6. Surah Al-An'aam

Commentary The first of the present verses has been revealed concerning a particular event and provides guidance in a matter of principle, that is, what you are not permitted to do yourself, for that you cannot become the cause or channel either - both shall remain equally impermissible. The Background of Revelation According to the background of revelation as narrated by Ibn Jarir, when Abu Talib, the respected uncle of the Holy Prophet ﷺ was on his death bed, the disbelieving chiefs of the tribe of Quraysh who, hostile and torturous to the Holy Prophet ﷺ always plotting to kill him, became alarmed at the eventuality of the death of Abu Talib which was likely to become an impediment to their nefarious designs. Because, they thought, if they were to kill Muhammad ﷺ after his protective uncle's death, that would go against the norms of their own self-respect and honour, for people would say that they were unable to do anything like that in the presence of Abu Talib, but when he died, they killed his helpless nephew. So, they decided to get together and go to Abu Talib to talk about the matter in a decisive manner. Every educated Muslim knows that Abu Talib, though he had not formally embraced Islam, loved the Holy Prophet ﷺ dearly, even respected him as a great bearer of the Divine message right from his heart, and always defended him against his enemies. So, the Quraysh chiefs formed a deputation who would go to see Abu Ta1ib. Included as members of the deputation were Abu Sufyan, Abu Jahl, ` Amr ibn al-` As and some others. The name of the person chosen to arrange for an appointment to meet with Abu Talib was Muttalib. He got his permission and escorted the deputation to him. To Abu Ta1ib, the deputation said: You are our elder, and a chief, and you know that your nephew, Muhammad ﷺ has been causing great pain to the idols we worship. We wish that you would talk to him and prevail on him that he should say nothing offensive against our idols, in which case, we shall make peace on the principle that he acts as he wishes on his faith, takes whoever he chooses as the object of his worship, against which, we shall raise no objection. Abu Talib called the Holy Prophet ﷺ to him and said: Here are the chiefs of your clan. The Holy Prophet ﷺ turned to the deputation and asked: What is your wish? They said: We wish that you leave us and our idols alone. Do not speak ill of them. We shall leave you and your object of worship alone. This will end our mutual hostility. The Holy Prophet ﷺ said: All right, you tell me, if I were to accept what you were saying, would you be ready to say a Kalimah (statement in words) by saying which you would become masters of the whole Arabia with even people from beyond subscribing to your authority? Abu Jahl said: You are talking about only one Kalimah. We are ready to say ten of them. Tell us what are they? The Holy Prophet said: لا إلہ إلا اللہ [ La Ilaha Illallah : There is no god (worthy of worship) but Allah ]. That infuriated all of them. Abu Talib said to the Holy Prophet ﷺ : 0 my nephew, say something other than this Kalimah because it has left your clansmen all confused. He said: As for me, I cannot say a Kalimah other than this. If they were to bring the sun down from the skies and put in my hands, even then I will not say a Kalimah other than this. His intention was to let them become totally disappointed. Thereupon, still in anger, they said: Either you stop speaking ill of our idols, the objects of our worship, or we too are going to start using insulting language against you, and also against that Being of which you claim to be the messenger. Revealed, thereupon, was the verse: وَلَا تَسُبُّوا الَّذِينَ يَدْعُونَ مِن دُونِ اللَّـهِ فَيَسُبُّوا اللَّـهَ عَدْوًا بِغَيْرِ‌ عِلْمٍ (And do not abuse those whom they invoke other than Allah, lest they abuse Allah transgressively without knowledge). “ لَا تَسُبُّوا " (la tasubbu) in this verse is a derivation from the word: سَبَّ (sabb) which means to abuse or use insulting language against someone (not in the sense of misuse, maltreatment or corrupt practice as currently used in American English which uses other alternates for hurling invectives - Tr.). The Holy Prophet ﷺ given his intrinsically high moral disposition, had already been abiding by this rule of conduct. Not even during his childhood, had his blessed speech ever been contaminated with an abusive word for any human being, rather not even for an animal. Perhaps, there may have been some hard word which escaped the lips of some from among the noble Companions which was overestimated as an invective by the disbelievers of Makkah, and which was used as a pretext by the chiefs of the Quraysh when their deputation brought this case up before the Holy Prophet g and gave the ultimatum that either he stops insulting their deities or they would start insulting theirs. Thereupon, came the Qur'anic injunction through which Muslims were prohibited from making any insulting statement against the false objects worshipped by disbelievers. Particularly worth noticing in this verse is that, just a verse earlier (106-107), the address was to the Holy Prophet ﷺ ، himself. Examples are: اتَّبِعْ مَا أُوحِيَ إِلَيْكَ مِن رَّ‌بِّكَ (Follow what has been revealed to you from your Lord) and: أَعْرِ‌ضْ عَنِ الْمُشْرِ‌كِين (and turn away from those who associate partners with Allah) and: مَا جَعَلْنَاكَ عَلَيْهِمْ حَفِيظًا (And We have not made you to stand guard over them) and: مَا أَنتَ عَلَيْهِم بِوَكِيلٍ (and you are not entrusted with their affairs). In all these grammatical forms, the Holy Prophet ﷺ was the addressee who was being asked to do or not to do something. After that, the form of address was changed in the present verse. It was turned away from the Holy Prophet ﷺ and was turned to Muslims in general. Said there was: لَا تَسُبُّوا (la tasubbu). The hint given thereby is that the Holy Prophet ﷺ who had never used abusive speech against anyone to start with, could not be directly addressed with the words of prohibition for that could make him disheartened. Therefore, the address was made general - and all Sahabah ؓ too started taking precaution in this matter. (As in Al-Bahr Al-Muhit) Related Considerations That idols have been mentioned in strong words in several verses of the Qur'an, and that those verses are not abrogated either for they are still recited, is a different matter. The answer is that such words wherever they appear in the verses of the Qur'an are there as a polemic or debating device to unfold some reality clearly. Intended at such places is no aggression, nor can a sensible person deduce from it such an intention to malign idols or to mock at disbelievers or to irritate them. This is an open difference in approach which is readily understood by those aware of the nuances of diction in any language. They know that the shortcoming or inadequacy of a person is called in question only to elucidate an issue in question. This is common practice in courts where no one challenges the statement being made before the Court as the throwing of invectives against someone. Similarly, narrated before physicians are the kind of defects and drawbacks people could have which, if described elsewhere would be taken as invectives hurled at someone. But, such statement made under medical need is not regarded as abusive talk by anyone. Thus, when the Qur'an describes the helplessness of idols in being devoid of sense and consciousness, knowledge and power, it uses a manner of speaking which would help the understanding to under-stand reality and expose the error or short-sightedness of those who do not. Hence, it was said: ضَعُفَ الطَّالِبُ وَالْمَطْلُوبُ ` Weak are, the seekers and weak, the sought (idols) 22:73.' And as it was said: إِنَّكُمْ وَمَا تَعْبُدُونَ مِن دُونِ اللَّـهِ حَصَبُ جَهَنَّمَ (You, and what you worship, other than Allah, are but fuel for Hell - 21:98). Here too, the purpose is not to speak ill of someone. The purpose is to state the sad end of straying and error. Muslim jurists, may the mercy of Allah be upon them, have made it all clear by explaining: If anyone were to recite this verse too as a tool aimed at causing irritation for disbelievers, then, for him, this recitation at that time and for that purpose, shall be considered as included under this ` abusing which is prohibited,' and will, therefore, be impermissible - as is the case in the prohibition of the recitation of the Qur'an at times and places which are Makruh (reprehensible) and known to everyone. (Ruh al-Ma'ani). To sum up, it can be said that, no word which could be taken as abusive was ever said by the Holy Prophet ﷺ or had appeared in the Holy Qur'an, nor was there any apprehension that it could happen in the future. Of course, the probability that Muslims at large may fall into such impulsive action did exist, therefore, this verse stopped them from doing so. This event and the Qur'anic instruction based on it has provided access to a large body of significant knowledge, some examples of which are given below: Becoming the Cause or Agent of a Sin is also a Sin 1. One of the principles thus deduced is: If doing something which is permissible intrinsically - in fact, even commendable in a certain degree - but, in the actual doing of it some corruption has to be accommodated, or as a result of which, people are let into sin, then, the doing of such a thing is also prohibited. The reason is that identifying false objects of worship, that is, the idols, is, at least, permissible after all - and if said under the need to uphold one's religious feelings, it may perhaps be even worthy of praise and reward - but, since this resulted in the apprehension that people would start speaking ill of Allah Jalla Sha'nuhu which, in turn, would make the degraders of idols the cause of this evil, therefore, prohibited was the act which was already permissible. 2. Another example of this appears in Hadith where, addressing his Companions, the Holy Prophet ﷺ is reported to have said: No one should abuse (use insulting language against) his or her parents. The Companions submitted: Ya Rasul Allah, it is just not possible that one will abuse parents. He ﷺ said: Yes, one does not usually do that. But, when such a person abuses the parents of someone else and, as a consequence of it, the other person abuses his parents, then, the cause of his parents being so abused was this very son. So, he too is like one who has himself abused his parents. 3. Yet another instance of a case of this nature came to pass during the blessed time of the Holy Prophet ﷺ . He said to Sayyidah ` A'ishah ؓ ، that the Baytullah (the Holy Ka'bah) had collapsed on its foundations in an accident during the Jahiliyyah. The Quraysh of Makkah reconstructed it before the advent of prophethood. In this structure, some details turned out to be against the initial Ibrahimi foundation. One of them was the part now known as حطیم Hatim. This too is part of the Baytullah. It was left out because of paucity of funds. Then, there were two doors of Baytullah, the Eastern and the Western - one for entry and the other for exit. The people of Jahiliyyah closed the Western door. The one door left was raised higher than the ground level so that entry into the Baytullah would depend on their will and permission and that no one could go there freely. The Holy Prophet ﷺ said: I wish I could demolish the present structure of Baytullah and make it like the structure raised by Sayyidna Ibrahim Khalilullah (علیہ السلام) . But, the danger is that your people, that is, the common Arabs, who have entered the fold of Islam just now, may fall a victim to some doubts at the sight of Baytullah being demolished, therefore, I have abandoned my intention. It goes without saying that raising the structure of Baytullah precisely on the foundations laid down by Sayyidna Ibrahim (علیہ السلام) was an act of obedience and a deed deserving of merit and reward. But, seeing the shadows of a danger lurking behind this intended action because of the ignorance of people around, he abandoned that idea. So, from this event too, there emerges the same principle that, should there be an apprehension of some evil or corruption necessarily resulting from what is permissible, even from what is otherwise an act of thawab or merit, then, that permissible or thawab-worthy act too becomes impermissible. But, there exists a strong doubt about this principle which has been reported from Abu Mansur in Ruh al-Ma'ani. The proposition posed is: Allah Ta` ala has made Jihad binding on Muslims - though, the inevitable outcome of killing is that, when a Muslim will start killing some non-Muslim, they would start killing Muslims - and killing Muslims is Haram (forbidden). Thus, given this principle, Jihad should also be prohibited. Then, the same will hold valid about our propagation of Islam and the recitation of the Qur'an, and about Adhan and Salah as well, all of which are subjected to mockery and ridicule by many among the disbelievers. If so, shall we surrender our right to worship and promote our religion? Answering this, Abu Mansur has himself said that this doubt has come up because of ignoring a necessary condition. That condition is that a permissible act which has been prohibited, because of the apprehension of something evil, should not be one of the basic objectives and necessary duties in Islam. Thus, speaking ill of false objects of worship does not relate to any objective of Islam. Similarly, no basic Islamic objective depends on making the structure of Baytullah conform precisely to the foundations laid out by Sayyidna Ibrahim (علیہ السلام) . Therefore, whenever there was the danger of some religious mal-situation cropping up by doing what was permissible, or even reward-worthy, such acts or intentions were abandoned. As for acts which are either the very Islamic objectives in themselves, or on them depends some Islamic objective, then, even if the wrongdoings of other people seem to be bringing visible corruption or evil in its wake, then, these objectives will never be surrendered or abandoned. Instead of that, effort will be made that such permissible acts should keep continuing in their place, and steps will be taken to block the spreading of evils and corrupting agents as far as possible. This is why two great men of Islamic history acted the way they did. Once Hasan al-Basri (رح) and Imam Muhammad Ibn Sirin (رح) ، went out to participate in the Salah for a Janazah. There, they noticed a gathering which had men as well as women. Seeing this Ibn Sirin returned back. But, Hadrat Hasan al-Basri (رح) said: Why should we leave doing what is necessary because of the false practice or ways of other people? The Salah of Janazah is Fard (obligatory). It cannot be abandoned because of this corrupting agent. Of course, effort will be made, as far as possible, that this evil is rooted out. This event too has been reported in Ruh al-Ma'ani. So, the substance of this principle which emerges from this verse comes to be: An act which is permissible in itself, even if it be an act of obedience and thawab - but, not be one of the religiously binding objectives, then, should doing it bring forth evil consequences, abandoning of that permissible act becomes Wajib (necessary). This is contrary to the case of the objectives of the Shari'ah which cannot be abandoned because of any impending evil or corruption. From this principle, the jurists of the Muslim community have deduced solutions to thousands of problems. Some examples of their juristic efforts are: 1. If a person has a disobedient son and he knows that, should he ask him to do something, he would refuse to do it and even prefer to do against it, in which case, he will become liable to a grave sin, then, in such a situation, the father should not ask him to do or not to do something as an order, instead of which, he should say so in the mode of a good counsel - for example, he says to him, ` if such and such job could be done, that would be nice' - so that, in the eventuality of a refusal or reverse action, the son does not become liable to the sin of a new disobedience. (Khulasatul-Fatawa) 2. The same rule holds good in matters where well-meaning advice is given to someone. If circumstantial indicators show that a person, rather than take advice, is more likely to take a worse course, as a result of which, he will sink deeper into sin, then, in such a situation, to give up advising is better. In his Sahih, Imam al-Bukhari has introduced a regular chapter on this subject: باب من ترک بعض الاختیار مخافۃ ان یقصر فھم بعض الناس فیقعوا فی اشد منہ There are occasions when things permissible, even those commendable, are abandoned lest they put common people in misunderstanding - subject to the condition that these acts are not from the core objectives of Islam. 3. But, acts which are included under the objectives of Islam - whether Fard, Wajib or Sunnah al-Mu'akkadah (obligatory, necessary or emphasized Sunnah) or other kinds of Islamic hallmarks - if by observing them some people lacking in understanding start falling in misunderstanding, then, these acts will not be abandoned, rather, other methods will be used to remove the misunderstanding and misdoing of such people. Events which came to pass in early Islam prove that the disbelievers of Makkah were provoked because of Salah, the recitation of the Qur'an and the preaching of Islam. But, the standing hallmarks of Islam were never abandoned because of such adverse conditions. In fact, the very episode relating to Abu Jahl and the rest of Quraysh chiefs recounted under the Background of Revelation of the present verse has proved the point eloquently. The essence of the episode was that the chiefs from the disbelieving Quraysh tribe wished to give a guarantee of peace if the Holy Prophet ﷺ would abandon preaching Tauhid, that is, stop calling Allah One. The answer given by him was: I can never do that, even if they were to bring the sun and the moon and put them in my hands. In conclusion, the question as refined and resolved is: If, by doing what is included under Islamic objectives, some people fall a victim to misunderstanding or misdeed, such acts would never be abandoned. Of course, acts which are not included under Islamic objectives - and leaving them off does not compromise or kill any religious objective - then, such acts will be abandoned because of the apprehension that others might fall into misunderstanding or misdeed.

On Signs and Miracles The previous verses had mentioned how obstinate people failed to benefit from clear signs of Allah and open miracles of His Messenger and kept on denying the message of truth. The present verses mention how they took a new turn, and demanded particular miracles from the Holy Prophet ﷺ . As reported by Ibn Jarir, the Quraysh chiefs asked that they be shown the miracle of turning the Mount of Safa into solid gold; if so, they would accept that he was a prophet and messenger, and that they would embrace Islam. The Holy Prophet ﷺ said: All right, make a solid agreement that, if this miracle is shown, all of you will become Muslims. They took solemn oaths. The Holy Prophet ﷺ stood up to pray that Allah turns the Mount into gold. Sayyidna Jibra'il (علیہا السلام) came with Wahy which said: If you wish, We shall make this whole Mount a Mount of gold, but the consequence will be that, according to the customary Divine Law, all of them - if they still fail to believe - shall be destroyed through a mass punishment, as has been happening with past communities who demanded a miracle which was shown, yet they reverted back to denial when the wrath and punishment of Allah overtook them. Since the Holy Prophet ﷺ was aware of their habitual obstinacy, and because he was in mercy the foremost, he said that he was not going to pray for that miracle anymore. Thereupon, the following verse was revealed: وَأَقْسَمُوا بِاللَّـهِ جَهْدَ أَيْمَانِهِمْ (And they swore by Allah on eloquent oaths - 109). Reported here is the sworn saying of the disbelievers that they would embrace Islam if they can see the miracle demanded by them. After that, in the sentence which follows immediately, it was said: إِنَّمَا الْآيَاتُ عِندَ اللَّـهِ (Signs are, definitely, with Allah - 109). This contains an answer to their saying. It has been declared here that all signs and miracles are within the power and control of Allah Ta` a1a. As for the miracles already manifested, they too were from Him - and those being demanded now, they too lie within His absolute control. But, according to the dictate of reason and justice, they had no right to make such a demand - because, the Holy Prophet ﷺ claims to be a Messenger of Allah, in support of which, he has already presented proofs and evidences in the form of miracles. Now, the other party does have the right to question these proofs and evidences by showing the proofs of their being false. But, the attitude of not cross-examining evidences presented and yet demanding some other evidences would be like the scenario in a law court where the respondent would avoid cross-examining the witness presented by the plaintiff and take the plea that he does not accept the evidence of these witnesses and that he would accept what is said particularly by such and such a person in his statement. Obviously, no court would consider this plea worth hearing. Similar is the case of the veracity of a prophet or Rasul of Allah. To that end there are many clear signs and miracles before those who disbelieve. Now, unless they prove that these signs and miracles are false, they have no right to say that they would rather like to see a miracle of this or that kind before they could believe. After that, upto the end of the cited verses, Muslims have been directly instructed that their duty is to stay firm on the true faith in their individual capacity, as well as convey it to others correctly and properly. If they, even then, show signs of rigidness and obstinacy, one should not worry about them because no one has to be forced into becoming a Muslim. If this was what could be done by force, who can claim to have greater coercive power than Allah Ta` ala. He Himself would have made everyone a Muslim. And in order to give Muslims their peace of heart, it was also explained in the verse that these people will not believe even if Allah were to show them the miracles of their choice openly and clearly. The reason was that their denial was not based on any misunderstanding or lack of awareness. In fact, it was due to their hostility and obstinacy - a disease which cannot be treated by miracles. In verse 111 وَلَوْ أَنَّنَا نَزَّلْنَا إِلَيْهِمُ الْمَلَائِكَةَ , it has been said that these people, if they were shown all miracles demanded by them, in fact, even if they were made to meet with angels and talk to the dead, they would still not believe. In the two verses that follow (112 113), the Holy Prophet ﷺ has been comforted by saying that the hostility of such people against him is nothing surprising. Past prophets too had their enemies - so, let him not be sad about it.

Commentary Mentioned in previous verses was the obstinate attitude of the disbelievers of Makkah against the veracity of the Qur'an and the Prophet of Islam ﷺ . Despite having seen signs and miracles proving their truth, they remained adamant, event went on to demand miracles of their choice before they could believe. The Qur'an answered this illogical argumentation by saying that the manifestation of miracles they demanded was easy for Allah, but those who were demanding them were obstinate people who would see them yet continue in their wickedness. When they do so, Divine Law will take over, as a result of which, they shall be over-run with mass punishment. That is why the Holy Prophet in his universal mercy, refused to oblige them. He asked them to ponder over the miracles, signs and proofs they have already seen. The present verses carry evidences which clearly prove the veracity of the Qur'an and that it is the Divine Word. The substance of what has been said in the first verse (114) is: The difference between you and me is in the case of my being a prophet and messenger of Allah. I claim it and you deny it. But, this case has already been decided by the Judge of judges in my favour in a way that the miracle of the Qur'an itself is more than sufficient a proof of the truth of my claim. This is the same Qur'an which has challenged the nations of the world to come forward - if they doubt its being the Word of Allah - and make a small Surah or 'Ayah to match this Word. Even the eloquent Arabs failed to meet this challenge. Then, there were those opposing Islam, Qur'an and the Prophet of Islam ﷺ enblock at the cost of their lives, properties and honour, even not one from among them rose with one single 'Ayah which would match the words of the miraculous Qur'an. Was this open miracle not good enough to make one accept the truth that a total Ummiyy who was never taught by anyone was reciting what had left Arabia and the world at large wondering? This is a case already decided in the Court of the Judge of all judges - that Muhammad ﷺ is a true Rasul of Allah and the Qur'an is the Kalam (Word) of Allah Jalla Sha'nuhu. It was regarding this that it was said in the first verse (114): أَفَغَيْرَ‌ اللَّـهِ أَبْتَغِي حَكَمًا (So, is it someone apart from Allah that I should seek as judge). In other words, it means: ` Do you want that I should, after this decision (of Allah Ta` ala to reveal the Qur'an to me), go and look for a judge other than Him? This is impossible. Following that - given there are some particular qualities of the Holy Qur'an which are by themselves the proof of the Qur'an being true and the Word of Allah. For example, it was said: وَهُوَ الَّذِي أَنزَلَ إِلَيْكُمُ الْكِتَابَ مُفَصَّلًا (while He has sent down to you the Book with details) which describes four special perfections of the Qur'an, that is: (1) It has been sent down from Allah Ta ala; (2) It is perfect, miraculous, unchallenged and inimitable; (3) All matters of principle have been given in clear details; and (4) Before the Qur'an, the People of the Book, the Jews and the Christians knew for sure that the Qur'an is the true Word of Allah. Then, those who had regard for truth, said so while those who were hostile would not say so despite that they were sure about it. After the description of these four qualities of the Holy Qur'an, the address is to the Holy Prophet ﷺ : فَلَا تَكُونَنَّ مِنَ الْمُمْتَرِ‌ينَ (So, never be one of those who are suspicious). It means that in the presence of such clear proofs, there is no room for doubt. It is obvious that the Holy Prophet ﷺ was never one of those who were in doubt, nor he could be, as confirmed by his saying reported in Tafsir Ibn Kathir: "Neither I ever doubted, nor I ever asked." This tells us that, though in terms of the words, the address is to the Holy Prophet ﷺ but, in reality, the purpose is to make others hear it. That it has been ascribed to him is a manner in which the aim is to lay emphasis on and heighten the effect of the command - in the sense: ` when this has been said to the Holy Prophet ﷺ who would have the audacity to entertain any doubt?'

Described in the second verse (115), there are two more distinctive qualities of the Holy Qur'an sufficient to prove its being the Divine Word. It is said: وَتَمَّتْ كَلِمَتُ رَ‌بِّكَ صِدْقًا وَعَدْلًا ۚ لَّا مُبَدِّلَ لِكَلِمَاتِهِ (And the Word of your Lord is perfect in truth and justice. None is there to change His Word). The word: تَمَّتْ (tammat) denotes the state of perfection and: كَلِمَتُ رَ‌بِّكَ (kalimatu Rabbik) refers to the Qur'an (A1-Bahr A1-Muhit, from Sayyidna Qatadah). All subjects of the Qur'an are of two kinds: (1) Those in which lesson-oriented events and conditions of world history, reward on good deeds and warning of punishment on evil deeds have been described; and (2) those in which injunctions relating to human betterment and prosperity have been laid out. It is about these two kinds that the following two qualities of the Qur'an have been identified: صِدْقًا وَعَدْلًا ، that is, perfect in truth and justice. Here, صِدْقً (sidq:truth) belongs to the first kind. It means that all events, conditions, promises or warnings mentioned in the Qur'an are true and correct. There is no possibility of fault or defect or error in them. And: عَدْلً (` adl: justice) relates to the other kind, that is, the injunctions (Ahkam). It means that all injunctions of Allah Jalla Sha'nuhu are based on ` Adl (justice). The sense of Adl covers two meanings: (1) Justice under which no injustice has been done to anyone, nor has any right been compromised or usurped; and (2) اعتدال I` tidal (moderation), that is, not being totally subordinated to the desires of human self, nor being what ingrained human emotions and natural traits cannot bear. This comes to mean that all Divine injunctions are based on justice and moderation, that is, in them, there is no injustice inflicted on anyone, nor do they have hardship and pain which are humanly unbearable - as said elsewhere: لَا يُكَلِّفُ اللَّـهُ نَفْسًا إِلَّا وُسْعَهَا (Allah does not obligate anyone except to his capacity - 2:286). Then, along with it, by bringing in the word: تَمَّتْ (tammat: is perfect), it was also pointed out that the Holy Qur'an not only has the qualities of truth and justice, but that it is also perfect and complete in them in all respects. And that all injunctions of the Qur'an be - for all peoples of the world, for all generations to come and for all changed conditions - based on both justice and moderation is something which, if considered with a little deliberation, can only be possible in nothing but Divine injunctions. No legislative assembly or congress of the world can completely foresee all forthcoming conditions in the present and the future, nor can it make any law which would accommodate all such conditions. Every country and nation makes its laws keeping in view what are usually the prevailing conditions of that country or nation. Then, even those laws are made to undergo changes when their experience proves that many of their provisions have remained contrary to justice and moderation. Now, to make a master law for other nations and peoples, or to make it with a complete consideration of all future events - that which embodies in it the qualities of justice and moderation for every nation, every country and every condition - is something beyond human thought and perception. This can only be in the Word of Allah Subhanuhu wa Ta` ala. Therefore, this fifth quality of the Holy Qur'an, the quality of truth and justice, is impeccable. It demonstrates that all past and present events, promises and warnings, narrated in it are true, wherein the least doubt of their being contrary to the actual cannot be entertained, and that all injunctions given by it are embedded with justice and moderation for the benefit of the whole world for all generations to come right through the Last Day of Qiyamah, in-junctions which inflict no injustice on anyone, nor is there the slightest deviation from the norms of moderation and balance. This is, in itself, the perfect proof of the Qur'an being the Divine Word. The sixth quality has been identified لَّا مُبَدِّلَ لِكَلِمَاتِهِ that is, there is no one who can change the words of Allah Ta` ala. One form in which such a change can take place is when someone proves a mistake in it because of which it has to be changed; or, that some enemy changes it forcibly. The Word of Allah is pristinely pure and far beyond any such possibilities. He has Himself promised: إِنَّا نَحْنُ نَزَّلْنَا الذِّكْرَ‌ وَإِنَّا لَهُ لَحَافِظُونَ ﴿9﴾ that is, ` We (only We) have revealed the Dhikr (the Qur'an) and, for it, We (only We) are the Protector - 15:9). When so, who can dare break through the protection of Allah and make any changes or alterations in it? For that matter, over fourteen hundred years have passed and there have been, in every century and every age, more people who have been against it as compared in numbers, even in power, with those who have been believing it, but not one of them had the courage to introduce one tiny variance in even a vowel point of the Qur'an. Of course, possible there was a third form of bringing in a change, that is, it be changed through abrogation (naskh) by Allah Ta` ala Himself. Therefore, Sayyidna ` Abdullah ibn ` Abbas ؓ said: ` This verse indicates that the noble Prophet ﷺ is the Last Prophet and the Qur'an, the Last Book. After this, there is no probability of an abrogation' - as it has been elucidated in other verses of the Qur'an. At the end of verse (115), it was said: وَهُوَ السَّمِيعُ الْعَلِيمُ (and He is All-Hearing, All-Knowing) which means that Allah Jalla Sha'nuhu hears all that is being said by these people and He knows what they do openly and secretly. He will give a return for every deed of theirs in accordance with it.

In the third verse (116), Allah Ta ala tells the Holy Prophet ﷺ that the majority of the progeny of 'Adam living on the earth is in error. Let him not be overawed by this situation and let him ignore what they say or do. The Qur'an has dealt with this subject at several places. In Surah As-Saaffaat, it is said: وَلَقَدْ ضَلَّ قَبْلَهُمْ أَكْثَرُ‌ الْأَوَّلِينَ ﴿71﴾ (And truly before them, many of the ancients went astray (37:71) In Su-rah Yusuf, it is said: وَمَا أَكْثَرُ‌ النَّاسِ وَلَوْ حَرَ‌صْتَ بِمُؤْمِنِينَ ﴿103﴾ (And the majority of people - even if you wish - are not to be believers (12:103). The outcome is that the awe of majority customarily overwhelms an individual and he or she ends up following it. Therefore, the address made to the Holy Prophet ﷺ was: And if you obey the majority of those on earth, they will make you lose the way of Allah. They follow nothing but whims, and they do nothing but make conjectures.' The gist of the advice is that he should not be impressed by their numerical majority as a model to follow because they lack principles and go off the right way: At the end of the verse (117), it was said: ` Surely, your Lord knows best those who go astray from His way, and He is the best knower of those who are on the right path (consequently, as the errants shall be punished, the people of the straight path shall be rewarded).

Linkage of Verses Earlier (116), by saying: وَ اِن تطِع (And if you obey), following people in error was prohibited absolutely. Onward from there, comes the prohibition of such following in a particular matter as necessitated by an event. That event pertains to the lawfulness of what has been slaughtered properly or improperly. The event is that disbelievers tried to put Muslims in doubt by commenting that they did not eat of the animals killed by Allah (i.e. by natural death) while they had no problem with eating of what they killed (slaughtered) themselves (as deduced by Abu Dawud and al-Hakim from Sayyidna Ibn ` Abbas ؓ ). Some Muslims reported this doubt before the Holy Prophet ﷺ Thereupon, these verses ending at: لَمُشْرِ‌كُونَ (121) were revealed (narrated by Abu Dawud and Al Tirmidhi from Sayyidna Ibn ` Abbs as in Al-Lubab). The gist of the answer given is: You are Muslims. You observe the injunctions of Allah particularly - and Allah has told you all about the Halal and the Haram. So, keep abiding by it. Do not entertain any doubts about something Halal being حَرَام haram, and something حَرَام haram, being Halal. As for the scruples of disbelievers, just pay no attention to them. The substantiation of this answer is that rational proofs are required only to prove the basic principles of faith (like Oneness of Allah, the prophethood of His messengers etc.) but once these basic principles are established and admitted, rational arguments are no more required for establishing a subsidiary or consequential rule of the Shari'ah. What is required is to prove that this rule is based on a specific order given by Allah or His messenger. Once it is established that the rule is based on a specific injunction imposed by Allah Ta` ala or His messenger, it cannot be called in question on the basis of rational ar-guments. (because after admitting that the rule is prescribed by Allah Who is all-Wise, all-Powerful, it will always be based on wisdom which might be unknown to us.) Rather, it is sometimes harmful to mention rational wisdom for the rules of Shari'ah, because any wisdom given by one's conjectures will always remain subject to doubts on the basis of counter arguments, and there is no way to find out a certain and absolute wisdom for a subsidiary rule of Shari'ah. However, if it is evident that a person wants to know the wisdom behind a rule of Shari'ah only to seek truth and to satisfy himself, there is no harm in mentioning some possible reasons of a rule before him as a matter of additional knowledge. But in the event that the rational wisdom is asked only for the sake of confrontation, then the proper way for a Muslim should be to ignore such questions and to act according to the prescribed rules without paying attention to the critic. It is true that if a person wants to prove that a subsidiary rule of Shari'ah is repugnant to an absolute principle established by reason, the point raised by him may deserve answer, but the question raised by the mushriks in the present case was not of this nature in any way. Therefore, the Muslims are directed to ignore such absurd questions and keep believing and acting as before. It is on the basis of the aforesaid principles that the question of Mushriks has not been answered in express terms; However, the expression used has given a subtle indication to the difference between a carrion and an animal slaughtered properly. The text gives permission to eat an animal on which Allah's name is invoked (كُلُوا مِمَّا ذُكِرَ‌ اسْمُ اللَّـهِ عَلَيْهِ It is obvious that Allah's name is invoked on an animal while slaughtering it, therefore, it implies the condition of slaughtering an animal which drains out impure blood from the animal. On the other hand, it is forbidden to eat of an animal on which Allah's name is not invoked وَلَا تَأْكُلُوا مِمَّا لَمْ يُذْكَرِ‌ اسْمُ اللَّـهِ عَلَيْهِ. Not invoking Allah's name may happen in two different situations: (1) Not slaughtering an animal at all (2) slaughtering an animal without invoking Allah's name. Both these situations render the animal Harm according to this verse. Obviously, an animal which dies its natural death is covered under the first situation where its impure blood was not drained out and remaining in the body rendered it impure. That is why it has been held as Haram. Commentary The Qur'anic order of reciting the name of Allah implied; مَا ذُكِرَ‌ اسْمُ اللَّـهِ عَلَيْهِ (that upon which the name of Allah has been invoked) includes both kinds of slaughter termed in Islamic Fiqh as "al-dhabh-al-ikhtiyariyy (slaughtering an animal under control) and "al-dhabh-al-idtirariyy„ (hunting an animal out of control with an arrow or a hunting dog or falcon). The name of Allah shall be recited in the latter case when releasing the arrow or the dog or falcon. Similarly, the words " مَّا ذُكِرَ‌ اسْمُ اللَّـهِ عَلَيْهِ " include reciting actually or as implied. That is why Imam Abu Hanifah (رح) has allowed to eat an animal upon which the reciting of the name of Allah was missed inadvertently. However if it is missed deliberately, it will render the animal Haram.