[1] Alif. Lam. Mim. These are verses of a Book2 and a clear Recitation. [2] Much3 will those who disbelieved wish (one day) they were Muslims4 [3] Leave them alone: eating and enjoying themselves.5 Hope distracts them.6 But soon they will know.7 [4] We did not destroy a people but they had a known decree.8 [5] And no nation outstrips its term nor postpones it.9 [6] They say, ‘O ye, to whom the Reminder has been revealed, surely, you are mad.10 [7] Why do you not bring angels to us, if you be of the truthful?’ [8] (But) We do not send down angels except in truth.11 And then, they would not be given respite. [9] Indeed, it is We who have revealed the Reminder, and it is indeed We who will be its Guardian.12

Commentary:

1. Except for a few verses, over whose identity there is no agreement, the whole chapter is Makkan (Alusi).

2. That is, these are magnificent, noble verses of a Book which alone, because of its qualities, deserves to be referred to as “the Book (worth its name)” - Shabbir.

3. The word “rubba” is used with various conjunctions to yield a variety of meanings. The linguists agree that although at this point the meaning is of “sometimes” or “a few times”, the hidden implication is “quite often” or, as we have rendered, “much” (Razi). Qurtubi says the word is used in both the senses, although less in the sense of “quite often.”

4. According to Ibn Mas`ud, Ibn ‘Abbas, Abu Musa and others, this will happen when, condemned to the Fire, sinning Muslims and unbelievers alike, will be in Hell. The unbelievers will taunt the Muslims: ‘So it doesn’t look like your faith in Allah did you any good,’ until Allah will be provoked to anger. He will then allow the intercessors to intercede for the unbelievers and they will begin to leave one after another. When the last of them is gone, the lid will be finally laid over the Hellfire and sealed. It is then that the unbelievers will say, “O that we were believers” (Ibn Jarir, Razi, Ibn Kathir).

According to one report in Ibn Marduwayh and Tabarani, and of trustworthy chain of narration, the Prophet (saws) recited this verse after making the above statement (Alusi).

Dahhak and Qatadah said that such wishing will begin from the time angels appear before the unbeliever at death, and at every stage thereafter (Ibn Jarir, Razi, Qurtubi).

There are in fact at least four ahadith that explain this verse in this way (although all not very trustworthy, but one strengthening the other: Au.). According to one of them the sinning believers will stay in Hell for lengths of time in accordance with their sins, some a day, others a year, and some others for as long as the age of the universe, from the day of its creation to the day of destruction (Ibn Kathir).

Majid comments: “In a minor degree one finds a similar feeling experienced in this very world. ‘Renan said that he never entered a mosque without a lively emotion, or even without a certain regret at not being a Muslim.’ (Arnold, Islamic Faith, p. 29).”

5. This is Allah’s mercy and justice. If the unbelievers use their faculty of reasoning to choose to deny some hard facts of life and death, and devote themselves madly to building up this world, then, why should they be denied the fruits of their works? (Au.)

Razi writes: The verse should lead us to believer that an overwhelming indulgence in worldly affairs should be avoided by an intelligent Muslim.

6. The Prophet (saws) has said, “The first generation Muslims succeeded by faith and renunciation, and the last of them will be destroyed by parsimony and vain hopes.” He also said, “Four things are a sign of bad luck: inability to cry, hardness of the heart, vain hopes and greed of this world” (Qurtubi). The hadith is in Bazzar, reported by Anas (Shafi`).

7. It is worth quoting here Yusuf Ali’s soothing words: “The foolish and the wicked set great store by the pleasures of this world. In their pride they think they have all knowledge. In the fullness of knowledge they will see how wrong they were. Meanwhile those who have received the Light should not for a single moment wonder at the apparent prosperity of the ungodly in this world. They should leave them alone, confident in the goodness and justice of Allah.”

8. The unbelievers usually taunt the believers: ‘If we are wrong, why do we prosper? Why are we not destroyed?’ The answer is in this verse: “We did not destroy a people but they had a known decree.” There is a time for prosperity and there is a term for destruction (Au., with a point from Thanwi).

9. Asad comments: “I.e., every community - and, in the widest sense of this term, every civilization - has a God-willed, organic span of life resembling in this respect all other living organisms, destined to grow, to reach maturity and ultimately to decay.”

Yusuf Ali has a more detailed note. He writes, “There are many shades of meaning implied. (1) For every people, as for every individual, there is a definite Term assigned: their faculty of choice gives them the opportunity of moulding their will according to Allah’s Will, and thus identifying themselves with Allah’s Universal Law. During that Term they will be given plenty of rope; after that Term is past, there will be no opportunity for repentance. (2) Neither the righteous nor the ungodly can hasten or delay the doom: Allah’s will must prevail, and he is All-Wise. (3) The destruction of a people is not an arbitrary punishment from Allah: the people bring it upon themselves by their own choice; for the fixed Law or Decree of Allah is always made known to them beforehand, and in many ways.”

10. There can be two implications. Either, they took the physical effects of Revelation coming down upon the Prophet (saws), when it appeared to them as if he was in a trance, as signs of madness; or, they thought it impossible that anyone in the world should receive revelations from Allah, and so, to explain the phenomenon, they had to say that he was possessed, which is another meaning of the textual word “majnun” (Razi).

Yusuf Ali sheds light on another aspect: “Al-Mustafa was accused by the ungodly of being mad or possessed, because he spoke of higher things than they knew, and acted from motives purer and nobler than they could understand. So, in a minor degree, is the lot of all the righteous in the presence of an ungodly world. Their motives, actions, words, hopes, and aspirations are unintelligible to their fellows, and they are accused of being mad or out of their senses. But they know that they are on the right path, and it is the ungodly who are really acting against their own best interests.”

Alusi has another implication to offer: Another derivable meaning of the verse is that one may not deny the validity or authenticity of esoteric knowledge or “states” that the Sufiya claim or evince, a denial in the manner of those ignorant Muslims who attribute some of their actions or words to madness. However, in mind are the true masters, learned Sufis, who closely follow the Shari`ah, and not the pseudo-Sufis, friends of the devil, teeming in today’s world, compared to whom the corrupt and atheistic Muslims are Islamically less sinful.

11. That is, angels are not sent down but for a true purpose: either with a message to a Prophet, or with the command to destroy a nation (Ibn Jarir, Ibn Kathir).

12. The first part of the verse makes a claim: “We have revealed this Reminder.” The second part offers a proof: “We shall be its Guardian” (Thanwi).

And the meaning of the second half is: We shall prevent any distortion, addition, deletion or the loss of the revelational text of the Qur’an - a promise that has given the Qur’an the unique position of being the only revelation around that has escaped corruption at man’s hand (Au.).

Shabbir adds: Just think about it. A ten-year old Indian boy, who cannot memorize a few pages in his own language, memorizes the whole of the lengthy Arabic Qur’an, interspersed in hundreds of places with similar words, phrases and sentences, and then recites like a machine, without a break, and, in fact, will correct an elderly renowned scholar, if he quotes the Qur’an wrong, and not only he, but, several voices intolerant of even a minor error impatiently correct his error in an assembly! Is this not a manifestation of Allah’s promise that He will guard this Revelation?

This writer once had the occasion to testing a young Indian lad, about ten year old, who had memorized the Qur’an. I tested the boy by asking him to start reciting from where I asked, and, to my amazement, the boy would start off from wherever I would ask: a feat only those are capable of, who have devoted the best years of their life towards mastering the Qur’an.

Sayyid has a few points here: “Times came upon the Qur’an when there were many factions, divisions, disagreements and uprisings. Every group sought support from the Qur’an and prophetic sayings. The uprisings were supported by the ever trouble-creating Jews and pushed along by the so-called ‘people’s’ movements. These divisive groups were able to introduce into the hadith literature material which they could argue their points with: a pollution that took the scholars decades to get rid of. The factions also tried to give new meanings to Qur’anic verses.

“Then came upon the Muslims a time, through which we are now passing, when they weakened in the defense of their religion, their faith, and their system of life. In fact they became too weak to be able to defend their lands, their wealth, their morals and values. They couldn’t even defend their minds and intellect. Their enemies overcame them and changed every good thing to evil. Beliefs, ideologies, values of life, morals, conduct, systems, laws - just about everything underwent changes. In fact, their enemies beautified for them their downfall and pushed them to a life little better than those of animals, making them accept every mean thing in the name of 'advancement', 'improvement', 'secularism', 'enlightenment', 'scientific and technological development', 'forward march', 'freedom', 'removal of the chains', 'revolution' ... and the rest of the balderdash. The Muslims were transformed into Muslims only in name, with nothing of the religion of Islam remaining with them as their share, converted to scum which is good for nothing except that it could be used as fuel for the fire, yet, fuel of little worth.

“Their enemies, spearheaded by the Jews, a people with their four thousand years of experience of corrupting the nations, laid for them many traps and were able to execute several plans. They were able to give new meanings to the Sunnah of the Prophet, new interpretations to the events of their history, even inventing events that never took place, and planting among them individuals from outside, managing to give them new set of heroes who could destroy the Muslims and their religion from within.

“Over the centuries, the enemies of Islam achieved all these things. But, although the Muslims lost the power to defend the Qur’an, even abandoned it, casting it behind their backs as if it did not exist, yet, one thing the enemies of Islam could not accomplish was to corrupt the Holy Book or introduce a single verse into it. This is the manifestation and fulfillment of the promise, ‘Indeed, We have revealed the Qur’an, and We shall be its Guardian.’”

Majid compares: “The Bible in particular makes no such claims ... The Bible is the work of a large number of poets, prophets, statesmen, and lawgivers, extending over a vast period of time and incorporates within itself other and earlier, and often conflicting documents” (Bosworth Smith, p. 19).

To the above we might add the following from the Church-approved, St. Jerome Biblical Commentary, produced by some fifty highly qualified scholars selected from Catholic, Protestant and other denominations: “Although God is the author of the Sacred Scripture, it is also true that human beings made their own genuine contribution to the production of the sacred books - a point firmly stated by Pius XII in Divine Afflante Spiritu (EB 556), when he remarked that the human writers employ their faculties and powers in the composition of Scripture.”

A little below: “That a human factor stands at the origin of Scripture has never been doubted.”

Further down again: “The real creativity of the human writers is also suggested in the few scenes that the Bible provides showing the sacred writers at work on their documents. Thus in the Foreword to Sir (Sirach) the writer states that he developed pains and labor to the composition of his book and begs indulgence for any imperfections that may exist in the finished work… (Similarly), In the NT (New Testament) Luke (I: 14-16) writes of the personal research that he has incorporated into the composition of his Gospel.”

A little further down: “Hence in contemporary Catholic thought great stress is placed on the Bible as truly the word of God expressed in words that are truly the product of human minds, as though two ‘artists’ composed the book of Scripture: God and man.” (St. Jerome Biblical Commentary, Prentice-Hall inc., Ind. publication, 1980, Vol. II, pp. 503, 504) – Au.

And, with reference to the last paragraph above, may we point out that the “contemporary”, “great stress” on Bible as “(in part a) product of human minds” coincided with the manufacture of printing presses and publication of the Bible, which allowed common Christians to read the scripture themselves, until then banned by the Church. Maybe there is a connection between the “open admission” by the Church (after the lapse of several centuries), and the Christian laity beginning to read the Bible themselves (Au.).

What about the Jewish Scriptures? The Jewish religion has two foundation principles: Yahweh is the racial god of the Jews, and Palestine is the land promised to them. Nothing else matters for them. And these principles are laid down in the Torah. But how trustworthy is the Torah, which portrays a Prophet as getting excessively drunk and lying naked (Genesis, 9: 20) another as having intercourse with his daughters (Gen., 20: 30-38), and a third as indulging in idol-worship (1kings, 11: 1-8)? What do the Jews themselves think about this Holy Scripture? Let us hear a Jew. Max I. Dimont, the well known Jewish scholar of the modern times who writes in his famous work, Jews, God and History: “The final fusion of the first five books of Moses, called Pentateuch, (the Torah: au.), occurred around 450 B.C. - in other words, eight to sixteen hundred years after some of the events narrated in them took place.”

The same author, who idolizes the Jews in his works, writes: “Biblical scholars have conjectured that the Old Testament is composed of four narratives, the ‘J,’ ‘E,’ ‘JE,’ and ‘P’ documents woven in one. The ‘J’ documents are so named because in them God is always referred to as ‘Jehovah.’ They are the oldest, written around the ninth century B.C. in the southern kingdom of Judah. The ‘E’ documents, so called because in them God is referred to as ‘Elohim,’ were written a hundred years after the ‘J’ documents in the eighth century in the northern kingdom of Israel. Scholars assume the ‘P,’ or ‘Priestly,’ documents were composed some two hundred years or so after the ‘E,’ about 600 B.C. In the fifth century, Jewish priests combined portions of the ‘J’ and ‘E’ documents, adding a little handiwork of their own (known as pious fraud), which are referred to as ‘JE’ documents, since God in these passages is referred to as ‘Jehovah Elohim’ (translated as ‘Lord God.’) - Jews, God and History, Signet classic pub., 1962, p. 40. The words in brackets are Dimont’s (Au.).

A question arises about the Qur’an. ‘Why did the Companions compile it, after the promise that it will be guarded?’ The answer is, their compilation was one of the means that Allah (swt) adopted for guarding it (Razi).

That the Qur’an has been preserved as it was revealed is widely accepted in scholarly circles. Majid produces the testimony of, in his words, “a few such unwilling witnesses”:

(i) ‘The text of the Qur’an is the purest of all the works of a like antiquity’ (Wherry, Commentary on the Qur’an, I., p. 349).

(ii) ‘Othman’s recension has remained the authorized text ... from the time it was made until the present day’ (Palmer, ‘The Qur’an’, Intro. P. LIX).

(iii) ‘The text of this recension substantially corresponds to the actual utterances of Muhammad himself’ (Arnold, Islamic Faith, p. 9).

(iv) ‘All sects and parties have the same text of the Qur’an’ (Hurgronje, Mohammadenism, p. 18).

(v) ‘It is an immense merit in the Qur’an that there is no doubt as to its genuineness ... That very word we can now read with full confidence that it has remained unchanged through nearly thirteen hundred years’ (Lane-Pool, SLK, Intro. P. C).

(vi) ‘The recension of ‘Othman has been handed down to us unaltered ... There is probably in the world no other work which has remained twelve centuries with so pure a text’ (Miur, op. cit. Intro. pp. xxii).

(vii) ‘In the Qur’an we have, beyond reasonable doubt, the exact words of Mohammad without subtraction and without addition’ (Bosworth Smith, op. cit. p. 22).

(viii) ‘The Koran ... lies before us practically unchanged from the form which he himself (Muhammad) gave it’ (Torrey, Jewish Foundations of Islam, p. 2).

(ix) “Modern critics agree that the copies current today are almost exact replicas of the original mother-text as compiled by Zayd (some ten years after the Prophet at the time of the third caliph ‘Uthman: Au.), and that, on the whole, the text of the Koran today is as Muhammad produced it.” (Hitti, op. cit. p. 123).

To the above, this author might add his own:

“Apart from certain orthographical modifications of the originally somewhat primitive method of writing, intended to render unambiguous and easy the task of reading and recitation, the Koran as printed in the twentieth century is identical with the Koran as authorized by ‘Uthman more than 1300 years ago” (A.J. Araberry, The Koran Interpreted, Foreword).

“The Koranic revelation followed each other at brief intervals and were at first committed to memory… During Mohammad’s life-time verses were written on palm-leaves, stones, and any material that came to hand. Their collection was completed during the caliphate of Omar, the second caliph, and an authorized version was established during the caliphate of Othman, his successor (644-56 A.D.). To this day this version remains as the authoritative word of God” (The Koran, translated with notes by N.J.Dawood [a Jew], Foreword, Penguin Publications, 1976).

Qurtubi narrates the following anecdote: The following was read in the presence of the famous Shaikha, the learned, pride of womenfolk, Shahda the daughter of Abu Nasr, in her own house. Yahya b. Ukthum said, “Once when Ma’mun was conducting his court a smart looking, well-dressed Jew came in. He spoke in a well-polished language. As he was leaving, Ma’mun (d. 218 A.H.) asked him, ‘Are you a Jew?’ He said yes. Ma’mun suggested that he embrace Islam and he would offer him such and such things as gift. The man said, ‘I think I’ll hold on to my religion.’ Then he left. It should so happen that the man re-appeared in the court after a year - this time as a Muslim. When he was about to leave Ma’mun asked him, ‘Aren’t you the one who was here last year?’ He said, ‘Yes, indeed.’ Ma’mun asked him what made him embrace Islam. He said, ‘After I left you, I said to myself, “Let me check on these three religions.” So, I prepared three copies of the Torah, adding and deleting verses of my own. Then I went around and offered them to the Synagogues. They bought them with no complaints. Next I did the same thing with the New Testament and sold the copies to the Church authorities. They too purchased without a comment. Finally, I did the same thing with the Qur’an and offered for sale to Muslim (book sellers). They examined them at length and then threw them away, refusing to buy, saying that the Book had been altered. That led me to believe that the Qur’an is a revelation that has been preserved.’”

When Sufyan b. ‘Uyayna learned of the story he remarked: The safeguarding of the earlier scriptures was left to the humans (but they corrupted them) so Allah (swt) took it upon Himself to guard the Final revelation. When asked how he could prove the statement that previous nations were charged to safeguard their revelations, he quoted the verse (5: 44): “Surely, We sent down the Tawrah wherein was guidance and a Light. The Prophets who had surrendered themselves gave judgment thereby for those of the Jewry (who believed in it), as did the godly men and the scholars, following what of Allah’s book they were charged to preserve - and they were witnesses to it. So fear not the people (O Prophet), rather, fear Me (alone) and sell not My revelations for a paltry price. And whoso judges not by what Allah has revealed ... such ... they are the unbelievers.”

It might be explained with reference to the above story that Ma’mun was the first Caliph in Islam who set up academies of study and translation. He collected together thousands of scholars at Baghdad and conducted special sessions, in which he himself presided. Every learned man could participate in those sessions. (See Shibli’s Urdu work Al-Ma’mun). Further, in those days books were hand-written. Copyists produced them, often on demand, but, pressed by economic needs, would do it on their own too. They then offered them to the booksellers. The bookseller would normally ask the man to leave his work for evaluation. The book was examined for its content, oftentimes compared with previous copies, either in stock, or in the personal library of a scholar, and then, depending on the ink, the paper, the style of writing, size of the work, etc., a price was offered. Many of the booksellers employed editors who checked the texts for accuracy (Au.).

Shafi` adds: It must be understood that what we know as “the Qur’an” is the name of two elements: the words and the meaning. Neither the words are the Qur’an, nor the meanings are the Qur’an; but rather, when both are brought together. For example, if somebody pieces together a few disparate phrases taken from the Qur’an, patching them up with his own words in between, it does not become “the Qur’an” because of the foreign words. Many religious books have passages of this sort. Similarly, merely expression of the meaning does not make a piece of writing the Qur’an. For example, a translation of the Qur’an is not the Qur’an since no translation can express the true meaning of the Qur’an, and that is how it should be referred to: meaning of the Qur’an, and not the Qur’an.

Further, it is agreed by the scholars, that the Qur’an should not be quoted in meaning, sense, or with the addition of the words, “to this effect.” Rather, the original words themselves should be quoted, even in conversations, or not at all. At best, if one cannot recall the actual words, he might say, “I think there is something about the topic at hand in the Qur’an” (Au.).

top^

Quick Links

About us Current Issue Past Issues Advertise Subscribe Iqra Publications e-Books Arabic Course Islam