اِنَّ Indeed اللّٰهَ Allah یُدْخِلُ will admit الَّذِیْنَ those who اٰمَنُوْا believe وَ عَمِلُوا and do الصّٰلِحٰتِ the righteous deeds جَنّٰتٍ (to) Gardens تَجْرِیْ flow مِنْ from تَحْتِهَا underneath it الْاَنْهٰرُ the rivers یُحَلَّوْنَ They will be adorned فِیْهَا therein مِنْ with اَسَاوِرَ bracelets مِنْ of ذَهَبٍ gold وَّ لُؤْلُؤًا ؕ and pearl وَ لِبَاسُهُمْ and their garments فِیْهَا therein حَرِیْرٌ (will be of) silk 22. Al-Haj Page 335 وَ هُدُوْۤا And they were guided اِلَی to الطَّیِّبِ the good مِنَ of الْقَوْلِ ۖۚ the speech وَ هُدُوْۤا and they were guided اِلٰی to صِرَاطِ (the) path الْحَمِیْدِ (of) the Praiseworthy اِنَّ Indeed الَّذِیْنَ those who كَفَرُوْا disbelieved وَ یَصُدُّوْنَ and hinder عَنْ from سَبِیْلِ (the) way اللّٰهِ (of) Allah وَ الْمَسْجِدِ and Al-Masjid Al-Haraam الْحَرَامِ and Al-Masjid Al-Haraam الَّذِیْ which جَعَلْنٰهُ We made it لِلنَّاسِ for the mankind سَوَآءَ equal لْعَاكِفُ (are) the resident فِیْهِ therein وَ الْبَادِ ؕ and the visitor وَ مَنْ and whoever یُّرِدْ intends فِیْهِ therein بِاِلْحَادٍۭ of deviation بِظُلْمٍ (or) wrongdoing نُّذِقْهُ We will make him taste مِنْ of عَذَابٍ a punishment اَلِیْمٍ۠ painful
(22:23) (On the other hand), Allah will cause those who believed and acted righteously to enter the Gardens beneath which rivers flow. They shall be decked in them with bracelets of gold and pearls38 and their raiment shall be of silk.
(22:24) They were guided (to accept) the pure word;39 they were guided to the Way of the Praiseworthy (Lord).40
(22:25) Indeed those who disbelieve41 and who (now) hinder people from the Way of Allah and hinder them from the Holy Mosque42 which We have set up (as a place of worship) for all people, equally for those who dwell therein and for those who come from outside,43 (they surely deserve punishment). Whosoever deviates therein from the Right Way and acts with iniquity,44 We shall cause him to taste a painful chastisement.
38. What is meant by this is that the believers will be made to don royal dress. At the time the Qur’an was revealed, kings and nobles wore jewelry of gold and precious stones. Such custom is in vogue even in our own time among the petty rulers, the nawabs and rajahs, of India.
39. Although the expression used here connotes a general significance, it refers, in fact, to that true statement and sound creed whose acceptance made them believers. (This consisted of affirming that there is no God other than Allah and that Muhammad is His Messenger — Ed.)
40. As we have stated in the introduction to this surah, in our opinion this verse concludes that part of the surah which was revealed during the Makkan period. The content and style of the verses up until the present one are those of the Makkan surahs. To put it differently, there is nothing, in these verses to Suggest that this part of the surah was revealed either wholly or partially in Madina.
Some commentators, however, believe that verse.19 of this surah belongs to the Madinan period. (See Ibn Kathir’s comments on the verse — Ed.) This view is based on the assumption that the two disputing parties mentioned refer to those who fought against each other in the Battle of Badr. This assumption, however, does not hold much water. The context does not indicate that the particular battle referred to is the Battle of Badr. Instead, the statement is couched in quite general terms. Commentators also seem to indicate that a reference is made here to the perennial dispute between belief and unbelief from the very beginning of time, a dispute which will last till the Day of Judgement. However, had there been any connection between this verse and the Battle of Badr it would have been located in Surah al-Anfal rather than-in the present surah or in this particular context. If one accepts such a line of argument, it implies that the verses revealed subsequently were placed quite arbitrarily according to the whims of people and without any regard for textual coherence. On the contrary, we find a highly cohesive order in the Qur’an, something which is in itself, emphatic refutation of such an argument.
41. This refers to those who rejected outright the Message of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be on him). What follows makes it evident that the reference here is to the unbelievers of Makka.
42. That is, they prevent the Prophet Muhammad (peace be on him) and his Companions from performing Hajj and ‘Umrah.
43. The Holy Mosque is not the property of any individual, family or tribe. It is meant instead for everyone and, hence, no one can bar others from visiting it. This gave rise to two legal questions regarding which Muslim jurists are disagreed. First, whether the expression ‘Holy Mosque stands for the masque itself, or for the sacred precincts of Makka? Second, what is meant by the statement that ‘those who dwell therein’, and ‘those who come from outside enjoy equal rights over it? Some scholars are of the opinion that the verse refers only to the Mosque and not to the entire area covered by the term Haram. (See Ibn Kathir’s comments on the verse — Ed.) This seems to be indicated by the apparent meaning of the words used here. As for equality of rights, what is meant is equality in the right of worship. In this respect, the Prophet Muhammad (peace be on him) said ‘Decendants of ‘Abd Manaf! Those of you who are placed in authority over the affairs of men shall not prohibit anyone from performing tawaf or praying for a while [in it] whenever he likes, be it in day or night.’ (For this command of the Prophet (peace be on him), see Tirmidhi, K. al-Hajj, ‘Bab ma ja’ fi al-Salah ba‘d al-‘Asr wa ba‘d al-Subh’. The words of the hadith are: See also Ahmad ibn Hanbal, Musnad, vol. 4, p. 8: ~ Ed.) Hence, exponents of this opinion contend that it is wrong to think that the Qur’an speaks here of the whole area of Makka. Nor is it legitimate to think that this verse declares that Makkans and outsiders are entitled to the same rights in all respects. They point out, by way of evidence, that from pre-Islamic times the land in Makka was considered to be the property of its inhabitants which they could inherit, buy, sell or lease, and these rights continued to be recognized even after the advent of Islam. This is evident, for instance, from the purchase of Safwan ibn Umayyah’s house for four thousand dirhams during ‘Umar ibn al-Khattab’s caliphate so as to transform it into a prison-house. (See Ibn Kathir’s comments on the verse — Ed.) Hence, what equality means is simply equality in the right to worship. This, then, is the opinion of Imam Shafi‘, as also of some other scholars.
Another group, however, is of the opinion that the expression ‘Holy Mosque’ here stands for the whole sacred area of Makka. The first argument advanced in support of this opinion is that the specific act of the Makkan polytheists, for ‘which they are here reproached, is in barring the Muslims from Hajj. It is also significant that this act is denounced on the grounds that all have equal rights there. Now, it is quite evident that the performance of Hajj rites is not confined to the Holy Mosque. Instead, its rituals are performed at several places, such as Safa, Marwah, Muzdalifah and ‘Arafat. Moreover, the Qur’an frequently employs the expression ‘Holy Mosque’ to denote the sacred precincts of Makka rather than in the narrow sense of the “Holy Mosque of Makka’. There are several examples of this in the Qur’an: ... Barring people from the way of Allah and denying entry into the Holy Mosque and expelling its inmates from it are more awesome acts in the sight of Allah... (al-Baqarah 2: 217).
This privilege is for those whose families do not live near the Holy Mosque (al-Baqarah 2: 196).
In these verses, the expression ‘Holy Mosque’ quite evidently denotes the sacred precincts of Makka rather than the Mosque itself. Hence, the equality mentioned in the above verse cannot be limited to the Mosque itself; rather, it embraces the entire precincts. Furthermore, this group of scholars does not limit equality to matters pertaining to worship or to acts relating to sanctity and reverence. They rather contend that within the area of the Haram there should be equality in other respects as well. They are also of the opinion that the land of Makka falls into the category of common waqf, i.e. endowment on behalf of God. Hence, none has any property rights over its land or its buildings. Anyone can stay wherever he likes. No one has-the right to stop anyone from staying wherever he wants nor can anyone be evicted from the place where he is staying.
These scholars marshal a number of traditions in support of this view. For instance, they adduce a hadith narrated by ‘Abd Allah ibn ‘Umar to the effect that the Prophet (peace be on him) said: ‘Makka is a site [for pilgrims]; its land may not be sold nor its buildings rented.’ (See the comments of Qurtubi and Jassas on the verse. The former attributes the transmission of the hadith to ‘Abd Allah ibn ‘Amr ibn al-‘As rather than to ‘Abd Allah ibn “Umar -— Ed.) Ibrahim al-Nakha‘i also narrates a mursal tradition from the Prophet: “Allah has made Makka a sacred territory: it is unlawful to sell its land or to receive rent on its houses.’ (See Alusi, Ruh al-Ma ‘ani, vol. 17, p. 138 — Ed.) It may be pertinent to point out that the mursal' traditions of Ibrahim al-Nakha‘l are rated as marfu‘.? This in view of his well-known practice of narrating a mursal tradition which was in fact a tradition transmitted by ‘Abd Allah ibn Mas‘Ud. ‘Alqamah ibn Nadlah also reported that in the time. of the Prophet (peace be on him) and of’ Abu Bakr and ‘Umar ibn al-Khattab the land of Makka was treated as sawa’ib, that is, land on which a person might live as long as he needed to, and pass it on to others when he did not. (See the comments of Ibn Kathir on the verse; and Alusi, Ruh al-Ma ‘ani, vol. 17, p. 138 — Ed.) ‘Abd Allah ibn ‘Umar reports that ‘Umar even issued the order that no Makkan may close his door during the days of Hajj. In fact Mujahid reports that ‘Umar directed the residents of Makka to keep the courtyards to their houses open; he asked them to have no door to their courtyards so that a pilgrim might stay wherever he wished. (See the comments of Ibn Kathir on the verse, vol. 3, p. 215 — Ed.) The same tradition is reported by ‘Ata’ who adds that the only exception that was made was in respect of Suhayl ibn ‘Amr who, because of his trading requirements, needed to keep his camels in an enclosure. He was, therefore, allowed to have a door to his courtyard. “Abd Allah ibn ‘Umar says that he who receives rent on his houses in Makka fills his belly with fire. (See the comments of Ibn Kathir, vol. 3, p. 215; and Alusi, Ruh al-Ma‘ani, vol. 17, p. 138, ‘Bay‘ Aradi Makkah wa Ijarat Buyutiha’.
Ibn Kathir has attributed this statement to ‘Abd Allah ibn ‘Amr ibn al-‘As, whereas Alusi and Jassas have attributed it to ‘Abd Allah ibn ‘Umar — Ed.) The same opinion is held by ‘Abd Allah ibn ‘Abbas who says that Allah sanctified the precincts of Makka into a mosque where all have equal rights. (1. A mursal tradition from the Prophet (peace be on him) narrated by a Successor, or anyone belonging to the generation(s) following the Successors, stating that the Prophet (peace be on him) said or did or tacitly approved something, even though the narrator, not being a Companion, did not have any direct contact with the Prophet. (See al-Sayyid al-Sharif al-Jurjani, al-Ta‘rifat, Beirut, Dar al-Surir, n.d., q.v. ‘mursal’ — Ed.) (2. A marfu ‘tradition is a tradition from the Prophet (peace be on him) which has been narrated by a Companion (ibid., q.v. ‘marfu” - Ed.)
He was of the opinion that the people of Makka had no right to receive any rent from outsiders. In the same vein, ‘Umar ibn ‘Abd al-‘Aziz issued the directive to the governor of Makka that no one may receive rent on houses in Makka, In view of these traditions, the majority of Successors subscribed to the above-mentioned opinion. Among the leading jurists of that age, Malik, Abu Hanifah, Sufyan al-Thawri, Ahmad ibn Hanbal and Ishaq ibn Rahawayh are of the opinion that the sale of Makkan land and the renting out of houses there, at least during the Hajj season, are not lawful. Most jurists concede, however, the right to property on the houses of Makka and, accordingly, consider it permissible to rent out houses even though they may not rent out land.
This viewpoint seems closer to the spirit of the Qur’an, the Sunnah and the practice of the Rightly-Guided Caliphs. For God did not prescribe Hajj as an obligatory duty on Muslims around the world in order to provide a source of income to the residents of Makka; nor in order to provide them with an opportunity to fleece pilgrims by charging exorbitant rents. Makka is to be treated as a common endowment for the benefit of all believers. No one has proprietary rights over it. Every pilgrim has the right to stay on any spot that he finds available. (For a detailed discussion of the question and for the traditions mentioned here see the comments of Ibn Kathir and Alusi on the verse. See also Qurtubi who, however, does not go into details — Ed.)
44. Zulm does not signify a specific act, but rather embraces all acts that do not conform with righteousness and share the attribute of ‘wrong-doing’. Such acts are sinful regardless of the place where they are committed. However, to commit them within the sacred precincts of the Haram is all the more iniquitous. Commentators, for example, are of the opinion that if someone swears without there being any legitimate reason for this in the precincts of the Haram, then it amounts to blaspheming the Haram, and so the present verse applies to such a person.
Apart from ordinary sins, there are certain acts which violate the sanctity of the Haram quite directly and blatantly on the grounds of this verse. The following represent some instances of violating the sanctity of the Haram.
If someone who commits a homicide outside the sacred precincts or commits any other crime which entails a hadd-punishment and seeks refuge in the sacred precincts, no action will be taken against him as long as he stays there. The Haram is considered to have enjoyed this immunity since the time of the Prophet Abraham. The only exception being made, quite temporarily, was on the day of the conquest of Makka after which the age-old inviolability of Makka was restored. The Qur’an says that: ‘Whoever enters it becomes secure’ (Al ‘Imran 3: 97). Statements from each of the following Companions, ‘Umar ibn al- Khattab, ‘Abd Allah ibn ‘Umar and ‘Abd Allah ibn Abbas, have authentically been reported to the effect that even if offspring were to get hold of those who had killed their father, they still could not touch them as long as they remained in the precincts of Makka. (See Alusi’s comments on Al ‘Imran 3: 97 ~ Ed.) Accordingly, a majority of Successors and Hanafi, Hanbali and Ahl al-Hadith scholars are of the opinion that qisas cannot be meted out in the Haram area for crimes committed outside it. (See the comments of Ibn Kathir on Al ‘Imran 3: 97 and Tirmidhi, K. al-Hajj, ‘Bab ma ja’ bi Jarhat Makkah’ — Ed.) - Fighting and bloodshed have also been forbidden within the sacred precincts. The Prophet (peace be on him) prohibited it in his address on the day following the conquest of Makka, declaring: ‘O People! God has sanctified Makka from the very beginning and it will remain so till the Last Day. It is forbidden for anyone who believes in God and the Last Day to shed blood within its precincts.’ Then he added: ‘If someone were to cite this fighting of mine to legitimize the shedding of blood within the sacred precincts, let him know that God has made it especially lawful for His Messenger, and even so for a certain hour on a certain day, after which its sanctity is restored as it was ever in the past.’ Such is the sanctity of Makka that its self-grown trees may not be felled and its self-grown grass may not be uprooted; nor may any birds and animals be hunted in Makka. Nor may any animals be driven away from Makka for the purposes of game outside its precincts. The only exception in this regard are snakes, scorpions and other harmful animals which may be killed even in the sacred precincts. Exception has also been made with regard to wild grass, there being explicit injunctions on all these matters in the collections of Hadith. (See Abu Da’ud, K. al-Manasik, ‘Bab Tahrim Haram Makkah’ — Ed.) It is a part of the inviolability of the Haram that one may not pick up in the Haram articles that have been dropped by others. According to a tradition of Abu Da’ud: ‘The Prophet (peace be on him) forbade people to pick up the articles dropped by pilgrims.’ (See Abu Da’ud, K. al-Luqtah — Ed.)
Likewise, whoever visits the sacred area for the purpose of Hajj or ‘Umrah may not enter without ihram. There is, however, some difference of opinion among jurists about whether it is obligatory for all persons who enter the sacred area to observe ihram even if their purposes be for other than Pilgrimage. ‘Abd Allah ibn ‘Abbas believes that no one may enter the sacred area without ihram, regardless of the purpose. of his visit. A statement to this effect is attributed to both Ahmad ibn Hanbal and Shafi‘i. There is, however, an opinion regarding those who frequent the Haram in connection with their occupation to the effect that such people are exempt from the requirements of ihram. This is the opinion of Ahmad ibn Hanbal and Shafi‘i. There is another opinion, however, that anyone who lives within the miqat may enter Makka without ihram. However, those living outside the miqat may not do so. This position is held by Abu Hanifah.