- Welcome Friends: Ahlan wa sahlan!
- Yusuf Ali’s Translation of this Chapter.
- Muhammad Asad’s Translation of this Chapter.
COMMENTS:
1. Verse 171 concludes this chapter’s historical narrative of Bani Isra-eel, by mentioning the circumstances in which God obtained their pledge. This incident was mentioned earlier (HQ 2:63; 2:93; 4:154), where I gave a similar opinion (Blog Post Day 7 – Blog Post Day 51) on the word ‘Toor’ طور – which Muhammad Asad translated as Sinai. He did the same here, with the word ‘jabal’- جبل-:
The mountain is not specified here; rather it is mentioned simply as ‘the mountain/al jabal.’ Ali’s translation is truer to the original, since as readers will note, Asad has influenced the reading by putting in his own subjective understanding; he added the word ‘Sinai’ to the body of his translation.
But his commentary 138 is interesting:
“This is the end, so far as this sūrah is concerned, of the story of the children of Israel. In accordance with the method of the Qur’ān, their story is made an object-lesson for all believers in God, of whatever community or time: and, therefore, the next passage speaks of the “children of Adam,” that is, of the whole human race.”
2. We now arrive at Verses 172-174 which are perhaps the most important verses of ‘Gheyb’ in the Qur’an. These verses speak of the Primordial Testimony made by all cognitive Selves in what scholars have called ‘3aalam al tharr/the realm of tharr/عالم الذرّ’…[1] … which (till we find a better translation) might be called ‘the realm of dispersing particles.’[2]
In that realm, or at that stage, all our Cognizant Selves (as yet spiritual entities that hadn’t acquired earthly form) were gathered in front of our Creator to acknowledge Him as Our Sole Lord-Sustainer and to promise that later (as earthlings, when we spread out and are pulled by distractions) we shall shun whatever might cause us to shirk Him.
“And when your Lord-Sustainer took from the Children of Adam, from their dorsum/ their prevalent appearance[3] -ظهورهم / thuhoorihim, their offspring, and made them bear witness versus على themselves: Am I not your Lord-Sustainer? They said, “Yes. We do bear witness!” Lest you say on the Day of Resurrection, ‘We had been of this unknowing/ heedless.’ (172) Or lest you say, ‘Indeed, our forefathers shirked before that, and we were (only) thurriyah/ descendants after them. Will You then destroy us because of what the falsifiers did?’ (173) Thus do We clearly explain the Signs perchance they may return. (174)
Return. An important word.
Muslim scholars often speak of this, saying that humanity’s yearning for spiritual meaning is in fact the soul’s innate quest for its Divine Source, remembered at a subconscious level. It is believed that this realm was where our FiTrah/naturally ingrained pre-disposition comes from; our inner knowledge that we should seek and worship God Alone.
Perhaps now we can better understand the difference between ‘ourselves’ as physical entities and ‘our Selves’ as spiritual entities who, not only shall return to God, but in fact, are yearning for Him throughout life. That drive is what I believe might be called ‘Inaabah,’ our drive to return to Him, mentioned in the Qur’an. Worshippers who feel that way are called in the Qur’an ‘muneeb (sing); muneebeen (plural).
An interesting fact should be mentioned here. Jungian psychology[4] has put forward the theory of the ‘collective unconscious’ to explain certain inexplicable psychological phenomena, shared by humanity, but totally unrelated to individual knowledge or experience. Jung believed that humans share with each other what has been imprinted upon their psyches from the experience of all their collective ancestors.
If we were to take Jung’s concept of shared ancestral knowledge all the way back to primordial existence, it might provide one of the best explanations of this verse, to date.
See both Yusuf Ali’s and Muhammad Asad’s explanations.
3. It is important to note what Verses 175-176 are about, seeing that they follow the verses on our primordial testimony! These verses instruct Prophet Muhammad ﷺ to describe a scene where a person (after having testified primordially) tears himself painfully away from what was his to embrace and be protected by:
And relate to them the news of him to whom we brought Our Signs, (but he) then stripped himself of them (like skin would be stripped from flesh [5] انسلخ- /insalakh) so the Deviant/Sheytaan stalked him, and he became one of The Deluded (in a state of darkness and corruption [6]–غوي-).
Here we note that this person was not stalked[7] by Sheytan until after he had stripped himself apart from God’s Signs. What a striking scene!
The next verse tells us that, had God not granted the person free will, His Signs would have lifted him despite himself. Having free will however, the person chose to follow his desire:
“Had We willed, we would have elevated him by them, but he stuck fast to the earth –[8]خلد – and followed his plummeting desires هوى)/hawaa), so in similitude, his example is that of a dog, if you threaten him he will loll out his tongue and pant, and if you let him be, he will also loll out his tongue and pant. That is the similitude of those who belie Our Signs, so do relate these narratives, perchance they will reflect.”
And we DID reflect (let me know, dear Readers, if you have any other ideas about this parable):
To understand it, we should correlate the similitude of a cognizant human skinning himself, to the similitude of a dog with tongue lolling.
What is the significance?
Dogs pant, and their tongues loll out because they need to cool themselves… it is necessary for them to do so, not having the wonderful skin we have![9]
If we were to literally skin ourselves –shed our own cognizance- we’d be inferior to animals. This is a purely physical image from nature using the largest, most visible organ of ours, drawn as a parable so that we’d understand the spiritual reality behind it.
It is our Cognizance with which we are ready to understand, accept, and follow God’s Signs. If we disregard it, we would not only have disregarded what differentiates us from all other creatures, we would also have discarded and broken the solemn pledge made by our primordial Selves to God.
The parable seems to end with two warning statements in 177, 178 about wronging our Selves, being rightly guided or being losers.
Now, although Verse 178 tells us that it is God Who guides and misguides, it is not to be understood that He would do so without giving us a chance to make choices! Our choices are our own, made within God’s knowledge and general design. This issue is difficult to understand from our point of view, but we must understand that He is The Creator, and that everything in creation follows the design He had put in place where we are given much freedom of choice, especially in matters of faith. Such verses must be understood together with Q13:27 below, where He says that He:
MISGUIDES WHOMEVER WISHES TO BE MISGUIDED AND GUIDES TO HIMSELF WHOMEVER RETURNS (as one returning home, which is the ‘Inaabah’ drive mentioned above.[10]
That is why I prefer -like some commentators[11]– to refer the pronoun in يشاء to the person rather than to God, as is SO OBVIOUS in Q13:27, which also happens to be the opening verse in the search engine; a God-given clue, so that we’d always refer the pronoun to the person himself when the subject isn’t defined.[12]
4. Verse 179 takes us to the Hereafter, namely to the Pit (of Hell) and speaks of the ‘Jinn’ and the ‘Inss’ who earn the title of The Heedless by not employing their faculties, being similar to livestock…. No… actually far more lost. It is such cognizant beings whose prospect is for the Pit.
5. Verse 180, according to Muhammad Asad:
AND GOD’S [alone] are the attributes of perfection; invoke Him, then, by these, and stand aloof from all who distort the meaning of His attributes: they shall be requited for all that they were wont to do!
See Asad’s Commentary.
6. Verses 181-183 show us -out of those whom God created- an exemplary community in those who guide others with Truth and Justice versus those who deny/belie God’s signs. We notice that when God gives the latter more time, it is NOT to their benefit. When we look at what people are doing, it often seems to us that wrongdoers do not taste the consequence of their actions, but rather -by not seeing the consequences- are tempted to step further and commit further wrongs (from the root-verb ‘daraja’).
God’s handling of affairs ‘kayd/كيد[13]’ is firm and persistent ‘mateen.’[14]
7. Verse 184, speaks to the idolatrous Meccans, reminding them of all the good things they knew about their erstwhile companion, now the Messenger of God, Muhammad.
According to Asad:
“Has it, then, never occurred to them that there is no madness whatever in [this] their fellow-man? He is only a plain warner.”
Notice the word ‘jinnah- جنّة- which denotes a hidden affliction. See Asad’s commentary number 150.
Verse 185 shows that a genuine contemplation of the dominion of heavens and earth and all that God had created would prove that- like all things- their term is nearing completion, then asks: …. in what ‘hadeeth- حديث ’ Communication after this will they have Faith and Trust?
We already mentioned that ‘hadeeth’ is ‘live,’ or ‘new’ communication, from the root-verb حدث /Hadatha– see Blog Post Day 46 Posting of February 23rd note 6. I disagree with translation of ‘Hadeeth’ as ‘Message’ by Ali, and ‘tiding’ by Asad. The Qur’an is called Hadeeth often, and is in fact the ‘best of Hadeeth’ put حديث in Tanzil.
Verse 186 seems like a conclusion, where we are reminded that God is The One to be worshipped and sought for guidance for there is no other but Him to guide; anyone in a state of active ‘Ttughyaan/طغيان’ -in the now- overbearing EXCESS/Tyranny’ shall be left in that state, rambling bewilderedly.[15]
The word ‘Ttughyaan’ follows the noun-form Fa’laan, and is about dire excessiveness, which when meted against others might be called ‘tyranny.’ This state of excessiveness and/or tyranny is what we are seeing more of in today’s world, may God help us!
Enough said!
Our next Reading is from HQ 7: 187-206
Peace unto all!
[1] Ibn Faris:
‘Tharra: One root, denoting subtleness and extensiveness. From that comes the noun ‘tharr’ which is about the smallest of ants, each one a ‘tharrah.’ One can say: “I dispersed the salt and the medicine.” Also, “the sun ‘tharrat thuroora’ spread its light softly yet extensively as it was rising.”
ابن فارس:
ذَرَّ: أَصْلٌ وَاحِدٌ يَدُلُّ عَلَى لَطَافَةٍ وَانْتِشَارٍ. وَمِنْ ذَلِكَ الذَّرُّ: صِغَارُ النَّمْلِ، الْوَاحِدَةُ ذَرَّةٌ. وَذَرَرْتُ الْمِلْحَ وَالدَّوَاءَ.
وَمِنَ الْبَابِ: ذَرَّتِ الشَّمْسُ ذُرُورًا، إِذَا طَلَعَتْ، وَهُوَ ضَوْءٌ لَطِيفٌ مُنْتَشِرٌ.
Al SaaHib Bin Abbaad (d.995 CE)
‘Thurriyyah’ is offspring because God has scattered them extensively throughout the earth, the plural of which is ‘tharaari.’
المحيط في اللغة للصاحب بن عبّاد:
والذُّرِّيَّةُ فُعْلِيَّةٌ: من ذَرَرْتُ، لأنَّ اللهَ ذَرَّهُم في الأرْضِ ذَرّاً، والجَمِيْعُ الذَّرَارِيُّ.
[2] Arabs understood that the word ‘tharrah’ referred to the tiniest of visible forms, which is why the ‘atom’ is called ‘tharrah’ in Arabic.
[3] ‘Thuhoor’ could either be the plural of ‘thahr’ ie. dorsum / back, or it could mean ‘appearance/ prevalence’ from the verb ‘thahara’ to appear/ prevail.
Most English commentators have explained ‘thuhoor’ as ‘loins,’ replacing it for the word used by Arab exegetes to explain this verse, which was أصلاب / ‘aSlaab.’ The Arabic أصلاب / ‘aSlaab’ is a far better explanation though, seeing that one’s ‘Sulb’ does not only point to one’s back/thahr, but the word also contains meanings of strength and prevalence whereas the English ‘loins’ has nothing of that. Furthermore, the word ‘aSlaab’ was used in the Qur’an to specify one’s own biological children -in life (Q4:23).
The difficulty in explaining this lies in the fact that it is all part of the unseen ‘gheyb’ however, if the Qur’an mentioned ‘aSlaab’ regarding progeny in life on earth, and mentioned ‘thuhoor’ regarding progeny before life on earth, then the words must be different, the latter probably unrelated to any future physical composition… and God knows best.
ظهر: يدلُّ على قوّةٍ وبروز.
من ذلك ظَهَرَ الشيءُ يظهرُ ظهوراً فهو ظاهر، إذا انكشفَ وبرزَ. ولذلك سمِّيَ وقت الظُّهرِ والظَّهيرة، وهو أظهر أوقات النّهار وأَضْوَؤُها. والأصل فيه كلّه ظهر الإنسان، وهو خلافُ بطنه، وهو يجمع البُروزَ والقوّة. والظَّهيرِ: المُعين، كأنَّه أسندَ ظَهْرَه إلى ظهرك. والظُّهور: الغَلبة. قال الله تعالى: {فَأَصْبَحُوا ظَاهِرِين} [الصف 14].
والظِّهريُّ: كلُّ شيءٍ تجعله بظَهْرٍ ، أي تنساه، كأَنَّكَ قد جعلتَه خلف ظهرِكَ ، إِعراضاً عنه وتركاً لـه. قال الله سبحانه: {وَاتّخَذْتُمُوهُ وَرَاءَكُمْ ظِهْرِيّاً} [هود 92].
[4] Carl Jung (1875-1961): ‘The Collective Unconscious’ is his most mystical, most controversial and, as some believe, his most important concept.
[5] سلخ: وهو إخراج الشيء عن جلده. ثم يُحْمَل عليه. والأصل سلخْتُ جلدةَ الشاةِ سلخاً. والسِّلْخ: جلد الحية تنسلخ.
[6] غوي: أصلانِ: أحدهما يدلُّ على خِلاف الرُّشد وإظلام الأَمْر، والآخرُ على فسادٍ في شيء. فالأوَّل الغَيّ، وهو خلاف الرُّشد، والجَهلُ بالأمر، والانهماكُ في الباطل. يقال غَوى يَغْوي غَيَّاً. وذلك عندنا مشتقٌّ من الغَيَاية، وهي الغُبْرة والظلمةُ تَغشيان، كأنَّ ذا الغَيِّ قد غَشِيه ما لا يرى معه سبيلَ حقّ.
فأمَّا الغَايَة فهي الرَّاية، وسمِّيت بذلك لأنّها تُظِلُّ مَن تحتَها. ثم سميِّت نهايةُ الشَّيء غايةً. وهذا من المحمول على غيرِه، إِنِّما سميت غايةً بغاية الحرب، وهي الرّاية، لأنَّه يُنْتَهَى إليها كما يَرجِع القومُ إلى رايَتِهم في الحرب. والأصل الآخر: قولهم: غَوِيَ الفَصيلُ، إذا أكثر من شُربِ اللّبَن ففَسَد جوفُه. والمصدر الغَوَى.
[7] The difference between تبع -اتّبع -أتبع is that with the alif it becomes purposeful following.
[8] خلد: يدلُّ على الثبات والملازمَة، فيقال: خَلَدَ: أقام، وأخلَدَ أيضاً. ومنه جَنَّةُ الخُلْدِ. ويقال أخْلَدَ إلى الأرض إذا لَصِق بها. قال الله تعالى: {وَلَكِنَّهُ أخْلَدَ إلَى الأَرْضِ} [الأعراف 176].
[9] The only few sweat glands that they have are on the pads of their feet, so instead of sweating to cool themselves, dogs cool themselves by panting. Other animals are similar, but cool themselves differently. Cats cool themselves by grooming; saliva on their fur cools them down.
[10] وَيَقُولُ الَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا لَوْلَا أُنزِلَ عَلَيْهِ آيَةٌ مِّن رَّبِّهِ قُلْ إِنَّ اللَّهَ يُضِلُّ مَن يَشَاءُ وَيَهْدِي إِلَيْهِ مَنْ أَنَابَ ﴿الرعد: ٢٧﴾
[11] Muhammad Asad often explains it in such manner, saying “….God lets go astray him that wills [to go astray], and guides him that wills [to be guided]…” (10:25; 14:4; 16:93; 24:35; etc..)
[12] In the words ‘Allahu yahdi man yashaa/ الله يهدي مَن يشاء’ the subject of the second verb (yashaa) is singular masculine, which could refer either to Allah, meaning ‘Allah yashaa’ to guide, or to the person meaning ‘man yashaa’ to be guided. (“God guides whom )He( wills (to guide)”…. OR: “God guides (him) who wills (to be guided)/ من يشاء/)” .. In the second, interpretation, note that the ‘He’ is added in the body of the interpretation although the subject of the verb ‘yashaa’ isn’t defined. Unfortunately, most interpretations sweepingly define the subject to be God, disregarding the evidence in Q13:27. This verse is a good one to memorize.
[13] كَيَدَ: أَصْلٌ صَحِيحٌ يَدُلُّ عَلَى مُعَالَجَةٍ لِشَيْءٍ بِشِدَّةٍ، ثُمَّ يَتَّسِعُ الْبَابُ، وَكُلُّهُ رَاجِعٌ إِلَى هَذَا الْأَصْلِ. قَالَ أَهْلُ اللُّغَةِ: الْكَيْدُ: الْمُعَالَجَةُ. قَالُوا: وَكُلُّ شَيْءٍ تُعَالِجُهُ فَأَنْتَ تَكِيدُهُ.
[14] مَتَنَ: أَصْلٌ صَحِيحٌ وَاحِدٌ يَدُلُّ عَلَى صَلَابَةٍ فِي الشَّيْءِ مَعَ امْتِدَادٍ وَطُولٍ.
[15] عَمِهَ: يَدُلُّ عَلَى حَيْرَةٍ وَقِلَّةِ اهْتِدَاءٍ. قَالَ الْخَلِيلُ: عَمِهَ الرَّجُلُ يَعْمَهُ عَمَهًا، وَذَلِكَ إِذَا تَرَدَّدَ لَا يَدْرِي أَيْنَ يَتَوَجَّهُ.