Surah 38. Sad

---

Verses [Section]: 1-14[1], 15-26 [2], 27-40 [3], 41-64 [4], 65-88 [5]

---

Quran Text of Verse 15-26وَ مَاAnd notیَنْظُرُawaitهٰۤؤُلَآءِtheseاِلَّاbutصَیْحَةًa shoutوَّاحِدَةًoneمَّاnotلَهَاfor itمِنْanyفَوَاقٍ delay وَ قَالُوْاAnd they sayرَبَّنَاOur Lord!عَجِّلْHastenلَّنَاfor usقِطَّنَاour shareقَبْلَbeforeیَوْمِ(the) Dayالْحِسَابِ (of) the Account 38. Sad Page 454اِصْبِرْBe patientعَلٰیoverمَاwhatیَقُوْلُوْنَthey sayوَ اذْكُرْand rememberعَبْدَنَاOur slaveدَاوٗدَDawoodذَاthe possessor of strengthالْاَیْدِ ۚthe possessor of strengthاِنَّهٗۤIndeed, he (was)اَوَّابٌ repeatedly turning اِنَّاIndeed Weسَخَّرْنَاsubjectedالْجِبَالَthe mountainsمَعَهٗwith himیُسَبِّحْنَglorifyingبِالْعَشِیِّin the eveningوَ الْاِشْرَاقِۙand [the] sunrise وَ الطَّیْرَAnd the birdsمَحْشُوْرَةً ؕassembledكُلٌّallلَّهٗۤwith himاَوَّابٌ repeatedly turning وَ شَدَدْنَاAnd We strengthenedمُلْكَهٗhis kingdomوَ اٰتَیْنٰهُand We gave himالْحِكْمَةَ[the] wisdomوَ فَصْلَand decisiveالْخِطَابِ speech وَ هَلْAnd has (there)اَتٰىكَcome to youنَبَؤُا(the) newsالْخَصْمِ ۘ(of) the litigantsاِذْwhenتَسَوَّرُواthey climbed over the wallالْمِحْرَابَۙ(of) the chamber اِذْWhenدَخَلُوْاthey enteredعَلٰیuponدَاوٗدَDawoodفَفَزِعَand he was afraidمِنْهُمْof themقَالُوْاthey saidلَا(Do) notتَخَفْ ۚfearخَصْمٰنِ(We are) two litigantsبَغٰیhas wrongedبَعْضُنَاone of usعَلٰیtoبَعْضٍanotherفَاحْكُمْso judgeبَیْنَنَاbetween usبِالْحَقِّin truthوَ لَاand (do) notتُشْطِطْbe unjustوَ اهْدِنَاۤand guide usاِلٰیtoسَوَآءِan evenالصِّرَاطِ [the] path اِنَّIndeedهٰذَاۤthisاَخِیْ ۫(is) my brotherلَهٗhe hasتِسْعٌninety-nineوَّ تِسْعُوْنَninety-nineنَعْجَةًewe(s)وَّلِیَwhile I haveنَعْجَةٌeweوَّاحِدَةٌ ۫oneفَقَالَso he saidاَكْفِلْنِیْهَاEntrust her to meوَ عَزَّنِیْand he overpowered meفِیinالْخِطَابِ [the] speech قَالَHe saidلَقَدْCertainlyظَلَمَكَhe has wronged youبِسُؤَالِby demandingنَعْجَتِكَyour eweاِلٰیtoنِعَاجِهٖ ؕhis ewesوَ اِنَّAnd indeedكَثِیْرًاmanyمِّنَofالْخُلَطَآءِthe partnersلَیَبْغِیْcertainly oppressبَعْضُهُمْoneعَلٰی[on]بَعْضٍanotherاِلَّاexceptالَّذِیْنَthose whoاٰمَنُوْاbelieveوَ عَمِلُواand doالصّٰلِحٰتِrighteous deedsوَ قَلِیْلٌand fewمَّا(are) theyهُمْ ؕ(are) theyوَ ظَنَّAnd became certainدَاوٗدُDawoodاَنَّمَاthatفَتَنّٰهُWe (had) tried himفَاسْتَغْفَرَand he asked forgivenessرَبَّهٗ(of) his Lordوَ خَرَّand fell downرَاكِعًاbowingوَّ اَنَابَ۩and turned in repentance فَغَفَرْنَاSo We forgaveلَهٗfor himذٰلِكَ ؕthatوَ اِنَّAnd indeedلَهٗfor himعِنْدَنَاwith Usلَزُلْفٰیsurely is a near accessوَ حُسْنَand a goodمَاٰبٍ place of return یٰدَاوٗدُO Dawood!اِنَّاIndeed Weجَعَلْنٰكَ[We] have made youخَلِیْفَةًa vicegerentفِیinالْاَرْضِthe earthفَاحْكُمْso judgeبَیْنَbetweenالنَّاسِ[the] menبِالْحَقِّin truthوَ لَاand (do) notتَتَّبِعِfollowالْهَوٰیthe desireفَیُضِلَّكَfor it will lead you strayعَنْfromسَبِیْلِ(the) wayاللّٰهِ ؕ(of) AllahاِنَّIndeedالَّذِیْنَthose whoیَضِلُّوْنَgo astrayعَنْfromسَبِیْلِ(the) wayاللّٰهِ(of) Allahلَهُمْfor themعَذَابٌ(is) a punishmentشَدِیْدٌۢsevereبِمَاbecauseنَسُوْاthey forgotیَوْمَ(the) Dayالْحِسَابِ۠(of) Account

---

Translation of Verse 15-26

(38:15) They are waiting for nothing except a single Cry, after which there will be no second Cry.¹⁴

(38:16) They say: “Our Lord, hasten to us our share (of chastisement) before the Day of Reckoning.”¹⁵

(38:17) (O Prophet), bear with patience what they say,¹⁶ and call to mind Our servant David,¹⁷ who was endowed with great strength¹⁸ and who constantly turned (to Allah).

(38:18) With him We had subjected the mountains that they join him in celebrating Allah's glory, evening and morning,

(38:19) and the birds, too, in their flocks, and turn again and again to celebrating Allah's glory.¹⁹

(38:20) And We strengthened his kingdom and endowed him with wisdom and decisive judgement.²⁰

(38:21) Has the story of the litigants reached you � of those who entered his private chambers by climbing over the wall?²¹

(38:22) As they came upon David � and he was frightened of them²² � they said: “Be not afraid. We are just two litigants: one of us has committed excess against the other. So judge rightly between us, and be not unjust; and guide us to the Right Way.

(38:23) Behold, this is my brother;²³ he has ninety-nine ewes and I have only one ewe.” And yet he said: “Give her into my charge,” and he got the better of me in argument.²⁴

(38:24) David said: “He has certainly wronged you in seeking to add your ewe to his ewes;²⁵ and indeed many who live together commit excesses, one to the other, except those that believe and act righteously; and they are but few.” (While so saying) David realized that it is We Who have put him to test; therefore, he sought the forgiveness of his Lord, and fell down, bowing and penitently turning (to Him).²⁶

(38:25) Thereupon We forgave him his shortcoming and indeed (an exalted position of) nearness awaits him, and an excellent resort.²⁷

(38:26) (We said to him): “O David, We have appointed you vicegerent on earth. Therefore, rule among people with justice and do not follow (your) desire lest it should lead you astray from Allah's Path. Allah's severe chastisement awaits those who stray away from Allah's Path, for they had forgotten the Day of Reckoning.²⁸

---

Commentary

14. A single blast will suffice to obliterate them and there will be no.

need for the second. This might also mean that once God’s chastisement suddenly strikes them, there will be no occasion for any further respite, not even the time that is needed for a she-camel’s udders to be filled with milk after milk has been drained from them.

15. On the one hand is the graveness of God’s punishment as depicted in the preceding verse. On the other hand, is the utter folly of those who asked the Prophet (peace be on him) to have their punishment hastened!

16. This alludes to the foolish utterance of the Makkan unbelievers about the Prophet (peace be on him): that he was a magician and a liar; their sarcastic statement that God had none other than Muhammad to endow with Prophet hood, assuring that the Prophet had an axe to grind by calling people to monotheism.

17. This can be translated either as: ‘Recall [the story of] Our servant, David,’ or ‘Call to mind Our servant David.’ Taken in the former sense, the point brought home is that there is a lesson for people in this story. Were we, however, to follow the latter meaning, it implies that the recounting | of this story will help them persevere. Both aspects are intended in the narration. Accordingly, the words used here lend themselves to both meanings. (For a detailed account of the Prophet David's story see ‘al-" Baqarah 2, n. 273, Towards Understanding the Qur’an, vol. I, p. 193; Bani Isra’il 17, nn. 7 and 63; and al-Anbiya’ 21, nn. 70-2, vol. V, pp. 53 and 282-5; al-Naml 27, nn. 18-20, vol. VIL, pp. 144-5; and Saba’ 34, nn. 14-16, vol. IX, p. 158).

18. Dha al-aydi is a metaphor of authority. Used with reference to the Prophet David (peace be on him), it stresses his power and authority.

Indeed, it might refer to many aspects of his power. One aspect of this was that he had been endowed with exceptional physical prowess, which was demonstrated in the violent encounter between him and Goliath.

It might also refer to his military and political might, which enabled him to inflict defeat upon the polytheistic communities of neighboring countries, and as a result of which a vast Islamic state was established.

This statement might also be an allusion to David's moral strength, which lay in his simple ascetic ways notwithstanding his kingship. For David was a devout and God-fearing person and despite his preoccupation with the affairs of a huge state he spent most of his time worshipping God. According to Bukhari and Muslim, he fasted every alternate day and devoted one-third of the night to Prayer. (Muslim, Kitab al-Sawm, Bab al-Nahy ‘an Sawm al-Dahr...; Bukhari, Kitab al-Sawm, Bab Sawm al-Dahr.) Bukhari narrates on the authority of Abu al-Darda’ that whenever the Prophet David (peace be on him) was mentioned, the Prophet (peace be on him) used to remark: ‘He was God’s most devout servant’ (verse 17). (Bukhari, Kitab al-Ta’rikh al-Kabir, Bab al-Alif min Tarajim Baqiyyat Muhammadiyin, Bab Sin.)

19. For further details, see al-Anbiya’ 21, n. 71, Towards Understanding the Qur'an, vol. V, pp. 282-5.

20. David’s speech was not marred by ambiguity or equivocation that might cause people to feel confused about what he meant. He was exceptionally articulate so that whenever he spoke about something it became absolutely clear to his audience. He had the ability to bring to the fore all such questions that called for decision and solution. This ability requires an abundance of intelligence, understanding and eloquence.

21. The main objective of mentioning the Prophet David (peace be on him) is to narrate this aspect of his story, which commences here. The narrative is prefaced with an account of his excellent attributes in order to underscore his exalted rank.

22. What frightened David (peace be on him) was that two people suddenly barged into his private apartment despite his being the ruler of the realm. Furthermore, they did so by scaling the wall.

23. The expression ‘my brother’ here does not signify a blood relationship; it rather signifies the tie of brotherhood in faith or nationhood.

24. It is noteworthy that the plaintiff did not contend that the person had forcibly appropriated his ewe from him and had mixed it up with his own lot. Rather, he claimed that the other party asked him to hand over that ewe to him and that he had overwhelmed him in argument. While the other party was influential and powerful, the plaintiff was poor and resource less and thus unable to refuse his demand.

25. This should not give rise to the misunderstanding that the Prophet David (peace be on him) pronounced his judgement after giving hearing to only one party. However, since the defendant did-not Say a single word to clear his position, this amounted to an admission of guilt. David, therefore, took the other party’s version as true.

26. There is some disagreement as to whether one is required to prostrate oneself when one recites these words. Imam Shafi’ does not consider it wajib (obligatory) to do so as there is reference here to the repentance of a Prophet. (Razi, al-Tafsir al-Kabir, comments on Surah Sad 38: 24.) However, Imam Abu Hanifah is of the opinion that it is obligatory to prostrate. (Khattabi, Ma‘alim al-Sunan, Kitab al-Salah, Wa min Bab al- Sujud fi Sad.) Three reports on this issue are on record on the authority of Ibn ‘Abbas. ‘Ikrimah states that Ibn ‘Abbas said: ‘It is not one of those Qur’anic verses whose recitation entails sajdah (prostration). However, I saw the Prophet (peace be on him) performing sajdah (prostration) while reciting it.’ (Bukhari, Kitab al-Jumu‘ah, Bab Sajdat Sad; Abu Da’aid, Kitab al-Salah, Bab al-Sujud fi Sad; Tirmidhi, Kitab al-Jumu‘ah ‘an Rasul Allah Salla Allah ‘alayhi wa Sallam; Bab ma Ja’a fi al-Sajdah fi Sad; Nasa’i, al-Sunan al-Kubra, Kitab al-Tafsir, Bab Qawlihi Ta‘ala: Ula’ik al-Ladhina Hada Allah...; and Ahmad ibn Hanbal, Musnad, narrated by Ibn ‘Abbas.) Sa’id ibn Jubayr also quotes Ibn ‘Abbas as follows: ‘Insofar as this verse of Surah Sad is concerned, the Prophet (peace be on him) performed sajdah, saying: “The Prophet David (peace be on him) prostrated as part of his seeking repentance. We, however, perform sajdah while reciting this verse as a token of our gratitude to God that He graciously accepted his [to wit, David’s] repentance,” (Nasa‘i, Kitab al-Iftitah, Bab Sujud al-Qur’an, al-Sujud fi Sad.) Mujahid recounts that Ibn ‘Abbas said: ‘God commands the Prophet (peace be on him): “(O Muhammad), those are the ones God guided to the Right Way. Follow, then, their way,” (al-An‘am 6: 90.) Since David (peace be on him), who was a Prophet, had performed sajdah, the Prophet Muhammad (peace be on him) also performed it in emulation of his example,’ (Bukhari, Kitab Tafsir al-Qur’an, Surah Sad.) These three traditions have come down from Ibn ‘Abbas. We also have the following tradition from Abu Sa‘id al-Khudri: ‘Once, while delivering asermon, the Prophet (peace be on him) recited this particular verse, then he got down from the pulpit and performed prostration and all those present did the same. On another occasion when he recited the same verse, those present got ready to perform prostration. On noting this the Prophet (peace be on him) said to them: “This is a Prophet’s repentance and I see you ready to perform sajdah”. After so saying the Prophet (peace be on him) came down from the pulpit and prostrated, and all those present did the same’ (Abu Daud, Kitab al-Salah, Bab al-Sujud fi al-Salah.) True, these traditions do not conclusively establish the obligation for prostration while reciting this verse. They do, however, establish that when the Prophet (peace be on him) recited it, he often prostrated and that prostrating while reciting this verse is therefore better than not doing so. In point of fact the above-cited narration from ‘Abd Allah ibn ‘Abbas in Bukhari turns the scale in favor of its obligatoriness.

Another point that emerges from the verse under discussion is that the Qur’an speaks of the Prophet David (peace be on him) in the following words: ‘He fell down, bowing’ (verse 24). All Quranic commentators unanimously take this to mean David's falling into prostration.

Accordingly, Imam Abu Hanifah and his disciples are of the opinion that, as regards those Qur’anic verses whose recitation or hearing requires sajdah, that obligation is fulfilled either by prostrating or even by bowing.

(Muhammad ‘Ala’ al-Din al-Haskafi, al-Durr al-Mukhtar, Kitab al-Salah, Bab Sujud al-Tilawah.) In other words, ruku’ (bowing) may be taken as a substitute for sajdah, as is implicit in this verse: Among Shafi’i jurists, Imam Khattabi holds the same opinion. While this opinion is doubtlessly sound and plausible, we do not find any record that the Prophet (peace be on him) or his Companions ever performed ruku’ in place of sajdah.

Therefore, one should have recourse to ruku’ only in situations when there is some constraint in performing sajdah. Even Imam Abu Hanifah and his disciples did not prescribe ruku’ as the normal practice. At most, they regarded this practice as valid but not that one should follow it routinely.

27. One thus learns that the Prophet David (peace be on him) had committed some lapse. However, it was a lapse that resembled in certain respects the case above in which one of the litigants laid claim to the other party’s ewes. Therefore, while pronouncing his judgement, it suddenly struck David that he was being tested. His lapse, however, was not of a - serious nature. God clarifies that as he fell down bowing and penitently turned to Him he was forgiven. Thus, this lapse did not have any bearing on his exalted status either in this world or the Next.

28. This represents the warning God delivered to the Prophet David (peace be on him) at the time when He accepted the latter’s repentance and gave him the glad tiding of granting him the exalted position “vicegerency. This implies that David was prompted by his base self to commit a lapse, that it was linked to an inappropriate exercise of his political authority. It was essentially an act involving the use of his authority in a manner that did not be hove a just ruler.

Thus, one is faced here with three questions: (i) What lapse was committed by David? (ii) Why did God make an oblique reference to it, instead of clearly spelling it out? (iii) Why has this lapse been referred to in this particular context? "Those who have studied the Bible know that it squarely charges the Prophet David with committing illicit sex with the wife of Uriah the Hittite and with having her husband deliberately killed in a war so that he could then take his wife in marriage. The Bible even states that the same woman gave birth to the Prophet Solomon (peace be on him). This account appears in detail in 2 Samuel, 11-12. Being part of the Bible, this account was known to the Jews and Christians. Indeed, it was the Bible that circulated this outrageous story. Even to this day, all works on the history of the Israelites and Judaism resonate the same charge against the Prophet David (peace be on him). Just consider the following Biblical passage which is illustrative: And the Lord sent Nathan to David. He came to him, and said to him, ‘There were two men in a certain city, the one rich and the other poor. The rich man had very many flocks and herds; but the poor man had nothing but one little ewe lamb, which he had bought. And he brought it up, and it grew up with him and with his children; it used to eat of his morsel, and drink from his cup, and lie in his bosom, and it was like a daughter to him. Now there came a traveler to the rich man, and he was unwilling to take one of his own flock or herd to prepare for the wayfarer who had come to him, but he took the poor man’s lamb, and prepared it for the man who had come to him.’ Then David’s anger was greatly kindled against the man; and he said to Nathan, ‘As the Lord lives, the man who has done this deserves to die; and he shall restore the lamb fourfold, because he did this thing, and because he had no pity.’

Nathan said to David, ‘You are the man... You have smitten Uriah the Hittite with the sword, and have taken his wife to be your wife, and have slain him with the sword of the Ammonites.’ (2 Samuel 12: 1-7 and 9.) Since the story was commonly known, there was hardly any need to repeat it in detail in the Qur’an. Even otherwise God does not expatiate on such matters in His Book. Accordingly, only a few oblique references have been made to the story, pointing out what actually happened and how it was altogether misrepresented and distorted by the People of the Book.

The actual event as it emerges from the Qur’anic account is that the Prophet David (peace be on him) had asked Uriah (or whatever that person’s name was) to divorce his wife. Now since this desire had been expressed to a commoner by a great ruler and a person of immense religious stature, the person concerned found it hard to refuse the request though no coercion was exercised to obtain his consent. However, before that person could actually carry out David's wish, two righteous people from the Prophet David’s community suddenly barged into his presence and presented a hypothetical case to him for judgement. David considered it to be an actual case of litigation and gave his judgement. However, no sooner had David pronounced his verdict than he realized the parallel between this case and the other case involving him and the person whom he had asked to divorce his wife. David’s conscience alerted him that what he had branded as an act of injustice in this case was equally applicable to him with regard to the earlier case. Upon realizing this, David fell into prostration, repented profusely to God and refrained from proceeding any further in that particular matter.

Even a little reflection over this Biblical narrative reveals that the Prophet David (peace be on him) had somehow come to know the exceptional qualities of this woman and it occurred to him that such a gifted woman should better be a queen rather than the wife of a petty official. Swayed by this thought, David simply asked Uriah (or whatever that person’s name war) to divorce his wife. In so doing, he did not feel any qualm of conscience because this kind of divorce and remarriage was fairly common among the Israelites at the time. None was offended by sue requests for divorce, which would enable another man to remarry the divorced woman. Indeed, close friends often divorced their wives in order to facilitate their friends’ marriage to them. However, in making this request the Prophet David (peace be on him) had become oblivious of his high position. For a word from him to this effect could be taken as a command. When the same point was pressed home through the parable of the ewes, he immediately gave up the idea of taking this woman as his wife, for it would have amounted to coercion. This, then, is how the matter ended. However, at a later date, Uriah was slain in battle. The Prophet David (peace be on him) had no part in his death. It was only after Uriah’s death that he married his widow. However, all this led perverse Jewish minds to fabricate the heinous charge against David as described above.

This fabrication grew in malice when a group of Jews took to opposing the Prophet Solomon (peace be on him). They circulated this outrageous story, adding further odious material. by their own accord to increase its outrageousness. (For further details see al-Naml 16, n. 56, Towards Understanding the Qur'an, vol. VII, p. 164.) Prompted by ulterior motives, they fabricated the story that the Prophet David (peace be on him) a caught a glimpse of Uriah’s wife from the roof of his palace when she was naked, taking a bath. Thereupon he summoned her and had illicit sex with her, as a result of which she became pregnant. Then, he deputed Uriah to fight against the Ammonites, directing his commander, Joab, to post him to a position that would ultimately cause his death in battle. Once he had been so slain, David then married his widow. It was she wo bore him Solomon.

These wicked people interpolated all this scandalous material into their Scripture in order to misguide their coming generations. They are guilty of calumniating against their two greatest benefactors, the Prophets David and Solomon (peace be on them) even though they were next only to the Prophet Moses (peace be on him) in their beneficence to the Israelites.

Some Qur’anic commentators have almost unquestioningly accepted these reports of Israelite origin. Indeed, they have discounted only that part of the narrative which charges the Prophet David (peace be on him) with indulgence in illicit sex and making Uriah’s wife pregnant. Another group of commentators, however, rejects such reports out of hand. They deny the occurrence of any such incident involving the Prophet David (peace be on him) which has any resemblance with the parable of the 99 ewes. While so doing, they offer far-fetched interpretations. Indeed, it is not only that the version of the incident offered by them does not fit in with the Qur’anic context but is also not corroborated by any authentic source.

Nevertheless, some scholars have duly grasped the true import of the parable as presented in the verse and have taken the right cues from the Qur’anic account. Consider the following which is illustrative. Both Masruq and Sa‘id ibn Jubayr cite Ibn ‘Abbas as follows: ‘The Prophet David (peace be on him) had only asked Uriah to divorce his wife so that he could marry her.’ (Tabari, Tafsir, comments on Surah Sad 38: 23.) Zamakhshari maintains in al-Kashshaf: ‘It clearly emerges from the Qur’anic account that the Prophet David (peace be on him) had suggested to Uriah that he divorce his wife for him.’ (Zamakhshari, al- Kashshaf, comments on Surah Sad 38: 21.) Abu Bakr al-Jassas, however, is of the view that this woman was not Uriah’s wife, but rather his fiancé. The Prophet David (peace be on him) also proposed to her, something which incurred God’s displeasure for he had thus tried to supersede the marriage proposal of a brother in faith at a time when he already had several wives in wedlock. (Jassas, Ahkam al-Qur’an, comments on Surah Sad 38: 23.) Some other Tafsir scholars also subscribe to the same view, (See Qurtubi, al-Jami’ li Ahkam al-Qur’an, comments on Surah Sad 38: 24.) Nonetheless, this version is not fully in line with the Qur’anic narrative. For the plaintiff in the Qur’anic narrative contends: ‘I have only one ewe. And yet he said: “Give her into my charge””’ (verse 23.) In his judgement, too, the Prophet David (peace be on him) pressed home the same point: ‘He has certainly wronged you in seeking to add your ewe to his ewes,’ (verse 24.) This parable is applicable to David and Uriah only if that woman was Uriah’s wife. Had the situation only involved a marriage proposal with Uriah’s fiancé, the wording would have been different.

While discussing this issue at length in his Ahkam al-Qur’an, Abi Bakr ibn al- “Arabi writes: ‘This is the main point of the story: that the Prophet David (peace be on him) had asked one of his men to divorce his wife for him, and had asked for this seriously... The Qur’an does not mention that the person concerned parted with his wife, or that David (peace be on him) actually married that woman, or that Solomon was born of her womb. What brought God’s censure upon him was that he had asked Uriah to divorce his wife for him... This act may, in itself, be all right as such but it was unbecoming of a Prophet to do so. Hence he was reminded about it and was censured and admonished,’ (Abu Bakr ibn al-‘Arabi, Ahkam al-Qur’an, comments on Surah Sad 38: 23, 26.) This interpretation seems consistent with the context in which the story has been narrated in the Qur’an. Were we to carefully consider the discourse in connection with which this story has been narrated, it will become absolutely clear that the narration aims to emphasize two points: One, it aims at urging the Prophet Muhammad (peace be on him) to remain patient in the face of offensive statements people were making about him. He is, therefore, told: ‘(O Prophet), bear with patience what they say, and call to mind Our servant David...’ (verse 17). That is, while the Prophet Muhammad’s detractors charged him with sorcery and lying, David was charged with something even more outrageous — adultery and killing by guile. In view of what befell David the Prophet Muhammad (peace be on him) is asked to endure with equanimity and patience the storm of false accusations made against him.

The other purpose of this narration was to impress upon the unbelievers that they were strutting around committing all kinds of excesses without the least fear of being called to account. They were told that God, in Whose dominion they were committing those iniquities, spares none from holding them to account, not even those whom He particularly likes and favors with the grant of His proximity. Whenever a slight lapse occurs, God rigorously takes such favored ones to task.

It is in this regard that the Prophet Muhammad (peace be on him) was asked to narrate the story of David: David was full of excellent qualities, but when he did something that did not befit him, God did not spare admonishing him.

It is also being pertinent at this point to clarify a misgiving. In the parable the plaintiff claimed that while the other party had 99 ewes, he still wanted him to hand over the only one ewe he had. This apparently gives rise to the suspicion that what it hints at is that although David (peace be on him) had 99 wives, he wanted to add another wife to reach the figure 100. However, there is no reason to believe that every little detail of the parable should be literally applicable to David or Uriah the Hittite.

The number mentioned in the parable should be seen in the context of the known linguistic practice of mentioning figures mainly to stress numerousness rather than to indicate an exact number. The plaintiff sought to draw the Prophet David’s attention to the fact that he already had quite a few wives yet he wanted to have someone else’s wife as well.

This insightful observation was made by al-Hasan al-Basri, as cited by Nisapuri in his Tafsir, ‘David did not have 99 wives. This statement is figurative.’ (Nisapuri, Tafsir, comments on Surah Sad 38: 24.) (We have also discussed this issue at length in another work of ours. Those interested in a detailed discussion of the matter should see Sayyid Abul A’la Mawdadi, | Tafhimat (Urdu), 17th ed., Lahore: Islamic Publications Ltd., 1995, vol. II, | pp. 39-58.)