49. Iqamatu al-salah is, to repeat, to do the Prayers on time, in good spirit, doing all its parts in an efficient, acceptable manner (Qurtubi).

50. Majid comments: “That brings to mind, by way of contrast, the strong connotation that has very frequently existed between obscenity and the acts of worship as ordained by the so-called religions of the world. In many of them even prostitution appears to have been not merely tolerated but encouraged. ‘In Egypt, Phoenicia, Assyria, Chaldea, Canaan and Persia, the worship of Isis, Moloch, Baal, Astarte, Mylitta and other deities consisted of the most extravagant sexual orgies, and the temples were merely centres of vice. In Babylon some degree of prostitution appears to have been even compulsory and imposed upon all women in honor of the goddess Mylitta. In India the ancient connection between religion and prostitution still survives.’ (EBr. XVIII, p. 596). ‘The Kedeshoth mentioned in the Bible were prostitutes attached to the Canaanite temples, and were held in the highest reverence by the worshippers. Temple prostitutes, in all countries, and at all times, have been highly thought of.’ (Scott, History of Prostitution, p. 10). In its earliest of phases prostitution was always associated with religion; and there seem strong grounds for the assumption that the first brothels were run by priests.’ (p. 59).”

51. Although a lone opinion of Ibn `Umar is that by “salah” the allusion is to the Qur’an which is recited in Prayers, most others, such as Ibn Mas`ud, Ibn `Abbas and others have said that by the term “salah” the allusion is to Prayers. In fact, Ibn `Abbas is reported to have said, “A Prayer which does not prohibit a man from the indecent and the reprehensive, actually distances him from Allah.” This is reported as a Prophetic statement also, coming down through Ibn Mas`ud (Ibn Jarir, Qurtubi).

Ibn Jarir however, does not seem to be very comfortable with the above report either as a Prophetic statement, or as that of Ibn `Abbas. For, he quotes Ibn `Awn as saying, (in reference to this verse), “When you are in the Prayers, you are in a good act: Prayer has come in between you and the indecent and reprehensive. ‘Fahshaa’ is fornication, and ‘the reprehensive’ is disobedience. Whoever then, committed an obscenity or disobeyed Allah, such as one which nullifies his Prayers, and, obviously, such a man did not Pray at all.”

In any case, the above as a statement of Ibn `Abbas is, according to Haythamiyy, a weak report, while, as a Prophetic statement, it is, according to Albani, a “Batil” narrative (“Mawdu`ah” no. 2), while to Haythamiyy it is untrustworthy (Majma`) - Au.

Qurtubi and Ibn Kathir also caution that none of the statements about a “salah” distancing away from Allah reaches the Prophet. Another hadith of the Prophet apparently contradicts the hadith that says that Prayer can cause distancing from Allah. It is said that the Prophet was told, “So and so Prays the whole night but steals in the morning.” He replied, “His Prayers will prevent him.” And, Qurtubi adds, that is how it happened.

Haythamiyy said about this last report: “Ahmad and Bazzar recorded it and its narrators are those of Sahih collections” (Au.).

In short, writes Qurtubi, if salah is performed properly, in the manner it is required of a Muslim, in complete mental presence, and physical humbleness, the heart filled with fear, then it does move one away from the indecent and the evil. It is reported of one of the Salaf that when he stood for Prayers, he became pale and shook with fear. When asked why that happened to him, he would say, “This is how one feels when before a king; what about when one is about to appear before the King of all kings?” It is this kind of Prayer about which the Prophet (saws) said, as in Tirmidhi, who judged it Hasan Sahih,

أَرَأَيْتُمْ لَوْ أَنَّ نَهَرًا بِبَابِ أَحَدِكُمْ يَغْتَسِلُ فِيهِ كُلَّ يَوْمٍ خَمْسًا مَا تَقُولُ ذَلِكَ يُبْقِي مِنْ دَرَنِهِ قَالُوا لَا يُبْقِي مِنْ دَرَنِهِ شَيْئًا قَالَ فَذَلِكَ مِثْلُ الصَّلَوَاتِ الْخَمْسِ يَمْحُو اللَّهُ بِهِ الْخَطَايَا

“Do you think if one of you had a river passing by his door, in which he bathed himself five times a day, will he have any dirt left on him?” They replied, “No, no dirt will be left on him.” He said, “This is how it is with the five daily Prayers. Allah wipes out the sins thereby.”

The above hadith is in Bukhari also (Au.).

But when salah is done badly, year after year, without any remorse, then it does not prevent a man from sins, but rather, he begins to commit them oftener. When he does that, then the sins that are blatantly committed cause him to stray away from Allah.

Hatim described his own Salah, “As if my feet are on the Bridge, Paradise on my right side and Hellfire on left with the angel of death right above me. And I Pray in a state of hope and fear.” It is this kind of Prayer, writes Zamakhshari, which comes in between a man and indecent acts.

Alusi clarifies the issue to a greater degree. He writes that some confusion is allowed for, when we fail to assign an exact meaning to the textual “tanhaa.” Many people seem to understand it not in the sense of “prohibit,” in which sense it has been used. They rather understand it in the sense of “prevent,” in which sense it has not been used. We must understand that Prayers can only “prohibit” a man from the indecent and reprehensive, but do not “prevent.” (That is, a strong inner voice protests against sins and says, in effect, “Do not do it”). This prohibition does not mean a complete prevention, for that is something for a man to decide for himself. Indeed, Allah Himself does no more than this with His slave. He prohibits. He said (16: 90):

{إِنَّ اللَّهَ يَأْمُرُ بِالْعَدْلِ وَالْإِحْسَانِ وَإِيتَاءِ ذِي الْقُرْبَى وَيَنْهَى عَنِ الْفَحْشَاءِ وَالْمُنْكَرِ وَالْبَغْيِ يَعِظُكُمْ لَعَلَّكُمْ تَذَكَّرُونَ} [النحل: 90]

“Verily, Allah enjoins justice, good-doing, and giving to kin. And He forbids the indecent, the reprehensible and rebellion.” Now, it is up to a man to decide how he will treat the admonition. (Hence Allah ended the verse by saying, “He admonishes you that perhaps you will be mindful”: Au.). It is following this understanding that we find Ibn `Abbas as saying, as in Ibn Hayyan, Kalbi, Ibn Jurayj and Hammad b. Sulayman that ‘the Prayers forbid these things, so long as a man is in the Prayers.’ What they meant perhaps, continues Alusi, is that the Prayer is the prohibiting element, telling him from within, “Do not do this, do not do that,” etc., in short, offering checks and brakes. Nonetheless, the possibility remains, adds Alusi, that, in addition to prohibiting, Prayers also “prevent” a slave from the indecent and reprehensible. But that of course is conditional to how well they are done, (the better done, the better the effects on the devotee). They weaken in their effect with increase in inattentiveness during the Prayers (ghaflah): the kind of Prayer that, as the Prophet said, is bundled as old clothes are bundled and flung back on the face of the devotee with the Prayers saying, “May Allah squander you, as you squandered me.”

The effect of Salah on the devotees is a commonly noted fact. Even non-Muslims confess that they see a glow on the faces of Muslims as they emerge from the mosques. A Hindu once complaining of a Muslim’s lies remarked, “And, the strange thing about him is that he Prays regularly (Au.).

Majid quotes, “.. In the words of a distinguished American psychologist: ‘All historians declare that the amazing success of Islam in dominating the world lay in the astounding coherence or sense of unity in the group, but they do not explain how this miracle was worked. There can be little doubt that one of the most effective means was prayer. The five daily prayers, when all the faithful, wherever they were, alone in the given solitude of the desert or in the vast assemblies in the crowded cities, knelt and prostrated themselves towards Mecca uttering the same words of adoration for the one true God and of loyalty to His Prophet, produce an overwhelming effect upon the spectator, and the psychological effects of thus fusing the minds of the worshippers in a common adoration and expression of loyalty is certainly stupendous.’ (Dennison, op. cit., 274-275).”

52. “Allah’s remembrance is greater.” But greater than what? Imam Razi answers that since there is nothing that can be compared to Allah’s remembrance, to any degree, nothing could be brought forth for comparison. After all, one does not say, “The mountain is bigger than a grain of sand.” There is no comparison between a grain of sand and a mountain. Yet, we know that the two are of the kind and class that are in some ways comparable. In contrast, is there anything that can be brought forth as comparable to Allah’s remembrance?

The translation of the text follows the heavier of the two opinions about how this verse is to be understood. One opinion (as in Ibn Jarir and others) is that “A slave’s remembrance of Allah within the Prayers, is greater than the Prayer itself. (Allah said in 20: 14, “Establish the Prayers for My remembrance”: Au.).

`Abdullah b. Rabi`ah says Ibn `Abbas asked him about how he understood these words. Ibn Rabi`ah replied that the allusion is perhaps to the mention of Allah’s Names and Attributes within the Prayers, recitation of the Qur’an within them, etc. Ibn `Abbas told him that it sounded good, but was not correct. But rather, he said, the allusion is to Allah’s remembrance of His slaves, which is a greater thing that their remembrance of Him. Another report coming down from him makes it clearer. He said, “Surely, Allah’s remembrance of His slaves, when they remember Him, is greater than your remembrance of Him.” This was also the opinion of `Atiyyah, Mujahid, Salman (al-Farsi: Ibn Kathir), Sho`bah and several others as in Ibn Jarir. A second opinion of Qatadah and Salman, also in Ibn Jarir, was that the meaning is, “Remembrance of Allah is the greatest (thing in this world).” A third opinion, that of Ibn `Abbas, is that both the meanings are possible, meaning perhaps that one does not rule out the other. Ibn Jarir’s own inclination is toward the first opinion while Qurtubi accepts all possibilities.

53. That is, with arguments and evidences better than that they, the People of the Book put forth (Qurtubi, Ibn Kathir).

It means, to respond to crudeness with gentleness, to anger with calmness, to argumentativeness with admonition (Alusi), and, to emotionalism with rationalism (Au.).

Mawdudi further expounds: “That is, the discussions should be conducted rationally, in a civilized and decent manner, with the reformation of the opponent as the objective. The chief aim should be to appeal to the heart and mind and not make it a wrestling match with the objective to defeat rather than convince. One should act like a physician, who tries to heal, and not to make the patient’s situation worse through ill-treatment.”

54. That is, you can act tough with those who are obstinate in the face of truth (Alusi and others). In the words of Mawdudi: “Islam ordains politeness. But that does not mean meekness and undue humbleness. The Muslims should not be such as to be taken for granted by every wicked tyrant.”

The prevalent opinion is that of Mujahid who said that the meaning of the second part of the verse is that those among them who do wrong, i.e., obstinately remain on their corrupt beliefs, should be fought against until they believe, or pay the tribute (Ibn Jarir, Ibn Kathir).

55. Sufyan b. Husain is said to have remarked that to say, “We believe in what has been sent down to us, and sent down to you,” is the “better” spoken of in verse 46 (Alusi).

Mawdudi points out that the verse implies that discussions should start with the points of agreement and not points of disagreement.

However, when that fails to convince, then the discussant or the debater may switch over to disagreements to demonstrate how Islamic position is the more rational and nearer to truth, but which of course should be done without hurting the sentiments of the contestants (Au.).

56. Explaining this verse Abu Hurayrah said: People of the Book used to recite the Tawrah in Hebrew and then explain to the Muslims in Arabic. The Prophet said, “Neither refute the holders of previous Scriptures, nor confirm. But rather say, ‘We believe in what has been sent down to us, and sent down to you. Our God and your God is One; and to Him we have surrendered’” (Ibn Jarir, Qurtubi).

The above report is in Bukhari. Another report of Musnad Ahmad has Abu Namlah al-Ansari saying that he was in the company of the Prophet when a Jew came in and asked,

يَا مُحَمَّدُهَلْ تَتَكَلَّمُ هَذِهِ الْجَنَازَةُ؟ فَقَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ: اللَّهُ أَعْلَمُ، فَقَالَ الْيَهُودِيُّ: أَنَا أَشْهَدُ أَنَّهَا تَتَكَلَّمُ، فَقَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ:مَا حَدَّثَكُمْ أَهْلُ الْكِتَابِ فَلا تُصَدِّقُوهُمْ وَلا تُكَذِّبُوهُمْ، وَقُولُوا آمَنَّا بِاللَّهِ وَكُتُبِهِ وَرُسُلِهِ، فَإِنْ كَانَ حَقًّا لَمْ تُكَذِّبُوهُمْ وَلَوْ كَانَ بَاطِلا لَمْ تُصَدِّقُوهُمْ

“Muhammad, do these corpses speak?” He replied, “Allah knows best.” He said, “But I bear witness that they speak.” The Prophet (saws) told the people around him, “When the People of the Book narrate to you something, neither give them credence nor refute them. But rather, say, ‘We have believed in Allah, His Books and Messengers.’ If it happens to be true, you would not have denied it, and if it happens to be false, you would not have given it credence” (Ibn Kathir).

The report is also in Sahih of Hibban (Au.).

Nevertheless, Imam Bukhari has a report that once Mu`awiyyah (b. Sufyan) was speaking to a group of people when Ka`b al-Ahbar was mentioned. Mu`awiyyah said, “Although he is the most trustworthy of those who narrate from the People of the Book, we still reckon that some of the things he narrates are not true (Qurtubi, Ibn Kathir).

57. That is: Just as We sent Books to earlier Prophets, in the like manner We have sent down the Book upon you, O Muhammad (Ibn Jarir, Ibn Kathir).

58. That is, those who have been given the Qur’an believe in it, while some of these – the People of the Book – also believe in it (Ibn Jarir).

Ibn Kathir however, understands the verse the other way around. That is, he assumes that by “of these” the reference is to the pagans of the Prophet’s time.

59. Jahad of the text is defined as denial of what one’s own heart is convinced (as true), and to confess and insist on what the heart denies (as false) - Alusi from Raghib.

60. That is, it is only those deny who have decided to remain on untruth (Au.).

61. Ayah 46 suggested that we are not to argue with the People of the Book save with that which is better: as arguments and as evidences. This ayah helps us with an evidence: how could someone who never wrote down anything in life, was able to dictate an everlasting masterpiece in one attempt, without ever editing and improving it? (Au.)

62. The addition of the words “with your right hand” is to draw an image for greater emphasis (Alusi), and leave a stronger impression on the mind (Au.).

Qurtubi comments on this verse in the following manner: Except for an outside opinion, that of Abul Walid al-Baji, who said that our Prophet wrote (a few words) at the time the peace-treaty was being drawn at Hudaybiyyah, which opinion has been rejected by the rest of the Ummah, the consensus has ever been that to the end of his life the Prophet remained unlettered. One or two stray reports to the effect that he had learnt how to read and write before his death are not authentic. It is said for instance that in one of his trustworthy hadith he stated that Dajjal will have kafir written on his forehead. He emphasized by pronouncing the letters: kaf, alif, faa, raa, which means he knew the Arabic letters. But, Qurtubi answers, we might not forget that he also said, “Everyone, whether lettered or not lettered, will be able to read these letters on Dajjal’s forehead.” (Being able to know the alphabets does not make one literate: Au.).

As regards the Hudaybiyyah incident, when the Prophet dictated the text of the treaty to `Ali which said, “In the name of Allah, the Kind, the Compassionate: This is what Muhammad, the Messenger of Allah, agreed to ..” The Quraysh objected, saying, “If we had known that you are a Messenger of Allah, we would have followed you. So, you better write, ‘Muhammad, son of Abdullah.’” The Prophet ordered `Ali to erase the words, “Messenger of Allah.” But `Ali refused, saying “By Allah, I will not erase.” So the Prophet asked to be shown the words “Messenger of Allah” and erased them and wrote in their place, “son of `Abdullah.” According to another version in Bukhari, “(He wrote down) but did not do it legibly.” This incident, continues Qurtubi, has led one or two stray scholars to believe that toward the end of his life the Prophet had learnt how to read and write. But, the great majority has not considered this evidence enough to conclude that he had become literate, and that he might have asked another person to write those words. The latter day scholars have thought that it was a miracle that he wrote those words. Allah moved his hands that drew lines that somehow read like “son of `Abdullah.”

Qurtubi’s comments end here.

Majid quotes the consensus of Western scholars: “His youth had never been instructed in the arts of reading and writing.’ (GRE. V. p. 376). ‘As to acquired learning, it is confessed he had none at all.’ (SPD. p. 73). ‘It is probable that he could neither read nor write.’ (Palmer, The Qur’an, Intro. p. XLVII). ‘There is no evidence that he was able to read.’ (EBr. XIII, p. 483). ‘It is certain that he had neither read the Bible nor any other books.’ (HHW, VIII, p. 11).”

63. Asad has a note on the contextual “mubtiloon”: “The participial noun mubtil is derived from the verb abtala, ‘he made a false [or ‘vain’] claim’, or ‘tried to disprove the truth [or something]’, or ‘to reduce [something] to nothing,’ or ‘to prove [it] to be of no account’, or ‘null and void’, or ‘unfounded’, ‘false’, ‘spurious’, etc., irrespective of whether the object is true or false, authentic or spurious, valid or unfounded (Lisan al-`Arab and Taj al-`Arus).”

64. They would have doubted both ways. If the Prophet knew how to read and write, they would have said he was not a Prophet since their Scriptures said that he will be unlettered. They would have also said that since he knew how to read and write, what he produced was no more than some clever plagiary (based on Zamakhshari).

65. Asad comments, “Lit., ‘self-evident (bayyinah) in the breasts of those who have been given knowledge’ – the term `ilm having here the connotation of intuitive, spiritual perception.”

66. There are two opinions. One, the allusion is to the predictions about our own Prophet found in the older Scriptures, such as that the final Prophet will be unlettered, which, along with others, are signs in the hearts of those of the People of the Book who have knowledge. This is attributed to Ibn `Abbas and Ibn Jurayj. (The Prophet carried in his person not one, but several signs: Qurtubi). The second opinion is expressed by Hasan who thought that by the signs, the allusion is to Qur’anic revelations. Ibn Jarir prefers the former.

Ibn Kathir follows the latter opinion and reminds us of the hadith of Bukhari which says,

مَا مِنْ الْأَنْبِيَاءِ نَبِيٌّ إِلَّا أُعْطِيَ مَا مِثْلهُ آمَنَ عَلَيْهِ الْبَشَرُ وَإِنَّمَا كَانَ الَّذِي أُوتِيتُ وَحْيًا أَوْحَاهُ اللَّهُ إِلَيَّ فَأَرْجُو أَنْ أَكُونَ أَكْثَرَهُمْ تَابِعًا يَوْمَ الْقِيَامَةِ

“There has not been a Prophet but who was given something because of which people believed in him (i.e., miracles). I have been given the Revelation that Allah revealed to me (as the miracle). And I expect that I will be the most-followed-one on the Day of Judgment.”

He is also recorded in Muslim as having said,

يَا مُحَمَّدُ إِنَّمَا بَعَثْتُكَ لأَبْتَلِيَكَ ، وَأَبْتَلِيَ بِكَ ، وَأَنْزَلْتُ عَلَيْكَ كِتَابًا لاَ يَغْسِلُهُ الْمَاءُ تَقْرَؤُهُ نَائِمًا وَيَقْظَانًا

“Allah said, ‘I shall try you, and through you try others. And I am going to send down a Book upon you that water cannot wash away; which you will recite in wakefulness and when asleep.’” That is, a Revelation which will be in the memory of the people and so cannot be washed away with water (Ibn Kathir).

67. One might note that here, at this verse, Allah (swt) designated them as “zalimoon” while at verse 47 He called them “kafiroon.” This is because at verse 47 they were simple “kafiroon” since the evidence had not yet been presented. By this verse, an evidence has been presented, viz., the Prophet was unlettered. If the unbelievers still refuse, then they become “zalimoon” – a rank above the ordinary unbeliever in perversion (Razi).

68. That is, writes Zamakhshari, is not a single sign – the Qur’an – enough for them? As against several signs of the past – such as the rod or the camel - this is a sign which is permanent, which does not wither with time, and remains a sign in every place, until the end of time? And which, Razi adds, cannot be rejected on grounds that it is sorcery (as, for example, the signs of Jesus could be rejected on grounds of sorcery: Au.).

Apart from above, Imam Razi also points out that, (as against the Prophethood of other Prophets) since our Prophet’s Prophethood was meant for all mankind, and not for a specific people, he was given a few miracles that were for all mankind, e.g., the splitting of the moon, two halves of which went down towards two opposite parts of the earth; or the seas that witnessed storm (in some parts of the globe), or Kisra’s pillars crashing down, while church portals came down in yet another part of the earth, all indicating that the Prophet’s Prophethood would not be for a specific people, but for the entire globe.

It is also reported (by Yahya b. Ja`dah: Ibn Jarir, Qurtubi, Ibn Kathir) that some Companions of the Prophet made notes of what the People of the Book were saying and brought them to the Prophet. He waved them aside and Allah revealed this verse: “Is it not sufficient for them that We have sent down the Book upon you, (which is) recited to them?”

Accordingly, the Prophet has said, Qurtubi adds,

ليس مِنَّا مَن لم يَتغنَّ بالقرآن

“He is not of us, who is not satisfied with the Qur’an (to give up the rest).”

It could also be rendered as: “He is not of us who does not sing out the Qur’an.” The present translation is based on the understanding of Imam Shafe`I (Au.).