Surah Al-Ikhlas 112:1-4 - Quran Translation Commentary

2. In this verse the pronoun, (Huwa) He is, according to the Arabic grammar, Zamirush shan which is used to express the importance of a thing, and it is used in the beginning of a sentence in order to draw attention. It lends eloquence to the sentence, e.g. Huwaz Zamanu Ghaddar.(That is time which is disloyal). In the first verse the pronoun Huwa (He) expresses the importance of the statement that is going to be made, so be attentive and listen carefully.

3. ‘Allah is One’ means that in His Being and in His attributes He is quite unique. Wahid (One)compared to the word Ahad (Unique) explains that in His Oneness there is no aspect of plurality, and that His oneness is so perfect that it cannot be analyzed nor can it be dissected. His existence is by Himself alone and quite separate from the creations. There is no kind or sex of gods. He is One and Alone, He has always been and will always be.

Man’s nature is acquainted with this idea of God, and the call of his inner self is also the same. His intellect also points to the same thing. Every particle of the universe and the entire system confirms this:

“In everything there is His sign, which proves his Oneness.”

His being Unique is the greatest, most prominent and the most basic reality of the universe. By ignoring this reality, people, who thought about God, made such a blunder that they could never recover. The basic error in this connection is to think of God on the lines of creations, when it is quite obvious that there cannot be any resemblance between the Creator and His creations, nor can our limited intellect be able to think and contemplate about His Being. Therefore, leaving aside the straight and simple idea of His being Unique and Unparalleled, all the theories and philosophies invented by the religious people about the existence of God are all unreal and totally false. Obviously when the first brick is not laid straight, the whole edifice that will be built on that brick will also be not straight.

As regards the materialists who do not recognize the very existence of God, this denial of theirs is an ultimatum of war against the human nature, and a person who is bent on fighting with his own nature cannot be convinced about anything by mere arguments. A man can refuse to see anything after blinding himself, and to such a man nothing can be shown.

So far as the guidance by the Prophets is concerned, all the Prophets, without a single exception, imparted the teaching of Oneness of God. Accordingly, in the Bible, inspite of numerous amendments and changes, the basic idea of Oneness of God is found even today. For example in the Torah, the following is found:

“Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord” (Deuteronomy 6:4) “ ‘Whoever sacrifices to any god, save to the Lord only, shall be utterly destroyed.” (Exodus 22:30)

And in the Zabur, it is mentioned: “thou alone art God.” (Psalms 86: 10)

But the nations and the communities of the world deviated from this teaching of the Prophet and went astray. One example of this deviation is the belief in Trinity of the Christians, which is the name of the mixture of three gods, Father, Son and the Holy Spirit. Its another example is the belief in Trimurti of the idolators of our country, which is the combination of three devtas, Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva. Their religious sign, Om; represents the three gods:

“In later times, Om is the mystic name for the Hindu triad, and represents the union of three gods, viz. a (Vishnu), u (Siva). m (Brahma).”-(A Sanskrit -English Dictionary by Sir Monier Oxford, Page 235).

And in the Introduction to the Vedas, Prof. C.K. Raja admits the fact that we in India had always been unacquainted with the idea of Oneness of God. He writes:

“The difficulty is that in India we never had a Monotheism till very recent times. If one reads the Mahabharata, it will be found that every divinity is in his turn a Supreme Godhead. This is exactly what is found in the Vedas too……………… and

there never came a stage when there was only one God.” -(The Quintessence of the Rigveda page 11 ).

4. In the text the word. “As-Samd” is used, which has a very vast meaning. Therefore, it is very difficult to translate it by one word.

The literal meaning of Samad is He who is sought. It is spoken for a chief other than whom there is none superior, and to whom people go for their needs and requirements. Samad is also that rock behind which people take shelter at the time of the enemy’s attack, and it is also that solid thing which has no cavity.

In view of these literal meanings, the attribute of As-Samad mentioned in the verse means that Allah is superior to all, His supremacy is complete and perfect, He is the objective and the goal. He is the Refuge; He is the Supporter He is without need, while He provides fulfillment for the needs of others. He is the rock of shelter, is mentioned in the Zabur:

‘The Lord is my rock, and my fortress, and my deliverer ,” (Psalms 18:1)

“In thee, O Lord, do I take refuge;” (Psalms 71:1)

In the attribute of His being Samad is also included the fact that nothing enters His Being nor does anything come out of it, and therefore, the question of his having children does not arise, and He is also free and clear of this fact that none can join with Him or amalgamate with Him, as is believed by the polytheists of our country.

5. Here also man committed a blunder that considered God like himself and imagined some one as His offspring, although this belief is supported neither by the Scriptures nor by the intellect. It is untenable intellectually because in the vent of accepting the belief in someone being the son of God, it will have to be admitted that the son is a part of God, because son is always a part of the father, and with that it will have to be admitted that godhood is dissectible and divisible. It will also be necessary to admit that the god has a wife and the wife is also of his own kind. Therefore, it will have to be admitted that god also belongs to some kind. It is obvious no idea about god can be more absurd and low than this one. But this obviously foolish and untenable idea has been accepted by some religious people merely by falling a prey to their sentimentality and exaggeration. This theory is not supported by the Scriptures, all the Divine books which were revealed to God’s Prophets for the. guidance of the people contain teachings about the Oneness of God. The parts of these books which are available to us today emphasize the Unity of God. As regards that part of Bible in which Prophet Eesa (Christ) has been termed as the son of God, first of all this thing is against the clear and basic teaching of Torah, Zabur and Injeel. Torah, in the collection of the Bible, is the first and the most ancient book. Therefore, any teaching of the four Injeels that goes against the teaching of Torah can be considered only as a modification. Secondly in the four Injeels (Gospels) where the Christ has been called the ‘son’ of God, there generally other pious slaves of God have also been called sons of God, e.g. “Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God.” (Matthew 5:9)

Apparently it seems that it has been stated in a metaphorical sense and not in its literal or real sense. But if the teaching of Oneness of God that has been imparted in the leaves of Torah, Zabur and Injeel, is taken into consideration, then it would be quite clear that the word ‘abd’ (slave) has been changed into ‘ibn’ (son). similarly the word, ‘Rab’ (Lord, Master) has been substituted by the word ‘ab’ (father). In the Gospel of Matthew it is mentioned:

“Pray then like this : Our Father who art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name.” (Matthew 6:9) This is an open modification or distortion which has been committed either by the editors or the translator, because in the Injeel it has been clearly stated:

“Jesus answered, ‘The first is, “Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one; and you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind, and with all your strength.” (Mark 12:29,30)

The Christians are not alone in imagining children of God, but other nations are also associated with them in this misguided activity. The Jews consider Prophet Uzair as the son of God, and the polytheists of Makkah had imagined angels to be the daughters of God. The Idolaters of India are two steps ahead of these. They do not S. 112 1130 Dawatul Quran only believe in innumerable gods, but also in their children, for example: The Maruts are the sons of Rudra, another great god in the Rigveda.” -(The Quintessence of the Rigveda, p. 45). To them Mahad Brahma is that womb in which Bhagwan as a father puts his seed, which gives birth to the creatures. Accordingly it is written in Bhagwad Geeta: “Mahad-Brahma is the womb wherein I cast My primal seedling whence are born all creatures. Whatever beings are born from any womb Mahad -Brahma is their Primal Mother and I Their Primal Father who inseminate her.” (Bhagwad Geeta 14 - 3 - 4 - English Trans. by Dilip Kumar Roy p. 160). But the Quran has presented an understanding about God in such clean, realistic and attractive manner that in its light all the darkness has been removed.

6. What kind of God is that who is begotten by others! But in the polytheistic religions there is an idea of the gods taking birth. For example in the Rigveda there is a description of the birth of gods: “There is a song about the birth of the gods (X-72). The gods are spoken of generally as having been born from the heaven and the earth and in various other ways.” (Quintessence of the Rigveda, page 100). This polytheistic idea has been negatived here. As Allah has no children, similarly He has no father. The gods that take birth can only be imaginary gods. The real God is the Creator of all, how can He be the created one? It is Allah’s Being alone that is not begotten by anybody nor He begets anybody. How befitting and appropriate is this concept of God of Quran and how in accord with His attribute of Oneness!

7. That is: There is none comparable or coequal to Him or His equal as regards His Being nor with regards to His attributes, all are creatures and He alone is the Creator. All are needy and He alone is Rich and Needless. All are servants and slaves, He alone is the Lord and Master. There has never been anyone like Him or His peer and there never will be.

Inspite of this clear reality, polytheists invented His equals. In this matter the polytheists of India are in the forefront. In their religious book, Upanishad, polytheism has been presented as a philosophy:

“ All that exists, says the Upanishad, is He, He is that All and the All is He.”(The Upanishads by M.P.Pandit -p. 154).

“The Self or Soul of everyone is Brahman.” - (Upanishads by Swami Sivananda p. 16). In their other religious books the concept of god is very much confused:

“There is no Personal Supreme God in the religion of Vedas”. (The Quintessence of the Rigveda, p. 7).

“He is in all and all are in Him………………He descends as the Avatar.” (The Bhagvad Geeta -A Revelation by D. K. Roy p. 33)

“Lord, I behold in Your body all gods.” (The Bhagvad Geeta, Ch. XI: 15)

Those who are wandering in the darknesses, being misled by these philosophies, cannot achieve salvation except when they give up all prejudices and accept the light of guidance provided by the holy Quran.