17. After presenting a rational argument to refute shirk, the Arabs are being told that this rational point of view is not being presented before them for the first time, but the wise and learned people before them also have been saying the same thing, including their own famous sage, Luqman. Therefore, they cannot refute the Prophet’s (peace be upon him) message, saying, “If shirk was an irrational creed, why didn’t it strike so to somebody else before?”

Luqman was well known as a wise and learned man in Arabia. He has been mentioned in the poetry of the pre- Islamic poets like Imraul-Qais, Labid, Aasha, Tarafa and others. Some educated Arabs also possessed a collection of the wise sayings of Luqman. According to traditions, three years before the Hijrah the very first person of Al-Madinah to be influenced by the Prophet (peace be upon him) was Suwaid bin Samit. He went to Makkah for Hajj. There the Prophet (peace be upon him) was as usual preaching Islam to the pilgrims coming from different places, at their residences. When Suwaid heard his speech, he submitted, “I have also gotten a thing similar to what you preach,” When the Prophet (peace be upon him) asked what it was, he said, “The roll of Luqman.” Then on the Prophet’s (peace be upon him) insisting, he read out a portion of it, whereupon the Prophet (peace be upon him) said, “This discourse is fine, but that which I have is better still.” Then he recited the Quran to him, and Suwaid admitted that that was certainly better than the wisdom of Luqman. According to the historians, this person, Suwaid bin Samit, was known by the title of kamil (perfect) in Al-Madinah on account of his ability, bravery, nobility and poetry. But after his meeting with the Prophet (peace be upon him), when he returned to Al-Madinah. He was killed in the battle of Buath, which was fought some time afterwards. His tribesmen were of the opinion that he had become a Muslim after his meeting with the Prophet (peace be upon him).

Historically, Luqman is a disputed personage. In the dark centuries of ignorance there was no compiled history. The only source of information were the traditions that were being handed down since centuries. According to these, some people thought that Luqman belonged to the people of Aad and was a king of Yaman. Relying on these traditions, Maulana Sayyid Suleman Nadvi has expressed the opinion in the Ard al-Qaran that Luqman was a descendent of the believers who remained safe with the Prophet Hud (peace be upon him) after the destruction of the people of Aad by a divine torment, and he was one of the kings of Yaman when it was ruled by the Aad. But other traditions which have been reported from some learned companions and their immediate followers do not support this view. Ibn Abbas says Luqman was a negro slave, and the same is the opinion of Abu Hurairah, Mujahid, Ikrimah and Khalid ar-Rabi. According to Jabir bin Abdullah Ansari, he belonged to Nirbah. Said bin al- Musayyib says that he was an Egyptian negro. These three sayings closely resemble one another. The Arabs generally called the black people negroes (Habashis) in those days, and Nirbah is the country south of Egypt and north of Sudan. Therefore, calling the same person an Egyptian and a Nubian and a negro, in spite of the difference in words. is one and the same thing. Then the elucidations made by Suhayli in Raud al-Unuf nd Masudi in Muruj adh-Dhahab also throw some light on the question as to how the wisdom of this Sudanese slave spread in Arabia. They both agree that this person, though originally a Nubian, was an inhabitant of Madyan and Aylah (modern, Aqabah). That is why he spoke Arabic and his wisdom spread in Arabia. Besides, Suhayli also elucidates that Luqman the Sage and Luqman bin Aad were two different persons, and it is not correct to regard them as one and the same man.

Another thing may also be made clear here. The Arabic manuscript from the Library of Paris, which the orientalist Derenbourg has published under the title Amthal Luqman Hakim (Fables De Luqman Le Sage) is a fabricated thing which has nothing to do with the Roll of Luqman. These fables were compiled by somebody in the 13th century A.D. Its Arabic is poor, and a perusal shows that it is, in fact, a translation of some other book in a different language, which the author or translator has himself ascribed to Luqman the Sage. The orientalists make such researches with a special object in view. They bang out such forged and fake things in order to prove that the narratives of the Quran are unhistorical legends and therefore unreliable. Anyone who reads B. Helle’s article on Luqman in the Encyclopedia of Islam will not fail to understand the real motive of these people.

18. That is, “The very first demand of the wisdom and knowledge, insight and sagacity, granted by Allah was that man should have adopted the attitude of gratefulness and obedience before his Lord, and not of ingratitude and thanklessness. And this gratefulness should not have merely been lip-service but expressed and translated in thought and word and deed. One should have the conviction in the depths of his heart and mind that whatever he has gotten, has been given by God. One’s tongue should always be acknowledging the favors of God; and also practically, one should be trying to prove by carrying out His commands, by avoiding sins, by striving to achieve His good-will, by conveying His blessings and favors to His servants and by fighting those who have rebelled against Him that he is really a grateful servant of his God.”

19. That is, “The one who is ungrateful and unbelieving, his unbelief is harmful to his own self. Allah does not lose anything. He is Independent and does not stand in need of anyone's gratitude. The gratitude of someone does not add anything to His Godhead, nor does anyone’s ingratitude and disbelief change the reality that whatever the servants have gotten, has been granted by Him. He is self- Praiseworthy whether someone praises Him or not. Every particle in the universe bears testimony to His Perfection and Beauty, His Creativity and Providence, and every creature is paying homage to His glory perpetually.”

20. This particular admonition from the wisdom of Luqman has been cited here for two reasons: (1) He gave this admonition to his son, and obviously, no one can be insincere to his own children. A person may deceive others, may behave hypocritically towards them, but no one, not even a most depraved person, will try to deceive and defraud his own children. Therefore, Luqman’s admonishing his son thus is a clear proof of the fact that in his sight shirk was indeed the most heinous sin, and for that very reason he first admonished his dear son to refrain from this iniquity. (2) The second reason for this narration is that many parents from among the disbelievers of Makkah were compelling their children to turn away from the message of Tauhid being preached by the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) and remain steadfast on the creed of shirk, as is being stated in the following verses. Therefore, those foolish people are being told, as if to say, The well-known sage of your own land had wished his children well by admonishing them to avoid shirk, now you should judge it for yourself whether you are wishing your children well or ill when you compel them to follow the same creed of shirk.”

21. Zulm means to deprive someone of his right and to act unjustly. Shirk is a grave iniquity because man sets up such beings as equals with his Creator and Provider and Benefactor as have no share whatever in creating him, nor in providing for him, nor in bestowing the blessings on him, which he is enjoying in the world. There could be no greater injustice than this. The Creator’s right on man is that he should worship Him alone, but he worships others and so deprives Him of His right. Then, in whatever he does in connection with the worship of others than Allah, he exploits many things, from his own mind and body to the earth and heavens, whereas, all these things have been created by Allah, the One. And man has no right to use any of them in the worship of any other than Allah. Then, the right of man’s own self on him is that he should not debase and involve it in punishment. But when he worships others than his Creator, he debases his self as well as makes it deserving of the punishment. Thus, the entire life of a mushrik becomes zulm in every aspect and at all times and his every breath becomes an expression of injustice and iniquity.