Selected Exegesis

The second question and answer in the tripartite story of Khiḍr and Moses revolves around the killing of the youth. After disembarking from the ship and continuing their journey, they came across a youth, whom Khiḍr killed without any preamble. For the second time, Moses forgot his commitment and, in a tone even more intense than before, objected. He questioned Khiḍr about killing a youth who had not taken a life and was not guilty of any crime warranting death. Moses condemned the act as something reprehensible and unrecognized—meaning it was not acknowledged as permissible by either of the two primary sources of religious knowledge: reason and tradition.

The term “reprehensible” (nukr) is stronger than the term “grievous” (imr) used in the incident of making a hole in the ship, because Khiḍr’s action in damaging the ship did not result in anyone’s death, unlike the second incident which ended in the taking of a life.

In response to Moses’ objection, Khiḍr reiterated his earlier warning with greater emphasis, reminding him that he had already said Moses would not be able to exercise patience in accompanying him. Once again, Moses apologized and then made a final commitment, stating that if he were to question Khiḍr about anything after this, Khiḍr would have full justification to end their companionship. Moses recognized that his excuses had reached their limit, and Khiḍr would be justified in parting ways with him.