60. Qurtubi writes: Examples of the living from the dead are: man from the sperm, plants from the seeds, chicken from the egg and the believer from the unbeliever.

Rashid Rida warns that the above explanations might not be acceptable to the modern mind. We should rather cite the first appearance of life on earth (whenever it originated) as an example of the living from the dead. Another example is that of the food we eat. It is broken down in the stomach to molecules and then, carried by the blood, enters into the cell, to be processed there and become the living matter that replicates itself (slightly reworded).

Modern scientific discoveries can cite viruses, prions and viroids as examples of the living from the dead. These are absolutely nothing more than specks of dust, but which, once they penetrate a living cell, take charge of it and start producing their own kind from the cell material, generating billions upon billions, until the cell burst and they spread out to invade other cells (Au.)

61. The allusion by AAllah's word is to His law which dictates that He does not guide those who show no inclination to receive guidance, who do not use their power of reasoning when it comes to religious truths, and who are bent upon rejection, evidences being of no consequence to them. Allah's law is not to force guidance upon anyone (based on Rashid Rida).

62. Mawdudi comments on AHow then are you being deluded@: AAddressing the generality of the unbelievers, the Qur'an inquires, 'How then, are you being turned away?' The question that is posed here makes it clear that it is not the unbelievers themselves who are guilty of turning away, rather they are being made to turn away from the right way and that this is happening under the influence of some person or group who is engaged in misleading people. It is for this reason that in effect people are being asked: 'Why should they go about blindly following those who are out to mislead people. Why should they not use their brains and think for themselves why they are being turned in a direction which is contrary to reality?'

63. The textual word Ayahiddi was originally Ayahtadi. The letter Ataa was dropped for some reason to render it as Atahiddi with some necessary diacritical changes (Ibn Jarir).

64. The point is, if these objects cannot guide their followers, how do they deserve worship? (Thanwi)

65. Majid reproduces the comments of a Christian priest Rev. E. Wherry: AThis passage contains very cogent reasoning against the idolaters, and very justly represents their folly in worshiping inferior deities, while regarding God as the source of all their blessings, and fleeing to him in every time of trouble. These teachings account for much of the success of Islam as a missionary religion. Its pure monotheism stands out in strong contrast with the polytheism of the idolaters.

66. Alusi writes that this verse is in support of the opinion that in matters of faith and beliefs blind following (taqlid of another person's opinion) is inadmissible as against fiqh (legal) matters where such following is allowed and the permission can be substantiated with the help of the Qur'an.

67. AThe statement that it is 'a confirmation of the revelation made before it' underscores the fact that the Qur'an lays no claim of introducing anything novel, of coming forth with any innovation at variance with the fundamental teachings already communicated to man through the Prophets (peace be upon them). The Qur'anic claim only consists of confirming and authenticating those teachings. Had the Qur'an been the product of imagination of the founder of an altogether new religion, the outcome of a creative brain, it would have borne traces of novelty in order to emphasize its distinctiveness (Mawdudi).

68. Thanwi’s comment at this point can be paraphrased in the following manner: Some people have tried to escape facing the challenge by saying that every writer has a style that is characteristically his own and which cannot be successfully imitated by others. The answer to this shallow argument is four fold:

First: It might be true that a successful imitation of another's writing, especially when it is of a good literary quality, is, generally, not possible. But, it is quite possible for someone who has a good command over the language, to produce a short passage similar to it.

Second: Not all of the Prophet's speeches are similar to one another. His traditions for instance, are of a completely different literary style than the Qur’an. How can this be explained? How did Muhammad fail to achieve the rhetorical and other literary qualities noticeable in the Qur'an, in his other productions, viz., the hadith?

Third: How come he became capable of producing the Qur'an only after he had reached the age of forty?

Fourth: How can a challenge go unanswered (until now), which claims that it will last up to the Day of Judgment?

For more details see al Baqarah, note 57 of this work.

Sayyid Qutb narrates an interesting incident in demonstration of the Qur'anic charm. Its abridged version is as follows: AWe were six who called ourselves Muslims in a ship in the Atlantic heading towards New York. Although not as regular in the Prayers as required, but, since there were some 120 non Muslim passengers in the ship, the idea that we should offer the Friday Prayers on the ship, sailing across the Atlantic excited us. The captain offered us a place and also allowed his Nubian Muslim off duty seamen to join us. Since it was quite a sight, the passengers gathered around us while I delivered the sermon. After the Prayers many of the onlookers came to us congratulating on the success of the AService. But a Christian lady surprised us. She came forward and told us very warmly in her broken English how much she was impressed by the spirit, the sincerity, and solemnity of the Prayers. She was especially impressed by the Sermon. 'Those were beautiful words' she said, although she admitted she did not understand a word thereof. But they had, she said, a kind of internal music concealed in them. It was only after considerable exchange of words that we realized she was referring to the Qur'anic passages that I had used during the Sermon and in recitation within the Prayers!

69. Two meanings are possible. One, the unbelievers never understood the true purport of the message because of intransigence and insensitivity to finer feelings and, therefore, denied it. Another possible meaning is that the unbelievers were in a great hurry to deny, even before they would try and understand the intent and purposes of the message. In doing so they were impelled by their love of the religion their forefathers followed. However, since the Qur'an is a miracle both in its form as well as in its contents, when the pagans considered its meaning, they felt convinced that it could only be a revelation. Yet, out of envy of the Prophet and hatred of the truth, they decided to denounce it all the same. And, of course, both these tendencies can be noticed among the modern antagonists of this message as well (Au.).

Qurtubi notes that Hussain b. Fadl was asked if he found anything in the Qur'an to support that a man ignorant of something will have a dislike for it? He said, AYes. In two places. In one place Allah said, 'They cried lies to what their knowledge could not encompass' (verse 39); and another (46: 11), 'If they are not guided to it they will say, ‘This is an old fib.'