20. “The plea of ancestral ways is refuted by the example of Abraham, in two ways: (1) he gave up the ancestral cults followed by his father and people, and followed the true Way, even at some sacrifice to himself; and (2) he was an ancestor of the Arabs, and if the Arabs stood on ancestral ways, why should they not follow their good ancestor Abraham, rather than their bad ancestors who fell into evil? The incident in Abraham’s story referred to here will be found in xxi, 51-70” (Yusuf Ali).

21. What word is being referred to? Mujahid said it was the testimony proclaiming Allah’s oneness (Ibn Jarir). This was the opinion of Ibn `Abbas, Mujahid, `Ikrimah, Dahhak and others who said that the testimony: “there is no god but Allah,” remained among the progeny of Ibrahim (Ibn Kathir).

22. That is, the posterity might return to Allah in repentance, piety, and good behavior (Ibn Jarir).

23. “Note the first person singular, as showing Allah’s personal solicitude and care for the descendants of Abraham in both branches. The context here refers to the prosperity enjoyed by Makkah and the Makkans until they rejected the truth of Islam when it was preached in their midst by a messenger whose Message was as clear as the light of the sun” (Yusuf Ali).

24. Asad comments: “I.e., God did not impose on them any moral obligations before making the meaning of right and wrong clear to them through a revealed message. Primarily, this is an allusion to the pagan contemporaries of the Prophet, and to the prosperity which they had been allowed to enjoy for a long time.”

25. The allusion by the two cities is to Makkah and Ta’if, and by “some great man” the pagans meant one of the following: Al-Walid b. al-Mughirah, `Utbah b. Rabi`ah, both of Makkah, Habib b. `Umayr al-Thaqafi, Ibn `Abd Ya Layl or Ibn Mas`ud (i.e., `Urwah ibn Mas`ud) of Ta’if (Ibn Jarir, Qurtubi, Ibn Kathir).

26. Far from they dividing Allah’s mercy: giving whom they would and denying whom they would, even a minor thing like division of means of life is not entrusted to them. Allah has kept this in His own hand (Au.).

Zamakhshari writes: It is Allah who divides providence between them, being the Sustainer of the world and what it contains. He did not, as can be observed, divide qualities equally between them, but rather, made them strong, weak, rich, poor, owners and dependents. This is in order that they interact with each other and find sustenance through the co-operation and co-ordination with each other. In contrast, had Allah left the division to them, the lands would be filled with injustice and life destroyed. If such is the situation in worldly matters, what about spiritual matters, and those matters which order this life and the next?

27. This translation has the consent of the great majority of commentators.

28. “Since ‘man has been created weak’ (4: 28), it is almost a ‘law of nature’ that whenever he is exposed to the prospect of great wealth he is liable to lose sight of all spiritual and moral considerations, and to become utterly selfish, greedy and ruthless” (Asad).

In Yusuf Ali’s simpler words: “So little value is attached in the spiritual world to silver or gold, or worldly ranks or adornments, that they would freely be at the disposal of everyone who denied or blasphemed Allah, were it not that in that case there would be too great temptation placed in the way of men, for they might all scramble to sell their spiritual life for wealth! They might have silver roofs and stair-ways, silver doors and thrones, and all kinds of adornments of gold. But Allah does not allow too great a temptation to be placed in the path of men. He distributes these things differently, some to unjust men, and some to just men, in various degrees, so that the possession of these is no test - either of an unjust or a just life. His wisdom searches out motives far more subtle and delicate than any we are even aware of.”

29. That is, Allah would have made these things of gold if not for the fear that mankind will become one community of unbelievers. Consequently, gold and silver have been forbidden to the males of this community: whether as wares, utensils, or ornaments. It is reported that,



عَنْ ابْنِ أَبِي لَيْلَى قَالَ كَانَ حُذَيْفَةُ بِالْمَدَايِنِ فَاسْتَسْقَى فَأَتَاهُ دِهْقَانٌ بِقَدَحِ فِضَّةٍ فَرَمَاهُ بِهِ فَقَالَ إِنِّي لَمْ أَرْمِهِ إِلَّا أَنِّي نَهَيْتُهُ فَلَمْ يَنْتَهِ وَإِنَّ النَّبِيَّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ نَهَانَا عَنْ الْحَرِيرِ وَالدِّيبَاجِ وَالشُّرْبِ فِي آنِيَةِ الذَّهَبِ وَالْفِضَّةِ وَقَالَ هُنَّ لَهُمْ فِي الدُّنْيَا وَهِيَ لَكُمْ فِي الْآخِرَةِ

`Abdul Rahman ibn Abi Layla said that they were with Hudhayfah in (the province of) Mada'in when he asked for a drink. A servant brought it in a silver bowl. Hudhayfah threw it away and said, “I did this because I have forbidden him, but he does not heed. The Prophet has prohibited us silk and brocade, and drinking out of golden and silver vessels saying, 'They are for them in this world and for you in the Hereafter’” (Sahihayn).

The possibility remains that the meaning of the word “zukhruf” here is ornaments (Qurtubi, Alusi).

Another possible meaning is, “We would have made some of these things from silver and some others from gold” (Zamakhshari).

30. The unworthiness of this world is best expressed by a hadith as found in Tirmidhi. It says,

لَوْ كَانَتِ الدُّنْيَا تَزِنُ عِنْدَ اللَّهِ جَنَاحَ بَعُوضَةٍ، مَا سَقَى كَافِرًا مِنْهَا شَرْبَةَ مَاءٍ

Sahl b. Sa`d reports the Prophet (saws) as having said, “If the world was equal to the wing of a mosquito in the sight of Allah, the unbeliever would not have received a mouthful of drink” (Ibn Kathir).