5. Surah Al-Maaida

Sequence of the Verses Continued from the third Section of Surah al-Ma'idah was the subject around the People of the Book. In between, some other subjects, though very few, appeared where particularly appropriate. Now, the text resumes that subject again which goes on further ahead. The People of the Book already had two groups among them. Joining them was a third group. They were really Jews who had become Muslims hypocritically. They would show their Muslim face before Muslims but when they sat with their coreligionist Jews, they mocked Islam and Muslims. The three verses appearing above concern the doings of these three groups which show that they prefer their desires and opinions over the injunctions and instructions of Almighty Allah and keep trying to interpret and mould them to their own choices. These verses tell us about the disgrace and evil end of such people in this world as well as in the Hereafter. As a corollary, there appear some guiding principles and injunctions for Muslims. The Background of the Revelation Two events which are the cause of the revelation of the cited verses relate to Jewish tribes who lived in the vicinity of Madinah during the blessed period of the Holy Prophet ﷺ . One of these events was that of Qatl and Qisas (killing and retaliation) and the other, that of Zina (fornication) and its punishment. It is not hidden from anyone who knows history (as it is) that tyranny prevailed all over before the advent of Islam. Mastery was for the powerful and slavery, for the weak. The powerful and the influential had their laws different from the weak and the meek. Not too far is an extension of that approach in our own time where some of our so-called civilized countries had separate laws for the black and the white. But, across this bridge of history, came the blessed benefactor of humanity, the Arab Prophet, may the blessings of Allah be upon him, and peace, who alone erased these distinctions. It was he who first declared equality of rights for the progeny of Adam and taught human beings their essential lesson in humanity. Before the coming of the Holy Prophet ﷺ to Madinah, there lived on the outskirts of Madinah two tribes of Jews, Banu Qurayzah and Banu Nadir. Out of the two, Banu Nadir were more powerful and wealthy than Banu Qurayzah who constantly suffered at their hands and could do nothing about it. Matters reached to the point when Banu Nadir forced Banu Qurayzah to agree to a disgraceful pact whereby if a man from Banu Nadir were to kill a man from Banu Qurayzah, they would not have the right to take his life in Qisas (retaliation). Instead, stipulated the pact, they will receive only seventy Wasaq of dates as his blood money (Wasaq, Arab measure of weight approximately equivalent to 195.30 kg). As for the case being the re-verse of it, if a man from Banu Qurayzah were to kill a man from Banu Nadir, the law will be that the killer will be killed and, on top of it, blood money will be taken, and that too, twice as much as compared to what Banu Nadir were entitled to, that is, one hundred and forty Wasaq of dates. Attached along with these were more conditions such as, if a woman from Banu Nadir were to be killed, a man from Banu Qurayzah will be killed in retaliation; and if the person killed were to be a man, two men from Banu Qurayzah will be killed in retaliation; and if a slave from Banu Nadir has been killed, a free man from Banu Qurayzah will be killed in retaliation; and if one hand of a man from Banu Nadir has been cut by someone, two hands of a man from Banu Qurayzah will be cut; if one ear has been cut, two ears of their man will be cut. This was ` law' before Islam as it prevailed between these two tribes and Banu Qurayzah being weak had no choice but to go along with it. When the Holy Prophet ﷺ migrated to Madinah, it became Dar al-Islam, a homeland of Muslims. These two tribes had not embraced Islam upto that time nor were they bound to follow Islamic law under any treaty obligation. But, they were observing the justice and common good brought in by Islamic law from a distance. During this period, it so happened that a man from Banu Qurayzah killed a certain man from Banu Nadir. According to the pact mentioned above, Banu Nadir demanded the doubled blood money (Diyat) from Banu Qurayzah. As said earlier, Banu Qurayzah were neither a part of the Muslim community nor did they have any existing pact with the Holy Prophet ﷺ . But, they were Jews who had among them many learned people as well. They knew on the strength of the prophecies of the Torah that the Holy Prophet ﷺ is the promised Last Prophet the glad tiding of which was given by the Torah. But, they had not declared their faith in him because of religious prejudice or temporal greed. Since they were watching that the Last Prophet's religion is a standard bearer of human equality and justice, they used it as a crutch to get rid of the tyranny of Banu Nadir. They refused to pay the doubled blood money on the plea that they belonged to the same family, same country, and same religion, that is, Judaism, and that they were not going to tolerate the unjust treatment meted out to them because of their weakness against tyranny right upto that day. This reply enraged Banu Nadir to the point of an imminent war. But, later, on the advice of some elders, it was decided that this matter should be taken to the Holy Prophet ﷺ for his decision. Banu Qurayzah could not have it any better. They already knew that the Holy Prophet ﷺ was not going to allow the injustice of Banu Nadir to continue. As for Banu Nadir, though they did agree to mutual conciliation talks under a situation of duress, but they also backed it up with a conspiracy when they sent a group of people to the Holy Prophet ﷺ before their case was to be presented in his court. These people were really their co-religionists, that is, they were Jews but kept in touch with the Holy Prophet ﷺ by hypocritically assuring him of their Islam. Their objective was to somehow find out the view of the Holy Prophet ﷺ before he hears and decides the case. So, the mandate and instruction given to these people was that they should accept what he said subject to the condition that it was in favour of their demand, and in the eventuality that his judgment turned out to be contrary to this, they were told not to make any commitments about its acceptance. This event describing the cause of the revelation of these verses has been reported in detail by al-Baghawi while the Musnad of Ahmad and Abu Dawud have reported its summary from Sayyidna ` Abdullah ibn ` Abbas ؓ (Mazhari). Similar to this, there is another event, that of Zina (fornication). Reporting its details, al-Baghawi says that it took place among the Jews of Khaybar. According to the punishment prescribed by the Torah, the couple involved had to be stoned to death. But, both of them belonged to some influential family. The Jews, acting in accordance with their old habit, looked for a softening of the punishment for them knowing that the religion of Islam gives leaves and concessions liberally. Based on this, they assumed that Islam would reduce this punishment as well. So, the people of Khaybar sent a message to their clansmen of Banu Qurayzah asking them to have this case settled by Muhammad and along with it, they sent the two accused as well. Their motivation behind this action was no different as they too in-structed their clansmen to accept the verdict of the Holy Prophet ﷺ if the punishment awarded by him turned out to be light, but they were to reject it if the case was otherwise. At first, Banu Qurayzah were reluctant about the proposal. They did not know how the case will be decided by him and once they were there, they would have to accept the verdict. But, after further consultations, they decided that some of their chiefs should take the accused couple to the Holy Prophet ﷺ and request him to decide the case. So, a deputation of Ka'b ibn Ashraf and others accompanied by the accused couple came to the Holy Prophet ﷺ . They asked: ` If a married man and a married woman are involved in adultery, what punishment do they get?' He said, ` Will you accept my verdict?' They said that they would. At that moment, Sayyidna Jibra'il appeared with a command from Almighty Allah which announced that their punishment was stoning to death. When these people heard this verdict, they were taken aback. They refused to accept it. Sayyidna Jibra'il (علیہ السلام) advised the Holy Prophet ﷺٍ that he should ask these people to appoint Ibn Surya as the arbitrator before deciding whether to accept or not to accept the verdict. Then, he told him about Ibn Surya and his identity. He asked the members of the deputation if they knew the young man who is white but blind in one eye. He lived in Fidak and His name was Ibn Surya. Everyone confirmed that they did. He asked, ` What do you think about him?' They said, ` Of the learned people among Jews, there is no scholar greater than him on this earth.' He said, ` Call him in.' So, he came. The Holy Prophet ﷺ asked him on oath, ` What is the injunction of the Torah in this case? He said, ` By the Being in whose name you have put me on oath, if you had not put me on oath in that manner, and I did not have the apprehension that a false statement on my part would make the Torah burn me, then, I would have not revealed the reality. The reality is that the Torah too, like the injunction in Islam, does carry the command that both of them should be killed by stoning (Rajm).' The Holy Prophet ﷺ said, ` What has come upon you now that you act against the injunction of the Torah?' Ibn Surya replied, ` The fact of the matter is that, religiously and legally, this is the punishment of adultery with us. But, since a prince of ours got involved in this crime, we showed leniency to him and let him go. We did not stone him to death. Later, the same crime was committed by an ordinary man. People responsible decided to stone him to death. The sup-porters of the criminal protested demanding that the Jewish Legal Punishment decided for this man should be given to the prince first, otherwise, they threatened, they would resist and block the execution of the punishment against him. When things dragged on, they sat together and compromised on just one light punishment for all, leaving the injunction of the Torah aside. So, we came up with a punishment which required some beating and the taking out of a procession with the culprits having their faces blackened with soot (a symbol of disgrace). This, then, became the usual custom with everyone.' Commentary We now know the details of the background in which the present three verses (41-43), and others which will follow, were revealed. Their gist is that the Jews were habitually used to issuing religious edicts as desired by the people, either for the benefit of relatives or to satisfy their greed for money, property, influence, and recognition. This had become a common custom particularly in matters involving punishments that they would, if the crime was committed by an influential person, change the severe punishment of the Torah into an ordinary one. It is this behaviour pattern of theirs which has been described in the first verse (41) in the following words: يُحَرِّ‌فُونَ الْكَلِمَ مِن بَعْدِ مَوَاضِعِهِ (They displace the words after their having been placed properly). When the Holy Prophet ﷺ took up residence in Madinah, these people started noticing changes. The Islamic Rule of Law was working as a unique system. It was simple, open and full of conveniences. Then, it had a reasonable set-up to eradicate crimes through appropriate punishments. Now the people who were used to making the severe punishments of the Torah easy for their clients by changing them saw an opportunity for themselves whereby they could take such shady matters to the Holy Prophet ﷺ and make him their judge or arbitrator. The dual advantage they saw in it was that they would reap the benefits of all easy and light rules of Islamic Law while, at the same time, they would not have to commit the crime of altering the Torah. But, here too, they had their crookedness at work as they would hold on to their decision of taking their case to him until such time that they succeeded in finding out beforehand through some source or ruse as to the actual verdict which would be delivered in their case when presented. Then, if they found this verdict matching their wishes, they would make him their arbitrator and have him decide their case. If it happened to be contrary to their wishes, they would leave it at that. Since the events of this nature had caused pain to the Holy Prophet ﷺ he has been comforted in the opening sentence of the verse that he should not grieve about their behaviour because it would finally turn out to be good for him. Then, Allah Almighty let him know that these people were not making him a judge in their case sincerely. Their intentions were mischievous. Then, in the later verse (42), he was given the choice to either decide or avoid their case as he wished. He was also assured that they will not be able to harm him in any way, if he wished to avoid them. This is what the verse: فَاحْكُم بَيْنَهُمْ أَوْ أَعْرِ‌ضْ عَنْهُمْ (judge between them or turn away from them) means. Then, in the part of the verse which follows immediately, it was stated that should he elect to decide their case, the guideline given is that the decision has to be just. In other words, it meant that he was to decide the case in accordance with his Shari` ah because, after the coming of the Holy Prophet ﷺ ، all former religious codes and their laws stand abrogated, except those which have been retained in the Holy Qur'an and the Shari'ah of the Last Prophet. It is for this reason that the act of deciding a case on the basis of another law, custom or usage contrary to the Divine Law has been declared to be injustice, sin and disbelief in later verses. Judicial Process for Non-Muslims in an Islamic State At this point, it should be borne in mind that these Jews who sent their cases to the court of the Holy Prophet ﷺ did not believe in him or his Shari` ah nor were they Dhimmis (non-Muslim citizens) protected by Muslims. However, they did have a no-war pact with the Holy Prophet ﷺ . This is why he was given the option to either turn away from them, or give a decision in their case according to his Shari` ah because no responsibility for them falls on the Islamic state. If they were Dhimmis (protected non-Muslim citizens of a Muslim State) and approached the Islamic government, the responsible Muslim official would have been duty-bound to give a verdict in their case. Avoiding it would have not been permissible because watching over their rights and removing injustice done to them is the duty of an Islamic government. Therefore, in a verse which will appear a little later (49), it has also been said: وَأَنِ احْكُم بَيْنَهُم بِمَا أَنزَلَ اللَّـهُ وَلَا تَتَّبِعْ أَهْوَاءَهُمْ (And judge between them by what Allah has sent down and do not follow their de-sires ...) In other words, it means: If these people bring their case to you, decide it in accordance with your Shari` ah. No choice has been given in this verse. Instead, the command is to decide as prescribed. In Ahkam al-Qur'an, Imam Abu Bakr al-Jassas (رح) has accomodated the sense of both these verses by suggesting that the first verse where a choice has been given relates to non-Muslims who are not citizens or Dhimmis of the Islamic state but continue to live where they are under a pact, such as, the position of the tribes of Banu Qurayzah and Banu Nadir. They had nothing to do with the Islamic state except that they were bound by a no-war pact. And the second verse concerns particular non-Muslims for whom Muslims are responsible and who are citizens of the Islamic state and owe allegiance to its legal government. Worth pondering here is that in both these verses - the first verse which gives a choice and the second which gives a specified command - the instruction given to the Holy Prophet ﷺ is that he should decide cases of these non-Muslims, whenever he does so, in accordance with the injunctions revealed by Almighty Allah, that is, in accordance with his Shari'ah - and not in accordance with the wishes of these non-Muslims or the religion they follow. To explain, it can be said that this injunction is related to events which have been described under the background of the revelation of these verses. Of these, one concerned the punishment for killing and blood money while the other was that of adultery and its punishment. In such punishments of crimes, the universal practice is to have a common law for the whole country. In this common law, no discrimination is made on the basis of classes or religions, for example, amputating the hand of the thief which would not apply to Muslims alone, but would be the punishment for every citizen of the country. Similarly, the punishments for killing and adultery will also be common to everyone. But, it does not make it necessary that personal and purely religious matters of non-Muslims should also be decided in accordance with the Islamic Shari'ah. Take an example from the conduct of the Holy Prophet g himself. Though he did declare liquor and swine unlawful for Muslims and prescribed a punishment for it, but he left non-Muslims free of any obligations in this matter. In addition to that, he never interfered in the personal law of non-Muslims pertaining to marriages and similar other matters. In fact, he accepted their marriages as valid. With the rise of Islam in the Arabian Peninsula, the Magians of Hajar and the Jews and Christians of Najran and Wadi al-Qura became Dhimmis (protected non-Muslim citizens) of the Islamic state. That the Magians believed in marriage with even a mother and sister as lawful was known to the Holy Prophet ﷺ . Similarly, marriage without ` Iddah (waiting period), or witnesses, was valid among Jews and Christians. But, he did not interfere in their personal matters and took their marriages as valid. In short, it can be said that decisions about personal law and religious matters of non-Muslims who are citizens of a Muslim state shall be left to their own religion and thinking - and should there be the need to arrive at a judicial settlement of their cases, a judge from their own religion will be appointed to decide them. However, in the event that they turn to a Muslim judge or ruler and show that the concerned parties would agree with the decision given, then, the Muslim judge or ruler will deliver his judgment but in accordance with his Shari` ah - because he is now the legally appointed arbitrator as approved by the parties concerned. In the noble verse وَأَنِ احْكُم بَيْنَهُم بِمَا أَنزَلَ اللَّـهُ (Judge between them by what Allah has sent down and do not follow their desires - 49) appearing a little later, the command to decide in accordance with the Islamic Shari` ah given to the Holy Prophet ﷺ is based either on the matter being that of common law from which no section can be exempted, or rests on the basis that such people have themselves come to the Holy Prophet , have taken him as the arbitrator and wish that he himself should decide their case. Thus, it becomes obvious that his decision should be the one he believes in and which is also the mandate of his Shari’ ah. Now as we move on to other aspects of verse 41, we see that it be-gins with words of comfort for the Holy Prophet ﷺ after which, he has been informed of the conspiracy hatched by the Jews, the description of which goes right upto its end. It reveals that the deputation coming to him was comprised of hypocrites who were secretly in league with the Jews and it is at their behest that they were going to see him. After that, there is a description of some evil traits of character the visiting group has against which Muslims have been warned. As an adjunct, it has been pointed out that these traits of character are rejectionist in nature, therefore, effort should be made to stay safe from them. Listed below are these four evil traits of character.

1. The first trait identified is: سَمَّاعُونَ لِلْكَذِبِ (They are listeners of the lie). It means that they are used to listening to and going by what is false. They are the kind of blind followers of unfaithful Jews who see to it that they are called men of learning who would go on following them despite noticing that they were openly negating the injunctions of the Torah, worse still, they would continue being satisfied with their fictional interpretations of it. Following ` Ulama': The Norm for People The way those making alterations and adulterations in the injunctions of Allah and His Messengers have been warned here, indicted similarly are those too who take such people as their leaders in religion and get used to listening to false and fabricated presentations from them. Offered here is an important rule of guidance for Muslims that, though the only way of following the obligations of religion open to un-lettered masses is to act in accordance with the ruling (Fatwa) and teaching (Ta` lim) of ` Ulama' (traditionally trained, morally groomed, professionally equipped men and women of learning and living and teaching in accordance with the inviolable truth of the Qur'an and Sunnah - a sense not carried by stray equivalents of scholars, the learned, religious leaders, divines, priests, et al. Tr.). But, this is a responsibility from which the masses too cannot escape. It is their duty to first find out what they are doing. Before they take a Fatwa or hope to act correctly in a religious matter, they must at least investigate into the antecedents of those they are going to follow. This is like a sick person looking for a good physician. He consults people who know about the best in the field, about their education, expertise, practice, professionalism, moral quality and human dealing. After this possible assessment, if one makes a mistake and falls into the trap of a quack or charlatan, a reasonable person would not blame him. But, anyone who did not take the trouble of investigating and landed into the lair of a false practitioner and messed up his life, then, he alone will be responsible for his suicide. The same principle applies to the dissemination of knowledge about religious matters for common people. If one of them first did what was necessary, talked to people of knowledge, expertise and experience available in his area and was able to pick up an ` Alim to consult and follow, and acted according to his Fatwa, then, he would be considered excusable not only in the sight of people but also in the sight of Allah. In a hadith relating to a similar matter, the Holy Prophet ﷺ is reported to have said: فَاِنَ اِثمَہ علٰی مَن اَفتٰی which means, if in a situation like that, should the ` Alim or Mufti make a mistake, and a Muslim acts in accordance with this incorrect Fatwa, then, the sin for having acted in that manner does not fall on him, but it does on that ` Alim or Mufti - and that too would apply in a situation when that ` Alim or Mufti had made such a mistake knowingly, or had fallen short in deliberating on the problem to the best of his ability, or, may be, he was no ` Alim or Mufti to begin with, and had taken that responsible office through fraud or favour. But, if a person takes someone as an ` Alim (a source of correct religious guidance which is worth following) on his own, without investigating, and does what he says - and the ` Alim so chosen is really not deserving of being followed - then, its curse will fall not only on that Mufti or ` Alim alone, but this person who chose him will also share its consequences equally because he gave the reins of his 'Iman (faith) into the hands of such a person without any investigation. These are the kind of people the Holy Qur'an calls ` the listeners of the lie,' people who keep tagged behind their (ill-chosen) religious leaders without taking the trouble of finding out the truth about their knowledge and integrity, conduct and deeds, trustworthiness and honesty. Unfortunately, they have got themselves into the habit of listening, accepting and being satisfied with fabricated and false narratives from them. The Holy Qur'an is talking about the condition of Jews here but the message behind it is actually beamed at Muslims so that they can stay safe against something like that. Unfortunately, this is one of the reasons of the downfall of Muslims in the contemporary world. They are quite smart in their mundane matters. When sick, they find the best physician. When stuck with a case, they will search out the best lawyer. When they make a house, they can dig out the top architect and engineer. But, when it comes to the matter of religion, they become so careless that they would take any man with a beard, a long shirt and a glib tongue as their religious leader, ` Alim, Mufti or guide. They would do that without bothering to find out whether or not this person was educated and trained formally in a reliable institution of higher religious learning; whether or not he has sat at the feet of experts in the field and culled the taste and temperament of the knowledge of Din; whether or not he has made intellectual contributions during his career; whether or not he has benefited from the company of truly pious elders and Men of Allah by imbibing from them the essential virtues of Taqwa (fear of Allah) and Taharah (physical and spiritual purity)? The result of this carefree attitude is that a large section of people from among Muslims who do turn to religion unfortunately falls into the fishing nets of ignorant preachers and commercial pirs and becomes far-removed from the correct path of religion. For people like that, their knowledge of religion stands reduced to tales which leave their desiring selves untouched and which, then, gives them the delusion that they are following religion and doing a lot of worship. But, its reality is what has been described in the Holy Qur'an in the following words: الَّذِينَ ضَلَّ سَعْيُهُمْ فِي الْحَيَاةِ الدُّنْيَا وَهُمْ يَحْسَبُونَ أَنَّهُمْ يُحْسِنُونَ صُنْعًا They are the people whose efforts and deeds have gone waste within the life of the world while they are thinking that they have done something good. Concluding with a summary, we can say that the Holy Qur'an identifies an important principle by describing the hypocrites from among the Jews as ` the listeners of the lie.' The principle is that following ` Ulama is inevitable for people at large, but it is their responsibility that they should not follow anyone as their ` Alim or guide in religion without prior investigation as a result of which they may not become habituated to listening to what is false from ignorant people. 2. Describing the other evil trait of these hypocrites, it was said: سَمَّاعُونَ لِقَوْمٍ آخَرِ‌ينَ لَمْ يَأْتُوكَ (listeners for other people who did not come to you). It means that these people have obviously come to ask you about a religious matter. But, the truth of the matter is that their objective is neither religion nor some ruling about it. In fact, they are the spies of the kind of Jewish people who did not come to you by themselves be-cause of their arrogance. The deputationists, following the wishes of their senders, simply want to find out your view of the punishment of adultery and let their senders know about it who will themselves decide whether or not they would accept the verdict. In this, there is warning for Muslims that whoever seeks a Fatwa from an ` Alim of Din is bound by the condition that the intention of the seeker must be to find out the command of Allah and His Messenger and to follow it. Any effort to find out from one Mufti, or more than one, the objective solution of a religious problem, then, going about looking for a solution which suits one's desires is an open demonstration of following one's own desiring self - and Shaytan. This should be avoided. 3. Describing the third evil trait of these people, it has been said that they ` displace the words (of Allah) after their having been placed properly,' which means that, by doing so, they give the Word of Allah a meaning which is not intended and thus try to alter Divine injunctions. Included here is the possibility of making some changes or alterations in the very words of the Torah, as well as the eventuality that they keep the words as they are but make interpretations and alterations which are absurd in meaning. The Jews are used to doing it both ways. In this, the warning given to Muslims is that Allah Almighty has Himself taken the responsibility of protecting the Holy Qur'an. As for an alteration in its words, nobod' - can dare to do that because it is simply not a matter of what is written in the already countless copies of the Qur'an, but also that of what lies secured in the memory banks of millions of human beings. Anyone who makes the slightest mistake of mispronouncing even a short vowel is caught instantly. As for an alteration in meaning, it can obviously be done - and doers have done it too. But, for its security, Almighty Allah has made the arrangement that there shall remain in this Ummah right through the Last Day of Qiyamah, a group of people who would be armed with the correct meaning and message of the Qur'an and Sunnah, and they would be enough to unmask the alterers, corrupters and distorters of their meanings. Bribery and its evil consequences 4. The second verse (42) mentions another evil trait of these people by calling them: أَكَّالُونَ لِلسُّحْتِ translated here as ` eaters of the unlawful' making ` the unlawful' to stand for the word, ` suht' in the text. The liter-al meaning of Suht is to uproot or destroy something totally which is the sense in what the Qur'an says in: فَيُسْحِتَكُم بِعَذَابٍ , that is, (do not forge lies against Allah) lest He destroy you with a punishment - 20:61). But, at this place in the Qur'an, Suht denotes bribe. Sayyidna Ibrahim Nakha'ii, Hasan al-Basri, Mujahid, Qatadah and Dahhak and other leading authorities in Tafsir have explained it as bribe. The reason for equating bribe with Suht (total destruction; also - unlawful earning, detestable enough to be shunned) is that it not only destroys its givers and takers alike but also goes on to uproot the whole country and community and destroy public peace and tranquility (by causing rise in illegal gratification and fall in avenues of honest earning). When bribery gains currency in a country or a department, law freezes and bribery stays hot. As for the law of a country, it is the only power which maintains peace and stability. When law and order stand suspended, nothing remains safe, life or property or honour, nothing. Therefore, by calling it Suht, the Shari’ ah has declared it to be gravely Haram, forbidden and unlawful. Moreover, to block all possible doors of bribery, even the gifts given to officials or leaders or dignitaries of a country have also been classed as Suht or bribe in an authentic Hadith, and has been declared to be Haram. (Jassas) The Holy Prophet ﷺ has said in a hadith: Almighty Allah causes His curse to fall on the giver and taker of bribe and on him too who acts as a broker between them. (Jassas). The Islamic Legal definition of Rishwah (meaning bribery) is the taking of compensation for something the taking of which would not be legally correct. For example, a person doing a job, the doing of which is included within his duty, and the fulfilling of which is mandatory on him, cannot take any compensation for it from any party. If taken, that is bribe. Functionaries of governments, officials or clerks, higher or lower, are all obligated to do their duties by virtue of being paid employees of the government. If they take something from the person whose case they are handling, that will be a bribe. The father and mother of a girl are responsible for the marriage of their daughter. They cannot take any ` compensation' for doing that. If they take any ` compensation' from the person who will have the hands of their daughter in marriage, that is a bribe. Sawm (fasting), Salah (prayers), Hajj (pilgrimage) and the Tilawah (recitation) of the Qur'an are ` Ibadah' (acts of worship) with which Muslims have been obligated. The taking of any ` compensation' from anyone is a bribe. However, the duty of the Teaching of Qur'an and the duty of leading Salah as Imam are exempt from this (as ruled by later Muslim jurists). Then, a person who takes bribe and does someone's job as it should rightfully be done, he commits the sin of taking bribe and the money or material he has ` earned' is ` suht,' and unlawful for him. And should he do it as it should have not been done rightfully, then, this becomes another grave crime, that of wastage of what was right and that of changing an express command of Allah, in addition to the initial one. May Allah keep all Muslims safe from this curse.

Sequence of the Verses This is the third Section of Surah al-Ma` idah. Here, Allah Almighty has asked the Jews, the Christians and the Muslims to pay heed to a particular injunction of the creed they all share as being the three communities attached to the Prophetic Tradition. Appearing in different contexts through verses which have gone earlier, this is the serious matter of acting against the pledges given to Almighty Allah and that of changes, alterations and false interpretations made in injunctions sent to them - something which had become a chronic compulsion of habit with the Jews and Christians. In the first two verses (44:45) of this Section, addressing the people of the Torah, Almighty Allah has warned them on this crookedness and about the sad end it will bring. With it, as a corollary, some congruent injunctions pertaining to Qisas (Even Retaliation) have also been mentioned - for the Jewish conspiracy described in the previous verses was related to Qisas which the people of the tribe of Banu Nadir did not like to be even and because of which they had compelled their weaker rivals, the Banu Qurayzah, to be content with lesser blood money as compared to themselves. Thus, in these two verses, the Jews have been given a stern warning against imposing their own law contrary to the Law sent down by Almighty Allah and those who do that have been classed as Kafir (disbelievers) and Zalim (unjust). After that, the third (46) and the fourth (47) verses are addressed to Christians. They too have been warned against enforcing a law of their own contrary to the Law sent by Allah. And those who do that have been classed as contumacious and disobedient. Finally, in the fifth (48) and sixth (49) verses, addressing the Holy Prophet ﷺ Muslims have been instructed that they should take precautions to stay immune from the disease which had afflicted the people of the Book lest they too, God forbid, were to start changing through misinterpretations the injunctions and laws given by Al-mighty Allah - goaded by greed for money and recognition, or stoop to the haughtier level of making and enforcing a self-made law of their own contrary to His Law. Also stated here subsequently is an important matter of principle which posits that all prophets, may peace be upon them all, adhered to the same faith and way as far as believing in and obeying Allah is concerned. But, every prophet was given, as wisdom demanded, a Shari` ah or Way or Code, appropriate to the nature and need of his time and in which many subsidiary injunctions differ. Thus, as pointed out here, the very Shari'ah given to a prophet was the wisest choice for that time of the prophet and during which following it was obligatory. When abrogated and replaced by another Shari'ah, the later, then be-came what was wise and expedient at its time, the following of which also became equally obligatory. That there is a unique element of wisdom in the phenomena of alternation and variation in the systems of Shari'ah is a point which has also been made here. Commentary In the first verse of the set of verses appearing above, by saying: إِنَّا أَنزَلْنَا التَّوْرَ‌اةَ فِيهَا هُدًى وَنُورٌ‌ (Surely We have sent down the Torah, having guidance and light therein), the hint given is that the abrogation of the Shari'ah of Torah at that point of time is not because of any shortcoming of the Torah itself but it has been done rather because of the need to change injunctions with the change of time. Otherwise, the Torah too is a Book revealed by the same Revealer. It has rules of guidance for the Ban' Isra'il and it also has a special light which moves their hearts spiritually. After that it was said: يَحْكُمُ بِهَا النَّبِيُّونَ الَّذِينَ أَسْلَمُوا لِلَّذِينَ هَادُوا وَالرَّ‌بَّانِيُّونَ وَالْأَحْبَارُ‌ that is, ` We had revealed the Torah so that, until its Shari'ah has not been abrogated, all incoming prophets and their deputies, the men of Allah and the 'Ulama shall all decide and rule in accordance with this Torah making it the working law of their time.' The deputies of the prophets, may peace be upon them all, have been mentioned in two categories - 'Rabbaniyyan' and ` Ahbar.' The word, 'Rabbaniyy ' is attributed to ` Rabb' and means ` Man of Allah.' As for Ahbar', it is the plural form of Hibr which, in the Jewish terminology, used to stand for ` Alim (roughly, a scholar of religious sciences). It is obvious that for one to be a Man of Allah one has to have the knowledge of the necessary injunctions of Al-mighty Allah, otherwise deed sans knowledge is not possible - and no one can become a Man of Allah without obeying Divine injunctions and acting in accordance with them. Similarly, an ` Alim is, in the sight of Allah, one whose deeds in life are a mirror of his knowledge, otherwise an ` Alim who, despite his knowledge of Divine injunctions, does not fulfill his binding religious obligations by doing what is required of him nor shows any concern for his failure to do so, is worse than an ignorant person in the sight of Allah. The outcome is that every Man of Allah is an ` Alim and every ` Alim is a Man of Allah (or should be, in principle). But, at this place, by mentioning both separately, a notice of caution has been given - no doubt, knowledge is necessary for a Man of Allah and deed, for an ` Alim - but, one gets to be identified with his dominant activity or colour (of the rainbow he follows in his path of obedience to Allah) and that becomes the name he is called with. A person who mostly devotes himself to ` Ibadat (acts of worship), A` mal (deeds) and the Dhikr of Allah (remembrance) and acquires religious knowledge sufficient for his needs, he is called a Rabbaniyy or Man of Allah. This, in our contemporary usage, is given names like Shaykh, Murshid, Pir and a good many others. As for the person who acquires the highest practical expertise available in religious sciences, and de-votes himself to the mission of teaching and training people in the rules of the Shari` ah, and fulfills the obligations of discharging what is Fard, Wajib and Sunnah al-Mu'akkadah - but is unable to spend any-more time in performing Nail ` Ibadat (voluntary acts of worship) - he is called ` Hibr' or ` Alim. To sum up, it can be said that the explanation given above also makes it clear that there is no dichotomy in Shari` ah and Tariqah and no distance between ` Ulama and Masha'ikh. They all converge into the basic unity. As far as the difference in their method of work and the predominant area of occupation is concerned, it becomes equally evident that the 'Ulama (religious scholars) and Sufis (religious mystics) are not two sects or factions. Far from it, they are, rather, one - in the sense that they both work for the same purpose in life, that of submission and obedience to Allah and His Messenger. But, their comparative methods employed to achieve this purpose do seem to be formally divergent. After that, it was said: بِمَا اسْتُحْفِظُوا مِن كِتَابِ اللَّـهِ وَكَانُوا عَلَيْهِ شُهَدَاءَ (because they were entrusted with the protection of the Book of Allah and they stood guard over it). It means that these prophets and their two kinds of deputies, the ` Ulama and the Masha'ikh (Men of Knowledge and Men of Allah) were responsible for enforcing the laws of the Torah because Almighty Allah had entrusted them with the protection of the Torah and they had given the pledge that they would guard it. Upto this point, the text was referring to the Torah as Divine Scripture and guidance and light which was enforced and guarded by prophets, and their deputies among guides and scholars. Then, the focus turns on to the contemporary Jews who have been censured for not having guarded the Torah as their elders did. They acted crookedly when they started changing its injunctions, for example, the glad tidings of the coming of the Last among Prophets, Muhammad al-Mustafa, may the peace and blessing of Allah be upon him, was mentioned clearly in the Torah and the Jews were asked to believe in him. But, rather than believe in him as required, they became hostile to him. Also given here is the reason as to what prompted them to do so. It was love for power and love for money. They knew that the Holy Prophet ﷺ was a true prophet of Allah but they balked at the thought of following him because they were taken as leaders among their people, common Jews who followed them. Now if they were to embrace Islam, they will turn into common Muslim individuals. Gone will be their pivotal position for power play. Other than this, they had almost made it a profession that they would bend and alter the provisions of the Torah to provide officially endorsed conveniences for influential people against payment of bribes. The contemporary Jews were warned about this practice in the following words: فَلَا تَخْشَوُا النَّاسَ وَاخْشَوْنِ وَلَا تَشْتَرُ‌وا بِآيَاتِي ثَمَنًا قَلِيلًا ۚ (So, do not fear people, fear Me. And do not take a paltry price for My verses). It means that they should not fear that their people will stop following them or will turn against them and that they should not alter Divine commands for the sake of insignificant worldly gains for it would ruin them both materially and spiritually because: وَمَن لَّمْ يَحْكُم بِمَا أَنزَلَ اللَّـهُ فَأُولَـٰئِكَ هُمُ الْكَافِرُ‌ونَ And whoever does not judge by what Allah has sent down, then, they are the disbelievers.