Surah An-Nahl 16:71-76 - Quran Translation Commentary

(16:71) And Allah has favored some of you over others in provision.¹⁰⁹ So, those who have been favored are not going to return their provision¹¹⁰ to those their right hands own, so that they are equal therein.¹¹¹ So, will they dispute with Allah’s favors?¹¹²

(16:72) And Allah has made for you of your own kind mates¹¹³ and from your mates produced for you children and grandchildren,¹¹⁴ and has provided for you sustenance from the good things. Then, in falsehood will they believe, and Allah’s favors deny?¹¹⁵

(16:73) And, (do) they worship besides Allah those that have no command over any sustenance for them in the heavens or in the earth, nor do they have any power?

(16:74) Therefore, strike not similitudes for Allah.¹¹⁶ Verily, Allah knows while you know not.

(16:75) Allah strikes the example of a slave, owned (by another), with no power over anything, and one whom We gave a goodly provision from Ourselves, so he expends (freely) thereof in open and secret - are they equal? All praise for Allah, but most of them know not.¹¹⁷

(16:76) Allah strikes (another) example of two men: one of them dumb with no power over anything, and moreover, he is a (wearisome) burden on his master: wherever he is sent, he does not bring back any good.¹¹⁸ Is he then equal with one who bids to justice, and is (himself) on a straight path?

Commentary

109. Since common observation reveals, Imam Razi comments, that many intelligent, efficient and hard-working people remain poor, despite their efforts, in contrast to the not-so-clever men, who possess wealth in abundance, it can be deduced that distribution of wealth is in the hands of Allah and has not much to do with intelligence and abilities.

110. In the usage of the term “return,” instead of the plain “give,” is perhaps the hidden implication that the labor class makes a major contribution towards the creation of wealth, and hence, anything given to them, is being “given back” to them, or being returned (Au.).

111. The message is: You do not like to associate your slaves with yourselves in your wealth, yet approve of association of other creations with Allah! So, you approve for Allah what you do not approve for yourselves? (Ibn Jarir, Ibn Kathir).

As Allah said at another place (30: 28):

ضَرَبَ لَكُمْ مَثَلًا مِنْ أَنْفُسِكُمْ هَلْ لَكُمْ مِنْ مَا مَلَكَتْ أَيْمَانُكُمْ مِنْ شُرَكَاءَ فِي مَا رَزَقْنَاكُمْ فَأَنْتُمْ فِيهِ سَوَاءٌ تَخَافُونَهُمْ كَخِيفَتِكُمْ أَنْفُسَكُمْ [الروم : 28]

“Allah strikes for you an example from your own selves. Do you have partners from among your slaves that share in what We have bestowed on you, so that you are equal, and you fear them as you fear yourselves?” (Ibn Kathir).

112. Mawdudi removes a misunderstanding. He writes, “According to ... (some) people (of the recent times), the true purpose of the verse is to tell those who have been granted ample worldly provisions to return them to their servants and slaves so as to make them equal sharers of those provisions. It is contended that if they fail to do so, they will be guilty of denying God’s favor.”

“The point that is being emphasized here is that people know the basic difference between master and slave. They also maintain such a distinction between the two in their practical lives, and make an effort to keep the two apart. However, they seem to brush all this aside in God’s case. Instead, they insist on associating His creatures - those who are His born servants - with Him. They also insist on giving thanks to God’s creatures for the favours that He alone bestowed on them.”

Mawdudi’s reference is to the ruling Muslim classes of the last century who, fired by initial successes of the socialist system in the Soviet block, were looking for its justification in the Qur’an, to counter the Islamists who disapproved of them and their political agenda. Indeed, this class of men was not even communist. These people were a bunch of bankrupt anti-Islamic materialists with no brains of their own. Having rejected Islam, and being unable to organize a modern state on healthy lines, more of show boys wearing show neck-ties - that they are down to this day - than efficient administrators, they adopted a system that allowed them tyranny as a tool for suppression, rather than a tool for equitable distribution of wealth and services. Hence, it is no surprise that they cling to the tyrannical system even after the fall of communism in the Soviet block. Some of them, in fact, chided the Russians for abandoning socialism and are sorrier for its demise than the true socialists themselves were.

Nevertheless, while we accept Mawdudi’s criticism as valid, and reject the communistic theory as wrong, we may still point out that of the earliest commentators, Zamakhshari states, “Allah favored you by bestowing provision on you in greater measure than on the slaves you possess, although they are humans like you and are your brothers. It would have been becoming if you had returned your wealth to them and become equal with them in matters of food and clothing. It is reported of Abu Dharr that since he had heard the Prophetic words, ‘They (the slaves) are your brothers. Clothe them with what you clothe yourself with, and feed them with what you feed yourself with,’ his slaves were never seen in shirts and trousers any different from his own.” And the implication is, Alusi adds, that by way of thanks to Allah for having favored you over others, you ought to return excessive wealth unto the less fortunate so as to become equal to them in outward, material terms, (although some of you may remain superior to others in moral terms).

113. According to some scholars the allusion is to the creation of first woman Hawwa, who was created out of Adam. But a better explanation is that the allusion is to the fact that the humankind’s spouses have been created from within their species, which is the prime cause of mutual love and understanding (Ibn Jarir, Kashshaf, Razi and others).

In view of this verse the jurists have ruled that marriage between men and Jinns is not lawful. Several cases of men marrying Jinns in pre-Islamic times have been reported, including about Bilqis (Queen of Sheba) one of whose parents was widely reported to be a Jinn. Shanqiti however, examines all such narrations and concludes that none of the reports of humans marrying Jinns is wholly trustworthy.

114. Ibn Jarir says that the term “hafadah” has been variously interpreted. ‘Abdullah ibn Mas`ud, Qatadah, Sa`id b. Jubayr and others have said that the allusion is to son-in-laws. Some others, such as ‘Ikrimah, Hasan, Mujahid and others have thought that the allusion is to servants. On the other hand, Ibn ‘Abbas is reported of both the opinions: grandchildren as well as son-in-laws. It is apparent that a general meaning fits the context. And a general meaning of “hafadah”, from “hafd” is, those who serve a man, be they his sons, servants, wives, or others. Hence the words of supplication prescribed for the Qunut Prayer:

وَإِلَيْكَ نَسْعَى وَنَحْفِدُ

“... and towards You do we strive, and (You) do we serve” (Ibn Jarir, Zamakhshari).

115. Mawdudi comments: “To charge the unbelievers that they ‘believe in falsehood’ means that they subscribe to beliefs which are totally baseless and devoid of all truth. They subscribe, for instance, to the belief that it is gods, goddesses, jinn, and saints of the past who have full powers to make or mar people’s destiny, to respond to their invocation, to bless them with offspring and the means for their livelihood, to effectively help them in any litigation and preventing them from falling prey to disease.”

“The Makkan polytheists did not deny that they owe to God all the bounties which they had received. They also had no hesitation in gratefully acknowledging God’s favours. However, their mistake lay in the fact that, in addition to giving thanks to God for those favours, they also gave thanks to others whom they considered to be His partners. The Qur’an considers this to be tantamount to denying God’s favors... (Thus) the Qur’an enunciates another principle ... that any gratuitous assumption that the benefactor did not bestow favour out of his benevolence, but did so at the behest or intervention of someone else, also amounts to denying the favour of the true benefactor.”

116. “Therefore, strike not similitudes for Allah”: To say for instance that, ‘Just as the earthly rulers, who need aides to rule over their kingdom, God also needs aides to rule over heaven and earth. Therefore, we worship these aides so that they might plead our case with Him’ (Shafi`). Asad puts it more elaborately. He writes, “‘Do not blaspheme against God by regarding anyone or anything as comparable with Him, or by trying to define Him in any terms whatsoever’ - since ‘definition’ is, in the last resort equivalent to delimitation of the qualities of the object thus to be defined in relation to, or in comparison with, another object or objects: God, however, is ‘sublimely exalted above anything that men may devise by way of definition.”

117. Yusuf Ali explains, “The first parable of two men, one of whom is a slave completely under the dominion of another, with no powers of any sort, and another a free man, who is gifted in every way, and is most generous in bestowing out of his opulent wealth (material as well as intangible), privately and publicly, without let or hindrance; for he is his own master and owes no account to any one. The first is like the imaginary gods which men set up, - whether powers of nature, which have no independent existence but are manifestations of Allah, or deified heroes or men, who can do nothing of their own authority but are subject to the Will and Power of Allah; the second describes in a faint way the position of Allah, the Self-Subsistent, to Whom belongs the dominion of all that is in the heaven and the earth, and Who bestows freely of His gifts on all His creatures.”

Mawdudi adds: “The unbelievers are fully aware of the difference between the powerful and the powerless among their fellow beings. Nor do they fail to distinguish between these two categories of people in their practical lives. So it is astonishing that when it comes to applying this reasonable distinction to Creator and created, they show utter foolishness and stupidity insofar as they fail to recognize the essential difference between the two.”

118. That is, he is neither good for himself, nor for others (Shawkani); rather, a slave of his carnal, miserly self (Au.).