1. By the morning light
2. and by the night when it darkens and becomes still
3. (Indeed) Your Lord has neither forsaken you nor is He displeased (with you)
4. and the Hereafter is (a lot) better for you than the present (worldly life)
5. and soon your Lord will bestow you (with so may blessings) that you will be satisfied
6. Did He not find you an orphan and give you shelter?
7. and did He not find you oblivious of the Guidance (of Islam) and guided you (to Islam)?
8. and did He not find you destitute and make you affluent?
9. So you (in gratitude for the above blessings) must not be harsh with the orphan
10. and you must not rebuke the beggar
11. and you must recount the blessings of your Lord.
Tag: Tafseer
Atheism in the Muslim Youth
There is a lot of concern in the Muslim communities about the rampant spread of atheism among the Muslim youth. I’d like to share my thoughts about this dilemma.
There are two major reasons for this, I guess. One is that the youth doesn’t know anything about Islam other than fairy tales extant in the common parlance. And with those cotton candy sticks they are thrown in the arena of the internet, to fight the beasts and trolls of atheism and ungodliness. And this fight they are bound to lose. Hence the pervasive atheism.
Second reason is that the youth doesn’t find any role model to follow in their near and dears. Every kid likes to emulate the most admired and successful person around, but the youth doesn’t find many religious people around them that are admired or successful. Also due primarily to daily struggle of existence, parents and elders don’t find time to educate and mentor their youth. The situation is aggravated more with the elders being as oblivious of Islam as the youth.
So when a kid, uninitiated in the field of polemics and unaware of the Islamic creed, encounters some attack on Islam, his already dwindling faith in Islam is shaken. Most young people don’t dare ask such queries but if he’s brave enough, he may ask the Imam of his mosque or his elders but they, not knowing the answer, would invariably snub him, which would result in him keeping these irreconcilable difficulties with his faith to himself. Which would pile up and sooner or later would convert into a rebellion with his faith making him an atheist.
The solution to this situation also needs two major steps. One is that if we want our youth to not fall in the cesspool of atheism, we need to prepare them for the impending onslaught of the internet which they are going to be exposed to, whenever they are online. That can only be achieved by letting them understand the Qur’an either by an authentic Aalim or from an authentic Tafsir. This is a must.
Secondly present the youth with religious role models, if it’s yourself it would be easier for the youth to follow and emulate. But if that’s not possible, find religious role models in your community and admire them and follow them, the youth will definitely follow.
Also do not snub any query regarding faith and Islam, if the kid asks a question, be patient and try to answer it and if unable to answer, tell him we’ll go together and ask such and such Aalim about this. This way you are gaining the confidence of the kid to come to you for subsequent inquiries, and you are giving him a role model to follow (in your form or in the form of the Aalim).
Who are the Salihoon in 21:105
In this audio Maulana Ayub Dehlavi criticizes the traditional interpretation of الصالحون as the righteous and present another meaning I e. the word Saalih refers to the one who has the ability to rule. The Ayat under discussion is:
{ وَلَقَدۡ كَتَبۡنَا فِی ٱلزَّبُورِ مِنۢ بَعۡدِ ٱلذِّكۡرِ أَنَّ ٱلۡأَرۡضَ یَرِثُهَا عِبَادِیَ ٱلصَّـٰلِحُونَ }
And We have written in Zabūr (Psalms) after the advice that the land will be inherited by My righteous slaves.
[Surah Al-Anbiyâ’: 105]
In this ayat 21:105, the word الأرض has been interpreted by the exegetes as meaning paradise or earth. For the meaning of Paradise following Ayat is cited:
{ وَقَالُوا۟ ٱلۡحَمۡدُ لِلَّهِ ٱلَّذِی صَدَقَنَا وَعۡدَهُۥ وَأَوۡرَثَنَا ٱلۡأَرۡضَ نَتَبَوَّأُ مِنَ ٱلۡجَنَّةِ حَیۡثُ نَشَاۤءُۖ فَنِعۡمَ أَجۡرُ ٱلۡعَـٰمِلِینَ }
And they will say, “AlHamdulillāh : Praise belongs to Allah who made His promise come true for us, and made us inherit the territory, so as we can dwell anywhere we wish in Jannah (Paradise) . So, excellent is the reward of those who did (good) deeds.[Surah Az-Zumar: 74]
And if the the meaning of earth is taken, then either it’s a general rule or a specific rule. Some exegetes say that it’s specific, with a difference of opinion on whom it’s specific to. Some say it’s specific to the Bani Israel according to the Ayat:
{ وَأَوۡرَثۡنَا ٱلۡقَوۡمَ ٱلَّذِینَ كَانُوا۟ یُسۡتَضۡعَفُونَ مَشَـٰرِقَ ٱلۡأَرۡضِ وَمَغَـٰرِبَهَا ٱلَّتِی بَـٰرَكۡنَا فِیهَاۖ وَتَمَّتۡ كَلِمَتُ رَبِّكَ ٱلۡحُسۡنَىٰ عَلَىٰ بَنِیۤ إِسۡرَ ٰۤءِیلَ بِمَا صَبَرُوا۟ۖ وَدَمَّرۡنَا مَا كَانَ یَصۡنَعُ فِرۡعَوۡنُ وَقَوۡمُهُۥ وَمَا كَانُوا۟ یَعۡرِشُونَ }
We caused those people who were deemed to be weak (the Israelites) to inherit the East and West of the land that We had blessed. And the sublime word of your Lord was fulfilled for the children of Isrā’īl, because they stood patient; and We destroyed what Pharaoh and his people used to build and what they used to raise high. [Surah Al-A`râf: 137]
And Ibn Abbas رضي الله عنهما says that this Ayat is specific to the Ummat of Muhammad ﷺ, which is also aided by the Ayat:
{ وَعَدَ ٱللَّهُ ٱلَّذِینَ ءَامَنُوا۟ مِنكُمۡ وَعَمِلُوا۟ ٱلصَّـٰلِحَـٰتِ لَیَسۡتَخۡلِفَنَّهُمۡ فِی ٱلۡأَرۡضِ كَمَا ٱسۡتَخۡلَفَ ٱلَّذِینَ مِن قَبۡلِهِمۡ وَلَیُمَكِّنَنَّ لَهُمۡ دِینَهُمُ ٱلَّذِی ٱرۡتَضَىٰ لَهُمۡ وَلَیُبَدِّلَنَّهُم مِّنۢ بَعۡدِ خَوۡفِهِمۡ أَمۡنࣰاۚ یَعۡبُدُونَنِی لَا یُشۡرِكُونَ بِی شَیۡـࣰٔاۚ وَمَن كَفَرَ بَعۡدَ ذَ ٰلِكَ فَأُو۟لَـٰۤىِٕكَ هُمُ ٱلۡفَـٰسِقُونَ }
Allah has promised those of you who believe and do good deeds that He will certainly make them (His) vicegerents in the land, as He made those before them, and will certainly establish for them their religion which He has chosen for them, and will certainly give them peace in place of fear in which they were before; (provided that) they worship Me, ascribing no partner to Me. And those who turn infidel after that are the transgressors. [Surah An-Nûr: 55]
Shia exegetes make it specific to their twelfth Imam Mahdi and his followers. [***]
Or this Ayat is general in it’s application i.e. only those who are Saalih will inherit the earth.
Maulana Ayub Dehlavi’s referred audio pertains to this interpretation only since in all the other interpretations the meaning of Saalih as righteous is established. Maulana translates the word Saalih as the one who has the ability to rule while the traditional exegetes translate it as righteous.
Following Ayaat are cited for support of the traditional interpretation:
{ وَقَالَ ٱلَّذِینَ كَفَرُوا۟ لِرُسُلِهِمۡ لَنُخۡرِجَنَّكُم مِّنۡ أَرۡضِنَاۤ أَوۡ لَتَعُودُنَّ فِی مِلَّتِنَاۖ فَأَوۡحَىٰۤ إِلَیۡهِمۡ رَبُّهُمۡ لَنُهۡلِكَنَّ ٱلظَّـٰلِمِینَ }
The disbelievers said to their prophets, “We shall certainly expel you from our land unless you come back to our faith.” So, their Lord revealed to them, “We shall destroy the transgressors, [Surah Ibrâhîm: 13]
{ وَلَنُسۡكِنَنَّكُمُ ٱلۡأَرۡضَ مِنۢ بَعۡدِهِمۡۚ ذَ ٰلِكَ لِمَنۡ خَافَ مَقَامِی وَخَافَ وَعِیدِ }
and shall certainly let you dwell in the land after them. This is for the one who is fearful of standing before Me and is fearful of My warning.” [Surah Ibrâhîm: 14]
{ قَالَ مُوسَىٰ لِقَوۡمِهِ ٱسۡتَعِینُوا۟ بِٱللَّهِ وَٱصۡبِرُوۤا۟ۖ إِنَّ ٱلۡأَرۡضَ لِلَّهِ یُورِثُهَا مَن یَشَاۤءُ مِنۡ عِبَادِهِۦۖ وَٱلۡعَـٰقِبَةُ لِلۡمُتَّقِینَ }
Mūsā said to his people, “Seek help from Allah and be patient. Surely, the land belongs to Allah. He lets whomsoever He wills inherit it from among His servants; and the end-result is in favor of the God-fearing.” [Surah Al-A`râf: 128]
Also a verse in Psalms echoes the traditional interpretation:
‘The righteous shall inherit the land, and dwell therein forever.’ Psalms 37:29, KJV BIBLE
Maulana’s argument against the traditional interpretation is that of historical nature, that we have seen that righteous aka Muslims, don’t always rule the earth, so the traditional interpretation is untenable. But for the correct interpretation we need to take the word’s lexical meaning i.e. somebody with requisite abilities (to rule). The Ayat then translates to ‘.. that the Earth shall be inherited by my slaves who possess requisite abilities to rule’. This interpretation can withstand the criticism of the Historical argument, Maulana surmised, as this does not presuppose the piety of the ruler; so throughout the history whoever ruled, he ruled because of his ruling abilities, not because he belonged to certain belief.
Due to following reasons Maulana’s argument becomes weak:
1. The context of the Ayat dictates that the inheritance of the Earth is a blessing accorded to Allah’s pious servants due to their piety rather than just a historical principle.
2. The traditional interpretation is also fully commensurate with another Ayat:
{ وَلَا تَهِنُوا۟ وَلَا تَحۡزَنُوا۟ وَأَنتُمُ ٱلۡأَعۡلَوۡنَ إِن كُنتُم مُّؤۡمِنِینَ }
Do not lose heart and do not grieve, and you are the upper-most if you are believers.
[Surah Âl-`Imrân: 139]
3. The above Ayat also answers Maulana’s observation of non universality both temporal and spatial, of Muslim rule; Since the Ayat guarantees success only if one is a true Muslim, so when Muslims are subjugated, the main cause is the detriment in their faith while other factors like unpreparedness for war etc are just the manifestations of this weak faith.
4. Also in the Ayah 55 of Surah Al Nur quoted above, Allah Ta’aala promises the Caliphate over the world, solely as a consequence of Belief and Good deeds for the future, and establishes the same criteria for the past as well.
Allah has promised those of you who believe and do good deeds that He will certainly make them (His) vicegerents in the land, as He made those before them, and will certainly establish for them their religion which He has chosen for them, and will certainly give them peace in place of fear in which they were before; (provided that) they worship Me, ascribing no partner to Me. And those who turn infidel after that are the transgressors.
[Surah An-Nûr: 55]
Favorite books of Great Scholars
I being a bibliophile always relish in the idea of knowing what are the books that were read by great men whilst they were not so great or rather were unknown. I have read some books about the subject like “Mashaheer ahl e Ilm ki Muhsin Kitabain” and “Ulama e Deoband ki Ilmi aur Mutaliati Zindagi“. I have yet to read Yaadgar e Zamana Shakhsiyat Ka Ahwal e Mutala (not a pdf link) by Ibnul Hasan Abbasi. This article about Maulana Anwar Badakhshani’s favorite books, which is also the part of previous book is available on the internet.
Mufti Zar Wali rahimahullah used to say that among more than a thousand books of Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanvi rahimahullah, I like four books the most.
1. Tafseer Bayan ul Qur’an
2. At Takashshuf an Muhimmaatit Tasawwuf
3. Bawadir un Nawadir
4. Islah e Inqilab e Ummat
While I was searching for something I came across Imam Ibn Taymiyya’s opinion about best Tafseer, Hadith book and different books of Tasawwuf. This passage also contains other gems of wisdom.
Somebody asked him about a person who wants to make copies of Qur’an and Hadith books by writing them, that will this writing be beneficial for him in the Hereafter? He answered, Yes he would be rewarded, whether he writes it for himself or for selling. He cited a Hadith in support of his statement that it is narrated from the Prophet ﷺ that “Allah will enter three person into Jannat due to one arrow; the one who makes it, the one who gives to the archer, the one who shoots it.”
Then he is asked, which Tafseer is nearer to Kitab o Sunnat among few named Tafaseer. This is what he says about different Tafaseer.
“The truest Tafseer is Tafseer e Tabari, since it cites the narrations of Salaf with sound chains of narrators and it does not contain any Bid’ah and it does not cite from the accused like Muqatil bin Bukair and Kalbi.
And their are many Tafaseer that contain narrations with chains of narrators. Like Tafseer of Abdur Razzaq, ‘Abd bin Humaid, Wakee’ bin Abu Qutaibah, Ahmad bin Hanbal, and Is’haq bin Rahway.
[مسألة جندي له إقطاع ونسخ بيده صحيح مسلم والبخاري والقرآن وهو ناو كتابة الحديث والقرآن العظيم]
٢٤٠١ – ٨١ مسألة:
سئل شيخ الإسلام ابن تيمية عن جندي له إقطاع ونسخ بيده صحيح مسلم والبخاري والقرآن وهو ناو كتابة الحديث والقرآن العظيم.
وإن سمع بورق أو أقلام اشترى بألف درهم وقال أنا إن شاء الله أكتب في جميع هذا الورق أحاديث الرسول والقرآن ويؤمل آمالا بعيدة، فهل يأثم أم لا؟ وأي التفاسير أقرب إلى الكتاب والسنة: الزمخشري، أم القرطبي، أم البغوي، أو غير هؤلاء.
وإذا نسخ الإنسان لنفسه أو للبيع يكون له أجر وثواب مثل إحياء علوم الدين وقوت القلوب ومثل كتاب المنطق أفتونا.
الجواب: ليس عليه إثم فيما ينويه ويفعله من كتابة العلوم الشرعية فإن كتابة القرآن والأحاديث الصحيحة والتفاسير الموجودة الثابتة من أعظم القربات والطاعات.
وأما التفاسير التي في أيدي الناس فأصحها تفسير محمد بن جرير الطبري فإنه يذكر مقالات السلف بالأسانيد الثابتة وليس فيه بدعة ولا ينقل عن المتهمين مقاتل بن بكير والكلبي.
والتفاسير المأثورة بالأسانيد كثيرة، كتفسير عبد الرزاق، وعبد بن حميد، ووكيع بن أبي قتيبة، وأحمد بن حنبل، وإسحاق بن راهويه.
وأما التفاسير الثلاثة المسئول عنها فأسلمها من البدعة والأحاديث الضعيفة البغوي، لكنه مختصر في تفسير الثعلبي وحذف منه الأحاديث الموضوعة والبدع التي فيه وحذف أشياء غير ذلك.
وأما الواحدي فإنه تلميذ الثعلبي، وهو أخبر منه بالعربية، لكن الثعلبي فيه سلامة من البدع وإن ذكرها تقليدا لغيره، وتفسيره وتفسير الواحدي البسيط والوسيط والوجيز فيها فوائد جليلة، وفيها غث كثير من المنقولات الباطلة وغيرها.
وأما الزمخشري فتفسيره محشو بالبدعة، وعلى طريقة المعتزلة، من إنكار الصفات والرؤية والقول بخلق القرآن وأنكر أن الله مريد للكائنات وخالق لأفعال العباد وغير ذلك من أصول المعتزلة.
وأصولهم خمسة يسمونها التوحيد والعدل والمنزلة بين المنزلتين وإنفاذ الوعيد والأمر بالمعروف والنهي عن المنكر، لكن معنى التوحيد عندهم يتضمن نفي الصفات ولهذا سمى ابن التومرت أصحابه الموحدين، وهذا إنما هو إلحاد في أسماء الله وآياته، ومعنى العدل عندهم يتضمن التكذيب بالقدر، وهو خلق أفعال العباد وإرادة الكائنات والقدرة على شيء، ومنهم من ينكر مقدم العلم والكتاب لكن هذا قول أئمتهم وهؤلاء منصب الزمخشري فإن مذهبه مذهب المغيرة بن علي وأبي هاشم وأتباعهم ومذهب أبي الحسين.
والمعتزلة الذين على طريقته نوعان مسايخية وخشبية، وأما المنزلة بين المنزلتين فهي عندهم أن الفاسق لا يسمى مؤمنا بوجه من الوجوه كما لا يسمى كافرا فنزلوه بين منزلتين وإنفاذ الوعيد عندهم معناه أن فساق الملة مخلدون في النار لا يخرجون منها بشفاعة ولا غير ذلك كما تقوله الخوارج، والأمر بالمعروف والنهي عن المنكر يتضمن عندهم جواز الخروج على الأئمة وقتالهم بالسيف – وهذه الأصول حشا كتابه بعبارة لا يهتدي أكثر الناس إليها ولا لمقاصده فيها، مع ما فيه من الأحاديث الموضوعة ومن قلة النقل عن الصحابة والتابعين.
وتفسير القرطبي خير منه بكثير وأقرب إلى طريقة أهل الكتاب والسنة وأبعد عن البدع، وإن كان كل من كتب هذه الكتب لا بد أن تشتمل على ما ينقد لكن يجب العدل بينها وإعطاء كل ذي حق حقه.
وتفسير ابن عطية خير من تفسير الزمخشري وأصح نقلا وبحثا وأبعد عن البدع وإن اشتمل على بعضها بل هو خير منه بكثير بل لعله أرجح هذه التفاسير لكن تفسير ابن جرير أصح من هذه كلها.
وثم تفاسير أخر كثيرة جدا كتفسير ابن الجوزي والماوردي.
وأما كتاب قوت القلوب، وكتاب الإحياء تبع له فيما يذكره من أعمال القلوب، مثل الصبر، والشكر، والحب، والتوكل، والتوحيد، ونحو ذلك.
وأبو طالب أعلم بالحديث والأثر وكلام أهل علوم القلوب من الصوفية وغيرهم من أبي حامد الغزالي وكلامه أشد وأجود تحقيقا وأبعد عن البدعة مع أن في قوت القلوب أحاديث ضعيفة وموضوعة وأشياء مردودة كثيرة.
وأما ما في الإحياء من المهلكات مثل الكلام على الكبر، والعجب، والرياء، والحسد ونحو ذلك فغالبه منقول من كلام الحارث المحاسبي في ” الرعاية ” – ومنه ما هو مقبول ومنه ما هو مردود ومنه ما هو متنازع فيه، والإحياء فيه فوائد كثيرة، لكن فيه مواد مذمومة، فإن فيه مواد فاسدة من كلام الفلاسفة تتعلق بالتوحيد والنبوة والمعاد – فإذا ذكرت معارف الصوفية كان بمنزلة من أخذ عدوا للمسلمين ألبسه ثياب المسلمين وقد أنكر أئمة الدين على أبي حامد هذا في كتبه وقالوا: أمرضه الشفاء يعني شفاء ابن سينا في الفلسفة – وفيه أحاديث وآثار ضعيفة، بل موضوعة كثيرة وفيه أشياء من أغاليط الصوفية وترهاتهم، وفيه مع ذلك من كلام المشايخ الصوفية العارفين المستقيمين في أعمال القلوب الموافق للكتاب والسنة ومن غير ذلك من العبادات والأدب ما هو موافق للكتاب والسنة ما هو أكثر مما يرد منه فلهذا اختلف فيه اجتهاد الناس وتنازعوا فيه.
وأما كتب الحديث المعروفة مثل البخاري ومسلم فليس تحت أديم السماء كتاب أصح من البخاري ومسلم بعد القرآن وبعدهما ما جمع بينهما، مثل الجمع بين الصحيحين للحميدي، ولعبد الحق الإشبيلي، وبعد ذلك كتب السنن كسنن أبي داود، والنسائي، وجامع الترمذي، والمسانيد كمسند الشافعي، ومسند الإمام أحمد، وموطإ مالك فيه الأحاديث والآثار وغير ذلك وهو من أجل الكتب حتى قال الشافعي: ليس تحت أديم السماء بعد كتاب الله أصح من موطإ مالك يعني بذلك ما صنف على طريقته، فإن المتقدمين كانوا يجمعون في الباب بين المأثور عن النبي – صلى الله عليه وسلم – والصحابة والتابعين ولم تكن وضعت كتب الرأي التي تسمى كتب الفقه.
وبعد هذا جمع الحديث المسند في جمع الصحيح للبخاري ومسلم والكتب التي تحب ويؤجر الإنسان على كتابتها سواء كتبها لنفسه أو كتبها لبيعها، كما قال النبي – صلى الله عليه وسلم -: «إن الله يدخل بالسهم الواحد ثلاثة الجنة: صانعه، والرامي به، والممد به» فالكتابة كذلك لينتفع به أو لينتفع به غيره كلاهما يثاب عليه.
وأما كتب المنطق فتلك لا تشتمل على علم يؤمر به شرعا، وإن كان قد أدى اجتهاد بعض الناس إلى أنه فرض على الكفاية، وقال بعض الناس إن العلوم لا تقوم إلا به كما ذكر ذلك أبو حامد فهذا غلط عظيم عقلا وشرعا – أما عقلا فإن جميع عقلاء بني آدم من جميع أصناف المتكلمين في العلم حرزوا علومهم بدون المنطق اليوناني – وأما شرعا فإنه من المعلوم بالاضطرار في دين الإسلام أن الله لم يوجب تعلم هذا المنطق اليوناني على أهل العلم والإيمان – وأما هو في نفسه فبعضه حق وبعضه باطل والحق الذي فيه كثير منه أو أكثره لا يحتاج إليه والقدر الذي يحتاج إليه منه فأكثر الفطر السليمة تستقل به والبليد لا ينتفع به والذكي لا يحتاج إليه، ومضرته على من لم يكن خبيرا بعلوم الأنبياء أكثر من نفعه فإن فيه من القواعد السلبية الفاسدة ما راجت على كثير من الفضلاء وكانت سبب نفاقهم وفساد علومهم – قول من قال إنه كله حق كلام باطل بل في كلامه في الحد والصفات الذاتية والعرضية وأقسام القياس والبرهان وموارده من الفساد ما قد بيناه في غير هذا الموضع وقد بين ذلك علماء المسلمين والله أعلم.
– امام ابن تيمية في الفتاوى الكبرى ج٥ ص٨٤-٨٧
مفید کتب
ایک عزیز طالب علم کے التماس کے حوالے سے کہ چھٹیوں میں کن کتب کا مطالعہ کیا جائے، یہ چند سطور رقم کیں۔ عمومی فائدے کے مد نظر اسے عام کرنا مناسب معلوم ہوا۔
کتابوں میں سب سے پہلے ایھا الولد (اردو) امام غزالی رحمہ اللہ کی پڑھیں۔ ان کی چند اور کتابیں میں درج کرتا ہوں وہ بھی ضرور پڑھیں۔
١. المنقذ من الضلال (English) (اردو) – یہ امام غزالی رحمہ اللہ کی سرگزشت ہے کہ وہ گمراہی سے کیسے بچے۔
٢.الاربعین (تبلیغ دین) – امام غزالیؒ نے اس کتاب میں حقوق اللہ اور حقوق العباد سے متعلق جو کوتاہیاں اور خرابیاں عام طور پر انسانوں میں پائی جاتی ہیں ان کی اصلاح کی پوری پوری کوشش فرمائی ہے۔
٣. احیاء العلوم کے عقائد اور علم کے ابواب۔
مولانا ادریس کاندھلوی کی سیرت المصطفیٰ۔
مقدمہ ابن خلدون یا مولانا حنیف ندوی کی افکار ابن خلدون جو مقدمہ کا ہی خلاصہ ہے۔
علی میاں رحمہ اللہ کی چند کتب ذکر کرتا ہوں ضرور پڑھیں۔
1۔ دستور حیات
2۔ معرکہ ایمان و مادیت
3۔ تاریخ دعوت وعزیمت
4۔ سيرة النبوية
حضرت علی میاں رحمہ اللہ کی جملہ کتب مختلف زبانوں میں اس رابطے سے حاصل کی جا سکتی ہیں۔
وحید الدین خان صاحب کی ایک کتاب راز حیات بھی پڑھنے کے لائق ہے۔
مولانا اشرف علی تھانوی کی تفسیر بیان القرآن سے جتنا استفادہ کر سکتے ہیں ضرور کیجیے۔ انھی کی اصلاح انقلاب امت بھی ضرور پڑھیں۔
Apparent Anachronism in the Story of Hazrat Lut Alaihis Salaam
A person who is a friend of one of my relatives, brought our attention to an apparent anachronism in the story of Hazrat Lut alaihis salaam, and asked us to solve the apparent discrepancy. First I’ll narrate the problem and then present the solution.
The Problem
In Surah Hijr, Quran says that when the angels came to Hazrat Lut alaihis salaam, they assured him as soon as they arrived that he should not worry they have come to destroy the bad people, while in Surah Hood, Quran says that Hazrat Lut alaihis salaam got worried and he did not know if they were angels. The respective translations are given below:
Surah Hood
77. When Our messengers came to Lut, he was grieved on their account and felt himself powerless (to protect) them. He said: “This is a distressful day.”
78. And his people came rushing towards him, and they had been long in the habit of practising abominations. He said: “O my people! Here are my daughters: they are purer for you (if ye marry)! Now fear Allah, and cover me not with shame about my guests! Is there not among you a single right-minded man?”
79. They said: “Well dost thou know we have no need of thy daughters: indeed thou knowest quite well what we want!”
80. He said: “Would that I had power to suppress you or that I could betake myself to some powerful support.”
81. (The Messengers) said: “O Lut! We are Messengers from thy Lord! By no means shall they reach thee! now travel with thy family while yet a part of the night remains, and let not any of you look back: but thy wife (will remain behind): To her will happen what happens to the people. Morning is their time appointed: Is not the morning nigh?”
Surah Hijr
61. At length when the messengers arrived among the adherents of Lut,
62. He said: “Ye appear to be uncommon folk.”
63. They said: “Yea, we have come to thee to accomplish that of which they doubt.
64. “We have brought to thee that which is inevitably due, and assuredly we tell the truth.
65. “Then travel by night with thy household, when a portion of the night (yet remains), and do thou bring up the rear: let no one amongst you look back, but pass on whither ye are ordered.”
66. And We made known this decree to him, that the last remnants of those (sinners) should be cut off by the morning.
67. The inhabitants of the city came in (mad) joy (at news of the young men).
68. Lut said: “These are my guests: disgrace me not:
69. “But fear Allah, and shame me not.”
70. They said: “Did we not forbid thee (to speak) for all and sundry?”
71. He said: “There are my daughters (to marry), if ye must act (so).”
The Solution
I checked almost all the famous names in exegesis like Tabari, Raazi, Zamakhshari, Ibn Kathir etc, but no one had dealt with this problem. May be that was not a significant problem to reckon with or they were never challenged by this problem. But after some thinking – by sheer grace of Almighty – I came up with an answer that I think has put the objection to rest.
The solution is that the actual sequence of the events is as given in Surah Hood while what Surah Hijr narrates are two different views of an instance coming in succession with out any temporal order. One instance is from Ayat 61 to 66, and the other is from 67 to 71. In first instance the whole episode of hazrat Lut alaihis salaam is narrated with the omission of ‘the inhabitants of the city’ while in the second only the part pertaining to ‘the inhabitants of the city’ is dealt with. So these two instances are temporally disjointed and one does not succeed the other. Since this is Quran there must have some reason behind choosing this sequence of instances about which one can just speculate. I think this sequence was chosen to tell the gist of the upcoming event and then the event was narrated in detail afterwards, just like we have an abstract for a thesis or an introduction for a book to inform the reader with the bigger picture before delving into the details.
After some time of proposing this solution I checked in ‘Bayan ul Quran’ – the Tafseer of Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanvi – and it was a pleasant surprise to find out that almost the same solution was presented by him with a slight difference in the reason for this duality of instances. What, according to him, is the reason for this duality is that ‘due to the importance of the whole event it was first narrated as a whole and then the details were narrated’.
The reason for the Quran’s elaborate employment of literary instruments
Quran tells us in Ayah 3:8 that its verses are divided in two types, i.e. Muhkammat (firm, established, unequivocal) and Mutashaabihaat (equivocal, having more than one meanings). Someone may ask why did Allah not reveal the Quran as Muhkamaat only which would be beneficial for the followers of Quran, as there would be no dispute about the meaning of Quran and the root of sectarianism could be nipped on the onset.
This is a question answered by Muslim exegetes over the centuries, but in the modern times our generation has grown up to acquire knowledge about Islam from the orientalists and so called western Islamic scholars –primarily due to our fetishism with English as the language of scholarship forced down our throats since childhood– who approach Islam for the sole purpose of fault finding, and in the process omit grandiose events which are against their premise and exaggerate whatever minuscule thing proves their point. Edward Said dwells upon this subject with strong scholarship in his famous work “Orientalism”. Due to this we were unable to look beyond what was written by them -whose concern is raising doubts rather than clearing them – and were unable to find answers to the doubts raised in our hearts from ‘Khannaas’ who is from ‘Jinns’ as well as ‘Men’. [114:4-6]
One of the many answers given by the Muslim Scholars regarding the reason of this bifurcation of Ayaat is given below. Allamah Ibnul Joozi [d. 592 Hijri] rahimahullah says in his book ‘Al Mud-Hish’;
لما كانت اللغة تنقسم قسمين: أحدهما: الظاهر الذي لا يخفى على سامعيه ولا يحتمل غير ظاهره.
والثاني: المشتمل على الكنايات والإشارات والتجوزات، وكان هذا القسم هو المستحلى عند العرب.
نزل القرآن بالقسمين ليتحقق عجزهم عن الإتيان بمثله، فكأنه قال: عارضوه بأي القسمين شئتم، ولو نزل كله واضحاً لقالوا: هلا نزل بالقسم المستحلى عندنا، ومتى وقع في الكلام إشارة أو كناية أو استعارة أو تعريض أو تشبيه كان أحلى واحسن.
المدهش لابن الجوزي الصفحة 7
Translation:
Since language is divided into two types: the one which is obvious to the listener and which has no chance of some meaning other than its obvious meaning, the other is which comprises of periphrases and allusions and metaphors, and Arabs were fascinated by the latter kind, the Quran was revealed in both types to establish their inability to bring forth its replica; its like Allah said, “Challenge the Quran with any type of language you wish”. And if the Quran was revealed all in the obvious (first type) they would definitely say “Why was it not revealed in the type which we admire (i.e. the second type)? And when the language (of Quran) consisted of allusion or periphrasis or circumlocution or innuendo or similes, it would have been sweeter and better.”
Ibn Al Joozi, Almud-hish, page 7
Fiqh ud deen 