Appearance
Verses 90–93
The verses are in conformity with each other in context; probably they all were revealed together or at short intervals. The last verse aims at removing a possible misunderstanding, as we shall describe. All this deals with the topic of intoxicants, although one adds to it the games of chance; and the other, games of chance and sacrificing to set up stones and dividing by arrows.
It has been mentioned earlier in volume two of the book under the verse: They ask you about intoxicants and games of chance. Say: “In both of them there is a great sin and (some) profit for men; and their sin is greater than their profit.” (); and in volume four under the verse: O you who believe! Do not go near prayer when you are intoxicated until you know (well) what you say, (), that these two verses together with the verse: Say: “My Lord has only prohibited indecencies, those of them that are apparent as well as those that are concealed, and sin … (), and the verses under discussion, that is,: O you who believe! Intoxicants and games of chance and (sacrificing to) stones set up and (dividing by) arrows are only an abomination of the Satan’s handiwork; shun it therefore that you may be successful. The Satan only desires to cause enmity and hatred to spring in your midst by means of intoxicants and games of chance, and to keep you off from the remembrance of Allah and from prayer. Will you then desist? If these verses are studied together, their diverse context shows that the Legislator had adopted a course of gradual progression in prohibition of intoxicants.
By gradual progression we do not mean that He had gone step by step; that it began with aversion and loathing, then displeasure, and finally ended at clear prohibition; giving an example of abrogation. Nor do we say that it had progressed from vague description to clear declaration, or from secret allusion to clear statement because of the religious policy in enforcement of the laws of sharīʾah. Such ideas are untenable because the verse had clearly prohibited ‘sin’, and it was in a Meccan chapter; then came the verse that in them there is a great sin (), and it is in the chapter of “The Cow” which was the first detailed chapter revealed at Medina. When these two verses are studied in conjunction, they clearly show the prohibition of intoxicants without leaving any room for any excuse or reinterpretation.
The gradual progression mentioned above, in fact, means that the Qur’an first forbade the intoxicants in a general context, and it was when it described it as a sin. Then it went ahead by prohibiting it in particular in the form of advice and admonition; this method was used in the verses: Say: “In both of them there is a great sin and some profit for men; and their sin is greater than their profit”; and, do not go near prayer when you are intoxicated until you know (well) what you say (if this verse had spoken about intoxication of liquor, and not of sleep). Finally, there came the prohibition of intoxicants in particular conjoined with the most emphatic intensity which is seen in the verses under discussion: O you who believe! Intoxicants and games of chance and (sacrificing to) stones set up and (dividing by) arrows are only an abomination of the Satan’s handiwork; shun it therefore that you may be successful. The Satan only desires to cause enmity and hatred to spring in your midst by means of intoxicants and games of chance, and to keep you off from the remembrance of Allah and from prayer. Will you then desist?
These verses were the last to be revealed concerning the intoxicants. We may easily see as to how many devices of emphasis have been used in them: They begin with innamā (but only); then name it “an abomination” and ascribe it to the Satan’s handiwork; then give an unambiguous order to shun it and give the hope that by shunning it “you may be successful”; then it elaborates the evil consequences of taking intoxicants, and asks them whether they would desist. This is followed by the order of obeying God and His Messenger and warning them to be cautious, implying that God and His Messenger have no need of them if they disobey their laws. The last verse of this piece (There is no blame on those who ) also hints to this connotation, as we shall explain later.
يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا إِنَّمَا الْخَمْرُ وَالْمَيْسِرُ وَالْأَنْصَابُ وَالْأَزْلَامُ رِجْسٌ مِنْ عَمَلِ الشَّيْطَانِ فَاجْتَنِبُوهُ لَعَلَّكُمْ تُفْلِحُونَ ٩٠
(5:90) O you who believe! Intoxicants and games of chance and (sacrificing to) stones set up and (dividing by) arrows are only an abomination of the Satan’s handiwork; shun it therefore that you may be successful.
The meanings of intoxicant, games of chance, sacrificing to set up stones and dividing by arrows have been explained in the beginning of this chapter. al-Khamr is every intoxicating fermented liquid, which covers the reason. al-Maysir is gambling of any type. al-Anṣāb means the idols or stones which were set up for slaughtering the sacrificial animals upon, and which were held in esteem and considered a source of blessings. al-Azlām were the arrows used for division of a camel’s shares; often this name was given to the arrows used for omen before beginning an important work like journey, etc. But this word has been used in the chapter’s beginning for the former meaning (because it is included among the things unlawful to eat); therefore, it has the same meaning in this verse too.
Objection: Games of chance in its general meaning includes the former meaning of al-azlām, that is, division by arrows; and there is no reason to mention a particular after the general without any apparent cause. Therefore, the only alternative would be to interpret al-azlām as the arrows of oracle, which was common feature in the Era of Ignorance. A poet had said:
If the tribe of Judhaymah have killed their (own) chiefs, So their women hit with arrows.
Reportedly, the method of oracle-seeking through arrows was like this: They used to take three slim arrow like pieces of wood; on one was written, ‘Do’; on another was written, ‘Don’t do’; and the third was left blank; all three were put in a small bag, and all were similar (in size, etc.). When a man wanted to begin any important work, like a journey, etc., he took out one arrow; if it was the one with ‘Do’, he determined to do it; if the arrow was the one with ‘Don’t do’, the idea was abandoned; if the blank arrow came out, the process was repeated—until one of the written arrows came out. This method was called istiqsām (to seek a share), that is, what is in his fate like sustenance or some other good things. The verse proves its unlawfulness because it contains the claim of the knowledge of future. The same is the position of similar other things like istikhārah by rosary and so on.
Reply: You have seen that the clause: (Forbidden to you is) … that you divide by the arrows, which has come at the beginning of the chapter (verse 3), manifestly speaks about prohibition of dividing the meat of an animal by using the arrows, which was a sort of gambling, because it is included among the unlawful food; and it supports the view that in this verse too ‘arrows’ has the same connotation.
However, if we admit that this verse has no connection with the verse 3, then the word ‘arrows’ will be having more than one meaning, and it will need an association for pinpointing its intended meaning; in sort, its interpretation will depend on traditions. And there are numerous traditions narrated from the Imams of Ahl al-Bayt which allow seeking divine guidance through rosary, etc. when one feels really perplexed.
What is istikhārah? When man intends to embark on an important work, it is possible for him to know of its appropriateness, by using the power of thought which God has given him, or by seeking the advice of those who have the ability to distinguish between right and wrong. However, if these two methods fail to make him recognize the correct way, and he is still bewildered, then he should choose his course of action after paying some attention to his Lord, and seeking His help.
When man chooses what he chooses through this type of seeking good, or istikhārah, he cannot be accused of claiming to know the unseen; nor does he meddle with the divine affairs, which are exclusively reserved with God. It does not involve allowing someone other than God to join with Him in management of affairs, nor it entails any other religious problem. Because the only function of istikhārah is to decide positively or negatively about a course of action without making it obligatory or unlawful or giving it any other shade of religious responsibility. Also, it does not claim to unveil the good or the evil that is hidden behind the curtains of the unseen. It only shows what is better for the man concerned whether he should or should not do that work; in this way he comes out of bewilderment and hesitation (with a firm resolve.)
As for what follows that action or non-action, it may turn out to be good and it may equally result in evil—in the same way as it happens when a man opts for a course of action by his own thinking or by someone’s advice. Thus, istikhārah, like one’s own thinking or well-wishers’ advice, is merely a way to remove hesitation or confusion while taking a practical step; and the result of acting upon it is not different from that of an action done by one’s own meditation or by someone’s advice.
Of course, someone may think looking at the traditions about seeking good omens from the Qur’an, etc., that it entails a sort of a claim of the knowledge of the unseen; because often the soul expects from it good or bad result, or benefit or harm. But it has been narrated in correct ḥadīth, through the chains of both sects that the Prophet sought good omen by good things and ordered it, and forbade (to believe in) ill omen and ordered to pass over it and rely on God.
Therefore, there is nothing to prevent seeking omen from the Qur’an, etc.; if the result of that omen seeking is good, it is OK. Otherwise, he should proceed ahead in that affair relying on God, the High. Its ultimate effect is to create satisfaction in mind about the affairs and actions, which he believes, would bring happiness and benefit to him. We shall write on this topic in detail in a place devoted to it particularly.
Now, it is clear that some exegetes are totally wrong when they have taken the ‘arrows’ as referring to their practice of oracle seeking; and then arriving at the conclusion that istikhārah was unlawful.
As for the clause: an abomination of the satan’s handiwork: al-Rijs (abomination) is dirty thing as al-Rāghib has said in his al-Mufradāt; so al-Rajāsah like al-Najāsah and al-qadhārah is that factor because of which one keeps away and refrains from a thing as the nature distastes it.
The items enumerated in the verse—intoxicants, games of chance, sacrificing to set up stones and dividing by arrows—are described as abominations because they have such a characteristic which the human nature is repulsed with and does not like to go near it. And that characteristic is its being devoid of all such things that contain human happiness—the happiness which sometimes appears in its pure form, which is probably alluded to in the divine words: they ask you about intoxicants and games of chance. Say: “In both of them there is a great sin and (some) profit for men; and their sin is greater than their profit” (). Note how sin is given dominance over profit without exception.
Probably, that is the reason why these abominations have been ascribed to the Satan’s handiwork alone without joining him to others. Then He says in the next verse: The Satan only desires to cause enmity and hatred to spring in your midst by means of intoxicants and games of chance, and to keep you off from remembrance of Allah and from prayer.
It is because God has clearly described the Satan as the enemy of man who never wants any good to reach to man. He says: surely the Satan is an open enemy to man (). Against him it is written down that whoever takes him for a friend, he shall lead him astray … (); … and they do not call on anything but a rebellious Satan; Allah has cursed him; … (4:117–8) In these verses God has confirmed His curse on the Satan and has removed him away from every good.
Also, He has mentioned that the Satan’s contact with man and the extent of his action about him is only through seduction, temptation and enticement by putting ideas in his mind; as God quotes him as saying: He said: “My Lord! Because thou hast left me to stray, I will certainly make (evil) fair seeming to them on earth, and I will certainly cause them all to deviate, except Thy servants from among them, the freed ones.” He said: “This is a straight path with Me: Surely as regards My servants, thou hast no authority over them except those who follow thee of the deviators.” (). It should be noted that the Satan had threatened only to cause them to deviate, and God negated the Satan’s authority except on his followers from among the deviators. Again, God quotes him as speaking to the children of Adam on the Day of Resurrection: … and I had no authority over you, except that I called you and you answered my call, … (). And God describes the Satan’s call in these words: O children of Adam! Let not the Satan cause you to fall into affliction as he got your parents out from the garden, … he surely sees you, he as well as his host, from whence you cannot see them; … (). It means that his call is not like men calling someone being face to face with each other; but the Satan calls men while he sees them but not vice versa.
This topic has been clarified in the chapter 114, where it says: From the evil of the whisperings of the slinking Satan, who whispers into the hearts of men, from among the jinn and the men (4–6). Thus, God makes it clear that the Satan’s dealings with man are based on his creating ideas in man’s heart, and in this way he calls him to error.
All this shows that when intoxicants and other items are called abominations of the Satan’s handiwork, it is because these items are ultimately based on the Satan’s action which is exclusively related to him; and his modus operandi is creating ideas in man’s heart—the Satanic whispering that calls him to error. That is why it is called abomination or uncleanness; God has called error as uncleanness, as He says: … and (for) whomsoever He intends that He should leave him to err, He makes his breast strait and narrow as though he were ascending into the sky; thus does Allah lay uncleanness on those who do not believe ().
What is the connotation of intoxicants and other items being an abomination of the Satan’s handiwork? The next verse clarifies it: The Satan only desires to cause enmity and hatred to spring in your midst by means of intoxicants and games of chance, and to keep you off from the remembrance of Allah and from prayer. That is, the Satan’s motive in calling you to intoxicants and games of chance is nothing except evil; thus it is an abomination of his handiwork.
Objection: The sum total of the above explanation is that the intoxicants and other items mentioned therein are abominations only because making it, drinking it (or using it) ultimately returns to the satanic temptation. But several traditions prove that it was the Satan himself who appeared before man and made liquor for the first time and taught him how to make it.
Reply: Yes. Although these traditions are merely solitary and as such it is not incumbent on us to accept them; yet there are many and diversified traditions, narrated under different chapters, which show that the Satan took shape and appeared before many prophets and friends of God and even before some other men. Also, there are reports about the angels appearing before them. There are still other narrations showing that the world and the deeds take (human or other) shapes; and so on. The divine Book too supports this view to some extent, as God says: then We sent to her Our spirit, and so he appeared to her as a well-made man (). We shall fully discuss this topic, God willing, in the exegesis of the chapter 17, under the verse: Glory be to Him Who made His servant to go on a night (vr.1), or in some other appropriate place.
It should be understood that if a report or story appears in one or more traditions, it does not have the authority to change the apparent connotation of a Qur’anic verse, especially when it is supported by other verses. The verses clearly show that the Satan has no more authority on man than creating ideas in his mind. Even if he appeared in physical form before a man and made something or taught him to make it, the net result was no more than seduction and temptation in his mind or imparting some information and knowledge. You should wait for the coming elaborate discussion.
“Shun it therefore that you may be successful”: It lays down the prohibition in unambiguous words, after describing its evil effects; this style has more impact on the souls. Then is expressed the hope of being successful if they would shun it. This gives intense emphasis to the prohibition, as it asserts that there would be no hope of success for those who would not refrain from these abominations.
إِنَّمَا يُرِيدُ الشَّيْطَانُ أَنْ يُوقِعَ بَيْنَكُمُ الْعَدَاوَةَ وَالْبَغْضَاءَ فِي الْخَمْرِ وَالْمَيْسِرِ وَيَصُدَّكُمْ عَنْ ذِكْرِ اللَّهِ وَعَنِ الصَّلَاةِ ۖ فَهَلْ أَنْتُمْ مُنْتَهُونَ ٩١
(5:91) The Satan only desires to cause enmity and hatred to spring in your midst by means of intoxicants and games of chance, and to keep you off from the remembrance of Allah and from prayer. Will you then desist?
al-Rāghib has said in his al-Mufradāt: “al-’Adw connotes overstepping, transgression and disharmony; sometimes it is related to heart, then it is called enmity and feud; at other times it is ascribed to walking, then it is called running; yet at other occasions it refers to lack of justice in dealings, then it means transgression and overstepping; God says: … lest exceeding the limits they should abuse Allah out of ignorance. (); at times it refers to parts of habitation, and then it is said, al-’adwā’, they say: a place having ‘adwā’, that is, whose parts are not in harmony with each other; from ‘enmity’ is derived ‘aduww so they say, enemy man, enemy nation; God says: … some of you being the enemies of others; … (). Its plural comes as ‘idayy and a’dā’; God says: And on the day that the enemies of Allah shall be brought together … ().”
al-Bughd (hatred) and al-baghḍā’ (intense hatred) are the opposite of love and to turn away. al-intihā’ is to obey a prohibition and is also the opposite of beginning (al-ibtida’).
As mentioned earlier, this verse aims at explaining the clause: the Satan’s handiwork, or an abomination of the Satan’s handiwork. It is the reality of these items being: the Satan’s handiwork, or an abomination of the Satan’s handiwork, that the only goal and purpose he wants to achieve from the intoxicants and the games of chance (which are abominations of his handiwork only) is to create enmity and hatred amongst you by making you transgress your limits and hate one another, as well as to divert your attention from the remembrance of God and from prayer, keeping you engaged in the intoxicants, games of chance, sacrificing to set up stones and dividing by arrows.
Only the intoxicants and the games of chance are singled out as causing enmity and hatred, because the two effects are their more apparent results. Look at liquor and intoxicants: Its use agitates nervous system in such a way that it covers and dominates the reason and brings up bigotry. If it incites anger, it lets the intoxicated person commit any felony, however serious and ugly it might be, which even beasts of pray do not do. If incites desire and lust, it makes to seem fair in his eyes all types of ugliness and debauchery, be it in his self, property or honor, in what he believes to be sacred and sanctified in religion or society, etc. He will commit theft and embezzlement, will not keep a secret, nor maintain the limit of a prohibited thing; in short he will indulge in affairs, which are destructive to humanity. Available data show that intoxicants have the lion’s share in various types of felonies and debaucheries in that society where drinking liquor is prevalent.
As for the games of chance, that is, gambling, it squanders in a short time all the endeavours a man had exercised for a long period in acquirement of wealth, property and status. Gambling throws the wealth away, and often it destroys honor, life, and prestige. If a gambler wins and gets wealth, it encourages him to abandon moderate way of life and indulge extravagantly in debauchery; he becomes indifferent towards earning his livelihood through lawful means. And if he loses, the loss of wealth and bitterness of defeat, leads to enmity and hatred towards the winner, and leaves irritation and grief in its wake.
Although these evil results do not manifest themselves so clearly to the simple minds in infrequent and rare cases for the first or second time, but the rare leads to dominant, the little pulls to numerous, and once becomes many times; and it does not take long for this evil to prevail in the society, and seep through all strata of the community; it thus turns into a barbaric free for all where unruly passions dominate and destructive desires rule.
All this shows that the exclusive particle innamā (only, but) in the verse: “The Satan only desires to cause enmity and hatred to spring in your midst by means of intoxicants and games of chance, and to keep you off from the remembrance of God and from prayer,” covers all the items enumerated earlier on the whole, yet prevention from the remembrance of God and from prayer is inflicted by all, and the enmity and hatred are especial effects of the intoxicants and games of chance by nature.
Although prayer is a kind of the remembrance of God, yet God has mentioned it separately in the clause: “and to keep you off from the remembrance of God and from prayer”; it shows how much importance the prayer has in the eyes of sharīʾah, because it is the perfect entity of the remembrance. The Prophet has said in a correct ḥadīth: ‘The prayer is the pillar of religion’; and the Qur’an in numerous verses shows its unparalleled significance, which no one can entertain any doubt about. For example: Successful indeed are the believers, who are humble in their prayers (); And (as for) those who hold fast by the Book and keep up prayer, surely We do not waste the reward of the good doers (); Surely man is created of a hasty temperament; being greatly grieved when evil afflicts him, and niggardly when good befalls him, except those who pray (); Recite that which has been revealed to you of the Book and keep up prayer; surely prayer keeps (one) away from indecency and evil, and certainly the remembrance of Allah is the greatest … (); … then hasten to the remembrance of Allah … (), (it refers to prayer); … and keep up prayer for My remembrance (); and there are many other such verses.
God, in this verse under discussion, has given precedence to His remembrance over prayer, because the remembrance is the only objective of the Divine Mission; it is the spirit of life in the body of servitude, and the basis of happiness in this world and the next. It may be seen in the words of God to Adam the first day He laid down the sharīʾah for him: He said: “Get down you two therefrom, all (of you), one of you (is) enemy to another. So if there comes to you guidance from Me, then whoever follows My guidance, he shall not go astray nor be unhappy. And whoever turns away from My remembrance, his shall surely be a straitened life, and We shall raise him, on the Day of Resurrection, blind” (20:123–4); And on the day when He shall gather them, and whatever they worshiped besides Allah, He shall say: “Was it you who led astray these my servants, or did they themselves go astray from the path?” They shall say: “Glory be to Thee! It was not beseeming for us that we should take any guardians besides Thee, but Thou didst make them and their fathers to enjoy until they forsook the remembrance, and they were a people in perdition.” (); Therefore turn aside from him who turns his back upon Our remembrance and does not desire anything but this world’s life. That is the (last) reach of their knowledge; … ().
Remembrance in the Qur’anic verses only connotes that which stands opposite to oblivion of the side of Lordship which brings in its wake oblivion of the side of servitude; and the servitude, the humble adoration, is that religious behavior which is the only path to bring good fortune and happiness to the soul. God says: And be not like those who forgot Allah, so He made them forget their own souls … ().
As for the end clause: “Will you then desist?” it is a reproving question, which indicates that the Muslims had somehow failed to desist from the prohibitions that had preceded this one. The verse: “The Satan only desires …” is a sort of explanation that explains the verse: They ask you about intoxicants and games of chance. Say: “In both of them there is a great sin and some profit for men; and their sin is greater than their profit” (). That is, their profit which is supposed to accompany the great sin is not of a type that could be separated at sometime from the sin or the greater sin; unlike the lie which contains sin and profit, and occasionally its profit may be separated from its sin, e.g., a lie spoken for removing misunderstanding between two persons.
It is because of the exclusive particle: “only”, in the verse: “The Satan only desires to cause enmity and hatred to spring in your midst by means of intoxicants and games of chance, and to keep you off from the remembrance of God and from prayer,” which comes after the words: only an abomination of the Satan’s handiwork. It means that it is nothing other than an abomination of the Satan’s handiwork, and the Satan’s only aim is to create enmity and hatred among you through the intoxicants and the games of chance, and to prevent you from the remembrance of God and from the prayer. In this framework, no situation can arise where these items’ profit could be separated from their sin. In no circumstances they could ever be supposed to be lawful. Understand it.
وَأَطِيعُوا اللَّهَ وَأَطِيعُوا الرَّسُولَ وَاحْذَرُوا ۚ فَإِنْ تَوَلَّيْتُمْ فَاعْلَمُوا أَنَّمَا عَلَىٰ رَسُولِنَا الْبَلَاغُ الْمُبِينُ ٩٢
(5:92) And obey Allah and obey the Messenger and be cautious; but if you turn back, then know that only a clear deliverance (of the message) is (incumbent) on Our Messenger.
The verse emphasizes the preceding command to abstain from these abominations. It does so by first ordering obedience to God, and He has the authority to lay down a law; then by ordering obedience to the Messenger, and he has the authority of implementation; and lastly by giving warning in clear words.
Then comes further emphasis in the words: “but if you turn back, then know that only a clear deliverance (of the message) is (incumbent) on Our Messenger.” This emphasis contains a serious warning, particularly as it begins with the word: “then know”; it has an allusion that if you turn back and indulge in these sins, probably you think that you are showing arrogance to the Prophet by going against his prohibition and that in this way you have defeated him; but you do not understand—or you have forgotten—that he is Our Messenger to you; he has no authority except a clear delivery of the message which is revealed to him and which he is ordered to deliver; actually you are only disputing with God in His Lordship.
It has been described in the beginning that these verses contain numerous modes of emphasizing the prohibition of these items. Look how it begins with the words: O you who believe! Then comes the exclusive particle, innamā (only), then its description as an abomination, then its ascription to the Satan’s handiwork, then the clear order to shun it; then the hope of success resulting from that shunning. Then comes the description of their general evil—enmity and hatred, averting from remembrance of God and from prayer. Then the rebuke at their indifference to desisting followed by the command to obey God and the Messenger, and the final warning in case of turning away after the clear deliverance.
لَيْسَ عَلَى الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا وَعَمِلُوا الصَّالِحَاتِ جُنَاحٌ فِيمَا طَعِمُوا إِذَا مَا اتَّقَوْا وَآمَنُوا وَعَمِلُوا الصَّالِحَاتِ ثُمَّ اتَّقَوْا وَآمَنُوا ثُمَّ اتَّقَوْا وَأَحْسَنُوا ۗ وَاللَّهُ يُحِبُّ الْمُحْسِنِينَ ٩٣
(5:93) There is no blame on those who believe and do good deeds for what they have eaten, when they fear Allah and believe and do good deeds, then they fear Allah and believe, then they fear Allah and do good, and Allah loves those who do good.
al-Ṭa’m and al-Ṭa’ām means to eat; it is used for taking food, not drink; the Madinans use it for wheat only; sometimes it is used in the meaning of taste, and then it is used for drinking too, as it is for eating. God says: … who- ever then drinks from it, he is not of me, and whoever does not taste of it, he is surely of me … (). And it has come in a ḥadīth of the Prophet that he said about the water of Zamzam: “Verily it is (ṭa’āmu ṭu’min) a satisfier of the stomach (of man, like as is food), and a remedy for a disease.”
The context of the verse makes it certain that it is connected with the preceding verses. As such it aims at answering an unspoken question: What will be the position of those believers who were indulged in drinking liquor before the revelation of (its) prohibition, or before the revelation of these verses? It is because the words: “for what they have eaten” are general, it is not restricted by anything that could restrict it. The verse aims at removing blame from this general food, and this removal of blame has been qualified with the clauses: “when they fear God and believe, then they fear God and do good.” This condition in which fear of God or piety has been mentioned three times makes it certain that it means intense piety, as the piety should be.
Now, let us see what would be the implication of the disavowal of blame from pious believers for whatever they eat (lawful nourishment): If it implies assertion of blame for the opposite group, that is, affirmation of general prohibition to non-pious persons from all believers and unbelievers, it is rebuttable by verses such as: Say: “Who has prohibited the embellishment of Allah which He has brought forth for His servants and the good provisions?” Say: “These are for the believers in the life of this world, purely (theirs) on the Resurrection Day …” ().
Moreover, it is known from the taste of this religion that it does not stop anyone from savoring the lawful good things which human nature is bound to use in the life.
Alternatively, if the verse is not meant to show its prohibition to the opposite group, then it would imply: that food is lawful for those who believe and do good provided that they fear God, then fear God, and then fear God. But it is known that its lawfulness is not restricted to the believers who do good, rather it is common to believers and unbelievers altogether; and even if we suppose that it is restricted to them, no one says that the permission depends on such a hard condition. (As both these alternatives are untenable, the supposition, that the verse removes blame from pious believers for whatever lawful food they eat, has no leg to stand upon.)
There are many such interpretations, based on the view that: “for what they have eaten” refers to lawful food in a general way; but none is free from either of the two objections mentioned above. It is because the meaning given by them revolves around the following proposition: There is no blame on those who believe and do good, when they avoid unlawful things, for eating lawful things. And this meaning cannot be free from either objection, as is clearly understood.
Some have said: There is an omission in verse; the complete verse is as follows: There is no blame on those who believe and do good for what they have eaten and for other things when they abstain from unlawful things.
Comment: It supposes an omission without any proof to support it; apart from that, the original objection still stands.
Someone else has said: The combination of belief and good deeds is not the primary condition in itself; rather, the essential point is to emphasize the necessity of abstaining from what is unlawful. The mention of belief and good deeds alongside this is to underscore the urgency and obligation of such avoidance.
Comment: The verse manifestly shows that it aims at removal of blame for what they have eaten, and it is not dependent on belief, good deed, or avoidance of unlawful things—as we have explained earlier. How far is this supposed meaning from the apparent meaning of the verse!
A third one has said: So far as a believer is concerned, it is all right to say that there is no blame on him; but an unbeliever deserves punishment, so he cannot be declared blameless.
Comment: There is no reason why the verse should be restricted to the believers. In fact, it is not unlike the verse: Say: “Who has prohibited the embellishment of Allah which He has brought forth for His servants and the good provision?” … (); and the verse: Say: “I do not find in that which has been revealed to me anything forbidden for an eater to eat of except that it be what has died of itself, or blood poured forth, or flesh of swine …” (), inasmuch as it lays down a general principle without addressing it to believer or unbeliever. Or it is like the verse: O you people! Surely We have created you of a male and a female and made you nations and tribes that you may recognize each other; surely the most honorable of you with Allah is the one among you who is most pious (), as it is addressed to the people, which include believers and unbelievers both.
Another one has said: The unbeliever has closed for himself the path of knowing unlawfulness and lawfulness; that is why the verse speaks particularly about the believers.
Comment: The objections mentioned earlier apply to this interpretation also; moreover, it does not remove the difficulty arising out of the words: when they fear Allah …
Thus, it is appropriate to say that the verse is connected with the preceding ones, and it looks at the condition of those Muslims who had indulged in drinking liquor, or in using it or eating from winnings of gambling or from what had been sacrificed to idols. It appears as if they had asked, after the clear prohibition was revealed to them, regarding him who had used liquor or indulged in other unlawful things mentioned above, before the revelation of prohibition—from among those Muslims who had passed away, or those who were present at that time and had willingly surrendered to the divine law.
Now, this verse answers their question, saying that there was no blame on those Muslims provided they were among those who believed and did good deeds, if they were proceeding on the path of piety with belief in God and good deeds, then believing in every law revealed to the Prophet, then doing good in acting according to the revealed commandment.
It appears from the above discourse that the relative clause: “what they have eaten,” refers to intoxicants (and ‘eaten’ stands for drunk); or it includes all the above mentioned items—intoxicants, gambling, and animals sacrificed to stones or divided by arrows—while the eating points to their various uses. The meaning: There is no blame on those who believe and do good for what they have tasted—before the revelation of prohibition—of intoxicants; or of intoxicants and the other unlawful items described in the verse.
... when they fear God and believe and do good deeds, then they fear God and believes, then they fear God and do good: Apparently, the clause: “when they fear God and believe and do good deeds,” repeats the same theme that has been described in the preceding clause: “There is no blame on those who believe and do good deeds”; it shows that these characteristics of belief and good deeds have a hand in nullification of blame. The same style is seen in the verse: with this is admonished whosoever among you believes in Allah and the last day … (). Such expressions are widely used in the language.
... then they fear Allah and believe: It takes into account “belief after the first mentioned belief.” It can only mean a detailed belief in every law brought by the Messenger from his Lord, without rejection or denial; inevitably it implies submission to the Messenger in all that he orders and forbids. God says: O you who believe! Fear Allah and believe in His Messenger: … (); And We did not send any messenger but that he should be obeyed by Allah’s permission; But no! By your Lord! They do not believe until they make you a judge of that which has become a matter of disagreement among them, and then do not find any straitness in their hearts as to what you have decided and submit with total submission (). There are numerous verses of this theme.
... then they fear God and do good: Apparently, it adds doing good to the belief after belief, with an aim to show its importance. al-Iḥsān means performance of an act because of its goodness—without false intentions. God says: Surely (as for) those who believe and do good, We do not waste the reward of him who does a good work (). Also, He says: (As for) those who responded to the call of Allah and the Messenger (even) after the wound had afflicted them, those among them who do good and fear (God) shall have a great reward (). That is, their response emanates from their seeking nearness to God and their total submission to Him, and not for any other motive. al-Iḥsān (doing good) is also used as transitive verb, that is, to do with someone what he thinks good; as God says: … and (you shall do) good to (your) parents, … (); and do good (to others) as Allah has done good to you, ().
According to the context, the first of the two meanings is more appropriate for the clause under discussion, that is, to do a work because of its goodness. The religious piety is not given its full due with merely believing in God and affirming truth of His religion, unless one believes in detail in each and every laid down law of the sharīʾah; because rejection of even one of those laws is rejection of the religion itself. And even the detailed belief in each and every law does not give piety its full due unless he acts according to the law in good manner, proceeding according to the demands of the law by implementing it or abstaining from it; and that proceeding must be based on total obedience, not on a hypocritical intention. Therefore, it is incumbent on him who is equipped with provision of piety to believe in God and do good deeds, and to believe in His Messenger in all that he has brought with him, proceeding in all this on the path of obedience and good doing.
The verse has repeated piety (fear of God) three times and has qualified all the three stages with it. It emphatically points to the fact that all three stages must be connected to real piety without any shade of any other irreligious motive. It has been mentioned somewhere in the preceding discourses that piety is not a special religious position; it is rather a spiritual condition that coexists with all spiritual positions. In other words, each spiritual station has a particular piety, which is reserved to it.
In short, the foregoing discourse shows that the verse means as follows: There is no blame on those who believe and do good deeds for what they had tasted and used of the intoxicants and the other unlawful items, provided they adhere to piety in all their conditions, hold fast to the belief in God and His Messenger, and do good deeds by performing all obligatory things and refraining from all unlawful things prohibited to them. However, if they had indulged in any abomination of the Satan’s handiwork, before the revelation of the prohibiting verse, before it had reached them, or before they understood its connotation, it will do them no harm.
It is like the words of God in the matter of the change of qiblah, in reply to their query regarding the prayers which they had prayed facing other than the Ka’bah: … and Allah was not going to make your faith to be fruitless … ().
Its context is another witness that the verse: “There is no blame on those who believe and do good deeds, …” is connected with the preceding verses, and that it was revealed with those verses (whose language testifies that they were the last to be revealed on the subject of intoxicants); and that some Muslims had not discarded the habit of drinking liquor between the period when the first verses were revealed till the revelation of these verses.
Then the question arose, after these verses were revealed, about the condition of those who had indulged in it: Some had used it before the prohibition; others had done so before learning the law, and some without any excuse. God replied them specifying for each group its order as related to its particular condition. He who drank it while he believed and did good deed—and it could be only those believers who did so before the revelation of prohibition or because they did not know of its unlawfulness—there was no blame on him; and as for others, the law concerning them is different.
The exegetes have written lengthy discussions on this verse. Some are concerned with explanation of: “what they have eaten,” and we have given a short detail of it.
Others have expressed their opinions about the end portion of the verse, where it repeats piety and fear of God three times, and repeats belief and then good deeds and ends at doing good. (Their opinions may be summarized as follows):
The clause: “when they fear God and believe and do good deeds,” means: When they avoid unlawful things and remain steadfast on belief and good deeds; then the clause: “then they fear God and believe,” means: Then they avoid what has been forbidden them like intoxicants, and believe in its prohibition; and the clause: “then they fear God and do good,” means: Then they remain steadfast and continue to firmly shun the disobedience, and remain engaged in good deeds.
This repetition looks at three situations as man uses belief and piety between himself and his soul, between himself and the people, and between himself and God; accordingly doing good means doing good to others.
The repetition looks at three stages: The beginning, the middle, and the end, that is, the piety as it should be.
The repetition is in consideration of what is feared of. One should leave the forbidden things for fear of chastisement; should avoid doubtful things as a precaution against falling into unlawful things, and should abstain from some permissible things for preventing the soul from meanness and keeping it clean from blemish.
It has been said that the first piety is avoidance of drinking liquor, and the first belief is the belief in God; the second piety is the continuation of the first piety, and the second belief is the continuation of the first one; and the third piety is performance of obligatory deeds, and doing good is performance of supererogatory deeds.
It has also been said that the first piety is avoidance of sins known through reason, and the first belief is believing in God and in evil of theses sins; the second piety is avoidance of sins known through sharīʾah, and the second belief is believing in obligatoriness of avoiding these sins; and the third piety concerns especially with rights of the people and with the injustice and iniquity vis-à-vis other persons; and doing good refers to doing good to others.
The first condition (that is, when they fear God …) is reserved for the past; the second, for its continuation, and the third one is reserved particularly to the people’s rights.
There are many similar opinions. But there is no proof either in the wording of the verse or somewhere else that could justify application of the verse on any of their interpretations; and it becomes manifest when one contemplates on its context and refers to what we have explained earlier.
Examining Narrations
- Hishām b. Sālim narrates from Abū ʿAbdillāh that he heard him saying, “While Ḥamzah b. ʿAbd al-Muṭṭalib and (some of) his companions were (drinking) a liquor named al-sukarkah” He said, “Then they talked about al-Sharīf, and Ḥamzah said, ‘How can we find it?’ They said, ‘There is this she-camel of your nephew, ʿAlī.’ So he went forth to it and slaughtered it; then took its liver and hump and brought it to them.” He said, “When ʿAlī, came and saw his she-camel, he was smitten by it. They said to him, ‘Your uncle Ḥamzah has done it.’” He said, “So he went to the Prophet, and complained to him of it.”
He said, “Then the Messenger of God came with him. Ḥamzah was told, ‘Here is the Messenger of God at the door.’” He said, “So Ḥamzah came out and he was enraged. When the Messenger of God saw (the sign of) anger in his face, he returned.” He said, “Then Ḥamzah said to him, ‘If the son of Abū Ṭālib wanted to lead you by a halter he could do it.’ Then Ḥamzah entered his house and the Prophet came back.”
He said, “It was before (the battle of) Uḥud.” He said, “Then God revealed the prohibition of liquor. So, the Messenger of God ordered their (liquor) pots to be turned over.” He said, “Then the call went out to the people to proceed to Uḥud. The Messenger of God went forth, and the people went forth, and Ḥamzah went forth. He stood in the side of the Prophet.” He said, “When they stood in line, he attacked the people (that is, unbelievers) until he was swallowed up among them; then he returned to his place. The people (that is, the believers) said to him: ‘God! God! O Uncle of the Messenger of God! That you should go (that is, die) and there be something against you in the heart of the Messenger of God.’” He said, “Then he attacked again until he disappeared amongst the people; then he returned to his place. They (again) said to him: ‘God! God! O Uncle of the Messenger of God! That you should go and there be something against you in the heart of the Messenger of God.’
“So he proceeded towards the Prophet. When he saw him (coming towards him), he proceeded to his direction, embraced him, and the Messenger of God kissed his forehead, then said, ‘Launch attack on the people.’ Then Ḥamzah was martyred, and the Messenger of God gave him a shroud of tamrah.” Then Abū ʿAbdillāh explained it saying, “Like this suryānī. When his face was covered his feet were opened, and when his feet were covered his face was opened.” He said, “So he covered his face with it and put idhkhir on his feet.”
He said, “The people fled away and ʿAlī remained. The Messenger of God said to him, ‘What did you do?’ He said, ‘O Messenger of God! I adhered to (this) place.’ He said, ‘This was expected of you.’” He said, “And the Messenger of God, said, ‘Fulfil, O my Lord! Your promise to me, because, if you wished (so), You would not be worshipped.’” (al-Tafsīr, al-ʿAyyāshī)
- al-Zamakhsharī has written: Three verses were revealed on the subject of intoxicants: They ask you about intoxicants and games of chance, … (). Some Muslims then left it and some continued to drink; until a man drank it, began his prayer, and talked nonsense. Then was revealed: O you who believe! Do not go near prayer when you are intoxicated until you know (well) what you say, … (). Still some Muslims continued drinking it; until ʿUmar drank it; then he took a jawbone of a camel and bashed with it the skull of ʿAbd al-Raḥmān b. ʿAwf, and then sat lamenting those (unbelievers) who were killed in the battle of Badr, reciting the poem of al-Aswad b. Yaghfūr:
How many spears (that is, braves) and noble drinkers are (thrown)
In the well—the well of Badr?
How many nobles and feeders of humps are (there)
In the well—the well of Badr?
Does Ibn Abī Kabshah threaten us that we shall be made alive again? And how can (happen) the life of ghosts and skulls?
Is he helpless in averting death from me?
And will raise me (again) when my bones become rotten? Well, who will convey my message to the Beneficent (God)
That I am abandoning the month of fast; So tell God to stop my drink from me,
And tell God to stop my food from me.
This (news) reached the Messenger of God and he came out enraged, dragging his cloak along; he raised something that was in his hand to strike him (ʿUmar). So he (ʿUmar) said, “I seek refuge in God from the wrath of God and the wrath of His Messenger.” Then God, the Glorified, the Sublime, sent down (the verse): The Satan only desires to cause enmity and hatred … Will you then desist? So ʿUmar said, “We desist.” (Rabī’ al-abrār)
- Ibn Jarīr, Ibn al-Mundhir, Ibn Abī Ḥātim, Abu al-Shaykh, Ibn Marduwayh, and al-Naḥḥās (in his al-Nāsikh) have narrated from Saʾd b. Abī Waqqāṣ that he said, “Regarding me was revealed the prohibition of intoxicants. A man from the Helpers prepared a feast, and he invited us. People came to him, ate, and drank until they became intoxicated with liquor—and it was before the intoxicants were prohibited. So they began boasting. The Helpers said, ‘The Helpers are superior;’ and the Quraysh said, ‘The Quraysh are superior.’ Then a man came down with a jawbone of a camel and hit at my nose tearing it—and Saʾd’s nose was torn.” He said, “Then I came to the Prophet and mentioned it to him. So this verse was revealed: O you who believe! Intoxicants and games of chance …” (al-Durr al-manthūr)
Author’s comment: The traditions about the stories, which resulted in prohibition of intoxicants, are numerous, through the Sunnī chains, with great discrepancies among them. As for those traditions which mention some companions who had been drinking, we have no concern to go into them analyzing and sifting, because our purpose is to explain the Qur’anic verse. However, these narratives support what we have written in the Commentary that these verses imply, nay, rather clearly say, that a group of Muslims had not left drinking liquor since the verse, was revealed until these verses of chapter five came down.
Of course, some traditions say that ʿAlī and ʿUthmān b. Maẓ’ūn had forbidden intoxicants to themselves before the verse of prohibition was revealed; and it has been mentioned in al-Milal wa al-Niḥal, that a few Arabs in the Era of Ignorance had forbidden intoxicants to themselves, and God helped some of them to find Islam and enter into its fold. Among them were ʿĀmir b. al-Zarīb al-’Udwānī and Qays b. ʿĀmir al-Tamīmī (who attained Islam). Also, among them were Ṣafwān b. Umayyah b. Muḥrith al-Kinānī, ‘Afīf b. Ma’dī Karb al-Kindī, al-Uslūm al-Yāmī (who forbade to himself both intoxicants and fornication). These few individuals were those on whose tongue the word of truth had appeared. Otherwise, generally the Arabs of that era like all other people of the world (except the Jews) were habituated to drink freely, until God forbade it in His Book.
It appears from the verses of the mighty Book that intoxicants were forbidden in Mecca before the hijrah, as is shown by the verse: Say: “My Lord has only prohibited indecencies, those of them that are apparent as well as those that are concealed, and sin and rebellion without justice …” (). It is a Meccan verse; and when it is joined to the divine words: They ask you about intoxicants and games of chance. Say: “In both of them there is a great sin and (some) profit for men, and their sin is greater than their profit.” … (); which is Medinite verse revealed in early days of hijrah, there does not remain room for any doubt that at that time its prohibition was clear to the Muslims. And if we meditate on the context of the verses of the chapter 5, “The Table”, and especially on the implications of the words: Will you then desist? And the verse: There is no blame on those who believe and do good deeds for what they have eaten, when they fear Allah and believe it will be clear that the indulgence of a group among them in drinking liquor between the revelation of chapter 2 and 5, was a residue of the previous bad habit. It was like some people’s continuing to sinfully cohabit in the nights of Ramaḍān until God revealed: It is made lawful to you on the night of fast to go in unto your wives; they are an apparel to you and you are an apparel for them; Allah knew that you were acting unfaithfully to yourselves, so He has turned to you (mercifully) and forgave you. ().
However, it is clear that these traditions invite two observations:
One: They differ among themselves concerning the date of the prohibition of intoxicants. The first narrative says that it was shortly before the battle of Uḥud (that is, the 3rd year of hijrah), while other reports say that it was after the battle of the Allies (that is, the 5th year of hijrah). But it is not a big problem, because possibly the latter may be referring to the revelation of the verses of the chapter “The Table” in the 5th year of A.H.—although the wording of some of the traditions do not fully agree with it.
Two: They say that intoxicants were not prohibited before the revelation of the verse of “The Table”, or that its prohibition was not clear before it for people and particularly for the companions. But the verse 33 of chapter 7, “The Battlements”, clearly forbids sin, and the verse 219 of the chapter 2, “The Cow”, clearly declares it to be a great sin; and these two declarations cannot be interpreted away.
Rather it looks far-fetched to think that prohibition of sin was revealed at Mecca before hijrah, in the verse which included a general summary of forbidden things, that is,: Say: “My Lord has only prohibited indecencies, those of them that are apparent as well as those that are concealed, and sin and rebellion without justice, and that you associate with Allah that for which He has not sent down any authority, and that you say against Allah what you do not know.” (), and then a long time would pass after it and neither the believers would ask its meaning from their Prophet, nor polytheists would seek from him its explanation, while their biggest concern was to refute the Book of God and object against it in any way they could imagine.
Rather the history shows that the Prophet’s prohibition of the intoxicants like his forbidding polytheism and fornication was widely known to the polytheists. For the proof, look at the report given by Ibn Hishām in his al-Sīrah; quoting Khallād b. Qurrah and other learned elders of the tribe of Bakr b. Wāil that, A’shā b. Qays went forth towards the Messenger of God intending to accept Islam. He said a Qaṣīdah in praise of the Messenger of God, (which began with these lines):-
Did not your eyes remain sore at night? And did you not spend the night awake like one bitten by snake?
When he reached Mecca—or was near it—some polytheists of Quraysh intercepted him and asked him his news. He told him that he had come intending to see the Messenger of God in order to enter into Islam. (The Qurayshite) said to him, “O Abū Baṣīr! He forbids fornication.” A’shā said, “By God! Certainly, it is a thing that I have no desire of.” The Qurayshite said, “O Abū Baṣīr! And he forbids intoxicants.” A’shā said, “As for this, certainly there are some consolations about it in (my) soul; but I am going back and shall quench my thirst with it this year, then I’ll come to him and accept Islam.” So he returned, and died the same year and did not come back to the Messenger of God.
Thus, no weight remains at all for the above mentioned traditions. We can only say that the narrators had inferred them by their independent thinking on the verses, while they had forgotten the verse . The exegetes have offered strange interpretations with an aim to justify these traditions.
However, after all this lengthy discourse, the net result remains that the Book of God had clearly announced prohibition of intoxicants in Islam before hijrah; and the only purpose of these verses of the chapter 5, “The Table,” was to put intense pressure on the people because they had not shown any seriousness in submitting to this divine prohibition and enforcing this law.
- Hishām narrates through a trustworthy person from Abū ʿAbdil-lāh that he was asked, “Is it true what has been narrated from you that intoxicants, set up stones and dividing arrows are men?“ He said, “God was not to address His creatures in a language that they did not understand.” (al-Tafsīr, al-ʿAyyāshī)
- ʿAbdullāh b. Sinān narrates from Abū ʿAbdillāh that he said, Qudāmah b. Maẓ’ūn was brought before ʿUmar b. al-Khaṭṭāb; and he had drunk liquor and proof was established against him. (ʿUmar) asked ʿAlī (about it) and he ordered him to be flogged eighty stripes. Qudāmah said, “O Leader of the Faithful! There is no penalty for me; I am of the people of this verse: There is no blame on those who believe and do good deeds for what they have eaten (up to the end of the verse).” ʿAlī said to him, “You tell a lie; you are not from among the people of this verse. What its people had eaten, it was lawful for them; and they do not eat or drink except what is lawful for them.” (ibid.)
Author’s comment: This meaning has also been narrated from Abu al-Rabī’ from the same Imam. Also, al-Shaykh has narrated it in al-Tahdhīb through his chain from Ibn Sinān from the same Imam; and this meaning is narrated through the Sunnī chains too. The Imam’s words, “What its people had eaten, it was lawful for them; and they do not eat or drink except what is lawful for them,” agrees with what we have explained in the foregoing Commentary; so refer to it.
- al-Ṭabarī narrates from al-Sha’bī that he said, “Four verses were revealed about the intoxicants: They ask you about intoxicants and games of chance … (), so they left it; then was revealed: … you obtain from them intoxication and goodly provision … (), so they drank it; then the two verses of “The Table” were revealed: intoxicants and games of chances and … Will you then desist? (). (al-Tafsīr, al-Ṭabarī)
Author’s comment: It appears from it that the verse abrogated the verse , and this in its turn was abrogated by ; this in itself is sufficient to show this claim’s invalidity.
- (al-Kulaynī and al-Shaykh) have narrated through their chains from Abū Jaʾfar that he said, “God did never raise any prophet but it was in God’s knowledge that when He would perfect his religion it would include prohibition of intoxicants; and intoxicants were always unlawful, but they are only carried away from (one) trait to (another) trait; and if it were imposed on them all together, it would have cut them off short of religion.” (The narrator) said, “Abū Jaʾfar, said, ‘There is no one more kind than God, the Sublime; and it is from His kindness (the Blessed, the Sublime) that He transfers them from (one) trait to (another) trait; and if He had imposed on them all together, they would have perished.’” (al-Kāfī; al-Tahdhīb)
- (al-Kulaynī) narrates through his chain from ʿAmr b. Shimr from Abū Jaʾfar that he said, “When God, the Mighty, the Great, revealed to His Messenger, intoxicants and games of chance and (sacrificing to) stones set up and (dividing by) arrows are only an abomination of the Satan’s handiwork; shun it therefore, it was said to him, ‘What is games of chance? O Messenger of God!’ He said: ‘Anything you make a bet with, even cubes and walnut.’ It was said, ‘Then what is stones set up?’ He said, ‘What they sacrifice to their deities.’ It was said, ‘Then what is arrows?’ He said, ‘Their arrows which they used for division (of meat).’” (al-Kāfī)
- (al-Kulaynī) narrates through his chain from ‘Atā’ b. Yasār from Abū Jaʾfar that he said, “The Messenger of God said, ‘Every intoxicant is unlawful, and every intoxicant is liquor.’” (ibid.)
Author’s comment: This tradition is narrated also through Sunnī chains, from ʿAbdullāh b. ʿUmar from the Prophet, and its wording is as follows, “Every intoxicant is liquor and every liquor is unlawful.” al-Bayhaqī and others have narrated it too. There are numerous traditions narrated from the Imams of Ahl al-Bayt which are nearly mutawātir that every intoxicant is unlawful, and that whatever is used for betting on, is game of chance.
- Abu al-Ṣabāḥ narrates that he asked Abū ʿAbdillāh about nabīdh and intoxicants, “Do they have the same position? (The Imam), said, ‘No. Surely nabīdh is not of the rank of intoxicants. Certainly, God has prohibited intoxicants a little of it and more of it, as He has prohibited dead body, blood and flesh of swine; and the Prophet has prohibited the intoxicant from among the drinks, and what the Messenger of God has prohibited, God has prohibited it.’” (al-Tafsīr, al-ʿAyyāshī)
- (al-Kulaynī and al-Shaykh) have narrated through their chains from Mūsá b. Jaʾfar that he said, “Verily, God has not prohibited the liquor because of its name; but He has prohibited it because of its effect. Therefore, anything, which has the effect of liquor, is liquor.” (In another version, the last sentence is, ‘Therefore, anything which does the action of liquor is liquor.’) (al-Kāfī; al-Tahdhīb)
Author’s comment: The tradition in condemnation of intoxicants and gambling that has come through the Sunnī and Shī’ah chains are beyond the limit of enumeration; whoever wants to study them should consult the Collections of Traditions.
al-Mīzān (Eng.), vol.3. (Trans.) ↩︎
al-Mīzān (Eng.), vol.8. (Trans.) ↩︎
Giving the order of desisting by using the mode of question has intensified its impact. (Trans.) ↩︎
It is generally called istikhārah, that is to seek good. (Trans.) ↩︎
Liquor made from a variety of sorghum or millet. (Trans.) ↩︎
Its meaning in this context is not clear. (Trans.) ↩︎
A well known wide-leafed aromatic grass; it was used in thatching roofs, and was burned in place of firewood. (Trans.) ↩︎
The Prophet had thrown after the battle of Badr the bodies of the seventy unbelievers who were killed therein. (Trans.) ↩︎
The polytheists of Quraysh used this nickname for the Prophet in a sneering manner. (Trans.) ↩︎
It has been narrated by al-Ṭabarī in his al-Tafsīr, and by al-Suyūṭī in al-Durru al-manthūr, quoting al-Ṭabarī and Ibn al-Mundhir from Qatādah. (Auth.) ↩︎
One of them has said that the companions were interpreting the verse , Say: “In both of them there is a great sin …”, that it means pure sin. And this was in spite of the verse , which had clearly forbidden sin before it. (Auth.) ↩︎