5. Al-Maaida

Commentary

This is an account of how the Bani Isra'il kept breaking the pledge taken from them. As said in verse 70, whenever their Messenger brought a command which did not suit their fancy, they would break their pledge and go about betraying Allah to the limit that they would falsify His Messengers, even kill some of them. They were commanded ` to believe in Allah and act righteously.' But, this was what they did in response. As for the other part of the command - ` Belief in the Last Day' their behaviour was equally reckless. After having committed acts so oppressive, they became totally carefree as if they would not have to pay for what they had done and as if the consequences of their injustice and rebellion will never come out in the open. Under this false impression, they became totally blind and deaf to Divine signs and words. They went on doing what should have not been done. So much so that they killed some prophets and put some others behind bars. Finally, Almighty Allah imposed on them the mastery of Nebuchadnezzar (King of Babylonia, 605-562 B.C., who took them as slaves to Babylon - Old Testament, book of Daniel). When, after a long time, they were sent back to Jerusalem from Babylon through help from some Persian kings who secured their release from disgrace under Nebuchadnezzar, they repented and turned to making amends. Allah relented and accepted their repentance. But, with the passage of some time, they went back to their old practices which made them so blind and deaf once again that they dared killing Sayyi.dna Zakariyah (علیہ السلام) (Zechariah) and Sayyidna Yahya (John) and were all set to kill Sayyidna ` Isa (علیہ السلام) (Jesus ). (Tafsir Usmani - Notes)

Commentary

This is an account of how the Bani Isra'il kept breaking the pledge taken from them. As said in verse 70, whenever their Messenger brought a command which did not suit their fancy, they would break their pledge and go about betraying Allah to the limit that they would falsify His Messengers, even kill some of them. They were commanded ` to believe in Allah and act righteously.' But, this was what they did in response. As for the other part of the command - ` Belief in the Last Day' their behaviour was equally reckless. After having committed acts so oppressive, they became totally carefree as if they would not have to pay for what they had done and as if the consequences of their injustice and rebellion will never come out in the open. Under this false impression, they became totally blind and deaf to Divine signs and words. They went on doing what should have not been done. So much so that they killed some prophets and put some others behind bars. Finally, Almighty Allah imposed on them the mastery of Nebuchadnezzar (King of Babylonia, 605-562 B.C., who took them as slaves to Babylon - Old Testament, book of Daniel). When, after a long time, they were sent back to Jerusalem from Babylon through help from some Persian kings who secured their release from disgrace under Nebuchadnezzar, they repented and turned to making amends. Allah relented and accepted their repentance. But, with the passage of some time, they went back to their old practices which made them so blind and deaf once again that they dared killing Sayyi.dna Zakariyah (علیہ السلام) (Zechariah) and Sayyidna Yahya (John) and were all set to kill Sayyidna ` Isa (علیہ السلام) (Jesus ). (Tafsir Usmani - Notes)

Commentary

1. The words: إِنَّ اللَّـهَ ثَالِثُ ثَلَاثَةٍ in verse 72, translated here literally as ` Allah is the third of the three,' refers to Sayyidna Masih (Jesus Christ), Ruhul-Quds (The Holy Spirit) and Allah, or to Masih, Maryam (Mary) and Allah - with all three taken as God (Refuge with Allah). Thus, Allah becomes a one-third partner with them, then all three of them become one, and that one is three. This unity in trinity, with three persons in one godhead, is the common belief of Christians. They explain this belief which is supported by neither reason nor revelation with a language that is kept circuitous and ambiguous. When not un-derstood, they declare it to be reality beyond comprehension. (Shabbir Ahmad Usmani - Notes)

2. In verse 75, by saying: قَدْ خَلَتْ مِن قَبْلِهِ الرُّ‌سُلُ (There have been messengers before him), the assigning of godhood to Sayyidna Masih (علیہ السلام) has been refuted. Prophets came to this world. They completed their mission. Then, they were gone. They were not eternal which is the mark of godhood. Similarly, Sayyidna Masih, may peace be upon him (being human like them) was not eternal. So, he cannot be what God is.

A little reflection will show that everyone who needs to eat and drink almost depends on everything in the world. We cannot say that the earth, the air, the water, the sun and the animals are what we do not need. Look into your own self. There is that grain of food outside you, then begins its journey from the entry into the stomach to the next destination of its digestion. Think of all those factors involved and things required directly and indirectly in this complex procedure. Then, there will be a chain of effects generated through eating and no one can tell precisely how far will they go. So, by pointing out that Sayyidna Masih and his pious mother used to eat, the Holy Qur'an has referred to the endless chain of needs it entails. The argument, thus runs that Masih and Maryam, may peace be upon them both, were not free of the need for eating and drinking which is proved by observation and authentic narrations (not denied by even Christians). And anyone who is not free from the need of eating and drinking cannot be free from anything in this world. How then, a human person, who like all human beings is not free of the need to depend on the chain of causa-tion for survival, could become God? This is a strong and clear proof which can be understood by the educated and the uneducated alike - that is, eating and drinking is contrary to godhood. Though, not eating too is not a proof in favour of godhood, otherwise all angels would become gods! (Refuge with Allah) (Tafsir Usmani)

3. Was Sayyidah Maryam a prophet or saint? This is a debated issue. In the present verse (75), the complimentary use of the word "Siddiqah" (truthful) obviously seems to indicate that she was a godly person, not a Nabiyy ( prophet) - because on a complimentary occasion, what is mentioned is the higher rank. If she had the station of prophethood, the word used for her at this place would have been "Nabiyyah"- but, the word used here is "Siddiqah" which is the station of sainthood or godliness (abridged from Ruh …

Commentary

1. The words: إِنَّ اللَّـهَ ثَالِثُ ثَلَاثَةٍ in verse 72, translated here literally as ` Allah is the third of the three,' refers to Sayyidna Masih (Jesus Christ), Ruhul-Quds (The Holy Spirit) and Allah, or to Masih, Maryam (Mary) and Allah - with all three taken as God (Refuge with Allah). Thus, Allah becomes a one-third partner with them, then all three of them become one, and that one is three. This unity in trinity, with three persons in one godhead, is the common belief of Christians. They explain this belief which is supported by neither reason nor revelation with a language that is kept circuitous and ambiguous. When not un-derstood, they declare it to be reality beyond comprehension. (Shabbir Ahmad Usmani - Notes)

2. In verse 75, by saying: قَدْ خَلَتْ مِن قَبْلِهِ الرُّ‌سُلُ (There have been messengers before him), the assigning of godhood to Sayyidna Masih (علیہ السلام) has been refuted. Prophets came to this world. They completed their mission. Then, they were gone. They were not eternal which is the mark of godhood. Similarly, Sayyidna Masih, may peace be upon him (being human like them) was not eternal. So, he cannot be what God is.

A little reflection will show that everyone who needs to eat and drink almost depends on everything in the world. We cannot say that the earth, the air, the water, the sun and the animals are what we do not need. Look into your own self. There is that grain of food outside you, then begins its journey from the entry into the stomach to the next destination of its digestion. Think of all those factors involved and things required directly and indirectly in this complex procedure. Then, there will be a chain of effects generated through eating and no one can tell precisely how far will they go. So, by pointing out that Sayyidna Masih and his pious mother used to eat, the Holy Qur'an has referred to the endless chain of needs it entails. The argument, thus runs that Masih and Maryam, may peace be upon them both, were not free of the need for eating and drinking which is proved by observation and authentic narrations (not denied by even Christians). And anyone who is not free from the need of eating and drinking cannot be free from anything in this world. How then, a human person, who like all human beings is not free of the need to depend on the chain of causa-tion for survival, could become God? This is a strong and clear proof which can be understood by the educated and the uneducated alike - that is, eating and drinking is contrary to godhood. Though, not eating too is not a proof in favour of godhood, otherwise all angels would become gods! (Refuge with Allah) (Tafsir Usmani)

3. Was Sayyidah Maryam a prophet or saint? This is a debated issue. In the present verse (75), the complimentary use of the word "Siddiqah" (truthful) obviously seems to indicate that she was a godly person, not a Nabiyy ( prophet) - because on a complimentary occasion, what is mentioned is the higher rank. If she had the station of prophethood, the word used for her at this place would have been "Nabiyyah"- but, the word used here is "Siddiqah" which is the station of sainthood or godliness (abridged from Ruh …

Commentary

1. The words: إِنَّ اللَّـهَ ثَالِثُ ثَلَاثَةٍ in verse 72, translated here literally as ` Allah is the third of the three,' refers to Sayyidna Masih (Jesus Christ), Ruhul-Quds (The Holy Spirit) and Allah, or to Masih, Maryam (Mary) and Allah - with all three taken as God (Refuge with Allah). Thus, Allah becomes a one-third partner with them, then all three of them become one, and that one is three. This unity in trinity, with three persons in one godhead, is the common belief of Christians. They explain this belief which is supported by neither reason nor revelation with a language that is kept circuitous and ambiguous. When not un-derstood, they declare it to be reality beyond comprehension. (Shabbir Ahmad Usmani - Notes)

2. In verse 75, by saying: قَدْ خَلَتْ مِن قَبْلِهِ الرُّ‌سُلُ (There have been messengers before him), the assigning of godhood to Sayyidna Masih (علیہ السلام) has been refuted. Prophets came to this world. They completed their mission. Then, they were gone. They were not eternal which is the mark of godhood. Similarly, Sayyidna Masih, may peace be upon him (being human like them) was not eternal. So, he cannot be what God is.

A little reflection will show that everyone who needs to eat and drink almost depends on everything in the world. We cannot say that the earth, the air, the water, the sun and the animals are what we do not need. Look into your own self. There is that grain of food outside you, then begins its journey from the entry into the stomach to the next destination of its digestion. Think of all those factors involved and things required directly and indirectly in this complex procedure. Then, there will be a chain of effects generated through eating and no one can tell precisely how far will they go. So, by pointing out that Sayyidna Masih and his pious mother used to eat, the Holy Qur'an has referred to the endless chain of needs it entails. The argument, thus runs that Masih and Maryam, may peace be upon them both, were not free of the need for eating and drinking which is proved by observation and authentic narrations (not denied by even Christians). And anyone who is not free from the need of eating and drinking cannot be free from anything in this world. How then, a human person, who like all human beings is not free of the need to depend on the chain of causa-tion for survival, could become God? This is a strong and clear proof which can be understood by the educated and the uneducated alike - that is, eating and drinking is contrary to godhood. Though, not eating too is not a proof in favour of godhood, otherwise all angels would become gods! (Refuge with Allah) (Tafsir Usmani)

3. Was Sayyidah Maryam a prophet or saint? This is a debated issue. In the present verse (75), the complimentary use of the word "Siddiqah" (truthful) obviously seems to indicate that she was a godly person, not a Nabiyy ( prophet) - because on a complimentary occasion, what is mentioned is the higher rank. If she had the station of prophethood, the word used for her at this place would have been "Nabiyyah"- but, the word used here is "Siddiqah" which is the station of sainthood or godliness (abridged from Ruh …

Commentary

The Crookedness of Bani Isra'il : Yet Another Aspect

It will be recalled that, in previous verses, mentioned there was the contumacy of Bani Isra'il along with their tyranny and injustice with reference to what they did to their benefactors, the prophets sent by Allah who had come to show them the way to succeed in this life and in the life to come. But, they mistreated them, by falsifying some and killing others: فَرِ‌يقًا كَذَّبُوا وَفَرِ‌يقًا يَقْتُلُونَ (70)

The present verses expose another aspect of the crooked ways of Bani Isra'il. So astray were they that they, not content with one extreme mentioned above, reached for another when they committed excess in showing reverence for messengers of Allah by making them nothing short of God: لَّقَدْ كَفَرَ‌ الَّذِينَ قَالُوا إِنَّ اللَّـهَ هُوَ الْمَسِيحُ ابْنُ. It means that the section of people from the Bani Isra'il who said that Allah is exactly Jesus the son of Mary had become disbelievers. Mentioned this far is the saying of the Christians only. Elsewhere, the Jews too have been censured for the same kind of excess and error: قَالَتِ الْيَهُودُ عُزَيْرٌ‌ ابْنُ اللَّـهِ وَقَالَتِ النَّصَارَ‌ى الْمَسِيحُ ابْنُ اللَّـهِ (And the Jews said, "Uzair (Ezra) is the son of Allah" and the Christians said, "Masih (the Christ) is the son of Allah."

The word "Ghuluww" used at the beginning of verse 5:77 قُلْ يَا أَهْلَ الْكِتَابِ لَا تَغْلُوا فِي دِينِكُمْ (Say, "0 people of the Book, be not excessive in your faith" ) means to cross limits. "Ghuluww" or excess in religion refers to the crossing of limits drawn by religion in matters of belief and deed. For example, there is a limit to paying homage to prophets. The farthest one can go is to take them as the best among God's creation. That is the limit. Going over and beyond this limit, calling those very prophets God or son of God is excess in matters of belief.

Bani Isra'il : Their Cycle of Excess and Deficiency

The behaviour of the people of the Bani Isra'il towards prophets and messengers of Allah had been a mixture of opposites. They could become as neglectful and irreverent as to falsify or even kill them while it would be they themselves who would stretch the limits of their exaggerated reverence for them by calling them God or son of God. This syndrome of excess and deficiency in group behaviour is a sign of ingrained brutality. There is a well-known saying among Arabs: اَلجاھِلُ امَّا مفرِط اَو مُفَرِّطُ which means that an ignorant person never stays on moderation. He would either go for اِفرَاط ` Ifrat' (excess) or for تَفریط ` Tafrit (deficiency). Ifrat means to cross the limit while Tafrit means to fall short in doing one's duty. These actions on two extremes may have come from two different groups of the Bani Isra'il, or it is also possible that one single group acted in two different ways with different prophets whereby some were subjected to their falsification, even killing, while some others were equated with God.

Addressing the people of the Book in this verse, the guidance given to them and their generations to come right through the Last Day, has the status of a basic principle to be kept in sight while …

The Sad End of Bani Isra'Il

Mentioned in the second verse (78) is the sad end of those from the Bani Isra'il who were involved in this error of excess and deficiency. On them fell the curse of Allah Almighty. Firstly, it came through the tongue of Sayyidna Dawud (علیہ السلام) as result of which they were transformed into swines. Then, this curse fell upon them through the tongue of Sayyidna 'Isa (علیہ السلام) the temporal effect of which was that they were transformed into monkeys. Some commentators have pointed out that the reference to the curse mentioned here as coming through only two prophets is because the context so requires. But, the fact is that the casting of curse on them began with Sayyidna Musa (علیہ السلام) and ended at the Last among Prophets ﷺ . Thus, the curse which overtook those, who were hostile to prophets or were guilty of acting excessively by making prophets sharers in Divine at-tributes, was wished verbally by four prophets one after the other.

In the last two verses (80, 81), the cultivation of deep friendship with disbelievers has been prohibited as its outcome is disastrous. It may also be indicative of the possibility that the deviation of Bani Isra'il was a result of their close friendly collaboration with disbelievers which may have affected their ways adversely and finally became the cause of their fall into the abyss.

The Sad End of Bani Isra'Il

Mentioned in the second verse (78) is the sad end of those from the Bani Isra'il who were involved in this error of excess and deficiency. On them fell the curse of Allah Almighty. Firstly, it came through the tongue of Sayyidna Dawud (علیہ السلام) as result of which they were transformed into swines. Then, this curse fell upon them through the tongue of Sayyidna 'Isa (علیہ السلام) the temporal effect of which was that they were transformed into monkeys. Some commentators have pointed out that the reference to the curse mentioned here as coming through only two prophets is because the context so requires. But, the fact is that the casting of curse on them began with Sayyidna Musa (علیہ السلام) and ended at the Last among Prophets ﷺ . Thus, the curse which overtook those, who were hostile to prophets or were guilty of acting excessively by making prophets sharers in Divine at-tributes, was wished verbally by four prophets one after the other.

In the last two verses (80, 81), the cultivation of deep friendship with disbelievers has been prohibited as its outcome is disastrous. It may also be indicative of the possibility that the deviation of Bani Isra'il was a result of their close friendly collaboration with disbelievers which may have affected their ways adversely and finally became the cause of their fall into the abyss.

The Sad End of Bani Isra'Il

Mentioned in the second verse (78) is the sad end of those from the Bani Isra'il who were involved in this error of excess and deficiency. On them fell the curse of Allah Almighty. Firstly, it came through the tongue of Sayyidna Dawud (علیہ السلام) as result of which they were transformed into swines. Then, this curse fell upon them through the tongue of Sayyidna 'Isa (علیہ السلام) the temporal effect of which was that they were transformed into monkeys. Some commentators have pointed out that the reference to the curse mentioned here as coming through only two prophets is because the context so requires. But, the fact is that the casting of curse on them began with Sayyidna Musa (علیہ السلام) and ended at the Last among Prophets ﷺ . Thus, the curse which overtook those, who were hostile to prophets or were guilty of acting excessively by making prophets sharers in Divine at-tributes, was wished verbally by four prophets one after the other.

In the last two verses (80, 81), the cultivation of deep friendship with disbelievers has been prohibited as its outcome is disastrous. It may also be indicative of the possibility that the deviation of Bani Isra'il was a result of their close friendly collaboration with disbelievers which may have affected their ways adversely and finally became the cause of their fall into the abyss.