All posts by AI REV LABS

Bible vs Quran: similarities vs difference

Of course. A comparison of the Quran and the Bible is a profound and complex topic, central to understanding both Islam and Christianity. It’s important to approach this with respect for both faiths.

Here is a comparative look at the Quran and the Bible across several key dimensions.


1. Origin and Revelation

Feature The Quran The Bible Source & Revealer Muslims believe the Quran is the literal, unchanging, and final Word of God (Allah), revealed directly to the Prophet Muhammad through the Angel Gabriel. Christians believe the Bible is the inspired Word of God, written by human authors who were guided by the Holy Spirit. It is seen as God’s message through human words and contexts. LanguageArabic exclusively. The Quran is considered miraculous and untranslatable in its essence. Translations are considered “interpretations of the meanings.” Originally written in Hebrew (OT), Aramaic (parts of OT), and Greek (NT). It is considered fully authoritative in translation, as the message is seen as transcending the original language. Process of Revelation Revealed to one person (Muhammad) over a period of 23 years. The revelation was witnessed, memorized, and written down during the Prophet’s lifetime. A collection of writings by numerous authors (over 40) from different backgrounds over approximately 1,500 years.


2. Structure and Content

Feature The Quran The Bible Structure114 Surahs (chapters), not arranged chronologically but roughly by length (longest to shortest, except the opening chapter). It is not a narrative. Two main parts: Old Testament (OT) and New Testament (NT). It is a collection of books of various genres: law, history, poetry, prophecy, gospels, epistles. Length Approximately the length of the Christian New Testament. Significantly longer than the Quran (the OT alone is much larger). Narrative StyleAllusive and thematic. It often refers to stories of past prophets (like Adam, Noah, Abraham, Moses, Jesus) but does not tell them as continuous narratives. The purpose is to convey moral, theological, and legal lessons. Detailed and narrative. Stories are often told in a linear, chronological fashion with characters, dialogue, and plot development (especially in the OT historical books and the Gospels). Central FigureGod (Allah). The Quran is fundamentally God’s speech. Even verses about Muhammad are spoken by God. The focus is on God’s Oneness, Will, and Majesty. Jesus Christ. The entire Bible is seen by Christians as pointing to Jesus. The OT foreshadows him, and the NT reveals his life, teachings, death, and resurrection.


3. Theological Content: Key Similarities and Differences

Shared Figures, Different Roles

Both books feature many of the same prophets, but their roles and stories often differ.

  • Adam: The first man and prophet. Story of creation and expulsion from Eden is similar.
  • Abraham (Ibrahim): A pivotal figure of pure monotheism in both. The Quran emphasizes his rejection of idolatry and his submission to God (Islam means submission).
  • Moses (Musa): A major prophet who received revelation (the Tawrat) and confronted Pharaoh. The Exodus story is detailed in both.
  • Mary (Maryam): Highly revered in both. The Quran dedicates a whole chapter to her and affirms the virgin birth of Jesus.
  • Jesus (Isa): This is the most significant point of theological divergence.
    • In the Bible: The Son of God, part of the Holy Trinity, who died on the cross for humanity’s sins and was physically resurrected.
    • In the Quran: A great Prophet and Messiah, born of the Virgin Mary, performed miracles by God’s permission, but not the Son of God. He was not crucified; instead, God raised him to Himself and it was made to appear so to others. He will return before the Day of Judgment. The Quran strongly rejects the concept of the Trinity (Quran 5:73).

Core Theological Concepts

Concept In the Quran In the Bible GodStrict, uncompromising Monotheism (Tawhid). God is One, Unique, and has no partners, children, or equals. He is transcendent and merciful. Monotheistic, but understood as a Trinity (Father, Son, Holy Spirit) – one God in three persons. This is a central mystery of the Christian faith. Sin & Salvation Humans are born pure. Sin is primarily an act of disobedience, not an innate state. Salvation is achieved through belief in One God, good deeds, and God’s mercy. There is no concept of original sin or a vicarious atonement. Humans are born with Original Sin from Adam’s fall. Salvation is achieved through faith in the atoning sacrifice of Jesus Christ on the cross. It is by God’s grace, received through faith. The Afterlife Detailed descriptions of Heaven (Jannah) and Hell (Jahannam). Admission to Heaven is based on God’s judgment of one’s faith and deeds. Also contains descriptions of Heaven and Hell. For Christians, eternal life is granted through acceptance of Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior.


4. Preservation and Authority

Feature The Quran The Bible Preservation Muslims believe the Quran has been perfectly and miraculously preserved, both orally and in text, since its revelation. The same text is used universally by all Muslims. Christians believe the Bible is the inspired and authoritative Word of God. Scholars acknowledge a process of compilation, translation, and transmission over centuries, with minor textual variants in ancient manuscripts, though the core message is considered intact. Role in Faith The ultimate and final authority in all matters of faith, law, and practice. It is the central miracle of Islam. The primary and sacred scripture. Its authority for Christians is derived from its witness to Jesus Christ.

Summary Table

Aspect Quran Bible Nature of Revelation Literal Word of God Inspired Word of God Language Sacred in Arabic Authoritative in translation Central Focus God’s Oneness and Will The Life and Work of Jesus Christ View of Jesus A revered Prophet, not divine The Son of God, central to salvation Core Theology Strict Monotheism Trinitarian Monotheism Salvation Faith + Good Deeds + God’s Mercy Grace through Faith in Christ Preservation Believed to be perfect and unchanged Believed to be divinely inspired despite human transmission process

Conclusion:

While the Quran and the Bible share a common geographical and prophetic heritage, they are fundamentally different books with distinct theological cores. The Bible is a library of books culminating in the story of Jesus Christ, while the Quran is a single book understood as the final divine discourse, confirming previous messages but correcting what it sees as human alterations and re-establishing pure monotheism.

Understanding these differences is key to a respectful and meaningful dialogue between the two faiths.

BELIEVES & RHETORICAL questions: depends on sincerity of questionaires

Q: in history disbelievers demanded for signs vs demands of current scholars, intellectuals for verses in Quran or questioning ahadees… does it sound same?

A: Verses on Demanding Signs Yet Remaining in Disbelief

  1. The Demand for Signs as a Pattern of Disbelievers
    “And they say: ‘Why are not signs sent down to him from his Lord?’ Say: ‘The signs are only with Allah, and I am only a clear warner.’”
    — Surah Al-Ankabut 29:50
    And Allah further says:
    “And even if We had sent down to them the angels and the dead had spoken to them, and We had gathered everything before them, they would not have believed unless Allah willed. But most of them are ignorant.”
    — Surah Al-An’am 6:111
  2. Clear Signs Were Given — Still They Disbelieved
    “Indeed, those against whom the word of your Lord has come into effect will not believe, even if every sign comes to them, until they see the painful punishment.”
    — Surah Yunus 10:96-97
  3. The Demand for Clear Verses / Physical Miracles
    “And they swore by Allah their strongest oaths that if a sign came to them, they would surely believe in it. Say: ‘Signs are only with Allah.’ And what will make you perceive that even if a sign came, they would not believe?”
    — Surah Al-An’am 6:109
  4. Previous Nations Who Demanded Signs
    “And nothing has prevented Us from sending signs except that the former peoples denied them. And We gave Thamud the she-camel as a visible sign, but they wronged her. And We send not signs except as warning.”
    — Surah Al-Isra 17:59
  5. The Psychological Reality — Arrogance, Not Lack of Evidence
    Even if We opened for them a gate to heaven and they continued to ascend through it, they would say: ‘Our eyes have only been dazzled. Rather, we are a people affected by magic.’”
    — Surah Al-Hijr 15:14-15
  6. The Quran Itself Being Dismissed
    “And they say: ‘Why has a sign not been sent down to him from his Lord?’ But you are only a warner, and for every people is a guide.”
    — Surah Al-Ra’d 13:7

Your Comparison is Well-Founded
The parallel you are drawing is theologically and psychologically accurate because:

∙ The Quran explicitly establishes that demanding more evidence is often a rhetorical tactic, not a sincere quest for truth
∙ Surah Al-Baqarah 2:118 notes this demand is repetitive across generations: “Those who do not know say: ‘Why does Allah not speak to us or why does a sign not come to us?’ Thus spoke those before them similar to their words…”
The rejection of authentic ahadith often follows the same pattern — the demand for Quranic verses on every detail of the unseen is structurally similar to asking prophets for miracles, when the existing evidence is already sufficient for sincere seekers
The issue, as the Quran frames it, is not lack of evidence but disposition of the heart.

Bans, penalties based on attire

https://grok.com/share/c2hhcmQtNA_1d486873-5bcc-429a-bf6f-202933540426

Countries Currently Penalizing Face Coverings (Burqa, Niqab) and/or Headscarves (Hijab)

Many countries enforce bans on full-face coverings like the burqa (full-body garment with mesh over the eyes) and niqab (face veil leaving eyes visible), often citing security, secularism, or social integration. These laws typically impose fines, short prison terms, or citizenship education. Bans on headscarves (hijab) are rarer and usually limited to public institutions like schools or government offices, with penalties including denial of access or fines. “Covering private parts” likely refers to these modesty garments, as no laws specifically target body coverage alone (e.g., bikinis are legal in banning countries). Below is a categorized list based on current enforcement as of November 2025.

Full National or Public Bans on Face Coverings (Burqa/Niqab), with Penalties

These apply in public spaces, transport, or institutions, affecting ~200–400 women per country in most cases. Penalties: Fines (€150–1,100), up to 7 days jail, or arrest for refusal.

  • France (2011 ban): Full-face coverings illegal in public; €150 fine or citizenship course. Hijab allowed but banned in schools (2004 law).
  • Belgium (2011): Nationwide ban; up to 7 days jail or €137.50 fine. Hijab banned in some public schools.
  • Austria (2017): Full-face veils banned in public; €150 fine. Partial hijab restrictions in schools.
  • Denmark (2018): Face coverings banned; fines start at €100, escalating for repeats. Applies to masks too.
  • Netherlands (2019): Partial ban in public buildings/transport/schools; €150+ fine or arrest.
  • Switzerland (2025 enforcement): Nationwide ban on face coverings; up to 1,000 CHF (~$1,100) fine.
  • Bulgaria (2016): Full ban in public; fines for non-compliance.
  • Latvia (2016): Face coverings banned in public.
  • Luxembourg (2018): Partial ban in public spaces; fines apply.
  • Norway (2018): Ban in educational/health institutions; fines.
  • Tunisia (1981, partial lift 2011): Face coverings banned in public; fines/jail.
  • Algeria (2018): Banned for public servants; fines for others.
  • Morocco (2017): Ban on manufacturing/sale of burqa; fines for public wear.
  • Egypt (2023): Full niqab ban in schools; hijab requires parental consent—non-compliance leads to expulsion/fines.
  • China (2017, Xinjiang): Burqa/niqab banned; fines or detention under anti-extremism laws.
  • Kazakhstan (2025): Face coverings banned in public for “facial recognition”; fines.
  • Uzbekistan (2023): Face coverings banned in public spaces; fines.
  • Kyrgyzstan (2025): Niqab banned in public; fines with medical exceptions.
  • Tajikistan: Face coverings restricted; fines.
  • Turkmenistan: Face coverings banned; fines.
  • Sri Lanka (2019): Full ban post-Easter attacks; fines/jail.
  • Cameroon/Chad/Congo/Gabon/Senegal: Face coverings banned in public; fines/jail for security.
  • Myanmar (2015 proposal enforced): Hijab/burqa restricted in schools/public; fines.

Partial/Institutional Bans on Headscarves (Hijab) or Face Coverings, with Penalties

These limit access to services; penalties include fines or exclusion.

  • Turkey: Hijab banned in military/courts (partial lift 2013); fines for violations.
  • Azerbaijan (2010): Hijab banned in schools/government; fines.
  • Kosovo (2009): Hijab banned in schools/public offices; denial of entry.
  • Russia (various regions, e.g., Mordovia 2015): Hijab banned in schools; fines.
  • Germany (state-level): Face veils banned in some states’ schools/offices; hijab bans for teachers in 8/16 states (fines up to €1,000).
  • Italy (Lombardy region, 2016): Face coverings banned in public buildings/hospitals; fines.

These bans are upheld by bodies like the European Court of Human Rights (e.g., France’s 2014 ruling on “living together”). Enforcement varies; few prosecutions occur due to low prevalence (e.g.,

Countries Enforcing Modesty Rules on Clothing and Public Exposure of Private Parts

Modesty laws worldwide typically require covering “private parts” (genitals, buttocks, and often breasts, midriff, or thighs) in public to prevent indecent exposure, with penalties like fines, arrests, or flogging. These are enforced via police patrols, morality squads, or judicial rulings. While nearly all countries have basic indecent exposure laws (e.g., banning full nudity), the query focuses on stricter, culturally/religiously driven codes mandating broader coverage (e.g., arms, legs, hair) for modesty. Below, I categorize by enforcement intensity, based on current laws as of November 2025. Enforcement varies by region (stricter in rural/conservative areas).

Strict National Enforcement (Mandatory Coverage for Women, Often Including Hijab/Abaya; Applies to Locals and Tourists)

These countries use Sharia-inspired laws or decrees, with morality police or fines/jail for violations like short skirts, tight clothes, or uncovered hair/shoulders/knees.

  • Iran: Hijab mandatory since 1979; women must cover hair, arms, legs, and body shape in public. Fines up to 30 billion rials (~$60,000 USD), license revocation, or imprisonment enforced by Guidance Patrol. Men must avoid shorts/sleeveless tops.
  • Afghanistan (Taliban rule): Burqa or full hijab mandatory for women; covers entire body/face (mesh over eyes). Fines, arrests, or violence by morality police for non-compliance.
  • Saudi Arabia: Modest loose clothing required (abaya/hijab for women covering hair/arms/legs; long pants/shirts for men). Public Decency Code (updated 2025) fines up to 1,000 SAR (~$267 USD) for revealing outfits like shorts or sleepwear; enforced in holy cities like Mecca.
  • Qatar: Penal code bans revealing/indecent clothes (e.g., not covering shoulders/knees, tight/transparent fabrics). Fines by Al-Adheed body; targets foreigners.
  • Sudan: Sharia-based; women must cover arms/legs (headscarves in conservative areas); trousers/miniskirts banned. Fines, jail, or 40 lashes for “public order” violations like tight clothes.
  • Maldives: Modest dress on local islands (cover shoulders/knees; bikinis only at resorts). Fines for revealing swimwear in public; enforced for cultural/Islamic reasons.
  • North Korea: Subdued, modest domestic attire; women banned from trousers/jeans (fines/forced labor); piercings forbidden as “anti-Western.”

Provincial/Regional Enforcement (Strict in Specific Areas)

  • Indonesia (Aceh Province): Sharia law mandates hijab and modest clothing (covering arms/legs); fines or public shaming for violations.

Moderate National Enforcement (Bans on Revealing Clothes; Fines for Exposure Above Knees/Thighs)

These focus on prohibiting “indecent” attire like miniskirts or low-cut tops, often under anti-pornography or public order laws.

  • Uganda: Anti-Pornography Act bans miniskirts/revealing clothes exposing thighs/breasts/buttocks. Arrests, harassment, or fines; women assaulted for non-compliance.
  • Gambia: Islamic republic; women urged (enforced in public jobs) to cover hair/arms/legs modestly. Fines for indecent dress.
  • Bhutan: National dress (kira for women covering body) required in government offices/schools. Fines for non-compliance to preserve culture.

Broader Global Context: Indecent Exposure Laws (Universal Basic Coverage)

All countries enforce minimum coverage of genitals/anus/breasts via indecent exposure statutes (e.g., fines/jail in US states, UK, India, Brazil). Examples with cultural emphasis:

  • India: Bans exposure of genitals/buttocks/nipples; malls require knee/shoulder coverage. Fines under colonial-era laws.
  • Brazil: “Public outrage to modesty” bans revealing private parts; fines/jail, though lenient in beaches.
  • Portugal: Penal code criminalizes exposure; fines for nudity/revealing attire in public.

These laws aim to uphold cultural/religious norms but face criticism for gender bias (e.g., UN reports on Iran/Afghanistan). Tourists should check advisories; enforcement eased in urban Saudi areas post-2019 reforms.

History of cultures, taxations on women covering upper body

https://grok.com/share/c2hhcmQtNA_6a128667-f65c-4f81-a2ba-c174f4f0406d

There are several well-documented cases in history (and even into the 20th century) where women were legally or socially required to keep their upper body bare in public or semi-public settings, and faced penalties — ranging from fines and public shaming to physical punishment or loss of rights — if they covered their breasts.

Here are the major examples:

1. India – Kerala (until 19th–early 20th century)

  • Who: Lower-caste women (Nadars/Chanars, Ezhavas, and other “avarna” castes) in the kingdoms of Travancore and Cochin.
  • Rule: These women were forbidden to cover their breasts in the presence of higher-caste men or in public spaces, as covering the upper body was considered a privilege reserved for upper-caste (Nair, Nambudiri, Syrian Christian) women.
  • Penalties: Forcible stripping in public, heavy fines, social ostracism, assault, and in some cases mutilation or murder. Higher-caste men or officials would tear off any cloth used to cover the breasts.
  • Rebellion & end: The Channar Revolt (also called the “Breast Cloth Controversy” or Maru Marakkal Samaram) began in the 1820s and peaked in the 1850s. After decades of protests, Travancore finally issued a royal proclamation in 1859 allowing Nadar women to cover their breasts (though not in the exact style of upper-caste women until later). Cochin followed shortly after.

2. Parts of West and Central Africa (pre-colonial and colonial era)

  • In many societies (e.g., among the Ewe of Ghana/Togo, some Yoruba subgroups, Igbo in eastern Nigeria, Mende in Sierra Leone, Wolof in Senegal, and others), adult women traditionally went topless in daily life and during work. Covering the breasts was sometimes seen as immodest or associated with mourning or menstruation.
  • Colonial period enforcement (late 19th–mid 20th century): British, French, and German colonial authorities and Christian missionaries tried to force women to cover up, but in some rural areas local chiefs or elders resisted and fined or punished women who adopted European-style blouses too early, viewing it as rejecting tradition.
  • Example: In parts of southeastern Nigeria in the 1920s–1930s, during the Women’s War / Aba Riots (1929), one of the grievances was that colonial taxes forced women to wear imported cloth tops to appear in court, which some communities saw as an infringement on customary toplessness.

3. Goa, India (Portuguese colonial rule, 16th–20th centuries)

  • Catholic converts from lower castes were sometimes prohibited from wearing the upper-body covering (cholis or blouses) that Hindu upper-caste women wore, to mark caste distinction even after conversion.
  • Portuguese records and 19th-century travelers noted that Christian fisherwomen (Konkani Catholics) went topless or with only a shawl until the early 20th century, partly because of lingering caste-based clothing rules.

4. Amazonian and some Pacific societies (into the 20th century)

  • In several indigenous Amazonian groups (e.g., Yanomami, Kayapo, Xingu tribes) and some Melanesian/Pacific societies, women traditionally went topless. When missionaries or governments tried to impose clothing in the 20th century, some communities initially resisted and punished women who adopted tops, viewing it as foreign or shameful. The reverse enforcement (forcing toplessness) faded rapidly after the 1950s.

Summary Table

Region / Society Time period Who was forced to remain topless Penalty for covering breasts Travancore & Cochin (Kerala) ~1800–1859 Lower-caste Hindu/Christian women Forcible stripping, fines, assault, murder Parts of West/Central Africa Pre-colonial & early colonial Many ethnic groups (varies) Social ostracism, fines by elders Portuguese Goa 16th–early 20th century Lower-caste Catholic women Social and sometimes legal sanctions Some Amazonian & Pacific groups Until mid-20th century Indigenous women Community pressure or punishment

The Kerala case is by far the most extreme and best-documented example of a state-enforced prohibition on women covering their upper bodies, complete with violent state-backed penalties.

Bani Israel: foot notes 6-11

Here is the English translation of the Urdu text:


Surah Bani Isra’il — Footnote No. 6

These warnings are found at various places in the collection of holy scriptures known as the Bible. The first corruption and its evil consequences were warned about to the Children of Israel in the Psalms, Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel; and the second corruption and its severe punishment was foretold by Jesus (peace be upon him), which is present in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke. Below, we reproduce the relevant passages from these books so that this Quranic statement may be fully corroborated.

The first warning about the first great corruption was given by the Prophet David, whose words are as follows:

“They did not destroy the nations as the Lord had commanded them, but mingled with those nations and learned their practices, and began to worship their idols, which became a snare to them. They even sacrificed their daughters to demons and shed innocent blood — the blood of their own sons and daughters… Therefore the anger of the Lord was kindled against His people, and He abhorred His heritage, and He delivered them into the hand of the nations, and those who hated them ruled over them.”
(Psalm 106, verses 34–41)

In this passage, events that were yet to occur are described in the past tense, as if they had already happened. This is a distinctive style of the heavenly scriptures.

Then, when this great corruption actually came to pass, the Prophet Isaiah foretold the resulting destruction in his book in the following words:

“Ah, sinful nation, a people laden with iniquity, offspring of evildoers, children who deal corruptly! They have forsaken the Lord, they have despised the Holy One of Israel, they are utterly estranged — why will you still be struck down? Why will you continue to rebel?”
(Chapter 1, verse 4–5)

“How the faithful city has become a whore! She that was full of justice — righteousness lodged in her, but now murderers… Your princes are rebels and companions of thieves. Everyone loves a bribe and runs after gifts. They do not bring justice to the fatherless, and the widow’s cause does not come to them. Therefore the Lord God of hosts, the Mighty One of Israel, declares: Ah, I will get relief from my enemies and avenge myself on my foes.”
(Chapter 1, verses 21–24)

“They are full of the customs of the East and they practice divination like the Philistines, and they strike hands with the children of foreigners… Their land is also full of idols; they bow down to the work of their own hands, to what their own fingers have made.”
(Chapter 2, verses 6–7)

“And the Lord says: Because the daughters of Zion (that is, the women of Jerusalem) are haughty and walk with outstretched necks and wanton eyes, mincing along as they go, tinkling with their feet — therefore the Lord will strike with a scab the heads of the daughters of Zion, and the Lord will lay bare their secret parts… Your men shall fall by the sword and your mighty men in battle. And her gates shall lament and mourn; ravaged, she shall sit on the ground.”
(Chapter 3, verses 16–26)

“Now, behold, the Lord is bringing up against them the waters of the River, mighty and many — the king of Assyria and all his glory — and it will rise over all its channels and go over all its banks.”
(Chapter 8, verse 7)

“These are rebellious people, lying children, children who will not hear the instruction of the Lord; who say to the seers, ‘Do not see,’ and to the prophets, ‘Do not prophesy to us what is right; speak to us smooth things, prophesy illusions’… Therefore thus says the Holy One of Israel: Because you despise this word and trust in oppression and perverseness and rely on them, therefore this iniquity shall be to you like a breach in a high wall, bulging out and about to collapse… and He will break it as one breaks a potter’s vessel, smashing it so ruthlessly that among its fragments not a shard will be found for taking fire from the hearth, or a dipper of water from the cistern.”
(Chapter 30, verses 9–14)

Then, when the flood was about to break its banks entirely, the voice of the Prophet Jeremiah rose, and he said:

“Thus says the Lord: What wrong did your fathers find in me that they went far from me, and went after worthlessness, and became worthless?… I brought you into a plentiful land to enjoy its fruits and its good things. But when you came in, you defiled my land and made my heritage an abomination… Long ago you broke your yoke and burst your bonds, and you said, ‘I will not serve.’ Yes, on every high hill and under every green tree you bowed down like a whore (that is, you prostrated before every power and every idol)… As a thief is shamed when caught, so the house of Israel shall be shamed — they, their kings, their officials, their priests, and their (false) prophets, who say to a tree, ‘You are my father,’ and to a stone, ‘You gave me birth.’ For they have turned their back to me, and not their face. But in the time of their trouble they say, ‘Arise and save us.’ But where are your gods that you made for yourself? Let them arise, if they can save you, in your time of trouble; for as many as your cities are your gods, O Judah.”
(Chapter 2, verses 5–28)

“The Lord said to me: Have you seen what apostate Israel (that is, the Israelite state of Samaria) did? She went up on every high hill and under every green tree, and there played the whore (that is, committed idolatry)… And her treacherous sister Judah (that is, the Jewish state of Jerusalem) saw it. Then I saw that when I had sent apostate Israel away and given her her certificate of divorce (that is, withdrawn My mercy from her) because of her adultery (i.e., polytheism), her treacherous sister Judah did not fear, but she too went and played the whore. She defiled the land, committing adultery with stone and wood (that is, idol worship).”
(Chapter 3, verses 6–9)

“Run to and fro through the streets of Jerusalem, look and take note! Search her squares to see if you can find a man, one who does justice and seeks truth, that I may pardon her… How can I pardon you? Your children have forsaken me and have sworn by those who are no gods. When I fed them to the full, they committed adultery and trooped to the houses of prostitutes. They were well-fed, lusty stallions, each neighing for his neighbor’s wife. Shall I not punish them for these things? declares the Lord; and shall I not avenge myself on a nation such as this?”
(Chapter 5, verses 1–9)

“O house of Israel, behold, I am bringing against you a nation from afar, declares the Lord. It is an enduring nation, it is an ancient nation, a nation whose language you do not know, nor can you understand what they say. Their quiver is like an open tomb; they are all mighty warriors. They shall eat up your harvest and your food; they shall eat up your sons and your daughters. They shall eat up your flocks and your herds; they shall eat up your vines and your fig trees. They shall batter down your fortified cities in which you trust, with the sword.”
(Chapter 5, verses 15–17)

“The dead bodies of this people will be food for the birds of the air and for the beasts of the earth, and none will frighten them away. And I will silence in the cities of Judah and in the streets of Jerusalem the voice of mirth and the voice of gladness, the voice of the bridegroom and the voice of the bride, for the land shall become a waste.”
(Chapter 7, verses 33–34)

“Send them out of my sight and let them go. And when they ask you, ‘Where shall we go?’ you shall say to them, ‘Thus says the Lord: Those who are for pestilence, to pestilence, and those who are for the sword, to the sword; those who are for famine, to famine, and those who are for captivity, to captivity.’”
(Chapter 15, verses 2–3)

Then, exactly at the right moment, the Prophet Ezekiel arose and addressed Jerusalem, saying:

“O city that sheds blood in her midst, so that her time may come, and that makes idols to defile herself!… Behold, the princes of Israel in you, every one according to his power, have been bent on shedding blood. Father and mother are treated with contempt in you; the sojourner suffers extortion in your midst; the fatherless and the widow are wronged in you. You have despised my holy things and profaned my Sabbaths. There are men in you who slander to shed blood, and people in you who eat on the mountains; they commit lewdness in your midst. In you men uncover their fathers’ nakedness. In you they violate women in their menstrual uncleanness. One commits abomination with his neighbor’s wife; another lewdly defiles his daughter-in-law; another in you violates his sister, his father’s daughter. In you they take bribes to shed blood; you take interest and profit and make gain of your neighbors by extortion; and you have forgotten me… Will your courage endure, or will your hands be strong, in the days that I shall deal with you?… I will scatter you among the nations and disperse you through the countries, and I will consume your uncleanness out of you. You shall be profaned by yourself in the sight of the nations, and you shall know that I am the Lord.”
(Chapter 22, verses 3–16)

These were the warnings given to the Children of Israel at the time of the first great corruption. Then, regarding the second great corruption and its terrible consequences, Jesus (peace be upon him) warned them. In Matthew chapter 23, a detailed sermon of his is recorded, in which after strongly criticizing the severe moral decline of his people, he says:

“O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the city that kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to it! How often would I have gathered your children together as a hen gathers her brood under her wings, and you were not willing! See, your house is left to you desolate.”
(Verses 37–38)

“Truly, I say to you, there will not be left here one stone upon another that will not be thrown down.”
(Chapter 24, verse 2)

Then, when the Roman authorities were leading Jesus to the crucifixion, and a great crowd of people including women were following him, weeping and wailing, he made his final address to the crowd and said:

“Daughters of Jerusalem, do not weep for me, but weep for yourselves and for your children. For behold, the days are coming when they will say, ‘Blessed are the barren and the wombs that never bore and the breasts that never nursed!’ Then they will begin to say to the mountains, ‘Fall on us,’ and to the hills, ‘Cover us.’”
(Luke, Chapter 23, verses 28–30)

Cxxxxxx

Here is the English translation:


Surah Bani Isra’il — Footnote No. 7

By this is meant the terrible destruction that befell the Children of Israel at the hands of the Assyrians and the Babylonians. To understand the historical background of this, the excerpts we have quoted above from the books of the prophets are not sufficient alone — a brief historical account is also necessary, so that the student may fully grasp all the reasons why Allah Almighty brought down a scripture-bearing nation from the position of leadership among nations and reduced them to a defeated, enslaved, and utterly degraded people.

After the death of the Prophet Moses, when the Children of Israel entered Palestine, various nations were already settled there — the Hittites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites, Jebusites, Philistines, and others. Among these nations, the worst form of polytheism prevailed. Their greatest deity was called El, whom they regarded as the father of the gods, and who was commonly depicted in the likeness of a bull. His wife was named Asherah, and from this union sprang an entire lineage of gods and goddesses numbering up to seventy. The most powerful among his offspring was Baal, who was regarded as the god of rain and vegetation and the lord of earth and sky. In the northern regions, his wife was called Anat, and in Palestine, Astarte. Both of these female deities were goddesses of love and fertility. Beyond these, one deity held dominion over death, another over health, another was assigned the power to bring plague and famine — and thus the entire divine order was divided among a multitude of gods and goddesses. Attributes and deeds of such shameful character were ascribed to these deities that even the most morally corrupt of human beings would not wish to be associated with them. It is therefore evident that people who made such vile beings their gods and worshipped them could hardly have escaped falling into the lowest depths of moral degradation. This is precisely why the conditions discovered through archaeological excavations testify to a severe moral collapse among these peoples. The sacrifice of children was common practice among them. Their temples had become dens of prostitution. Dedicating women as temple prostitutes and committing immoral acts with them was considered part of worship. And many other such moral corruptions were rampant among them.

In the Torah, the instructions given to the Children of Israel through the Prophet Moses had clearly stated: you are to destroy these nations and wrest the land of Palestine from their possession, and you are to refrain from living alongside them and from falling into their moral and ideological corruption.

But when the Children of Israel entered Palestine, they forgot this directive. They did not establish a unified state. They were consumed by tribal rivalries. Each tribe preferred to take a portion of the conquered territory and go its separate way. As a result of this fragmentation, no single tribe became powerful enough to fully cleanse its region of the polytheists. In the end, they had to accept the polytheists living alongside them. Not only that, but small city-states of these polytheistic peoples also continued to exist throughout the conquered territories — states that the Children of Israel were unable to subjugate. This very complaint is voiced in the passage from Psalms that we quoted at the beginning of Footnote No. 6.

The first consequence they had to bear was that through these nations, polytheism seeped into their midst, and along with it, other moral corruptions gradually found their way in as well. This complaint is recorded in the biblical Book of Judges as follows:

“And the children of Israel did evil in the sight of the Lord and served the Baals. They forsook the Lord, the God of their fathers, who had brought them out of Egypt, and followed other gods from among the gods of the peoples who were around them, and bowed down to them, and provoked the Lord to anger. They forsook the Lord and served Baal and the Ashtaroth, and the anger of the Lord was hot against Israel.”
(Chapter 2, verses 11–13)

The second consequence they had to bear was that the city-states of the polytheistic peoples they had allowed to remain, along with the Philistines — whose entire territory had remained unconquered — formed a united front against the Children of Israel and, through repeated attacks, drove them out of large parts of Palestine, even seizing from them the Ark of the Covenant of the Lord. Eventually, the Children of Israel felt the need to establish a unified kingdom under a single ruler, and at their request, the Prophet Samuel appointed Saul as their king in 1020 BC. (The details of this have been discussed in Surah Al-Baqarah, Section 32.)

This unified kingdom had three rulers: Saul (1020–1004 BC), the Prophet David (peace be upon him) (1004–965 BC), and the Prophet Solomon (peace be upon him) (965–926 BC). These rulers completed the work that the Children of Israel had left unfinished after the Prophet Moses. Only the Phoenician states on the northern coast and the Philistine states on the southern coast remained unsubjugated; these were merely made tributary rather than fully conquered.

After the Prophet Solomon, worldliness again took a powerful hold over the Children of Israel, and they fought among themselves and established two separate kingdoms. In northern Palestine and Transjordan arose the Kingdom of Israel, whose capital eventually became Samaria; and in southern Palestine and the region of Edom arose the Kingdom of Judah, whose capital remained Jerusalem. Between these two kingdoms, intense rivalry and conflict began from the very start and persisted until the very end.

Among these, the rulers and inhabitants of the Kingdom of Israel were the first and most deeply affected by the polytheistic beliefs and moral corruption of the neighboring nations, and this situation reached its extreme when the ruler of that kingdom, Ahab, married Jezebel, the polytheistic princess of Sidon. From that point onward, polytheism and moral corruption began to spread like a flood among the Israelites, driven by the power and resources of the state. The Prophets Elijah and Elisha (peace be upon them both) made every possible effort to stem this flood, but this people would not turn back from the decline into which they were heading. In the end, the wrath of Allah descended upon the Kingdom of Israel in the form of the Assyrians, and from the ninth century BC, continuous Assyrian invasions of Palestine began. During this period, the Prophet Amos (787–747 BC) and then the Prophet Hosea (747–735 BC) rose and delivered repeated warnings to the Israelites, but the intoxication of heedlessness in which they were steeped only grew sharper in the face of reproof. It reached the point where the king of Israel ordered the Prophet Amos to leave the country and banned him from prophesying within the borders of the Kingdom of Samaria. Thousands upon thousands of Israelites were put to the sword, more than 27,000 influential Israelites were expelled from the land and scattered across the eastern provinces of the Assyrian Empire, and peoples from other regions were brought in and settled in the land of Israel — living among whom, the remnant of the Israelite element grew increasingly alienated from its own national civilization day by day.

The second Israelite state, established in southern Palestine under the name of Judah, also fell quickly into polytheism and moral corruption after the Prophet Solomon, though its ideological and moral decline was comparatively slower than that of the Kingdom of Israel — and for this reason, it was also given somewhat more time. Although the Assyrians attacked it repeatedly as well, devastated its cities, and besieged its capital, this state was not destroyed at the hands of the Assyrians but merely became a tributary. Then, when despite the sustained efforts of the Prophets Isaiah and Jeremiah, the people of Judah refused to abandon idol worship and immorality, the king of Babylon, Nebuchadnezzar, in 598 BC conquered the entire Kingdom of Judah, including Jerusalem, and the king of Judah remained his prisoner. The chain of the Jews’ misdeeds did not end even then, and despite the counsel of the Prophet Jeremiah, instead of reforming their conduct, they attempted to change their fate by rebelling against Babylon. Finally, in 587 BC, Nebuchadnezzar launched a devastating assault and razed every city and town of Judah to the ground, reducing Jerusalem and the Temple of Solomon to rubble so completely that not a single wall of it was left standing. A vast multitude of Jews were expelled from their land and scattered across many countries, and those Jews who remained in their territory were themselves thoroughly humiliated and trampled underfoot at the hands of the neighboring nations.

This was the first great corruption against which the Children of Israel had been warned, and this was the first punishment that was given to them in consequence of it.​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​

Xxxxxxxx

Here is the English translation:


Surah Bani Isra’il — Footnote No. 8

This is a reference to the respite that was granted to the Jews (that is, the people of Judah) after their release from the Babylonian captivity. As for the people of Samaria and Israel, they never rose again after falling into the depths of moral and ideological decline. However, among the inhabitants of Judah there remained an element that was steadfast upon goodness and called others to it. This element continued its work of reform among those who had remained behind in Judah, and also encouraged repentance and turning back to God among those who had been exiled to Babylon and other regions. Eventually, the mercy of Allah came to their aid. The Babylonian empire declined, and in 539 BC the Persian conqueror Cyrus (Khurush or Khusraw) conquered Babylon. In the very next year, he issued a decree granting general permission to the Children of Israel to return to their homeland and resettle there. Consequently, caravans of Jews began making their way back to Judah one after another, a process that continued for a long time. Cyrus also granted the Jews permission to rebuild the Temple of Solomon, though for a considerable period the neighboring nations that had settled in the region continued to offer resistance. Eventually, Darius (Wahya) I, in 522 BC, appointed Zerubbabel — the grandson of the last king of Judah — as governor of Judah, and he undertook the reconstruction of the Holy Temple under the supervision of the Prophets Haggai and Zechariah and the High Priest Jeshua. Then, in 457 BC, the Prophet Ezra (’Uzayr) arrived in Judah with a group of exiles, and the Persian king Artaxerxes (Arta-Ksher-Shazia, also known as Ardeshir) issued a decree authorizing him:

“You are to appoint magistrates and judges who may judge all the people in the province Beyond the River, all such as know the laws of your God. And those who do not know them, you shall teach. Whoever will not obey the law of your God and the law of the king, let judgment be strictly executed on him, whether for death or for banishment or for confiscation of his goods or for imprisonment.”
(Ezra, Chapter 8, verses 25–26)

Taking advantage of this decree, the Prophet Ezra performed the immense work of renewing the Mosaic faith. He gathered all the righteous and upright people of the Jewish nation from every direction and established a strong order. He compiled and published the five books of the Bible, which contained the Torah; organized the religious education of the Jews; enforced the laws of the Sharia and began eliminating the ideological and moral corruptions that had crept into the Children of Israel through the influence of foreign nations; had all polytheistic women — whom Jews had married — divorced; and renewed the covenant with the Children of Israel to worship God and follow His law.

In 445 BC, another group of exiles returned to Judah under the leadership of Nehemiah, and the Persian king appointed Nehemiah as governor of Jerusalem, authorizing him to rebuild its city walls. In this way, after a hundred and fifty years, Jerusalem was once again inhabited and became the center of Jewish religion and civilization. However, the Israelites of northern Palestine and Samaria derived no benefit from the reform and renewal brought by the Prophet Ezra. Instead, in competition with Jerusalem, they constructed their own religious center on Mount Gerizim and attempted to make it the qiblah of the People of the Book. This further widened the rift between the Jews and the Samaritans.

With the decline of the Persian Empire, the conquests of Alexander the Great, and then the rise of the Greeks, the Jews suffered a severe blow for a period. After Alexander’s death, his empire was divided into three kingdoms, of which the region of Syria fell to the Seleucid kingdom whose capital was Antioch. Its ruler, Antiochus III, occupied Palestine in 198 BC. These Greek conquerors, who were polytheists in religion and libertines in morality, found the Jewish religion and civilization deeply objectionable. They began promoting Greek culture through political and economic pressure, and a considerable element from among the Jews themselves became their instrument. This external interference sowed division within the Jewish nation. One group adopted Greek dress, Greek language, Greek social customs, and Greek games, while another group held firmly to their own civilization. In 175 BC, when Antiochus IV — whose epithet was Epiphanes, meaning “the manifestation of God” — ascended the throne, he set out to uproot the Jewish religion and civilization with the full force of tyranny. He forcibly installed idols in the Temple of Jerusalem and compelled the Jews to bow down before them. He halted sacrifice at the altar. He ordered the Jews to offer sacrifices at polytheistic altars. He prescribed the death penalty for anyone who kept a copy of the Torah in their home, observed the Sabbath commandments, or had their children circumcised. But the Jews were not subdued by this oppression, and a powerful movement arose among them, known in history as the Maccabean Revolt. Although in this struggle the Hellenized Jews had all their sympathies with the Greeks and actively collaborated with the tyrants of Antioch in suppressing the Maccabean revolt, the spirit of religiosity breathed into the common Jews by the Prophet Ezra was so powerfully alive that they all joined the Maccabees, and eventually they drove out the Greeks and established their own independent religious state, which endured until 67 BC. The boundaries of this state gradually expanded to encompass the entire territory that had once been under the kingdoms of Judah and Israel, and even a large part of Philistia came under its control — a region that had not been subjugated even in the time of the Prophets David and Solomon (peace be upon them both).

It is to these very events that the verse under commentary in the Quran refers.

Xxxxxxxxxxx

Here is the English translation:


Surah Bani Isra’il — Footnote No. 9

The historical background of this second great corruption and its punishment is as follows:

The moral and religious spirit with which the Maccabean movement had arisen gradually perished, and its place was taken by pure worldliness and hollow outward show. Eventually, divisions broke out among them, and they themselves invited the Roman conqueror Pompey to come to Palestine. Pompey accordingly turned his attention to the country in 63 BC, occupied Jerusalem, and brought the independence of the Jews to an end. However, it was the consistent policy of the Roman conquerors that rather than establishing their own direct administration over conquered territories, they preferred to extract what they needed indirectly through local rulers. They therefore established a native state in Palestine under their patronage, which ultimately came into the hands of a shrewd Jew named Herod in 40 BC. He is known as Herod the Great. His rule over all of Palestine and Transjordan lasted from 40 to 4 BC. On one hand he kept the Jews satisfied by patronizing their religious leaders, and on the other he earned the goodwill of Caesar by promoting Roman civilization and displaying the utmost loyalty to the Roman Empire. By this time, the religious and moral condition of the Jews had sunk, through a gradual process of deterioration, to the very lowest depths of decline.

After Herod, his kingdom was divided into three parts.

One of his sons, Archelaus, became the ruler of Samaria, Judea, and northern Idumea, but in 6 AD, Emperor Augustus deposed him and placed his entire kingdom under a Roman governor — an arrangement that remained in place until 41 AD. This was the very period when Jesus (peace be upon him) rose to reform the Children of Israel, and all the religious leaders of the Jews conspired together to oppose him and sought to have him condemned to death by the Roman governor Pontius Pilate.

Herod’s second son, Herod Antipas, became the ruler of the region of Galilee in northern Palestine and Transjordan. He is the one who, at the request of a dancing girl, had the head of the Prophet John (Yahya, peace be upon him) cut off and presented to her as a gift.

His third son, Philip, became the ruler of the territory stretching from Mount Hermon to the River Yarmouk, and he was even more deeply immersed in Roman and Greek civilization than his father and brothers. In his territory, there was even less room for any word of goodness to take root than there was in the other regions of Palestine.

In 41 AD, the Romans made Herod Agrippa — the grandson of Herod the Great — the ruler of all the territories over which Herod the Great had once held sway. After coming to power, this man inflicted extreme persecution upon the followers of Jesus (peace be upon him) and devoted all his efforts to crushing the movement of God-consciousness and moral reform that was proceeding under the guidance of the disciples.

To gain a true appreciation of the condition of the general Jewish population and their religious leaders during this period, one should study the critiques that Jesus (peace be upon him) directed against them in his sermons — all of which are preserved in the four Gospels. And to gauge the depths of their degradation, it is sufficient to note that before the very eyes of this nation, the head of a man as pure as the Prophet John (peace be upon him) was severed, yet not a single voice was raised against this great injustice. The religious leaders of the entire nation demanded the death sentence for Jesus (peace be upon him), and apart from a small number of righteous individuals, there was no one who mourned this calamity. Indeed, when Pontius Pilate asked this ill-fated people — it being a festival day on which, by custom, he was authorized to release one prisoner condemned to death — “Shall I release Jesus or Barabbas?” the entire assembled crowd cried out with one voice: “Release Barabbas.” This was, as it were, the final proof that Allah Almighty established against this nation.

Not much time had passed after this when a fierce conflict broke out between the Jews and the Romans, and between 64 and 66 AD the Jews rose in open revolt. Both Herod Agrippa II and the Roman procurator Florus failed to suppress the rebellion. Eventually, the Roman Empire crushed it through a severe military campaign, and in 70 AD, Titus conquered Jerusalem by force of arms. In the massacre that took place on this occasion, 133,000 people were killed, 67,000 were captured and enslaved, thousands were seized and sent to work in the mines of Egypt, and thousands more were taken to various cities to be used as fodder for wild animals in amphitheaters and coliseums, or as targets in gladiatorial games. All the tall and beautiful young women were selected for the victors, and the city of Jerusalem and the Temple were demolished and razed to the ground. After this, Jewish power and influence was so thoroughly erased from Palestine that for two thousand years it found no opportunity to raise its head again, and the Holy Temple of Jerusalem was never rebuilt. The Emperor Hadrian later repopulated the city, but it was now called Aelia, and for a very long time Jews were not permitted to enter it.

This was the punishment that the Children of Israel received in consequence of the second great corruption.

Xxxxxxxxx

Here is the English translation:


Surah Bani Isra’il — Footnote No. 10

One should not fall into the misapprehension that the Children of Israel are the addressees of this entire passage. The actual addressees are the disbelievers of Makkah. However, since a few instructive lessons from the history of the Children of Israel had been presented here in order to warn them, these sentences were addressed to the Children of Israel as a parenthetical remark — so that they might serve as a prelude to those reformatory discourses which were, just a year later, to take place in Madinah.

Xxxxxx

Here is the English translation:


Surah Bani Isra’il — Footnote No. 11

The meaning is that any person, group, or nation that does not come to the straight path through the warning and guidance of this Quran should then be prepared to face the same punishment that the Children of Israel suffered.

SUMMARY OF THE TOPIC

The Rise and Fall of the Children of Israel: A Quranic Perspective

Summary of Footnotes 6–11, Surah Bani Isra’il


The Biblical Warnings (Footnote 6)

The Quran’s account of the two great corruptions of the Children of Israel finds comprehensive corroboration in the Bible itself. The prophets David, Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel each delivered increasingly urgent warnings about the first corruption — the abandonment of monotheism, rampant moral decay, idol worship, injustice toward the weak, and widespread immorality. Jesus (peace be upon him), as recorded in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke, foretold the second corruption and its catastrophic consequences, warning Jerusalem of total desolation and prophesying that not one stone of the Temple would remain upon another.


The First Great Corruption and Its Punishment (Footnote 7)

When the Children of Israel entered Palestine after the death of the Prophet Moses, they failed to follow divine instructions to cleanse the land of its polytheistic inhabitants. Tribal rivalries prevented them from forming a unified state, and they allowed pagan nations to remain among them. The inevitable result was that idol worship — centered on deities such as El, Baal, Asherah, and Astarte, whose worship involved temple prostitution, child sacrifice, and extreme moral depravity — seeped into Israelite society.

This spiritual and moral collapse unfolded in stages. The unified kingdom under Saul, David, and Solomon temporarily reversed the decline, but after Solomon, the nation split into two rival kingdoms: Israel in the north and Judah in the south. The Kingdom of Israel fell first, succumbing to Assyrian invasions from the ninth century BC onward. Over 27,000 Israelites were deported and scattered, foreign peoples were resettled in their land, and the Israelite identity was gradually erased. The Kingdom of Judah, though slower to decline, ultimately suffered the same fate. In 587 BC, Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon razed Jerusalem and the Temple of Solomon completely, deported vast numbers of Jews, and reduced the remaining population to utter humiliation.


The Respite and Partial Renewal (Footnote 8)

After the Babylonian captivity, divine mercy granted the Jews another opportunity. In 539 BC, Cyrus the Great of Persia conquered Babylon and permitted the Jews to return to their homeland. The Temple was rebuilt under Zerubbabel, and the Prophet Ezra arrived in 457 BC to undertake a comprehensive religious renewal — compiling the Torah, reorganizing religious education, enforcing Mosaic law, dissolving unlawful marriages with polytheistic women, and renewing the national covenant with God. Nehemiah subsequently rebuilt the walls of Jerusalem in 445 BC, and the city was restored as the center of Jewish faith and civilization.

However, the Samaritans refused to participate in this renewal and established a rival religious center on Mount Gerizim, deepening the sectarian divide. Later, Greek conquest under the Seleucids brought severe cultural pressure, culminating in the brutal persecution by Antiochus IV Epiphanes, who desecrated the Temple, banned Torah observance, and imposed the death penalty for circumcision and Sabbath-keeping. The heroic Maccabean Revolt eventually expelled the Greeks and established an independent Jewish state that endured until 67 BC, restoring Jewish sovereignty over a territory even broader than that of the earlier kingdoms.


The Second Great Corruption and Its Punishment (Footnote 9)

The spiritual vitality of the Maccabean movement gave way to worldliness and internal division. The Jews themselves invited the Roman general Pompey into Palestine in 63 BC, ending their independence. Under Herod the Great and his successors — ruling as Roman client kings — Jewish religious and moral life reached its lowest point. It was in this environment that Jesus (peace be upon him) arose to call his people back to righteousness, only to be opposed by the religious establishment and condemned through their machinations.

The nation’s moral bankruptcy was starkly illustrated when the crowd chose to free the criminal Barabbas over Jesus, a moment the author describes as Allah’s final proof against them. Open revolt against Rome between 64 and 66 AD led to catastrophic consequences. In 70 AD, Titus sacked Jerusalem: 133,000 were killed, 67,000 enslaved, thousands were sent to mines or used in gladiatorial spectacles, and the Temple was completely destroyed. Jewish influence in Palestine was extinguished for two thousand years, and the Holy Temple was never rebuilt. Emperor Hadrian later renamed the city Aelia, barring Jews from entering it for generations.


A Parenthetical Address (Footnote 10)

Although these passages appear to address the Children of Israel directly, the primary audience of the Surah is in fact the disbelievers of Makkah. The history of the Children of Israel was invoked as a powerful cautionary lesson for them. The direct address to the Jews functions as a parenthetical remark, also serving as a deliberate prelude to the more extensive reformatory discourses that would follow just a year later in Madinah.


The Universal Warning (Footnote 11)

The lessons drawn from Israelite history are not confined to one people or one era. Any individual, community, or nation that refuses to heed the guidance and warnings of the Quran should expect to face the same devastating consequences that befell the Children of Israel. The pattern of divine justice is consistent and universal: corruption and defiance bring ruin, while sincere return to righteousness opens the door to mercy and restoration.​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​

Thanks to Quran.com for Tafheemul Quran & Claude Ai in preparing this article

Babri mosque dispute, courts verdict

Overview of the Supreme Court Judgment

On November 9, 2019, a five-judge Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court of India, led by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi, delivered a unanimous 1,045-page verdict in the long-standing Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid land dispute case, formally titled M. Siddiq (D) Thr. Lrs. vs. Mahant Suresh Das & Ors. The judgment resolved competing title claims over a 2.77-acre site in Ayodhya, Uttar Pradesh, which Hindus regard as the birthplace of Lord Rama and where the Babri Masjid stood until its demolition in 1992. 15 5 10 The court overturned the 2010 Allahabad High Court ruling that had divided the land into three parts, deeming it incorrect, and instead awarded the entire disputed site to the Hindu deity Ram Lalla Virajman (represented as a juristic person) for the construction of a Ram Temple. 7 11 To balance equities, the court directed the central or Uttar Pradesh government to allot 5 acres of alternative land in Ayodhya to the Uttar Pradesh Sunni Central Waqf Board for building a new mosque, acknowledging the 1992 demolition and the 1949 placement of idols in the mosque as illegal acts of desecration. 9 8 5 The verdict dismissed 18 review petitions on December 12, 2019, and emphasized principles of evidence, title, and justice over pure faith, while recognizing the site’s religious significance to both communities. 13 5

The full text of the judgment is available as a public document from the Supreme Court of India’s official repository. 0 3

Basis of the Judgment

The court’s decision was grounded in a meticulous analysis of historical records, archaeological evidence, legal title claims, and principles of adverse possession and equity under Indian law. 15 8 It rejected the notion that the case could be decided solely on faith or belief, instead relying on verifiable evidence to establish possession and title. 8 The bench noted that while the Babri Masjid was built in 1528 by Mir Baqi under Mughal Emperor Babur, it was not constructed on vacant land, as archaeological findings indicated a pre-existing non-Islamic structure with temple-like features dating back to the 12th century. 7 12 5 However, the court found insufficient direct evidence to prove that the mosque was built by deliberately demolishing a Hindu temple, though it affirmed the site’s status as Ram Janmabhoomi based on undisputed Hindu faith and continuous worship. 15 13 The judgment applied the law of limitation, ruling that Hindu title suits from 1950 and 1959 were not time-barred, while dismissing Nirmohi Akhara’s claim as a shebait (custodian) of the deity due to limitation issues. 12 6 It also rejected the Shia Waqf Board’s claim against the Sunni Waqf Board. 5 Ultimately, the court invoked Article 142 of the Constitution to provide a “complete justice” remedy, granting the site to Hindus while compensating Muslims to foster harmony. 15 11

Key Evidence Considered

  • Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) Report (2003): The court heavily relied on the ASI excavation, which uncovered a massive underlying structure with features typical of North Indian Hindu temples, such as pillar bases, decorated bricks, sculptures, and motifs like lotus and amalaka. 15 7 12 While critics pointed to potential biases (e.g., ignoring animal bones or glazed ware suggesting Islamic influence), the court concluded the mosque was not built on empty land but did not attribute deliberate demolition to Babur. 15
  • Historical Records and Travelogues: Evidence included 18th-century accounts by Jesuit priest Joseph Tieffenthaler describing Hindu worship at a “cradle” platform marking Rama’s birth, and reports from 1717 under Jai Singh II vesting the land in the deity. 15 Babur’s memoirs (Baburnama) omitted any mention of the mosque or temple demolition, and texts like Ain-i-Akbari and Ramcharitmanas lacked references to a mosque at the site. 15 Continuous Hindu worship outside the mosque (and Muslim use inside) until 1949 was established through British-era gazetteers and court records from 1822, 1855, and 1885. 15 8
  • Legal and Possession Records: The court examined title suits, finding Hindus had uninterrupted possession via worship, supporting adverse possession claims against the Muslim side’s waqf argument (claiming possession since 1528). 15 8 Post-1949 state control under CrPC Section 145 and riots in 1855–1857 and 1934 were noted as disruptions. 15

Arguments from Both Sides

  • Hindu Parties (Ram Lalla Virajman, Nirmohi Akhara, etc.): Asserted the site as Rama’s birthplace since ancient times, supported by scriptures like Ayodhya Mahatmya, ASI evidence of a prior temple, and continuous worship. 15 13 They claimed the 1949 idol placement was miraculous and sought full title, dismissing the mosque as invalid waqf. 15
  • Muslim Parties (Sunni Waqf Board): Maintained the mosque was built on vacant land in 1528 as valid waqf, with no evidence of temple demolition, citing lacks in historical texts and critiquing ASI findings as inconclusive. 15 8 They highlighted invasions like the 1992 demolition and sought restoration or shared use. 15

The judgment has been described as balanced, nuanced, and aimed at ending a fractious dispute through evidence-based resolution. 4 14

AYAT AL-KURSI: CHALLENGE …

DO WE KNOW OUR LORD?

DO WE KNOW ANY ONE ELSE LIKE OUR LORD?

Audio summary link

https://notebooklm.google.com/notebook/958de767-a674-4b4c-be85-c5e1cbc04a42/audio


SOME QUALITIES SUMMARIZED IN ONE VERSE

This verse is known as Ayat al-Kursi (The Verse of the Throne) and is regarded as the greatest verse in the Quran due to its profound description of Allah’s majesty, power, and knowledge. The Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) said:

“The greatest verse in the Book of Allah is: ‘Allah! There is no god but Him, the Ever-Living, the Sustainer of existence…’ (Ayat al-Kursi).” (Sahih Muslim)

It serves as a comprehensive declaration of Tawheed (Islamic monotheism), refuting all forms of polytheism and false beliefs about divinity.


Detailed Tafseer (Exegesis) – Breakdown of Key Themes

1. Allah’s Absolute Oneness (لَآ إِلَـٰهَ إِلَّا هُوَ)

  • The verse begins by affirming that no deity is worthy of worship except Allah.
  • This negates all false gods (idols, saints, natural forces, etc.) worshipped by humans.
  • Implication: True faith requires complete rejection of shirk (associating partners with Allah).
  • Al-Hayy (The Ever-Living):
  • Allah’s life is perfect, eternal, and without weakness.
  • Unlike created beings, His existence has no beginning or end.
  • Al-Qayyum (The Sustainer of All Existence):
  • He maintains all creation—nothing exists or functions without His support.
  • If He withdrew His sustenance for even a moment, the universe would collapse.

2. The Ever-Living (ٱلْحَىُّ) and Self-Sustaining (ٱلْقَيُّومُ)

3. Neither Drowsiness Nor Sleep (لَا تَأْخُذُهُۥ سِنَةٌۭ وَلَا نَوْمٌۭ)

  • Unlike humans and other creatures, Allah never tires or needs rest.
  • This refutes the pagan idea that gods “sleep” or neglect creation.
  • Implication: Allah’s watch over the universe is continuous and flawless.

4. Supreme Ownership (لَّهُۥ مَا فِى ٱلسَّمَـٰوَٰتِ وَمَا فِى ٱلْأَرْضِ)

  • Everything in the heavens and earth belongs to Him alone.
  • No one shares in His dominion—kings, rulers, or false deities are mere creations.

5. Intercession Only by His Permission (مَن ذَا ٱلَّذِى يَشْفَعُ عِندَهُۥٓ إِلَّا بِإِذْنِهِۦ)

  • Some religions believe saints or angels can grant favors independently.
  • Islam’s stance: No intercession occurs without Allah’s permission.
  • Even prophets (like Muhammad PBUH) or angels can only intercede if Allah wills.

6. Allah’s All-Encompassing Knowledge (يَعْلَمُ مَا بَيْنَ أَيْدِيهِمْ وَمَا خَلْفَهُمْ)

  • He knows:
  • The past, present, and future.
  • What is hidden and apparent.
  • Humans only know what Allah allows them to know.

7. The Vastness of the Kursi (وَسِعَ كُرْسِيُّهُ ٱلسَّمَـٰوَٰتِ وَٱلْأَرْضَ)

  • Kursi (Throne/Authority):
  • Symbolizes Allah’s dominion and knowledge.
  • Its vastness exceeds the heavens and earth—indicating His limitless power.
  • Misconception Clarified: Some imagine the Kursi as a physical chair, but it is a metaphor for Allah’s supreme authority.

8. No Fatigue in Preservation (وَلَا يَـُٔودُهُۥ حِفْظُهُمَا)

  • Maintaining the universe does not tire Allah.
  • Contrast with humans, who grow weary even managing small tasks.

9. The Most High, The Most Great (وَهُوَ ٱلْعَلِىُّ ٱلْعَظِيمُ)

  • Al-Aliyy (The Most High):
  • Above all in rank and authority.
  • Nothing is equal or comparable to Him.
  • Al-Azeem (The Most Great):
  • His greatness is beyond human comprehension.

Summarized by grok


Verse 2:255 (Ayat al-Kursi) – Arabic Text

اللّٰهُ لَاۤ اِلٰهَ اِلَّا هُوَ الۡحَـىُّ الۡقَيُّوۡمُۚ  لَا تَاۡخُذُهٗ سِنَةٌ وَّلَا نَوۡمٌؕ لَهٗ مَا فِى السَّمٰوٰتِ وَمَا فِى الۡاَرۡضِؕ مَنۡ ذَا الَّذِىۡ يَشۡفَعُ عِنۡدَهٗۤ اِلَّا بِاِذۡنِهٖؕ يَعۡلَمُ مَا بَيۡنَ اَيۡدِىۡهِمۡ وَمَا خَلۡفَهُمۡۚ وَلَا يُحِيۡطُوۡنَ بِشَىۡءٍ مِّنۡ عِلۡمِهٖۤ اِلَّا بِمَا شَآءَ ۚ وَسِعَ كُرۡسِيُّهُ السَّمٰوٰتِ وَالۡاَرۡضَۚ وَلَا يَـُٔوۡدُهٗ حِفۡظُهُمَا ۚ وَ هُوَ الۡعَلِىُّ الۡعَظِيۡمُ‏ 

English Translation (from Tafheem-ul-Quran by Syed Abul Ala Maududi)

Allah, the Ever-Living, the Self-Subsisting by Whom all subsist, there is no god but He. Neither slumber seizes Him, nor sleep; to Him belongs all that is in the heavens and all that is in the earth. Who is there who might intercede with Him save with His leave? He knows what lies before them and what is hidden from them, whereas they cannot attain to anything of His knowledge save what He wills them to attain. His Dominion overspreads the heavens and the earth, and their upholding wearies Him not. He is All-High, All-Glorious. 15

Tafsir/Explanation (from Tafheem-ul-Quran by Syed Abul Ala Maududi)

This verse is generally known as the ‘Verse of the Throne’ and it provides in one piece a knowledge of God without parallel. The question that arises here is: What is the occasion for describing the Lord of the Universe and His attributes? In order to appreciate this one should rehearse the discourse beginning with (verse 243) and continuing up to this point. In this discourse the believers were urged to strive with their lives and belongings to establish the true faith and were warned to get rid of the weaknesses which had characterized the conduct of the Israelites. A fundamental fact about war – that victory and success do not depend upon superiority in either numbers or weapons – was then indicated. They depend rather on faith, fortitude, discipline and firm resolution. Thereafter the Divine wisdom underlying fighting was disclosed, namely that God removes one set of people by means of another in order to maintain the good administration of the world. For were one group’s dominance to be assured in perpetuity, the lives of all other human beings would become miserable. This was followed by the clarification of a misunderstanding which often arises in the minds of ignorant people. This misunderstanding arose from the false assumption that God had sent His Prophets so that all diversity and disagreement might come to an end. The people who accepted this premise, however, saw considerable diversity and disagreement, and were aware that falsehood existed side by side with Truth. They were agitated by the thought that this state of affairs might suggest helplessness on God’s part, that He had failed to stamp out the evils He wanted to. In reply to this it was pointed out that it was not God’s will to compel all human beings to follow one and the same way. Had it been so, man could not have deviated from the course set for him by God. This observation was followed by a passing reference to the subject with which the discourse opened. Finally, the point is made that no matter how many divergent beliefs, viewpoints, ways of life and conduct exist in actual life, the reality underlying the order of the universe is the one stated in this verse, and it remains unaffected by the misconceptions of people. On the other hand, however, it is not God’s purpose to compel people to accept it. Whoever accepts it will find it to his own benefit; whoever rejects it, will find the result harmful.

Irrespective of the number of gods or objects of worship set up by ignorant people, the fact remains that godhead in its entirety, belongs exclusively to the Eternal Being, Who is indebted to no one for His existence. In fact, He is not only self-existent, but upon Him rests the entire order of the universe. He alone wields all sovereign authority over His dominion. None shares either His attributes or His power and might, and no one has the same claims against the creatures as He. Hence, if anywhere in the heavens or the earth someone sets up anything or anybody as an object of worship and service (ilah) either instead of or in addition to the One True God this amounts to declaring war on reality.

This is a refutation of the ideas of those who, in formulating their concepts of God, are inclined to consider God analogous to their own imperfect selves and hence ascribe to God the weaknesses characteristic of human beings. An instance at hand is the famous Biblical statement that God created the heavens and the earth in six days and on the seventh day He rested (see Genesis, chapters 1 and 2).

To God belongs the heavens and the earth and everything therein. There is no one who shares anything with God in governance either of the heavens or of the earth. Any conceivable being other than God would necessarily be a part of the universe and thus belong to, and be a subject of, God rather than His partner and equal.

This is a refutation of the ideas of those polytheists who consider either saints, angels or other beings to be so influential with God that if they were adamant in demanding something of Him, their demand would prevail. They are being told that, far from anyone having the power to impose his will on God, none – not even the greatest Prophets and the most highly esteemed angels – will dare utter one word in the majestic court of the Lord unless they are expressly permitted to do so.

Here another blow is struck against polytheism. On the basis of the concept of God’s unlimited sovereignty and omnipotence it was stressed, in the foregoing verses, that no one shares independently in God’s governance of the universe, and no one is so powerful with God that his intercession would decisively influence His judgement. The same point is stressed here but in a different manner. It is pointed out that no one possesses the knowledge that would enable him to comprehend the order of the universe and the considerations underlying it, so no one can legitimately interfere in its governance. The knowledge of human beings, of jinn, of angels and of all other creatures is limited and imperfect. No one’s knowledge embraces all the facts of the universe. If someone did have the right to interfere even in only a part of the universe, and if his suggestions were of necessity to be put into effect, the entire order of the universe would be disrupted. Creatures are incapable of understanding what is best for them, and do not have the capacity to know how best the universe should be governed. It is God alone Who knows everything.

The Arabic term kursi signifies sovereignty, dominion and authority. (The word Kursi has been variously interpreted by Muslim scholars. The literal meaning is obvious; it signifies that which one sits on. Scholars have differed, however, as to whether the word has been used in the Qur’an literally or figuratively. They have also disagreed whether the Kursi and ‘Arsh Which occur in the Qur’an have one and the same meaning or are different. The main opinions expressed by the scholars are the following: (i) that Kursi signifies God’s knowledge, a view attributed to Ibn ‘Abbas; (ii) that it is identical with ‘Arsh (Throne), a view attributed to Hasan al-Basri; (iii) that it signifies God’s power (iv ) in opposition to such views a large number of scholars insist that Kursi should be considered a reality rather than be understood figuratively. In addition to many earlier scholars, this was vigorously championed by Ibn Taymiyah. It should be remembered, however, that Ibn Taymiyah and others who hold this opinion, side by side with affirming that Kursi is a reality, also emphasize that man has no knowledge about the nature and modality of Kursi and that it ought to be treated as something unique, being related to God Who is unique both in His essence and attributes. (See the commentaries of Alusi. Tabari, Qurtubi, Ibn Kathir and Shawkani on this verse. See also Ibn Taymiyah, Majmu al-Fatawa 1bn Taymiyah, vol. 5, pp. 55-8 and vol. 6, pp. 584-5. It is interesting to note that Sayyid Qutb, (martyred 1386 A.H/966 C.E.), a contemporary of Mawdudi and one of the most influential Islamic thinkers of our time, has interpreted the verse exactly, as Mawdudi did – Ed.)

This verse is generally known as the ‘Verse of the Throne’ and it provides in one piece a knowledge of God without parallel. 15

Article on Islamophobia by

Emelia@emeliarjt

They want to extinguish the light of Allah with their mouths, but Allah will perfect His light, even if the disbelievers hate it.”

The distortion of Islam’s image in the West is no longer the result of ignorance or cultural misunderstanding. In many cases, it has become an organized project, fueled by money, media platforms, and political alliances. What makes this especially painful is that some of these efforts do not come only from Islam’s traditional adversaries, but from Arab actors who should have been part of its moral defense most notably circles linked to United Arab Emirates.

These campaigns rely on a dangerous strategy: deliberately conflating Islam as a faith with extremism as a phenomenon, stripping Muslims of their right to represent themselves, and then marketing a so-called “alternative Islam” that is hollow, domesticated, and politically obedient. This version is presented to Western audiences as “reform” or “moderation,” while in reality it empties Islam of its ethical substance and turns it into a public-relations tool.

The real target is not extremism, but independent awareness. An Islam that rejects oppression, stands with the oppressed, and provides a moral compass for society is perceived as a threat. It is therefore replaced with a silent Islam one that does not question injustice, does not challenge power, and does not disturb geopolitical comfort zones.

To advance this narrative, think tanks, media outlets, conferences, and carefully selected “voices” are funded to promote the idea that Islam itself is the problem, while repression is the solution. The political goal is clear: to please Western power centers, justify authoritarian policies, and criminalize any free Islamic or ethical opposition by associating it with violence.

Meanwhile, Muslims in the West pay the price. Islamophobia intensifies, religious freedoms are curtailed, and Muslim identity is placed under constant suspicion all under the banner of “countering extremism.”

The most dangerous aspect of this project is that it seeks to undermine Islam from within, using fluent Arabic, cultural familiarity, and selective religious language to legitimize the attack. Yet no amount of funding or media influence can erase the truth of Islam: a faith rooted in justice, dignity, and moral accountability.

Islam does not need to be redesigned to satisfy power, nor reshaped to earn approval. It has endured for centuries without lobbying firms or image campaigns, spreading through values, not propaganda.

Qur’anic verse:

“They want to extinguish the light of Allah with their mouths, but Allah will perfect His light, even if the disbelievers hate it.”

(Qur’an 61:8)

GROUPS INVOLVED IN Islamophobia spread

Several organizations and groups have been identified by civil rights and research entities as actively involved in promoting Islamophobia, which is generally defined as prejudice, fear, or hatred directed toward Muslims or Islam. These accusations often stem from activities like spreading misinformation about Sharia law, opposing Muslim immigration, challenging mosque constructions, or portraying Islam as inherently violent or incompatible with Western values. However, many of these groups describe their work as focused on countering radical extremism, terrorism, or threats to national security rather than targeting Muslims broadly. Below is a compilation based on reports from sources like the Center for American Progress and the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), which track such networks. Note that these designations are subjective and contested; the groups often reject the “Islamophobia” label, arguing they address specific ideological or security concerns.

Key Groups and Their Alleged Activities:

  • ACT for America: Founded by Brigitte Gabriel, this grassroots organization claims over a million members and focuses on national security issues, including campaigns against Sharia law implementation in the U.S., designating the Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist group, and opposing certain refugee resettlements. It’s accused of mobilizing anti-Muslim legislation and rhetoric, such as urging deportations of pro-Hamas visa holders and defunding organizations linked to extremism. 41 The group maintains its efforts target threats to American values, not Muslims as a whole.
  • Center for Security Policy: Led historically by Frank Gaffney, this think tank produces reports on perceived threats from “Islamism” and Sharia, including claims of infiltration in U.S. institutions. It’s criticized for conspiracy theories, like linking unrelated events (e.g., infrastructure failures) to Muslim sabotage, and for influencing anti-Muslim policies. 41 11 The organization positions itself as providing analysis on national security threats, emphasizing distinctions between moderate Muslims and radical ideologies.
  • Jihad Watch: Directed by Robert Spencer, this blog and organization publishes content highlighting what it calls “Islamic jihad theology” in global conflicts. It’s accused of promoting bias through selective reporting on violence linked to Islam, including books and articles that critics say generalize the faith as conquest-oriented. 41 11 Spencer and the group argue their work exposes specific doctrinal issues, not hatred toward Muslims.
  • David Horowitz Freedom Center: An umbrella for projects like FrontPage Magazine and Jihad Watch, it hosts events and publishes content blaming Islam for various global issues. Accused of mainstreaming anti-Muslim narratives through conferences featuring speakers like Geert Wilders. 41 The center frames its activities as defending freedom against totalitarian ideologies.
  • American Freedom Defense Initiative (AFDI): Co-founded by Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer, it opposes Muslim-related initiatives like mosque builds and runs provocative ad campaigns. Labeled for spreading prejudice. 41 11
  • Middle East Forum: Focuses on Middle Eastern policy, funding anti-Islamist efforts. Accused of supporting misinformation networks. 11
  • Investigative Project on Terrorism: Monitors terrorism-related activities, but criticized for conflating mainstream Muslim groups with extremists. 11
  • Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD): A think tank involved in foreign policy, accused in some discussions (e.g., on X) of promoting Islamophobia through anti-Muslim war advocacy, with alleged ties to UAE and Israeli interests. 31

Other groups mentioned in reports include Stop Islamization of America, Citizens for National Security, Political Islam, and The United West, often linked to similar activities like anti-immigration campaigns or theological critiques. 41

Funding and Networks:

These groups are part of a broader network reportedly funded by donors providing tens of millions (e.g., $42.6 million from 2001-2009, per one analysis) to amplify anti-Muslim messaging through think tanks, blogs, and grassroots efforts. 11 Critics argue this funding “hijacks” mainstream discourse, leading to policies like travel bans and increased hate crimes (e.g., a 49% rise in anti-Muslim incidents in 2023). 41

Counterpoints and Context:

Many accused groups deny promoting hatred, instead claiming to combat “radical Islam” or “jihadism” while supporting moderate Muslims. For instance, they often cite terrorist acts by groups like ISIS or Hamas as justification. Skeptics of the “Islamophobia” concept argue it’s used to silence criticism of extremism, as seen in some X discussions where users dismiss it as a tool by regimes like Iran. 27 Internationally, entities like UAE-linked initiatives have been accused of funding similar efforts to counter groups like the Muslim Brotherhood. 31 Advocacy organizations like CAIR and SPLC track these as hate groups, but the labels remain debated.

ARABIC LANGUAGE: The historical timeline of arabic language

Historical Timeline of the Arabic Language

  • Early Origins (9th–8th century BCE): The earliest manifestations of Arabic appear in the northwest of the Arabian Peninsula as part of the Semitic language family, related to languages like Hebrew and Aramaic. These early forms were spoken by nomads and traders, with influences from neighboring regions along trade routes such as the Silk Roads. 10
  • Pre-Islamic Period (Old Arabic, 1st century BCE–6th century CE): Arabic evolved as a collection of dialects in the Arabian Peninsula, attested in inscriptions such as Safaitic, Hismaic, Dadanitic, Taymanitic, and Hasaitic. The Arabic script developed from the Nabataean Aramaic script. The earliest continuous Arabic text dates to around 125 CE, and by the 4th–6th centuries, the script had evolved into an undotted 17-letter form, with further refinements like the Namara inscription in 328 CE. 9 11
  • 7th Century CE (Rise of Classical Arabic): The revelation of the Quran to Prophet Muhammad standardized Arabic as a written and religious language. Ancillary signs were added to the script to avoid ambiguities, and it became the language of Islam, spreading rapidly across the Arabian Peninsula and beyond. 9 10 11
  • 8th–10th Centuries CE (Classical Arabic and Islamic Golden Age): Classical Arabic was codified through grammar, lexicography, and phonology by scholars like Abu al-Aswad al-Du’ali (who introduced diacritics), al-Khalil ibn Ahmad al-Farahidi (first dictionary in 786 CE), and Sibawayhi (comprehensive grammar in the late 8th century). It spread via Islamic conquests and trade, incorporating loanwords from Persian, Greek, and Turkish. Intense linguistic activity led to multiple dictionaries and works on synonyms. Dialects began diverging due to contact with local languages in regions like Mesopotamia and North Africa. 9 10 11
  • 11th–18th Centuries CE (Medieval and Post-Classical Period): Arabic continued as the language of science, philosophy, and administration in the Islamic world, with peaks in lexicography like Ibn Manzur’s Lisān al-ʿArab (1290 CE). Neo-Arabic dialects evolved, losing some classical features (e.g., case endings, dual forms). Migrations spread the language westward to North Africa and northward, leading to regional variations influenced by local tongues. 9 10
  • 19th–20th Centuries CE (Modern Standard Arabic): During the Nahda (Arab Renaissance), Modern Standard Arabic (MSA) emerged, simplifying Classical Arabic for modern use in education, media, and government. Language academies were established (e.g., Damascus in 1919, Cairo in 1932) to develop vocabulary for new concepts like technology. Printing presses and translations helped standardize it across Arab countries. 9 11
  • Present Day (21st Century Onward): Arabic is an official language in 22 Arab League countries and one of the UN’s six official languages. MSA is used formally, while diverse dialects (e.g., Egyptian, Levantine) dominate spoken communication. Digital adaptations include “Arabizi” (Latin script with numbers for informal texting) and influences from European languages. Diglossia persists between formal MSA and colloquial varieties. 9 11

AL NAHL16:125-128

 اُدۡعُ اِلٰی سَبِیۡلِ رَبِّکَ بِالۡحِکۡمَۃِ وَ الۡمَوۡعِظَۃِ الۡحَسَنَۃِ وَ جَادِلۡہُمۡ بِالَّتِیۡ ہِیَ اَحۡسَنُ ؕ اِنَّ رَبَّکَ ہُوَ اَعۡلَمُ بِمَنۡ ضَلَّ عَنۡ سَبِیۡلِہٖ وَ ہُوَ اَعۡلَمُ بِالۡمُہۡتَدِیۡنَ ﴿۱۲۵﴾ وَ اِنۡ عَاقَبۡتُمۡ فَعَاقِبُوۡا بِمِثۡلِ مَا عُوۡقِبۡتُمۡ بِہٖ ؕ وَ لَئِنۡ صَبَرۡتُمۡ لَہُوَ خَیۡرٌ لِّلصّٰبِرِیۡنَ ﴿۱۲۶﴾ وَ اصۡبِرۡ وَ مَا صَبۡرُکَ اِلَّا بِاللّٰہِ وَ لَا تَحۡزَنۡ عَلَیۡہِمۡ وَ لَا تَکُ فِیۡ ضَیۡقٍ مِّمَّا یَمۡکُرُوۡنَ ﴿۱۲۷﴾ اِنَّ اللّٰہَ مَعَ الَّذِیۡنَ اتَّقَوۡا وَّ الَّذِیۡنَ ہُمۡ مُّحۡسِنُوۡنَ ﴿۱۲۸﴾٪

Here is the English translation of Surah An-Nahl, verses 125–128 with Mawdudi’s footnotes:

Surah An-Nahl (16:125–128) — Translation & Commentary

Verses

  1. O Prophet, invite to the way of your Lord with wisdom and excellent counsel,¹²² and debate with them in the finest manner.¹²³ Your Lord knows best who has strayed from His path, and He knows best who are rightly guided.
  2. And if you retaliate, retaliate only to the extent of the harm done to you. But if you endure patiently, that is indeed better for those who are patient.
  3. And be patient, O Muhammad — your patience is only possible through Allah’s grace. Do not grieve over them, and do not be distressed by their scheming.
  4. Indeed, Allah is with those who are mindful of Him and those who do good.¹²⁴

Footnotes
Footnote 122
That is, two things must always be kept in mind in the work of calling people to Islam: hikmah (wisdom) and maw’izah hasanah (excellent counsel).
Wisdom means that one should not preach blindly and recklessly like a fool. Rather, one should speak with understanding — gauging the mindset, capacity, and circumstances of the person being addressed, and choosing the right moment and occasion. Not everyone should be driven with the same stick. When dealing with any individual or group, one must first diagnose their particular ailment, and then treat it with arguments capable of uprooting the disease from the depths of their heart and mind.
Excellent counsel carries two meanings. The first is that one should not be content merely with satisfying the intellect through rational arguments, but should also appeal to the emotions. The falsehood and misguidance of wrong beliefs should not only be refuted on rational grounds — the natural aversion that human nature already holds toward them should also be stirred, and people should be made conscious of the harmful consequences. Similarly, the soundness and beauty of right guidance and righteous action should not merely be established intellectually, but a genuine love and longing for them should be cultivated in the hearts.
The second meaning is that the counsel should be delivered in a manner that radiates sincere concern and well-wishing. The person being addressed should not feel that the one advising him looks down upon him or is enjoying a sense of superiority. Rather, he should sense that the adviser’s heart is filled with a deep yearning for his reform and that he genuinely desires his good.
Footnote 123
That is, the debate should not be mere polemical sparring — a contest of wits and verbal combat. It should be free of crooked argumentation, false accusations, taunts, and jibes. Its aim should not be to silence the opponent and trumpet one’s own rhetorical prowess. Instead, it should be characterized by gentle speech, the highest moral conduct, and sound, persuasive reasoning. The listener should not be provoked into stubbornness, obstinacy, or a spirit of contrariness. The effort should be to make the truth clear in a straightforward manner. And when it becomes evident that the other person has descended into mere wrangling, he should be left to himself — lest he drift even further into misguidance.
Footnote 124
That is, those who, out of fear of Allah, guard themselves against every form of wrongdoing and remain steadfast upon righteous conduct. No matter how badly others may treat them, they respond not with evil but with good.

Subhan Allah — with these closing verses, Surah An-Nahl reaches its majestic conclusion. The three principles laid out in verse 125 — hikmah, maw’izah hasanah, and mujadalah bil-ahsan — form the timeless charter of Islamic da’wah. Shall we do a comparative tafsir of these final verses from Ibn Kathir or Sayyid Qutb,

Here is a comparative tafsir of Surah An-Nahl 16:125–128 across the major classical and modern scholars:

Comparative Tafsir — Surah An-Nahl (16:125–128)

Verse 125 — The Three Methods of Da’wah

🔹 Ibn Kathir (d. 774 AH)
Ibn Kathir explains that Allah is commanding His Messenger ﷺ to call humanity to Allah through three distinct methods, each suited to a different category of people:
∙ Hikmah is directed at the intellectuals and people of understanding — those whose minds are receptive and who respond to sound reasoning and clear proof.
∙ Maw’izah Hasanah (excellent counsel) is for the general public — the common people who need encouragement, gentle persuasion, and reminders about rewards and punishments.
∙ Mujadalah bil-Ahsan (debating in the finest manner) is reserved for those who are stubborn or contentious — and even with them, the debate must remain dignified, without harshness or aggression.
Ibn Kathir further notes that the concluding phrase — “Your Lord knows best who has strayed and who is rightly guided” — is a consolation to the Prophet ﷺ, signifying that his duty is only to convey; the matter of guidance belongs entirely to Allah. He draws a parallel with verse 56 of Surah Al-Qasas: “You do not guide whom you love, but Allah guides whom He wills.”

🔹 Al-Tabari (d. 310 AH)
Al-Tabari, the earliest of the great classical commentators, focuses on the linguistic and contextual dimensions. He identifies hikmah as the Quran itself — that is, calling people through the clear proofs, evidences, and divine speech contained in the Book of Allah. He interprets maw’izah hasanah as the admonitions, parables, and narratives of the Quran that soften hearts and warn people of consequences. On mujadalah bil-ahsan, al-Tabari emphasizes that the believer must never use falsehood, distortion, or cheap rhetoric even when engaging opponents — the debate must remain anchored in truth and conducted with noble manners.
Al-Tabari also notes the important contextual dimension: this verse was revealed at a time when the Muslims were still in Makkah and were not permitted to use force. The three methods of da’wah were therefore the only legitimate tools available, and they remain the primary tools of calling people to Islam in all circumstances.

🔹 Al-Qurtubi (d. 671 AH)
Al-Qurtubi provides perhaps the most legally detailed analysis. He notes that the three methods correspond not only to different types of audiences but also to the stages of da’wah:
1. First comes hikmah — the clear, rational argument that establishes the truth.
2. If that does not suffice, one moves to maw’izah hasanah — the emotional and spiritual appeal that moves the heart.
3. If the person still resists and begins to argue, one engages in mujadalah bil-ahsan — but only in the finest possible manner.
Al-Qurtubi draws an important jurisprudential point: this verse establishes that the default posture of the caller to Islam is gentleness and wisdom, not coercion or confrontation. He also notes that hikmah here includes not only rational argument but also placing things in their proper context — knowing what to say, to whom, when, and how.
On the phrase “your Lord knows best who has strayed”, al-Qurtubi comments that this is both a comfort to the Prophet ﷺ and a reminder that the caller bears no ultimate responsibility for the outcome — his accountability is for the effort, not the result.

🔹 Sayyid Qutb (d. 1966)
Qutb, writing in Fi Zilal al-Quran from within an Egyptian prison, brings a deeply experiential and movement-oriented reading. He sees this verse as a comprehensive manhaj (methodology) for Islamic work in any age and under any condition.
He emphasises that hikmah is not merely intelligence — it is the wisdom of knowing that hearts differ, circumstances differ, and that the same truth must be presented differently to different people. The da’i (caller) must read both the truth he carries and the human being before him, and find the point of connection between them.
On maw’izah hasanah, Qutb powerfully observes that the word hasanah (excellent/beautiful) is crucial — it rules out any form of harshness, condescension, or emotional manipulation. The counsel must be beautiful in its spirit, not just its content.
On mujadalah bil-ahsan, Qutb notes that the purpose of debate in Islam is never to humiliate or defeat — it is to open a door in the heart of the listener. The moment one senses that a debate is becoming an ego contest, the wise caller steps back.
Qutb then makes a distinctive point absent in the classical scholars: he connects this verse to the broader Quranic vision of human dignity (karamah). The three methods all share a common foundation — they treat the human being as a rational, feeling, morally responsible agent worthy of respect. This is itself a form of da’wah — demonstrating by one’s very conduct that Islam honours human dignity.

Verse 126 — Proportional Retaliation and the Superiority of Patience

🔹 Ibn Kathir
Ibn Kathir records an important historical context for this verse. It was revealed after the Battle of Uhud, when the Quraysh had mutilated the body of Hamza ibn Abd al-Muttalib (رضي الله عنه). The Prophet ﷺ, overcome with grief, said: “I will mutilate seventy of them in return.” This verse was then revealed, permitting proportional retaliation but strongly encouraging patience and forgiveness. Ibn Kathir notes that the Prophet ﷺ immediately chose patience and forgiveness, and expiation (kaffarah) was prescribed for his oath.
This provides a profound lesson: the verse does not forbid retaliation — it permits it within strict limits of proportionality — but it then immediately elevates the status of those who choose patience above retaliation.

🔹 Al-Qurtubi
Al-Qurtubi develops the jurisprudential implications extensively. He notes that the principle of mithl (equivalence) in retaliation is foundational to Islamic law — one may not exceed the harm done to oneself. He also engages with the question of whether this verse was abrogated by the later verses of jihad — and concludes that it was not abrogated, but rather that both retaliation and patience remain valid options, with patience being the morally superior choice.

🔹 Sayyid Qutb
Qutb reads this verse with particular emotional intensity, given that he wrote his tafsir while himself being subjected to imprisonment and persecution. He observes that the verse acknowledges the human right to retaliation — Islam does not demand impossible sainthood. But it then opens a higher door: “if you are patient, that is better for the patient.” Qutb notes the beautiful Quranic construction — it does not say patience is better in the abstract, but that it is better for the patient ones — meaning those who actually practise it discover its superiority through lived experience.

Verses 127–128 — Divine Companionship and the Promise to the Righteous

🔹 Ibn Kathir
Ibn Kathir comments that these closing verses are among the most comforting in the entire Quran for those engaged in the work of calling to Allah. The command “be patient” is followed immediately by the acknowledgement that “your patience is only through Allah” — meaning that even the capacity for patience is a divine gift, not a purely human achievement. This removes any sense of pride or self-sufficiency from the one who manages to remain patient.
On “Allah is with those who have taqwa and those who do ihsan”, Ibn Kathir explains that this ma’iyyah (divine companionship) is a special, active presence — it means Allah’s support, protection, and assistance — distinct from the general divine knowledge that encompasses all creation.

🔹 Al-Tabari
Al-Tabari emphasises the closing pairing of taqwa and ihsan as the two pillars that attract divine support. Taqwa is the inward shield — the fear and consciousness of Allah that prevents one from wrongdoing. Ihsan is the outward expression — the active doing of good, even toward those who do harm. Together they represent the complete Islamic character: protected from evil within, overflowing with good without.

🔹 Sayyid Qutb
Qutb closes his commentary on Surah An-Nahl with a sweeping reflection. He notes that the Surah began with the grandeur of divine creation — the heavens, the earth, the animals, the blessings poured upon humanity — and ends with the intimate promise: “Allah is with those who have taqwa.” The circle is complete: the God who sustains the universe with His power is the same God who walks with the righteous servant through every trial. This, Qutb writes, is the ultimate source of the believer’s tranquility — not the removal of difficulty, but the certainty of divine companionship within it.

Summary Comparison Table Scholar Distinctive Emphasis Al-Tabari Linguistic precision; hikmah = the Quran itself; historical context of Makkan period Ibn Kathir Hadith-grounded; historical context of Uhud; three methods suited to three audiences Al-Qurtubi Jurisprudential detail; staged methodology; non-abrogation of patience Mawdudi Practical da’wah methodology; psychological insight into the caller’s conduct Sayyid Qutb Movement-oriented; human dignity; divine companionship as source of tranquility

Alhamdulillah — this concludes the comparative tafsir of the final passage of Surah An-Nahl. These closing verses are a remarkable gift to every caller to truth in every age. Shall we now begin Surah Al-Isra (17), or would you like a summary overview of the major themes of Surah An-Nahl as a whole?​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​

اے نبی ؐ ، اپنے ربّ کے راستے کی طرف دعوت دو حکمت اور عمدہ نصیحت کے ساتھ،122 اور لوگوں سےمباحثہ کرو ایسے طریقہ پر جو بہترین ہو۔123 تمہارا ربّ ہی زیادہ بہتر جانتا ہے کہ کون اُس کی راہ سے بھٹکا ہوا ہے اور کون راہِ راست پر ہے۔ اور اگر تم لوگ بدلہ لو تو بس اسی قدر لے لو جس قدر تم پر زیادتی کی گئی ہو۔ لیکن اگر تم صبر کرو تو یقیناً یہ صبر کرنے والوں ہی کے حق میں بہتر ہے۔ اے محمد ؐ ، صبر سے کام کیے جاوٴ۔۔۔۔اورتمہارا یہ صبر اللہ ہی کی توفیق سے ہے ۔۔۔۔اِن لوگوں کی حرکات پر رنج نہ کرو اور نہ ان کی چال بازیوں پر دل تنگ ہو۔ اللہ اُن لوگوں کے ساتھ ہے جو تقوٰی سے کام لیتے ہیں اور احسان پر عمل کرتے ہیں۔124 ؏ ١٦

122

یعنی دعوت میں دو چیزیں ملحوظ رہنی چاہیں۔ ایک حکمت ۔ دوسرے عمدہ نصیحت۔

حکمت کا مطلب یہ ہے کہ بے وقوفوں کی طرح اندھا دھند تبلیغ نہ کی جائے، بلکہ دانائی کے ساتھ مخاطب کی ذہنیت استعداد اور حالات کو سمجھ کر ، نیز موقع و محل کو دیکھ کر بات کی جائے۔ ہر طرح کے لوگوں کو ایک ہی لکڑی سے ہانکا جائے، جس شخص یا گروہ سے سابقہ پیش آئے ، پہلے اس کے مرض کی تشخیص کی جائے، پھر ایسے دلائل سے اس کا علاج کیا جائے جو اس کے دل و دماغ کی گہرائیوں سے اس کے مرض کی جڑ نکال سکتے ہوں۔

عمدہ نصیحت کے دو مطلب ہیں ۔ ایک یہ کہ مخاطب کو صرف دلائل ہی سے مطمئن کرنے پر اکتفا کیا جائے بلکہ اس کے جذبات کو بھی اپیل کی اجائے۔ برائیوں اور گمراہیوں کا محض عقلی حیثیت ہی سے ابطال نہ کیا جائے بلکہ انسان کی فطرت میں اُن ے لیے جو پیدائشی نفرت پائی جاتی ہے اسے بھی اُبھار ا جائے اور ان کے بُرے نتائج کا خوف دلایا جائے۔ ہدایت او ر عمل صالح کی محض صحت اور خوبی ہی عقلًا ثابت نہ کی جائے بلکہ ان کی طرف رغبت اور شوق بھی پیدا کیا جائے۔ دوسرا مطلب یہ ہے کہ نصیحت ایسے طریقہ سے کی جائے جس سے دل سوزی اور خیر خواہی ٹپکتی ہو۔ مخاطب یہ نہ سمجھے کہ ناصح اسے حقیر سمجھ رہا ہے اور اپنی بلندی کے احساس سے لذت لے رہا ہے۔ بلکہ اسے یہ محسوس ہو کہ ناصح کے دل میں اس کی اصلاح کے لیے ایک تڑپ موجود ہے اور وہ حقیقت میں اس کی بھلائی چاہتا ہے۔

123

یعنی اس کی نوعیت محض مناظرہ بازی اور عقلی کُشتی اور ذہنی دنگل کی نہ ہو۔ اس میں کج بحثیاں اور الزام تراشیاں اور چوٹیں اورپھبتیاں نہ ہوں۔ اس کا مقصود حریفِ مقابل کو چپ کر دینا اور اپنی زبان آوری کے ڈنکے بجا دینا نہ ہو۔ بلکہ اس میں شیریں کلامی ہو۔ اعلیٰ درجہ کا شریفانہ اخلاق ہو۔ معقول اور دل لگتے دلائل ہوں ۔ مخاطب کے اندر ضد اور بات کی پچ اور ہٹ دھرمی پیدا نہ ہونے دی جائے۔ سیدھے سیدھے طریقے سے اس کو بات سمجھانے کی کوشش کی جائے اور جب محسوس ہو کہ وہ کج بحثی پر اتر آیا ہے تو اسے اس کے حال پر چھوڑ دیا جائے تاکہ وہ گمراہی میں اور زیادہ دُور نہ نکل جائے۔

124

یعنی جو خدا سے ڈر کر ہر قسم کے بُرے طریقوں سے پرہیز کرتے ہیں اور ہمیشہ نیک رویہ پر قائم رہتے ہیں ۔ دوسرے ان کے ساتھ خواہ کتنی ہی بُرائی کریں، وہ ان کا جواب برائی سے نہیں بلکہ بھلائی ہی سے دیے جاتے ہیں۔

Al NAHL16:120-124

اِنَّ اِبۡرٰہِیۡمَ کَانَ اُمَّۃً قَانِتًا لِّلّٰہِ حَنِیۡفًا ؕ وَ لَمۡ یَکُ مِنَ الۡمُشۡرِکِیۡنَ ﴿۱۲۰﴾ۙ شَاکِرًا لِّاَنۡعُمِہٖ ؕ اِجۡتَبٰہُ وَ ہَدٰىہُ اِلٰی صِرَاطٍ مُّسۡتَقِیۡمٍ ﴿۱۲۱﴾ وَ اٰتَیۡنٰہُ فِی الدُّنۡیَا حَسَنَۃً ؕ وَ اِنَّہٗ فِی الۡاٰخِرَۃِ لَمِنَ الصّٰلِحِیۡنَ ﴿۱۲۲﴾ؕ ثُمَّ اَوۡحَیۡنَاۤ اِلَیۡکَ اَنِ اتَّبِعۡ مِلَّۃَ اِبۡرٰہِیۡمَ حَنِیۡفًا ؕ وَ مَا کَانَ مِنَ الۡمُشۡرِکِیۡنَ ﴿۱۲۳﴾ اِنَّمَا جُعِلَ السَّبۡتُ عَلَی الَّذِیۡنَ اخۡتَلَفُوۡا فِیۡہِ ؕ وَ اِنَّ رَبَّکَ لَیَحۡکُمُ بَیۡنَہُمۡ یَوۡمَ الۡقِیٰمَۃِ فِیۡمَا کَانُوۡا فِیۡہِ یَخۡتَلِفُوۡنَ ﴿۱۲۴﴾

Here is the English translation of Surah An-Nahl, verses 120–124 with Mawdudi’s footnotes:

Surah An-Nahl (16:120–124) — Translation & Commentary

Verses

  1. Indeed, Ibrahim was in himself an entire nation — devoutly obedient to Allah, wholly devoted to Him alone, and he was never among the polytheists.¹¹⁹
  2. He was grateful for His favours. Allah chose him and guided him to a straight path.
  3. And We granted him good in this world, and in the Hereafter he shall surely be among the righteous.
  4. Then We revealed to you: “Follow the way of Ibrahim, who was wholly devoted, and he was not among the polytheists.“¹²⁰
  5. As for the Sabbath, it was imposed only upon those who disputed concerning it.¹²¹ And surely your Lord will judge between them on the Day of Resurrection regarding all that they used to dispute.

Footnotes
Footnote 119
That is, this one man was in himself an entire nation. At a time when there was not a single Muslim left in the world, he alone stood as the standard-bearer of Islam on one side, while the whole of humanity bore the banner of disbelief on the other. This solitary servant of God accomplished what an entire nation was meant to accomplish. He was not merely one individual — he was a complete institution unto himself.
Footnote 120
This is the complete answer to the first objection raised by the opponents. The answer has two parts.
The first is that there is no contradiction in the divine law, as the critics had assumed upon observing the apparent differences between Jewish religious law and the Shari’ah of Muhammad ﷺ. In reality, the Jews were specifically deprived of certain blessings as a consequence of their own disobedience — there was no reason to impose those same deprivations upon others.
The second part is that the way Muhammad ﷺ has been commanded to follow is the way of Ibrahim ﷺ, and it is well known that in the Abrahamic tradition those things were not forbidden which are forbidden in Jewish law. For instance, the Jews do not eat camel meat, yet it was lawful in the Abrahamic tradition. Ostrich, duck, rabbit, and similar animals are prohibited among the Jews, yet all of these were lawful in the Abrahamic tradition.
Alongside this answer, the Makkan disbelievers were also put on notice that neither they nor the Jews have any genuine connection to Ibrahim, because both groups are engaged in polytheism. If there is any true follower of the Abrahamic tradition, it is this Prophet and his Companions, in whose beliefs and conduct there is not the slightest trace of shirk.
Footnote 121
This is the answer to the second objection of the Makkan disbelievers. There was no need here to explicitly state that the Sabbath too was specific to the Jews and that the observance of the Sabbath had no existence in the Abrahamic tradition — for this was already known even to the Makkan disbelievers themselves. Therefore, it sufficed to indicate only this much: that the stringencies they observed in Jewish Sabbath law were not part of the original commandment. Rather, they were imposed upon the Jews later, as a consequence of their mischief and repeated violations of the divine commands.
This Quranic allusion cannot be fully appreciated unless one examines, on one hand, the Biblical passages where the Sabbath commandments are laid out — such as Exodus 20:8–11; 23:12–13; 31:12–17; 35:2–3; Numbers 15:32–36 — and, on the other hand, becomes acquainted with the audacity with which the Jews persisted in violating the sanctity of the Sabbath, as recorded for instance in Jeremiah 17:21–27 and Ezekiel 20:12–24.

Alhamdulillah — the portrait of Ibrahim ﷺ in verse 120 as an ummah unto himself is one of the most powerful characterisations in the Quran. Shall we continue with verses 125 onward, or would you like a comparative tafsir from Ibn Kathir or Sayyid Qutb on these verses?

واقعہ یہ ہے کہ ابراہیم ؑ اپنی ذات سے ایک پوری اُمّت تھا،119 اللہ کا مطیعِ فرمان اور یکسُو۔ وہ کبھی مشرک نہ تھا۔ اللہ کی نعمتوں کا شکر ادا کرنے والا تھا۔ اللہ نے اُس کو منتخب کر لیا اور سیدھا راستہ دکھایا۔ دنیا میں اس کو بھلائی دی اور آخرت میں وہ یقیناً صالحین میں سے ہوگا۔ پھر ہم نے تمہاری طرف یہ وحی بھیجی کہ یکسُو ہو کر ابراہیم ؑ کے طریقے پر چلو اور وہ مشرکوں میں سے نہ تھا۔120 رہا سَبت، تو وہ ہم نے اُن لوگوں پر مسلّط کیا تھا جنہوں نے اس کے احکام میں اختلاف ک121یا، اور یقیناً تیرا ربّ قیامت کے روز ان سب باتوں کا فیصلہ کر دے گا جن میں وہ اختلاف کرتے رہے ہیں۔

119

یعنی وہ اکیلا انسان بجائے خو د ایک اُمت تھا۔ جب دنیا میں کوئی مسلمان نہ تھا تو ایک طرف وہ اکیلااسلام کا علمبردار تھا اور دوسری طرف ساری دنیا کفر کی علمبردار تھی۔ اُس اکیلے بندۂ خدا نے وہ کام کیا جو ایک امّت کے کرنے کا تھا۔ وہ ایک شخص نہ تھا بلکہ ایک پورا ادارہ تھا

120

یہ معترضین کے پہلے اعتراض کا مکمل جواب ہے۔ اس جواب کے دو اجزا ہیں ۔ ایک یہ کہ خدا کی شریعت میں تضاد نہیں ہے، جیسا کہ تم نے یہودیوں کے مذہبی قانون اور شریعت محمدیؐ کے ظاہری فرق کو دیکھ کر گمان کیا ہے ، بلکہ دراصل یہودیوں کو خاص طور پر ان کی نافرمانیوں کی پاداش میں چند نعمتوں سے محروم کیا گیا تھا جن سے دوسروں کو محروم کرنے کی کوئی وجہ نہیں۔ دوسرا جزء یہ ہے کہ محمد صلی اللہ علیہ وسلم کو جس طریقے کی پیروی کا حکم دیا گیا ہے وہ ابراہیم علیہ السلام کا طریقہ ہے اور تمہیں معلوم ہے کہ ملتِ ابراہیمی میں وہ چیزیں حرام نہ تھیں جو یہودیوں کے ہاں حرام ہیں۔ مثلًا یہودی اونٹ نہیں کھاتے، مگر مِلّتِ ابراہیمی میں وہ حلال تھا۔ یہودیوں کے ہاں شتر مرغ ، بط، خرگوش وغیرہ حرام ہیں، مگر ملّتِ ابراہیمی میں یہ سب چیزیں حلال تھیں۔ اس جواب کے ساتھ ساتھ کفارِ مکّہ کو اس بات پر بھی متنبہ کر دیا گیا کہ نہ تم کو ابراہیمؑ سے کوئی واسطہ ہے نہ یہودیوں کو ، کیونکہ تم دونوں ہی شرک کر رہے ہو۔ ملّتِ ابراہیمی کا اگر کوئی صحیح پیرو ہے تو وہ یہ نبی اور اس کے ساتھی ہیں جن کے عقائد اور اعمال میں شرک کا شائبہ تک نہیں پایا جاتا

121

یہ کفارِ مکّہ کے دوسرے اعتراض کا جواب ہے۔ اس میں یہ بیان کرنے کی حاجت نہ تھی کہ سَبت بھی یہودیوں کے لیے مخصوص تھا اور مِلّتِ ابراہیمی میں حرمتِ سبت کا کوئی وجود نہ تھا ، کیونکہ اس بات کو خود کفار مکہ بھی جانتے تھے ۔ اس لیے صرف اتنا ہی اشارہ کر نے پر اکتفا کیا گیا کہ یہودیوں کے ہاں سبت کے قانون میں جو سختیاں تم پاتے ہو یہ ابتدائی حکم میں نہ تھیں بلکہ یہ بعد میں یہودیوں کی شرارتوں اور احکام کی خلاف ورزیوں کی وجہ سے ان پر عائد کی گئی تھیں ۔ قرآن مجید کے اس اشارے کو آدمی اچھی طرح نہیں سمجھ سکتا جب تک کہ وہ ایک طرف بائیبل کے اُن مقامات کو نہ دیکھے جہاں سبت کے احکام بیان ہوئے ہیں (مثلاً ملاحظہ ہو خروج باب ۲۰، آیت ۸ تا ۱۱۔ باب ۲۳، آیت ۱۲ و ۱۳۔ باب ۳۱، آیت ۱۲ تا ۱۷۔ باب ۳۵، آیت ۲ و ۳۔ گنتی باب ۱۵، آیت ۳۲ تا ۳۶)، اور دوسری طرف اُن جسارتوں سے واقف نہ ہو جو یہودی سبت کی حرمت کو توڑنے میں ظاہر کرتے رہے(مثلًا ملاحظہ ہو یر میاہ باب ۱۷، آیت ۲۱ تا ۲۷۔ حِزقِی ایل ، باب ۲۰، آیت ۱۲ تا ۲۴)۔