Verses 41–50

Chapter 5: Al-Māʾidah (The Table) · Printed edition: Volume 10, pp. 164–202

These verses are interlinked revealed in a single context. Clearly they speak about a group from the People of the Book who had approached the Messenger of God regarding some laws of the Torah, hoping that he would give a judgement other than that of the Torah; and thus they would get relief from the strict ruling of their own Book. They told each other: “If you are given this—that is, what they desired—take it; and if you are not given this—that is, are given the same law of the Torah—then be cautious.” The Prophet referred them to the ruling of the Torah, so they turned away from him. Also there was a group of hypocrites which had a tendency similar to that of the Jews; they wanted to put the Messenger of God into temptation, so that he might judge between them according to their desire, favoring the powerful segments of the society, as they were doing in the days of ignorance; and who is better than God to judge for a people who are sure?

The verses give credence to what has been narrated regarding its reason of revelation. That they were revealed concerning the Jews when two distinguished married persons from among them committed adultery; and their religious scholars desired to change the scriptural law of stoning to flogging. So they sent some people to ask the Messenger of God for the ruling about adultery of married persons; they enjoined them to accept it if he sentenced them to flogging, and reject it if he sentenced them to be stoned. The Messenger of God gave judgement for stoning, so they turned away from him. Then the Messenger of God asked Ibn Sūriyā what was the law of the Torah on this matter, and he adjured him by God and His signs not to hide what he knew of the truth; so he confirmed to the Messenger of God that the law of stoning was there in the Torah This story will come under “Traditions,” God willing.

However, the verses independently throw light on their theme; they are not restricted in their connotation to their reason of revelation. This is the case in general with all the verses, which were revealed on particular occasions; the reasons or events of their revelation have no significance except as one, among many, of their applications. It is because the Qur’an is a comprehensive and everlasting Book, which is not, confined to a time or space and not restricted to a particular group or event. God says: ... it is nothing but a reminder for all mankind (). Blessed is He Who sent down the Furqān to His servant so that he may be a warner to the worlds (). ... and most surely it is a Mighty Book; falsehood shall not come to it from before it nor from behind it; ().

يَا أَيُّهَا الرَّسُولُ لَا يَحْزُنْكَ الَّذِينَ يُسَارِعُونَ فِي الْكُفْرِ مِنَ الَّذِينَ قَالُوا آمَنَّا بِأَفْوَاهِهِمْ وَلَمْ تُؤْمِنْ قُلُوبُهُمْ ۛ وَمِنَ الَّذِينَ هَادُوا ۛ سَمَّاعُونَ لِلْكَذِبِ سَمَّاعُونَ لِقَوْمٍ آخَرِينَ لَمْ يَأْتُوكَ ۖ يُحَرِّفُونَ الْكَلِمَ مِنْ بَعْدِ مَوَاضِعِهِ ۖ يَقُولُونَ إِنْ أُوتِيتُمْ هَٰذَا فَخُذُوهُ وَإِنْ لَمْ تُؤْتَوْهُ فَاحْذَرُوا ۚ وَمَنْ يُرِدِ اللَّهُ فِتْنَتَهُ فَلَنْ تَمْلِكَ لَهُ مِنَ اللَّهِ شَيْئًا ۚ أُولَٰئِكَ الَّذِينَ لَمْ يُرِدِ اللَّهُ أَنْ يُطَهِّرَ قُلُوبَهُمْ ۚ لَهُمْ فِي الدُّنْيَا خِزْيٌ ۖ وَلَهُمْ فِي الْآخِرَةِ عَذَابٌ عَظِيمٌ ٤١

(5:41) O Messenger! Let not those grieve you who strive together in hastening in unbelief from among those who say with their mouths: “We believe,” and their hearts do not believe, and from among those who are Jews; (they are) listeners for the sake of a lie, listeners for another people who have not come to you; they alter the words from their places, saying: “If you are given this, take it, and if you are not given this, be cautious;” and as for him whose temptation Allah desires, you cannot control anything for him with Allah. Those are they for whom Allah does not desire that He should purify their hearts; they shall have disgrace in this world, and they shall have a grievous chastisement in the hereafter.

The verse consoles the Prophet and placates him because of what he had to endure at the hands of those who are mentioned here. They were those who were striving together in hastening in disbelief; they went ahead rapidly on this path; their motives of disbelief were reflected in their words and deeds one after another; thus they were unbelievers striving in unbelief. It should be noted that striving in unbelief is not the same as striving to unbelief.

The clause: “from among those who say with their mouths: ‘We believe’, and their hearts do not believe,” describes those who strive together in hastening in unbelief, that is, from among the hypocrites. It has given the attribute instead of naming the persons concerned, in order to describe the reason of this prohibition. Likewise, the attribute: “who strive together in hastening in unbelief,” points to the reason for not grieving. Meaning therefore will be as follows, and God knows better: These people should not grieve you by striving together in hastening in disbelief, because they have entered into Islam with their mouths only, not with their hearts; and they are not the believers; of the same character are the Jews who have approached you and have said what they said.

The context shows that the phrase: “and from among those who are Jews,” is in conjunctive with the phrase: “from among those who say with their mouths: ...”; it is not an independent sentence. Accordingly, the words: “listeners for the sake of a lie, listeners for another people who have not come to you,” are predicate of an omitted subject, that is, they are. These sentences describe the condition of the Jews; as for the hypocrites who have been mentioned at the beginning of the verse, obviously, their condition does not fit this description. These Jews are “listeners for the sake of a lie”; they avidly listen to a lie although they know it to be a lie; otherwise they were not liable to be blamed; and they are “listeners for another people who have not come to you”; that is, they accept whatever is reported to them and do whatever they are told. This variation in the import of listening necessitated the repetition of the word, “listeners.” The first indicates paying attention to while the second signifies acceptance.

The clause: “they alter the words from their places,” that is, after the words have been put in their proper places; it shows the attribute of “another people”; also with the same phrase is connected the sentence: “saying: ‘If you are given this, take it, and if you are not given this, be cautious.’”

It all shows that a group of the Jews were involved in a religious problem; their Book contained clear divine order for it, but their scholars changed it knowingly; then they sent some people to the Prophet to seek his judgement on that matter, enjoining them to accept his decision if he decided according to their corrupted order, and be on guard if he decided otherwise.

The sentence: “and as for him whose temptation God desires, you cannot control anything for him with God,” is parenthetical; it shows that the Jews in this affair are enmeshed in divine temptation and trial; therefore the Prophet should set his mind at rest that this affair is from God and it has to return to Him, and no one else has any authority on any of it; why should he feel grieved for a matter from which no one except God can remove.

“Those are they for whom God does not desire that He should purify their hearts”: Their hearts continue to wallow in their original filth and dirtiness, because they are piling up sin over sin, so God has left them to their error: ... but and He does not cause to err by it (any) except the transgressors [].

... they shall have disgrace in this world, and they shall have a grievous chastisement in the hereafter: It is a threat that the Jews will be disgraced in this world—and it has already been done—and shall have grievous punishment in the life hereafter.

سَمَّاعُونَ لِلْكَذِبِ أَكَّالُونَ لِلسُّحْتِ ۚ فَإِنْ جَاءُوكَ فَاحْكُمْ بَيْنَهُمْ أَوْ أَعْرِضْ عَنْهُمْ ۖ وَإِنْ تُعْرِضْ عَنْهُمْ فَلَنْ يَضُرُّوكَ شَيْئًا ۖ وَإِنْ حَكَمْتَ فَاحْكُمْ بَيْنَهُمْ بِالْقِسْطِ ۚ إِنَّ اللَّهَ يُحِبُّ الْمُقْسِطِينَ ٤٢

(5:42) (They are) listeners of a lie, devourers of what is forbidden; therefore if they come to you, judge between them or turn aside from them, and if you turn aside from them, they shall not harm you in any way; and if you judge, judge between them with equity; surely Allah loves those who judge equitably.

al-Rāghib says:

“al-Suht (rind, bark which is destroyed); God says: fa-yushitakum bi-ʾadhāb (‘lest He destroys you by a punishment’ []); it has also been recited as fa-yashitakum; it is said: suhtuh and asuhtuh; from this root is derived al-Suht, a forbidden thing which brings shame to the user or doer, as though it destroys his religion and honor; God says: devourers of what is forbidden; and the Prophet, has said: ‘All flesh that grows from forbidden things, Fire is more entitled to it;’ and bribe is named suht.”

Thus every property obtained unlawfully is suht (forbidden). The context shows that in this verse “what is forbidden” refers to bribe. This adjective as used here indicates that those Jewish scholars who had sent that group to the Prophet had taken bribe in that matter for altering the divine law; some people’s safety was under threat because of that law, so they averted it with bribery; they took bribe and changed the order of God.

It is now clear that the two phrases: “listeners of a lie, devourers of what is forbidden,” taken together describe the condition of the whole nation; but taken separately, the words, “listeners of a lie,” describe the attribute of preceding: those who are Jews, that is, those who were sent to the Prophet and their companions; and: “devourers of what is forbidden,” points to the preceding: another people who have not come to you. In short, the scholars of the Jews devour bribe, and their followers, the general public, listen to their lies.

... therefore if they come to you, judge between them or turn aside from them, and if you turn aside from them, they shall not harm you in any way; and if you judge, judge between them with equity; surely Allah loves those who judge equitably: The verse leaves it to the Prophet’s discretion to judge between them—when they come to him for judgement—or to turn aside from them. It is understood that the Prophet was not to choose either of the two without an underlying reason and justification. In short, the matter was left to his own outlook. Further elaborating this option, God says that if the Prophet turned aside from them refusing to judge between them, they could not harm him in any way; and if he decided to judge, he was to judge with justice and equity.

Ultimately, it means that God does not like them to be judged except according to His law; the Prophet was to enforce divine law among them, if it was not acceptable to them, he should not involve himself with them because he could not apply any other law anywhere.

وَكَيْفَ يُحَكِّمُونَكَ وَعِنْدَهُمُ التَّوْرَاةُ فِيهَا حُكْمُ اللَّهِ ثُمَّ يَتَوَلَّوْنَ مِنْ بَعْدِ ذَٰلِكَ ۚ وَمَا أُولَٰئِكَ بِالْمُؤْمِنِينَ ٤٣

(5:43) And how do they make you a judge and they have the Torah wherein is Allah’s judgement? Yet they turn back after that, and these are not the believers.

The verse points to a surprising behavior of the Jews: They are a nation having their own Book and shariah; they reject your Prophethood, Book and shariah; then they are faced with a problem about which their book contains a clear divine order; yet they turn back from the Torah with its divine order, while they are not those who believe in it.

Accordingly, the phrase: “Yet they turn back after that,” means: they turn back from the law concerning that event although they do have the Torah, which contains divine commandments. The phrase: “and these are not the believers,” means: they do not believe in the Torah and its law; they have abandoned belief in the Book and its law, and turned to disbelief.

It is possible to take the words: “Yet they turn back,” as referring to their rejection of the Prophet’s judgement; and the phrase: “these are not the believers,” as pointing to their disbelief in the Prophet, even though they had come to him and sought his judgement; or it could refer to their disbelief in the Torah and the Prophet together. But the explanation we have given earlier is more in keeping with the context.

The verse confirms to a certain extent the Torah now prevalent among the Jews. It is the book collected by Ezra by the permission of Cyrus, king of Persia, after he conquered Babylon, released the Children of Israel from captivity of Babylon, and allowed them to return to Palestine and rebuild the Temple at Jerusalem. It is the same Torah, which was in their hands during the time of the Prophet, and it is the same, which they have with them today. The Qur’an confirms that this present Torah contains laws of God, and it also says that alterations and changes have corrupted it.

The above discourse proves that the present Torah, prevalent among the Jews today, contains some parts of the original Torah sent down to Moses, also many of its parts have been changed and corrupted through addition, omission, change of word or context, etc. This is the Qur’anic view of the Torah and extensive research leads to the same conclusion.

إِنَّا أَنْزَلْنَا التَّوْرَاةَ فِيهَا هُدًى وَنُورٌ ۚ يَحْكُمُ بِهَا النَّبِيُّونَ الَّذِينَ أَسْلَمُوا لِلَّذِينَ هَادُوا وَالرَّبَّانِيُّونَ وَالْأَحْبَارُ بِمَا اسْتُحْفِظُوا مِنْ كِتَابِ اللَّهِ وَكَانُوا عَلَيْهِ شُهَدَاءَ ۚ فَلَا تَخْشَوُا النَّاسَ وَاخْشَوْنِ وَلَا تَشْتَرُوا بِآيَاتِي ثَمَنًا قَلِيلًا ۚ وَمَنْ لَمْ يَحْكُمْ بِمَا أَنْزَلَ اللَّهُ فَأُولَٰئِكَ هُمُ الْكَافِرُونَ ٤٤

(5:44) Surely We sent down the Torah in which was guidance and light; with it the prophets who submitted themselves (to Allah) were judging (matters) for those who were Jews, and (so did) the Divines and the scholars, as they were required to guard (part) of the Book of Allah, and they were witnesses thereof; therefore fear not the people and fear Me, and barter not My signs for a small price; and whoever did not judge by what Allah revealed, those are they that are the unbelievers.

It gives the reason of what was explained in the preceding verse. This and the following verses describe that God had laid down for these nations, in their successive times, laws, and wrote them in the books revealed to them, in order that they should be guided by them and acquire insight through them, and they should serve as reference points in matters in which they differed; He ordered their prophets and scholars to judge matters by them; they were given the responsibility to guard the books and protect them from corruption and alteration; they were admonished not to accept any price for giving judgement—a price which was bound to be trivial [in comparison to God’s pleasure]; they should not fear the people, rather they should fear God.

He emphasized it again and warned them of following their low desires, lest the worldly people seduce them from divinely revealed truth. He has appointed various sets of law for various people in different times, so that He might try them thoroughly; it is because abilities of times differ with changing eras, and two things which differ in strength and weakness cannot be perfected with one factor with one style.

... Surely We sent down the Torah in which was guidance and light: There was in it some guidance and some light with which the Israelites were led to some cognizance and laws adequately suitable to their condition, conforming to their capabilities. God has described in His book their general behavior and the particulars of their national affairs and limits of their understanding. Accordingly they were given a part of guidance and a part of light because they had appeared on the scene in remote past and primitive age with simple understanding; God says: And We wrote for him in the tablets admonition from every thing and clear explanation of all things ... ().

... with it the prophets who submitted themselves (to Allah) were judging (matters) for those who were Jews: The prophets followed Islam, that is, submission to God, which is the religion with God. This nomenclature has been used to show that there is only one religion, and that is to submit to God and not to refrain from worshipping Him. A man who believes in God and submits to Him has no right to reject any of His commandments and laws.

... and (so did) the Divines and the scholars as they were required to guard (part) of the Book of Allah, and they were witnesses thereof: The Divines, that is, those scholars whose knowledge and action were exclusively devoted to God (if the word is derived from al-Rab (Lord); it may also be taken to mean those scholars who train and raise up people by their knowledge (if it is derived from al-Tarbiyah (to raise up)). al-Ahbār are those knowledgeable and expert scholars who judge according to the divine order, and who guard the shariah as contained in the Book of God; and because they were its guardians and preservers, they were called its witnesses; the sacred book was safe from change and alteration because they had memorized it perfectly. The clause: “and they were witnesses thereof,” is a sort of result of the phrase: “as they were required to guard (part) of the Book of God.” In other words, they were told to guard it, so they were guarding it by being its witnesses.

This meaning of witnessing is supported by the context. Some people have said that it refers to attesting about the Prophet’s judgement of stoning that it is found in the Torah; some others have said that it means testifying for the Book that it has come from God. But the context does not support either of these two interpretations in any way.

... therefore fear not the people and fear Me, and barter not My signs for a small price: It branches out from the clause: “Surely We sent down the Torah in which was guidance and light; with it the prophets ...” Meaning: As the Torah was sent down by Us, and it contained the laws with which the prophets, the divines and the scholars judged between you, therefore you should not hide anything of it nor should you make any alteration in it, be it for fear or for greed. As for fear, it may happen, if you fear the people and forget your Lord; but you should fear God only, it will liberate you from people’s fear; and as for greed, it may take place if you barter the signs of God for a small price, like worldly riches or glory—all of which is transitory and ephemeral.

There is also another possibility: It could have branched out from the phrase: “as they were required to guard (part) of the Book of God, and they were witnesses thereof”; because the requirement to guard the Book is tantamount to take covenant for guarding it. Thus the meaning will be as follows: We made covenant with them for guarding the Book and made them witnesses for it, that they would not change it, would not be afraid of anyone except Me in making it known and would not barter My signs for small price. God says: And when Allah made a covenant with those who were given the Book: You shall certainly make it known to men and you shall not hide it; but they cast it behind their backs and took a small price for it; ... (). Then there came after them an evil posterity who inherited the Book, taking only the frail good of this low life and saying: “It will be forgiven us.” And if the like good came to them, they would take it (too). Was not a promise taken from them in the Book that they would not speak anything about Allah but the truth, and they have read what is in it? And the abode of the hereafter is better for those who guard (against evil). Do you not then understand? And (as for) those who hold fast by the Book and keep up prayer; surely We do not waste the reward of the right-doers (7:169–70).

And this second meaning is more appropriate, keeping in view the forceful emphasis at the end piece of the subsequent verse: and whoever did not judge by what Allah revealed, those are they that are unjust.

وَكَتَبْنَا عَلَيْهِمْ فِيهَا أَنَّ النَّفْسَ بِالنَّفْسِ وَالْعَيْنَ بِالْعَيْنِ وَالْأَنْفَ بِالْأَنْفِ وَالْأُذُنَ بِالْأُذُنِ وَالسِّنَّ بِالسِّنِّ وَالْجُرُوحَ قِصَاصٌ ۚ فَمَنْ تَصَدَّقَ بِهِ فَهُوَ كَفَّارَةٌ لَهُ ۚ وَمَنْ لَمْ يَحْكُمْ بِمَا أَنْزَلَ اللَّهُ فَأُولَٰئِكَ هُمُ الظَّالِمُونَ ٤٥

(5:45) And We prescribed to them in it that life is for life, and eye for eye, and nose for nose, and ear for ear, and tooth for tooth, and (that there is) reprisal in wounds; but he who foregoes it, it shall be an expiation for him; and whoever did not judge by what Allah revealed, those are they that are the unjust.

The context, and especially or the mention of reprisal in wounds proves that the aim here is to describe the law of retribution in various types of felonies, like murder, cutting wounding. The contraposition in “life for life” and subsequent phrases places the avenger against the felon. It means that a life is taken in retaliation for life, an eye in reprisal of eye and so on. Ba (for) is used here for exchange, as you say: “I sold it for so much.”

These sentences, then, give the following meaning: A life would be taken in place of a life, an eye would be gouged for an eye, a nose would be cut for a nose, an ear would be severed for an ear, a tooth would be extracted for a tooth and there is reprisal in wounds. In short, all limbs and organs of man shall be avenged with similar limb and organ of the felon.

Probably that is the purpose of the suggestion offered by someone that: “life is for life,” actually has an omitted but understood predicate, ‘avenged’ or ‘killed’. Otherwise, there is no need of this supposition; sentences are grammatically complete without that addition.

The verse is not without a certain indication that this law is other than that for which they had come to the Prophet and which has been mentioned in preceding verses; because the context has changed with the verse: Surely We sent down the Torah in which was guidance and light.

The law described in the verse under discussion is found in the present Torah, as will be quoted in the forthcoming “Traditions,” God willing.

... but he who foregoes it, it shall be an expiation for him; and whoever did not judge by what Allah revealed, those are they that are the unjust: If the possessor of the right of retribution, like the heir of the slain, the victim of attack himself or the wounded forgives the felon and remits the retribution, then “it,” that is, this remission shall be an expiation for the sins of the remitter; or it shall be an expiation for the felon in that particular felony.

The meaning therefore is as follows: If the holder of the right of retaliation forgives the culprit, it shall be expiation for him; but if he does not forgive then he must decide according to the law revealed regarding retaliation; and whoever does not judge by what God has revealed, those are the unjust people.

It clearly shows that:

First: The conjunctive: wa (and) in the clause: “and whoever did not judge,” joins it with the clause: “but he who foregoes”; that is, it does not begin a new sentence. Also, the conjunctive, fa (translated here as ‘but’) has the import of branching out, that is, it makes the details grow from the general order of retaliation. It is not unlike another verse of retaliation, which inter alia says: ... but if any remission is made to any one by his (aggrieved) brother, then (the demand for the bloodwit) should be made according to the usage, and payment should be made to him in a good manner ().

Second: The clause: “and whoever did not judge by what God revealed,” metaphorically puts the reason in place of its effect. The full construction shall be as follows: and if he does not forego, then he should judge by what God has revealed, because whoever did not judge by what God revealed, those are they that are the unjust.

وَقَفَّيْنَا عَلَىٰ آثَارِهِمْ بِعِيسَى ابْنِ مَرْيَمَ مُصَدِّقًا لِمَا بَيْنَ يَدَيْهِ مِنَ التَّوْرَاةِ ۖ وَآتَيْنَاهُ الْإِنْجِيلَ فِيهِ هُدًى وَنُورٌ وَمُصَدِّقًا لِمَا بَيْنَ يَدَيْهِ مِنَ التَّوْرَاةِ وَهُدًى وَمَوْعِظَةً لِلْمُتَّقِينَ ٤٦

(5:46) And We sent after them in their footsteps Jesus, son of Mary, verifying what was before him of the Torah and We gave him the Gospel in which was guidance and light, and verifying what was before it of Torah and a guidance and an admonition for those who are pious.

al-Taqfiyah (to send something behind another thing); it is derived from al-qafā (back); al-āthār is plural of al-athar (track, trace, sign), it is mostly used for footsteps; “after them” that is, after the prophets.

The sentence: “And We sent after them in their footsteps Jesus, son of Mary,” is an extended metaphor, intimating that God made Jesus to proceed on the same path on which had gone the preceding prophets; and it is the way of invitation to monotheism and submission to God.

The clause: “verifying what was before him of the Torah,” makes the preceding statement clearer; it points to the fact that the call of Jesus was the same as the call of Moses (peace be on them both), without any difference at all.

... and We gave him the Gospel in which was guidance and light, and verifying what was before it of Torah, and a guidance and an admonition for those who are pious: As the verses speak about the shariah of Moses, Jesus and Muḥammad (may God’s blessing be on him and his progeny and on them both), and as they have been revealed concerning their Books, it proves that the Books tally with each other.

It follows that:

First: The Gospel mentioned in this verse—and it means Good News—was a book revealed to Jesus; it was not merely a “good news” without a book. But God has not given any detail in His Book as to how it was revealed, contrary to what He has done regarding the Torah and the Qur’an. He says about the Torah:

He said: “O Moses! Surely I have chosen you above the people with My messages and with My words, therefore take hold of what I give to you and be of the grateful ones.” And We wrote for him in the tablets admonition from everything and clear explanation of all things ... (7:144–5). ... he took up the tablets, and in the writing thereof was guidance and mercy for those who fear for the sake of their Lord ().

And He says especially for the Qur’an:

The Faithful Spirit has descended with it, upon your heart that you may be of the warners, in plain Arabic language (26:193–5). Most surely it is the Word of an honored messenger, the possessor of strength, having an honorable place with the Lord of the Throne, one (to be) obeyed, and faithful in trust (). In honored books, exalted, purified, in the hands of scribes, noble, virtuous (). Although God has not mentioned anything regarding revelation of Gospel and its particulars, yet the verse under discussion mentions its revelation to Jesus side by side with the coming down of Torah on Moses, and revelation of the Qur’an on Muḥammad (may God’s blessings be on him and his progeny) and it proves that Gospel too was a book like the other two.

Second: God says about Gospel: in which was guidance and light, parallel to what He had said about Torah [in ]: Surely We sent down the Torah in which was guidance and light; these words point to the cognition and laws contained in the Book. He says at the end of this very verse [about Gospel]: and a guidance and an admonition for those who are pious. By putting the two phrases [about Gospel] side by side, it is understood that the guidance mentioned in the former phrase is something separate from the one mentioned in the latter phrase and which has been explained as admonition. The former guidance is related to cognition, which guides in matters of faith and belief, while the latter refers to that cognition which leads one to fear of God and piety in religion.

Now, what is meant by light? It can only mean the laws and shariah; and meditation gives support to this interpretation. The laws of religion are the light, which illuminates the path of life and man proceeds in that light to his destination. God says: Is he who was dead then We raised him to life and made for him a light by which he walks among the people, ().

It is now clear that the guidance, mentioned first in description of the Torah and the Gospel, refers to matters of faith and belief; like Oneness of God and resurrection; and the light in both places denotes shariah and laws; while the guidance mentioned second time as attribute of the Gospel refers to sermon and admonition. And God knows better.

Also, now one may understand the reason of repetition of “guidance” in the verse; it is because the second “guidance” is different from the first one; in the second instance, in the phrase: “a guidance and an admonition,” there is an explicative apposition, inasmuch as “admonition” gives the meaning of “guidance.” And God knows better.

Third: The phrase: “and verifying what was before it of Torah,” as attribute of Gospel, is not a repetition for the sake of emphasis, etc.; rather it denotes that Gospel follows the shariah of Torah, because there was nothing in Gospel other than confirmation of Torah’s shariah and call to follow it. Of course, there were a few exceptions made by Jesus, as God quotes him as saying: ... and that I may allow you part of that which has been forbidden you, ().

Its proof is seen in the next but one verse: And We have revealed to you the Book with the truth, verifying what is before it of the Book and a guardian over it, as will be explained in the “Commentary.”

... and a guidance and an admonition for those who are pious: This clause has already been explained. It proves that the Gospel revealed to Jesus paid special care to piety, in addition to matters of belief and faith and practical laws which were found in the Torah. Although the Qur’an does not verify totally the Torah which is in their hands today; and although the four Gospels attributed to Matthew, Marks, Luke and John, are not the same Gospel which Qur’an says was revealed to Jesus himself, yet they all confirm this matter, as will be explained later, God willing.

وَلْيَحْكُمْ أَهْلُ الْإِنْجِيلِ بِمَا أَنْزَلَ اللَّهُ فِيهِ ۚ وَمَنْ لَمْ يَحْكُمْ بِمَا أَنْزَلَ اللَّهُ فَأُولَٰئِكَ هُمُ الْفَاسِقُونَ ٤٧

(5:47) And the People of the Gospel should have judged by what Allah revealed in it; and whoever did not judged by what Allah revealed, those are they that are the transgressors.

God had revealed in the Gospel confirmation and verification of the Torah in its laws, except some abrogated rules which were described in the Book revealed to Jesus; obviously when Gospel verified the laws of Torah and made lawful some things which had been forbidden in it, then following the Torah in its laws—except those unlawful things which were made lawful by Gospel—was tantamount to obeying the law of Gospel.

Some exegetes have claimed on the strength of this verse that Gospel too contained, like Torah, elaborated laws and shariah; but the explanation given above show the weakness of this claim.

The statement: “and whoever did not judge by what God revealed, those are they that are the transgressors,” puts emphasis on the order contained in the preceding sentence: “And the people of the Gospel should have judged ...” God has repeated this sentence three times with minor difference all for emphasis; twice relating to the Jews and once regarding the Christians; as He has said: and whoever did not judge by what Allah revealed, those are they that are the unbelievers []. ... those are they that are the unjust []. ... those are they that are the transgressors []. In this way, their disbelief, injustice, and transgression have officially been put on record.

What is the reason that the Christians have been called transgressors while the Jews were described as unbelievers and unjust? It is because the Christians changed monotheism to trinity and abandoned the laws of Torah; they were misled by Paul who preached that Jesus had brought an independent religion, separate from that of Moses, and that the new religion had abrogated all laws through Jesus’s atonement; thus the Christians went out of the fold of monotheism and its shariah through mistaken interpretation; so they transgressed the boundary of the true divine religion. Transgression means exit of a thing from its prescribed place, like exit of the core of date from its cover.

As for the Jews, they had no doubt whatsoever about the religion of Moses; they had rejected knowingly the laws and beliefs, which they had, full knowledge of; and it was nothing but injustice and disbelief in God’s signs.

It should however be noted that the three verses, that is,: and whoever did not judge by what Allah revealed, those are they: that are the unbelievers; that are the unjust; that are the transgressors, are unrestricted; they are not confined to any one group, religion or nation, although here they have been applied to the People of the Book.

There is a difference of opinion among exegetes regarding the import of the unbelief of him who does not judge by what God has revealed, e.g., a judge who decides a case contrary to what God has revealed, or a ruler who rules against what God has revealed, or an innovator who invents a system other than that of divine religion. This question comes under the purview of fiqh. The fact is that violation of any rule of the shariah or any other established matter of religion, when one knows that it is an established fact and then rejects it, is disbelief, if one violates it, knowing its factuality but without rejecting it, it is transgression. But of one does not know that it is an established religious matter and then rejects it, it is neither disbelief nor transgression, because it is an excusable incapability (except if there was negligence in investigation of facts and proofs). See books of fiqh for details.

وَأَنْزَلْنَا إِلَيْكَ الْكِتَابَ بِالْحَقِّ مُصَدِّقًا لِمَا بَيْنَ يَدَيْهِ مِنَ الْكِتَابِ وَمُهَيْمِنًا عَلَيْهِ ۖ فَاحْكُمْ بَيْنَهُمْ بِمَا أَنْزَلَ اللَّهُ ۖ وَلَا تَتَّبِعْ أَهْوَاءَهُمْ عَمَّا جَاءَكَ مِنَ الْحَقِّ ۚ لِكُلٍّ جَعَلْنَا مِنْكُمْ شِرْعَةً وَمِنْهَاجًا ۚ وَلَوْ شَاءَ اللَّهُ لَجَعَلَكُمْ أُمَّةً وَاحِدَةً وَلَٰكِنْ لِيَبْلُوَكُمْ فِي مَا آتَاكُمْ ۖ فَاسْتَبِقُوا الْخَيْرَاتِ ۚ إِلَى اللَّهِ مَرْجِعُكُمْ جَمِيعًا فَيُنَبِّئُكُمْ بِمَا كُنْتُمْ فِيهِ تَخْتَلِفُونَ ٤٨

(5:48) And We have revealed to you the Book with the truth, verifying what is before it of the Book and a guardian over it (Haymanah), therefore judge between them by what Allah has revealed, and do not follow their (low) desires (diverging) from the truth that has come to you; for every one of you did We appoint a law and a way, and if Allah had pleased He would have made you (all) a single people, but that He might try you in what He gave you, therefore strive with one another to hasten to virtuous deeds; to Allah is the return, of all of you, then He will let you know that in which you differed;

Haymanah of a thing over another thing entails its authority over it, involving its protection, safety and management. This describes the position of the Qur’an, which God says is explanation of everything vis-à-vis the previous divine books. It preserves from those books’ contents, the permanent unchangeable fundamentals and abrogates what deserves it from the subsidiary items that are liable to change and alteration, in order to make it conform to man’s position, keeping in view his step-by-step development and perfection with passage of time. God says: Surely this Qur’an guides to that which is most upright (). Whatever signs We abrogate or cause to be forgotten, We bring one better than it or like it (). Those who follow the Messenger, the Prophet, the Ummī, whom they find written down with them in the Torah and the Gospel, (who) enjoins them good and forbids them evil, and makes lawful to them the good things and makes unlawful to them impure things, and removes from them their burden and the shackles which were upon them; so (as for) those who believe in him and honor him and help him, and follow the light which has been sent down with him, these it is that are the successful ().

The phrase: “a guardian over it,” is an explanatory conclusion of the preceding, verifying what is before it of the Book; without it the mention of verification could cause a misunderstanding that the Qur’an confirmed the laws of the Torah and the Gospel and let them continue without any change; but with this phrase in place, the verification only means that the Qur’an accepts that those laws and cognitive matters had truly come from God and God has full power to manage them as He pleases, He may abrogate them or may complete them with other laws, as He points to it in this very verse: and if Allah had pleased He would have made you (all) a single people, but that He might try you in what He gave you.

Therefore, the words: “verifying what is before it,” mean that the Qur’an has kept intact that part of the law and knowledge of Gospel which were suitable for this ummah, as such the consequent addition, omission or abrogation was not contrary to this verification—in the same way as Jesus and his Gospel had verified the Torah even when they had made lawful some things prohibited by the Torah, as God quotes him as saying: And a verifier of that which is before me of the Torah and that I may allow you part of that which has been forbidden you ... ().

... therefore judge between them by what Allah has revealed, and do not follow their (low) desires (diverging) from the truth that has come to you: As the shariah, which has been revealed to you and is contained in the Book, is truth, and as it is truth when it tallies with the Books revealed earlier, and is truth when it goes against those Books, because it is a guardian over them, therefore you are inevitably required to judge between the People of the Book (as is apparently supported by the preceding verses), or between the people (as is supported by following verses), by what Allah has revealed to you; you should not follow their desires or turn away from the truth that has come to you.

The above discourse shows that the pronoun in: “judge between them,” may refer to the People of the Book or to the people in general. But the first alternative necessitates taking the phrase as meaning, judge between them if you decide to judge, because God had not obligated him to judge between the People of the Book, but had left it to his discretion whether he wanted to judge or turned aside from them. He says: therefore if they come to you, judge between them or turn aside from them []. Moreover, God has at the beginning of this set of verses, mentioned the hypocrites together with the Jews. So there is no reason why the pronoun, “them,” should be taken to refer to the Jews only when another group was mentioned together with them. Therefore, looking at it in this context, the second alternative seems more appropriate, that is, judge between the people.

Obviously, the words: “do not follow their desires from the truth,” are well connected and they imply divergence from the truth.

... for every one of you did We appoint a law and a way: al-Rāghib says:

“al-Sharʾ is the way of a clear path; it is said: ‘I opened for him a path.’ al-Sharʾ is a masdar, then it was used as a noun for open path; it is pronounced al-shirʾ, al-sharʾ and al-shariah; then it was used for the divine path; God says: a law and a way ... Some people have said, ‘The shariah was given this name to liken it to drinking place.’”

Probably, the case is vice versa, that is, the drinking place was the original meaning which was then borrowed for the law; because they knew clearly the ways to water holes, etc. which were frequently visited by them. And he has said: “al-Nahj is clear path; nahaj al-amr and anhaja both mean the matter became clear; manhaj and minhāj of path mean open road.”

Discourse

The discussion “Meaning of Shariah and Difference Between Shariah, Din and Millah in Qur’anic Usage” appears here in the printed volume. Read it in the Al-Mizan App.

وَأَنِ احْكُمْ بَيْنَهُمْ بِمَا أَنْزَلَ اللَّهُ وَلَا تَتَّبِعْ أَهْوَاءَهُمْ وَاحْذَرْهُمْ أَنْ يَفْتِنُوكَ عَنْ بَعْضِ مَا أَنْزَلَ اللَّهُ إِلَيْكَ ۖ فَإِنْ تَوَلَّوْا فَاعْلَمْ أَنَّمَا يُرِيدُ اللَّهُ أَنْ يُصِيبَهُمْ بِبَعْضِ ذُنُوبِهِمْ ۗ وَإِنَّ كَثِيرًا مِنَ النَّاسِ لَفَاسِقُونَ ٤٩

(5:49) And that you should judge between them by what Allah has revealed, and do not follow their low desires, and be cautious of them, lest they seduce you from part of what Allah has revealed to you; but if they turn back then know that Allah desires to afflict them on account of some of their faults; and most surely many of the people are transgressors.

The beginning of the verse: “And that you should judge between them by what God has revealed, and do not follow their low desires,” corresponds with the clause in the preceding verse: therefore judge between them by what Allah has revealed, and do not follow their (low) desires; then the two separate in their ramifications, and one realizes that the repetition has occurred for this purpose. The former verse tells them to judge by what God has revealed and admonishes them not to follow their low desires—because this shariah revealed by God is the one prescribed for the Prophet and his people. Therefore, it is incumbent upon them to vie with one another in virtuous deeds. The latter verse orders them to judge by what God has revealed and not to follow their low desires—explaining that if they turned back from what God has revealed, it would show that God has left them in their error on account of their transgression. God has said: ... He causes many to err by it and many He leads aright by it; but He does not cause to err by it (any) except the transgressors ().

It results from the above that this verse elaborates some themes of the preceding verse which needed more explanation: The only reason that people of low desire turn away from following what God has revealed with truth is that they are transgressors; God desires to afflict them on account of some of their sins which have caused their transgression. This affliction apparently means that He leaves them to err. Thus the clause: “And that you should judge between them by what God has revealed,” is in conjunction, as has been said, with the word, “Book,” in the preceding verse’s opening sentence: And We have revealed to you the Book ... In that case, it is more appropriate to take the al (the) in, “the Book,” as connoting a new occurrence; the meaning then will be as follows: We have revealed to you the laws which have been prescribed for them, and that you should judge between them by what God has revealed.

and be cautious of them, lest they seduce you from part of what God has revealed to you: Here God warns His Prophet against their seduction and temptation, although he was maʾsūm and sinless through divine protection. It is because the power of ʿismah (sinlessness) does not nullify the free will and choice, nor does it repeal the laws based on that will and choice. Ismah is in fact an academic and intellectual aptitude; knowledge and perception do not deprive practical powers and faculties from their middle position between doing and not doing. It is these faculties, which move the limbs and organs of a man and cause his activities.

For example, a sure knowledge that a certain food is poisoned prevents man from taking that food. But the organs used in eating, like hand, mouth, tongue, and teeth may perform their activities in this eating, or they may remain inert although they could possibly become active; so the action is within power, although it has become like impossible to do because of that knowledge.

We have written to some extent on this topic when explaining the verse: ... and they shall not harm you in any way, and Allah has revealed to you the Book and the Wisdom, and He has taught you what you did not know, and Allah’s grace on you is very great (). “But if they turn back, then know that God desires to afflict them on account of some of their faults”: As mentioned above, it describes that they were left to err because of their transgression. This clause reverts to the initial theme of this set of verses, where it says: O Messenger! Let not those grieve you who strive together in hastening in unbelief ... []. The verse aims at putting the Prophet’s mind at rest and cheers him up; it teaches him that which would keep grief and sorrow away from his heart. This is what God has done in most of the places where He has told him not to grieve if the unbelievers turn away from the true Call or disdain to accept, that which would lead them to the path of guidance and success. So God explained to him that they were not going to weaken the kingdom of God, nor were they to overwhelm Him; it is God Who is dominant in His affairs; it is He Who leaves them to err because of their transgression, makes their hearts deviated because of their deviation, and puts uncleanness on them by removing His help from them and luring them into evil. God says: And let not those who disbelieve think that they shall come in first; surely they will not escape (). So, as all matters are in God’s hand, and He drives away all types of uncleanness from His clean religion, so nothing can escape from Him if He wants it; therefore there was no cause to grieve, as nothing was lost.

Probably, that is the reason that God has said: “but if they turn back, then know that God desires to afflict them on account of some of their faults”; instead of saying, ‘but if they turn back, then God desires . . .’ or some other expression to that effect. In its present structure the verse intends to teach the Prophet that their turning back is caused by divine subjugation, as such it should not cause grief to the Prophet; he is a Messenger inviting people to the way of his Lord; if anything grieves him it should do so because God’s will is predominant in the affairs of religious Call. As nothing can overcome God’s will, and it is He Who leads them here and there by His subjugation, helping some and leaving some in their deception, therefore there was no reason to be grieved.

God has explained this reality in other words: Then may be you will kill yourself with grief, sorrowing after them, if they do not believe in this announcement. Surely We have made whatever is on the earth an embellishment for it, so that We may try them (as to) which of them is best in deed. And most surely We will make what is on it bare ground without herbage. () Thus God has made it clear that the aim of sending messengers, and their coming with religious warning and good news was not that all people should enter into the fold of true religion, as a man plans and thinks concerning his requirements and needs. The only purpose of this all is to test the people and put them on trial, so that it may be known who is best in deed. Otherwise, this world and all that is in it is going to perish very soon, nothing will remain except a bare ground, free from these disbelievers who turn away from the speech of truth, and cleansed from all their hearts’ attachments. So, there is no reason to be sorry, because it is not going to bring any failure in Our endeavours, nullify Our power or cause weariness in Our will.

... and most surely many of the people are transgressors: As mentioned earlier, it gives the reason of the preceding sentence: then know that Allah desires to afflict them on account of some of their sins.

أَفَحُكْمَ الْجَاهِلِيَّةِ يَبْغُونَ ۚ وَمَنْ أَحْسَنُ مِنَ اللَّهِ حُكْمًا لِقَوْمٍ يُوقِنُونَ٥٠

(5:50) Is it then the judgement of (the times of) ignorance that they desire? And who is better than Allah to judge for a people who are sure?

This question branches out from the theme of the preceding verse that describes their turning back from what is in reality the judgement of God that was revealed to them and which, they knew very well, was truth. Also possibly the verse may be taken as the conclusion of the themes of previous verses.

Its meaning: As these laws and rules are the truth revealed by God, and as other than these there is no true shariah, there is nothing besides them except the system of the days of ignorance, emanating from low desires. What do these people, who turn aside from judgement of truth, want after all? There is noting else except the judgement of the Days of Ignorance. Do they then want that judgement, when there is no one better than God to judge for these people who claim to be believers?

So, the sentence: “Is it the judgement of (the time of) ignorance that they desire?” is a reprimand in the form of question; and: “who is better than God to judge?” Is a question with implied negative reply, that is, no one is better than God to judge, and a judgement is followed because of its good. The clause: “for a people who are sure,” is an insinuation to them that if they are truthful in their claim of believing in God, then they are sure of His signs; and those who are sure of His signs deny that any one can be better than God in judgement.

It should be noted that these verses in several places turn from singular or plural first person pronoun to that of third person and vice versa. For example, the clause: surely Allah loves those who judge equitably, followed by: Surely We sent down Torah, which is followed by: as they were required to guard (part) of the Book of Allah, after which comes: and fear Me, and so on. Whenever the third person uses the proper Divine Name: God, it reflects on the importance of the subject. Where the first person singular pronoun is used, it shows that all affairs are in the hand of God alone, without any interference from any friend or intercessor. If the verse speaks of any good promise or attraction, it is God who is going to manage it and He is the Most Noble of those who fulfil their promise. If it contains a threat or warning then it is really most troublesome and hardest and no friend or intercessor can avert it from man, because the matter is in God’s hand alone. And He [by using singular pronoun] has nullified every intermediate link and rejected every intervening cause. Ponder on it; and some aspects of it have been described earlier.

Examining Narrations

1. Majmaʾ al-bayān narrates under the verse: O Messenger! Let not those grieve you who strive together in hastening in unbelief ..., from al-Baqir that he said, “A woman of high status in Khaybar committed adultery with a man of high rank from among them—and both had spouses. So they did not like to stone them. They sent (some one) to the Jews of Medina and wrote to them to ask the Prophet about it, hoping that he would allow them some latitude. So a group of them, including Kaʾb b. al-Ashraf, Kaʾb b. Usayd, Shuʾbah b. ʿAmr, Mālik b. al-Sayf and Kinānah b. Abi al-Haqīq, etc., went (to the Prophet,) and said, ‘O Muḥammad! Tell us about a fornicator and a fornicatress, when they have their spouses, what is the prescribed punishment for them?’ He said, ‘And will you agree to my judgement in this?’ They said, ‘Yes.’ So Gabriel came down with (the order of) stoning. (The Prophet) told it to them; they refused to accept it. Gabriel said, ‘Make Ibn Sūriyā (arbitrator) between you and them;’ and gave his particulars to (the Prophet).

“So the Prophet said, ‘Do you know a young man, beardless, white, one-eyed, who lives in Fadak and is called Ibn Sūriyā?’ They said, ‘Yes.’ He said, ‘What position does he have among you? They said, ‘(He is) the most knowledgeable Jew (living on the face of the earth) of what God had revealed to Moses.’ He said, ‘Then you send (message) to call him.’ They did so, and ʿAbdullāh b. Sūriyā came to them.

“So the Prophet said to him, ‘I adjure you by God, that which there is no god but He, and Who sent down Torah to Moses, and parted the sea for you, and delivered you and drowned the people of Pharaoh, and made the clouds to give shade over you and sent to you manna and quails, do you find in your Book (the punishment of) stoning for the one who commits adultery while having a spouse?’ Ibn Sūriyā said, ‘Yes. By Him Whom you have reminded me, if it were not for the fear that the Lord of Torah would burn me down if I lied or changed, I would not have confessed to you. However, (now) you tell me how it is in your Book, O Muḥammad!’ He said, ‘When four witnesses of approved probity testify that he had entered into her as kohl stick enters kohl container, then he becomes liable to stoning.’ Ibn Sūriyā said, ‘Exactly like it had God revealed to Moses in Torah.’

Then the Prophet said to him, ‘What was the first time you became lax in the judgement of God?’ He said, ‘[It was our custom that] when a man of status committed adultery, we did nothing to him, and when a weak person did so, we enforced the punishment to him; thus fornication increased in our high class society, until a cousin of one of our kings committed adultery and we did not subject him to stoning. Then another man committed the same and the King wanted to stone him. But the man’s people told the King, “Never, until you stone that person, that is, the King’s cousin.” So we said, “Come together, so that we lay down something below stoning that will be applied to men of high and low status both.” Thus we laid down flogging and tahmīm, that is, the fornicator and fornicatress should each be flogged forty strokes, then their faces be blackened, and they be put on two donkeys their faces being towards the donkey’s posterior, and they be made to go round (the town). They prescribed it in place of stoning.’

“The Jews then said to Ibn Sūriyā, ‘How quickly you told him (everything); you did not deserve what we had said about you, but you were absent, and we did not like to slander your reputation.’ He said, ‘He adjured me by Torah, otherwise I would not have informed him.’

The Prophet gave his judgement and the two were stoned near the door of his mosque. And he said, ‘I am the first to revive your judgement when they had made it dead.’ Then God revealed in this connection: O People of the Book! Indeed has come to you Our Messenger making clear to you much of what you concealed of the Book and passing over much. Then Ibn Sūriyā stood up and put his hands on the knees of the Messenger of God and said, ‘This is the place of the one who seeks protection by God and you, that you should not mention to us the “much” which you have been told to pass over.’ So the Prophet did not mention it.

“Then Ibn Sūriyā asked him about his sleep. He (the Prophet) said, ‘My eyes sleep but my heart does not sleep.’ He said, ‘You said the truth; now tell me (why) a child resembles his father and has no resemblance with his mother at all, or resembles his mother without having any resemblance to his father.’ He said, ‘The water of whichever of the parents tops that of the other, his or her resemblance will prevail.’ He said, ‘You said the truth; now tell me which parts of the child belong to the man and which to the woman?’” (The Imam), said, “Then the Messenger of God went into trance for a long time; then he came out of it, with ruddy face and pouring sweat; and he said, ‘Flesh, blood, nail and fat belong to the woman, and bone, sinew and veins belong to the man.’ He said, ‘You said the truth; your affairs are those of a prophet.’

“So Ibn Sūriyā accepted Islam at this stage. And he said, ‘O Muḥammad! Which of the angels comes to you?’ He said, ‘Gabriel. He said, ‘Describe his attributes to me; and the Prophet described it.’ He said, ‘I bear witness that he is in Torah as you have said and that you are truly the Messenger of God.’

“When Ibn Sūriyā accepted Islam, the Jews quarrelled with him and abused him.

“When they wanted to leave, Banū Qurayzah caught the hold of Banu al-Nadīr and said, ‘O Muḥammad! (These are) our brothers, Banu al-Nadīr, our father is one, and our religion is one, and our prophet is one. When they slay one of us, (the slain one) is not avenged [that is, his killer is not killed], rather they give us his blood money seventy wasaq of date; and when we slay one of them, they kill the killer and take from us double the amount, one hundred and forty wasaq of date. If the slain one is a woman, they kill (in her retaliation) one of our men, and (they kill) two of our men in place of their one man, and one of our free men in place of their slave; and our wounds are recompensed at half of their wounds. Therefore, you judge between them and us. So, God revealed the verse about stoning and retaliation.’”

Author’s comments: al-Tabrisī has also narrated in Majmaʾ al-bayān, through a group of exegetes, in addition to his narration from al-Bāqir. Also, there are traditions in Sunnī tafsīrs and collections of ahādīth, somewhat nearer to the beginning of the above story, narrated through several chains from Abū Hurayrah, Barāʾ b. ʿÃzib, ʿAbdullāh b. ʿUmar, Ibn ʿAbbās and others. The traditions are nearer in meaning to each other. The end part of the tradition has been narrated in al-Durr al-manthūr from ʿAbd b. Hamīd and Abu al-Shaykh from Qatādah, and from Ibn Jarīr, Ibn Ishāq, al-Tabarānī, Ibn

Abī Shaybah, Ibn al-Mundhir and others from Ibn ʿAbbās.

As for the confirmation (in the tradition) by Ibn Sūriyā that the order of stoning was found in the Torah, and that it was the meaning of the verse: And how do they make you a judge and they have the Torah, it is also supported by the fact that nearly similar order is found in the Torah which is prevalent among them, as may be seen in the Deuteronomy, ch. 22, vs. 22–24:

If a man be found lying with a woman married to a husband, then they shall both of them die, both the man that lay with the woman, and the woman: so shalt thou put away evil from Israel.

If a damsel that is a virgin be betrothed unto an husband, and a man find her in the city, and lay with her;

Then ye shall bring them both out unto the gate of that city, and ye shall stone them with stones that they die; the damsel, because she cried not, being in the city; and the man, because he hath humbled his neighbor’s wife: so thou shalt put away evil from among you.

As you have seen, this reserves stoning for some eventualities. As for the report in the tradition that they had also asked the Messenger of God about the law of blood money, apart from their question regarding the law of adultery, it has been written earlier that the verses are not without some support to it. As for the order of retaliation of slaying and wounding which the verse says was prescribed in the Torah, this too is found in the present Torah, as may be seen in Exodus, ch. 21, vs. 12-13 & 23-25:

(12) He that smiteth a man, so that he die, shall be surely put to death.

(13) And if a man lie not in wait, but God deliver him into his hand; then I will appoint thee a place whither he shall flee.

(23) And if any mischief follow, then thou shalt give life for life,

(24) Eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot,

(25) Burning for burning, wound for wound, stripe for stripe.

Further, the Leviticus, ch. 24, vs. 17–20, says:

(17) And he that killeth any man shall surely be put to death.

(18) And he that killeth a beast shall make it good; beast for beast.

(19) And if a man causes a blemish in his neighbor; as he hath done, so shall it be done to him;

(20) Breach for breach, eye for eye, tooth for tooth: as he hath caused a blemish in a man, so shall it be done to him again.

2. al-Suyūtī narrates through Ahmad, Abū Dāwūd, Ibn Jarīr, Ibn al-Mundhir, al-Tabarānī, Abu al-Shaykh and Ibn Marduwayh from Ibn ʿAbbās that he said, “Surely God revealed: and whoever did not judge by what Allah revealed, those are they that are the unbelievers. ... that are the unjust. ... that are the transgressors. He revealed it about two groups of the Jews, one of them subdued the other in the Era of Ignorance, until they reconciliated and made peace (on the condition) that if the mighty group slew someone of the weaker group, his blood money should be fifty wasaq, and if the weaker one slew a member of the mighty group, his blood money should be a hundred wasaq. This continued until the Messenger of God came to Medina. The two groups came down to welcome the Messenger of God, and he had not over-powered them yet. Then the weaker group stood up and said, ‘Was there ever such a thing between two tribes? Their religion is one, their lineage is one and their town is one and (yet) blood money of one is half of that of the other? Certainly, we had given it to you only because of the injustice you did to us and in fear of you. But now that Muḥammad has arrived, we shall not give in to you.’ War was almost to erupt between them, and then they agreed to make the Messenger of God (Arbitrator) between them. Then the mighty group thought it over and said, ‘By God! Muḥammad is not going to give you from them the double of what he would give them from you;’ and they have truly said that they had not given it to us but because of (our) injustice and coercion to them. So, they engaged in secret intrigue against the Messenger of God. God informed His Messenger of all their affairs and what they wanted. Then God revealed: O Messenger! Let not those grieve you who strive together ... and most surely many of the people are transgressors.” []

Then he said, “By God! It was revealed about them.” (al-Durr al-manthūr)

Author’s comments: al-Qummī has narrated this story inter alia in a lengthy tradition in his al-Tafsīr; and it says that it was ʿAbdullāh b. Ubayy who talked on behalf of Banu al-Nadīr—and it was the mighty one—and tried to frighten the Messenger of God of them, and that it was he who had said: If you are given this, take it, and if you are not given this, be cautious.

But the first tradition is truer in text, because its meaning is more in conformity with the context of the verses; the first parts of the verses—particularly the first two—do not fit the story of the blood money between Banu al-Nadīr and Banū Qurayzah, as is not hidden from a person who recognizes the literary styles. It is not unlikely that it is an attempt to apply the story to the Qur’an, as is the case with a lot of traditions purporting to describe the reason of revelation of verses. It is as though the narrator found this story applicable to the verse: And We prescribed to them in it that life is for life, and preceding ones; then he found that the verses are connected with one another beginning from: O Messenger! Let not those grieve you who strive together ... so he took all these verses as revealed in this story, and became oblivious of the story of stoning. And God knows better.

3. Sulaymān b. Khālid said, “I heard Abū ʿAbdillāh, saying, ‘When God intends good for a servant, He scratches up a white spot in his heart, and deputes to him an angel who keeps him on right (path); and when He intends evil for a servant, He scratches up a black spot in his heart, and closes the hearing of his heart, and deputes to him a Satan who leads him astray.’ Then he recited this verse: Therefore (for) whomsoever Allah intends that He would guide him aright, He expands his breast for Islam; and (for) whosoever He intends that He should leave him to err, He makes his breast strait and narrow as though he were ascending into the sky ... [].

Then he said: Surely those against whom the word of your Lord has proved true will not believe []; and he said: ... Those are they for whom Allah does not desire that He should purify their hearts; ... [].” (al-Tafsīr, al-ʿAyyāshī)

4. [al-Kulaynī] narrates through his chain from al-Sakūnī that Abū ʿAbdillāh said, “al-Suht (forbidden) is the price of dead body, and price of dog, and dowry for fornication, and bribe in judgement and wage of al-kāhin (fortune teller, soothsayer).” (al-Kāfī)

Author’s comments: The tradition describes a number of forbidden and unlawful earnings, without encompassing all such things. There are a lot of unlawful earnings as detailed in traditions. There are many traditions of this theme narrated from the Imams of Ahl al-Bayt.

5. ʿAbd b. Hamīd has narrated that ʿAlī b. Abī Tālib was asked about suht, he said, “Bribe.” It was said to him, “In judgement?” He said, “That is disbelief.” (al-Durr al-manthūr)

Author’s comments: “That is disbelief” points to what has come in the verses under discussion in condemnation of suht and taking bribe in judgement: and barter not My signs for a small price and whoever did not judge by what Allah revealed, those are they that are the unbelievers. Many traditions from al-Bāqir and al-Ṣādiq have repeatedly said that: ‘As for taking bribe in judgement, it is disbelief in God and His Messenger.’ There are numerous traditions in exegesis of suht and its prohibition, narrated through Shīʾah and Sunnī chains and recorded in their collections of ahādīth.

6. Ibn Abī Hātim, al-Nahhās (in his al-Nāsikh wa al-mansūkh), al-Tabarānī, al-Hākim (saying that it was correct), Ibn Marduwayh and al-Bayhaqī (in his al-Sunan al-kubrā) have narrated from Ibn ʿAbbās that he said, “Two verses of this chapter—that is, ‘The Table’—were abrogated: the verse of al-qalāid (sacrificial animals with symbolic garlands) and: therefore if they come to you, judge between them or turn aside from them. Thus the Messenger of God had option, if he wished he would judge between them and if he wished he would turn aside from them and return them to their laws. Then was revealed (the verse): And that you should judge between them by what Allah has revealed, and do not follow their low desires.” (Ibn ʿAbbās) said, “So the Messenger of God was ordered to judge between then according to our Book.” (al-Durr al-manthūr)
7. Abū ʿUbayd, Ibn al-Mundhir and Ibn Marduwayh have narrated from Ibn ʿAbbās that he said about the verse: judge between them or turn aside from them, that it was abrogated by the verse: And that you should judge between them by what Allah has revealed. (ibid.)

Author’s comments: al-Suyūtī has also narrated it through ʿAbdu al-Razzāq from ʿIkrimah. However, the theme of the verses does not agree with this claim of abrogation. The clear context of the verses shows them to be interlinked and proves that they were revealed all together. As such there is no sense in saying that some of its verses have abrogated some others. Moreover, the verse: And that you should judge between them by what Allah has revealed, is not independent in its meaning; it is connected with the preceding verses; therefore there is no reason to treat it as an abrogating one. (However, if abrogation is OK with all these difficulties, then the clause: therefore judge between them by what Allah has revealed, in the preceding verse, has more right to be treated as abrogating.) Apart from that, you have seen that the pronoun, them, in, judge between them, more manifestly refers to the people in general, rather than the People of the Book or particularly the Jews. Moreover, we have described in the beginning of this chapter that the chapter of “The Table” is abrogating, and not abrogated.

8. Abū ʿAmr al-Zubayrī narrates from Abū ʿAbdillāh that he said, “Surely the things because of which one deserves Imamah are: Purification, cleanliness from sins and grave offences which make one liable to the hell; then enlightened—and another copy says, (hidden) knowledge of all that the ummah needs, its halāl and harām, knowledge of its Book, its particular and general, decisive and ambiguous, intricacies of its knowledge and marvels of its interpretation, its abrogating and abrogated.”

“I said, ‘What is the proof that Imam cannot be except he who has the knowledge of these things you have mentioned?’ He said, ‘The word of God regarding those whom He has given permission to rule and made them deserving to it: Surely We sent down the Torah in which was guidance and light; with it the prophets who submitted themselves (to Allah) were judging (matters) for those who were Jews, and (so did) the Divines and the scholars, So these are the Imams, below the prophets, who raised up the people by their knowledge; and as for al-ahbār, they are the scholars, below the Divines; then God gave information and said: as they were required to guard (part) of the Book of Allah; and He did not say, they were put under the burden of the Book.’” (al-Tafsīr, al-ʿAyyāshī)

Author’s comments: It is a very fine argument presented by the Imam; it shows a wonderful connotation of the verse, finer than the previously given explanation: It describes that the sequence used in the verse—the prophets, then the Divines, then the scholars—points to their descending ranks in excellence and perfection; thus the Divines are below the prophets and above the scholars, and the scholars are those men of religious erudition who have been entrusted with its knowledge through teaching and learning.

God has described the mode of the Divines’ knowledge in these words: as they were required to guard (part) of the Book of Allah, and they were witnesses thereof. If the idea were to show its similarity to the scholars’ knowledge, it would have been said, as they were placed under it, as God says: The similitude of those who were placed under the Torah, then they did not hold it ... (). It is because al-istihfāz means to ask someone to guard; it implies obligating him to guard and protect; it is similar to the words of God: That He may question the truthful of their truth, ... (), that is, that He may obligate them to display the attribute of truthfulness that is hidden in their souls.

This guarding of the Book and its witnessing cannot be complete without ʿismah (sinlessness) which God does not grant to non-maʾsūms. ʿIsmah’s essentiality is understood from the fact that God has based His permission to them to judge on their guarding of the Book, and has given credence to their witnessing based on the same; and it is impossible to give credence to their witnessing if there were any possibility of their falling into error or committing any mistake—because it is on their testimony that the Book is confirmed.

So, this guarding and witnessing is something quite different from the protection and the testimony, which we are familiar with, in our society. Rather it is of the type of the protection of deeds and witnessing that has been mentioned in the verse: ... that you may be the witnesses for the people and (that) the Messenger may be a witness for you ... (). Its explanation was given in the first volume of the Book.

This guarding and witnessing is ascribed to all, although only some of them were going to do it, in the same way as witnessing of deeds has been ascribed to the whole ummah, although only a few shall do it. Such usage is common in the Qur’an; e.g. God says: And certainly We gave the Book and the Wisdom and the Prophecy to the Children of Israel ... (). Of course, the scholars too were given the responsibility of guarding and witnessing and covenant was taken to that effect from them too. But it was only a subjective religious affirmation, quite apart from real affirmation that depends on real guarding, free from mistake and error; and divine religion cannot be complete without this as it cannot be without that.

It is now established that there is a position between those of the prophets and the scholars, and it is the position of the Imams. God has told us about it in His word: And We made of them Imams to guide by Our command as they were patient, and they were certain of our signs (). It does not go against the verses, which say: And We gave him Isaac, and Jacob, as a further gift, and We made(them) all good ones. And We made them Imams, to guide (people) by Our command, ... (). It is because joining of prophethood and Imamate in a group does not prevent separation of the two positions in others. Some details about Imamate have been given in the first volume under the divine words: And (remember) when his Lord tried Abraham with certain words, ... ().

In short, the divines and Imams, who hold the middle rank between the prophets and the scholars, do have the knowledge of the Book as it should be known, and do bear witness thereof as it should be done.

The verse speaks about the divines and Imams of the Children of Israel. But the verse shows that it was because Torah was a Book revealed by God which contained guidance and light, that is, matters of belief and deed required of the ummah; and if that demanded this guarding and witnessing which can only be done by the divines and Imams, then the same will apply to every Book revealed by God which contained divine gnosis and practical laws. And this proves our intended purpose.

Therefore, the Imam’s words, ‘so these are the Imams below prophets’, mean that the Imams’ rank is below that of the prophets, according to the sequence given in the verse; likewise, the scholars are below the Imams. The words, they bring up the people with their knowledge, make it clear that the Imam has taken the word, al-rabbānī as being derived from al-Tarbiyah (to bring up) and not from al-rububiyyah (lordship). The meanings of other clauses are clear from earlier explanation.

Perhaps this meaning was intended by al-Bāqir when he said that the verse: Surely We sent down the Torah in which was guidance and light ... required to guard (part) of the Book of Allah ..., was revealed about the Imams of Ahl al-Bayt. Mālik al-Juhanī narrates that Abū Jaʾfar said about the above verse, “About us was it revealed.” (al-Tafsīr, al-ʿAyyāshī)

9. Tafsīr al-burhān writes under the verse: and whoever did not judge by what Allah revealed, those are they that are the unbelievers, that [al-Kulaynī] narrates through his chain from ʿAbdullāh b. Muskān that he said, “The Messenger of God, said,

‘Whoever judged about two dirhams a judgement of injustice, then enforced it by coercion, he shall be from among the people of this verse: and whoever did not judge by what Allah revealed, those are they that are the unbelievers.’ I said, ‘And how does he coerce in this matter?’ He said, ‘He will be having whip and prison; so he gives judgement against someone; then if he agreed to his judgement, (well and good); otherwise, he would beat him with his whip and put him in prison.’”

Author’s comments: al-Shaykh has narrated it in al-Tahdhīb through his chain from Ibn Muskān, from the Prophet; and al-ʿAyyāshī has narrated it in his al-Tafsīr from him. The beginning of the hadīth is narrated through other chains too from the Imams of Ahl al-Bayt.

In this tradition, the judgement is made conditional on coercion. It implies that the judgement should be of such a nature as would produce an affect; it would be a decree, which by its very nature would show some definite result. Otherwise, mere utterance is not called judgement.

10. Saʾīd b. Mansūr, Abu al-Shaykh and Ibn Marduwayh have narrated from Ibn ʿAbbās that he said: and whoever did not judge by what Allah revealed, those are they that are the unbelievers, ... that are the unjust, ... that are the transgressors, (were revealed) especially about the Jews. (al-Durr al-manthūr)

Author’s comments: The three verses are unrestricted and there is no cause to justify their restriction; place of application does not permit change in word’s generality. Apart from that, the third verse is related to the Christians, not the Jews. Moreover, a contrary tradition is narrated from the same Ibn ʿAbbās.

11. ʿAbd b. Hamīd narrates from Hakīm b. Jubayr that he said, “I asked Saʾīd b. Jubayr about these verses of ‘The Table’; I told (him) that a group thinks that they were revealed to the Children of Israel, and not to us. He said, ‘Recite what is before it and what is after it,’ so I recited them before him. So he said, ‘No; but it was revealed to us.’ Then I met Muqassim, mawlā of Ibn ʿAbbās; and I asked him about these verses in ‘The Table’; I told (him) that a group thinks that they were revealed to the Children of Israel, and not to us. He said, ‘It was revealed to the Children of Israel and revealed to us, and whatever was revealed to them and to us, it is for them and for us.’

“Then I went to ʿAlī b. al-Husayn, and asked him about these verses in ‘The Table’; and I told him that I had asked Saʾīd b. Jubayr and Muqassim about them. He (the Imam) said, ‘Then what did Muqassim say?’ So I informed him of it.” (Hakīm) said, “The Imam said, ‘He has said truth; but it is an unbelief, not like the unbelief of polytheism; and a transgression, not like the transgression of polytheism; and an injustice, not like the injustice of polytheism.’ Then I met Saʾīd b. Jubayr and informed him of what he (the Imam) had said. Saʾīd b. Jubayr said to his son, ‘How did you find him?’ [He said], ‘Indeed I found for him excellence over you and Muqassim.” (ibid.)

Author’s comments: The earlier given commentary shows that the tradition fits the apparent meaning of the verse.

12. al-Kulaynī narrates in al-Kafī through his chain from al-Halabī from Abū ʿAbdillāh; and al-ʿAyyāshī narrates in his al-Tafsīr from Abū Basīr from the same Imam that he said about the verse: but he who foregoes it, it shall be an expiation for him; “Shall be expiated from his sins as much as he will forego of his wound or other things.”
13. Ibn Marduwayh has narrated from a man from the Helpers that the Prophet said regarding the words of God: but he who foregoes it, it shall be an expiation for him. “A man, his tooth is broken, or his hand is cut, or any organ of his body is cut or wounded, and he foregoes it, so (similar) quantity of his faults is reduced from him. If it was one-fourth of blood-money, then one-fourth of his faults, and if it was one-third, then one-third of his faults; and if it was (full) blood-money (all) his faults will fall down from him in similar way.” (al-Durr al-manthūr)

Author’s comments: A similar tradition has been narrated by ad-Daylamī from Ibn ʿUmar. Probably, what this and the preceding traditions say that the expiation is divided according to the division of foregoing, is inferred from the fact that in the shariah, blood-money, which is divisible, has the same position as retaliation; then retaliation and blood-money together are weighed vis-à-vis expiation of sins, and this too is divisible. Therefore part of it would stand opposite to part of that, as the whole stands opposite to the whole.

14. al-Qummī narrates in his al-Tafsīr, under the verse: for every one of you did We appoint a law and a way, that he said: “For every prophet was a shariah and a way.”
15. Tafsīr al-burhān writes under the verse: Is it then the judgement of (the times of) ignorance that they desire?, that [al-Kulaynī] narrates through his chain from Ahmad b. Muḥammad b. Khālid from his father from Abū ʿAbdillāh that he said, “Judges are four (types), three are in the Fire and one is in the Garden; a man judges unjustly and knowingly, so he is in the Fire; and a man judges unjustly and he does not know, so he is in the Fire; and a man judges justly but he does not know, so he is in the Fire; and a man judges justly and he knows, so he is in the Garden.”

And he said, “Judgements are (of) two (categories): Judgement of God and judgement of (the Era of) Ignorance; so whoever misses the judgement of God, judges according to the (Era of) Ignorance.”

Author’s comments: There are many traditions of these two themes from the Shīʾah and Sunnī chains, recorded under the chapters of judgement and evidence. The verse hints at, rather clearly denotes both meanings. As for the first meaning, it is because judging unjustly whether he knew it to be unjust, or judged without knowledge and it chanced to be unjust—and likewise judging justly but without knowing it, all this is following the low desire, and God has forbidden it in His words: therefore judge between them by what Allah has revealed, and do not follow their low desires (diverging) from the truth that has come to you. In this verse, God warned against following low desires and has put it parallel to the judgement by the revealed truth. It is understood from it that permission of judgement is conditional on knowledge of truth; otherwise giving judgement is not allowed because it is merely following the low desires. Moreover, the name, judgement of the Era of Ignorance, is applicable to it, which stands face to face with the judgement of God.

As for the second theme, that is, the division of judgement between that of God and that of the Era of Ignorance, it is inferred from the apparent meaning of the words of God: Is it then the judgement of (the times of) ignorance that they desire? And who is better than Allah to judge ...? See how the two judgements stand opposite each other.

16. al-Tabarī has narrated in his al-Tafsīr from Qatādah, under the verse: Surely We sent down the Torah in which was guidance and light; with it the prophets who submitted themselves (to Allah) were judging (matters) for those who were Jews, and (so did) the Divines and the scholars, that he said, “As for the Divines, they were jurisprudents of the Jews; and as for the ahbār, they were their scholars.” He (also) said, “And it has been reported to us that the Prophet of God said, when this verse was revealed, “We do judge the Jews and the others from people of (other) religions.”

Author’s comments: al-Suyūtī too has narrated it under the same verse through ʿAbd b. Hamīd and through Ibn Jarīr from Qatādah.

This tradition apparently shows that the reported utterance of the Prophet is related to this verse, that is, the verse is the proof of this statement. But the difficulty is that the said verse proves only that the judgement was based on the Torah and was reserved for the Jews because it contains the word: for these who were Jews; it did not extend to non-Jews, or to judging by other than Torah, contrary to what appears from the tradition. It could be said that the Prophet’s word, “We do judge,” means that the prophets do so; but it is a ridiculous meaning and has no relevance to the verse.

However, it appears that one of the narrators has erred in quoting the verse, and that the Prophet had spoken those words after revelation of the verse: And We have revealed to you the Book with the truth, ... therefore judge between them by what Allah has revealed and do not follow their low desires This hypothesis fits on what has earlier been mentioned that apparently the pronoun in, judge between them, refers to the people and not particularly to the Jews. However, the narrator has quoted one verse () in place of the other ().

---

1. For a concise, yet informative, discourse on compilation of Torah and Gospel see the translator’s book, The Qur’an and Hadīth, available from Bilal Muslim Mission, Dar-es-Salaam, Tanzania. (Trans.) ↩︎

2. Readers should note that in other volumes, we have translated Injeel as “The Evangel”. Nevertheless both terms refer to the Book given to Prophet Jesus. (Pub.) ↩︎

3. In fact, there is no repetition at all. The first clause: And We sent ... Jesus ..., verifying what was before him, is an attribute of Jesus, while this second one describes Gospel’s position. (Trans.) ↩︎

4. A weight (Trans.) ↩︎

5. These quotations as well as all others from the Old and New Testaments throughout various volumes of the English al-Mīzān have been taken from the Authorized (King James) Version of the Holy Bible. (Trans.) ↩︎

6. al-Mīzān (Eng.), vol. 2. (Trans.) ↩︎

7. al-Mīzān (Eng.), vol. 2. (Trans.) ↩︎