بِسْمِ اللّٰهِ الرَّحْمٰنِ الرَّحِيْمِ

قُلۡ هُوَ اللّٰهُ اَحَدٌ ۚ‏ ﴿112:1﴾ اَللّٰهُ الصَّمَدُ ۚ‏ ﴿112:2﴾ لَمۡ يَلِدۡ   ۙ وَلَمۡ يُوۡلَدۡ ۙ‏ ﴿112:3﴾ وَلَمۡ يَكُنۡ لَّهٗ كُفُوًا اَحَدٌ‏ ﴿112:4﴾

(112:1) Say:¹ “He is Allah,² the One and Unique;³ (112:2) Allah, Who is in need of none and of Whom all are in need;⁴ (112:3) He neither begot any nor was He begotten,⁵ (112:4) and none is comparable to Him.”

Based on Maulana Mawdudi’s Tafseer of Surah Al-Ikhlas:

Please use link for Urdu, Hindi and Telugu version of this.

Chapter AL IKHLAS: Q&A,Urdu, Hindi & Telugu

🕌 Q&A Session: Surah Al-Ikhlas (112) — The Surah of Pure Monotheism

PART ONE: Understanding the Command — “Say”
Q1. Why does the Surah begin with the command “Say” (Qul)? Who is being addressed?
The primary addressee is the Prophet ﷺ himself, since it was he who was asked: “Who is your Lord, and what is He like?” He was commanded to answer in precisely these words. However, after him, every believer inherits this command — each Muslim is to carry and declare this same answer in their own life.

Q2. Why did Allah not simply say “Allah is One” without the command “Say”? What does the structure add?
The command “Say” transforms this from a mere doctrinal statement into a living declaration — something to be actively proclaimed, not just internally believed. It establishes that Tawheed is not a private opinion but a public testimony. The believer is not merely informed; they are commissioned.

PART TWO: Huwa Allah — “He is Allah”
Q3. When the answer begins with “He is Allah” — wasn’t Allah already a known name to the Arabs? Why introduce their own word back to them?
Precisely because they already knew it. The Arabs used “Allah” specifically for the Creator of the universe — distinct from their word ilah (deity), which they applied to their idols. The answer is therefore a reconnection, not an introduction. It says: the Lord I call you to is not a new invention — it is the very Being your own hearts already recognize as the Creator, the Sustainer, and the One you cry out to in moments of drowning at sea.

Q4. What does this tell us about the nature of polytheism among the Arabs?
It reveals a profound internal contradiction at the heart of Arab polytheism. They intellectually acknowledged Allah as Creator, Sustainer, and ultimate Refuge — yet they worshipped others alongside Him. The Quran, in Surah Az-Zukhruf, Al-Ankabut, Yunus, and others, documents this again and again: when asked who created the heavens and earth, they would say: “Allah.” Their shirk was not ignorance of Allah — it was an irrational failure to follow through on what they already knew.

PART THREE: Ahad — The Absolute One
Q5. Arabic has two words for “one” — wahid and ahad. What is the difference, and why does this Surah use ahad?
Wahid means “one” in the numerical sense — it can apply to any single unit, even one that is internally complex or composite. We say: one nation, one universe, one man. But ahad carries the meaning of absolute, indivisible singularity — free from any internal plurality whatsoever. Crucially, in all of pre-Quranic Arabic, ahad was never used as an adjective for a person or thing. After the Quran’s revelation, it is used exclusively for Allah. Where the Quran says Ilahun Wahid (One Deity), it modifies a noun. But Ahad stands alone — because only Allah qualifies for it without condition or qualification.

Q6. The polytheists asked: “What is your Lord made of? What is His ancestry? What is His gender?” How does the single word Ahad answer all of these?
Ahad answers them all in one stroke:
∙ He is not composed of material — Ahad excludes all composition and divisibility.
∙ He has no ancestry — Ahad means there is no species of gods from which He descended.
∙ He has no gender — gender implies biological species, plurality, and reproduction; Ahad negates all of this.
∙ He has no beginning or end — Ahad means His oneness is eternal; there was no God before Him and there will be none after.

PART FOUR: As-Samad — The Eternally Besought
Q7. What does As-Samad mean, and why is it one of the most comprehensive attributes in the Quran?
The word Samad carries multiple dimensions, and the scholars of the Companions’ generation each highlighted a different facet:
∙ The One who has no superior (Ali, Ikrimah)
∙ The One upon whom all depend, who depends upon none (Abu Hurairah)
∙ The Chief whose sovereignty is absolute and perfect (Ibn Abbas)
∙ The Ever-Living, Immortal One (Hasan al-Basri, Qatadah)
∙ The One who is faultless and indivisible (Muqatil ibn Hayyan)
∙ The One to whom all creatures turn in need (Suddi, Ibrahim al-Nakha’i)
Taken together, As-Samad means: all existence flows toward Him in need, while He flows toward none. He is the Axis of all dependency in the universe.

Q8. The Surah says Allah-us-Samad with the definite article, not merely Samad. Why does this matter?
Because samad in a lesser sense can describe a powerful human leader — a chief his people turn to. But no created being is Samad in the complete sense: every human leader is mortal, dependent on others, limited in knowledge, and unable to fulfill all needs. The definite article As restricts true Samad-hood to Allah alone. He is not merely a Samad — He is the Samad, the only Being in whom this attribute is total, absolute, and without deficiency.

Q9. What is the logical relationship between Ahad and As-Samad? Do these two attributes reinforce each other?
Yes, profoundly. If Allah is As-Samad — meaning all depend on Him and He depends on none — then He must be Ahad. Two or more beings cannot both be self-sufficient and the ultimate destination of all need. Dependency and self-sufficiency cannot be shared between equals. Similarly, Ahad requires As-Samad: a truly singular Being admits no associate, partner, or rival — and therefore must be the sole Refuge. Each attribute logically necessitates the other.

PART FIVE: Lam Yalid wa lam Yulad — He Neither Begets Nor Was Begotten
Q10. Why is the negation of offspring and parentage given as a separate verse? Wasn’t it implied by Ahad and As-Samad?
Yes, it was logically implied — but the historical urgency required an explicit refutation. The belief that gods beget children, or that saints are sons of God, was the most widespread and emotionally entrenched form of shirk across human civilizations. From Arabian tribal beliefs (angels as daughters of Allah) to Jewish and Christian corruptions to Hindu cosmology, this concept of divine progeny was the deepest root of polytheism. So Allah stated the refutation directly, leaving no room for ambiguity.

Q11. What are the necessary logical implications of believing that God begets children?
Mawdudi identifies four devastating logical consequences that flow inescapably from this belief:
1. God is not singular — if He begets, there must be a species of gods, and His children would share in His divine attributes.
2. God is material — biological reproduction requires physical substance and a mate; ascribing progeny to Allah necessitates ascribing corporeality to Him.
3. God is mortal — species reproduce to survive mortality. If God reproduces, it implies He too is subject to death.
4. God is needy — adopting a son implies needing an heir or a helper; it is an admission of weakness and dependency.
All four of these are annihilated by Ahad and As-Samad, and then categorically restated in this verse.

Q12. If Ahad and As-Samad already destroy these ideas, why does the Quran return to this theme again and again in other Surahs?
Because the human tendency to ascribe family, form, and physical characteristics to the Divine is deep-rooted and recurring. Surah An-Nisa, As-Saffat, Al-An’am, Al-Anbiya, Yunus, Bani Israil, Al-Muminun — all address this from different angles. The Quran treats it not as a minor error to be corrected once, but as the central corruption of human theology that must be addressed repeatedly and from multiple directions until it is uprooted entirely.

PART SIX: Wa lam yakun lahu kufuwan ahad — None Is Comparable to Him
Q13. What does kufu mean, and how does this final verse seal the Surah?
Kufu means an equal, a match, or a comparable counterpart — the same word used in marriage law for social compatibility between spouses. The final verse declares: there is nothing in existence — past, present, or future — that is similar to Allah, equal to Him in any attribute, or even partially comparable to Him in any of His works or powers.
This verse is the universal lock on the entire Surah. The previous verses defined what Allah is — One, Self-Sufficient, uncreated, not begetting. This final verse forecloses every remaining angle: even if someone imagined a being that somehow escaped all the previous descriptions, that being still could not be Allah’s equal. The Surah closes every conceptual door through which false notions of divinity might enter.

Q14. This Surah is said to be equal to one-third of the Quran. How do these four short verses justify that ranking?
Because the Quran’s fundamental message rests on three pillars: Tawheed (Oneness of God), Risalah (Prophethood), and Akhirah (the Hereafter). Surah Al-Ikhlas addresses Tawheed in its most complete and concentrated form. Every attribute of Allah — His uniqueness, self-sufficiency, eternity, transcendence, and incomparability — is compressed into four verses. In knowing Who Allah is, one knows the foundation upon which all worship, all ethics, all hope, and all accountability rests. That is one-third of the entire religion.

This Q&A may be used for study circles, mosque sessions, or ForOneCreator content. Translation into Urdu, Hindi, or other languages available upon request.

Divine truth is absolute and must prevail, regardless of the displeasure, opposition, or personal desires of people: verses of Quran

Here are the key verses from the Quran containing the phrase “وَلَوْ كَرِهَ” (walaw kariha)—which means “even if they dislike it” or “even though they detest it”—along with their translations and concise tafseer.

Introduction

The phrase “وَلَوْ كَرِهَ” (even if they dislike it) is a powerful Quranic expression emphasizing that the decree, law, or truth from Allah is absolute and must prevail, regardless of the displeasure, opposition, or personal desires of people—be they disbelievers, hypocrites, or even some among the believers.

It establishes the supremacy of divine will over human sentiment.

The Verses

1. The Universal Law of Allah’s Sovereignty

Arabic:

يُرِيدُونَ لِيُطْفِـُٔوا۟ نُورَ ٱللَّهِ بِأَفْوَٰهِهِمْ وَٱللَّهُ مُتِمُّ نُورِهِۦ وَلَوْ كَرِهَ ٱلْكَـٰفِرُونَ
Translation (Sahih International):
“They want to extinguish the light of Allah with their mouths, but Allah will perfect His light, even if the disbelievers dislike it.”
Surah & Verse: As-Saff (61:8)

Tafseer (Concise):
The disbelievers and opponents of truth actively plot to defeat Islam. This verse assures the believers that Allah’s religion (His light) will triumph and reach perfection, irrespective of the hatred and schemes of its enemies. This is an unchanging divine law.

2. The Decree of Fighting Against Aggression

Arabic:

كُتِبَ عَلَيْكُمُ ٱلْقِتَالُ وَهُوَ كُرْهٌ لَّكُمْ ۖ وَعَسَىٰٓ أَن تَكْرَهُوا۟ شَيْـًٔا وَهُوَ خَيْرٌ لَّكُمْ ۖ وَعَسَىٰٓ أَن تُحِبُّوا۟ شَيْـًٔا وَهُوَ شَرٌّ لَّكُمْ ۗ وَٱللَّهُ يَعْلَمُ وَأَنتُمْ لَا تَعْلَمُونَ
Translation (Sahih International):
“Fighting has been enjoined upon you while it is hateful to you. But perhaps you hate a thing and it is good for you; and perhaps you love a thing and it is bad for you. And Allah knows, while you know not.”
Surah & Verse: Al-Baqarah (2:216)

Note: This verse contains the concept (كُرْهٌ لَّكُمْ – “hateful to you”) and teaches the same principle: a divine decree may be difficult, but it is for a greater good known to Allah.

3. The Obligation of Judgment by Allah’s Law

Arabic:

فَلَا وَرَبِّكَ لَا يُؤْمِنُونَ حَتَّىٰ يُحَكِّمُوكَ فِيمَا شَجَرَ بَيْنَهُمْ ثُمَّ لَا يَجِدُوا۟ فِىٓ أَنفُسِهِمْ حَرَجًا مِّمَّا قَضَيْتَ وَيُسَلِّمُوا۟ تَسْلِيمًا
Translation (Sahih International):
“But no, by your Lord, they will not [truly] believe until they make you, [O Muhammad], judge concerning that over which they dispute among themselves and then find within themselves no discomfort from what you have judged and submit in [full, willing] submission.”
Surah & Verse: An-Nisa’ (4:65)

Note: This verse, mentioned earlier, directly relates to the principle of “walaw kariha”—true faith requires submitting to the Prophet’s judgment even if it goes against one’s own desire or interest.

4. The Rejection by the People of the Book

Arabic:

وَدَّ كَثِيرٌ مِّنْ أَهْلِ الْكِتَابِ لَوْ يَرُدُّونَكُم مِّن بَعْدِ إِيمَانِكُمْ كُفَّارًا حَسَدًا مِّنْ عِندِ أَنفُسِهِم مِّن بَعْدِ مَا تَبَيَّنَ لَهُمُ الْحَقُّ ۖ فَاعْفُوا وَاصْفَحُوا حَتَّىٰ يَأْتَيَ اللَّهُ بِأَمْرِهِ ۗ إِنَّ اللَّهَ عَلَىٰ كُلِّ شَيْءٍ قَدِيرٌ
Translation (Sahih International):
“Many of the People of the Scripture wish they could turn you back to disbelief after you have believed, out of envy from themselves [even] after the truth has become clear to them. So pardon and overlook until Allah delivers His command. Indeed, Allah is over all things competent.”
Surah & Verse: Al-Baqarah (2:109)

Related Context: The subsequent verses (e.g., about changing the Qiblah) often carry the implication that Allah’s command will stand “walaw kariha al-mushrikoon” (even if the polytheists dislike it), as in Surah Al-Baqarah 2:144.

5. The Principle in a General Form

The phrase appears regarding different groups:

· “وَلَوْ كَرِهَ ٱلْكَـٰفِرُونَ” – Even if the disbelievers dislike it. (At-Tawbah 9:32, As-Saff 61:8)
· “وَلَوْ كَرِهَ ٱلْمُشْرِكُونَ” – Even if the polytheists dislike it. (At-Tawbah 9:33, Al-Fath 48:28, As-Saff 61:9)
· “وَلَوْ كَرِهَ ٱلْمُنَـٰفِقُونَ” – Even if the hypocrites dislike it. (At-Tawbah 9:48)
· “وَلَوْ كَرِهَ ٱلْأَشْرِبَةُ” – Even if the drinkers dislike it. (Al-Ma’idah 5:91) – Regarding the prohibition of intoxicants.

Key Verse (Exemplifying the Phrase)

Arabic:

هُوَ ٱلَّذِىٓ أَرْسَلَ رَسُولَهُۥ بِٱلْهُدَىٰ وَدِينِ ٱلْحَقِّ لِيُظْهِرَهُۥ عَلَى ٱلدِّينِ كُلِّهِۦ وَلَوْ كَرِهَ ٱلْمُشْرِكُونَ
Translation (Sahih International):
“It is He who has sent His Messenger with guidance and the religion of truth to manifest it over all religion, even though the polytheists dislike it.”
Surah & Verse: At-Tawbah (9:33) & As-Saff (61:9)

Tafseer (Concise):
This is a fundamental mission statement of Islam. Allah has decreed that the truth of Islam will be made supreme over all other ways of life, ideologies, and religions. This is a divine promise that will be fulfilled, regardless of the intense hatred, resistance, and plots of those who associate partners with Allah.

Conclusion

The phrase “وَلَوْ كَرِهَ” is a cornerstone of Islamic creed regarding:

1. The Finality of Truth: Allah’s truth and religion are absolute and will prevail.
2. The Test for Believers: They must accept and uphold Allah’s commands (like fighting, judgment by Shariah, prohibition of evils) even when it is difficult or against their personal desires.
3. A Warning to Opponents: Their dislike and opposition are futile against the divine decree.

It is a call for unwavering conviction and submission to the will of Allah, the All-Knowing, the All-Wise.

14:13. The unbelievers said to their Messengers: “We shall certainly banish you from our land unless you revert to our ways.” Thereupon their Lord revealed to them: “We will most certainly destroy the wrong-doers,

Click the link to explore the history, divine interventions to help oppressed ones

https://voiceofquran5.com/14-131415-threats-to-push-out-believers-divine-promises-intervention/

Quranic Verses Related to “Uprooting Innocents”

Holy Quran strongly condemns harming, killing, oppressing, or displacing innocent people unjustly. Themes of injustice, genocide, and persecution of the innocent (often believers) are addressed, with warnings of severe divine punishment for perpetrators.

Relevant verses grouped by theme, using standard English translations (primarily Sahih International or similar). Where possible, I’ve included brief context or tafseer-inspired explanations based on common interpretations. These draw from themes of not harming innocents, responding to displacement, and divine retribution for oppression. If you meant a specific context (e.g., a particular surah or translation), let me know for refinement.

1. Condemnation of Killing or Harming Innocents

The Quran equates unjust killing of one person to killing all humanity, emphasizing the sanctity of innocent life.

• Surah Al-Ma’idah (5:32)
  Arabic: مِنْ أَجْلِ ذَٰلِكَ كَتَبْنَا عَلَىٰ بَنِي إِسْرَائِيلَ أَنَّهُ مَن قَتَلَ نَفْسًا بِغَيْرِ نَفْسٍ أَوْ فَسَادٍ فِي الْأَرْضِ فَكَأَنَّمَا قَتَلَ النَّاسَ جَمِيعًا وَمَنْ أَحْيَاهَا فَكَأَنَّمَا أَحْيَا النَّاسَ جَمِيعًا
  Translation: “Because of that, We decreed upon the Children of Israel that whoever kills a soul unless for a soul or for corruption [done] in the land – it is as if he had slain mankind entirely. And whoever saves one – it is as if he had saved mankind entirely.”
  Context/Tafseer: This verse, revealed in the context of Cain and Abel, prohibits unjust killing and extends to all humanity, not just Muslims. It condemns acts that “uproot” or destroy innocent lives, with exceptions only for legal punishment after due process. 20 19
• Surah An-Nisa’ (4:93)
  Arabic: وَمَن يَقْتُلْ مُؤْمِنًا مُّتَعَمِّدًا فَجَزَاؤُهُ جَهَنَّمُ خَالِدًا فِيهَا وَغَضِبَ اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَلَعَنَهُ وَأَعَدَّ لَهُ عَذَابًا عَظِيمًا
  Translation: “But whoever kills a believer intentionally – his recompense is Hell, wherein he will abide eternally. And Allah has become angry with him and has cursed him and has prepared for him a great punishment.”
  Context/Tafseer: This specifically addresses killing a believer (an innocent in faith), promising eternal Hell for the perpetrator. It underscores that harming innocents invites divine wrath. 20 16

2. Response to Displacement or Uprooting (e.g., Driving Out Innocents)

Verses permit defensive action against those who displace or persecute, implying condemnation of unjust displacement.

• Surah Al-Baqarah (2:191)
  Arabic: وَاقْتُلُوهُمْ حَيْثُ ثَقِفْتُمُوهُمْ وَأَخْرِجُوهُم مِّنْ حَيْثُ أَخْرَجُوكُمْ ۚ وَالْفِتْنَةُ أَشَدُّ مِنَ الْقَتْلِ
  Translation: “And kill them [in battle] wherever you overtake them and expel them from wherever they have expelled you, and fitnah [persecution] is worse than killing.”
  Context/Tafseer: Revealed during early Muslim persecution in Mecca, this allows reciprocal expulsion against oppressors who “uproot” or drive out innocents. It highlights that persecution (including displacement) is a greater evil than killing, but limits fighting to self-defense. 13 1
• Surah Al-Baqarah (2:193)
  Arabic: وَقَاتِلُوهُمْ حَتَّىٰ لَا تَكُونَ فِتْنَةٌ وَيَكُونَ الدِّينُ لِلَّهِ ۖ فَإِنِ انْتَهَوْا فَلَا عُدْوَانَ إِلَّا عَلَى الظَّالِمِينَ
  Translation: “Fight them until there is no [more] fitnah and [until] religion [i.e., worship] is [acknowledged to be] for Allah. But if they cease, then there is to be no aggression except against the oppressors.”
  Context/Tafseer: Continues from 2:191, emphasizing that aggression stops once persecution ends, and only oppressors (those who uproot or harm innocents) are targeted. 1

3. Condemnation of Oppression and Injustice (Which Can Include Uprooting or Displacing Innocents)

Oppression (zulm) is forbidden, and oppressors face divine consequences.

• Surah Ali ‘Imran (3:140)
  Arabic: إِن تَكُونُوا تَأْلَمُونَ فَإِنَّهُمْ يَأْلَمُونَ كَمَا تَأْلَمُونَ ۖ وَتَرْجُونَ مِنَ اللَّهِ مَا لَا يَرْجُونَ
  Translation: “Allah does not like the unjust [oppressors].” (Note: Full verse context is about trials, but this phrase highlights divine disdain for oppressors.)
  Context/Tafseer: Allah hates those who oppress, including acts like displacing or harming innocents, promising them no success. 21 2
• Surah Al-Mumtahanah (60:8)
  Arabic: لَا يَنْهَاكُمُ اللَّهُ عَنِ الَّذِينَ لَمْ يُقَاتِلُوكُمْ فِي الدِّينِ وَلَمْ يُخْرِجُوكُم مِّن دِيَارِكُمْ أَن تَبَرُّوهُمْ وَتُقْسِطُوا إِلَيْهِمْ ۚ إِنَّ اللَّهَ يُحِبُّ الْمُقْسِطِينَ
  Translation: “Allah does not forbid you from those who do not fight you because of religion and do not expel you from your homes – from being righteous toward them and acting justly toward them. Indeed, Allah loves those who act justly.”
  Context/Tafseer: This permits kindness to non-hostile non-Muslims and implicitly condemns expelling (uprooting) people from homes without cause, promoting justice. 21

4. Divine Punishment for Genocide or Mass Harm to Innocents

Surah Al-Buruj describes a historical genocide of innocent believers, cursing the perpetrators.

• Surah Al-Buruj (85:4-8)
  Arabic: قُتِلَ أَصْحَابُ الْأُخْدُودِ ۝ النَّارِ ذَاتِ الْوَقُودِ ۝ إِذْ هُمْ عَلَيْهَا قُعُودٌ ۝ وَهُمْ عَلَىٰ مَا يَفْعَلُونَ بِالْمُؤْمِنِينَ شُهُودٌ ۝ وَمَا نَقَمُوا مِنْهُمْ إِلَّا أَنْ يُؤْمِنُوا بِاللَّهِ الْعَزِيزِ الْحَمِيدِ
  Translation: “Cursed were the companions of the trench [containing] the fire full of fuel, when they were sitting near it, and they, to what they were doing against the believers, were witnesses. And they resented them not except because they believed in Allah, the Exalted in Might, the Praiseworthy.”
  Context/Tafseer: Refers to oppressors who burned innocent believers alive in trenches for their faith alone. This condemns mass killing or “uprooting” of communities based on belief, promising divine curse and Hell (85:10). 32 17

Surah An-Nas provides the believer with the divine formula to fortify the heart—the center of faith and action—against the most cunning internal enemies, by seeking protection from the Lord, King, and God of all mankind.

Surah An-Nas (The Mankind)

Chapter 114 • 6 Verses • Makki

Arabic Text:

بِسْمِ اللَّهِ الرَّحْمَٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ
قُلْ أَعُوذُ بِرَبِّ النَّاسِ ﴿١﴾ مَلِكِ النَّاسِ ﴿٢﴾ إِلَٰهِ النَّاسِ ﴿٣﴾ مِنْ شَرِّ الْوَسْوَاسِ الْخَنَّاسِ ﴿٤﴾ الَّذِي يُوَسْوِسُ فِي صُدُورِ النَّاسِ ﴿٥﴾ مِنَ الْجِنَّةِ وَالنَّاسِ ﴿﴾

Translation:

1. Say, “I seek refuge with the Lord of mankind,
2. The King of mankind,
3. The God of mankind,
4. From the evil of the whisperer who withdraws (when Allah’s name is mentioned),
5. Who whispers into the hearts of mankind,
6. From among the jinn and mankind.”

Explanation from the perspective of Tafheem-ul-Qur’an:

Core Theme & Context:
This Surah, along with Surah Al-Falaq, was revealed as part of a complete system for the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) and the believers to seek Allah’s protection. While Surah Al-Falaq concerns external evils, Surah An-Nas specifically seeks refuge from the internal evil of waswasah (evil suggestions/whisperings) that target the human heart and mind. It addresses the most subtle and dangerous form of attack on one’s faith and moral character.

Verse-by-Verse Tafheem (Comprehension):

(Verses 1-3): قُلْ أَعُوذُ بِرَبِّ النَّاسِ مَلِكِ النَّاسِ إِلَٰهِ النَّاسِ

· The instruction “Say” makes this a permanent formula for every believer. It is an active, verbal affirmation of seeking refuge.
· Allah is described with three consecutive attributes, each followed by “An-Nas (mankind)”:

1. “Rabb” (Lord): The One who creates, sustains, and governs all human beings.
2. “Malik” (King): The Sovereign who has absolute authority and control over all humanity. No power can operate outside His command.
3. “Ilah” (God): The Only One worthy of worship. The relationship is of a servant turning to his Master.
   · Why this threefold repetition? It establishes a comprehensive foundation. Before confronting the enemy, the believer must fully realize that the One whose protection he seeks has absolute power over creation (Rabb), absolute authority over all kingdoms (Malik), and is the ultimate object of devotion (Ilah). This crushes any notion that the source of evil whispers has independent power.

(Verse 4): مِن شَرِّ الْوَسْوَاسِ الْخَنَّاسِ

· “Al-Waswas” is the whisperer. This is not a loud assault, but a sly, insidious suggestion that sneaks into one’s thoughts.
· “Al-Khannas” is its key characteristic: “the one who withdraws or slinks away.” This describes the nature of Satanic whisperings and evil thoughts—they gain strength when a person is heedless of Allah, but they retreat and lose power when Allah is remembered and His name is invoked. This verse, therefore, contains its own cure: the remembrance of Allah (Dhikr).

(Verse 5): الَّذِي يُوَسْوِسُ فِي صُدُورِ النَّاسِ

· The target of this attack is clarified: “Fi sudoorin-nas” — “in the breasts (or hearts) of mankind.”
· The Sudoor is the center of feelings, thoughts, intentions, and conscience. The attack is aimed at corrupting the very seat of faith and morality, creating doubts, evil desires, and misguidance from within.

(Verse 6): مِنَ الْجِنَّةِ وَالنَّاسِ

· This is a critical clarification. The source of evil whisperings is not only “Al-Jinnah” (i.e., Satan and his devils) but also “An-Nas” (mankind).
· Tafheem’s Emphasis: Maududi explains that this verse broadens the scope. It means believers must seek protection from the whisperings sown by:

1. Evil jinn (the unseen tempters).
2. Evil humans who act as Satan’s agents—those who spread corrupt ideas, promote sin, incite hatred, or tempt others through speech, writing, or influence. They, too, become “whisperers” into the hearts of people.

Key Takeaways from Tafheem-ul-Qur’an:

1. Internal Defense: The primary battlefield is the human heart. Faith is protected by seeking refuge from intellectual and spiritual corruption.
2. All-Encompassing Lordship: Protection is sought from the Ultimate Authority, making the act of seeking refuge itself an affirmation of Tawhid (monotheism).
3. Dual Enemy: The believer must be vigilant against both the hidden whispers of Satan and the open or subtle whisperings of corrupt people.
4. The Mechanism of Cure: The nature of the whisperer (“the one who withdraws”) points to its remedy: consistent remembrance of Allah, which causes these evil suggestions to fade.

In summary, Surah An-Nas provides the believer with the divine formula to fortify the heart—the center of faith and action—against the most cunning internal enemies, by seeking protection from the Lord, King, and God of all mankind.

Arabic Text:
وَالزُّبُرِ ۚ وَأَنزَلْنَا إِلَيْكَ الذِّكْرَ لِتُبَيِّنَ لِلنَّاسِ مَا نُزِّلَ إِلَيْهِمْ وَلَعَلَّهُمْ يَتَفَكَّرُونَ ﴿٤٤﴾

English Translation:
”…and the Scriptures and the illuminating Book. And We have sent down to you the Reminder (the Qur’an) so that you may explain to mankind what has been revealed for them, and so that they may reflect.”

Word-by-Word Breakdown:
وَالزُّبُرِ — “and the Scriptures” (the written records/books given to earlier prophets)
وَأَنزَلْنَا إِلَيْكَ — “and We sent down to you” (addressing the Prophet ﷺ)
الذِّكْرَ — “the Reminder / the Qur’an” (the remembrance and admonition)
لِتُبَيِّنَ لِلنَّاسِ — “so that you may explain / make clear to the people”
مَا نُزِّلَ إِلَيْهِمْ — “what has been sent down to them” (i.e., the Qur’an, meant for all of humanity)
وَلَعَلَّهُمْ يَتَفَكَّرُونَ — “and so that they may reflect / ponder”

Key Significance:
This verse establishes two profound purposes for the revelation of the Qur’an to the Prophet ﷺ:
1. تبيين (Tabyin) — Explanation: The Prophet ﷺ was not merely a postman delivering a text. He was appointed to explain, demonstrate, and embody the message — which is the very foundation of the Sunnah and Hadith.
2. تفكر (Tafakkur) — Reflection: The ultimate goal is that humanity engages deeply in thought and contemplation — not blind following, but conscious, reflective acceptance of the truth.
This verse is the direct basis for Footnote 40 discussed earlier, which argues powerfully that rejecting the Hadith is equivalent to negating the entire purpose of prophetic mission itself.

Tafseer

Surah An-Nahl — Footnote No. 40
Translation of Mawdudi’s Tafheem ul-Quran (16:44, Note 40)

Explanatory Note:
“Explanation and clarification” — not merely through words, but also through one’s own actions; and by forming, under one’s guidance, a complete Muslim society; and by running its system in accordance with the intent of the “Dhikr” (the Reminder/Message).
In this way, Allah has set forth the wisdom which demanded that necessarily a human being be sent as a Prophet. The Dhikr could have been sent through angels. It could have been delivered directly, printed and distributed to every individual. But merely sending the Dhikr could not fulfil the purpose for which Allah’s wisdom, mercy, and Lordship required its revelation. For the fulfilment of that purpose, it was essential that the most capable of human beings carry this Dhikr to the people. He would present it to them gradually and in stages. He would explain its meaning to those who did not understand. He would remove the doubts of those who harboured doubts. He would answer the objections of those who raised objections. Against those who refused to accept and who offered opposition and resistance, he would demonstrate — through his own conduct — the behaviour befitting the bearers of this Dhikr. To those who accepted, he would provide guidance concerning every aspect and dimension of life. He would present his own life as a living example before them, and through individual and collective training, he would place before the entire world — as a model — a society whose complete social order would itself be an elaboration of the intent of the Dhikr.

Just as this verse was a decisive refutation of those deniers of prophethood who refused to accept Allah’s Dhikr coming through a human being, so too today it is a decisive refutation of those deniers of Hadith who wish to take only the Dhikr without the Prophet’s explanation and clarification. Whether they hold:
1. That the Prophet had not explained or clarified anything at all and had merely presented the Dhikr, or
2. That only the Dhikr is worthy of acceptance and not the Prophet’s explanation, or
3. That for us today only the Dhikr is sufficient and there is no need for the Prophet’s explanation, or
4. That only the Dhikr has survived in a reliable state, and the Prophet’s explanation has either not survived at all, or if it has, it is not trustworthy —
regardless of whichever of these four positions they hold, their stance in every case collides with this verse of the Qur’an.

If they hold the first position, it means the Prophet nullified the very purpose for which the Dhikr was conveyed through him as an intermediary rather than being sent through angels or delivered directly to people.
If they hold the second or third position, it means that Allah — God forbid — committed a pointless act by sending His Dhikr through a Prophet, because the outcome of the Prophet’s coming would then be no different from what could have been achieved by the Dhikr descending in printed form without any Prophet.
If they hold the fourth position, then this is in reality a declaration of the abrogation of both the Qur’an and the Prophethood of Muhammad ﷺ — after which, if any rational position remains, it is only the position of those who believe in a new prophethood and a new revelation. For in this very verse, Allah Himself is declaring the Prophet’s explanation to be indispensable for fulfilling the purpose of the Qur’an’s revelation, and the necessity of the Prophet is being established precisely on the grounds that he would expound the intent of the Dhikr. Now if the deniers of Hadith are correct in claiming that the Prophet’s explanation and clarification has not survived in the world, then two conclusions necessarily follow:
The first conclusion is that the Prophethood of Muhammad ﷺ has ended in its capacity as a model to be followed, and our relationship with Muhammad ﷺ is reduced to the same kind we have with Hūd, Ṣāliḥ, and Shu’ayb (peace be upon them) — that we affirm them and believe in them, but we possess no Uswa (exemplary conduct) of theirs that we may follow. This very situation automatically proves the necessity of a new prophethood — and only a fool could, after this, insist upon the finality of prophethood.
The second conclusion is that the Qur’an alone — without the Prophet’s explanation and clarification — is, by the testimony of its own Sender, insufficient for guidance. Therefore, no matter how loudly its adherents cry themselves hoarse declaring it self-sufficient, the testimony of eager witnesses in support of a negligent claimant can never prevail, and the need for a new Book of revelation automatically stands proven — even on the basis of the Qur’an itself.
Qātalahum Allāh — May Allah destroy them — for in this manner these people are, through their rejection of Hadith, in reality digging up the very roots of the religion.

Arabic translation

Here is the Arabic translation of Surah An-Nahl, Footnote 40:

سورة النحل — الحاشية رقم 40
ترجمة تفهيم القرآن للمودودي (16:44، الحاشية 40)

شرح وإيضاح:
“الشرح والتوضيح” — لا بالكلام وحده، بل بالعمل أيضاً، وبتكوين مجتمع مسلم متكامل تحت إشرافه وتوجيهه، وبإدارة نظامه وفق مقتضى “الذِّكر”.
وهكذا بيَّن اللهُ تعالى تلك الحكمةَ التي اقتضت ضرورةً أن يُبعث إنسانٌ نبيًّا. فقد كان بالإمكان إرسال الذِّكر عن طريق الملائكة، أو إيصاله مباشرةً إلى كل إنسان في صورة مطبوعة. غير أن مجرد إرسال الذِّكر لم يكن ليحقق الغرض الذي اقتضته حكمة الله ورحمته وربوبيته من إنزاله. فلتحقيق ذلك الغرض كان لا بد أن يحمل هذا “الذكر” أكفأُ إنسانٍ وأجدرُه؛ يعرضه على الناس شيئاً فشيئاً، ويشرح معناه لمن لم يفهمه، ويزيل الشك عمن ساوره الريب، ويرد على اعتراض من اعترض، ويُري من أبى وعاند وقاوم — بسلوكه وموقفه — النهجَ اللائق بحاملي هذا “الذكر”. ويهدي من آمن في كل شأن من شؤون حياته، ويضع أمام العالم أجمع — من خلال سيرته الشخصية والتربية الفردية والجماعية — مجتمعاً نموذجياً يكون نظامه الاجتماعي بأكمله شرحاً حياً لمقتضى “الذكر”.

وكما كانت هذه الآية حجةً دامغةً على منكري النبوة الذين رفضوا قبول “ذكر” الله جاءهم عن طريق بشر، فهي كذلك اليوم حجةٌ دامغة على منكري الحديث الذين يريدون الأخذ بـ”الذكر” وحده دون شرح النبي وتوضيحه. سواء أكانوا يرون:
1. أن النبي لم يشرح شيئاً البتة وإنما اكتفى بتقديم الذكر، أم
2. أن المقبول هو الذكر وحده لا شرح النبي، أم
3. أن الذكر وحده يكفينا اليوم ولا حاجة بنا إلى شرح النبي، أم
4. أن الذكر وحده هو الذي بقي في حالة موثوقة، أما شرح النبي فلم يبق أو بقي ولا يُوثق به —
فمهما كانت نظرتهم من هذه النظرات الأربع، فإن مسلكهم في كل الأحوال يصطدم بهذه الآية الكريمة.

فإن كانوا يرون الأمر الأول، فمعناه أن النبي أضاع الغرض ذاته الذي من أجله جُعل واسطةً للتبليغ بدلاً من إرسال الذكر بأيدي الملائكة أو إيصاله مباشرةً إلى الناس.
وإن كانوا يرون الأمر الثاني أو الثالث، فمعناه — معاذ الله — أن الله تعالى فعل فعلاً لغواً حين أرسل “ذكره” عن طريق نبي؛ إذ إن حاصل بعثة النبي — والحال هذه — لا يختلف عما كان يمكن أن يتحقق بنزول الذكر وحده في صورة مطبوعة دون نبي.
وإن كانوا يرون الأمر الرابع، فهذا في حقيقته إعلانٌ بنسخ القرآن والنبوة المحمدية معاً، وبعده لا يبقى مسلكٌ معقول إلا مسلك القائلين بنبوة جديدة ووحي جديد. ذلك لأن الله تعالى في هذه الآية يُقرر بنفسه أن شرح النبي أمرٌ لا غنى عنه لتحقيق مقصد القرآن من الإنزال، ويثبت الحاجة إلى النبي بالطريقة ذاتها من حيث إنه يوضح مراد الذكر. فإن كان قول منكري الحديث صحيحاً في أن توضيح النبي وشرحه لم يبق في الدنيا، فإن نتيجتين لا مناص منهما:
الأولى: أن النبوة المحمدية قد انتهت بوصفها قدوةً متبَّعة، وأصبح صلتنا بمحمد ﷺ كصلتنا بهود وصالح وشعيب عليهم السلام — نصدقهم ونؤمن بهم، لكن لا أسوة لنا منهم نتبعها. وهذا من تلقاء نفسه يُثبت الحاجة إلى نبوة جديدة، ولا يصر على الختم بعد ذلك إلا أحمق.
الثانية: أن القرآن وحده — بدون شرح النبي وتبيينه — قاصرٌ عن الهداية بشهادة مُنزِّله نفسه. فمهما صاح أصحابه بأنه كافٍ بذاته، فـ”لا يجدي شاهدٌ نشيطٌ في نصرة مدعٍ خامل”، وتصبح الحاجة إلى نزول كتاب جديد ثابتةً بنص القرآن ذاته.
قاتلهم الله — فهؤلاء في الحقيقة يقتلعون جذور الدين بإنكارهم الحديث.

Download from website, txt 6308999817 or make copies to share. Deep dive into comprehensive study of Tafheemul Quran tafseer in Urdu and English. Check the links.https://voiceofquran5.com/2025/12/13/holy-quran-ahadees-introduction-translation-tafseer-explanation/

FEEL FREE TO DOWNLOAD/MAKE COPIES FOR SHARING

https://voiceofquran5.com/introducing-quran/

Q: When was Surah An-Nisa revealed?

It was revealed in Medina between the end of A.H. 3 and early A.H. 5, primarily in the aftermath of the Battle of Uhud.

Q: What events triggered its revelation?

Three major triggers shaped its revelation: the social crises following the Battle of Uhud (such as inheritance disputes for martyrs and orphan rights), the exile of the Banu Nadir Jews in A.H. 4, and the need for legislation around wartime practices like tayammum and shortened prayers during expeditions.

Q: What does the surah say about women and orphans?

It establishes their rights to inheritance (vv. 7–12), mandates dowries for women (v. 4), prohibits the usurping of orphans’ wealth (v. 10), and forbids forcing women into marriage — all of which were serious abuses in pre-Islamic Arabian society.

Q: How does the surah address polygamy?

It permits up to four wives but makes this contingent on the husband’s ability to treat them with complete fairness (v. 3). It also abolishes the pre-Islamic practice of inheriting women as property.

Q: What are the surah’s inheritance laws?

Verses 11–12 lay out detailed and equitable rules for distributing wealth among family members after death, making it one of the most comprehensive legal passages on inheritance in the Quran.

Q: What moral and social conduct does the surah promote?

It commands fair judgment (v. 58), fulfillment of trusts, and obedience to Allah, the Prophet, and legitimate authority (v. 59). It also prohibits alcohol (v. 43), usury (v. 161), and sexual misconduct (vv. 15–16), grounding all of this in taqwa — God-consciousness — as the foundation of a healthy society.

Q: How does the surah respond to the defeat at Uhud?

It critically examines the disobedience and hypocrisy that contributed to the losses at Uhud (vv. 73–100), while also legitimizing warfare for self-defense and religious freedom (vv. 71–76). It frames resilience and discipline as essential to the community’s survival.

Q: What is Salat al-Khawf?

It refers to the guidelines given in verse 102 for performing prayer during active military engagements — a practical concession that reflects Islam’s concern for worship even under the most difficult conditions.

Q: How does the surah address the People of the Book?

It critiques Jewish distortions of scripture and Christian theological deviations, particularly the doctrines of the Trinity and the divinity of Jesus (vv. 44–57, 171–172). It also warns Muslims against forming close alliances with those who are hostile to their faith (vv. 138–139).

Q: What does the surah say about hypocrites?

It identifies the defining traits of hypocrites (munafiqun) across several passages (vv. 88–91, 138–145) and calls on the Muslim community to remain vigilant about this internal threat, which Maududi considered as dangerous as external enemies.

Q: How is the surah structured overall?

It moves from family law (vv. 1–35) through community ethics, purification rules, theological critique, governance principles, military ethics, and concludes with exhortations on accountability and the afterlife (vv. 105–176).

Q: What makes Maududi’s treatment of this surah distinctive?

In Tafheem-ul-Quran, Maududi integrates legal rulings with moral psychology, connects verses to specific historical events like the Banu Nadir exile and the Najran Christian delegation, and systematically refutes the Trinity using Quranic reasoning — giving the surah both scholarly depth and practical relevance.

Q: What is the broader significance of Surah An-Nisa?

It is often described as a constitutional blueprint for Muslim society, balancing individual rights with collective stability. A Prophetic narration further underscores its importance, comparing the reward for reciting it to freeing a slave and spending in Allah’s path.

۞ شَرَعَ لَكُم مِّنَ الدِّينِ مَا وَصَّىٰ بِهِ نُوحًا وَالَّذِي أَوْحَيْنَا إِلَيْكَ وَمَا وَصَّيْنَا بِهِ إِبْرَاهِيمَ وَمُوسَىٰ وَعِيسَىٰ ۖ أَنْ أَقِيمُوا الدِّينَ وَلَا تَتَفَرَّقُوا فِيهِ ۚ كَبُرَ عَلَى الْمُشْرِكِينَ مَا تَدْعُوهُمْ إِلَيْهِ ۚ اللَّهُ يَجْتَبِي إِلَيْهِ مَن يَشَاءُ وَيَهْدِي إِلَيْهِ مَن يُنِيبُ [Ash-Shura : 13]
(42:13) He has prescribed for you the religion which He enjoined upon Noah and which We revealed to you (O Muhammad), and which We enjoined upon Abraham and Moses and Jesus, commanding: ‘Establish this religion and do not split up regarding it.‘ *20 What you are calling to is very hard upon those who associate others with Allah in His Divinity. Allah chooses Himself whomsoever He pleases and guides to Himself whoever penitently turns to Him. 

*21*20) Here the same thing as already mentioned in the first verse has been further elaborated. It clearly states that Muhammad (upon whom be Allah’s peace) is not the founder of any new religion, nor was any of the Prophets a founder of a separate religion, but it has been one and the same Religion which all the Prophets have been presenting from Allah from the very beginning, and the same is being presented by Muhammad (upon whom be Allah’s peace). INFERENCE: SHARIA HAS BEEN SINCE ADAM, NOAH,ABRAHAM,MOSES AND THE LAST PROPHET MOHAMMED PBU THEM ALL.>>>>> like to know more , please proceed.

In this regard, the first name mentioned is of the Prophet Noah, who was the first Prophet before the great flood. After him the Holy Prophet Muhammad (upon whom be Allah’s peace) has been mentioned, who is the last of the Prophets; then the Prophet Abraham has been mentioned, whom the Arabs acknowledged as their guide, and last of all, the Prophets Moses and Jesus have been mentioned to whom the Jews and the Christians attribute their religions. This does not mean that only these five Prophets had been enjoined this Religion, but what is meant to be said is that all the Prophets who came to this world, brought one and the same Religion and the names of the five illustrious Prophets have been mentioned only as examples through whom the world received the most well known codes of Divine Law.
As this verse throws important light on Deen (Religion) and its aim, it is necessary that we should study it to understand it well.
Lexically, the word shara’a in shara’a !a kum (ordained for you)means to make the way. As a term it implies appointing a way, a code and a rule. Accordingly , in Arabic the words tashri’ ` and shari’at and shari’ arc understood as the synonyms of legislation and law and law giver respectively. This Divine legislation, in fact, is the natural and logical result of the fundamental truths which have been stated in verses l, 9 and 10 above: that Allah alone is the Owner of everything in the Universe, and He alone is man’s real Guardian and it is for Him to judge the disputes that arise between human beings. Now, when Allah alone is the Owner and Guardian and Ruler, inevitably He alone is entitled to make the code of law for man and it is His responsibility that He should give this code of law to man. So, He has carried out His responsibility like this.
Then the words min-ad-din (of the nature of din) denote that the way appointed by Allah is legislation pertaining to din. If the explanation of the word din that we have given in E.N. 3 of Surah Zumar above, is kept in view, there can be no difficulty in understanding that din means nothing but acknowledging the sovereignty and leadership of someone and obeying his commands. And when this word is used in the meaning of the way, it implies the way which man must regard as obligatory for himself to follow and the one appointing it as the one whom he ought to obey. On this basis, calling God-appointed Way as legislation pertaining to din clearly means that it is not merely recommendatory in nature or a mere counsel, but it is a law enjoined by the Master, which must necessarily be obeyed by the servants and disobedience of which is tantamount to rebellion, and the one who does not obey it, in fact, denies Allah’s being the Sovereign and Ruler and his own position of a servant.
” Then, it has been said that this legislation which pertains to din is the same as was enjoined on Noah. Abraham and Moses (peace be upon them all) and the same now has been enjoined on Muhammad (upon whom be Allah’s peace). This contains several points: (1) That Allah did not send this legislation of His directly to every man, but appointed Whenever He deemed proper and necessary a person as His Messenger and consigned the legislation w him; (2) that this legislation has been the same from the beginning: it did not so happen that in one age one particular din was appointed for a nation, and in another age another and contradictory din was sent for another nation. Allah did not send many dins but on every occasion He sent one and the same din; (3)that it is an essential part of this din to acknowledge the apostleship of those men through whom the legislation has been sent and the Revelation in which the legislation has been couched, besides acknowledging the Sovereignty of Allah; and it is the demand of reason and logic too, that it should be a necessary part of it, for a man cannot obey this legislation at all unless he is satisfied that it is authentically from Allah.
Then it has been said that the Prophets were given this legislation pertaining to din “, with the express instruction: “Aqim-ud-din “; “Establish this din”, or “Keep this din established,” as variously translated by Shah Waliullah, Shah Rafi’uddin and Shah `Abdul Qadir. Both these translations are correct, for iqamat means both to establish and to keep established, and the Prophets were appointed to perform both the functions. Their first duty was to establish this din wherever it was not established, and the second that they should keep it established after they had established it, or had found it already established in a place. Obviously, a thing can be kept established only when it has already been established, otherwise the primary requirement would be to establish it first, and then make continuous effort to keep it established.
Here, two questions arise : First, what is the meaning of establishing the din? Second, what is din itself, which we have been enjoined to establish and then keep it established? Let us try to understand these questions well.
The word iqamat (to establish)when used in respect of a material or physical object implies causing it to rise from the sitting or lying positions or assembling the scattered parts of a thing and raising it up high. But when iqamat is used in respect of a thing which is not material but spiritual in nature it dces not merely imply preaching it, but also acting according to it as best as one can, introducing it and enforeing it practically. For example, when we say that so and-so established his rule, it does not mean that he invited others to his government but that he subdued the people of the land and organised the different departments of the government in a way that the administration of the country began to function according to his orders. Similarly, when we say that courts have been established in the country, it means that judges have been appointed to do justice and they ate hearing the cases and giving judgements, and not that hymns in praise of justice arc being sung and the people being impressed. Likewise, when the Qur’an enjoins the establishment of the Prayer (Salat), it does not imply that one should merely preach and exhort others to the Prayer but that one should not only perform it oneself, observing aII its conditions, but should also strive to make arrangement so that it becomes a’ regular practice among the believers. There should be mosques, there should be arrangements for offering the Prayer collectively and for the Friday congregational Prayer, and for making calls to the Prayer punctually; there should be the Imams to lead the Prayers and the scholars to give sermons, and the people should visit the mosques regularly and punctually and make offering the Prayer an essential part of their daily routine. After this explanation, there should remain no difficulty in understanding that when the Prophets were enjoined to establish the din and to keep it established, it did not simply mean that they. should practise it themselves and not even this that they should preach it to others so that the people may accept its truth, but also that when the people have accepted it, steps should be taken to introduce and enforce the entire din practically among them so that they may start living according to it for ever afterwards. No doubt preaching is the primary necessary stage of this work without which there can be no second stage, but every intelligent person can himself see that in this Command preaching has not been made the object, but the real object is to establish the din and keep it established. Preaching is certainly a means to the end but not the end in itself, but nobody can say that it was the only and foremost object of the mission of the Prophets.
Now, Iet us take the second question. When some people saw that the din which has been enjoined to be established is common among all the Prophets, and their shari’ahs have been different, as Allah Himself says: “We appointed for each community among you a law and a way of life”, they formed the view that inevitably this din did not imply the shari’ ah commandments, rules and regulations but only the acceptance of Tauhid, the Hereafter and the Book and the Prophethood and performance of certain acts of devotion to Allah, or at the most, it included some of the major moral principles which have been common to alI the shari ahs. But this is a superficial view, which has been formed after having a cursory glance over the unity of religion and the difference of the shari’ahs. This is, however, a dangerous view, which if not corrected in time, may well lead to the separation between din (religion) and shari’ahs (law). It was this very view in, which St. Paul was involved, who presented the doctrine of the din (religion)without shari’ah (law), and corrupted the community of the Prophet Jesus (peace be upon him). For, if shari’ah (law) is something separate from din (religion) and the command is only for establishing the din and not the shari’ah, inevitably the Muslims also, like the Christians, would regard the shari ah as unimportant and overlook its establishment as not being the real object by itself, and would remain content with only beliefs and a few important moral principles. Instead of determining the meaning of din from such speculations, Iet us turn to the Qur’an itself and see whether the din which we have . been enjoined here to establish unplies the beliefs and a few important moral principles only, or the shari’ah values and commandments as well. When we explore the Qur’an we find that what it regards as din includes the following things as well:
(1) “And the only Command they were given was to worship Allah, making their din sincerely His, turning all their attention towards Him, and to establish the ,salat and to pay the Zakat.’ this alone is the true and right din. ” (Al-Bayyinah: 5). This shows that the Salat and the Zakat are included in this din. whereas the commandments .pertaining to both have been different in the different shari ahs. No one can say that in all the previous shari ahs the Salat has had the same form, the same elements, the same mumber of the rak ahs, the same direction of the giblah, the same times and the same other commands concerning it. Likewise, no one can claim also about the Zakat that in alI the shari ahs the same has been the exemption limit, the same rates and the same injunctions concerning its collection and distribution. But in spite of the difference of the shari’ahs, Allah has regarded both these as part of din.
(2) ‘You are forbidden carrion and blood, the flesh of swine and of that animal which has been slaughtered in any other name than of Allah, and of the strangled animal, and of that beaten to death or killed by a fall or gored to death or mangled by a beast of prey—save of that you duly slaughtered while it was still alive – and of that which is slaughtered at (ungodly) shrines. It is also unlawfirl for you to try to find your fortune by means of divining devices, for all these things are sinful acts. Today the disbelievers have despaired of (vanquishing)your religion; therefore do not fear them but fear Me. Today I have perfected your din for you and completed My blessing on you and approved Islam as the din (way of life) for you.” (AI-Ma’idah: 3). This shows that aII these shari sh commandments are also din.
(3) Fight with those from among the people of the Book, who do not believe in AIlah nor in the Last Day; who do not make unlawful what Allah and His Messenger have made unlawful, and do not adopt the right din as their din. ” (At-Taubah: 29). This shows that besides belief in Allah and the Hereafter it . is also din to accept and follow the Commands about the lawful and the unlawful, which have been given by Allah and His Messenger.
(4) “The woman and the man guilty of fornication, flog each one of them with a hundred stripes, and let not any pity for them restrain you in regard to a matter prescribed in the din of Allah, if you believe in Allah and the Last Day.” (An-Nur: 2). “It did not behove Joseph to seize his brother by the king’s din. ” (Yusuf: 76). This shows that the criminal law is also din. If a man follows the criminal law prescribed by God, he is a follower of God’s din and if he follows a king’s law, he is a follower of the king’s din.
These are the four specimens in which the shari’ah commandments have been described as din in clear words. But, besides these, a careful study shows that the eradication of the sins for which Allah has held out the threat of Hell (e.g. adultery, taking of interest, killing of a believer, consuming the property of the orphan, taking possession of the other peoples properties in unlawful ways etc.), and the crimes which become the cause of God’s torment, e.g. sodomy (the act of Lot’s people) and dishonesty in business dealings (as practised by the Prophet Shu’aib’s people) should necessarily be included in din, for if din cannot save one from Hell and Allah’s torment, what use could it be ? Likewise, those shari’ah commandments also should be part of the din violation of which has been regarded as cause of entry into the Fire, e.g. injunctions relating to inheritance, after stating which it has been said: “And whoever disobeys Allah and His Messenger and transgresses the limits prescribed by Him, Allah will cast him into the Fire wherein he will have a disgraceful torment.” (An-Nisa: 14,). Likewise, the prohibition of those things whose prohibition Allah has mentioned with great emphasis and absoluteness, e.g. prohibition of the mother, sister and daughter and prohibition of wine, theft, gambling, false evidence, etc. if not included in the establishment of the din, it would mean that Allah has given some unnecessary Commands also, which are not meant to be introduced and enforced. Similarly, establishing those things which Allah has made obligatory, e g. fasting and pilgrimage; cannot be excluded from the establishment of din only on the pretext that the 30 fasts of Ramadan had not been enjoined in the previous shari ah, and pilgrimage to the Ka’bah was enjoined only in the Shariah which was inherited by the Ishmaelite branch of the Prophet Abraham’s progeny.
As a matter of fact, the misunderstanding was caused only because the verse: “We appointed for each community among you a law and a way of life”, has been misconstrued to mean that since the shari’ah appointed for every community was separate. and the command given was only to establish the din (way of life)which was common to all the Prophets, the establishment of the shari ah was not included in the establishment of the din, whereas the real meaning of this verse is just the opposite of it. If the context (vv. 41-50) in which this verse has occurred in Surah AI-Ma’idah is studied carefully, it will be seen that the correct meaning of this verse is: Whatever shari ‘ah was given by Allah to the community of a Prophet, was the din for that community, and the establishment of the same din was the object during his Prophethood. And since now is the period of the Holy Prophet Muhammad’s Prophethood, the shari ah which has been given to the Ummah of Muhammad (upon whom be Allah’s peace) is the din of this time, and to establish the same is to establish the din. As for the difference of the shari ah, it does not mean that the shari ‘ahs sent by God were mutually contradictory, but it means that in their details there have been some differences owing to the different environments, take, for instance, the Prayer and the Fast. The Prayer has been obligatory in aII the shari’ ahs, but the giblah of all the shari ahs was not the same, and there was a difference in its times and rakahs and elements as well. Likewise, the Fast was obligatory in every shari’ah, but the 30 fasts of Ramadan were not there in the other shari ahs. From this it is not correct to conclude that the Prayer and the Fast as such are included in the establishment of din but performing the Prayer in a particular way and observing the Fast at a particular time is excluded from it. However, the correct conclusion that one can draw is: To perform the Prayer and observe the Fast according to the rules and procedures that had been appointed for the people in the shari’ah of every Prophet amounted to establishment of din in his time. In the present age the establishment of the din is that these acts of worship be performed according to the procedures enjoined in the Shari ‘ah of the Prophet Muhammad. The same is true about all other Shari’ah commandments as well.
Whoever studies the Qur’an carefully will see that this Book does not envisage that its adherents will live as subjects of the disbelievers and will pass a religious lift under them, but it openly proclaims that it will have its own rule established; it demands from its followers that they should struggle with their lives for the intellectual, cultural, Iegal and political supremacy of the true Faith; and it gives them a programme for the reformation of human life, the major part of which can be acted upon only when political power and authority is in the believers’ hand. As stated by itself, the object of this Book’s being sent down is: “We have sent down this Book to you with the Truth so that you may judge between the people in accordance with the light that Allah has shown you. ” (An-Nisa: 105). The Commandments given in this Book about the collection and distribution of the Zakat expressly envisage a government who should be responsible for collecting the Zakat and distributing it among the deserving people according to a laid down procedure. (At-Taubah;60,103). The prohibition of interest that has been enjoined in this Book aad the declaration of war that has been made against those who do not abstain from taking interest (AI-Baqarah: 27_5-279) can be enforced only when the political and economic system of the country is entirely in the believers’ hand. The Law of Retribution for murder (AI-Baqarah: 178), cutting off of the hand for theft (AI-Ma’idah 38)and carrying out of the prescribed punishment for adultery and calumny (An-Nur: 2-4) have not been enjoined on the assumption that the believers will remain subject to the police and courts of the disbelievers. The Command to fight the disbelievers (AlBaqarah: 190, 216) has not been given with the idea that the followers of this din will carry out this Command by getting enlisted in the army of disbelief. The command to take Jizyah from the followers of the former Books (At-Taubah: 29) has not been given on the assumption that the Muslims will take Jizyah from them while being their subjects and will be responsible for their protection. And this thing is not true only about the Madinite Surahs; in the Makkan Surahs as well a discerning eye can clearly see that the scheme envisaged from the very beginning was of Islam’s supremacy and dominance and not of Islam’s and the Muslims’ subjugation under an un-Islamic rule. See, for instance, Bani Isra`il: 76-89; AlQasas: 85-86; Ar-Rum: 1-6; As-Saaffat: 171-179; Suad: Introduction, v. 11 and E.N. 12 on it.
Above alI, this misinterpretation clashes with the great work that the Holy Prophet himself accomplished during the 23 years of his Prophethood. Who can deny the fact that he subdued entire Arabia by means of both preaching and the sword and established in it a full fledged system of government with a detailed law, covering all aspects of life, from beliefs and rites of worship to personal conduct, collective morality, culture and civilization, economic and social life, politics and judiciary, peace and war. If this entire work of the Holy Prophet is not accepted as a commentary of the Command of “iqamat din ” (establishment of din) which, according to this verse, he had been enjoined to undertake like aII other Prophets, then it could have one of the two meanings: That earlier, God forbid, the Holy Prophet should be blamed that he had been appointed only to preach and teach beliefs and a few important moral rules but he exceeded his mandate and established a government of his own whim and laid down a code of law, which was different from the common law of the Prophets as well as in excess of it; or that Allah should be blamed that after having made the abovementioned declaration in Surah Ash-Shura. He went back on His own word, and made His Last Prophet do something which was not only much over and about and different from the objective of “iqamat din ” as stated in this Surah but on the completion of this mission He also made this declaration, contrary to His first declaration: “Today I have perfected your din for you.”(Al-Ma’idah:3). May Allah keep us safe from this! Apart from these two, if there is any third alternative,, which makes this-interpretation of “iqamat din”plausible and also does not lay any blame on Allah or His Messenger, we would like to know it.
After giving the Command for “iqamat din “, the last thing that Allah has stated in this verse is this: La tatafarraqu fi-hi: “Do not create schisms in the din: Be not divided in it” Creating schisms in din implies that one should introduce something new in religion for which there exists no sound basis, and then should insist that belief and unbelief depend on the acceptance of the innovation, and should separate along with those who have accepted it from those who have not accepted it. This new thing can be of several kinds: (1) To introduce something entirely new into din; (2) to exclude from din something which actually belonged to it; (3)to tamper with the fundamentals of din by misinterpretations and introduce new beliefs and novel practices; and (4) to distort the din by making changes of fundamental nature in it, for example, by reducing what was important in it to un-important, by rAlsing what was at most permissible to the position of imperative and obligatory, even to the position of the most fundamental pillar of Islam. Owing to such innovations, divisions first appeared in the communities of the Prophets; then gradually the creeds of the sects developed into wholly separate and mutually exclusive religious systems whose followers now do not have any idea that once they all belonged to one and the same origin. These divisions have nothing to do with the permissible and reasonable difference of opinion which naturally takes place among the scholars when they are engaged in understanding and studying the injunctions and fundamentals of the din for the purpose of deriving and extracting points of law, and for which there is room in the words of the Book of Allah itself owing to the considerations of lexicon, idiom and rules of grammar. (For a detAlled discussion of this subject, see Al-Baqarah: 213, Al’Imran: 19, 50; An-Nisa: 171, Al-Ma’idah: 77; Al-An’am; 159; An-Nahl: 118124; Al-Anbiya’: 9293; Al-Hajj: 67; Al-Mu’minun: 53-54; Al-Qasas: 53; ArRum: 32 and the E.N.’s) 2).
*21) Here the same thing as stated in vv. 8-9 above, has been reiterated, and we have explAlned it in E.N. 11 above. The object of repeating it here is as if to say: ‘You are presenting the clear highway of religion before them but the foolish people, instead of appreciating the blessing, are becoming annoyed over it. But even among them there are the people of their own tribe, who are turning to AlIah. and Allah also is drawing them closer to Himself. But one should understand that Allah’s bestowal of His blessings is not blind: He draws only him towards Himself who is inclined to be drawn and not him who urns away from Him. “

https://claude.ai/share/8345eec9-1971-4a33-ae8e-ef2f1cc754e1

Reconciling Apparently Conflicting Quranic Verses
Islamic scholarship has developed sophisticated methodologies over centuries to address apparent contradictions in the Quran. Here’s what classical and contemporary scholars say:

The Foundational Scholarly Position
Scholars universally hold that no real contradiction exists in the Quran, citing the verse itself:
“Do they not reflect upon the Quran? Had it been from other than Allah, they would have found within it much contradiction.” — (4:82)
Apparent conflicts, scholars argue, arise from limited human understanding, not from the text itself.

The Four Main Scholarly Approaches

1. Al-Jam’ (Reconciliation / Harmonization)
   The first and preferred method — scholars try to reconcile both verses so both remain valid.
   ∙ How it works: Each verse may be speaking about a different context, audience, condition, or time period.
   ∙ Example: “Allah forgives all sins” (39:53) vs. “Allah does not forgive shirk” (4:48) — reconciled by understanding the first refers to a repentant person, the second to one who dies unrepentant.
   ∙ Key scholars: Al-Shafi’i strongly advocated exhausting reconciliation before any other approach.
2. Al-Naskh (Abrogation)
   When reconciliation is genuinely impossible, some scholars apply naskh — the principle that a later verse supersedes an earlier one in legal rulings.
   ∙ How it works: The Quran was revealed over 23 years; some rulings evolved (e.g., gradual prohibition of alcohol).
   ∙ Conditions: Classical scholars set strict criteria — both verses must be on the same legal matter, the later one must be clearly established, and there must be no possible reconciliation.
   ∙ Limitation: Scholars like Ibn Kathir and Al-Suyuti warned against over-applying naskh. Al-Suyuti reduced claimed cases of abrogation from 500 to just 20.
   ∙ Contemporary view: Many modern scholars (like Sheikh Al-Qaradawi) argue naskh applies only to legal rulings, not to theological or moral statements.
3. Al-Tarjeeh (Preference / Weighing)
   When two interpretations conflict, scholars prefer the stronger interpretation based on:
   ∙ Linguistic analysis of the Arabic
   ∙ Context of revelation (asbab al-nuzul)
   ∙ Supporting hadiths
   ∙ Consensus of companions
4. Al-Tawaqquf (Suspension of Judgment)
   If none of the above resolve the apparent conflict, scholars suspend judgment and say: “We believe in both; the full meaning is known only to Allah.” This is considered intellectually honest rather than forcing a resolution.

Key Interpretive Tools Scholars Use Tool Description Asbab al-Nuzul The specific historical context/occasion of each verse’s revelation Makkiyya vs. Madaniyya Whether the verse was revealed in Mecca or Medina — different audiences and stages Siyaq al-Nass Reading the verse within its surrounding textual context Ijaz al-Lugha Arabic linguistic precision — a word may carry multiple valid meanings Ijma’ al-Sahaba How the Prophet’s companions understood and applied verses

Famous Examples Scholars Have Addressed
On fate vs. free will:
“Allah leads astray whom He wills” (14:4) vs. “Allah does not wrong people at all” (10:44) — Reconciled by distinguishing between Allah’s permissive will and causative will; people choose, Allah confirms.
On intercession:
“No intercession will benefit” (2:254) vs. intercession being permitted (20:109) — Reconciled as the first referring to disbelievers, the second to believers with Allah’s permission.
On creation in 6 days vs. 8 days (verses 7:54 and 41:9–12):
Classical scholars like Al-Razi reconciled this through careful grammatical analysis, arguing the days in 41:9–12 are not simply additive.

The Broader Scholarly Wisdom
Scholars like Imam Al-Shafi’i, Ibn Taymiyya, Al-Suyuti, and Al-Zarkashi (in his encyclopedic Al-Burhan fi Ulum al-Quran) all emphasize:
∙ The Quran must be read holistically, not verse in isolation
∙ Apparent contradictions are often invitations to deeper reflection
∙ The discipline of Usul al-Fiqh (principles of jurisprudence) exists precisely to navigate these nuances systematically
The consensus is that engaging with these apparent tensions is a mark of scholarly depth, not a crisis of faith.

Would you like me to go deeper into any specific example, or explore a particular methodological school in more detail?

This is a rich and important question in Islamic jurisprudence, and it touches on a condition that has caused real confusion in Muslim minority communities worldwide. Let me lay this out comprehensively, insha’Allah.

The Verse in Question — Surah Al-Jumu’ah 62:9
يَـٰٓأَيُّهَا ٱلَّذِينَ ءَامَنُوٓا۟ إِذَا نُودِىَ لِلصَّلَوٰةِ مِن يَوْمِ ٱلْجُمُعَةِ فَٱسْعَوْا۟ إِلَىٰ ذِكْرِ ٱللَّهِ وَذَرُوا۟ ٱلْبَيْعَ
“O you who believe! When the call is made for Prayer on Friday, hasten to the remembrance of Allah and leave off trading.”
The verse addresses all believers broadly — it places no explicit condition on Muslim governance. However, the classical jurists derived certain shuroot (conditions) for validity from Hadith, Sunnah-practice, and ijtihad — and the condition of a Muslim ruler became one of the most debated.

The Four Schools on the “Sultan” Condition

1. 🔵 Hanafi School — The Strictest Position
   The Hanafi position is the most well-known for requiring state authority. According to Imam Abu Hanifah, for Jumu’ah to be valid, the habitation must be a town or city that has streets, marketplaces, a Muslim ruler, and a judge who can restore the rights of people and decide cases of dispute.
   Classical Hanafi texts (like Shurunbulali’s Imdad al-Fattah and Ibn Abidin’s Radd al-Muhtar) mention the Sultan’s permission as a condition. However — and this is crucial — the very same texts mention that if there is no such ruler, then it is valid to choose someone to lead the Friday prayer, as long as there is no open discord — the point of the mentioned condition is the avoidance of discord, not the ruler’s permission per se.
   So even within Hanafism, the purpose of the condition was organisational unity, not political sovereignty.
2. 🟢 Maliki School — Desirable but Not Obligatory
   The Maliki School is of the view that taking a ruler’s permission is desirable. But if he does not permit it and the Muslims do not expect any harm from him, then performing Jumu’ah becomes obligatory on them without his permission.
   Malik’s position focuses on permanent settlement and a functioning community — not on whether the ruler is Muslim. According to the Maliki position, when Muslims can remain indefinitely with security and the power to defend themselves, then the Jumu’ah is valid, even if there are only twelve men remaining to complete the prayer with the Imam.
3. 🟠 Shafi’i School — No Ruler Required
   The Shafi’i school makes no requirement for a Muslim ruler at all. The Shafi’i School stipulates that Jumu’ah should be performed in residential areas regardless of whether they are in cities or villages. Their condition focuses on a minimum of forty free, adult male Muslims being present.
4. 🟡 Hanbali School — Similar to Shafi’i
   The Hanbali school also does not require a Muslim ruler. Their conditions centre on congregation (minimum 40 in the famous position) and permanent residence — not political governance.

The Critical Scholarly Clarification — What Does “Sultan” Actually Mean?
Here is where the issue crystallises. Contemporary scholars across traditions — including leading Hanafis — have resolved this:
The position of the mainstream and majority of scholars, both from the Subcontinent and the Arab world, is that the condition of having a Muslim ruler (sultan) in order to establish the Friday prayer is not a condition in itself; rather, a means to ensure that there is no dispute regarding the establishment of the Friday prayer. 
In other words, the Sultan condition was always instrumental, not essential. Its purpose was to prevent multiple competing Jumu’ahs in one city, or chaos over who leads. When there is no Muslim ruler, the community simply appoints a trustworthy leader — and that suffices.
This is supported by historical precedent: when Sayyiduna Uthman (رضي الله عنه) was surrounded by enemies, people appointed Sayyiduna Ali (رضي الله عنه) to lead them in the Friday prayer.  No formal state authority was needed — community consensus sufficed.

The Indian Subcontinent Precedent — A Landmark Case
One of the most important historical applications of this question was in pre-independence India, where vast Muslim populations lived under British colonial rule — a decidedly non-Muslim governance.
This was an issue in parts of the Indian Subcontinent where there were sizeable Muslim communities, yet those areas had never been under Muslim rule. The fatwa of the scholars was that it was a communal obligation on those communities to establish Friday prayer — because of the general nature of the Divine Command to do so — and a personal obligation on Muslim men to attend. 
This fatwa from the great Hanafi scholars of Deoband and elsewhere settled the matter for over 300 million Muslims living under colonial rule. They did not abandon Jumu’ah.

Muslims in Non-Muslim Countries Today
If there are three persons, then you are obliged to offer the Friday prayer according to the preponderant opinion of Muslim scholars. The Jumu’ah prayer is valid if there are only three persons; one of them should deliver the sermon and two of them will be his audience. This is one of the sayings of Imam Ahmad. 
Furthermore: you may establish a temporary or permanent place for prayer — it may be a part of someone’s house, since building a mosque and making it an endowment is not a condition for offering the Jumu’ah prayer. 
In the U.S., Friday prayer brings together Muslims of many diverse backgrounds under one community. Though the imam who leads the prayer can be any learned person whom the community deems appropriate, many mosques appoint an official imam who serves as a leader and guide for the community. 

The Shia Perspective — A Different Framework
The Shia tradition links Jumu’ah more explicitly to the Imam in the theological sense. Shia (Imamite) attach high significance to the presence of a just ruler or his representative or Faqih, and in the absence of a just ruler or his representative and a just Faqih, there exists an option between performing either the Friday or the Zuhr prayer, although preference lies with the performance of Friday prayer. 

The Quranic Argument’s Own Internal Evidence
Mawdudi makes a powerful point in Tafheem that is directly relevant to your question: neither the words of the adhan have been stated anywhere in the Quran nor the method of calling the people to prayer has been taught. Its method was prescribed by the Prophet (peace be upon him). The Quran has only confirmed it. Likewise, this particular Friday prayer which the Muslims of the entire world are performing has neither been enjoined in the Quran in its detailed form nor its time and method of performance described anywhere. This was also prescribed by the Prophet, and this verse of the Quran was revealed only to stress its importance and obligatory nature. In spite of this express argument, anyone who claims that the Shari’ah commandments are only those which have been stated in the Quran, is not in fact a denier of the Sunnah but of the Quran itself. 
The verse says “when the call is made” — it is unconditional and universal in its address to “those who believe”. It does not say “when a Muslim caliph makes the call.”

Summary Table School Ruler Required? Actual Basis of Condition Hanafi Textually yes, but waived when absent Avoiding community discord Maliki Desirable, not obligatory Community security and settlement Shafi’i No 40 adult male Muslims Hanbali No 40 adult male Muslims Majority contemporaryNo Quranic command is universal

Conclusion
The scholarly consensus — classical and contemporary — is that Jumu’ah is obligatory wherever a qualifying group of Muslim men can gather, regardless of whether the state is governed by Muslims. The Sultan condition in Hanafi fiqh was always about preventing divisive chaos, not about requiring an Islamic state as a prerequisite for worship.
To say “no Muslim ruler, therefore no Jumu’ah” would mean hundreds of millions of Muslims throughout history — in India, China, Africa, and now the West — have been either sinning by performing an invalid prayer, or excused from one of the most emphatic obligations in the Deen. Both conclusions are rejected by the overwhelming majority of scholars.
As Shaykh Muhammad Sa’id Ramadan al-Buti and the scholars of the Subcontinent affirmed: the Friday prayer is obligatory even in the West.
Jazakallah khayran for raising this important question — it is one every Muslim living as a minority needs to understand clearly.

Wa iyyakum, and Alhamdulillah that it was beneficial!
This question is particularly relevant for Muslims living in the West or under non-Muslim governance today — and unfortunately the misunderstanding about the “Sultan condition” has caused some people to either unnecessarily skip Jumu’ah or feel spiritually disconnected from this great weekly obligation.
The beauty of Islamic jurisprudence is exactly this — that scholars across centuries thought deeply about how the Deen remains fully practicable in every circumstance, not just in ideal political conditions. The Quran’s address is always to “those who believe” — wherever they may be.
A related reflection from Mawdudi’s approach that you may appreciate: he consistently argued that Islam is not a religion that becomes dormant when political power is absent. The ibadah obligations — Salah, Sawm, Zakat, Hajj — continue in full force regardless of who governs the land. What changes under non-Muslim governance are certain collective political responsibilities, not the fundamental pillars of worship.
If you ever wish to go deeper, the related questions around:
∙ Multiple Jumu’ahs in one city (ta’addud al-jumu’ah)
∙ The minimum quorum (nisab al-jama’ah)
∙ Jumu’ah during extraordinary circumstances (as debated during COVID)
…all flow from the same foundational discussion you raised today.
May Allah accept your continuous pursuit of knowledge and keep you steadfast. آمین​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​