70. In the text the word ‘Rushdahu’ (his rushd) is used which means understanding and also religious guidance. Prophet Ibrahim was to be raised as a great personality, therefore, Allah has bestowed on him, according to his status, seriousness, understanding and intelligence of a very high standard. On account of these capabilities he had reached the truth about monotheism even before he was blessed with prophethood, and he was a truthful man. And when he was blessed with prophethood, he became the standard-bearer of monotheism and a tower of guidance.

The favours and blessings of Allah which were showered on Prophet Ibrahim due to his knowledge and His selection was most appropriate and Ibrahim proved himself to be the most deserving of these favours.

71. After being blessed with prophethood. Ibrahim wanted to bring out his father and community from the mire of idolatry and in attempting to do so he openly denounced idolatry.

The present day secular mentality recommends tolerance in the case of even idolatry, and does not like any criticism of this objectionable practice. But the very purpose of the prophets’ being granted their high position is to bring out the people from the darkness of ignorance and to save them from the punishment of the Hell-Fire. Therefore, they register an effective hit at polytheism.

72. This was also a straight, unambiguous talk which Ibrahim delivered. If the forefathers were worshipping idols, it does not naturally mean that it is the right way. If the forefathers acted under the influence of ignorance, then how can it be reasonable for the children also to behave in the same ignorant way. But even in the modern scientific times what a large number of nations indulge in this ignorant practice. They are attached to their polytheistic culture because they have received it in their national heritage.

73. That is: These idols are not gods, but God is that who has created the universe and is its Master. This statement contains the argument that when these gods and goddesses are not the creators and masters of the universe, then how can they be the real God ?

74. Here witness means declaration. That is, I openly express and declare my belief of monotheism before you, and I am appointed by Allah to give witness to this fact.

75. The step which Prophet Ibrahim wanted to take against the idols, was hinted by him in advance so that the people may know it.

This was a sign of his extreme courage. We said: “O Fire, be coolness and peace for Ibrahim.”And they sought to plot against Ibrahim, but We made them the greater losers. And We delivered him and Loot, and brought them to the land which We have blessed for all mankind. (Al-Quran)

76. One day Prophet Ibrahim, when the people had gone out in connection with some festival, Prophet Ibrahim got the opportunity of entering the temple and he broke into pieces all idols, except the big one. He left the big idol purposely, so that the people might ask the ‘Red Joker’ who had done that to their deities. And when he would not give an answer, it would be clear to the people that the idols are lifeless things, which neither could profit nor could harm anyone. This was a great missionary tactic, which led him to break these idols. And this action he had taken after he had already presented his message with arguments, the details of which are given in Surah An’am, ayat Nos. 74 to 81. If his main objective were merely to break the idols then he would not have left even a single idol unbroken, nay, he would have broken the big idol first.

There was a possibility of one question being asked: What right had he to break the deities of other people ? Such a question arises only as a result of not understanding the real importance of a Prophet’s position. A prophet is sent by Allah, and he receives Allah’s messages through revelation direct, and he is directly guided. Therefore, he has to obey Allah’s commands, regardless of the consideration whether it is against the current practice of a certain community or caste or society. A prophet considers the divine right more important than the human rights, and he does not care if he has to break any traditional rule or law in order to finish every evil or forbidden thing, he would willingly do it. And whatever Prophet Ibrahim had done was to end the great evil-polytheism -and therefore, his action is praise-worthy and not at all objectionable. Accordingly Allah declared this action of his as the result of right guidance.

77. When people returned from the festival, they saw the condition of their deities and were terribly offended and were extremely enraged.

78.It is thus learnt that this incident took place when Ibrahim was a young man, and that prophethood was bestowed on him in his youth.

Prophet Ibrahim had expressed his thoughts against the idols, therefore, when the people saw their idols broken they thought that damage must have been caused by him alone.

79. In this way Ibrahim got the opportunity to present his message before the masses and the classes.

80. That is: The biggest idol had done this act. If idols can speak, why not ask them ? This was a very effective taunt on the helplessness of the idols. When they could not save themselves, then how can they save their worshippers ? If they have the power of speech, then ask them who has done this, and if they do not have the power of speech, then it means that they are lifeless stones. Then how can they be gods ?

Prophet Ibrahim had taken this step to bring home to the people that the idols were unreal deities, and for this very purpose he had ascribed the damaging action to the big idol. This manner of speech-ironical-is very effective in bringing out the waywardness and straying of the people, as it at once shocks them. But those who cannot understand the delicacies of language, merely go by the apparent meaning of the words and start raising objections. This telling reply from Prophet Ibrahim also did not influence them, and they treated it as a lie. They thought that Prophet Ibrahim has denied that he had broken the idols. If his intention was to deny this allegation, he would have clearly stated that he had not broken the idols and that the allegation was false. But he did not say anything of the sort, and his opponents also did not consider it a lie, as they understood that he was presenting a logical argument against idolatry, therefore, they, in their reply, admitted that idols do not speak. When they admitted this fact, it gave an opportunity to Prophet Ibrahim to show the helplessness of the idols and to register an effective proof against idolatry.

As for the hadith in which three falsehoods have been ascribed to Prophet Ibrahim, which includes the statement here referred to i.e. Nay, but this big one has done this: this hadith has been narrated in Bukhari, Muslim and Tirmizi, etc., and ulema have given different interpretations for this, but Imam Razi has put the nail on the head : “ As for the first narrated hadith, it is better to ascribe the falsehood to their narrators than to ascribe it to the prophets (Peace Be Upon Them)”.

And Maulana Abul Kalam Azad has rightly commented :

“Generally the commentators have agreed that on three occasions Prophet Ibrahim uttered such words as can be termed as falsehood. One of these occasions was when he was asked whether he had broken those idols, and he replied : ‘Nay, but this big one has done this.’ although he himself had broken them.

“In this connection argument is pushed on the basis of a narrative from one of the authentic ahadith, but first of all we must seriously contemplate on this occasion whether here in reality any such event has been narrated which proves that Prophet Ibrahim spoke a lie, irrespective of the seriousness and manner of that lie. The fact is that in the history of the commentaries of the holy Qur’an there is no greater and unaccountable puzzle than this one. There is nothing in Qur’an which depicts the uttering of the falsehood of the truest of the true personality. But with difficulty one ayah is being distorted in its interpretation to show that a falsehood is being uttered. And why is this attempt to prove the commitment of falsehood being made ? Only because there is a supposed hadith, lest the narrative of the non-innocent narrators might be considered weak. As if the main thing in this affair is the protection of the non-innocent narrators and not of the innocent prophets, and if there is a difference between the Qur’an and a narrative, then Qur’an has to be moulded to conform to the narrative. The evidence of the narrator is inviolable.”

- (Tarjumanul Qur’an, Vol. II, page 495)

Blind following of tradition is very aptly and effectively pointed out by his sarcastic remarks. Further on the writes :

“Without doubt the narrative is from the two authentic books of the hadith, but in these thirteen hundred years no Muslim has claimed innocence for the narrators of the hadith, nor has anyone considered Imam Bukhari and Imam Muslim above committing mistake So the truthfulness and the innocence of the prophets is a part of the religious belief and is to be followed.

“However best the narrative among the various kinds of narratives it may be, in no way his evidence is more than an evidence of a non-innocent narrator , and the evidence of a non-innocent person cannot be accepted against the certain beliefs of the religion. We will have to admit that this cannot be the saying of Allah’s messenger, surely the narrators have committed a mistake here.” (ibid page 499).

The reply of Prophet Ibrahim was in the nature of an argumentative charge against his opponents, and it cannot be termed as (falsehood) and when a hadith- whether of Bukhari or Muslim- differs from Qur’an and also casts doubts on the innocence of a prophet, then such a narrative cannot be the saying of the Prophet. Therefore, that tradition, from the viewpoint of its text, deserves rejection. And as for its sources, that is also doubtful. Imam Bukhari has, stated it to be the exact sayings of the prophet and also as not the exact sayings of the prophet the narrator Abu Huraira narrating it not exactly as stated by the Prophet.(See Bukhari, Kitab Ahadithul Anbiya), Then again the narrative which is said to be according to the statement of the Prophet is by one Jarir bin Hazim, and there is a difference of opinions among the scholars of hadith about this narrator. Allama Ibn Hajr, in his Tahzibut tahzib, the well known and reliable book about the narrators of the ahadith, has quoted both kinds of statements, e.g. Ibn Saad says that he is reliable, but in his last days he suffered from a mental sickness. Nasai says that there is nothing wrong in quoting from him. Imam Ahmed says that Jarir commits many errors. In Egypt his memory was not proper and he narrated from his superstition (See Tahzibut Tahzib, Vol. II, pages 69 to 72). And Imam Zahbi has quoted the saying of the very Imam Bukhari that Jarir Ibn Hazim sometimes commits errors.

(See Meezanul E’tidal, Vol. I, page 393).

It is clear that the sources of this hadith are doubtful, and its allusion of authorship to the prophet is not right. But those who insist on its authenticity, quote in support a hadith from Bukhari about intercession, in which it is stated that on the Day of Resurrection when people will approach Prophet Ibrahim to intercede on their behalf, he will put this excuse that he had committed three falsehoods (Bukhari Kitabut tawheed), and they explain this falsehood by saying that it was a taunt. But this interpretation is not correct for if this was a taunt, then it was a thing to be appreciated; what was his fault that under its excuse he would decline to intercede before God on the day of Resurrection ? On the one hand considering his statement as very meaningful and effectively impressive and on the other hand thinking him to be guilty! These two opinions are contradictory. Therefore, imputing falsehood to Prophet Ibrahim is absolutely wrong.

81.That is: For a short time there was a realisation in their minds that they were on the wrong side, and this they conveyed to one another secretly.

82.That is: Again their prejudice returned and they could not think dispassionately.

83.This was the greatest argument against idolatry which Prophet Ibrahim could present before his opponents.

84.This harsh statement was uttered by Prophet Ibrahim when the argument in support of monotheism had been convincingly conveyed to the idolaters. And the fact that idols cannot profit or harm anybody had been brought home to them, for if they could have the power to harm anyone they could have definitely harmed Ibrahim.

85. It is elicited that idolatry is absolutely nonsensical. A person using his intelligence cannot be an idolater.

86. Those who said this might have been religious leaders and purohits of the temple.

87. That is: Ultimately these worshippers of the idols threw Prophet Ibrahim into the fire, but Allah commanded the fire to be cool for Ibrahim and the guarantor of his safety. This was a miracle which Allah manifested in favour of his Prophet. There is nothing contrary to common sense in this phenomenon. The characteristic of the fire to burn is created by its Creator, and if He wants to create a different characteristic in it, can He not do it ? The physical characteristics of things are not their own, but are created by God. And when they are created by Him, then He can change them whenever He likes. It confounds only those who do not believe in God, or if they believe they do not consider Him as the Absolute Powerful Being.

As it is, in the modern times a number of inventions have been made which are fire proof. If man can produce such protective things, then how is it difficult for the Absolutely Powerful Being to protect His favourite slave from the ravages of fire? In reality it was the help from Allah that was manifested in support of Prophet Ibrahim, when He had jumped into the fire as a standard bearer of tawheed.

88. That is: Prophet Ibrahim was not harmed in any way. On the contrary his opponents were unsuccessful.

89. It is learnt that among the community of Prophet Ibrahim, only Prophet Loot was his follower. Therefore, after this stated event Allah commanded him to migrate. So he migrated and went to Palestine.

90.Means the land of Palestine, which is full of blessings of both the kinds, worldly and spiritual. It is rich spiritually, because it was the habitat of quite a number of prophets from Ibrahim to Eesa (Peace be upon all of them). It is rich materially because it is very productive and green. (For further explanation. please see Surah Bani Israil, Not. No.1).

91.That is: Allah not only gave a son like Ishaq but also a grandson like Yaqub. They were the bright gems of the clan of Ibrahim.

92. That is: These personalities were most virtuous in their character. This refutes the various statements in the Bible which tarnish their image.

93. He was a true leader of mankind, for he showed them the path that leads to God and guided them according to the divine command. Everyone who followed him achieved true glory. The distinctive aspect of the leadership was that he himself did not seek to be the leader nor was he interested in assuming leadership, but it was Allah who made him the Imam or the leader of the people, and under his guidance many communities were raised.

94. After giving the comprehensive command of doing good deeds, the command for establishment of salat and giving of zakat signifies that these two mode.” of worship are the sources of good. By making arrangements for them, virtues are nourished.

From this ayah it is also learnt that salat and zakat had been two important parts or pillars of the shariah of the Prophets (peace be upon them ).

95. The word ‘Hukm’ used in the text means wisdom, and the word ‘Ilm’ (knowledge) means that knowledge which is obtained through divine revelation.

96. Refers to wicked and abominable practices like homosexuality. The story of the community of Prophet Loot is narrated in Surah A’raf (Verses Nos. 80 to 94) and Surah Hood Verses Nos. 77 to 83).

97.It is this point which is purported to be clarified here, that is, how Allah helps His Prophets.

98. The first and foremost attribute of the prophets (peace be upon them) is to be righteous, but in the existing Torah and the Bible improper things have been imputed to them, which tarnishes their character. Qur’an declares their righteousness, which fact automatically refutes these allegations.

A very shameful allegation has been made against Prophet Loot in the Book of Genesis, Bible (19: 32 to 38), and it is so absurdly shameful that quoting it is intolerably repulsive.