Welcome Friends: Ahlan wa sahlan!
Our last Posting ended with a description of some among the People of (earlier) Compilation, in that they had made a Solemn Pledge with God which they DID not honor. Today’s Posting continues with the same subject, baring their iniquities on one hand, but also -on the other- including a beautiful description of those of them who were the ‘Affirmed in Knowledge’ and the ‘Faithful.’ Such were these groups among the People of (earlier) Compilation who had honored their Pledge and therefore had faith in the Qur’an revealed to the Messenger ﷺ(verse 162).
Note: Due to the subject-matter of todays’ topics, I have tried to put in quite a few of Ali’s and Asad’s comments for readers’ benefit. The explanation I use of Yusuf Ali’s work is his original, in which appears the word ‘God’ for ‘Allah,’ before those who reproduced his work made the changes he himself had spoken of and had argued against.
COMMENTS:
1. Verses 155-161 discuss their iniquities, beginning with their slander against the Virgin Mary and publicizing that they had killed Jesus the Messenger of God (peace upon him). Yusuf Ali tells us in note 661:
“Their iniquities were: (1) that they broke their Covenant: (2) that they rejected God’s guidance as conveyed in His signs; (3) that they killed God’s Messengers and incurred a double guilt, viz., that of murder and that of a deliberate defiance of God’s law; and (4) that they imagined themselves arrogantly self-sufficient, which means a blasphemous closing of their hearts forever against the admission of God’s grace.
Then begins another series of iniquities from a different point of view: (1) that they rejected Faith: (2) that they made false charges against a saintly woman like Mary, who was chosen by God to be the mother of Jesus; (3) that they boasted of having killed Jesus when they were victims of their own self-hallucination: (4) that they hindered people from God’s way: and (5) that by means of usury and fraud they oppressed their fellow-men.”
Verses 157-158 tell us that they hadn’t, of a certainty, killed Jesus at all, although it was made to appear so to them; God had in fact (saved and) ‘raised him up/exalted him’ (Ali/Asad) unto Himself.
Please read important details in (Blog Post Day 29) which offer an entirely different version of the Jesus narrative(s) from the viewpoint of a Christian historian.
With regard to Verse 158 and verse 159 Asad says in his note 172, and 173:
“..Nowhere in the Qur’ān is there any warrant for the popular belief that God has “taken up” Jesus bodily, in his lifetime, into heaven. The expression “God exalted him unto Himself” in the above verse denotes the elevation of Jesus to the realm of God’s special grace – a blessing in which all prophets partake, as is evident from 19:57, where the verb rafa‘nāhu (“We exalted him”) is used with regard to the Prophet Idrīs. (See also Muhammad ‘Abduh in Manār III, 316 f., and VI, 20 f.) The “nay” (bal) at the beginning of the sentence is meant to stress the contrast between the belief of the Jews that they had put Jesus to a shameful death on the cross and the fact of God’s having “exalted him unto Himself.”
“Lit., “who does not believe in him before his death.” According to this verse, all believing Jews and Christians realize at the moment of their death that Jesus was truly a prophet of God – having been neither an impostor nor “the son of God” (Zamakhsharī).”
We do know that many Muslims traditionally believe that this verse ‘indicates the physical return of Jesus, who had physically departed this earth,’ referring the pronoun in the word موته ‘his death’ to Jesus himself. While Muhammad Asad quite obviously disagrees with this tradition and explains these verses subjectively, Yusuf Ali maintains closeness to the verses themselves, giving us both viewpoints in his notes, explaining in note 665 that the pronoun could very well be referring to the person from Ahl Al Kitaab/ People of the (earlier) Compilation. Let us remember that these verses have been speaking about the Jews of Ahl al Kitaab:
“Before his death: Interpreters are not agreed as to the exact meaning. Those who hold that Jesus did not die refer the pronoun “his” to Jesus. They say that Jesus is still living in the body and that he will appear just before the Final Day, after the coming of the Mahdi, when the world will be purified of sin and unbelief. There will be a final death before the final Resurrection, but’ all will have believed before that final death. Others think that “his” is better referred, to “none of the People of the Book”, and that the emphatic form “must believe” (la-yu’ minanna) denotes more a question of duty than of fact.”
The latter explanation is quite eye-opening, in that each person of Ahl al Kitaab -Jews and Christians- those who either killed Jesus, or denied his mission, or made him out to be ‘son of God;’ each and every one of them would be made to see the truth upon their death and that, at that point, each of them would necessarily have faith in Jesus as Messenger of God, who shall be bearing witness over them on the Day of Resurrection!
To us, the truth of the matter will remain ‘gheyb.’ It will remain unseen, un-witnessed by us, and unascertained until God wills otherwise. There is hardly any point in arguing something that cannot be proven! The safe and correct thing to do would be to translate/explain the words as literally as possible- and leave it at that.
But before we leave these verses, let’s look at one of Al- Zamakhshari’s interesting explanations of the words ‘ma qataluhu yaqeena/ they did not kill him in certainty:’
Al Zamakhshari adds to the common explanation of the word ‘qatala’ that it might also be related to how the word was sometimes used at the time in exaggeration, as in ‘I killed it- or even slaughtered it- by knowledge,’ meaning ‘I know it so well that I killed it.’[1] He is saying here that the verses may be responding with scorn, in that they did not ‘kill him’ (or otherwise) in their alleged certainty.
Today this use of the word kill in English is well known (see Urban disctionary below),[2] especially among our children, who ‘kill’ everything; an expression by which they indicate having accomplished something well!
2. Verses 160-161 mention what God had made forbidden unto the Jews, and why. Yusuf Ali mentions what was forbidden them in note 667:
“The ceremonial law of the Jews forbade the eating of the flesh of the camel, rabbit and hare (Leviticus xi. 4-6), and the fat of oxen, sheep, and goats (Leviticus vii. 23), and was in other respects very strict.”
Muhammad Asad goes deeper into the subject in his note 174. For newcomers to our study:
Please note Asad’s heritage and background in Talmudic studies.
“Most of the commentators assume that this refers to the severe dietary restrictions imposed on the Jews, which are alluded to in 3:93 and 6:146. Since, however, 3:93 clearly states that these restrictions and prohibitions were a punishment for evil deeds committed “before the Torah was bestowed from on high,” while the verse which we are now discussing relates to their sinful behaviour in later times, we must conclude that the punishment spoken of here has another meaning: namely, the age-long deprivation of the Jewish people of the many “good things of life” which other nations enjoy – in other words, the humiliation and suffering which they have had to undergo throughout most of their recorded history, and particularly after the time of Jesus. It is on the basis of this interpretation that I have rendered the expression harramnā ‘alayhim (lit., “We forbade them”) as “We denied to them.”
Then Muhammad Asad speaks about the Children of Israel, whom he knew better than any other commentator (God bless him, it’s amazing how he tackles the issue of ‘Sadda/صَدَّ/barring’ themselves/others from God’s path; the italics below are mine) saying:
“The verb sadda (“he turned away”) can be transitive as well as intransitive, and the same applies to the noun sadd derived from it. In the former case, the sentence would read, “for their having turned away many [others] from the path of God”; in the latter case, “for their having [so] often turned away from the path of God.” In view of the repeated stress, in the Qur’ān, on the refractory nature of the children of Israel – and the abundant evidence to this effect in the Old Testament – I prefer the intransitive rendering.”
On verse 161 Muhammad Asad says:
“and [for] their taking usury although it had been forbidden to them, and their wrongful devouring of other people’s possessions. And for those from among them who [continue to] deny the truth We have readied grievous suffering.’
3. After baring the transgressions of some of the People of (earlier) Compilation, we arrive at this beautiful description of their counterparts in verse 162 (also among People of earlier Compilation) who were ‘The Affirmed in Knowledge,’ ‘well-grounded/deeply rooted’ in Knowledge (Ali/Asad). Obviously, at the time of revelation of this verse, they had announced their faith in the Qur’an, and were doing the rest of the beautiful acts of worship mentioned in the verse, while having faith and trust in God (Alone; without ascribing divinity to others) and in the Final Day/ the Hereafter.
According to Asad they were: ‘constant in prayer and spend in charity, and all who believe in God and the Last Day – these it is unto whom We shall grant a mighty reward.’
4. Speaking to Prophet Muhammad, ﷺ Verse 163 mentions the names of a few earlier Prophets who had received God’s exclusive knowledge/information;[3] revelation/ waHi/وحي, peace upon them all. Verse 164 continues, speaking this time of those among them who were also Messengers, making it quite clear to him that not all the Messengers have been narrated. Unique among these Messengers was Moses, whom God spoke to verbally.[4] The word ‘takleema’ after the verb ‘kallama’ serves to indicate that this is NOT a figurative matter; it is literal: God spoke to him BY WAY OF SPEECH.
Verse 165 gives us the main reasons for the missions of these Messengers: They were sent in fulfillment of a promise by God (HQ2:38; 7:35; 20:123), since He would not leave people unguided. They were also sent so that people would not plead ignorance!
5. In Verse 166 God Himself Is Witness to what He sent down/ revealed to Prophet Muhammad peace upon him, in His Knowledge, as are the Guardians/Angels, and God suffices for Witness.
6. Verse 167 refers to Those who Denied (in general, among all Humanity) referring again specifically to their act of barring (‘Sadda’) which Asad spoke of earlier; their barring from God’s path has already set them far off-track! Again Verse 168 refers to Those who Denied and (in this instance) committed thulm/ injurious wrong[5] assuring everyone that God will neither forgive them nor guide them a path other than the path of Jahannam (which they have already chosen having barred themselves from the other). But we, who understand the difference between people being named by the verbs they enact, versus being named by titles, know that BOTH GROUPS HAVE A CHANCE TO CHANGE THEIR ACTIONS AND REPENT SINCE THEY HAVEN’T YET BEEN LABELLED.
7. Verse 170 calls on ALL Cognizant Humans of this world:
This is God’s Messenger sent for the benefit of everyone and everything: Have faith and trust in him!
Enough said!
Our next Reading is from HQ4:171- HQ 5:1-2 Yes! A new sura!
Peace unto all!
[1] “الزمخشري:
“…. كما ادّعوا ذلك في قولهم إنا قتلنا المسيح أو يجعل يقيناً تأكيداً لقوله { وَمَا قَتَلُوهُ } كقولك ما قتلوه حقاً أي حق انتفاء قتله حقاً. وقيل هو من قولهم قتلت الشيء علماً ونحرته علماً إذا تبالغ فيه علمك. وفيه تهكم…..”
[2] Urban Dictionary: “Killed it: When someone does something really well.”
[3]‘WaHi’ is the noun, ‘awHaa’ is the verb, which is about giving exclusive information, usually understood as Divine Revelation, but we see God giving ‘waHi’ in HQ5:111 to Jesus’ disciples, in 16:68 to the bees, in 20:38 to Moses’ mother. In HQ19:11 we find Zakariya to be the one giving notification, signaling ‘wahi’ to his people.
وَحَى: إِلْقَاءِ عِلْمٍ فِي إِخْفَاءٍ أَوْ غَيْرِهِ إِلَى غَيْرِكَ. فَالْوَحْيُ: الْإِشَارَةُ. وَالْوَحْيُ: الْكِتَابُ وَالرِّسَالَةُ. وَكُلُّ مَا أَلْقَيْتَهُ إِلَى غَيْرِكَ حَتَّى عَلِمَهُ فَهُوَ وَحْيٌ كَيْفَ كَانَ. وَأَوْحَى اللَّهُ تَعَالَى وَوَحَى. وَكُلُّ مَا فِي بَابِ الْوَحْيِ فَرَاجِعٌ إِلَى هَذَا الْأَصْلِ الَّذِي ذَكَرْنَاهُ. وَالْوَحِيُّ: السَّرِيعُ: وَالْوَحَى: الصَّوْتُ. وَاللَّهُ أَعْلَمُ.
[4] كلم: نطقٍ مُفهِم….الكَلام. تقول: كلّمته أُكلّمه تكليماً؛ وهو كَليمِي إذا كلّمك أو كلَّمتَه. ثمَّ يتَّسِعون فيسمُّون اللفظةَ الواحدة المُفهِمَةَ كلمة، والقِصَّةَ كلمة، والقصيدةَ بطولها كلمة. ويجمعون الكلمةَ كلماتٍ وكَلِماً. قال الله تعالى: {يُحرِّفُونَ الكَلِمَ عَنْ مَوَاضِعِهِ} [النساء 46، المائدة 13].
[5] ‘Thulm’ is a word that carries far more meaning than the English ‘wrongdoing.’ Besides being about an injurious wrong, it carries the meaning of darkness and gloom from the Arabic ‘thalaam,’ and we do know of a reported Hadeeth that says ‘Thulm is thulumaat/ many folds of darkness and gloom… on the Day of Resurrection..’
عن جابر رضي الله عنه أن رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم قال: اتقوا الظلم، فإن الظلم ظلمات يوم القيامة واتقوا الشح فإن الشح أهلك من كان قبلكم حملهم على أن سفكوا دماءهم واستحلوا محارمهم. رواه مسلم .