Appearance
Verses 77–83
This section of verses describes the punishment of Lot’s people. It is essentially a continuation of the previous set of verses that narrated the angels’ visit to Abraham to give him good news of the birth of Isaac, which served as a preface to the story of Lot and his people.
وَلَمَّا جَاءَتْ رُسُلُنَا لُوطًا سِيءَ بِهِمْ وَضَاقَ بِهِمْ ذَرْعًا وَقَالَ هَٰذَا يَوْمٌ عَصِيبٌ ٧٧
(11:77) When Our messengers came to Lot, he was distressed on their account (sīʾa bi-him) and in a predicament for their sake (wa ḍāq bi-him dharʿan), and he said, ‘This is a terrible day (yawm ʿaṣīb)!’
The phrase sīʾa bi-him—in the passive voice—means that the situation troubled him and brought him distress.
Dharʿ (‘cubit’, lit. ‘forearm’) is a unit of measurement for lengths, whose name is taken from the word forearm, because people used to measure with their forearms. It can also be used to denote the measure itself. The phrase ḍāq … dharʿan (lit. ‘his arm was curtailed’) is a figure of speech that means that one cannot find a way to save someone from a calamity or disaster, just as one is distressed if they cannot encompass something fully with their arm.
The adjective ʿaṣīb is a passive participle derived from the root ʿasab, meaning ‘to bind.’ To describe a day as ʿaṣīb means to say that it is a day bound up with such intense hardship that it cannot be relieved, nor can any of its parts be separated from the others.
Therefore, the meaning of the verse is: ‘When our messengers, who are the angels that descended to Abraham came to Lot, their arrival troubled Lot, because he could not find a way to save them from the evil of his people. They appeared to him in the form of handsome young men, and his people were highly inclined to commit indecent acts. Therefore, he did not expect that they would leave his guests alone and let them be. Thus, Lot could not help but exclaim, “This is a terrible day”—a day wrapped in layers of intense distress.’
وَجَاءَهُ قَوْمُهُ يُهْرَعُونَ إِلَيْهِ وَمِنْ قَبْلُ كَانُوا يَعْمَلُونَ السَّيِّئَاتِ ۚ قَالَ يَا قَوْمِ هَٰؤُلَاءِ بَنَاتِي هُنَّ أَطْهَرُ لَكُمْ ۖ فَاتَّقُوا اللَّهَ وَلَا تُخْزُونِ فِي ضَيْفِي ۖ أَلَيْسَ مِنْكُمْ رَجُلٌ رَشِيدٌ ٧٨
(11:78) Then his people came running (yuhraʿūn) toward him, and they had been committing vices aforetime. He said, ‘O my people, these are my daughters: they are purer for you. Be wary of Allah and do not humiliate me with regard to my guests. Is there not a right-minded man among you?’
Al-Rāghib says: ‘The verb haraʿ or ahraʿa means to drive something forward with threats and violence.’ In Kitāb al-ʿAyn, we read: ‘Ihrāʿ (from whence is derived yuhraʿūn) means to drive forward with vigor.’
… and they had been committing vices aforetime—This means that had already been committing sins and indulging in immoral acts. In other words, they were audacious in their licentiousness and had grown accustomed to it to the extent that they could not be dissuaded from such acts, nor deterred by shame or guilt, nor prevented through admonition or rebuke. This is because when one is accustomed to something, even the most difficult things become easy and even the most repugnant things become normal.
This phrase can be read as an aside between the statement: Then his people came running toward him … and the statement: , ‘O my people, these are my daughters …’ It serves to illustrate that what drove them to come running towards Lot was their habituation to evil deeds. They had grown accustomed to committing indecency and were therefore drawn to him, intending to harm his guests.
The sentence implies that, due to their deeply ingrained habits, they refused to listen or to be admonished by warnings or advice. Therefore, Lot began by offering them his daughters, and then said to them: ‘Be wary of Allah and do not humiliate me with regard to my guests ….’
As for the statement, ‘O my people, these are my daughters: they are purer (aṭhar) for you. Be wary of Allah and do not humiliate me with regard to my guests. Is there not a right-minded man among you?’, this shows that when Lot saw his people had come together to do evil, he knew that mere words or stern language would not dissuade them from it. Therefore, he attempted to divert them by offering an alternative to the indecency they desired to commit, presenting something permissible instead, asserting that they were purer for them.
The use of the comparative form aṭhar (‘purer’) in the verse merely signifies being clean without any pollution. Here it implies purity in the general sense, which is a common style of expression. For example, see the verse: What is with Allah is better than diversion (), and the verse: And reconciliation is better (). These verses convey the meaning that one should always choose what one knows to be better with certainty.
The fact that Lot qualifies his statement, ‘these are my daughters’ by saying, ‘they are purer for you’, attests to the fact that he was offering his daughters for marriage, not merely for sexual gratification, which would not befit a prophet of God. This is because there is no purity in such base gratification, as God has said elsewhere: Do not approach fornication. It is indeed an indecency and an evil way (), and: … you shall not approach indecencies, the outward among them and the inward ones … (). In our commentary on these verses, we explained that there are certain moral principles that were enshrined in all of the divine codes revealed by God to His prophets—and the prohibition in licentiousness and indecency is one such example.
From this, it becomes apparent that the position of those who say that Lot offered his daughters to the people without specifying that it was for marriage is flawed. I cannot see how it is possible to cure one form of indecency by resorting to another. After all, This would render his admonition that they ‘Be wary of Allah’ virtually meaningless. And were he only interested in saving himself from shame and disgrace, he could have simply said, ‘and do not humiliate me with regard to my guests.’
Now, some might argue that when Lot said, ‘these are my daughters’, he was referring to the womenfolk of his people, as a prophet is like a father to his nation and, therefore, their womenfolk are all his daughters and their menfolk are all his sons. Therefore, what he meant was that they should pursue women as nature intended, and that this was purer than seeking males through indecent acts. However, this interpretation is an arbitrary reading that lacks any linguistic basis in the verse itself.
But what about the fact that they were disbelievers and his daughters were believers, and that it is not permissible for a believing woman to marry a non-believer? It is not known whether this principle was part of Abraham’s teachings, which the prophet Lot followed. It’s possible that in his law, the marriage of a believing woman to a nonbeliever was permissible, just like it was initially permissible in Islam. The Prophet Muḥammad himself married his daughter to Abū al-ʿĀṣ b. al-Rabīʿ, who was a non-believer, before the migration to Medina, but this law was later abrogated.
Furthermore, the people of Lot responded: ‘You certainly know that we have no interest in your daughters, and indeed you know what we want’ (). This does not make sense if when Lot said ‘daughters’ he was referring to the womenfolk of his people rather than his own literal daughters. After all, his people did not believe in him, so they would not have acknowledged that their womenfolk were his daughters, unless they uttered these words mockingly, and there is no evidence of this.
It also does not make sense to say that Prophet Lot’s reference to ‘daughters’ in the plural form when he had only two of his own implies that by ‘daughters’, he meant the women of his people, not his own daughters. This interpretation is not supported by the fact that he merely used the plural form of the word rather than the dual.
This is because we would argue that there is no evidence for his only having two daughters in the Qurʾan, nor is there any reliable narration to this effect. Yes, it is mentioned in the present Torah that Lot had two daughters. However, we cannot depend on this in our understanding of the Qurʾan. His statement, ‘Be wary of Allah and do not humiliate me with regard to my guests’, clarifies what he meant. The phrase, ‘and do not humiliate me with regard to my guests’ is an exposition of his admonition to ‘Be wary of Allah.’ This is because Lot was only asking them not to harm his guests out of fear of God, not out of any personal desire or tribal prejudice, as he did not distinguish between his guests and others in what he admonished them for. After all, he had been exhorting them to refrain from immorality and preaching to them about this for many years.
He only referred to the principle of hospitality, associating the guest with himself, and the shame inflicted by their actions, in hopes of awakening their own sense of chivalry and honor. Hence, he followed up by appealing for help, saying, ‘Is there not a right-minded man among you?’ This shows that he hoped to find a right-minded individual who would stand up for him and his guests against these wrongdoers. But the people were, as God has said, bewildered in their drunkenness (), and they remained unmoved by his plea.
قَالُوا لَقَدْ عَلِمْتَ مَا لَنَا فِي بَنَاتِكَ مِنْ حَقٍّ وَإِنَّكَ لَتَعْلَمُ مَا نُرِيدُ ٧٩
(11:79) They said, ‘You certainly know that we have no interest in your daughters, and indeed you know what we want.’
This is the response of Lot’s people to his call for them to seek divinely sanctioned marriage in place of indecency. In uttering these words they confirmed that they had no intention of marrying his daughters, that Lot already knew this, and that Lot knew who they were really seeking in their assault.
There are various explanations of their response. One is that it means they have no need for his daughters, and what a person doesn’t need, it’s as if he has no interest in. This expression is a form of metaphorical speech.
Others understand them as saying, ‘We have no right to your daughters because we will not marry them,’ and a man who doesn’t marry a woman has no right over her. Therefore, by denying the right, they are denying the basis for it, which is marriage.
Another interpretation is that by ‘interest’, they mean inclination, rather than a legal or customary right, meaning they have no desire for them as they are women and have no inclination towards them.
However, what needs to be taken into account in our reading of the verse is that they did not simply say, ‘we have no interest in (or right to) your daughters,’ but rather, ‘You certainly know that we have no interest in your daughters’—therefore, they did not answer him directly but rather indicated that he was already well-aware of their answer to his offer. This suggests they were reminding him of a social norm among them that he was aware of: that they actually forbade approaching women, particularly by force or coercion, or had ceased approaching women altogether, considering it permissible only to approach men or boys for sexual gratification instead.
The Qurʾan indicates that Lot had been trying to deter them from this practice in the course of his preaching. For example, it quotes him as telling them, ‘Indeed you come to men with desire instead of women! Rather you are a profligate lot’ (), ‘What! Of all people do you come to males, abandoning your wives your Lord has created for you? Rather you are a transgressing lot.’ (), and ‘What! Do you come to men, and cut off the way, and commit outrages in your gatherings?’’ (). There is no doubt that societal norms establish a right to do something, while a norm to avoid something denies that right.
In sum, they called his attention to what he already knew on the basis of the societal norms, namely, their lack of interest in his daughters because they were women, and their intentions for attacking his house. This is probably the best explanation of their response, followed by the third one cited above.
قَالَ لَوْ أَنَّ لِي بِكُمْ قُوَّةً أَوْ آوِي إِلَىٰ رُكْنٍ شَدِيدٍ ٨٠
(11:80) He said, ‘If only I had some power through you (law anna lī bi-kum quwwa), or could take refuge in a mighty support (aw āwī ilā ruknin shadīd)!’
It is said that the verb āwī (‘take refuge’) means to join or ally oneself to another. A rukn (‘support’) literally denotes what holds up the structure of a building after the foundations.
Therefore, it is evident that when Lot tried to admonish them by urging them to be wary of God and awaken their sense of honor to respect the sanctity of his station and his dignity, and cautioning them against trespassing on his guests, which would bring him shame and disgrace, and when he suggested they marry his daughters instead of violating his guests, and called for the help from the right-minded amongst them, hoping that there would be a reasonable man who would stand up to support him and repel their attack, not a single person responded. When no right-minded person came to his aid, and when they replied, ‘You certainly know that we have no interest in your daughters, and indeed you know what we want’, he was left with no recourse save to express his sorrow and grief. He wished he had the strength to resist their attack, ‘a mighty support’—the right-minded man he had called out for, or a strong clan to come to his aid and repel them.
So, when he says, ‘If only I had some power through you…’ he means to say: ‘If only I had some power because of you, by having a sensible man from among you join my side to defend against your attack.’ And when he said, ‘…or could take refuge in a mighty support’, he wished he had a strong clan that could prevent them from causing him harm. This reading of the verse is supported by its broader context.
It has also been suggested that when he said, ‘If only I had some power through you…’ he meant to say, I wish I had the strength, the capability, and the numbers to stand up against you and protect my guests. In this reading, the phrase bi-kum (‘through you’) is read as meaning ‘against you.’
Another explanation of the phrase, ‘If only I had some power through you…’, is that he wished he could stand up to them by himself, but this seems to be less consistent with the text of the verse than what we have propounded already.
It has also been proposed that Lot’s statement in this verse addresses the guests rather than the people of the town. According to this reading, he said to his guests, ‘I wish I had the strength to repel them for your sake.’ But in this case, it’s hard to understand the transition from addressing the people of his city to addressing the guests without there being any clear textual indication for this, which creates ambiguity and complications in the narrative, and this does not befit the eloquence of the Qurʾan.
قَالُوا يَا لُوطُ إِنَّا رُسُلُ رَبِّكَ لَنْ يَصِلُوا إِلَيْكَ ۖ فَأَسْرِ بِأَهْلِكَ بِقِطْعٍ مِنَ اللَّيْلِ وَلَا يَلْتَفِتْ مِنْكُمْ أَحَدٌ إِلَّا امْرَأَتَكَ ۖ إِنَّهُ مُصِيبُهَا مَا أَصَابَهُمْ ۚ إِنَّ مَوْعِدَهُمُ الصُّبْحُ ۚ أَلَيْسَ الصُّبْحُ بِقَرِيبٍ ٨١
(11:81) They said, ‘O Lot, we are messengers of your Lord. They will never get at you (lan yaṣilū ilayk). Set out with your family in a watch of the night; and none of you shall turn round, except your wife; indeed she will be struck by what strikes them. Indeed their tryst is the dawn. Is not the dawn (already) near?’
The phrase, lan yaṣilū ilayk (‘they will never get at you’) means that they will not obtain what they desire.
The verse shows that the situation had escalated to the point where the angels addressed Lot, revealing to him that they were not human beings, but angels who had been sent by God—‘we are the messengers of your Lord’. They comforted him by assuring him that the townspeople would not reach him or achieve what they desired. This aligns with the verse: Certainly they even solicited of him his guests, whereat We blotted out their eyes (). God took away the sight of those who had crowded around his door with the intention to do evil, leaving them blind and stumbling in confusion.
Then the angels told Lot: ‘Set out with your family in a watch of the night (fa-asri bi ahlika bi qaṭaʿin min al-layl); and none of you shall turn round (lā yaltafit min-kum aḥad).’
The verb asri (which is derived from the same root as isrāʾ) means to journey by night, and the phrase, ‘in a watch of the night’ serves to make this meaning clear, with qataʿ (lit. ‘piece’) meaning ‘during a one part of the night.’ According to al-Rāghib, the verb iltafat, which is the Form VIII of the root lafat, meaning to be diverted from one’s course. See, for instance, the words of Pharaoh’s magicians to Moses, ‘Have you come to us to turn us away (li-talfita-nā) from what we found our fathers following…?’ (). Therefore, lafat means to turn one’s face from one’s direction; equally a woman can be said to have ‘turned away’ from her husband if she bears a child from a man other than him.
When the angels told Lot, ‘Set out with your family in a watch of the night; and none of you shall turn round’, they were giving him instructions to keep himself and his nearest and dearest safe from the impending punishment that was about to descend upon the townspeople that very morning, and it conveys a sense of extreme urgency, as suggested by the following phrase, Indeed their tryst is the dawn.
Therefore, the meaning of this verse is: ‘We are the messengers sent for the destruction of the townspeople, so save yourself and your family. You and your family must leave during a part of this night and depart from this place, as its people will be destroyed by God’s punishment at dawn. There is not much time left until dawn and none of you should look back.’
Some commentators have suggested that ‘looking back’ means to be concerned for which property or belongings they should take with them and save from destruction or to delay their departure. However, neither of these readings should be given much consideration.
The phrase, ‘… except your wife; indeed she will be struck by what strikes them …’, appears to be an exception to the command to ‘Set out with your family’, rather than to the prohibition, ‘and none of you shall turn around.’ The reason for this exception is explained by the statement, ‘… she will be struck by what strikes them.’ Elsewhere, God says, ‘… except his wife, We have ordained, will indeed be among those who remain behind’ ().
Next, the angels say to Lot, ‘Indeed their tryst is the dawn (subḥ). Is not the dawn near?’ In other words: ‘Their punishment is due to descend at dawn’—which is at the very beginning of the morning, just as the sun starts to rise, as God indicates elsewhere: So the Cry seized them at sunrise ().
The first of these two sentences—‘ Indeed their tryst is the dawn’—is an explanation of the phrase: ‘Set out with your family in a watch of the night.’ This implies urgency, which is confirmed by the following sentence: ‘Is not the dawn near?’ It is also possible that they said this because the prophet Lot was urging them to punish his people, and they responded by saying: ‘Indeed their tryst is the dawn. Is not the dawn near?’ This means that it has been ordained that they shall be destroyed in the morning, and this is not a far-off time. Alternatively, the first sentence could be a sign of urgency from the angels, and the second sentence is a way to reassure Lot in his haste to see the punishment descend.
Note that the verses concerning the story of Lot do not specify their destination when they escaped from the city. God says elsewhere: ‘Take your family in a watch of the night; and follow in their rear, and none of you should turn round, and proceed as you are bidden’ (). It appears that the angels did not tell him his ultimate destination and left it to what would be revealed to him later through divine revelation.
فَلَمَّا جَاءَ أَمْرُنَا جَعَلْنَا عَالِيَهَا سَافِلَهَا وَأَمْطَرْنَا عَلَيْهَا حِجَارَةً مِنْ سِجِّيلٍ مَنْضُودٍ ٨٢ مُسَوَّمَةً عِنْدَ رَبِّكَ ۖ وَمَا هِيَ مِنَ الظَّالِمِينَ بِبَعِيدٍ ٨٣
(11:82-83) So when Our edict came, We made its topmost part its nethermost, and We rained on it stones of laminar shale (sijjīl manḍūd), marked (masmūm) with your Lord, never far from the wrongdoers.
The three occurrences of ‘it’ (a feminine singular pronoun) in the verse refer to the people of Lot’s land, town, or territory, as is indicated by the context. According to al-Ṭabrisī in Majmaʿ al-Bayān, the adjective sijjīl is synonymous with sijjīn, meaning ‘fired.’ Al-Rāghib writes: ‘Sijjīn means stones mixed with clay. Some say it is a Persian loanword.’ By this, he is referring to the etymology of the Arabic word sijjīn / sijjīl being traced to the Persian compound sang gil (‘clay stone’). Some have said that it comes from the Arabic root sijil, meaning ‘inscription’, in the sense that the destiny of these stones to punish the people of Lot was written aforehand. Others have said that it is derived from the verb asjalat, meaning ‘sent.’
However, it appears that the original meaning of all these explanations is the Arabicized Persian compound sang gil, meaning ‘stones and clay’. The term ‘book’ is also derived from it, as they used to write on clay-fired tablets, then the semantic range of this word expanded to mean any sort of inscription, even if it is made on paper. The meaning of ‘sent’ is derived from this as well.
Manḍūd (‘layered’) means to be arranged and ordered, while masmūm (‘marked’) means to identified by a mark or symbol.
Therefore, the meaning of the verse is: ‘When Our edict for punishment came to pass…’—which is God’s directive to the angels to execute their punishment, and that is the divine command “Be,” as referred to in His saying, All His command, when He wills something, is to say to it ‘Be,’ and it is ()—‘…We made the high points of their land and their cities their lowest points by overturning them, and We rained down upon them stones of baked clay, arranged and marked in Your Lord’s knowledge, so that none of them will miss the target for which they were intended.’
Some commentators have said that the punishment of being overturned seized those who were living in the land at the time, while the rain of stones punished those who were away. Others have said that it was the city itself that rained down as stones when Gabriel lifted it up to overturn it and bury it in the earth. Still others have said that the stones only rained down after the city was overturned in order to intensify the punishment of Lot’s people. However, all of these interpretations are arbitrary and without any support in the text itself.
Note that in Sūrah al-Ḥijr God says, So the Cry seized them at sunrise (). Therefore, the punishment of Lot’s people consisted of a blast, the city being overturned, and stones being rained down upon them. Now, it is possible that these verses actually describe a volcanic eruption near the city, which would have produced a blast, and caused an earthquake that resulted in it being overturned, while also potentially raining down stones and volcanic debris on the people.
Turning to the last part of the final verse in this section, … never far from the wrongdoers—some have said that the ‘wrongdoers’ in this verse refers to the wrongdoers of Mecca or the idolaters of the Prophet’s own people. This statement is intended as a threat, meaning: ‘these stones are not far from the wrongdoers of Mecca.’ Alternatively it could mean that the physical location of these ruined cities is not far from the wrongdoers of Mecca, as they are situated on the path between Mecca and Syria, as per the verses: And indeed, it is upon a path often frequented (), and: And indeed you pass by them at dawn and at night. So do you not apply reason? ().
This reading is supported by the shift in address from God speaking in the first-person (in terms of ‘We’ and ‘Our’) to speaking to the Prophet about Himself in the third person (‘your Lord’). It is as if God deviated from the expected expression, ‘marked by us’ to say ‘marked by your Lord’ in order to direct a warning to the Prophet’s people, or to seize their attention and deliver a stronger rhetorical effect in the debate with them. However, it may also imply a general threat to all wrongdoers, meaning that the divine punishment represented by the rain of stones is never far from the wrongdoers, of whom the people of Lot are but one example. Even in this case, however, the use of the phrase by your Lord could also still be addressed to the wrongdoing idolaters of the Prophet’s own people first and foremost.
Examining Narrations
- In al-Kāfī, al-Kulaynī narrates from Zakariyā b. Muḥammad (from his father), from ʿAmr, from Imām al-Bāqir: ‘The people of Lot were some of the best people that God had created, so Satan pursued them vigorously. One of their virtuous practices was that the men would go out to work and leave their womenfolk behind. But Satan would not give up his hostility to them and, when they returned, he ruined what they had accomplished.
So the people of Lot said to one another: “Let us keep watch for the one who is ruining our belongings.” So they kept watch and found that it was a young boy who was extremely handsome. They asked him, “Are you the one who keeps ruining our belongings?” They agreed among themselves to kill him, so they kept him overnight with a guard. At night, the boy cried out, “What’s wrong with you?” the guard asked, “I can only sleep when I’m lying on my father’s belly.” The man responded, “Come, sleep on my belly.”
The boy kept caressing the man until he taught him how to commit a sinful act. Firstly, Satan had taught the boy, and secondly, the boy taught the man. Afterward, the boy escaped. The next morning, the man began to speak about what he had done with the boy. This was met with astonishment by the people who did not know about the act that the boy had committed, and they became curious about it. This led to the men satisfying themselves with each other. Then, they then began to ambush travellers in order to commit sinful acts with them. This caused people to abandon their city. Eventually, they also abandoned their women and turned entirely towards boys.
When Satan saw that he had successfully corrupted the men, he went to the women, transforming himself into a woman. He asked them, “Are your men satisfying themselves with each other?” They responded, “Yes, we have seen it.” All the while, Lot was admonishing them and preaching to them, but Satan kept tempting them until the women began satisfying themselves with other women.
When the guilt against them was established, God sent Gabriel, Michael, and Raphael disguised as young boys, each wearing a turban. They passed by Lot while he was working the fields. He asked them, “Where are you going? I have never seen anyone more handsome than you!” They said, “We are the messengers of our master to the lord of this town.” He asked, “Has your master not informed you about what the people of this town are doing? By God, they take men and abuse them until they are bloody.” They replied, “Our lord master ordered us to pass through it.” He said, “I have a request for you.” They asked, “What is it?” He said, “Wait for me here until dusk.”
So they sat and waited. He then sent his daughter with bread and water for them in a gourd, and a cloak to protect them from the cold. But when his daughter left, it began to rain and the valley flooded. Lot said, “The flood will sweep away the boys.” He said to them, “Let’s get moving.” Lot began walking along the base of the wall, while Gabriel, Michael, and Raphael walked in the middle of the road. Lot told them, “Walk over here, my sons.” But they replied, “Our master commanded us to walk in the middle of the road.” Lot was trying to make use of the cover of dark.
Satan passed by and stole a baby boy from a woman, then threw him in the well. The entire town started yelling at Lot’s door. When they saw the boys in Lot’s house, they said, “Lot, are you partaking in our deeds now?” He replied, “These are my guests, don’t dishonor me in their regard.” They said, “There are three of them, keep one and give us two.” Lot took them into a room and said, “If only I had a household to protect me from you!”
They battered on the door until they broke in and threw Lot out. Then Gabriel said to him, “We are messengers of your Lord, they will not reach you.” Gabriel took a handful of gravel, hit them in the faces and said, “Blind are the countenances.” All the people of the town went blind. Lot then said to the angels, “O messengers of my Lord, what is your Lord’s command concerning them?” They replied, “We were commanded to seize them for punishment at dawn.” He said, “I have a request.” They asked, “What is it?” He said, ‘Take them now, for I fear that their sin might be exposed to my Lord.” They said, “Indeed their tryst is the dawn. Is not the dawn near for those about to be taken? Take your daughters and go, leave your wife behind.”’
Imām al-Bāqir added: ‘May God have mercy on Lot. If he had known who was with him in the room, he would have known that he was destined to be victorious. He said, “If only I had some power through you, or could take refuge in a mighty support!” () But what support could be stronger than having Gabriel right there in the room with him? Then God told Muḥammad, ‘… never far from the wrongdoers.’ () Meaning: ‘The wrongdoers of your nation if they do what the people of Lot did.’ The Prophet, said, ‘Whoever pursues men will not die until men are called to him.’
Author’s comment: The account in this narration is somewhat confused. It says three angels were sent, but other narrations—such as the one we cited from Abū Yazīd al-Ḥammār, from Imām al-Ṣādiq, in the previous section—says that there were four including Kerubiel. Some Sunni narrations state they were three: Gabriel, Michael, and Raphael. The narration also suggests that Lot’s words ‘If only I had some power through you…’, were addressed to the angels, not the people, whereas it is clear from our analysis of the verses that Lot was speaking to his people.
As for his saying, ‘May God have mercy on Lot. If he had known…’, this is similar in meaning to the narration attributed to the Prophet: ‘May God have mercy on Lot, he would have taken refuge in a mighty support…’
As for his saying, ‘Then God told Muḥammad’, this correlates with what we said earlier about the possibility of the phrase never far from the wrongdoers being intended as a warning to the Quraysh.
- In Tafsīr al-Qummī, it is narrated via a chain from Abū Baṣīr, from Imām al-Ṣādiq, about the verse, ‘and We rained on it stones of laminar shale, marked …’ (): ‘There is no servant who leaves this world who considers the behavior of Lot’s people permissible save that God will pelt him with one of those stones, and it will be his final end, but no one will see it.’
Author’s comment: It is also narrated in al-Kāfī, via a chain of narrators from Maymūn al-Bān, from the Imām: ‘Whoever persists in the sin of Lot’s people will not die until he is pelted by one of those stones, and it will be his final end, but no one will see it.’
Both of these traditions suggest that the verse, never far from the wrongdoers, is not specific to the Quraysh, and that this punishment is spiritual rather than physical.
- In al-Kāfī, al-Kulaynī narrates from Yaʿqūb b. Shuʿayb, from Imām al-Ṣādiq, about Lot’s saying, ‘… these are my daughters: they are purer for you’: ‘He proposed that they should marry them.’
- In al-Tahdhīb, al-Ṭūsī narrates from Imām al-Riḍā: Regarding a man approaching a woman from behind, he said: ‘It is made permissible by a verse from the book of God when Lot says, these are my daughters: they are purer for you, when He knew that they did not desire vaginal intercourse.’
- In al-Durr al-Manthūr, Abū al-Shaykh reports that ʿAlī delivered a sermon in which he said: ‘A man’s clan’s support for him is better than a man’s support for his clan, for if he withholds his hand from them, he holds back only one hand, while a clan can keep many hands away from a man, along with their love, protection, and support. Perhaps one man becomes angry with another, and he does not know him except by his lineage (and that is all that prevents him from doing harm to him). I will recite to you from that verses of the Book of God.’ Then he recited this verse: ‘If only I had some power through you, or could take refuge in a mighty support!’
Ali continued: ‘The mighty support mentioned in this verse is the clan, but Lot did not have a clan. I swear by the one there is no God but Him, God did not send a prophet after Lot, except amongst an abundance of his own people.’
Author’s comment: The end of the narration is reported through Sunni and Shia chains of narration.
- In al-Kāfī, al-Kulaynī narrates a tradition from Abū Yazīd al-Ḥammār from Imām al-Bāqir, which we cited in the previous section. In it, we read: ‘The angels came to Lot while he was farming near the town. They greeted him while they were disguised. When he saw their handsome appearance—they wore white clothes and white turbans—he asked them: “Will you stay in my home?” They replied: “Yes.” So, he led them and they walked behind him. He regretted inviting them to his home and said: “What have I done? I brought them to my people, knowing full well what they are like.” He told them: “Indeed, you have come to the worst of God’s creation.” Gabriel said to the other angels: “We will not hasten God’s punishment upon them until he testifies against them three times.” Then he said: “This makes one.” He walked for a while, then turned to them and said: “Indeed, you come to the worst of God’s creation.” Gabriel said: “That makes two.” Then he walked until he reached the city gate, he turned to them and said: “Indeed, you come to the worst of God’s creation.” Gabriel said: “That is the third.” Then he entered and they entered with him until they reached his house.
When his wife saw them, she beheld their handsome appearance and climbed onto the roof. She clapped, but the people didn’t hear her. So, she started a fire, and when they saw the smoke, they rushed to the door until they reached it. She came down to them and said: “We have people, I have never seen people with a more handsome appearance.” They came to the door to enter.
When Lot saw them, he stood up and said to them: “Be wary of Allah and do not humiliate me with regard to my guests. Is there not a right-minded man among you?” () Then he said: “these are my daughters: they are purer for you.” He called them all to what is lawful. They said: “You certainly know that we have no interest in your daughters, and indeed you know what we want.” He said to them: “If only I had some power through you, or could take refuge in a mighty support!’” Gabriel said: “If only he knew the power he has!”
The people massed until they forced their way in through the door. Gabriel shouted at them and said: ‘O Lot, let them in.’ When they entered, Gabriel pointed his finger at them and their eyes were blinded. This is what God Almighty said: whereat We blotted out their eyes (). Then Gabriel called him and said to him: “we are messengers of your Lord. They will never get at you.” He advised him to leave with his family in a portion of the night. Gabriel said to him: “We have been sent for their destruction.” He said: “O Gabriel, hurry.” He said: “Indeed, their appointment is the morning. Is not the morning near?”
He was commanded to take whoever was with him except his wife. Then he, Gabriel, uprooted the city from the seven earths with his wing. Then he raised it until the inhabitants of the lowest heaven heard the howling of its dogs and the crowing of its roosters. Then he turned it over and rained stones of baked clay upon it and upon those around it.
Author’s comment: The final part of the narration, which includes the city being uprooted from seven earths and then raised to the point where the inhabitants of the lowest heaven could hear the barking of its dogs and the crowing of its roosters, is an extraordinary event. While such an event is not beyond God’s omnipotent power, this type of narration, which is isolated and not widely reported, does not suffice as proof of its occurrence.
Indeed, the divine norm is that miracles and extraordinary events are meant to serve a purpose. What wisdom could there be in raising them to such an extent, if it had no impact on the people of Lot’s punishment or its severity?
Some theologians have said that such extraordinary and supernatural events could be seen as an act of divine kindness (luṭf), insomuch as the reporting of such events through the infallible prophets can draw believers closer to obedience and deter them from sin. This is a valid point, as the creation of magnificent, awe-inspiring events and phenomena that defy ordinary expectations can strengthen the faith of believers and serve as a lesson for those who heed such warnings. However, such divine kindness only applies when the event is perceived through sensory experience or any other form of empirical knowledge. A solitary or weak narration that lacks authoritative support should not be given any consideration. The occurrence of supernatural events or extraordinary incidents simply to provide a lesson or invoke fear is pointless if it doesn’t reach people, and there is no rationale for intensifying the punishment of one group as a lesson for others except in the practices of ignorant tyrants and oppressors.
In his commentary on the Qurʾan, al-Manār, Rashīd Riḍā writes: ‘One of the mythical accounts that commentators have taken from Judeo-Christian traditions is that Gabriel uprooted the city with his wing from the edge of the earth, and ascended with it to the zenith of the sky until the inhabitants of the heavens heard the sounds of dogs and chickens in it, then he overturned it completely, making the highest part its lowest.
This imaginary account is based on the belief that celestial bodies inhabited by living beings are within reach of the inhabitants of earth and its creatures, and that they remain alive. However, it has been scientifically proven by observation and actual testing in our current era that aircraft and balloons that are created to function in the atmosphere can reach a point where the air pressure is low, and human life becomes impossible there. They are also manufacturing types of these aircraft which are supplied with enough oxygen for breathing and sustaining life in the upper layers of the atmosphere.
The Glorious Book, the Qur’an, has referred to the impact of ascending into the atmosphere on breathing difficulty, as it can cause chest constriction. As stated in the verse: Whomever Allah desires to guide, He opens his breast to Islam, and whomever He desires to lead astray, He makes his breast narrow and straitened as if he were climbing into the heavens ().
Now, one might argue that the act attributed to Gabriel in the narrative is rationally possible, and its occurrence is an exception to normal occurrences, then it isn’t appropriate to require belief in it to hinge upon known laws of nature.
To this I would respond: Yes, however, the first condition for accepting a narrative about an event that goes against the norms and laws God has set up to organise the world, concerning both its construction and destruction, is that the narrative must have come from divine revelation and been transmitted either through continuous testimony from an infallible source, or through an authentic chain of narration without anomalies or flaws at the very least. Yet, this has not been mentioned in God’s book, there is no reported tradition from His Prophet about it, and God’s wisdom does not appear in it—it has only been reported by some of the generation of the Successors, not the Companions of the Prophet. Without a doubt, it is taken from Judeo-Christian sources.
Another claim made by people is that the inhabitants of the city were four million in number, yet all of Palestine wouldn’t hold this number of people, so how were these millions of people living among those four towns?’
As for what Rashīd Riḍā says about the tradition being narrated by the Successors rather than the Companions, a tradition with the same meaning is actually narrated from both Ibn ʿAbbās and Hudhayfa b. al-Yamān. In al-Durr al-Manthūr, al-Suyūṭī transmits Ibn ʿAbbās’ narration from Isḥāq b. Bishr and Ibn ʿAsākir, via Juwaybar and Muqātil from al-Ḍaḥḥāk, from him: ‘When dawn broke, Gabriel turned to the towns of Lot—with their men, women, fruits, and birds—enclosed and folded them, then uprooted them from the surface of the earth. He carried them under his wing and raised them to the lowest heaven—so that its inhabitants could hear the barking of dogs and the birds, and the cries of the women and men under Gabriel’s wing—then he overturned the town and cast it down, following it with a rain of stones. The stones were for the shepherds and merchants and anyone else outside their towns.’
Meanwhile, in the narration from Hudhayfa b. al-Yamān, al-Suyūṭī narrates it in al-Durr al-Manthūr from ʿAbd al-Razzāq, Ibn Jarīr, Ibn al-Mundhir, and Ibn Abī al-Ḥātim from him. It reads: ‘Gabriel asked permission to destroy them, and he was granted permission. He carried the ground they were on and hovered with it until the inhabitants of the nearest heaven could hear the barking of their dogs, then he ignited a fire beneath them and turned it over with them. Lot’s wife heard the sound while she was with Lot, so she turned back and the punishment struck her, and those inhabitants of the city who were travelling abroad were pursued by stones.’
As for the Successors, traditions with this meaning were narrated from Saʿīd b. Jubayr, Mujāhid, Abū Ṣāliḥ, Muḥammad b. Kaʿb al-Quraẓī, and something even more intense from al-Sudayy, who recounted: ‘When they awoke, Gabriel descended and uprooted the ground from the seven earths, then carried it until he reached the lowest heaven, then Gabriel cast it down to the earth.’
As for Rashīd Riḍā‘s claim that for a narrative to be accepted, it must have ‘been transmitted either through continuous testimony from an infallible source, or through an authentic chain of narration without anomalies or flaws’, this is a matter of legal theory. The current consensus on the matter is that if a report is continuously transmitted or supported by conclusive evidence, there is no reason to doubt its authoritativeness. However, no other reports are considered authoritative unless they pertain to matters of jurisprudence and law, in which case the report is treated as credible based on specific probable knowledge and, as such, is authoritative.
This is because religious authoritativeness (ḥujjiyya sharʿiyya) is a rational convention, which follows from the practical relevance of topic in which there can be religious legislation and authority. In historical issues and matters of faith, there is no sense in establishing any authority, as they do not have any practical religious impact. There is no sense in the legislator deeming ignorance as knowledge and making people blindly follow it. As for external matters, even if it is possible for them to have a religious impact, their effects are partial and religious legislation can only pertain to generalities. Detailed discussion on this matter should be sought from discussions of legal theory (uṣūl al-fiqh, or ‘the principles of jurisprudence’).
- In al-Durr al-Manthūr, Ibn Mardawayh cites Ubayy b. Kaʿb, who said: ‘The Messenger of God said: “May God have mercy on Lot, for he would seek refuge in a mighty support.”‘
Author’s comment: Given the circumstances under which Lot was confronting his people and advising them to fear God and abstain from immorality, and the apparent context of the verses describing the argument between him and his people, it seems that Lot only wished for righteous supporters among his people or others. So, when he said, ‘… or could take refuge in a mighty support’, he meant supporters other than his people, such as relatives, allies, or Godly friends who would help him protect his guests. This ‘mighty support’ was, in fact, already with him in his house in the form of the angels Gabriel, Michael, and Raphael. Hence, they comforted him immediately after he uttered these words and said, ‘O Lot, we are messengers of your Lord. They will never get at you.’
Lot would not neglect his Lord under any circumstances or forget that all the assistance that comes to him is from Him, let alone to the point of forgetting Him and wishing for a helper other than Him. Far be it from such a noble prophet to be associated with such reprehensible ignorance. God Almighty has said about him: We gave judgement and knowledge to Lot, … and We admitted him into Our mercy. Indeed he was one of the righteous. ().
So, the Prophet’s statement, ‘… for he would seek refuge in a mighty support’, means that Gabriel and the rest of the angels were already with him, but he was unaware of this. It does not mean that God was with him, and he was ignorant of his Lord’s status.
As for what some narratives report, namely that what the Messenger of God said implied that what he meant by ‘a mighty support’ is God, glorified is He, rather than the angels, is due to how some narrators of the tradition have understood it. This is as reported from Abū Hurayra, who said: ‘The Messenger of God said: “May God have mercy on Lot - he used to seek refuge in a mighty support,” meaning God Almighty.’
Also from him via another route of transmission: ‘The Prophet said: “May God forgive Lot—indeed, he used to seek refuge in a mighty support.”‘ This report might be an instance of transmission of the meaning rather than the wording of a tradition, as the Prophet said, ‘May God have mercy on Lot’, but the narrator altered it to say, ‘May God forgive Lot.’ However, this suggests that Lot had neglected some manners of divine servanthood or committed a sin by misunderstanding his Lord’s status or forgetting something that he should not have forgotten.
Discourse
The discussion “A Discourse on the Story of Lot” appears here in the printed volume. Read it in the Al-Mizan App.