattle, and I will prompt them to alter Allah’s creation.’ Whoever takes Satan as a guardian instead of Allah has certainly incurred a manifest loss.
Satan the accursed whispers to God’s servants and tries to lead them astray. If he manages to lure a person and catch him in his snares, Satan sets about teaching him more misguidance and deviation.
Given that some verses attribute leading astray to God (s.w.t.), the threat of leading astray in this verse, “and I will surely lead them astray”, is in reality also God’s word, Exalted, and His proof, not the word of Satan the accursed. But God’s leading astray is, of course, a leading astray by way of recompense, not at the outset, while the human being’s choice remains; so it is neither compulsion (jabr) nor delegation (tafwīḍ).
Among the most important ways Satan the accursed enters the human being is through his control of the channels of perception and belief. By adorning the scenes and gifts of nature, which are signs of God (s.w.t.), Satan the accursed works to occupy a person with far-reaching hopes and useless dreams, because the human being looks at nature’s gifts with the eye of greed and avarice. There is no doubt that the result of this is excessive attachment to this world and its adornment, and neglect of the Hereafter and flight from it. So a person may not stretch his eyes toward what others have; he should look with wisdom and reason.
Satan the accursed also commands his followers to invent innovations (bidaʿ): “and I will surely command them...”. To show how Satan the accursed misleads people, the noble Qur’an points to one of the innovations that prevailed in the age of ignorance: “so they will surely slit the ears of cattle.” When a she-camel had given birth five times and the fifth was male, they would slit her ear and forbid themselves to make use of her! All this was like their worship of idols.
The fāʾ of consequence and the heavy nūn of emphasis in his words “so they will surely slit” point to the certainty of actually bringing about that innovation, and to the decisiveness of following the footsteps of Satan the accursed in it: “and I will surely command them...”.
The aim of Satan the accursed in leading his followers astray is to deprive their divine innate nature (fiṭrah) and keep it from growing toward perfection, so that the human being becomes ready to commit any sin and wrongdoing. For this reason he commands his followers to change and deform their human nature: “and they will surely change God’s creation.” Changing the creation is itself interfering with the fiṭrah, deforming it and weakening its power; and there is no doubt that this is a loss and a harm that gathers all sins.
But God (s.w.t.) stresses that the fiṭrah He granted does not change: “There is no changing God’s creation.” So Satan the accursed is not able to change the human being’s creation and nature; nor does he dare to wish to remove or replace the root of human creation and nature. Even so, he spares no effort to weaken it, or curb it and cover it with his tricks and intrigues. The meaning of Satan’s words, “and I will surely command them...”, is weakening the light of the fiṭrah, which is possible, not wiping it out entirely, which is impossible. Satan the accursed is able only to enter the channels of thought and belief, give a person false worldly promises and hopes, make them seem fair in his eyes, and bring him to an evil end.
In short, the meaning of changing the creation is distorting and deforming the reality, which, as we said, is possible. Changing the creation does not mean changing the human being’s essence. The person who lets Satan enter him becomes transformed in the unseen realm (malakūt), not in the visible realm (mulk). That is, he turns into a predatory human; and since his predatoriness matches the level of his intelligence, he will no doubt be more dangerous than the predatory animals we know. This change of form will appear clearly on the Day of Resurrection.
It is worth mentioning that change in religion, as mentioned in the noble Qur’an and the sunnah of the Infallibles (a.s.), does not mean interpretation by personal opinion, forging ḥadīths, distorting the words and phrases of transmitted ḥadīth, and applying it to other than its real instance. That is not a change in God’s creation. But since the written religion is in harmony with the inner human nature, changing it goes together with changing the fiṭrah, which is among God’s creations.
Some have held that changing the bodily structure of a human being or an animal is one instance of changing God’s creation; and that if changing the creation includes, for example, circumcision and the like, it must be limited to cases that come by the command of Satan the accursed. So the cases that the holy Lawgiver commanded, or did not specifically forbid, are not included in changing the creation.
The intellect, which is God’s creation, Exalted, is free and accepts only evidence and proof. For this reason some hold that stopping the intellect from reasoning is an instance of changing its created structure and an example of changing God’s creation; and that placing a veil between the intellect and its inclinations is a kind of devilry, and the veilers are the devils among humankind.
At the end of the verse comes: “And whoever takes Satan as a guardian besides God has certainly suffered a manifest loss.” In it there is a pointer that the true master of the world and of all existence is God, Mighty and Majestic, alone; and those who take Satan the accursed as their guardian have lost everything they had in a clear loss with no doubt about it, and have wasted what God gave them, the divine fiṭrah.
4:120 — He makes them promises and gives them [false] hopes
He makes them promises and gives them [false] hopes, yet Satan does not promise them anything but delusion.
Satan the accursed casts far-reaching hopes into the person he enters and makes him long for false promises. If these take effect in that person and the way of whispering is fully prepared for Satan, he then forces him to carry out his commands; even though the human being, in creation, is entirely free to follow truth or falsehood. In any case, the general meaning of this verse, as concerns the work of Satan the accursed, is: Satan can make promises to the human being and stir up longings in him, but his deeds go no further than these two things.
So exchanging true happiness for imaginary happiness and real misery, because of Satan’s false promises and his invented, illusory longings, is one of the clear instances of the manifest loss mentioned at the end of the previous verse.
So Satan the accursed makes promises to the human being and threatens him. By threats he frightens him and keeps him from doing righteous deeds; and by false promises he stirs up longings in him and pushes him to do things that will be of no use in the future. In both cases he deceives the human being and tricks him.
Satan’s longings, promises and threats are nothing but delusion and illusion, and all his longings and promises rest on trickery and deceit. But linking delusion to the promise is closer, because its effect on a human being’s happiness is great. Then, because of the confusion that strikes the feelings, longing works to create a great deceit within the human being, who finds no escape from believing it.
4:121 — The refuge of such shall be hell
The refuge of such shall be hell, and they will not find any escape from it.
It is known that the refuge of those deceived by the false promises of Satan the accursed is Hell, from which they have no way to escape. They are unable to bring themselves out of the Fire, nor is there anyone to help them or intercede for them; indeed, there is no one who will accept to be their guardian.
The complete denial of any escape in the verse, “and they will not find any escape from it”, covers both the state of coming into being and the state of remaining. That is, they have no way or means to prevent their entering Hell, and they have no path or escape to leave the Fire. Because of the depth of Hell and the faithless falling to the furthest point in it, the noble Qur’an refers to them with “Those”, the demonstrative for what is far.
It is worth mentioning that the threat of Hell itself and of abiding in it concerns a particular group of the obstinate faithless and the bitterly hostile hypocrites. This threat comes because of their bad choice and their closing the three ways of rescue mentioned, so that no other way of deliverance is left for them. It is possible that those faithless are living in a state of divine punishment, but because of their intoxication in this world they do not feel the punishment, and they will become aware of it after their death and destruction.
4:122 — But those who have faith and do righteous deeds
But those who have faith and do righteous deeds, We will admit them into gardens with streams running in them, to remain in them forever—a true promise of Allah, and who is truer in speech than Allah?
After mentioning the promise and threat of Satan the accursed and warning those deceived by his false promises in the previous verses, this noble verse contains good news and a promise from God (s.w.t.) to the faithful who have joined faith (goodness of the doer) with righteous deeds (goodness of the act).
According to external evidence, what is meant by the word “righteous deeds” in this verse is not all righteous deeds; though the reward of one whose deeds are all righteous is greater and weightier, and he is far from any loss and harm. It should be pointed out that the deed must match the proof of its age. For this reason, acting according to the abrogated laws of the past prophets (a.s.) is not a righteous deed, even if it was so in its own time; but the main and comprehensive lines of religion are not abrogated with the passing of time.
The promises of Satan the accursed are all false and lying, while the promises of God (s.w.t.) are the very truth; indeed they are the truest of promises, and their truth is decisive and certain. God, Exalted, is the most truthful of speakers, and His speech and word include both statement and command; indeed, they are the most truthful and firmest of words.
4:123 — It will be neither after your hopes nor the hopes of the People of the Book
It will be neither after your hopes nor the hopes of the People of the Book: whoever commits evil shall be requited for it, and he will not find for himself any guardian or helper besides Allah.
There is no doubt that salvation does not come through national or religious boasting and vanity, nor through false wishful thinking. Merely belonging to a heavenly religion has no effect at all. The false wishes of any group, whether Muslims or People of the Book, have no basis in knowledge and rest on no proof. Those wishes have no effect in bringing happiness and salvation from terrors. Rather, salvation and success lie in having faith in the Origin and the Return, and righteous deeds according to the proof of each age.
As for the implied pronoun in His words, Exalted, “It is not by your wishes...”, it is said to refer to the reward, the recompense and God’s promise. But in reality it refers to the order that prevails in creation and legislation, which rests on cause and effect, justice and fairness, where there is no place for wishful thinking.
Calling false belief, empty conjecture and superstitions “wishes” is to show the falseness of all of it, and that such a wish is nothing but a mirage with no effect at all. The false and empty wishes of the People of the Book have no effect worth mentioning. And to stress that such false wishes have no effect among the Muslims either, God (s.w.t.) put them together with the People of the Book, saying: “It is not by your wishes, nor by the wishes of the People of the Book.”
So a false wish means making truth and justice follow desires and falsehoods; and that is nothing but the misguidance of purely ignorant thought, and one of the teachings of Satan the accursed, who threatened earlier, saying: “and I will surely stir up wishes in them.”
In any case, whoever has faith and does righteous deeds will be covered by God’s kindness, Exalted. And whoever does evil deeds, whether a Muslim, a Jew, a Christian, a Sabian or a heretic, will see the outcome of his deeds; the goodness of the doer will not stand between him and the punishment. For the ugliness of the act is the condition of punishment, and it makes no difference whether the doer is righteous or wicked, because the measure here is the sin and the wrongdoing. The recompense of an evil deed may be less than the evil deed itself; and some afflictions that befall a person in this world may, by God’s grace and care, be a means of wiping out his evil deeds. But what is certain is that those punished will not be wronged.
On the Day of Resurrection the faithless will have no way to rescue himself from danger, besides which he will find no one there to help him and take his part, because he has left God’s (s.w.t.) guardianship and remained without a guardian. On the Day of Resurrection too, no one will be able to help or aid the faithless except by the leave of God (s.w.t.). For the human being is not an independent being, and there is no doubt that he is in urgent need of someone to take his part and help him.
4:124 — And whoever does righteous deeds
And whoever does righteous deeds, whether male or female, should he be faithful—such shall enter paradise and they will not be wronged [so much as] the speck on a date-stone.
If hope is not joined with fear, it turns into despair; and if fear is not present with hope, hope becomes a means to false wishes. Bringing fear and hope together prevents falling short and going to excess. On this basis, after the divine threat in the previous verse, the turn of the promise came: “And whoever does righteous deeds...”, joined to His words, Exalted, in the previous verse: “Whoever does evil...”.
For a human being to enter Paradise by its widest gate, he must have the goodness of the doer (faith) and the goodness of the act (righteous deeds). Faith, which is among the acts of the heart, comes before the righteous deed, which is among the acts of the body. Perhaps the secret of mentioning the righteous deed before faith in this verse is to show the importance of righteous deeds, and to encourage joining belief and action for those faithful who have been taken in by false wishes and been careless in doing righteous deeds.
It is not a condition that all of a person’s deeds be righteous for him to enter Paradise: “And whoever does [some] of the righteous deeds”. Rather, a believer may be fit to enter Paradise even by doing some righteous deeds. For example, he may not have been required to do the righteous deeds he did not do, such as not being required to pay zakāh on wealth that had not reached the minimum amount (niṣāb); or he may have been heedless and forgetful, not deliberate, in failing to carry out some duties and obligations, and then he makes up for all of it through repentance and turning back.
Being a man or a woman is not a condition for reaching the degrees of spiritual perfection and faith. God’s (s.w.t.) promise of Paradise covers believing men and believing women, and each of them can do good deeds and win Paradise.
The faithful of the highest degrees are nearer to God than others, while ordinary individuals are far from them and cannot reach those high degrees. The use of the word “Those”, the demonstrative for what is far, makes clear the loftiness of the standing of the people of Paradise and the height of their degrees.
The noble verse also stresses that no one will be wronged on the Day of Resurrection, even by as much as the speck on a date stone.
4:125 — Who has a better religion than him who submits his will to Allah
Who has a better religion than him who submits his will to Allah, being virtuous, and follows the creed of Abraham, a Hanif? And Allah took Abraham for a dedicated friend.
Religion is sound belief and righteous deeds; nothing other than this is good, because it is not accepted by God (s.w.t.), and the perfection of goodness exists only in Islam. Whoever takes a religion other than the religion of Islam, God will not accept it from him. The word “better” in His words, Exalted, “And who is better in religion”, conveys designation, not comparison. For the religions of the Jews, the Christians and the Sabians were a proof in their own time, before abrogation.
For a human being to be saved and reach everlasting happiness, he must hold to tawḥīd in belief and be upon the creed of Abraham, turning his face and spirit to God (s.w.t.), that is, submitting. He must also be a doer of good (muḥsin) who does righteous deeds; it is not enough to hold to tawḥīd in his heart alone.
The meaning of muḥsin is one who does good, whether for himself (such as performing individual acts of worship) or for others (such as meeting the need of his believing brother). So doing good (iḥsān) in this sense means doing good to others, and it is one of the moral matters. As for iḥsān in the sense that a person worships his Lord as though he sees one of the faces of the divine essence, it is one of the stations of wayfaring and journeying to God (s.w.t.).
The comprehensive and universal principle in His words, Exalted, “And who is better in religion than one who submits his face to God while he is a doer of good”, sets out the true concept of religion. So that no one should claim that his religion is the best of religions, that is, so that no one should be confused and claim to be the best of the religious because of his error in applying the comprehensive and universal concept to an instance, He, Exalted, mentioned the true instance and the particular model of it alongside the principle and concept. The clear instance of the goodness of the doer (“one who submits his face to God”) and the goodness of the act (“while he is a doer of good”) is following the creed of Abraham: “and follows the creed of Abraham, the upright (ḥanīf)”; for the Friend of God (a.s.) is the prominent example of tawḥīd in practice.
So whoever has the goodness of the doer and the goodness of the act is on the creed of Abraham the Friend (a.s.). And just as Abraham (a.s.) was ḥanīf, that is, balanced in his conduct and his original course, inclined toward the truth and turned away from falsehood, his followers must be so too. There was a close friendship (khullah) between God (s.w.t.) and Abraham (a.s.). But God’s friendship, Exalted, toward the servant, according to the illuminative relation (al-iḍāfah al-ishrāqiyyah), is of the kind of a relation whose two sides are unlike, and of the kind of the affection of the giver toward the one who asks.
Some narrations mention the reasons our master Abraham (a.s.) reached the station of friendship: he never turned anyone away and never asked anyone but God, Mighty and Majestic; and because of his many invocations of blessing upon Muḥammad (s.a.w.) and his Household, God’s blessings be upon them, his many prostrations on the earth, his feeding people, and his praying at night while people slept.
It is worth mentioning that His words, Exalted, “a day in which there is no trading and no friendship”, do not deny the effect of the friendship of the Friend of God on the Day of Resurrection and at the scene of the Return. For Abraham’s (a.s.) friendship is part of God’s (s.w.t.) dye that prevails in the whole realm of possibility, and it prevails and remains firm at the Return and the Resurrection too.
There is no doubt that following the Friend of God (a.s.) in belief, character and action can raise a human being’s station to the rank of friendship, which is better than entering Paradise.
4:126 — To Allah belongs whatever is in the heavens and whatever is on the earth
To Allah belongs whatever is in the heavens and whatever is on the earth, and Allah comprehends all things.
Everything in the heavens and the earth (the universe and what is in it) is owned by God, Exalted. And ownership differs from power; so the sentence “and God encompasses all things” is not a repetition of His words, Exalted, “And to God belongs whatever is in the heavens and whatever is in the earth.”
On the basis of this verse, and as tawḥīd requires, everything to which the name “thing” applies, even if it does not actually exist, or exists but outside the bounds of the heavens and the earth, is without fail encompassed in its existence by God, Mighty and Majestic.
What is meant by “encompassing” in this verse is encompassing by power, not encompassing by knowledge. It is well known that the attributes of the essence and the beautiful divine names are independent of one another in concept, but one with another in their instance; and there is no priority in reality between God’s (s.w.t.) knowledge and His power. But at the level of proof, power may sometimes come before knowledge, or the reverse. The secret of mentioning divine power before divine knowledge in some verses is that people, before anything else, perceive the doer through the act, and only after that perceive the doer’s knowledge by way of the order in it.
Given what the previous verses convey, that is, the command to worship and leave sins, the promise and good news of Paradise, the threat and warning of Hell, and the mention of God’s (s.w.t.) friendship with Abraham (a.s.), what comes in this verse contains the following points:
The proof of these commands; meaning: everything whose existence is from God, Exalted, in coming into being and in remaining, must follow the One who granted it that existence.
Keeping promises. A promise is effective only if the one who makes it is able to keep and fulfil it, and nothing lies outside his knowledge. Since everything is owned by God (s.w.t.), and God is All-Powerful and All-Knowing, He will without doubt keep all His promises, just as He is able to carry out His threat too.
God’s (s.w.t.) freedom from need of anything. He has no need of any friend; His choosing a friend is to meet the needs of the friend himself. Abraham (a.s.) is a part of the beings in the order of the universe and among God’s possessions, and God’s friendship with him is nothing but an illuminative relation.
4:127 — They seek your ruling concerning women
They seek your ruling concerning women. Say, ‘Allah gives you a ruling concerning them and what is announced to you in the Book concerning girl orphans—whom you do not give what has been prescribed for them, and yet you desire to marry them—and about the weak among children: that you should maintain the orphans with justice, and whatever good you do, indeed Allah knows it well.
This verse completes the explanation begun by the verses at the start of the chapter about the matter of women and reviving their rights. It sets out the rights of women and of oppressed children that people had let die in the age of ignorance, in property, in relations and in other matters, and it answers the questions that were raised after those verses came down.
The issues of women, the principles of the family, and orphans and children are branches of jurisprudence. Even so, the noble Qur’an took them up openly and clearly, because of the great problems they posed for the Muslims at that time, owing to the neglect of them by the society of ignorance.
To show the importance of this problem of thought and conduct concerning women among the Arabs of the age of ignorance, the verse referred the matter of the ruling (fatwā) to God (s.w.t.) and turned it away from the most noble Prophet (s.a.w.). So the meaning is: they ask you to give them a ruling about women; say, the ruling belongs to God, and He has already given you a ruling about them in the verses He sent down at the start of the chapter. This is so even though he (s.a.w.) is the one responsible for setting out matters of jurisprudence and rights.
Joining the phrase “and what is recited to you in the Book” to the pronoun in “about them” is meant to say that God gives you the ruling that you must act justly with women, their orphans, and the oppressed among the children.
His words “and what is recited to you” are not joined to the name “God” or to the subject pronoun in “gives you a ruling”, as though the verse were listing those who give rulings and attributing the ruling to God and to His Book each separately. The divine verses are the text of God’s (s.w.t.) ruling, not another giver of rulings besides Him. So the saying that God and what is recited in His Book both give rulings is refuted.
It has been said that “women” in “the orphan women” means orphan girls, the adjective being added to the noun it describes; or it means the orphans in the care of women, so that “the women” are the mothers of the orphans.
What is meant by His words “what is prescribed for them” is the creational prescription, that is, divine measuring, not the legislative prescription particular to inheritance, dowry or the right of marriage. As shown by the omission of the object, which points to generality, “what is prescribed for them” means all the natural rights of which women are deprived. And since the order of legislation is in harmony with the order of creation, all the rights that the system of divine creation has set for women in the spheres of jurisprudence and rights must be taken into account. This comprehensive principle also covers social, economic, cultural and other matters.
In the society of ignorance, ugliness or beauty decided whether a man wanted to marry a woman or turned away from it; and the wise Qur’an condemns both. So “and you desire to marry them” bears two senses: desire and longing, or aversion and turning away. If you take it as desire, the meaning is: you desire to marry them for their wealth. If you take it as aversion, the meaning is: you turn away from marrying them because of their ugliness.
The request for a ruling about women was behind the coming down of God’s ruling for them, and of what was legislated concerning orphan girls and children. What these two groups share in being deprived of their rights is the man’s freedom to dispose of their honour and property.
There is no doubt that the justice of the Islamic order is enough to prevent wrong and unfairness against members of society. But the orphan’s being left homeless and his need for someone to support him are among the reasons the noble Qur’an takes care to provide him with just support. In great matters God (s.w.t.) commands that they stand firm for justice, and this is what He commanded with regard to orphans. And in His words, “and whatever good you do, God knows it”, there is further encouragement and urging to do good deeds.
4:128 — If a woman fears from her husband misconduct or desertion
If a woman fears from her husband misconduct or desertion, there is no sin upon the couple if they reach a reconciliation between themselves; and reconcilement is better. The souls are prone to greed; but if you are virtuous and Godwary, Allah is indeed well aware of what you do.
Verses 34 and 35 set out the ruling on the wife’s rebelliousness (nushūz). The essential element in this verse is the husband’s rebelliousness, or his turning away from his wife in matters of married life. Of course this does not include leaving her for a time because he is busy with important political, military and other affairs.
What is meant by turning away is keeping silent about good and bad, about kind treatment and harm, without cancelling her rights (maintenance, for example), and without foul speech or violence.
So, following the teachings of the previous verse on women’s rights, this verse sets out to strengthen the pillars and structure of the family within the frame of kindness and Godwariness. It deals with the husband’s rebelliousness and the wife’s fear that he will wrong her and belittle her rights; so the call came to men to be kind and hold to Godwariness. In truth, married life contains mutual rights between husband and wife which they should observe, and they should settle their disputes by overlooking some rights and being lenient about them. The wife may overlook her right to her share of nights, sharing the bed, maintenance, clothing, housing and the like; and likewise overlook, as a matter of character, the husband’s coldness and harshness, his turning away, his silence and the like. All of this is to keep the order of married life from coming apart.
This verse takes up the subject of reconciliation in the family and putting its affairs right with greater focus, compared with verse 35. It mentions the verbal noun “a reconciliation”, and follows it with the independent phrase “and reconciliation is better”, which shows the importance of reconciliation.
The reconciliation meant is reconciliation before the dispute, not after it has happened, and this is the meaning that best fits the setting. For the mere fear of rebelliousness and of turning away strengthens the possibility of making peace: “And if a woman fears rebelliousness or turning away from her husband, there is no blame on them if they make a reconciliation between them.” The meaning is: take care that no bitter dispute breaks out, because avoiding harm is easier than removing it, especially when the matter concerns the affairs of the family, which involves greater sensitivity.
Some people take “better” in “and reconciliation is better” as all-embracing, that is, reconciliation in itself is good and beneficial; and some take it as referring to what was just mentioned, meaning that reconciliation between husband and wife is better than separation.
Following the principle that teaching the Book and wisdom goes together with purification, the noble verse offers a solution to avoid the separation of husband and wife: one or both of them overlooking some of their rights. It then explains “avarice” (shuḥḥ) and how to be rid of it.
The human being is moulded to love himself. He holds tightly to his interests and is fanatical about his beliefs and habits, and this is what is called shuḥḥ. Among its effects are stinginess and holding back, joined with greed and covetousness, until it becomes a habit for him. In its broader sense it covers wealth, rights and positions in this world. It is one of the deadliest diseases for the human being, and its harm reaches his conduct, actions, words and writings. In the end, avarice and stinginess are not limited to wealth alone, but go beyond it to rights too (such as the mutual rights of husband and wife).
The root of shuḥḥ was planted by the wise God in the human soul. It is a psychological instinct with which the human spirit is moulded, and one of the important factors in gaining benefit and warding off harm; without it the continuance of human life is impossible. For this reason the wise God keeps this flame alive within the human being as an energy ready to sharpen resolve. So He called this state “the presence of avarice” (iḥḍār al-shuḥḥ), meaning not the bringing of the soul itself, but the higher principles subject to the management of God, Exalted.
What matters here is directing this useful power according to the teachings of reason and of the transmitted texts drawn from revelation. God, Exalted, inspired the power that guides it, the intellect, with its wickedness and its Godwariness, and created the root of the power of avarice in a moderate measure.
The ruling of Godwariness is comprehensive and general. But “if you do good and are Godwary” in the verse, in the light of “and souls are prone to avarice”, has a particular ruling. It means that an armed enemy is entrenched in the depths of your souls, called fanaticism and selfishness, and you must fight it with the weapon of Godwariness, so that you protect yourselves, escape the danger of this enemy, and reach the rank of success and perfection.
From this verse we also learn a general law about the natural ambition of every human being, and likewise the loftiness of reconciliation and peace for all and in all matters. “Souls” here are not particular to husband and wife, nor is “reconciliation” limited to the rights of the family, even though the verse turns on a ruling about the family.
4:129–130 — You will not be able to be fair between wives
(129) You will not be able to be fair between wives, even if you are eager to do so. Yet do not turn away from one altogether, leaving her as if in a suspense. But if you are conciliatory and Godwary, Allah is indeed all-forgiving, all-merciful. (130) But if they separate, Allah will suffice each of them out of His bounty, and Allah is all-bounteous, all-wise.
Like the previous verses, these two verses contain some rulings related to the family and married life.
The third verse of this chapter also set out the matter of justice toward wives. It is a mistake to imagine that it does not fit with the verse under discussion and to conclude that the noble Qur’an opposes having more than one wife; for the subject of each is different. What is meant in the third verse is justice in the rulings of jurisprudence and rights; that is, the condition of justice between wives, when there is more than one, must be met in maintenance, clothing, housing and so on. This may seem hard, but it is not impossible; so whoever is not able to meet this condition should not take more than one wife. As for the subject of this verse, it is justice of the heart, especially in the attachment of hearts. For the love of the heart does not always come under choice; and justice, which is truly keeping to the exact middle, is something an ordinary human being cannot do even if he strives for it. His heart overcomes him and leads him rather than being led (and this difference in attachment prepares the way for a difference in conduct and actions). This is His word, Exalted: “And you will not be able to act justly between women, even if you are eager to.”
Love has many causes, some of which do not come under choice. So He, Exalted, made clear that justice between women in the full sense of the word is not possible; and for this reason He did not command it here, because it would be a duty beyond what can be borne. But good character and justice in dealing with the wife are possible. After setting out the human being’s inability to control the attachments of his heart, He, Exalted, made this inner matter a preparation for the coming down of a legal ruling: “so do not incline wholly [to one], leaving the other as though suspended.”
It should be made clear that providing the financial rights (the maintenance known in jurisprudence) and dividing them justly, and likewise dividing justly the rights of married life (the share of nights, sharing the bed and the like), is obligatory. But dividing equally any kindness beyond providing maintenance, and likewise equalising the attachments of the heart and inner love, is not obligatory. Nor is there anything wrong in inclining a little toward one of them, so long as the other’s right is not lost. Rather, what is forbidden is inclining wholly toward one of them and abandoning the other, in a way that makes a woman who has rights like one suspended; and this is not permitted at all.
After the noble verse forbids such forbidden discrimination and unjust suspension, He, Exalted, says: “And if you put things right and are Godwary, surely God is All-Forgiving, All-Merciful.”
If none of these methods and solutions bear fruit, the ways of reconciliation between husband and wife are exhausted, and married life cannot continue, then there is no escape from divorce, even though it is the most hateful of permitted things to God (s.w.t.). Here the fear of poverty and need should not stand in the way of divorce. Who knows, perhaps ampler provision for both depends on their separating, and each of them trying his or her fortune in a new marriage. So when married life has come to drain the strength of both sides, they may go ahead with separation without fear of the future, after putting their trust in God. God is All-Embracing and All-Wise, and will make another chance easy for husband and wife with another spouse. God owns the order of creation, and He is the All-Embracing, the All-Wise; and the breadth of blessing, mercy and power is secured under the shade of divine wisdom.
4:131–132 — To Allah belongs whatever is in the heavens and whatever is on the earth
(131) To Allah belongs whatever is in the heavens and whatever is on the earth. We have certainly enjoined those who were given the Book before you, and you, that you should be wary of Allah. But if you are faithless, [you should know that] to Allah indeed belongs whatever is in the heavens and whatever is on the earth, and Allah is all-sufficient, all-laudable. (132) To Allah belongs whatever is in the heavens and whatever is on the earth, and Allah suffices as trustee.
The first verse gives the reason for, confirms and stresses the content of the previous verse about the breadth of God’s provision, and likewise stresses the command to be Godwary in the previous verses.
The repetition of “to God belongs whatever is in the heavens and whatever is in the earth” is not meant only for emphasis. In the light of the three independent contents of the verses under discussion (131 to 133), this repetition is three comprehensive proofs for three claims: 1. God is All-Embracing, which establishes His power to give ample provision to husband and wife after their separation. 2. He, Exalted, has no need of human worship, and their lack of Godwariness and their unbelief do not harm Him at all. 3. He (s.w.t.) has the power to wipe out one people and put another in its place to preserve His religion. The cause of the three points is one; the proofs are many only because the claims are many.
Some moral principles are among God’s perfect words that do not accept abrogation or change. Counselling them is also among the necessary teachings that cannot be altered or replaced, such as the counsel to be Godwary and to serve God. These two are a shared principle that does not accept abrogation, neither among the Muslims nor among the followers of other heavenly religions; they are among the general moral lines and the rights of the past religions.
The order of the universe, and even the human being’s created identity, is created and owned by God, and He is its owner. The pious draw help from the order of creation; and if they disbelieve (whether unbelief in belief or unbelief in practice) and leave piety and Godwariness, they will not be safe from the punishment of the heavens and the earth.
In His words, Exalted, “then surely to God belongs whatever is in the heavens and whatever is in the earth”, there is a statement of the breadth of God’s kingdom, and also of the breadth of His servants’ glorifying, praise and worship.
The heavens and the earth are all His (s.w.t.) possession, and He is the absolutely Self-Sufficient (al-Ghanī), free of need of humans and jinn and of their worship. Neither the worship nor the unbelief of His servants brings Him benefit or harm, just as their unbelief does not benefit the faithless.
He alone is the Self-Sufficient, free of any need (all-glorious, all-holy). He has no need of anyone or anything, and everyone and everything needs Him. He is the master of blessings, who meets the need of everyone in need; and for this reason He deserves praise and commendation as is His due. All glorify Him with His praise, and He is the absolutely Praiseworthy (al-Ḥamīd).
“Praiseworthy” (ḥamīd) means both “one who praises” and “one who is praised”. He praises because He praises Himself (“Praise belongs to God, Lord of the worlds”); and He is praised because all things extol Him and glorify Him with His praise. The whole world of existence glorifies Him (s.w.t.) with His praise. Yes, the human being may be heedless in the order of legislation and disbelieve; but in the order of creation all creatures and humankind glorify Him with His praise.
The phrase “and God suffices as a guardian” gives the reason for the content of the next verse (verse 133). It is as though it were a preparation to warn them that they will not be able to solve their problems themselves, so it is best for them to entrust their affairs to God, who is the All-Knowing, the Self-Sufficient and the Praiseworthy, and to put their trust in Him. Even if they choose unbelief and not to rely on Him, the meaning of the general Guardian who controls all things remains. Whether the servants put their trust in Him or not, their affairs are managed according to His absolute guardianship and as the good of the order of creation requires, not according to their desires. So He takes away one people and replaces it with another. He is the absolute Owner, the order of existence is His possession, and He is the Guardian over the universe.
It has also been said that “guardian” (wakīl) means the one who watches over, controls and observes. If that is so, then God’s (s.w.t.) sufficing, according to these meanings of the divine names, makes clear the servants’ duty to be careful in His presence.
4:133 — If He wishes, He will take you away
If He wishes, He will take you away, O mankind, and bring others [in your place]; Allah has the power to do that.
We have seen that God, Exalted, is the guardian of all things (“and God suffices as a guardian”). He acts as the good of creatures and the order of creation requires; and if His wisdom requires that He destroy a transgressing people and replace them with another people in order to preserve His religion, He is without doubt able to do so. In the same way it can be said that if those who take charge of the affairs of society do not carry out their duties, God will replace them with others who are faithful and committed.
In the light of the verse’s context and arrangement, which blame unbelief and urge people to Godwariness, it sets out God’s power, Exalted, and establishes His power to preserve His religion and stand against the spread of unbelief. It does not set out to establish the root of God’s strength and ownership and His power to destroy one generation and bring a new one.
The word “take away” (idhhāb) in the verse expresses that death is not annihilation; after this world there is the barzakh and the Resurrection, and the human being moves from one abode to another.
It is God’s fixed custom to take away one group and bring another. But since the verse turns on threat, not on God’s fixed custom, what it means is a humiliating taking away, not taking away as such, which means causing to die.
If what “that” in the verse points to is both taking away and bringing together, not bringing alone, then the will relates to both of them (taking away and bringing), and so does the power; so nothing in between is nothingness.
4:134 — Whoever desires the reward of this world
Whoever desires the reward of this world, [should know that] with Allah is the reward of this world and the Hereafter, and Allah is all-hearing, all-seeing.
In the previous verses He (s.w.t.) counselled His servants to be Godwary. And He shows the error of those who cling to this world and turn away from Godwariness, who think that holding to Godwariness and obeying God’s commands deprives them of the blessings of this world. But they are entirely mistaken; for this world too is in God’s hand, not in anyone else’s, so let them not think it is gained by sin and distance from God. They do not get the pleasures of this world in the measure of their desire and effort (in the form of a universal affirmative); for the keys of this world are in the hand of God (s.w.t.), and He gives each according to what His wisdom requires. Then He deprives him in the Hereafter of the bliss and pleasures of Paradise and afflicts him with the punishment of the fire of Hell. The reward and happiness of both abodes are in God’s hand alone, and reaching them depends on faith, not unbelief. The believer too should ask God for both this world and the Hereafter. If he prays to his Lord to give him good in this world and in the Hereafter, he will win them both; especially the reward of the Hereafter, which God grants them in the form of a universal affirmative, without limit in quantity or kind, in proportion to his righteous deeds.
God has prepared for both groups (the people of this world and the people of the Hereafter) the provision of this test. He is All-Hearing, All-Seeing, and knows the intentions, needs and interests of His servants; so He pours out upon each servant what His wisdom requires.
4:135 — O you who have faith! Be maintainers of justice and witnesses for the sake of Allah
O you who have faith! Be maintainers of justice and witnesses for the sake of Allah, even if it should be against yourselves or [your] parents and near relatives, and whether it be [someone] rich or poor, for Allah has a greater right over them. So do not follow [your] desires, lest you should be unfair, and if you distort [the testimony] or disregard [it], Allah is indeed well aware of what you do.
This verse may be a general statement after a particular one, and an emphasis on acting on all the duties set out from the start of the chapter up to here.
The order of creation turns on the truth, and the order of legislation is also in full harmony with this order of creation. So nothing fits with wisdom and the good except that the human being make the truth the centre of all his affairs, individual, social, judicial and so on. Turning aside from the highway and swerving to one side prepare the way for falling into the abyss; and the way of firmness is standing for justice, establishing justice, being steadfast in justice and the like. So the living and lasting principle is avoiding deviation, turning from the highway and swerving to one side.
In matters of government and judgment, it is not enough for a person to be “standing for justice” (qāʾiman bi-l-qisṭ); he must be “steadfast in justice” (qawwāman bi-l-qisṭ), so as to apply justice fully and completely.
The command to stand for justice may come before the command to bear witness because standing for justice is harder for the judge than bearing witness is for the witness. Whoever cannot be steadfast in justice and truth will succeed neither in bearing witness justly nor in judging with justice and fairness. Bearing true witness is easy for one in whom justice and standing for justice have become a settled trait deep within.
So the governor or judge must act justly to the point of perfection; and the witness or the party in a case must bear witness to the truth, and his witness must be for God. The apparent sense of the verse, and the least that is certain in the setting of address, is that the witness must be of upright character (ʿadālah), because it holds that steadfastness in justice is obligatory. So the witness, besides faith, should be upright and observe justice in his witness. What makes witness acceptable is the uprightness of the witness, and his transgression bars it; and the particular identity of the one witnessed for or against plays no part. The command to bear witness, and likewise to accept it, covers all Muslims and is not particular to one people or tribe.
In bearing witness to the truth, there is no difference between those witnessed against (whether it is the person himself or someone close to him or a stranger far off, a city-dweller or a villager, rich or poor, Muslim or non-Muslim, free or slave). So witness to the truth about rich and poor is regardless of the wealth or poverty of the one witnessed for and the one witnessed against. Neither the wealth of the rich nor the poverty of the poor should keep the witness from the duty of witnessing with justice and truth. For as to the person who benefits or is harmed by the witness, God knows better and is more fit to take care of his state; and his true good is not achieved by false witness, but by caring for the interests of the individual, the parents, the near relatives, the poor and the rich under the shade of establishing justice and gaining the pleasure of God (s.w.t.).
As was said, the noble verse dealt with both cases, benefit and harm, including where the one witnessed against is one of the parents or other near relatives and the witness’s testimony goes against him. It may seem that the son is witnessing against his father’s interest, but in reality he is doing him a kindness and saving him from the punishment of the Fire. And what kindness is greater than saving one’s parents from the Fire? As for the father being hurt by this just conduct, that does not befit him. Of course, in worldly matters he must be gentle with his parents and treat them well (“and keep them company in this world with kindness”); but going along with him in falsehood is keeping company with wrong, not with kindness.
From here comes the obligation to give witness in Islamic courts (just as putting the command “be” before the phrase “witnesses for God” suggests obligation). True witness that harms others, even parents and near relatives, takes effect, and judges must accept it. For if giving witness were obligatory but not accepted in court, that would be pointless.
Desires and the appetites of the self are the source of every kind of injustice and of turning one’s back on the truth. It is these desires that stand in the way of steadfastness in justice; so if a person wants justice to become a settled trait in him, he must fight desire. From here came God’s (s.w.t.) prohibition of following desire and acting on appetite: “so do not follow desire.” This prohibition may cover desires of knowledge and thought as well as desires of action and conduct.
Following desire means that the witness does not come to court to give witness, or that he bears false witness.
Turning away from just witness, whether by not bearing witness at all or by distorting it, is forbidden. Every witness who bears false witness, or refuses to give it when it is obligatory, or keeps silent, has left a duty and done a forbidden act; and God knows it, and he deserves punishment for it.
4:136 — O you who have faith! Have faith in Allah and His Apostle and the Book that He has sent…
O you who have faith! Have faith in Allah and His Apostle and the Book that He has sent down to His Apostle and the Book He had sent down earlier. Whoever disbelieves in Allah and His angels, His Books and His apostles and the Last Day, has certainly strayed into far error.
“Steadfastness in justice”, which the previous verse commanded, requires complete and firm faith.
Those addressed in this verse are the faithful, not the polytheists (on account of their faith in idols) nor the People of the Book (on account of their faith in the Torah and the Gospel); for the noble Qur’an does not address the polytheists and the People of the Book with the phrase “O you who have faith”.
From commanding the faithful to have faith a second time, it becomes clear that those addressed by the verse bear a quality that God (s.w.t.) commands them to complete, persevere in and hold firm to, namely faith. In the light of the detail in the object of the second command to have faith, that is, “God”, “the Messenger” and “the Book” (“Have faith in God and His Messenger and...”), and also in the light of the threat and warning against unbelief and leaving faith in each one of these details (“and whoever disbelieves in God and...”), the noble verse commands the faithful to extend their general faith to the details of these truths. For they are teachings connected to one another, each requiring the others. God (s.w.t.), there is no god but He, has the beautiful names and the highest attributes; and these are what require that He create creatures, guide them to what directs them aright and makes them happy, then raise them for a day in which there is no doubt, to judge between them in what they differed about, and make clear to them the teachings of the Origin and the Return, and the roots of the laws and the rulings. So faith in one of the truths of these teachings is not complete except with faith in all of them without exception. Rejecting some of them while taking others is unbelief if shown, and hypocrisy if hidden and concealed. And it is hypocrisy for a believer to take a course that ends in rejecting some of it; such as leaving the community of the faithful, drawing close to the community of the faithless and taking them as allies, and agreeing with them in some of what they throw at faith and its people, or objecting to or mocking the truth and those devoted to it. For this reason He, Exalted, followed this verse by taking up the state of the hypocrites and threatening them with a painful punishment.
By the clear indication of the unrestricted and general wording of the verse, the faithful must have faith in all of God’s prophets (a.s.). It is a faith that cannot be split up or divided; meaning that faith in some of the prophets (a.s.) and rejection of others is unbelief. And since mere faith in a prophet’s prophethood without faith in his heavenly book is not enough, what is required is faith in the heavenly books, which goes together with faith in the root of the prophet’s prophethood. What is meant by “the Book” in “and the Book which He sent down before” is the genus of book in general, which includes all the past heavenly books.
The noble verse expresses the coming down of the Qur’an with the word tanzīl (“and the Book which He sent down [nazzala] upon His Messenger”), while it uses the word inzāl for the earlier heavenly books (“and the Book which He sent down [anzala] before”). Although a complete explanation of the difference between tanzīl and inzāl as gradual and all-at-once is open to objection and criticism, in the light of the contrast between the two words, what is meant in this verse by this difference, unless it is merely variety of expression, is the coming down of the Qur’an in parts, which fits with tanzīl, and the coming down of the earlier heavenly books all at once, which fits with the word inzāl.
The truths that God (s.w.t.) commands the faithful to have faith in, in detail (“Have faith in God and His Messenger and...”), are teachings that are joined, connected to one another and each requiring the others. Faith in one of the truths of these teachings is not complete except with faith in all of them without exception, and rejecting some of them while taking others is unbelief. Likewise the “and” in “and whoever disbelieves in God and His angels and...” means “or”; so whoever has faith in God and His Messenger but does not have faith in the Return has gone astray.
So “whoever disbelieves in God and His angels and His Books and His messengers and the Last Day has certainly strayed far away”: he strays from the path and from the goal, and lives his whole life lost and bewildered.
4:137–138 — As for those who believe and then disbelieve
(137) As for those who believe and then disbelieve, then believe [again] and then disbelieve and then increase in disbelief, Allah shall never forgive them, nor shall He guide them to any way. (138) Inform the hypocrites that there is a painful punishment for them
A person’s faith in a particular religion out of self-interest leads him only to accept a call or a ruling that carries some interest or benefit for him.
On one way of interpreting the verse, the meaning that fits with what was said earlier in interpreting “O you who have faith, have faith”, the verse sets out the state of those who had faith but disbelieved when this faith did not agree with their interests in some matters. Then they returned to faith when it met their inclinations and interests in another ruling, and turned back again with another ruling that clashed with their desires; and so they are in constant turning about.
The noble verse describes the state of those who change colour in religion; it does not mean to state this number, three times. These people are afflicted with changing states and settle neither on unbelief nor on faith. They have no foundation, no firmness of thought and no religious faith. They are nearer to unbelief, and they go deeper and deeper into it as a result of their confusion in conduct, speech and writing. They work in various ways and take on different colours. Just as faith has levels and degrees of strength and weakness, unbelief has descending levels.
Those who change colour in religion make God’s religion a plaything and a trade. They buy and sell with faith and unbelief, take on a new colour and dress every day, go to bed in faith and wake up in unbelief; sometimes they are faithful people of tawḥīd, and at other times faithless heretics. They turn about between unbelief and faith because of their confusion of thought: they believe once, disbelieve many times and turn back. And when this trait has become firmly fixed in them, they increase in unbelief upon unbelief. These people are deprived of forgiveness, repentance, special guidance and divine reward. For God favoured them with His kindness and His turning toward them again and again, but they persisted in unbelief, made light of God’s signs and kindness, and by their bad choice turned their backs on Him.
Changing colour and hypocrisy in religion, and the difference between outward and inward, prevent success in repenting or lessen its chances. So those who change colour, and those who show faith and hide unbelief, are deprived of repentance, or are seldom guided to it.
In the light of the negative form of the incomplete past verb “was” (“God was not to forgive them nor to guide them to a way”), which has the sense or indication of a decisive custom, together with the lām of denial in “to forgive”, God’s custom of accepting repentance does not apply to these people who change colour. He will without doubt deprive them of His special creational guidance. Of course the way back to God is open. And as was said, the withholding of guidance from those who change colour and the hypocrites means the special divine guidance with which God favours a particular group, not His general legislative guidance. These people are always included in legislative guidance, which means calling them to obedience and leaving disobedience. And if the initial guidance is enough to bring about a state of turning back and inner change in the individual, God favours him with special guidance.
So the depriving of this colour-changing group of divine forgiveness is only because of their wavering of thought; otherwise there is nothing in the way, given the breadth of divine forgiveness. If this unsettled and wavering group had firm and settled faith, God would turn to them and include them in His mercy and forgiveness. But their repentance is very hard and not like the repentance of ordinary people. Beyond repentance itself, it involves certain particular things that can be achieved only with great effort, such as: 1. putting right what they corrupted and destroyed; 2. holding fast to God’s rope to make sure they do not slip again; 3. keeping to this holding fast.
The end of this changing of colour is hypocrisy, apostasy and increase in unbelief, and then the “good news” of a painful punishment. If the label “hypocrisy” applies to this colour-changing group, they will not only be deprived of God’s turning to them, but will be afflicted with a painful punishment: “Give the hypocrites the good news that for them is a painful punishment.”
The root of “good news” (bishārah), in the comprehensive, first and real meaning of the word, is news that brings joy, which shows in the skin (basharah) of the face. Then it is used for news that brings sorrow too. But the meaning in usage here is sarcasm and mockery.
4:139 — —those who take the faithless for allies instead of the faithful
—those who take the faithless for allies instead of the faithful. Do they seek honour with them? [If so,] indeed all honour belongs to Allah.
The previous verse threatened the hypocrites with a painful punishment. This verse describes the state of the hypocrites, the secret of their being deprived of repentance and special guidance, and the cause of their punishment and their being afflicted with divine punishment: namely taking the faithless as allies, cutting themselves off from the community of the faithful, being inwardly linked to the faithless and taking intimates from among them, even in the time of the Messenger (s.a.w.). As for the truly faithful, they take as intimates, close companions and allies, to whom they reveal their secrets, none but God, His Messenger (s.a.w.) and the faithful. No intimate is permitted to the faithful except from among the faithful themselves, and the faithless have no authority or argument over them.
Among the aims the hypocrites pursue in taking the faithless as allies instead of the people of faith in God, Exalted, is seeking might and protection with them, in case the state of Islam were brought to an end and affairs passed to the faithless. Yet these attempts to find might with the faithless are useless; for might belongs to God alone, and He gives might to whom He wills. It can be reached only through the goodness of the doer (true belief and faith) and the goodness of the act (righteous deeds). False and illusory might is a mere mirage; indeed, it is real abasement and submission. Soon the abasement of the imagined mighty one is clearly exposed, and he is afflicted with punishment.
This noble verse attributes all might to God alone; but in another verse it attributes it to God, His Messenger (s.a.w.) and the faithful. The way to bring together that restriction and this sharing is that the might of God, Exalted, is of His essence, original and independent, while the might of others depends on His might; so their might is secondary and derived from His.
4:140 — Certainly He has sent down to you in the Book that when you hear Allah’s signs being…
Certainly He has sent down to you in the Book that when you hear Allah’s signs being disbelieved and derided, do not sit with them until they engage in some other discourse, or else you [too] will be like them. Indeed Allah will gather the hypocrites and the faithless in hell all together
Besides the political hypocrisy of the hypocrites and their taking the faithless as allies, as the previous verse pointed out, they also had a cultural hypocrisy. They took part with the faithless in their secret gatherings and mocked the divine signs and miracles.
So the verse addresses the Muslims (the true ones and the outward ones), saying: We have sent down to you and warned you not to sit with the faithless in gatherings where God’s signs are mocked.
The subject pronoun in “He has sent down” refers to God the Mighty; and tying the ruling (the prohibition of taking part in gatherings of unbelief and mockery) to the description of might shows that this is its cause. So the meaning of “And He has already sent down to you in the Book that...” is that God, the only source of might, is the One who sent down this ruling; and whoever goes against it will be afflicted with falling into abasement.
So taking part in gatherings where the divine signs are mocked and denied, and in circles hostile to religion; or sitting with one who denies religion while he is rejecting and denying it; or sitting with a heretic or an obstinate person while he plunges into heresy and obstinacy, without warding off their falsehood or defending the truth: none of these is permitted at all. So too with virtual gatherings and the media, such as looking at an image that insults God’s signs, or hearing insulting propaganda that belittles God’s religion and distorts and deforms divine teachings in audio, visual and print media, all of which are equal in effect. Given that the noble verse gives as its reason the taking of the listener’s likeness to the speaker as the measure, all of these are covered by the verse’s ruling and come under the generality of its reason. The label “seeing” in verse 68 of the chapter of al-Anʿām, and the label “hearing” in the verse under discussion, are evidence that watching an insulting scene and hearing a tune that insults the religion of Islam share a common ruling.
On this basis, taking part in such gatherings is not permitted until the faithless change the subject and plunge into some other talk: “until they plunge into some other talk.” As for the ordinary gatherings of the faithless, taking part in them is allowed, on condition of not agreeing with them or supporting them. Indeed, the verse does not even yield the prohibition of attending gatherings of sin in which there is no unbelief and no mockery of God’s signs, provided this attendance is not by way of agreeing with some of the talk they exchange that God (s.w.t.) is not pleased with. So it is not correct to extend the ruling that listening to the mockery of the faithless is forbidden to a ruling that listening to ordinary sins is forbidden; because that would be extending a ruling from a higher instance to a lower one, not the reverse, as in extending the prohibition of saying “uff” (“so do not say to them ‘uff’”) to “striking and abusing”.
In any case, if attending gatherings of sin is an instance of cooperating in sin and aggression, it is forbidden on the basis of what the noble verse lays down: “and do not cooperate in sin and aggression.”
The “likeness” mentioned in “then surely you would be like them” is meant in its comprehensive sense, so as to include the hypocrite who is like the faithless in belief and action, and also the transgressor who is like him in action only. For in a gathering where God’s religion is mocked and His signs and prophets denied, the listener is a sinner and is like the speakers in belief and action; and he is without doubt a hypocrite and faithless at heart, because whoever is pleased with unbelief is faithless. Someone other than the speaker and the listener has the duty of forbidding what is wrong or leaving that gathering; otherwise he commits two sins: leaving the forbidding of wrong, and being present in forbidden gatherings. Such a person is like the faithless at the level of action, not belief.
In short, the hypocrite and the faithless are exactly alike, the ruling for things alike is one, and the black destination of both is the Fire: “surely God will gather the hypocrites and the faithless in Hell all together”; though the levels of descent differ for each of them.
4:141 — —those who lie in wait for you
—those who lie in wait for you: if there is a victory for you from Allah, they say, ‘Were we not with you?’ But if the faithless get a share [of victory], they say, ‘Did we not prevail upon you and defend you against the faithful?’ Allah will judge between you on the Day of Resurrection, and Allah will never provide the faithless any way [to prevail] over the faithful.
Besides the political and cultural problems the hypocrites caused, they may also cause military and financial problems. With their usual opportunism they wanted to milk both sides (Islam and unbelief), and to gain and profit from whichever of them fared well. So they had ties with both the faithful and the faithless at the same time, and sometimes they lay in wait to see how things went for both sides. If the faithful had a victory, they said: “We were with you, so let us have a share of the spoils and the like that you have been given.” And if the faithless had a share, they said: “Did we not gain the upper hand over you and protect you from the faithful?” That is, from having faith in what they had faith in and joining them; “so we have a share of what you were given, or we have done you a favour by drawing the share your way. For our propaganda covered you and we had control over you, so we kept you from the faithful (not kept them from you), and from entering Islam and joining the ranks of the faithful (‘and protect you from the faithful’). Otherwise your fate would have been to enter Islam; so we are your partners in the spoils.”
The meaning above fits better with the word “gain the upper hand” (nastaḥwidh), since it shows the hypocrites’ control over the faithless in the field of thought and belief, not on the battlefield, and so their turning them away from faith. It also agrees with the hypocrites’ claim “and protect you from the faithful”, which is a fitting expression for preventing the faithless from having faith in Islam.
According to this interpretation of the verse (“Did we not gain the upper hand over you and protect you from the faithful?”), the devils among humankind may be able, by their misleading and evil propaganda, to empty the hearts of those who might have faith of the remembrance of God and His name, and so turn them away from entering Islam; just as Satan does when he overpowers a human being and makes him forget the remembrance of God.
The noble verse expressed what the faithful gain as a “victory” (fatḥ) and attributed it to God, Exalted (“a victory from God”), because it is what was promised them; and what the faithless gain as a “share” (naṣīb). This is to honour the standing of the faithful and belittle the lot of the faithless. For the faithful’s triumph in war is a real victory and a great matter from God; while the triumph of the faithless is nothing but a base share that passes away, leaving nothing but blame in this world and punishment in the end.
In any case, the final judgment is left to the Day of Resurrection, when the faithless will have no way over the believer. So too in this world, God, Exalted, has never given the faithless a way over the faithful in matters of argument, and questions such as revelation, prophethood and the Return; rational proofs are always on the side of the faithful, and the faithless never have a proof against the believer. Yes, in this world judgment may go against the Muslim. We do not say that the faithless have no way over the believer in this world, outwardly at least. For according to the historical evidence, the outward events and the present situation, the faithless have overcome the ignorance of the Muslims with their sciences and military arts. And on the basis of the fixed general principle that truth triumphs over falsehood, and since falsehood is ignorance and division, the failure and defeat of the Muslims at some stages were because of their ignorance in knowledge and in practice and their deep internal divisions. If the pivot of argument, struggle, confrontation and alignment between the Muslims and the faithless were faith and unbelief, God, Exalted, would not be pleased for His faithful servants to be defeated, and He would surely give them victory on the field of confrontation. The passing triumph of the faithless will not be the final victory; and if the Muslims stand firm in this test, the final victory will certainly be theirs. History is the best witness to this: despite the trials and calamities that befell the prophets and the friends of God (a.s.), their stories ended in the final victory of truth over falsehood.
In sum, as for the interpretation of “and God will never give the faithless a way over the faithful”: if it is a legislative will, the content of this phrase is particular to this world, because the Resurrection is not a place of legislation. If it is a creational will, the complete instance of the verse is the Day of Resurrection. But if the Muslims hold fast in their worldly life to tawḥīd and unity, they will become an instance of this verse.
On the basis of the verse, and taking into account that it is a statement serving as a command, any political, economic, cultural or military alliance that opens the door to the faithless gaining the upper hand over the Muslims is an illegitimate alliance.
4:142 — The hypocrites indeed seek to deceive Allah
The hypocrites indeed seek to deceive Allah, but it is He who outwits them. When they stand up for prayer, they stand up lazily, showing off to the people and not remembering Allah except a little,
The verse continues from what came before in setting out the qualities of the hypocrites. Here it takes up another quality: their bad dealing with God, His religion and His creatures. Their bad dealing with their Lord shows in their deceiving Him by appearing to obey nothing but His commands and rulings. Their deceiving God’s religion lies in tricking their way around it and applying it in form only, while in their actual conduct they flee from it. So you see them standing up for the prayer, and in the other acts of religious worship, sluggish and slow. The reason is that they find it heavy at the time, hope for no reward from it and fear no punishment for leaving it. So the motive for leaving it was strong in these respects, and the only motive for doing it was fear of people; and for this reason you find them lazy and slack in the prayer.
As for the hypocrites’ bad dealing with God’s creatures, it is because they show off to people to win their trust, but they are not truly trustworthy. They stand up for the prayer and other acts of worship sluggish and lazy, because their hearts are not attached to their Lord; and when they are with people they show off to them and perform it with effort and energy to win their approval. So their deceiving of God (s.w.t.) is constant.
But how far it is from possible for a human being to deceive God, Exalted; for no one can encompass the infinite reality. So his deceiving is of the religion and of the signs of God and His Messenger; even though deceiving the Messenger is deceiving God.
The hypocrites deceive God, while in reality they deceive themselves but do not know it. For the human being’s perfection lies in obeying God’s commands and rulings, and his rebellion and disobedience against them do not harm God at all, because His reality is infinite and is not affected. Rather, it is a cause of his own downfall and of his affliction or withering. So the disobedient, rebellious human being harms only himself, but does not realise it. In this turning back there is a divine deception: here God deprives this hypocrite of His kindness and leaves him to himself, and he falls into the abyss through his ignorance, his heedlessness and his evil aims. Sometimes God (s.w.t.) prepares the means for the hypocrite to enter into some matter, and when he enters into it, He cuts those means off from him; and this forsaking can be classed as deception.
In short, the hypocrites are not only punished on the Day of Resurrection; in this world too they are afflicted with divine scheming, and this worldly affliction will appear to them on the Day of Resurrection.
In truth, the hypocrites do not believe in God at all and never remember Him; the remembrance of God and His name does not enter their inner selves and hearts. Yes, they may be forced to do some acts of worship, not to draw near to God, but to protect themselves and to be seen by people. The Qur’anic expression of little remembrance (“and they do not remember God except a little”) is not because their belief in God is little, or because some of their remembrance is for God. It goes back to: 1. their remembrance not being joined with Godwariness, so it is thrown back at them; God has not accepted it, and whatever God rejects is little. 2. Their remembrance is hollow, without effect, and passing. 3. Their remembrance is for some worldly gain they may get, and in worldly dress, without truth or depth; and the goods of this world are little, and so is their remembrance.
4:143 — wavering in between: neither with these
wavering in between: neither with these, nor with those. And whomever Allah leads astray, you will never find any way for him.
The hypocrites are “wavering” (mudhabdhab), that is, they go back and forth between the truly faithful and the open faithless. Outwardly they live among the faithful, but inwardly they hide unbelief, and in belief they are counted on the side of the faithless. Because of this changing of colour, having many faces, trickery and deceit, wavering between faith and unbelief is worse than unbelief. The hypocrites are wavering, and the waverer is not a believer; for he has not had faith in his heart, either outwardly and inwardly, or only inwardly and in private. There is no middle ground between faith (Islam) and unbelief to which the hypocrite belongs.
The hypocrite is faithless in reality, and a believer in appearance from the point of view of common and simple people. The Qur’anic expression “neither to these nor to those” is to show the wavering of this position, not with regard to reality.
It may be useful to mention that the hypocrite is not a bewildered person who does not know what to do. Rather, he has decided in advance and firmly to deal with people with two faces, one outward and the other inward: to keep in touch deep down with the faithless, and to take part in the congregational prayer of the faithful in mockery.
The cause of the hypocrite’s changing colour and showing two faces is himself, not God (s.w.t.); so it is not correct to attribute his hypocrisy to God. Likewise the leading astray meant in “and whoever God leads astray, you will never find a way for him” is a leading astray in belief, which goes back to the removal of divine kindness. Leading astray is something negative, not an act of bringing into existence attributed to God, Exalted. That is, if the servant is deprived of God’s outpouring he will fall into the abyss; not that God will throw him into the swamp of hypocrisy and misguidance.
So the hypocrite was deprived of God’s kindness, Exalted, and afflicted with His wrath because of his own sins. He was also deprived of His special guidance, so God (s.w.t.) led him astray; that is, He cut off His kindness from him after giving him long respite. And of course, whoever God leads astray will find no way of salvation.
4:144 — O you who have faith! Do not take the faithless for friends instead of the faithful
O you who have faith! Do not take the faithless for friends instead of the faithful. Do you wish to give Allah a clear sanction against yourselves?
Continuing the previous verses, this noble verse points to another ugly deed and conduct of the hypocrites. It addresses the faithful, saying: do not be like the hypocrites in your relations with the faithless.
The hypocrites are bound to the faithless by a tie of allegiance, and this tie does not exist between them and the faithless and the faithful equally; though this part of their deeds is also a sin.
Disavowal of the enemies of religion (the faithless at war, or those treated as being at war) is obligatory, and taking them as allies is forbidden, whether in beliefs, character or deeds, all along the path of worship. Likewise it is forbidden to trust them, take them as intimates (and let them into the depths of the Islamic community), and tell them the military, economic or cultural secrets of the Islamic community. Nor should help and assistance be given to them, or they be appointed to sensitive positions in government and the judiciary. Naturally, the prohibition of taking the faithless or their judges as allies comes before the prohibition of supporting them, loving them and the like.
On the basis of the general covenant and Islamic international law concerning human relations, the human (not Islamic) and international relationship between the Islamic government and the Muslims and the faithless should be peaceful. The People of the Book who wish to live with the Muslims in peace and harmony are permitted to do so; indeed Islam encourages it, on condition that they themselves take the initiative in asking, that it is not aimed at conspiracy, that they do not hide evil or rancour behind their request, and that no hostile conduct or evil intention comes from them afterwards.
The religion of Islam is not a tyrannical or oppressive religion, nor does it accept tyranny and injustice against itself. Islamic life means free human and international coexistence on the basis of justice and fairness; so it is neither a tyrannical life nor one that accepts injustice.
Inclining toward the obstinate faithless is extremely dangerous, so much so that God, Exalted, denied the will to bring it about and warned the Muslims against it, instead of using the act itself. This is to show the danger of the matter and the difficulty of putting it right and of perceiving it from afar. So He (s.w.t.) said in the verse under discussion: “Do you want to give God a clear authority against you?” The meaning of this is: do not even wish to bring this about, lest you create a cause for your own punishment; which means that God, Mighty and Majestic, punishes no one without the causes of punishment having come about.
Mentioning the word “clear” after the word “authority” is a true witness that “authority” (sulṭān) here means proof and cause, not creational power. So this sentence sets out God’s authority, Exalted, and His legislative proof against both the faithless and the hypocrite. As for the believer, since he carries out his duties and fulfils his obligations in the order of legislation, God (s.w.t.) has not imposed His legislative authority on him; and so He, Exalted, will not put him into Hell.
As for warning, threat, promise and menace, they cover the righteous and the wicked alike, so that the righteous person does not become heedless and forgetful and so become wicked, and thus God’s legislative proof, Exalted, be established against him and he deserve punishment.
4:145–146 — Indeed the hypocrites will be in the lowest reach of the Fire
(145) Indeed the hypocrites will be in the lowest reach of the Fire, and you will never find any helper for them, (146) except for those who repent and reform, and hold fast to Allah and dedicate their religion [exclusively] to Allah. Those are with the faithful, and soon Allah will give the faithful a great reward.
Leaving the allegiance of the faithful and taking the faithless as allies, which the previous noble verse warned us against, is hypocrisy itself; and the destination of the hypocrites is the lowest depth of the Fire and the lowest layer of the layers of Hell, that is, at its bottom and in its worst abode. What is meant by the lowest depth of the Fire is lowliness, baseness and humiliation, besides the severity of the punishment in that layer; and all of this fits the lowly, base and despicable hypocrite. And since the place and standing of the hypocrites is one with that of the pharaohs and tyrants, theirs is the severest punishment in that lowest depth of the Fire.
The hypocrite’s intellect is the captive of his self that commands evil, of his desires and evil deeds; and so he deserved the lowest place in Hell and became the lowest of the low. The corrupt person is in a continual downward movement toward misguidance. The first stage he passes through is the stage of animality, resembling an animal in deed and self. Then he reaches pure, real animality and becomes an animal in every sense of the word. In the third stage he becomes baser and lower than an animal. Sometimes, after the corrupt person has passed through these three stages, he turns into something like a plant and then into a plant itself, which is a lower standing than the animal itself. And at other times, in the course of his fall and descent, the corrupt person reaches the stage of inanimate matter, and then actually becomes inanimate (something like stone), and then turns into what is lower than stone.
On the Day of Resurrection the levels of the hypocrite’s fall that he passed through in this world will appear clearly: “Surely the hypocrites will be in the lowest depth of the Fire.”
The noble verse stresses that no one will be able to help the hypocrites or support them, and no one’s intercession for them will ever be accepted. In this world the way of repentance and return to God (s.w.t.) is open to all. But the hypocrite has buried alive his sound innate nature (fiṭrah), made it the captive of his desires, wishes and evil deeds, and buried it in the dust. Yet that fiṭrah of his has not died completely. So the hypocrite can reach the stage of perfection, just as a stone first turns gradually into soil, then into a plant, which the human body then draws in; and so that stone has passed through the stages of its perfection and growth. For repentance to become possible for a human being, he must first revive his buried fiṭrah and cut himself off from his desires by virtue of the greater striving (al-jihād al-akbar). In this way the hard stone can be broken and pure water flow from its cracks: “And surely there are stones from which rivers gush forth, and surely there are some of them that split open and water comes out of them.” After that, the corrupt person who wants to repent must put himself right, correct his earlier corrupt conduct, and give back the rights of God and the rights of people. And since doing this is very hard without great support, he must hold fast to a handhold that never breaks, so as to purify his thoughts, improve his character and correct his conduct.
As for the cause of the hypocrite’s repentance being hard, it is God’s loathing of hypocrisy and the extreme ugliness of it. For this reason the noble verse takes up the subject of putting right, holding fast to God and making religion sincerely God’s, alongside its main subject, which is repentance.
The most the hypocrite can gain by way of reward, after passing these stages and meeting all the required conditions, is to be in the company of the faithful, but not one of them. God (s.w.t.) has told us of the greatness of the standing of the faithful and of His giving them a great reward. So the hypocrite who repents, puts himself right, holds fast to the firmest handhold and makes his religion sincerely God’s (Mighty and Majestic) will be given a great reward like the reward of the faithful.
4:147 — Why should Allah punish you if you give thanks and be faithful
Why should Allah punish you if you give thanks and be faithful? And Allah is appreciative, all-knowing.
This noble verse stresses what came in the previous verse, now addressing the one who is absent. It also urges a person to turn back from misguidance and save himself from severe divine punishment. The existence of those being punished does not harm God (s.w.t.), and punishing them does not benefit Him in anything; this punishment is not to satisfy any grudge of His, Exalted.
God, Mighty and Majestic, does not punish any of His corrupt, sinful creatures without cause or reason. Their punishment is because of their error, misguidance, unbelief, transgression, disobedience and bad choice. But if they have faith and give thanks, there is no place for punishment at all. There is no doubt that warding off punishment and lifting it entirely and completely requires continuing faith and perseverance in giving thanks; mere faith and thanks at a certain stage or in a time of hardship do not help or benefit.
Thanks (shukr) is one of the duties of the faithful, and so it holds the rank after faith; and it would have been necessary to mention its word after the word faith. But the order of words and joining with “and” do not always indicate the order of rank. In this noble verse the coming first in wording may point to coming first in rank, since thanks sometimes becomes a cause of faith being realised. When the reflecting, thinking human being sees himself drowned in the blessings and bounties of God (s.w.t.), he knows that God, Mighty and Majestic, is the master of his blessings, and his faith increases and grows strong.
God (s.w.t.) does not only refrain from punishing anyone while his faith and thanks continue. Rather, He, Exalted, knows by His infinite knowledge the person’s effort, faith and righteous deeds, and He thanks him for it. He, Exalted, is the One who thanks (al-Shākir), and the servant is the one thanked; so He rewards him and repays him.
4:148 — Allah does not like the disclosure of [anyone’s] evil [conduct] in speech except by…
Allah does not like the disclosure of [anyone’s] evil [conduct] in speech except by someone who has been wronged, and Allah is all-hearing, all-knowing.
After mentioning the qualities of the hypocrites and the conditions for the hypocrite’s repentance in the previous verses, this noble verse points to the prohibition of using the noble Qur’an as an argument that the evil coming from the faithless and the hypocrites is recommended or permitted without condition. It also forbids the faithful to reproach the hypocrites who have repented for their earlier hypocrisy.
God (s.w.t.) does not love any sin or evil, whether hidden or open, and it is blameworthy. Worse than that is its spreading and broadcasting among the members of the Islamic community; God, Exalted, strongly forbade this, and indeed threatened those who do it with severe punishment. On this basis, if someone commits a sin that no one knows but God and himself, and he has not set out to spread and broadcast it among others, but has tried to conceal it and kept it hidden and covered, then whoever broadcasts it and exposes him will be punished with the severest punishment.
Besides what we have mentioned, this noble verse states that God, Mighty and Majestic, does not permit anyone to question others with the aim of exposing them or uncovering their evil deeds. The exception concerns the wronged person who cannot remove the wrong done to him and ward off the oppressor’s injustice except by making his case known, whether by bringing his complaint to a judge, or keeping it confidential with his believing brothers, or calling on someone for help, or asking people for aid. In this case making it known and exposing it is obligatory and necessary, especially when forbidding what is wrong depends on making known and exposing the oppressor’s injustice, and silence and concealment would embolden the oppressor or the injustice would harm the religious dignity of the wronged person. As for going too far, such as falsely and slanderously attributing injustice to the oppressor, it is forbidden. The noble verse under discussion does not try to permit speaking out about evil even in cases that lead to committing another sin. So permitted speaking out about evil should not harm other divine rulings, such as leading to the spread of indecency and wrong, nor become a pretext for violating the sanctity of real or legal persons.
There is a difference between speaking out in an evil way (al-jahr al-sayyiʾ) and speaking out about evils (al-jahr bi-l-sawʾāt). The first (broadcasting sins and evil deeds) is not permitted to anyone, and there is no exception in it. As for the second (meaning complaining of injustice), it is loved by God if hearing the wronged person’s complaint and cry and announcing it publicly is obligatory or recommended; and in this case the exception may be taken from His words, Exalted, “except one who has been wronged”. So the meaning of the noble verse is: “God does not love speaking out about evil for anyone, except the speaking out of one who has been wronged.”
It is worth mentioning that what the verb “does not love” at the start of the verse conveys is a denial of love, joined with a figurative expression of divine dislike. And just as a command after a prohibition, or where prohibition is suspected, means no more than lifting the ban, and establishing obligation or recommendation needs other evidence, so nothing can be drawn from the wronged person referred to (“except one who has been wronged”) except the basic permissibility of making it known, not that it is loved (including its being obligatory or recommended); for the All-Merciful God loves only what is obligatory and recommended. As for personal matters and rights (such as theft and the like), speaking of the oppressor behind his back, complaining, and making known his faults and injustice is permitted, not obligatory, recommended or loved. But as for what concerns public or religious rights, it is not only permitted but loved as well: if the good involved is complete and binding it is obligatory, and if it is incomplete and not binding it is recommended.
4:149 — Whether you disclose a good [deed that you do] or hide it
Whether you disclose a good [deed that you do] or hide it, or excuse an evil [deed], Allah is indeed all-excusing, all-powerful.
The subject mentioned in the previous noble verse may point to the unrestricted scope of the ruling of the verse under discussion and be one of its examples. On this basis, in cases where making evil known or speaking out about the oppressor’s injustice is not obligatory, concealing it, or overlooking and pardoning it, is better.
To order human beings’ relations with their Lord, with themselves, and with the world and society, God (s.w.t.) has issued certain commands. This verse contains two ways of strengthening and tightening social bonds: 1) doing good and kindness; 2) overlooking and turning a blind eye to others’ mistakes and being patient with their harm.
In contrast to “speaking out about evil”, which God, Exalted, hates, and whose subject we met in the previous verse, every good deed a person does is loved by God, Mighty and Majestic, in its proper place. That is, showing a good deed when the good requires showing and making it known (for example, to encourage others to do it too), or hiding and concealing it if the good requires that (for example, when concealing it is meant to protect the person, or the doer of good, from falling into the snares of showing off and fame).
The righteous servant who journeys to God takes on the character of his Master. God (s.w.t.), whose mercy has gone before His wrath, is not pleased, Mighty and Majestic, with a pardon that humiliates and degrades the one who gives it. Nor is He, Exalted, pleased with pardon and leniency in individual, social and similar matters when that pardon becomes a cause of emboldening the corrupt transgressor.
Pardon or overlooking in general is a perfection, a kindness and an expiation, and it is rewarded too. These rulings must be carried out when one is able, so that the oppressor does not become bold or the tyrant overreach himself. The description of perfection in His words, Exalted, “Pardoning, All-Powerful”, is a pointer to God (s.w.t.). It means that although God, Mighty and Majestic, is strong and able to take vengeance, He pardons and overlooks; and people too must pardon and overlook when they have power. Such pardon with power counts as an instance of true kindness.
The pardon of the All-Powerful God (“then surely God is Pardoning, All-Powerful”), which comes as the answer and outcome of the condition, covers the three cases mentioned: showing good (“If you show good”), hiding it (“or hide it”), and pardoning the wrongdoer (“or pardon an evil”), so that there is no loss or harm to the one who shows, hides or pardons. And God (s.w.t.) has promised those who pardon an ample reward.
4:150–151 — Those who disbelieve in Allah and His apostles and seek to separate Allah from His…
(150) Those who disbelieve in Allah and His apostles and seek to separate Allah from His apostles, and say, ‘We believe in some and disbelieve in some’ and seek to take a way in between (151) —it is they who are truly faithless, and We have prepared for the faithless a humiliating punishment.
The fact that the deeds of the faithless among the People of the Book share something with the deeds of the polytheists and the hypocrites may be the reason for mentioning the state of this group in the two verses under discussion, after setting out the state of the polytheists and the hypocrites in the previous verses.
The People of the Book wanted a middle way, so as to be neither like the polytheists, who have faith in none of the prophets (a.s.), nor like the Muslims, who have faith in all the prophets (a.s.). The truth is that there is no middle way: there is either pure faith or sheer unbelief, and faith and unbelief cannot be split apart. Unbelief destroys and defiles any belief, quality (character) or deed. Those who want to separate between particular prophethood and the prophets (a.s.) and find a middle solution are faithless absolutely, not faithless in part; just as denying any of the definite rulings of Islam, whether among the roots or the branches, without a doubt that excuses it, means absolute unbelief.
The faithless were not content with “separating between God and His messengers”; they actually set about creating a division. His words, Exalted, “and they want to separate”, are to draw attention to this point: that these people are still plunging into their naive desire and their wish that cannot be fulfilled, for they cannot separate between tawḥīd and prophethood.
God (s.w.t.) manages the affairs of all creatures and is the Lord of them all; and He is also the One who nurtures the human being according to the rulings of religious law. On this basis, the polytheists, who deny revelation and general prophethood and think that no human being is able to receive divine revelation, and so separate prophethood from the Origin, have not known God as He should be known. Likewise the faithless among the People of the Book, who make divisions in particular prophethood and deny the message of the Seal of the Prophets and Messengers (s.a.w.), are deprived of pure knowledge of tawḥīd.
However that may be, the belief of the Jews and the Christians in dividing up the prophets and not accepting the later prophets is a false belief with no proof; indeed it is a foolish belief, because the later prophets had many divine miracles.
So unbelief cannot be true in any way at all. What is meant by “truly” in the sentence “those are the faithless, truly” is either that the unbelief of these people (who seek to separate and deny) is real, firm and beyond doubt, and that this declaration that they are faithless is true; or that belief in the faith of one who denies the prophethood of the greatest Messenger (s.a.w.) is void; or that the unbelief of these people is complete, total and sheer. The secret of this is that the measure of what this faithless person believed was its agreement with his own opinion, not that God (s.w.t.) commanded it. And whoever makes his own desire and temperament, and not the truth, the measure of what he accepts or denies is without doubt sheerly faithless.
Thus these people deserved a humiliating punishment because of their sheer unbelief. And the use of the explicit noun, that is, the description “for the faithless”, points to unbelief being the cause and their deserving punishment.
4:152 — But those who have faith in Allah and His apostles and make no distinction between any of…
But those who have faith in Allah and His apostles and make no distinction between any of them—them He will soon give their rewards, and Allah is all-forgiving, all-merciful.
The previous verse mentioned those who hold to dividing up and separating between the prophets (a.s.). This verse points to the group opposite to them: the truly faithful, who do not separate between the prophets and have faith in all their messages. The noble verse says: God (s.w.t.) gives these faithful their reward and forgives their slips. Naturally the degrees of the faithful differ, and each believer has his reward according to his faith.
As for bringing together good news and warning in this verse and the previous verses, with the contrast between faith and unbelief, punishment and mercy, humiliation and forgiveness, it is to make the way clear before the human being and keep him free to choose the path of truth or falsehood.
About those who hold to dividing up and separating between the prophets, the previous noble verse says: “those are the faithless, truly”; for dividing up and separating between the prophets (a.s.), having faith in some of them and disbelieving in others, is sheer unbelief. But He, Mighty and Majestic, did not say in the verse under discussion, “those are the faithful, truly”. For the root of faith has actually come about and is firm once these people have accepted tawḥīd and the prophethood of all the prophets (a.s.); but pure faith requires other conditions besides these, and until those conditions are met, pure faith seems hard to reach.
As for the shift from the third person to the first person (“We have prepared”) in the previous verse, and from the third person to direct address (“those”, “We shall give them”), it is to throw light on punishment and reward, and also to stress, through direct speech and clear address, the divine promise that will not be broken. As for direct speech and address concerning the divine threat, which may be changed according to divine wisdom, it is to show the certainty of the threat being carried out and to stress its effect.
4:153 — The People of the Book ask you to bring down for them a Book from the sky
The People of the Book ask you to bring down for them a Book from the sky. Certainly they asked Moses for [something] greater than that, for they said, ‘Show us Allah visibly,’ whereat a thunderbolt seized them for their wrongdoing. Then they took up the Calf [for worship], after all the manifest proofs that had come to them. Yet We excused that, and We gave Moses a manifest authority.
Continuing the survey of the qualities of the polytheists, the hypocrites and the People of the Book in the previous verses, this verse uncovers for us other qualities and various excuses, but this time particular to the People of the Book. By alerting the faithful to the cooperation and solidarity of the People of the Book with the polytheists and the hypocrites in their conspiracy against the religion of Islam, it warns them against falling into the snares of sensory (empirical) philosophy and losing their reason.
The People of the Book asked the noble Prophet (s.a.w.) to bring down a book upon them from heaven before their eyes. It is known that such a request carries obstinacy and contention, and is not aimed at knowing the truth and having faith. That is, they did not want a miracle so as to have faith in it and in the Messenger (s.a.w.); for the call of the greatest Prophet (s.a.w.) came accompanied by the great miracle.
The Jews believed that God (s.w.t.) can be perceived by the senses, and that His revealed books are mere ordinary, familiar sheets, papers and books. So they expected the noble Qur’an to come down all at once upon the Messenger of God (s.a.w.), if it was a heavenly book, because in their belief it was like any familiar human book; this came from their ignorance in knowledge and their folly in practice. They also expected the heavenly book to come down in the name of one of their own figures. But they did not know that the heavenly book is not like a human book; and that the noble Qur’an did not come down all at once as the tablets of Moses (a.s.) came down, which contained all the counsels and comprehensive principles. A book meant to answer people’s questions and inquiries gradually, over time, about events and rulings concerning matters that arise one after another, had to come down gradually; just as the Torah came down gradually and contained the principles of belief and the rulings of jurisprudence, rights and morals.
On this basis, what the People of the Book asked for in the time of revelation could not be granted, because they were only inventing excuses and reasons. It resembles the request of the nations before them, who relied on outward materialist thinking, until they said to Moses (a.s.): “Show us God openly.”
Attributing what earlier people said to the present generation is because all their words are alike and their hearts are united on one view.
The story of the request of Moses’ (a.s.) people may be mentioned here to reassure the heart of the most noble Prophet (s.a.w.), to acquaint him with the qualities of the Jews of his time and their forebears, and to show that what happened to Moses (a.s.), and what was said to him and asked of him, was greater and more audacious. If today they demand that you bring a book that comes down before their eyes, they asked something monstrous of Moses (a.s.), when they said to him: “They asked Moses for something greater than that, for they said: Show us God openly.” It is worth mentioning that the description “greater” is to show that their request was bigger and more serious; otherwise all the levels of folly and degrees of evil are worse and fouler than one another, and none of them is smaller or bigger.
There is no doubt that an ignorant, unreasonable and obstinate request is injustice itself. Although it is also an injustice to religion and a main cause of halting the wheel of religion and its spread, because of the negative effects that can result from it, the unjust themselves are the centre of the harm that comes from their injustice, for by it they wrong themselves.
However that may be, such unfair demands may cause unexpected punishment to come down. This is what God, Mighty and Majestic, did with that group of the Children of Israel when He seized them with the thunderbolt because of their materialist thinking toward divine teachings, and their obstinacy and contention; and so they wronged themselves.
The noble verse points out that God (s.w.t.) favoured them once more and brought them back to life. These are the successors of those who saw God’s signs and clear miracles, yet were swept along by the current of the Sāmirī, who made a calf for them and said to them: this is your lord. So they worshipped it and left their true Lord.
So God (s.w.t.) punished them for some of their deeds, then pardoned their worship of the calf. And He gave His prophet and the one He spoke to, Moses (a.s.), clear authority, that is, a shining proof and means in knowledge and action; for he had a miracle and a proof at the same time, so that he prevailed over Pharaoh and his chiefs and became the leader and guide of the Children of Israel.
4:154 — And We raised the Mount above them for the sake of their covenant
And We raised the Mount above them for the sake of their covenant, and We said to them, ‘Enter the gate prostrating’ and We said to them, ‘Do not violate the Sabbath,’ and We took from them a solemn covenant.
This noble verse points out that God, Mighty and Majestic, raised the Mount (the mountain) above the heads of the Children of Israel, who were in the habit of breaking pledges. This was so that they would remember this sight and not break God’s pledge and covenant concerning tawḥīd, faith in the prophethood of Moses (a.s.), the one spoken to, and the Torah sent down to him, and so that they would not kill one another without right.
God (s.w.t.), who created this whole cosmic and heavenly order without pillars, or with pillars that cannot be seen, is without doubt able to raise the mountain in all its greatness above the heads of the Children of Israel. As we pointed out above, the apparent sense of the matter is that raising the Mount above the heads of the Children of Israel was to frighten them so that they would not break their pledge with God, Exalted. It was not, as some think, to shade them from sun or rain or the like, as a reward for keeping and fulfilling the pledge and covenant.
Then God, Exalted, commands the Children of Israel in the noble verse to prostrate and humble themselves inside Jerusalem (Bayt al-Maqdis), so that He might forgive them their faults and expiate their sins.
In another test of the Children of Israel, God (s.w.t.) commanded them not to fish on their day of rest, the Sabbath, and forbade them to fish on that day (“and We said to them: do not transgress in the Sabbath”), and asked them to stay in their homes on the Sabbath. Then He took from them a firm covenant to keep His commands. But the Children of Israel tried to deceive God, tricked their way around His command and broke their pledge with Him. So God (s.w.t.) punished them with the severest punishment for that deed of theirs (the fishing that was forbidden to them).
4:155 — Then because of their breaking their covenant
Then because of their breaking their covenant, their defiance of Allah’s signs, their killing of the prophets unjustly and for their saying, ‘Our hearts are uncircumcised’… Indeed, Allah has set a seal on them for their unfaith, so they do not have faith except a few.
These verses close the subjects mentioned above and give us a conclusion of everything that went before about the Children of Israel’s breaking of pledges and covenants. This is done through the fāʾ of consequence, as He, Exalted, says: “So for their breaking of their covenant...”. What the prepositional phrase in the verse attaches to is omitted, and the meaning of the verse is: “For their breaking of their covenant We made them such and such...”.
Breaking the pledge is sometimes by leaving the root of religion entirely, such as killing the prophets (a.s.), and at other times by committing major sins. The Children of Israel committed both ugly deeds. They were an obstinate people who broke pledges, and so they were in greater need of guidance. For this reason (and not because they deserved it in themselves) God (s.w.t.) sent many prophets to them, and sent through Moses (a.s.), the one He spoke to, many signs and miracles in word and deed. But the Children of Israel disbelieved in all of it and killed a great number of the prophets unjustly and in aggression: “and their killing of the prophets without right.” The acceptance by the Jews in the time of the Prophet (s.a.w.) of the deeds of their forebears, and their being pleased with what came from them, justifies attributing the killing to them in the noble verse.
The Jews used to repeat with all arrogance and insolence what the polytheists said: “Our hearts are under coverings from what you call us to, and in our ears is deafness, and between us and you is a veil; so act, we too are acting.” The word “uncircumcised” (ghulf) here may be the plural of ghilāf (covering); that is, our hearts are in a covering that does not take in what you say. It does not mean that our hearts are full of knowledge and need no other knowledge, and we do not want the knowledge you have.
The more likely possibility is that ghulf is the plural of aghlaf. Since the verse speaks of divine punishment, and “sealing” is attributed in the noble verse to God (s.w.t.) (“Rather, God has set a seal upon them”), the meaning of “our hearts are ghulf” is that their hearts are closed and wrapped. So the divine teachings and the teachings of revelation are not understandable to them. This is not because those teachings are not understandable; rather, the Jews’ repeated committing of sins and the piling up of wrongdoing closed the channels of their hearts, so that they could not reach an understanding of revelation, and their hearts were no longer a safe and protected place for divine teachings. On this basis, the covering on their hearts is in the nature of a punishment, not something at the outset. They say: “Our hearts are closed and we do not understand what you say!” But that is not correct. Rather, God’s wrath and punishment, Exalted, have surrounded them, so He set a seal on their hearts and did not grant them success in understanding the truths and in true faith. This is because of their unbelief, the major sins they committed, their not repenting and not putting right what they had missed, and their constant turning away from the divine reminder: “Rather, God has set a seal upon them for their unbelief.”
In short, the sealing of the heart is not something positive in existence. Its matter goes back to God, Exalted, and His holding back His mercy; it is something negative, of the kind of the loss of a settled capacity. That is, God (s.w.t.) held back His mercy from these Jews.
The exception mentioned in the noble verse, “so they do not have faith except a little”, either refers to some individuals, so that the meaning is: the Jews did not have faith in this religion except those of them who were fair and just. Or it refers to faith; that is, they have faith in some of the prophets (a.s.) and not all of them, so their faith is a divided faith and not pure faith, and so it is rejected and not accepted. The noble Qur’an has excepted such faith and counted it as unbelief.
4:156 — And for their faithlessness
And for their faithlessness, and their uttering a monstrous calumny against Mary,
This is another great sin and grave wrong committed by the People of the Book: they accused the Virgin Mary (a.s.), with all her infallibility and purity, of adultery, and held the Messiah (a.s.) to be an illegitimate son. This, as the noble Qur’an describes it, is a great slander and a sin beyond which there is no sin; and by saying it this group of the Children of Israel disbelieved.
The size of this great accusation matches the greatness of the standing of that pure mother (a.s.). Besides, such an accusation means accusing a prophet sent by God (s.w.t.) in his reputation and honour, not only accusing the person of Lady Mary (a.s.).
4:157 — and for their saying, ‘We killed the Messiah
and for their saying, ‘We killed the Messiah, Jesus son of Mary, the apostle of Allah’—though they did not kill him nor did they crucify him, but so it was made to appear to them. Indeed those who differ concerning him are surely in doubt about him: they do not have any knowledge of that beyond following conjectures, and certainly, they did not kill him.
Another cause of the disbelief of the fanatical members of the Children of Israel was their false notion regarding the killing of Jesus the Messiah. They killed many prophets and brazenly sought to kill him as well, and falsely claimed they had slain him—a lie which reveals their audacity and transgression.
The Children of Israel outwardly called the Messiah Jesus son of Mary: “We killed the Messiah, Jesus son of Mary”; however, they did not consider him the legitimate son of Mary. Similarly, they did not believe in the Messiah’s prophethood and either mockingly or based on his own claim called him “the messenger of God.”
Of course, it is possible that in this sentence, God used the eloquent and acceptable expression “the messenger of God” in place of some improper expression they had uttered.
In any case, they neither killed the Messiah in the ordinary manner nor crucified him, but rather the matter became confused for them; that is, they executed or crucified someone who was not Jesus, but rather someone who resembled him.
It is unlikely that “confusion” (ishtibāh) here means that God made the matter confused for them; in such a way that He cast the resemblance of the Messiah upon one of the leaders of disbelief and instigators of sedition (fitna), and the person killed or crucified was one of the leaders of disbelief and seditious Jews upon whom this matter was mistakenly applied.
The secret of combining killing and crucifixion and negating both: “though they did not kill him nor did they crucify him” is that if He had only negated the killing, it might be possible to speak of crucifying him, since sometimes it is possible for someone to be crucified and not die.
The explanation is that there is a difference between killing and crucifixion. Crucifixion and hanging on the cross is a specific type of killing, and in it there is the possibility of survival. Therefore, there is no necessary correlation between the two (crucifixion and killing), and for this reason they are placed in opposition to each other: “though they did not kill him nor did they crucify him” (4:157). By virtue of this very opposition, the word “killing” (qatl) in this sentence does not encompass both killing and crucifixion; however, this same word in the final summary of the verse: “and certainly they did not kill him” (4:157) encompasses both killing and crucifixion.
The claims of those who assert killing or crucifixion are unscholarly and unresearched, based on following doubt and conjecture, which is not reliable in such cases. The Qur’an refutes their certainty with three expressions:
The foundation of their judgment is their doubt, and they have no knowledge of the story of the Messiah.
They follow conjecture.
They have no certainty.
The fundamental and real report in this regard is the account of divine revelation that neither killing occurred nor crucifixion took place, and this definitive report is obtained from the expression “though they did not kill him nor did they crucify him” (4:157). However, it is unlikely that the sentence “and certainly they did not kill him” (4:157) means a certain report, because all of God’s statements are definitive. The clear meaning of this sentence can be that certain killing did not occur, but rather suspected, doubtful, and confused killing took place.
It should be noted that the negation of killing and crucifixion does not necessitate the current life of the Messiah. What is certain is his elevation to divine proximity.
On the Summary page · Read the commentary on 4:157 →
4:158 — Indeed, Allah raised him up toward Himself
Indeed, Allah raised him up toward Himself, and Allah is all-mighty, all-wise.
God, the Exalted and Powerful, based on His might and wisdom, raised up the spirit and body of Jesus the Messiah to Himself while preserving his life.
The apparent meaning of the verse “When God said, ‘O Jesus, I shall take your soul, and I shall raise you up toward Myself” (3:55) is the taking of the soul (tawaffī) of that personage; however, the term “taking of the soul” (tawaffī) is not explicit in meaning death, because sometimes tawaffī is also applied to the incomplete withdrawal of the soul from the body, namely sleep. Based on this principle, it is difficult to be certain about the death of Jesus from the specific verse “When God said, ‘O Jesus, I shall take your soul, and I shall raise you up toward Myself” (3:55). Of course, death certainly exists for all human beings and is without exception and the Messiah too, if he has not passed away, will certainly die one day; however, his raising up toward God: “Rather God raised him up toward Himself” (4:158) does not mean natural death and passing away, but rather the contextual evidence in the verse indicates his raising up while alive:
The turning away from being killed and crucified with the word “rather” (bal). This turning away is not compatible with passing away and the ascension of his soul alone - which is involved in killing and crucifixion.
The unity of context in the pronouns referring back to that personage. If the pronoun in “raised him up” (rafaʿahu) refers back to his soul, the unity of context would be disrupted.
It should be said that raising up (rafʿ) in “Rather God raised him up toward Himself” (4:158) does not specifically mean ascending to heaven either, because in this sentence there is talk of “raising up and ascension and return to God” (rafʿ wa-ʿurūj wa-rujūʿ ilā Allāh) - not “raising up to heaven” (rafʿ ilā l-samāʾ) - and God appears both in heaven and on earth and has no physical place or location such that Jesus the Messiah would have gone to heaven and to Him (God). Of course, the apparent meaning of some reports is his ascension to heaven and his descent from heaven at the time of the appearance of the Master of the Age (a.s.).
Another possibility - which is also compatible with the aforementioned report - is the realization of the raising up of Jesus the Messiah toward God in the manner of occultation (ghayba) and being hidden from others, similar to the occultation of the Imam of the Age; that is, God has concealed his spirit and body while preserving his life from human sight, so he is alive and awaiting the appearance (ẓuhūr) and has existential (takwīnī) and individual responsibility but does not have the responsibility of prophethood (risāla) and leadership of society.
On the Summary page · Read the commentary on 4:158 →
4:159 — There is none among the People of the Book but will surely believe in him before his death
There is none among the People of the Book but will surely believe in him before his death; and on the Day of Resurrection, he will be a witness against them.
All the People of the Book believe in that personage before their death.
Given the extreme disagreement of the People of the Book regarding the Messiah, the possibility of the pronoun “his death” (mawtihi) referring back to the People of the Book seems more preferable. According to this possibility, the People of the Book, with the opening of their spiritual eye (ʿayn malakūtī) during their death throes and at the time of death, their unlearned assumption about Jesus the Messiah is removed and the truth becomes clear to them, and all of them believe in that personage before their death; the Jews in his prophethood (risāla) and the Christians in the fact that that personage is neither God nor the son of God but only the messenger of God.
Given the descent of Jesus the Messiah at the time of the appearance of the Proof (a.s.) and his praying behind him, if the meaning of “They will surely believe in him before his death” (la-yuʾminanna bihi qabla mawtihi) is that the People of the Book who exist on earth at the time of that personage’s descent to earth believe in him, there is no problem whatsoever with the principle of that personage’s descent to earth and also the correct faith of the People of the Book of that era in him. Of course, that personage does not possess the office of prophethood (manṣab al-nubuwwa) at the time of descent; that is, the period of his prophethood has ended, whether he descends or does not descend, because the prophethood of every prophet ended with the mission (mabʿath) of Muḥammad ibn ʿAbdallāh.
According to the apparent context (ẓāhir siyāq) of the verses under discussion, which address the matter of Jesus the Messiah, the referent of the pronoun “him” (bihi) is that personage, not the Prophet, and its reference to Messenger in some narrations is by way of application (jarī) and correspondence (taṭbīq), and the meaning is that after the mission of Prophet and consequently the abrogation (naskh) of the law (sharīʿa) of Jesus, it necessarily became obligatory upon the People of the Book to both primarily believe in the Prophet and also, while believing in him, accept the messengership (risāla) of the Messiah and the previous prophets. For this group of the People of the Book, at the time of death when the veils are lifted, the truth (ḥaqāniyya) of Jesus becomes clear along with the truth of the messengership of Messenger. In this case, their faith in Prophet is primary and in Jesus is secondary, and on the Day of Resurrection Messenger is a witness over them, just as the Messiah is a witness.
In any case, the true followers of Jesus the Messiah and the referent of the verse “And I shall set those who follow you above the faithless until the Day of Resurrection” (3:55) are the People of the Book who became Muslim and the masses of Muslims.
On the Day of Resurrection, every prophet bears witness to the deeds of his community. The Messiah also bears witness in the Hereafter to the deeds of Christians, therefore he is well aware of their worldly actions; because bearing witness on the Day of Resurrection - which is the time for giving testimony - necessitates being a witness to people’s deeds in this world. Of course, the true observer and watcher is God, the Knower of the Unseen, and Jesus is the manifestation of His witnessing and testimony, and in this respect he is a witness and bears witness.
On the Summary page · Read the commentary on 4:159 →
4:160 — Due to the wrongdoing of the Jews
Due to the wrongdoing of the Jews, We prohibited them certain good things that were permitted to them [earlier], and for their barring many [people] from the way of Allah,
This noble verse is a warning to the heedless and a reminder for every attentive ear. It sets out the details of the atrocities and ugly deeds the Jews committed, such as their constant breaking of their pledges, their killing of God’s prophets (a.s.), the great slander they attributed to Lady Mary (a.s.), and their false words about the Messiah (a.s.).
The word “injustice” stands in place of these atrocities, as a summary after detail. Putting it before what it attaches to, that is, “We forbade”, is meant to restrict; and its tanwīn points to the greatness of the injustice they committed.
As for the evil results that befell the Jews because of their injustice and aggression, they consist in the legislative prohibition of some foods and good things that had been lawful for them before. This prohibition, which God (s.w.t.) imposed on them as a punishment for their injustice, is a lesson and an example for nations other than the Jews.
Another example of the Jews’ injustice is their turning away from the way of God. That is, their own turning aside and turning their backs on the way of God, and also turning others away and urging them to turn from the way of God, through their hostile propaganda and their distortion of the heavenly book and the principles of God’s religion, Exalted. These people turned themselves away and turned others away from the way of God.
The noble verse points out that they did this (that is, turned away) much and constantly: “and for their turning away from the way of God much.” Since the verb “turn away” (ṣadda) may be intransitive or transitive, the word “much” also points to the repetition and continuance of their turning themselves away and turning others away from the way of God. On this basis there are many examples of this great turning away: 1) whenever they wanted to repent and turn back from their error, they turned aside again and went back to what they had been doing; 2) whenever someone wanted to embrace God’s religion, they stood between him and what he wanted and turned him away from it; 3) whenever one of them wanted to have faith in God and His Messenger, they turned him away from the way of God and prevented him.
4:161 — and for their taking usury—though they had been forbidden from it—and for eating up the…
and for their taking usury—though they had been forbidden from it—and for eating up the wealth of the people wrongfully. And We have prepared for the faithless among them a painful punishment.
Among the other kinds of corruption that the Jews were known for committing were consuming usury (ribā) and unlawful wealth. Their elders and patriarchs dared to distort the Book of God, interpret the Torah by personal opinion, trade with God’s signs, and take bribes from people for any service, because they had fallen into the trap of material things. For this reason they did not fight usury or forbid it, because it brought them much wealth. Thus the corrupt Jews deserved worldly punishment, and they will receive their share of the painful punishment on the Day of Resurrection.
4:162 — But as for those who are firmly grounded in knowledge from among them
But as for those who are firmly grounded in knowledge from among them, and the faithful, they believe in what has been sent down to you, and what was sent down before you—those who maintain the prayer, give the zakat, and believe in Allah and the Last Day—them We shall give a great reward.
Before this, the chapter of al-Nisāʾ spoke briefly of a few faithful among the Jews. This verse acquaints us with those faithful and heaps praise on them.
This faithful few among the People of the Book is divided into two groups: those firmly grounded in knowledge, and the sincere faithful.
Being firmly grounded in knowledge is in proportion to the existential capacity of the knower; each person gains of knowledge what fits the essence of his self. As for the Infallibles (a.s.), they certainly have an ample share of knowledge. Being firmly grounded in knowledge is the basis of benefiting from it. Beneficial knowledge is a means of saving a person from doubts and ambiguity, and a cause of deliverance from blameworthy bewilderment. So among the signs of being firmly grounded in knowledge are freedom from doubt in every religious matter and freedom from vagueness and ambiguity in practical will. Among its praiseworthy effects are establishing the prayer, giving the zakāh, and faith in God and the Return.
The true faithful have faith in the greatest Messenger (s.a.w.) and in the revelation sent down to him, embodied in the noble Qur’an, just as they have faith in all God’s earlier messengers and prophets and their heavenly books. That is, they do not stop at a particular prophet or a particular message, and are never bewildered about it. For their proof and way of establishing the message of all the prophets (a.s.) and the truth of the heavenly books is one and does not change; and Islam for its part did not bring anything novel or new as regards the general lines of belief.
As for repeating the word “faith” in His words, Exalted, “and the faithful who have faith in what was sent down to you...”, it is by way of summary and detail; otherwise it would not have been repeated. So the sentence means: those who had faith in general in all the prophets and heavenly books now have faith in detail as well.
Among the qualities of the faithful mentioned in the verse are establishing the prayer and giving the zakāh: “and those who establish the prayer and those who give the zakāh.” We notice that the words “those firmly grounded” and “the faithful” are in the nominative, while the word “those who establish” (al-muqīmīna) is in the accusative, as the object of an implied verb, “I mean”, in praise of those who establish the prayer, and to show that those firmly grounded in knowledge and the true faithful are the ones who establish the prayer. They are praised with this quality because of the importance of the prayer, the special feature that distinguishes it, and its being the pillar of religion. In short, arranging the grammatical case of the word “those who establish” and setting it apart from what comes before and after it is to show the importance of the prayer.
This faithful group has faith in God and the Last Day: “and those who have faith in God and the Last Day.” Perhaps the aim of putting establishing the prayer and giving the zakāh before faith in God and the Return in wording in this noble verse, though the usual way of the noble Qur’an in ordering these words is the opposite, is to focus on the importance of righteous deeds and not to be content with faith alone.
God (s.w.t.) praised this faithful group in the noble verse, saying: “those, We shall give them a great reward”; through the demonstrative “those”, the particle of the future (sa-) in “We shall give them”, as a pointer to emphasis, and the indefinite form of the word “reward”.
4:163 — We have indeed revealed to you as We revealed to Noah and the prophets after him
We have indeed revealed to you as We revealed to Noah and the prophets after him, and [as] We revealed to Abraham and Ishmael, Isaac, Jacob, and the Tribes, Jesus and Job, Jonah, Aaron, and Solomon—and We gave David the Psalms—
This noble verse stresses several points, among them:
It gives the lie to the Jews, who think that God (s.w.t.) has given revelation to no one after Moses (a.s.).
It gives the reason for the sentence “they have faith in what was sent down to you and what was sent down before you” in the previous verse.
It answers the Jews’ objection mentioned in the previous verses, where they asked the greatest Messenger (s.a.w.) for the noble Qur’an to come down upon him all at once, like the tablets sent down to Moses (a.s.).
We draw from the verse above that the proof of the authority of God’s messengers (a.s.) and of the truth of their books is one; and that whoever acknowledges the prophethood of all the earlier prophets (a.s.) and the authority of their books must not separate between the prophets, but must have faith in the message of the Seal of the Prophets (s.a.w.) and the authority of the noble Qur’an.
Here the noble verse addresses the greatest Messenger (s.a.w.). It first points to his receiving revelation and prophethood from God, Mighty and Majestic, and then speaks of the other messengers before him. The superiority of the noble Prophet (s.a.w.) over the other prophets and messengers (a.s.) can be drawn from his (s.a.w.) being mentioned first in wording in the noble verse. The verse also shows the perfection of the revelation sent down to the Seal of the Prophets (s.a.w.) compared with all the various books and laws of the earlier prophets and messengers, and that God, Mighty and Majestic, held back no truth in revelation from His greatest Messenger (s.a.w.).
The Messiah (a.s.) was sent after Job, Jonah, Aaron, Solomon and David (a.s.). The secret of putting the name of the noble Prophet (s.a.w.) before the prophets mentioned in this verse may be to answer the doubts of those who questioned the Messenger’s (s.a.w.) prophethood, or because the greatest Prophet (s.a.w.) is one of the prophets of firm resolve (ulū al-ʿazm) (a.s.).
The noble verse points out that God (s.w.t.) sent down the Psalms (al-Zabūr) to David (a.s.). It contained a collection of counsels and wise sayings, and was not like the other heavenly books sent down to the prophets of firm resolve (a.s.), which contain a series of teachings, morals, duties, laws and decrees.
It should be pointed out that the word “We gave revelation” is repeated three times in this noble verse. The secret of this may be to show the three forms of divine revelation that came down to the prophets (a.s.) or to human beings, namely:
Revelation without an intermediary, which is called in technical usage special revelation.
Revelation from behind a veil, such as God speaking to Moses (a.s.) from behind the blessed tree.
Revelation through an intermediary, with the angel who carries revelation coming down to the messenger or prophet.
Although God (s.w.t.) divides speech into these three kinds, according to noble verse 51 of the chapter of al-Shūrā, God’s particular speech with all His prophets (a.s.) falls under the heading of revelation.
4:164 — and apostles We have recounted to you earlier and apostles We have not recounted to…
and apostles We have recounted to you earlier and apostles We have not recounted to you—and to Moses Allah spoke directly—
God, Mighty and Majestic, the Lord of the worlds, teaches the human being by way of revelation and religious law, so as to establish His proof against him. So there is no nation that was left without divine guidance. God’s (s.w.t.) messages reached people continuously and constantly, in the form God, Exalted, wanted, through the prophets of firm resolve or their successors (a.s.), whether with or without an intermediary. In this way the tie between heaven and earth was never cut; rather, God, Mighty and Majestic, sent His messengers one after another to all nations continuously.
God, Exalted, told His noble Messenger (s.a.w.) the stories of some of the earlier prophets and messengers, mentioning their names and some of the events they went through. The noble Qur’an also pointed to the lives of some prophets and nations who lived in regions and lands that could be searched and investigated to make the truths clear. There is no doubt that the main aim of telling stories and reports is to take lessons and examples. And comparing nations that lived beyond the seas was hard to achieve at that time. On this basis, there is without doubt no benefit in telling the stories of prophets and nations that lived in far and remote regions, since those regions could not be reached and their conditions and circumstances known, and so there was no way to take lessons and examples from them.
As we pointed out at the end of the interpretation of the previous noble verse, when mentioning the kinds of divine revelation that came down to the prophets and messengers (a.s.), God’s (s.w.t.) speaking to Moses (a.s.) at the first coming down of revelation to him was through an intermediary and from behind a veil (the blessed tree). But that does not deny speaking without an intermediary; rather, the meaning of speaking without an intermediary can be drawn from His words, Exalted, “and God spoke to Moses directly”, through the exaltation that the verse contains.
It is worth mentioning: 1) God’s (s.w.t.) speaking is not by physical and material means, such that a sound comes from the tree, for example, and others too can hear that sound. In that case the sound would be heard from one direction only, the direction of the tree; whereas Moses (a.s.) heard the divine voice from six directions at the same time, because the divine outpouring in the Lord’s speech covers all directions. 2) Divine speaking consists in bringing speech about and creating it. So God’s words come from God (s.w.t.); they do not subsist in Him and inhere in Him like human speech, which subsists in and inheres in the speaker and is tied to the speaker’s tongue, mouth, palate and throat.
4:165 — apostles, as bearers of good news and warners
apostles, as bearers of good news and warners, so that mankind may not have any argument against Allah, after the [sending of the] apostles; and Allah is all-mighty, all-wise.
The general proof of the necessity of prophethood in every age and land, and the matter of extending divine messages to every nation so as to complete the proof, is not something limited or restricted. On this basis, as we have seen, no nation was deprived of the blessing of the divine message. The Mighty, Wise God left no nation without a leader or guide, so that it would have no argument against God on the Day of Resurrection.
To explain this: the human being does not perish at death. Rather, his negative and positive effects, his qualities of belief and character, together with all his deeds that accompany his spirit, will appear; their effects will show after his death. Each human being will meet the recompense he deserves according to the reality of his deeds. And since there is no likeness between tawḥīd and heresy (unbelief), justice and injustice, truth and lying, and each belief, trait or deed has its own reckoning, some people will be happy on the Day of Resurrection and others wretched.
On this basis God, Mighty and Majestic, willed to send people and nations guides who bring good news and warn, so that they would not object after their death or have an argument and say: no messenger or prophet was sent among us. Was not God, who created the human being and the whole world and knows what links the human being to the world of existence, supposed to send us a guiding and warning messenger, to teach us and direct us to the straight path, especially since we lived among many things and matters most of which were of no benefit to us?
On the basis of what has been said above, what is mainly meant in the verse under discussion is good news and warning within the frame of religious law. The argument mentioned turns on knowing the religious law, not on the basic knowledge of the one, unique Origin, for which rational proof is enough to establish His reality and existence, just as there is also a rational proof of the possibility and necessity of prophethood. But the straight path to meeting the Lord of the worlds will not be known without revelation or prophethood, for ignorance of it will without doubt lead to deviation and misguidance. For this reason the argument mentioned counts as a complete and full argument. And far be it from God, Exalted, to punish people before sending them a prophet or messenger, especially in a period of interval (fatrah), because they would argue that no messenger or prophet had been sent to them.
According to what we have seen, two things can be drawn from the verse under discussion. First, the ability of the intellect to argue and the completeness of its argument, and God’s (s.w.t.) hearing that argument and that reasoning. Second, the sound intellect’s understanding of its own inability to secure happiness for itself, and its pressing and urgent need of heavenly revelation and the sending of the prophets (a.s.). For the human intellect is unable to understand the secret of creation and to know many hidden matters and questions; that is, it is not able on its own to achieve happiness, nor is it enough for guiding the individual and society. Otherwise there would have been no need to send the messengers and prophets (a.s.).
Note 1: The preposition “after” in the noble verse points to a limit, and it carries an implied meaning: that there was an argument against God, Mighty and Majestic, before the sending of the messengers, but after the sending of the messengers no argument against God (s.w.t.) remained for people.
Note 2: Mentioning the word “the messengers”, though the pronoun “them” could have been used, is to give attention to the matter and show its importance.
4:166 — But Allah bears witness to what He has sent down to you—He sent it down with His…
But Allah bears witness to what He has sent down to you—He sent it down with His knowledge—and the angels bear witness [too], and Allah quite suffices as witness.
The greatest Messenger (s.a.w.) came with the message, but the People of the Book denied him. As we have just seen, the People of the Book made excuses and asked the Prophet (s.a.w.) to have the book come down to him from heaven, as the tablets of the Torah came down to Moses (a.s.). This noble verse represents another answer to the People of the Book. It points out that God, Mighty and Majestic, is the witness to the prophethood of the noble Messenger (s.a.w.), and reminds the People of the Book that they accepted God’s (s.w.t.) witness concerning the earlier prophets, embodied in the miracles they brought. So today they should accept God’s witness, Exalted, to the truth of the Prophet (s.a.w.), his truthfulness and the soundness of his prophethood; and God’s (s.w.t.) witness (that is, the Book and divine speech) is within their reach. If the matter witnessed (that is, what is witnessed to or for) in the phrase “But God bears witness” is the truth of the greatest Prophet’s (s.a.w.) message, and not the truth of the noble Qur’an sent down to him, then the meaning of His (s.w.t.) words “to what He has sent down to you” is that God’s witness, Mighty and Majestic, concerns the message of the Messenger (s.a.w.).
It should be pointed out that witnessing in this noble verse means bearing witness and giving it (that is, presenting and delivering testimony), not knowledge; so that it can be relied upon in debate and argument, and not set aside or left out of the debate, where the Messenger (s.a.w.) says that God is witness to his truth and His knowledge of this matter is enough.
As for the bāʾ in the word “with His knowledge”, it is for accompaniment or close association, meaning that the Qur’an is accompanied by or closely joined with God’s knowledge. Or: “The mere coming down is not enough for the claim, because among the kinds of coming down is coming down by revelation from the devils, where the devil corrupts the matter of divine guidance and puts a false way in place of God’s true way, or mixes things, bringing something false into the true divine revelation, so that the matter becomes confused.”
The message of the greatest Prophet (s.a.w.) has other witnesses too: those firmly grounded in knowledge among the People of the Book (“But those firmly grounded in knowledge among them, and the faithful, have faith in what was sent down to you and what was sent down before you”); likewise the most complete instance of those firmly grounded in the knowledge of the Book, that is, the Commander of the Faithful ʿAlī ibn Abī Ṭālib (a.s.); and the angels. But the witness of these witnesses to the truth of the message is not on the same level; it is secondary and derived, and needs the endorsement of God (s.w.t.). So their proof is derived, and they only deliver the very witness of God, Exalted. With the witness of God, Mighty and Majestic, there is no need for the witness of others; rather, the witness of God, Exalted, alone is enough. For this reason the end of the verse, “and God suffices as a witness”, mentions nothing about other witnesses.
4:167 — Indeed those who are faithless and bar [others] from the way of Allah
Indeed those who are faithless and bar [others] from the way of Allah, have certainly strayed into far error.
After the previous verses established the truth of the message of the greatest Prophet (s.a.w.) and the Book sent down to him, and showed that the revelation of all the prophets has one source with the revelation that came down to the Messenger of God (s.a.w.), this noble verse points to some of the actions and ugly deeds of the Children of Israel. It counts as astray those who disbelieved in the truth of the noble Qur’an and the message of the most noble Prophet (s.a.w.), and turned away from the way of God, that is, the message of the greatest Prophet (s.a.w.), the divine revelation that came down to him, and the heavenly Book.
These people themselves disbelieved and went far from the path, and set about turning others away from following the path of truth and keeping them from reaching it, because they thought unbelief was faith and misguidance was guidance. Besides this, they changed their faces and put on the mask of faith to preserve their social standing and gain wealth, while in reality they are astray and leading others astray. These people, who went far from God’s way and led themselves and others astray because of their ignorance and their enmity to the truth, fell into double misguidance.
4:168–169 — Indeed those who are faithless and do wrong
(168) Indeed those who are faithless and do wrong, Allah shall never forgive them, nor shall He guide them to any way, (169) except the way to hell, to remain in it forever, and that is easy for Allah.
The noble verse above states that those who disbelieved, turned others from the way of God, wronged people and went to extremes in their injustice, and so fell into the abyss of far misguidance, as the previous verse pointed out, will never be forgiven if they die without repenting. In the Hereafter they will have no way of salvation and deliverance except the way of punishment and the Fire, in which they will abide forever. There is no doubt that God (s.w.t.) is able to create a place to punish those unjust faithless forever.
As for the phrase “abiding in it forever”, it means everlasting residence and abiding, not staying a long time; because “abiding” and “forever” are both mentioned in this verse.
This everlasting abiding is the lot of the obstinate faithless person who dies without repenting. But the destination of those who repent is salvation from divine punishment.
It is worth mentioning that if the depiction of the punishment of the corrupt and the unjust in this verse is a statement and not a command, God (s.w.t.) will without fail carry it out by His will; for God’s statement, Exalted, is decisive and cannot be turned back. But if we take this depiction as a threat, God, Mighty and Majestic, may not carry out His punishment. For a threat is a command, not a statement whose being untrue would be impossible; and going back on a threat does not conflict with His wisdom, Exalted, so that its coming from God would be impossible.
4:170 — O mankind! The Apostle has certainly brought you the truth from your Lord
O mankind! The Apostle has certainly brought you the truth from your Lord. So have faith! That is better for you. And if you are faithless, [you should know that] to Allah indeed belongs whatever is in the heavens and the earth, and Allah is all-knowing, all-wise.
After answering the objections of the People of the Book in the previous verses about the truth of the message of Muḥammad and the Prophet’s (s.a.w.) receiving divine revelation, the verse under discussion addresses people in general, after the earlier address particular to the People of the Book, to declare to them the universal message of the most noble Prophet (s.a.w.), saying: the Messenger sent to you has brought you the reality of the Qur’an and true teachings; or, the message of the Prophet who has come to you lies within the frame of the truth, or comes with the truth.
As we pointed out above, the main pivot in this verse too is the particular message. The definite article of reference in the word “the Messenger” is to point to the promised and known Messenger; for the People of the Book knew the qualities of the greatest Messenger (s.a.w.) before his mission, since they were mentioned in their heavenly books, and the polytheists too had heard from the People of the Book some reports about the Prophet (s.a.w.).
Given the word “Lord”, and the statement that this Messenger is the Messenger of your Lord, the One responsible for your upbringing, the noble verse points to its concern with the matter. Everything that the Lord of the human being and of this world, the only One responsible for both in deciding their destiny, decrees comes about by His will. So there is no reason that would lead a human being to deny this truth; and this is the reason for using the fāʾ of consequence in His words, Exalted, “so have faith, it is better for you.” It is known that the faith of tawḥīd being good and better is a matter of designation, not comparison. And since the faith of tawḥīd is the only good in belief, its absence certainly means evil in belief.
After this good news, the noble verse warns that people’s faith does not benefit God (s.w.t.), just as their unbelief does not harm Him in anything. For He is the owner of the heavens, the earth and the whole world, and nothing of His kingdom is reduced by the unbelief of the faithless: “And if you disbelieve, then surely to God belongs whatever is in the heavens and the earth.”
This phrase contains a warning to the faithless that their unbelief in God (s.w.t.) means challenging a Ruler and Commander whose soldiers and armies are the whole of existence, and so He cannot be overcome. God (s.w.t.) knows what stirs in the breasts and intentions of His servants, and He answers whom He wills by His wisdom; and the divine order rests on observing knowledge and wisdom. And since oversight and rule over the order of existence are in the hand of the All-Knowing, All-Wise God, no truth or justice remains unknown, and there is no falsehood or injustice that He does not know.
4:171 — O People of the Book! Do not exceed the bounds in your religion
O People of the Book! Do not exceed the bounds in your religion, and do not attribute anything to Allah except the truth. The Messiah, Jesus son of Mary, was only an apostle of Allah, and His Word that He cast toward Mary and a spirit from Him. So have faith in Allah and His apostles, and do not say, ‘[God is] a trinity.’ Relinquish [such a creed]! That is better for you. Allah is but the One God. He is far too immaculate to have any son. To Him belongs whatever is in the heavens and whatever is on the earth, and Allah suffices as trustee.
The Jews, through negligence (tafrīṭ) regarding Jesus the Messiah, slandered his pure mother. In contrast to this negligence, which was responded to in the previous verses, is the excess (ifrāṭ) of the Christians who considered that personage to be the son of God.
Both groups, Jews and Christians, had exaggeration (ghuluww) in their religion, and the general address “O People of the Book” (yā ahl al-kitāb) encompasses both of them. However, based on the subsequent sentences and the context of the verse, those addressed are the Christians, and “excess” (ghuluww): “do not exceed” (lā taghlū), which means transgression and passage toward excess and negligence, in this verse means excess and extremism in religion, not encompassing both.
The verse warns the People of the Book against excess (ghuluww) in their religion and against any false speech about God, and calls them to the necessity of adhering to truth in beliefs: “O People of the Book! Do not exceed the bounds in your religion, and do not attribute anything to God except the truth” (yā ahl al-kitāb lā taghlū fī dīnikum wa-lā taqūlū ʿalā llāh illā l-ḥaqq). The expression “do not attribute… to God” (lā taqūlū ʿalā llāh) indicates slander, because slanderous speech against any person is harsh opposition to them, and its clear example is attributing falsehood to them.
Negligence and shortcoming in the knowledge of God, and excess and extremism regarding the prophets and elevating them beyond the limit of humanity, became the foundation for the Christian belief in the Trinity (tathlīth) and worship of the threesome.
The Qur’an, in order to combat the extremist thought of Christians who consider Jesus the Messiah to be one of the three gods, always mentions the name of the Messiah with the description “son of Mary”; not that, like the mention of other prophets, it brings only the name of that personage. The verse under discussion also, in order to refute the aforementioned excessive notion and show the path of truth, calls Jesus the Messiah the son of Mary and the messenger of God who was born by His will without a father. He is God’s Word (kalima) given to his mother and a spirit (rūḥ) from God.
Factors such as the characteristics of Jesus, the limited capacity of the people of that era, the reasonable and acceptable expressions of the age of the Gospel’s revelation, and the gradual evolution of colloquial literature, especially the Qur’anic expression “Word of God” (kalima Allāh): “and His Word that He cast toward Mary” (wa-kalimatuh alqāhā ilā Maryam) (with attention to the special relationship of the word or the one who speaks), could have provided the ground for some delusions and excesses (ghuluww). Unaware that other divine prophets are also each a divine word (kalima) and likewise recipients and listeners of such a word in the realm of creation (takwīn).
In summary, all contingent existence are divine words (kalimāt); however, the friends of God (awliyāʾ) are perfect words (kalimāt tāmma), and Jesus too, since he is God’s supreme word (kalima), was separately called a divine word. That personage is both God’s Word (kalima) and the recipient and listener of it.
The word “from” (min) in “and a spirit from Him” (wa-rūḥun minhu) indicates the source of creation, not a sign of distinction and partiality; meaning the existence of the Messiah is from God; not that he is a part of God. Of course, all human spirits (arwāḥ) are attributed to the Lord; however, just as some individuals are chosen (muṣṭafā) and some are selected (mujtabā), some spirits also have a characteristic that God, the Bestower of gifts, is aware of what He has given them.
The verse continues by asking Christians to have faith in the One God and His messengers.
Faith in the One God and His messengers means declaring the Creator free from having a spouse and child and not attributing a status higher than messengership (risāla) to His sent ones.
God after the call to faith has expressed the incompatibility of true faith with the Trinity (tathlīth) and considers the good and happiness of the People of the Book to lie in avoiding the worship of the threesome (thalātha). Of course, the scope of the Qur’an’s proof encompasses all types of Trinity (tathlīth) and duality (tathniya), because with the establishment of monotheism (tawḥīd), other than that is negated.
In any case, belief in the Trinity (tathlīth) is disbelief (kufr) and polytheism (shirk), and the Trinity - meaning belief in the divinity of God, the Messiah, and Mary or in the threefold gods of the Father (God), the Son (the Messiah), and the Holy Spirit - in any form is impossible and false; whether God is conceived as a universal matter (amr jāmiʿ) that has three individuals (three instances); or God is a reality composed and compounded of three parts; or neither universal nor composite but collective (jamīʿ), meaning each of those three are independent gods.
God, the Most High, is holy (quddūs) from every kind of Trinity and glorified (subbūḥ) from every type of incarnation (ḥulūl), union (ittiḥād), partnership (sharika), and the like.
The verse, after refuting every kind of Trinity, in order to declare God free from having a child and to remove any delusion about having offspring, emphasizes the oneness of God and presents His ownership and sovereignty over the entire universe; what is in the heavens and the earth belongs to the One God, and He alone undertakes their guardianship and management and is sufficient and best for their guardianship and management.
On the Summary page · Read the commentary on 4:171 →
4:172 — The Messiah would never disdain being a servant of Allah
The Messiah would never disdain being a servant of Allah, nor would the angels brought near [to Him]. And whoever disdains His worship and is arrogant, He will gather them all toward Him.
This verse, in another argument for the purity of Jesus the Messiah from the claim of divinity and being God’s son, and for the negation of that personage’s divinity and the absolute refutation of the Trinity, presents the non-disdain (lā yastankif) and non-turning away of that personage as well as the angels brought near to God from servitude (ʿubūdiyya) and bondage to God; how can he be considered God or one of the three gods when he calls himself a servant of God?
God has proclaimed the servanthood of Jesus and the angels to refute the delusion of the divinity of the Messiah - which a group of Christians had fallen into - and to remove the false notion of the lordship (rubūbiyya) of the angels - which the polytheists (mushrikān) had accepted. Indeed, transparently and by expressing the implied word - instead of saying “ʿabd Allāh” - He says “ʿabdan lillāh” (a servant of God) to explicitly convey the servitude of the Messiah as well as the angels.
The conjunction of “angels” (malāʾika) with “Messiah” (masīḥ) can indicate that none of the characteristics of Jesus, such as creation without a father, the ability to perform miracles, and being brought near and honored, can prevent him from being a servant or cause him to disdain and flee from servitude, because the angels have neither father nor mother, they are brought near to God and have a lofty station, and they perform miracles by the permission of the Lord. Indeed, the miraculous power of the Messiah was through the assistance of the Holy Spirit (rūḥ al-qudus). Despite this, they never turn away from worship, but rather worship God more than others.
The submission (khuḍūʿ) and humility (khushūʿ) and servitude of Jesus the Messiah and the angels brought near results from their complete awareness of the divine names (asmāʾ al-ilāhiyya) and also their knowledge that all their perfections shine in the mirror of their existence as borrowed reflections from the source of eternal light (nūr azalī). For this reason, no perfection causes them to disdain.
The aforementioned conjunction may also be an implicit warning to the polytheists (mushrikān) of the Hijaz who called the angels the children of God. The literary justification (muṣaḥḥiḥ adabī) for the mentioned conjunction is the superiority of the station of the angels brought near over the rank of Jesus the Messiah; otherwise, that is, if their station were lower and inferior, the aforementioned conjunction would have no justification. Even if their station were equal to the rank of that personage, there would not be much necessity for mentioning them in this sensitive position.
The Dominant God (qahār) will bring those who disdainfully and arrogantly refuse to worship to the scene of resurrection (maḥshar) on the Day of Judgment and punish them for their deeds:
“And whoever disdains His worship and is arrogant, He will gather them all toward Him” (4:172).
“Disdain” (istinkāf) is ignorant turning away and “arrogance” (istikbār) is conscious disobedience. Therefore, if someone possesses knowledge but turns away from the worship of God, their disdain is mixed with arrogance, as in this verse and the following verse, after “disdain” the qualification “arrogance” is mentioned, because the disdain of Jesus the Messiah and the angels would only occur if an arrogant spirit dominated them. Since what prevents the Messiah and the angels from disdain and arrogance is their knowledge and faith in being gathered in the presence of God, the mention of arrogance in the second sentence is to express the complete purity of those sacred beings from this contamination.
On the Summary page · Read the commentary on 4:172 →
4:173 — As for those who have faith and do righteous deeds
As for those who have faith and do righteous deeds, He will pay them in full their rewards, and He will enhance them out of His grace. But those who are disdainful and arrogant, He will punish them with a painful punishment, and they will not find besides Allah any guardian or helper.
The gathering and bringing before God (s.w.t.) on the Day of Resurrection, to call creatures to account for their deeds and for each of them to receive the recompense he deserves, includes the righteous faithful and those who disdain and are arrogant. This noble verse explains in detail the word “all” that came in summary form in the previous verse, and sets out the reward and punishment of each of the two groups.
The righteous faithful will receive their rewards in full. God, Exalted, will include them in His vast mercy and repay them with the best of what they used to do; they may be given double the reward, or ten times it, or perhaps seven hundred times, and indeed more, for all the good and fine deeds they did.
As for those who disdain to worship their Lord and are too arrogant to humble and submit themselves to Him, God will punish them with a painful punishment; though the All-Merciful, Most Merciful God will punish them only according to their deeds, without increase.
On the Day of Raising and Reckoning, the arrogant and those who turned away from servanthood to God will find no guardian to take their part and no helper to help them and save them from divine punishment and the penalty that awaits them. On that day there will be no guardian and no helper besides God (s.w.t.).
It is worth mentioning, as can also be drawn from this noble verse, that the main factor in deserving to enter Hell is the ugliness of the act (that is, committing what is forbidden), whether it comes from a faithless person or a transgressing Muslim; and the ugliness of the doer (that is, unbelief and hypocrisy) is the cause of abiding in Hell. As for entering Paradise, it depends on two basic conditions: faith (the goodness of the doer) and righteous deeds (the goodness of the act).
4:174 — O mankind! Certainly, a proof has come to you from your Lord
O mankind! Certainly, a proof has come to you from your Lord, and We have sent down to you a manifest light.
After refuting the polytheistic beliefs of the Jews and the Christians in the previous verses, this noble verse addresses people (“O people”) and calls them to have faith in the teachings of revelation.
The noble Qur’an is the instance of “the proof” and “the clear light”; both descriptions point to the noble Qur’an. So the pivot of the verse is the mighty Book of God, which requires faith in the message of the Seal of the Prophets (s.a.w.). For the noble Qur’an and the message of Muḥammad are two joined realities that never part. Both of them (that is, the noble Qur’an and the greatest Messenger (s.a.w.)) speak of one reality, and neither outweighs the other, since each has a station of light and a lofty spiritual unity.
The noble Qur’an is a shining proof in knowledge, and the greatest Messenger (s.a.w.) is the greatest divine miracle and the greatest concrete proof. But the word “proof” (burhān) is mostly used in the sciences and certain knowledge. The noble Qur’an is called a proof and a clear light because it deals with the basic questions and subjects concerning the Origin and the Return, revelation and prophethood, removing the darkness of heresy and the receding of polytheism, purifying the heavenly schools and clearing them, sanctifying God’s prophets (a.s.), and the like.
In short, the noble Qur’an is a proof and a clear argument; it removes every darkness, and it is the clear light, luminous in itself and shining in its essence.
It is worth mentioning that the noble Qur’an came at the hand of the Seal of the Prophets and Messengers (s.a.w.) in a decisive and certain way. But the apparent sense of the sentence “a proof has come to you from your Lord” suggests as though the Qur’an itself came down from God without anyone bringing it. This subtle expression contains a pointer to this divine Book having perfect light, absolute clarity and a brilliance beyond measure.
4:175 — As for those who have faith in Allah
As for those who have faith in Allah, and hold fast to Him, He will admit them to His mercy and grace, and He will guide them on a straight path to Him.
After the previous verses pointed out that the noble Qur’an is a proof and a clear light, this verse sets out the blessing of following this heavenly Book, in keeping with the explanation the two previous verses gave about the reward of the righteous faithful. It says: those who have offered the goodness of the doer and the goodness of the act, that is, who have had faith in God, Exalted, at the level of the goodness of the doer, and held fast to His religion, the message of His Prophet and the firm divine rope at the level of the goodness of the act, will receive three main blessings:
God (s.w.t.) will admit them into His vast mercy, and His special mercy will also include them, just as they enjoyed divine mercy in the root of their faith and holding fast.
In addition to the reward particular to the root of faith and righteous deeds, and alongside the many other kinds of reward the faithful will receive in the Hereafter, God, Exalted, will grant them of His grace and kindness what cannot be encompassed.
God, Mighty and Majestic, will guide them to the straight path. This guidance, which is among the effects and fruits of their holding fast to God, Exalted, in practice, represents a new outpouring in this world. It is of the kind of guidance given as a reward, not guidance at the outset. On this basis, God (s.w.t.) guides those who have the goodness of the doer and of the act in a special way, from the straight path directly to the highest goal, so that He fills their hearts with pure belief, enabling them to choose good and happiness with ease and to do good deeds by their own will. This inner attraction is what is called special divine guidance.
As for the indefinite form of the words “mercy” and “grace”, it may point to the greatness of the special divine gifts and blessings that can be known only by walking a special path.
As we pointed out above, the three blessings and rewards mentioned, that is, “special mercy”, “grace and more grace and kindness” and “guidance given as a reward”, are not limited to the Hereafter; rather, the unrestricted wording of the reward covers this world too.
4:176 — They ask you for a ruling
They ask you for a ruling. Say, ‘Allah gives you a ruling concerning the kalalah: If a man dies and has no children [or parents], but has a sister, for her shall be a half of what he leaves, and he shall inherit from her if she has no children. If there be two sisters, then they shall receive two-thirds of what he leaves. But if there be [several] brothers and sisters, then for the male shall be the like of the share of two females. Allah explains [the laws] for you lest you should go astray, and Allah has knowledge of all things.’
The last verse of the chapter of al-Nisāʾ deals with the ruling on inheritance. Some commentators count it as the last verse revealed to the Messenger of God (s.a.w.), and some held it to be the last verse speaking of the rulings of inheritance, like the first verses of this chapter, on the basis of the rule of “returning the end to the beginning”.
“The one without direct heirs” (al-kalālah) is the subject of the question in His words, Exalted, “They ask you for a ruling”, which He (s.w.t.) answered. Kalālah in this noble verse is a name for the heirs of the deceased other than the child and the parent, such as his brother and sister from both his parents or from his father only.
Inheritance in kalālah has two conditions: 1) that the deceased have no child, male or female; 2) that the deceased’s father and mother have died.
If the heir is one sister only, she inherits half the estate by fixed share, and the other half by return (radd) and kinship.
If the heir is one brother only, he inherits all the wealth.
As for the difference between this verse and the twelfth verse of this chapter in setting out the share of the deceased’s brother or sister, verse 12 dealt with kalālah on the mother’s side, while this verse speaks of the ruling of inheritance for kalālah on the side of both parents or of the father alone.
If the heirs are two sisters only, they inherit two-thirds of the wealth by fixed share, and the rest of the wealth on the basis of kinship. But if the heirs are brothers and sisters, the male has the like of the share of two females.
The right way to divide wealth among heirs is the way based on the Book of God, Mighty and Majestic. The aim of the noble Qur’an in setting out the rulings of inheritance particular to kalālah is to protect the Muslims from deviating and straying from the straight path, which would lead to some heirs being favoured over others in the division.
God (s.w.t.) divided the wealth only by His wisdom and on the basis of the general good. He knows everything and is aware of the hidden sides of things; He knows people’s interests and harms, their benefits and losses, and the good and evil, beauty and ugliness of things, while people know nothing of that at all. So there is no escape from acting according to the divine commands.