وَ اِذْ And when قَالَ said مُوْسٰی Musa لِفَتٰىهُ to his boy لَاۤ Not اَبْرَحُ I will cease حَتّٰۤی until اَبْلُغَ I reach مَجْمَعَ the junction الْبَحْرَیْنِ (of) the two seas اَوْ or اَمْضِیَ I continue حُقُبًا (for) a long period فَلَمَّا But when بَلَغَا they reached مَجْمَعَ the junction بَیْنِهِمَا between them نَسِیَا they forgot حُوْتَهُمَا their fish فَاتَّخَذَ and it took سَبِیْلَهٗ its way فِی into الْبَحْرِ the sea سَرَبًا slipping away 18. Al-Kahf Page 301 فَلَمَّا Then when جَاوَزَا they had passed beyond قَالَ he said لِفَتٰىهُ to his boy اٰتِنَا Bring us غَدَآءَنَا ؗ our morning meal لَقَدْ Certainly لَقِیْنَا we have suffered مِنْ in سَفَرِنَا our journey هٰذَا this نَصَبًا fatigue قَالَ He said اَرَءَیْتَ Did you see اِذْ when اَوَیْنَاۤ we retired اِلَی to الصَّخْرَةِ the rock فَاِنِّیْ Then indeed I نَسِیْتُ [I] forgot الْحُوْتَ ؗ the fish وَ مَاۤ And not اَنْسٰىنِیْهُ made me forget it اِلَّا except الشَّیْطٰنُ the Shaitaan اَنْ that اَذْكُرَهٗ ۚ I mention it وَ اتَّخَذَ And it took سَبِیْلَهٗ its way فِی into الْبَحْرِ ۖۗ the sea عَجَبًا amazingly قَالَ He said ذٰلِكَ That مَا (is) what كُنَّا we were نَبْغِ ۖۗ seeking فَارْتَدَّا So they returned عَلٰۤی on اٰثَارِهِمَا their footprints قَصَصًاۙ retracing فَوَجَدَا Then they found عَبْدًا a servant مِّنْ from عِبَادِنَاۤ Our servants اٰتَیْنٰهُ whom We had given رَحْمَةً mercy مِّنْ from عِنْدِنَا Us وَ عَلَّمْنٰهُ and We had taught him مِنْ from لَّدُنَّا Us عِلْمًا a knowledge قَالَ Said لَهٗ to him مُوْسٰی Musa هَلْ May اَتَّبِعُكَ I follow you عَلٰۤی on اَنْ that تُعَلِّمَنِ you teach me مِمَّا of what عُلِّمْتَ you have been taught رُشْدًا (of) right guidance قَالَ He said اِنَّكَ Indeed you لَنْ never تَسْتَطِیْعَ will be able مَعِیَ with me صَبْرًا (to have) patience وَ كَیْفَ And how can تَصْبِرُ you have patience عَلٰی for مَا what لَمْ not تُحِطْ you encompass بِهٖ of it خُبْرًا any knowledge قَالَ He said سَتَجِدُنِیْۤ You will find me اِنْ if شَآءَ Allah wills اللّٰهُ Allah wills صَابِرًا patient وَّ لَاۤ and not اَعْصِیْ I will disobey لَكَ your اَمْرًا order قَالَ He said فَاِنِ Then if اتَّبَعْتَنِیْ you follow me فَلَا (do) not تَسْـَٔلْنِیْ ask me عَنْ about شَیْءٍ anything حَتّٰۤی until اُحْدِثَ I present لَكَ to you مِنْهُ of it ذِكْرًا۠ a mention
(18:60) (And recount to them the story of Moses) when Moses said to his servant: "I will journey on until I reach the point where the two rivers meet, though I may march on for ages."57
(18:61) But when they reached the point where the two rivers meet, they forgot their fish, and it took its way into the sea, as if through a tunnel.
(18:62) When they had journeyed further on, Moses said to his servant: "Bring us our repast. We are surely fatigued by today's journey."
(18:63) The servant said: "Did you see what happened? When we betook ourselves to the rock to take rest, I forgot the fish � and it is only Satan who caused me to forget to mention it to you � so that it made its way into the sea in a strange manner."
(18:64) Moses said: "That is what we were looking for."58 So the two turned back, retracing their footsteps,
(18:65) and there they found one of Our servants upon whom We had bestowed Our mercy, and to whom We had imparted a special knowledge from Ourselves.59
(18:66) Moses said to him: "May l follow you that you may teach me something of the wisdom which you have been taught?"
(18:67) He answered: "You will surely not be able to bear with me.
(18:68) For how can you patiently bear with something you cannot encompass in your knowledge?"
(18:69) Moses replied: "You shall find me, if Allah wills, patient; and I shall not disobey you in anything."
(18:70) He said: "Well, if you follow me, do not ask me concerning anything until I myself mention it to you."
57. The narration of Moses’ story here is meant to draw both the unbelievers’ and the believers’ attention to an important fact. Those who are concerned with the external aspects of things are liable to draw false conclusions from their observations. This happens because man is not aware of the wisdom underlying the events that take place under God’s dispensation.
One frequently witnesses that the wrong-doers prosper whereas the innocent suffer hardships; those who disobey God and commit transgression live in great affluence whereas those who obey God face adversities, and that the wicked enjoy the pleasures of worldly life whereas the virtuous live in misery. Such spectacles are quite common.
Not knowing why such things happen, doubts arise in people’s minds, leading them, on occasion, to have a totally false perception of things. Those who consciously disbelieve and are immersed in the perpetration of injustice and oppression are led to conclude that they live in a disordered and chaotic world, a world which has either no sovereign, or if there is any, one who must have become senseless or unjust. Hence, they conclude that people may go about doing what they please, without fearing that they will be called to account, On the other hand, those who believe in God are heart-broken by what they see around them. It also often happens that when such believers are faced with severe tests, their faith is shaken to the core.
It was in order to enable Moses to comprehend the wisdom underlying those events which generally baffle one’s understanding that God slightly lifts the curtain from the reality which governs the workings of the world. In this way Moses was able to appreciate that appearances are quite different from the reality.
The Qur’an does not specify where and when this incident relating to Moses _ took place. In the Hadith, however, we do find some information about it. For instance, there is a tradition from ‘Awfi in which he reports a statement by Ibn ‘Abbas according to which the incident took place after Pharaoh’s drowning, and when Moses had settled his people in Egypt. (Al-Alusi, Ruh al-Ma‘ani, vol. 15, comments on al-Kahf 18, verse 60, p. 313 — Ed.) There are, however, other traditions, more authentic ones, which are found in al-Bukhari and other collections of Hadith which do not support the content of the tradition just mentioned. Nor do any other sources confirm that after Pharaoh’s drowning, the Prophet Moses (peace be on him) ever lived in Egypt. In fact, the Qur’an makes it clear that after the exodus from Egypt, Moses spent all his life in Sinai, in the wilderness. (See al-Ma’ idah 5: 26 — Ed.) Hence there seems no reason to accept al-‘Awfi’s report.
When we reflect over the details of the story, however, two points clearly emerge. Firstly, that the Prophet Moses’ experience probably belongs to the early phase of his prophethood. For it is in the earlier part of their prophetic careers that Prophets stand in need of the kind of instruction given to Moses and requiring that he be exposed to certain experiences. Secondly, it also stands to reason that Moses would have been in need of such instruction at the time when the Israelites faced conditions similar to those facing the Muslims during the Makkan phase of the Prophet’s life.
Because of these two reasons we presume — though the truth is known to God alone — that this story belongs to the period when the Israelites were being persecuted by Pharaoh in Egypt. At that time Pharaoh and his courtiers, in the manner of the Quraysh aristocracy, believed that they would not be held to account because God’s punishment — which, as we know, is not meted out instantly — was not in sight. It is likely that the Egyptian Muslims [i.e. the followers of Moses], like their Makkan counterparts in the time of the Prophet (peace be on him) felt agitated at seeing their tormentors flourishing while they suffered grievously. How long, they asked somewhat impatiently, will this state of affairs continue? Even Moses cried out to God in these words: ‘Our Lord! You bestowed upon Pharaoh and his noble’s splendor and riches in the world. Our Lord! Have You done this that they may lead people astray from Your path?’ (Yunus: 10: 88).
If our assumption is correct, then it is probable that the Prophet Moses (peace be on him) travelled towards the Sudan and that the place referred to in the Qur’4n by the expression majma‘al-bahrayn (see verse 60) is located near Khartoum where the two main branches of the Nile — the Blue Nile and White Nile — converge (see Map 1.) When one traces the places through which Moses journeyed in his life, there is no other place than the one just mentioned where the two rivers meet.
The Bible is totally silent about all this. The event as such is, however, mentioned in the Talmud. The Talmudic version is, however, quite different in so far as it is attributed to Rabbi Joehanan, the son of Levi, rather than to the Prophet Moses (peace be on him). According to the same report, the other person involved in the incident was Elijah. This is the same Elijah who is considered to have been taken up alive from this world to the heavens, who was subsequently made an angel and asked to look after the affairs of the world. (See H. Polano, The Talmud Selections, pp. 313-16.) Possibly, like other events of Jewish history which pre-date the exodus, this event might not have been authentically preserved. Accretions might also have adulterated the account as has happened in the case of other events. Influenced by the Talmudic account, some Muslim scholars think that the person called Moses in the Qur’anic account is a Moses other than the Prophet Moses (peace be on him). Now, there is no reason to believe that all reports mentioned in the Talmud are reliable. Nor is there any prima facie reason why the Qur’an would narrate the story of some unknown Moses at such length. On the other hand, we have authentic hadith narrated by Ubayy bin Ka‘b, in which the Prophet Muhammad (peace be on him) mentioned Moses (peace be on him) while explaining this very story. (See al-Bukhari, K. Tafsir al-Qur’an: Sarah al-Kahf, ‘Bab wa idh qal Musa li Fatahu’ and ‘Bab Qawluh fa lamma balagha Majma‘ baynihima nasiya Hutahuma’ .. . — Ed.) In view of all this, there is no reason for any Muslim to pay attention to the Talmudic account.
The Orientalists, true to their ilk, have attempted to explore the possible sources of this Qur’anic story as well. After strenuous efforts, they identify three possible sources from which the Prophet Muhammad (peace be on him) may have composed the story and ascribed it to God’s revelation. These sources are the Gilgamesh epic, the Alexandrian romance in Syriac, and the Talmudic report referred to earlier about Elijah.
It is obvious that Orientalists share a common attitude: that one may be open to all assumptions except that the Qur’an is a revelation from God. That being definitely excluded, these scholars embark on this grand mission to dissect whatever was presented in the Qur’an (which, in their view, was definitely the work of Muhammad (peace be on him) rather than God) and to show how each fragment had some external source. They pursue this line of inquiry so brazenly and go to such absurd lengths that one feels instinctively repelled.
Ironically, they term their bigoted pursuit scholarly research. If such, biased inquiry can be called knowledge or research, one might as well do without it.
The true nature of their bigoted research would become fully evident if they were asked to answer the following four questions:
Firstly, granted that there are similarities in the contents of the Qur’an and the contents of several ancient texts, one might, nevertheless, ask: Is there any positive evidence to suggest that this similarity of content is the result of the Qur’anic account having been taken from other sources? Secondly, the sources mentioned as the materials for the Qur’anic stories are quite numerous. Were all such sources to be added up, they would be so numerous as to make the fully-fledged catalogue of a fairly good library. Did any such library exist in Makka at the time of the Prophet (peace be on him)? And even if there had been an abundance of sources from which he might have drawn his material, is there any evidence to indicate that there existed a large team of translators available to the Prophet (peace be on him) whereby this wealth of information might have been brought to his knowledge. Now, since that is quite certainly not the case, the allegations of borrowing simply rest on the two or three trade journeys which the Prophet (peace be on him) took to lands outside Arabia; journeys which he made a few years before his designation as a Prophet. In this respect, it is pertinent to ask: Did the Prophet memorize whole libraries during those journeys? Additionally, how does one explain that before being designated a Prophet, Muhammad (peace be on him) never displayed any such knowledge? Thirdly, the Makkan unbelievers as well as the Jews and Christians were always on the look-out to identify possible sources of the Prophet’s statements.
Yet the Prophet’s contemporaries were unable to point to any definite source for the Prophet’s alleged plagiarism. The Qur’an frequently challenges them by emphatically stating that the Qur’an is from God alone, that its only source is revelation from God. The Qur’an repeatedly asks its detractors to come forth with whatever proof they have to show that the Qur’an is the product of the human mind. This challenge struck at the very root of their contention, and yet they failed to point to any plausible human source for the Qur’an. Not only were they totally unable to point, in a persuasive manner, to any specific source from which the Qur’an might have been derived, they could not produce even as much as a shred of evidence that would create any reasonable doubt about the matter. It is ironic that while the Prophet’s contemporaries failed to point to any plausible source of the Qur’an; some pseudo-scholars of our time, animated by inveterate hostility to Islam, have the temerity to claim — a thousand and several hundred years after the Prophet’s time — the so-called sources from which the contents of the Qur’an were derived! The fast point to consider is the following. It is not possible for anybody to ~ deny that there exists at least the logical possibility that the Qur’an might be the revealed word of God. It is logically possible that the information the Qur’an provides about past events might indeed be true whereas those reports commonly available to us about the past might be the distorted versions of oral reports of events over the centuries, and hence unreliable. It should be noted ‘that this possibility was arbitrarily ruled out without any valid reason - whatsoever. Having discarded this all attention was focused on one assumption alone — that the material in the Qur’an was primarily drawn from oral reports - and legends that were current in the region at the time the Qur’an was revealed.
One wonders if this can be explained by anything other than religious prejudice _ and bigotry. _ A little reflection on the above points should convince us that much of what has been trumpeted by the Orientalists as knowledge and scholarship is far too palpably colored by bigotry to be worthy of serious consideration by students who: have embarked on a quest for the truth.
58. Moses exclaimed that it was precisely the disappearance of the fish in the sea that was the significant indicator of the place where he would encounter the person whom he wanted to meet. This implies that Moses (peace be on him) had undertaken his journey under God’s direction. It is for this reason that he was informed he would encounter certain incidents which would be of special significance. He had been foretold that the place where the fish intended for breakfast would disappear would be the meeting place between him and the person he was required to meet.
59. According to authentic traditions, this person was called Khidr. Hence, those reports which, under the influence of the Israelite traditions, link this story with Elijah are erroneous. It is incorrect to think that Moses met Elijah, firstly because it is opposed to the Prophet’s statements on the question. (Al-Bukhari, K. Tafsir al-Qur’an: Surah al-Kahf, ‘Bab wa idh qal Musa li Fatahu ...’ and ‘Bab fa lamma balaghd Majma‘ baynihima. . . - Ed.) Secondly, Elijah was born several hundred years after the time of the Prophet Moses (peace be on him), thus casting further doubt on the likelihood of their meeting.
The Qur’an does not specify the name of Moses’ servant. According to some reports, it was Joshua, son of Nun who later succeeded the Prophet Moses (peace be on him). (See al-Bukhari, K. Tafsir al-Qur’ an: Surah al-Kahf, ‘Bab wa idh qal Musa li Fatahu . . . — Ed.)