24. Surah An-Noor

Commentary It has been described in the beginning of this Surah that the injunctions of Surah Nur mostly relate to prevention of obscenity and vulgarity. Under the same sequence some injunctions regarding social etiquette and mutual meetings are also enjoined. After that the injunctions about Hijab for women are prescribed. The injunction for relatives and mahrams for seeking permission at specific timings Earlier in this Surah the social etiquette and manners for mutual meetings were described in verses 27, 28 and 29 under the heading 'injunctions on seeking permission', where it was enjoined that if you go to visit someone, do not enter the house without taking permission. Irrespective of the situation whether it is a female section of the house or the male section, and whether the visitor is a man or a woman, it has been made obligatory on every one to seek permission before entering the house. However, these injunctions relate to those who come in the house as visitors. But in the present verses a different type of isti'dhan is enjoined. Here those persons are instructed to seek permission who live together in the same house and keep roaming in the rooms freely. In this category those men are also included with whom the hijab of women is not required (the mahrams). They, too, are advised to make some sort of sound, either by cleaning the throat or by thumping of steps, in order to make their presence felt. This type of isti'dhan is preferable and not obligatory, but to give it up is Makruh Tanzihi. Tafsir Mazhari has remarked: فمن اراد الدخول فی بیت نفسہ و فیہ محرماتہ یکرہ لہ الدخول فیہ من غیر استیذان تنزیھا لاحتمال رؤیۃ واحدۃ منھن عریانۃ وھو احتمال ضعیف و مقتضاہ التنرہ (مظھری) The one who intends to enter his own house, while it is occupied by his mahram ladies, it is not desirable (makruh tanzihi) for him to enter it without seeking permission, because of the possibility that one of those ladies is without clothes. However, since this possibility is a remote one, it requires precaution only (and not Prohibition). This injunction relates to the time before entering the house, but once men-folk have entered the house, all the inmates live together and being members of the same family keep meeting each other within the house. For the family members living together there is another injunction of seeking permission at three specific times, which are the times of privacy. These three times are before the Fajr prayers, the resting time in the afternoon and in the night after ` Isha' prayers. At these times all the mahrams and relatives, even the young children and slave girls having sense, are prohibited to enter the private places without taking permission. It is to ensure that none should go in the private rooms without first seeking the permission. At these times one wants to be on one's own and sometimes takes off the extra clothes, while at times one is in a compromising position with his wife. During any of these situations one would feel very embarrassed and upset if seen by even a very young but sensible child or a woman of the household. In the least it will cause him disturbance in his rest. Hence, there is a need to take permission at these three specific times before entering the private chambers. After this injunction it is said لَيْسَ عَلَيْكُمْ وَلَا عَلَيْهِمْ جُنَاحٌ بَعْدَهُنَّ (58) that is besides these times there is no harm if you go to each other without any permission, because during all other times people are busy doing their normal duties and are properly attired in their usual clothing. These are also not the normal times for intimacy with the wife. Here the question arises that enforcement of injunction on adult man and woman is normal, but why the young children are also commanded to comply with this injunction, which is not the normal practice. The answer to this confusion is that in actual fact it is the adult men and women who are charged with this duty to explain to the young children not to go to private chambers at these times without taking permission. It is in the same manner as a hadith instructs to teach the prayers to children when they attain the age of seven years and persuade them to offer it. And when they attain the age of ten years they be bound down to offer prayers regularly, and if they default then they should be beaten to be regular in their prayers. Similarly, the injunction of isti'dhan in the above verse is actually for the adult men and women. In the sentence under discussion the word Junah is used to say that apart from these three times there is no harm if the inmates go in the private chambers without permission. Generally the word Junah is used for sin, but sometimes it is also used for harm or obstacle. Here in this verse it is used for the latter meaning, hence, any doubt of sinning on the part of children is also removed. (Bayan ul-Qur’ an) Ruling The phrase الَّذِينَ مَلَكَتْ أَيْمَانُكُمْ (the slaves owned by you) used in verse (58) covers the meaning of both the slaves and the slave girls. Among them the adult slaves fall under the category of non-Mahrams under the Islamic law. As has been explained earlier, the mistress owner woman of an adult slave is obligated to be in hijab before him. Therefore, the phrase is purported to mean here the slave girls and minor slaves who roam about in the house freely. Ruling The scholars and jurists have different viewpoints on the question whether this type of isti'dhan is obligatory or merely commendable and whether this injunction is still valid or is abrogated. Majority of jurists have ruled that this verse is firm and thus not abrogated, and the injunction is obligatory both for men and women (Qurtubi). But it is obvious that the reason and ground for the injunction to be obligatory is that which is given above, that is, one wants to be on his own at these three times and likes privacy, and sometimes gets busy with his wife. However, if people could get into the habit of keeping their concealable parts covered even at these three times, and be careful to copulate with wife only at times when there is no possibility of anyone coming in, as is the norm these days, then it is not obligatory to restrain the relatives and children from entering without isti'dhan. In this situation it is no more obligatory for the relatives to follow it. But there is no doubt that it is a desirable and commendable act, though it seems that people have given it up for a long time. According to one narration Sayyidna Ibn ` Abbas ؓ ', has used very strong words for ignoring it, and according to another narration he has put forward excuses for those who do not follow it. The first narration is reported by Ibn Kathir on authority of Ibn Abi Hatim that Sayyidna ` Abdullah Ibn ` Abbas ؓ has said that there are three verses which people have stopped following. One of them is this very verse of istidhan يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا لِيَسْتَأْذِنكُمُ الَّذِينَ مَلَكَتْ أَيْمَانُكُمْ (58) in which relatives and young children are instructed to seek permission. The second verse is وَإِذَا حَضَرَ‌ الْقِسْمَةَ أُولُو الْقُرْ‌بَىٰ (4:8) in which people are advised to hand over a part of the inheritance to those relatives also who are present at the time of division of patrimony but have no claim on it, in order to console them. The third verse is إِنَّ أَكْرَ‌مَكُمْ عِندَ اللَّـهِ أَتْقَاكُمْ in which it is declared that the noblest among you in the sight of Allah is the most god-fearing of you. But these days such persons are regarded honorable and respectable who possess plenty of wealth and palatial houses. According to some other narration Ibn ` Abbas ؓ has also said that in respect of these three verses the Shaitan has overpowered the people. Then he said "I have restrained even my slave girl not to come to me without permission at these three times". The second narration is also reported on authority of Ibn Abi Hatim by Sayyidna ` Ikrimah ؓ that two persons enquired from Sayyidna Ibn ` Abbas ؓ عنہما about isti'dhan enjoined (by this verse) upon near relatives and commented that people have stopped acting on this. Ibn ` Abbas ؓ replied ان اللہ ستیریحبّ السّتر that Allah keeps cover on many things, and He likes the same for others. The fact of the matter is that at the time of revelation of this verse the society was very simple. People did not use curtains at the door nor did they have large beds with curtains. There used to be occasions when a child or servant would come in unannounced at a time the person was in a compromising position with his wife. It was to prevent such happenings that Allah Ta’ ala sent down this injunction to take permission at these three times. But now people use curtains at the door and large beds having curtains, which is considered enough for the purpose. Now there is no need for isti'dhan. (Having reproduced this narration Ibn Kathir has said ھٰذا اسناد صحیح الی ابن عباس ؓ (that is, the chain of its narrators is 'Sahih' i.e. authentic). In the light of this narration ascribed to Sayyidna Ibn ` Abbas ؓ one thing is quite clear that when there is no apprehension of any one seeing the other in an uncovered position or involved with his wife, in that case some concession is allowed. But Qur'an teaches for a pure society so that no one interferes in anyone's freedom and everybody lives in peace and comfort. Those who do not make their family members follow the practice of seeking permission they themselves face inconvenience and curb their natural instincts and desires.

Emphasis on hijab for women and an exemption The injunction on hijab for women has already appeared earlier in detail in two verses, and two exemptions were also mentioned there. One exemption relates to the one who is seeing, and the other to that who is seen. According to the first exemption, young children and the slave girls are exempt. As for the second exemption, the outward adornment is exempt from hijab, which includes outer clothing like veil or covering sheet. There is agreement of all on this, but according to some, women's face and palms are also included in this exemption. In the next verse the third exemption is granted on the basis of a woman's personal situation. If a woman has grown so old that no one would have any (sexual) desire towards her, nor is she marriageable, for such a woman concession in hijab is allowed in that even strangers (non-Mahrams) are treated like mahrams for her. She is not required to cover those parts of her body before non-Mahrams which are not required to be covered before mahrams. Hence, it is said وَالْقَوَاعِدُ مِنَ النِّسَاءِ اللَّاتِي (And those old women who have no hope for marriage - 60). The explanation of this verse is already given above. Although very old women are allowed to uncover those parts of their body before non-Mahrams which are not required to be covered before mahrams, yet this exemption is allowed with the condition that they do so without applying any makeup or adornment. The other thing said in the last is وَأَن يَسْتَعْفِفْنَ خَيْرٌ‌ لَّهُنَّ (60) that is, it is better for them if they avoid going before non-Mahrams altogether.

Commentary Some injunctions and social etiquettes after the entry in the house In the previous verses it was enjoined to seek permission before entering into anyone's house. In the above verse those injunctions and etiquettes are pronounced which are obligatory or preferable to follow after the permission to enter the house is granted. Before understanding the injunction contained in this verse and its purport it would be advisable to know the background in which this verse was revealed. Every Muslim knows very well how much emphasis is laid by the Holy Qur'an and the teachings of the Holy Prophet ﷺ for respecting and preserving the rights of the people (Huquq ul-` Ibad). Very strong warnings are sounded against using anything owned by someone else without his permission. On the other hand Allah Ta’ ala had chosen such fortunate persons for the company of the Holy Prophet ﷺ that they were all ears for any command from Allah or His Messenger. They were always ready to put in their best on every single command. By following Qur'anic teachings diligently and having the exalted company of the Holy Prophet ﷺ they were turned by Allah Ta’ ala into a group of whom even the angels were proud. Not to think ever to spend even slightly from other's wealth, to avoid putting in anyone into the slightest of trouble and to remain steadfast on the highest standard of Taqwa (constant awareness of Allah) were only some of the attributes of the companions of the Holy Prophet ﷺ . Some related incidents had taken place during the life of the Holy Prophet ﷺ ، in which connection the injunctions contained in the present verse were revealed. All commentators have made reference of these incidents with the difference that different incidents are quoted as the cause of revelation by different commentators. The actual position is that there is no contradiction in their assertions, and all these incidents put together are the cause of revelation of this verse. The incidents are as follows: Imam Baghawi (رح) has related on authority of Said Ibn Jubair ؓ and some other commentators that it is a common habit among people to feel disgust in eating together with lame, cripple, blind and sick, and avoid it. Among the companions who had any of these disability thought that if they were to eat with others they might cause botheration and trouble to them. Therefore, they started avoiding eating with normal persons. The blind people thought that they might eat more than others, as they cannot see, causing injustice for the rest. Justice requires that all who eat together should eat equally. Likewise, the lame thought that they would create problem for others as they could not sit properly and occupy more space, which will result in taking up the share of space of others. In this background, the above verse was revealed in which the disabled were asked to join other normal persons for eating. They were advised not to take upon themselves such painstaking precautionary measures which could lead them into trouble. Imam Baghawi (رح) has narrated another incident related by Ibn Jarir on authority of Sayyidna Ibn ` Abbas ؓ which presents the other side of the picture. The story goes like this; when the verse لَا تَأْكُلُوا أَمْوَالَكُم بَيْنَكُم بِالْبَاطِلِ (Do not eat up each other's property by false means - 2:188) was revealed, people were hesitant to eat with the blind, lame and the sick. Their consideration was that the sick eats less because of his indisposition, so he would suffer if he eats with others. The blind cannot differentiate between the good and ordinary food, and the lame is slow to eat because of his posture. So, people thought there is a possibility that the disabled are deprived of their due share, whereas the justice demands that all should eat equally while eating together. So, it was in this background that this verse was revealed, and people were taken out of this predicament. The spirit behind this injunction is that people should eat together and if there is a little disparity in the quantity of food taken by each one of them, it should not be a cause of botheration. Said Ibn al-Musayyab ؓ has given yet another version that while going on jihad or battles, the Muslims used to hand over the keys of their houses to the disabled with the instructions that they can eat whatever is there in the house. On the other hand, the disabled would not eat anything, lest they spend something against the wishes of the owners. Hence, to counter this position, the above verse was revealed. Musnad al-Bazzar has also reported this version on the authority of Sayyidah ` A'ishah ؓ that when the Holy Prophet ﷺ used to go on a battle, it was the desire of every companion to go along with him to participate in the battle. They used to hand over the keys of their houses to the poor and disabled persons with the permission that they could eat anything available in the house during their absence. But the disabled would abstain from taking anything from the house fearing that the permission given to them to eat freely from the house might not have been given with full willingness. Baghawi has also narrated on authority of Sayyidna Ibn ` Abbas ؓ that the word صَدِیقَکُم (your friend) used in the verse, which means that there is no harm in eating from your friend's house, was a reference toward the incident of Harith bin ` Amr ؓ . The incident was that Hrith b. ` Amr ؓ went for jihad along with the Holy Prophet ﷺ ، leaving the care and custody of his house to his friend, Malik Ibn Zaid ؓ . When Harith returned, he noticed that Malik Ibn Zaid ؓ had become very weak. When he enquired the reason of the weakness, Malik ؓ replied that he did not feel it right to eat anything from his house. (All these narrations are taken from Tafsir Mazhari). Indeed all these incidents had a bearing on the revelation of this verse. Ruling As mentioned above, a general permission was granted in this verse to eat in certain houses without asking special consent. This permission was granted on the basis of a tradition among ` Arabs to eat freely in the houses of close relatives. There was absolutely no formality among them, and no one would ever mind this habit, rather they used to encourage it and would feel happy about it. Not only that, sometimes the relatives used to bring poor, sick or needy persons and feed them at houses of others, on which the hosts would feel happy. According to custom they would not seek special permission for this, as there was a general consent among them to follow the tradition. It therefore becomes obvious that wherever and whenever this tradition is not in vogue, or the owner's consent is doubtful, then eating without permission is forbidden. In the present time no one would like that even a close relative would eat in his house without seeking permission. Therefore, the permission granted in this verse would not apply, unless someone is absolutely sure that his eating in a relative's house would not cause any problem or displeasure, rather he would enjoy it. Only in this situation eating at such a house would be permissible under the dictate of this verse. Ruling It is now clear from the above statement that it is not right to say that this injunction was meant for the early days of Islam, and was abrogated later. The injunction is in force right from the beginning up to the date and shall always remain effective. The real condition of the application of this injunction is the certainty of permission of the owner of the house, and if that is not present, then the very basis of injunction is not available. (Mazhari). Ruling It has also now become clear that this injunction is not restricted only to the relatives specified in the verse, but the concession is applicable to other persons also, with the sole condition that it is certain that the owner of the house will be pleased and will not be offended if someone eats and also makes others eat without seeking prior permission. (Mazhari) These injunctions relate to the acts permitted or preferable on entering in someone’ s house after taking permission. The act of eating and drinking has been mentioned first due to its importance. The second act (mentioned in verse 64) relates to the etiquettes of entry. The etiquette demands that as one enters the house with permission, he should greet all the Muslims present there with سلام salam. This is the purport of the words "greet your own selves", (verse 61). It is because all Muslims are a single united group. In many Sahih Ahadis great emphasis is laid on Muslims for greeting each other as an act of virtue.

Commentary Some etiquettes and injunctions in regard to meetings with the Holy Prophet ﷺ ' in particular, and in the society in general The above verses contain two injunctions. The first injunction is that when the Holy Prophet ﷺ call people for the meeting in connection with jihad or any other religious matter, the demand of the faith is that all should attend and must not leave the meeting without his permission. If there is an emergency, permission may be sought from the Holy Prophet ﷺ ، who was advised that unless there is special need and requirement, permission may be granted on such requests. In the same connection those hypocrites are condemned who would come to attend the meeting only to fulfill the obligation of faith, but would quietly sneak out under the cover of some other person. This verse was revealed at the time of the battle of Ahzab, when the Arab disbelievers and other groups joined together and suddenly attacked Madinah. After consultations with the companions, the Holy Prophet ﷺ consented to dig up a trench to defend against the attack. For this reason this battle is also known as 'the battle of trench (Khandaq) '. This battle was fought in Shawwal 5th Hijra. (Qurtubi) Baihaqi and Ibn Ishaq have reported that the Holy Prophet ﷺ himself had taken part in the digging of the trench. But the hypocrites used to come late in the first place, and after doing a little bit of work just to show their presence, would sneak away quietly. As against this all the believers were putting in their best, and in case of any need or emergency would take permission from the Holy Prophet ﷺ before leaving the work. At that point this verse was revealed. (Mazhari) A question and its answer It appears from this verse that it is forbidden to get up and leave from the presence of the Holy Prophet ﷺ without seeking his permission. But there are several incidents when companions used to leave his meeting when they wished and would not deem it necessary to take his permission. The answer to this point is that the injunction mentioned in the present verse is not an injunction for ordinary meetings, but it is meant for specific gatherings, which the Holy Prophet ﷺ might have called for some need, as was the case at the time of battle of the trench. The phrase ) عَلَىٰ أَمْرٍ‌ جَامِعٍ (for a collective matter - 62) is itself pointing toward this exclusivity. What does أَمْرٍ‌ جَامِعٍ (collective matter) mean? There are different views on this point. The most evident explanation is that this phrase is used for such acts for which the Holy Prophet ﷺ felt necessary to collect the people, as he regarded it important to collect the people for digging the trench on the occasion of battle of Ahzab. (Qurtubi - Mazhari) Is this injunction exclusive to meetings of the Holy Prophet ﷺ or is general? Since this injunction is issued for a religious and Islamic need, all the jurists agree that it is not exclusive to meetings of the Holy Prophet ﷺ . The same injunction would apply to any Imam or ruler of the Muslims who is in control of the government, if he called up a meeting. It is obligatory to attend the meetings called up by the rulers and it is not lawful to leave it without permission. (Qurtubi - Mazhari – Bayan ul-Quran) This is but obvious that this injunction has greater stress and emphasis for meetings called up by the Holy Prophet ﷺ ، and its opposition is open callousness. As for the common meetings and gatherings (not convened by a ruler), acting upon this injunction is surely preferable and commendable from the point of view of Islamic social etiquette. When Muslims are gathered in a meeting for deliberation or action on a collective issue, one should Ie:av ( the meeting only after taking permission from the presiding person. The second injunction The second injunction is given in the last verse:

لَّا تَجْعَلُوا دُعَاءَ الرَّ‌سُولِ بَيْنَكُمْ Do not take the call of the messenger among you as a call of one of you to another - 24:63. One explanation of this verse is that "call of the messenger" means calling of the people by the Holy Prophet ﷺ (which implies that "call" is the act of the messenger). Thus the meaning of the verse is, when the Holy Prophet ﷺ call people, it should not be taken as a common call of an ordinary person, in which one has the choice to go or not to go. In the case of a call by the Holy Prophet ﷺ it becomes obligatory to go to him and leaving the meeting without his permission is unlawful. In the context of the verse the above explanation appears more appropriate. That is why Mazhari and Bayan ul-Qur'an have adopted this explanation. The other explanation of "call of the messenger" is related by Ibn Kathir and Qurtubi on authority of Sayyidna ` Abdullah Ibn ` Abbas ؓ . According to this explanation it means calling of the Holy Prophet ﷺ by the people for some need which implies that 'the messenger' is the object of the 'call'. On the basis of this explanation the meaning of the verse would be that when you Call the Holy Prophet ﷺ for some need, do not call him by his name saying ` Ya Muhammad یا محمد ، as you call others. This is disrespect to him. Therefore, call him by an honorific form of address such as ` Ya Rasul Allah i.e. یا رسول اللہ or ` Ya Nabiyy Allah' یا نبی اللہ . In the final analysis it is obligatory on all Muslims to have respect and veneration for the Holy Prophet ﷺ and to avoid all such things which are in conflict with respect and etiquette, or which may cause inconvenience to the Holy Prophet ﷺ . This injunction is similar in nature to many of those enjoined in Surah al-Hujurat, for instance لَا تَجْهَرُ‌وا لَهُ بِالْقَوْلِ كَجَهْرِ‌ بَعْضِكُمْ لِبَعْضٍ (49:2) It means that when you talk to the Holy Prophet ﷺ keep in mind his respect, and do not talk in a loud voice, as people do while talking to each other. A similar example is إِنَّ الَّذِينَ يُنَادُونَكَ مِن وَرَ‌اءِ الْحُجُرَ‌اتِ (49:4) which means that when he is inside the house, one must not call him out, rather wait for him outside until he comes out on his own. A Warning It has also been inferred from the second explanation that as a common etiquette it is incumbent upon Muslims to pay respect to the elders, and to call them by their names is disrespect. Elders should always be called with titles of respect. Alhamdulillah The Commentary on Surah An-Nur Ends here.