Verses 49–79
This is another section in Moses’ life, describing Moses’ and Aaron’s dispatch to Pharaoh, where they convey their Lord’s Message regarding the Israelites’ exodus. The verses detail the account of their going to him, showing him God’s signs, confronting the magicians, the truth prevailing and the submission of the magicians. The Israelites’ night journey, the splitting of the sea, Pharaoh’s pursuing them along with his armies and their being drowned are also alluded to.
Commentary
قَالَ فَمَنْ رَبُّكُمَا يَا مُوسَى ٤٩
(20:49) (Pharaoh) said: And who is your Lord, O Moses?
[This is] a narration of the dialogue (that transpired) between Moses and Pharaoh. What they said to him is known from what He has stated—His command to both of them to go to Pharaoh, invite him to monotheism and speak to him about sending the Israelites with them. Therefore it is omitted because it is implied by Pharaoh’s reply. It is evident from Pharaoh’s reply that he was aware by way of their introduction, that they were associates in regards to the propagation. It was obvious that Moses was the primary executor and Aaron was his helper. That is why he addressed Moses alone but asked about their Lord. The propagative message which they were commanded to give him was, Surely we are two Messengers of your Lord; therefore send the children of Israel with us and do not torment them! Indeed we have brought to you a sign from your Lord … The word Rabbika, your Lord, was directed at Pharaoh twice, because he did not believe he had a Lord. Instead, he had convinced himself of being their lord and of the nation’s, as some of his reported statements indicate: I am your lord, the most high (); If you will take a god besides me, I will most certainly make you one of the imprisoned ().
In that setting it would have been more appropriate for him to say: “And who is my Lord, Who you claim is a Lord to me?” or something to that effect. It alludes to his feigning indifference to God being his Lord, as though he had not heard them say: “Your Lord”, and inquiring about their Lord, Whose Messengers they were.
It was an incontrovertible fact among idolatrous nations that the Creator of everything was a truth exalted beyond measure and too great for minds to comprehend or to be imagined. Thus, it was impossible [for them] to turn to Him through worship or to achieve closeness to Him through any means of seeking proximity, and therefore He could not be adopted as god or lord. Rather, it was necessary to direct one’s attention of worship and sacrifice towards one of His favored creation, for them to bring the person closer to God by interceding on his behalf, with his Lord. They were gods and lords. God is not a god or lord but just the God of gods and Lord of lords. Someone’s saying: “I have a lord”, would just mean one of the gods, not God. He would not mean God and that would not be understood from what he said in their conversations.
Pharaoh’s words, And who is your Lord are not the denial of the existence of a Creator of everything or a denial of his having a god as is clear from his (other) words: … and to forsake you and your gods ().
It is merely a request by him to know about Whom they had adopted as God and Lord. This is what was meant above by Pharaoh’s feigning inadvertence in saying this about their invitation to God at the beginning of the propagation. He reckoned—albeit as someone feigning ignorance—that Moses and his brother were calling him to one of the gods taken as lord amongst themselves and not God, so he could ask about him. Sophistication in adopting gods—each of them adopting whom they liked as god—was the idolaters’ custom. They may have swapped one god for another and so that was their way. The chiefs’ words, and to take away your best traditions will follow. True, commoners among them may have uttered some of what was not in conformity with their fundamental [beliefs] for example attributing creation and regulation to the idols themselves as opposed to those idolized.
In summary, their religion was to absolve God of the [possibility of being] worshiped and of closeness to Him being achievable. They could only come near to Him through the intercession of some of His creatures such as Angels, jinn and holy people. Many of them believed that their great kings were manifestations of the magnanimity of divinity and worshiped them on the same level as the rest of the gods and lords. However, that would not stop the worshiped king from adopting one of the gods and worshiping him. Thus, he would be both a worshiper of his lord and an object of worship to others among the flock, just like the case of the lord of the house in the ancient Roman Empire, most of whom were being Sabaean idolaters; Moses’ Pharaoh was a deified king who worshiped idols as evidenced by the noble verses.
Thus, [the problem with] what many exegetes say about him [that is Pharaoh] is clear. Rūḥ al-maʿānī says: “Some of them believe that Pharaoh was well aware of God . He was just obstinate”. They seek to rely on several verses as evidence of that, and, on the fact that his kingdom did not surpass Egypt nor reach the Levant. Do you not recall that when Moses fled to Midian, Jethro (Shuʿayb) told him: Fear not, you are secure from the unjust people (). So how could he [Pharaoh] believe that he was the god of the world? He was rational and by necessity was accountable. Every rational being knows a priori that he came into existence following non-existence. Anyone like that is in need of a regulator. Therefore he believes in a regulator.
Some people say that he [Pharaoh] was ignorant of God after agreeing that a rational person cannot believe in his soul that he is the creator of the Heavens and the earth and everything between them. There is disagreement among the scholars about Pharaoh’s ignorance. It is possible that he was materialist that denied the existence of a creator. It could be that he believed that a contingent being does not need a cause, and that the existence of the universe is coincidental, as it is attributed to Democritus and his followers. It is conceivable that he was a philosopher, who believed in necessitating cause or that he was a star worshiper. He may have been an idol worshiper and it is possible that he was an anthropomorphist subscribing to reincarnation. As for his claim to lordship, it meant that everyone under his control had to obey and follow him and not (worship or) obey anyone else.
The reader by returning to the essence of the faith of the idolaters will realize that none of these opinions, possibilities or evidence that they rely on conform to the truth of the matter.
قَالَ رَبُّنَا الَّذِي أَعْطَى كُلَّ شَيْءٍ خَلْقَهُ ثُمَّ هَدَى ٥٠
(20:50) He said: Our Lord is He Who gave to everything its creation, then guided it (to its goal):
This verse is a response to Pharaoh’s question, And who is your Lord, O Moses? Given this context, “creation” in this verse is verbal noun and the pronoun “its” refers to “everything”. Thus, it means the existence particular to the thing. Hidāyah means showing a thing the way to its objective and making it reach its goal [or objective]. Both explanations are in fact a single clarification, that is, a kind of making something reach its objective either independently or to be led to the path which ultimately leads to its goal. Hidāyah is said in regard to the recipient of the guidance and that to which it is guided. However, only the former is mentioned here. Therefore, it is referring to the guidance of everything to its goal, as mentioned before. Its objective is the purpose to which its existence and destination are linked. The primary objective of its creation is to reach the goal which has been established for it. Its guidance means that it is oriented towards it. This is based on a proper connection between a thing’s creation and its purpose. In other words, the verse is referring to the connection that God has made between the properties and faculties of everything and their effects which allow it to journey towards the purpose of its existence. For instance, a human embryo which begins as a small drop of seed, is a form equipped in itself with faculties and limbs appropriate for the actions and effects which will ultimately take it to forming into a complete person, soul and body. The human sperm with its potential, has been given the particularities for its creation that is existence specific to humanity. The faculties and limbs it is equipped with are then guided and steered towards its objective, namely the purpose of human existence—the final perfection particular to this species.
Thus it is clear why “guided it” (hadā) is joined with the conjunction thumma (then) to, “gave to everything its creation” (aʾtā kulla shayʿin khalqahu) and that it means lower rank because a thing’s course and movement comes after its existence in terms of rank. This sequence in physical existents is somewhat level and time based. It is also clear that guidance means general guidance which applies to everything, as opposed to particular guidance for humanity. This comes by resolving distinct instruction and casting off the specifics because the essence of human guidance is by showing them the way, which takes them to their objective. The path is the link between the object and its purpose gravitating towards its final goal. Everything is equipped with that which links it to something and moves it, towards its end. In the process it is being guided towards that thing. All things are guided towards their perfection through the provisions it has been given and God is the Guide.
Thus the system of actions and reactions of things—or you can also say the specific system particular to each thing and the general system which comprises all specific systems –are an example of His guidance with regard to how their various parts are related and how things move from one part to another. From another perspective, it is an example of His regulation (tadbīr). Obviously His regulation ultimately leads to creation that is He to whom regulation of things is attributable is He Who brings the things themselves into being. Thus every existence or attribute of existence is attributable to Him and subsists through Him.
Therefore it is clear that the words, Who gave to everything its creation, then guided it consist of proof that He is the Lord of everything. There is no lord apart from Him. His having created all things and brought them into being means He owns their existence—because they subsist through Him—and to Him belong the regulation of their affair.
At this [juncture] it is clear that the words given their natural order and thread are appropriate to the context because the circumstance is one of an invitation to monotheistic belief and obedience to the Messenger. Pharaoh, in short, feigned inadvertence to His being his Lord and construed their words as an invitation to him to their Lord. He then asked, And who is your Lord…? It would have been appropriate to reply: “Our Lord is the Lord of the Worlds”—to include them, him and others altogether but the answer came more eloquently than that, Our Lord is He Who gave to everything its creation, then guided it. The answer was given that He was the Lord of everything and in addition to that, proof was provided for this claim. If “Our Lord is the Lord of the Worlds”, had been said, the claim alone would have been stated without the proof. This is something the reader should take note of. It is only guidance and not regulation which is affirmed in these words even though they both share the same place as referred to above because the context is one of propagation and guidance, and general guidance is more relevant to it.
This is what can be understood by reflection upon this noble verse. Thus the problem with all other explanations given for the verse is obvious, for example:
(i) khalqahu means like its creation—a spouse which is equivalent to the thing. It means: He Who gave everything a spouse. Thus it is like His Words: And of everything We have created pairs that you may be mindful ().
(ii) Everything means the kinds of blessing. It is the second object of aʾṭā (gave). Khalq (creation) means makhlūq (creature). It is the first object of aʾṭā. It means: He Who gave His creatures every blessing.
(iii) Hidāyah means guidance and proving His existence and Oneness without any partner. It means: He Who gave everything the existence that it calls for by its very capacity and potentiality. He then pointed to and proved His existence and Oneness through that.
Reflection on the above suffices to show the reader the invalidity of these explanations because they are such which are far from the context and restrictions to the wording of the verse whereas there should be none as such.
قَالَ فَمَا بَالُ الْقُرُونِ الْأُولَىٰ ٥١
(20:51) He said: Then what is the state (bāl) of the former generations?
It is claimed that bāl originally meant thought. An example is what people say: khaṭara bi bālī kadhā (x came to mind). It was then used to mean state. It does not have a dual or plural form. The suggested plural biʾālāt is uncommon.
Moses’ reply contained a sense of universal guidance which is not accomplished in humans except through Prophethood or resurrection because a monotheistic religion cannot be established without (the system of) reckoning, punishment and reward through which those who do good are distinguished from wrongdoers. That can only be accomplished by distinguishing what He commanded from what He forbade and what pleases Him from what angers [or displeases] Him. Furthermore, the word of propagation which they were commanded to pass on to Pharaoh contains an explicit reference to punishment at the end: Surely it has been revealed to us that the chastisement will surely come upon him who rejects and turns back. Idolaters deny that. That is why Pharaoh switched from talking about lordship (rubūbīyyah)—which had been put to an end by Moses’ reply—to talking about resurrection. The question about it was based on skepticism. His question (was), Then what is the state of the former generations?—that is the state of the past human nations and generations who had died and become extinct without any information or trace about them. How can they be punished and rewarded for their deeds if there is no doer in existence and no deed? Today, they are nothing but stories and myths. Thus, the verse is similar to what the polytheists are quoted as saying: What! When we have become lost in the earth, shall we then certainly be in a new creation? ()
The apparent meaning of these words is that they are based on [his] believing it to be unlikely due to the lack of knowledge of them and their deeds because of death and the passage of time (fawt) as evidenced by Moses’ reply: He said: The knowledge thereof is with my Lord in a book … He answered his question by confirming His absolute, detailed knowledge of those past centuries.
قَالَ عِلْمُهَا عِنْدَ رَبِّي فِي كِتَابٍ ۖ لَا يَضِلُّ رَبِّي وَلَا يَنْسَى ٥٢
(20:52) He said: The knowledge thereof is with my Lord in a book, my Lord errs not, nor does He forget.
Knowledge is mentioned unconditionally and in an absolute sense. This implies that He does not miss any knowledge about any of those individuals or their actions. The verse also says that this knowledge is “with God”, which shows that He does not lose it and does not disappear from Him. He said, and what is with God is enduring. He then qualifies that by saying, in a Book—as if it is a state of knowledge—to confirm thereby that it is recorded and kept without its state changing. Kitāb (book) is in the indefinite to indicate the magnificence of its affair with regard to the extent and precision of its comprehensiveness such that: …it does not omit a small one nor a great one, but numbers them (all) ().
The words can be explained as saying that punishment or reward of the earlier generations would be problematic only if one did not know them. However, they are known to their Lord and recorded with Him in a book which is not assailed by error, change, missing [information] or erasure.
According to some exegetes, this sentence first negates God’s ignorance from the beginning, and then His ignorance after knowing. However, apparently both parts are meant to negate ignorance after knowledge. Ḍalāl (erring, going astray) is to seek a goal by treading a path that does not reach it but goes somewhere else. When talking about knowledge, ḍalāl means taking something instead of something else. This happens when the object of knowledge, in the sense that it is known, changes from what it was originally in the knower’s knowledge. Nisyān (forgetting) is when something goes out of one’s knowledge after being in it. Therefore, both of them are forms of ignorance after knowledge. The negation of this ignorance affirms God’s knowledge at the beginning. Hence, the verse as a whole implies: God is knowledgeable about the former generations and ignorance after knowing cannot ever reach him. Thus, he can reward and punish them based on [His] knowledge.
This clarifies that, My Lord errs not, nor does He forget complements the verse. It is as if this sentence is meant to answer a potential objection that could be raised: Even though He knew about them some day they have now ceased to exist, their traces have disappeared and nothing about them can be discerned. So the verse answers: “He does not mix anything about them or about their properties and actions due to an erroneous change, and He does not miss them due to forgetfulness”. That is why this sentence is not annexed to the previous part by the conjunction “and”.
The verse affirms God’s knowledge and negates His ignorance by referring to Him as the Lord. This is to indicate the proof of what is claimed. This is because it is impossible to assume someone to be a lord yet be ignorant of what he owns. A lord (rabb) is the owner of something and the director of its affairs. The assumption of God’s Absolute Lordship of everything necessitates that all things are owned by Him and depend on Him in every aspect of their existence, and that He is the director of their affairs. This suffices to show that all things are known to Him. Any being that can be assumed anywhere is owned by Him, depends on Him in its existence, and is directed by His regulation. Nothing blocks or separates it from Him, and this is the very presence (ḥuḍūr) that we call knowledge. Now, if we suppose that something is unknown to Him due to error, forgetfulness or ignorance to from the beginning, then we are assuming it to be absent from Him, which is a contradiction.
He says “my Lord” twice in this verse. The second usage, as the exegetes have said, is the usage of the noun instead of a pronoun. Furthermore, he did not say “our Lord” as in the previous verse. This is because the previous question was about the Lord that the two of them called toward. That is why he gave an answer according to the question. The meaning of that answer based on the context is: “The Lord that I and my brother call toward is such and such”. This verse, however, is an answer to a question that pertains to the former generations, and the one who is describing this is Moses [alone]. Hence, it is as if he is saying: “The Lord that I am describing is Knowledgeable about them”. This is understood from the word “my Lord” and could not be implied otherwise. The reader should contemplate on this subtle point.
The point in explicitly mentioning “my Lord” for a second time is similar to what was said about the first “my Lord”. The idea that it is an example of using the noun instead of a pronoun can be challenged because the second sentence is separated from the first [they are not conjoined by “and”].
Exegetes have differed and disagreed to a great extent in their opinions on the two verses—their explanations and what they believe to be possible. We have refrained from citing them because there is no benefit. One of the strangest opinions, held by many, is that Pharaoh’s question to Moses, Then what is the state of the former generations?, pertains to the history of the past and extinct nations, an attempt to distract Moses by the useless account of the previous nations from his main message—speaking about the fundamentals of divine knowledge and demonstrating the explicit truth about matters of origin and resurrection (which are) denied by idolaters. Then, Moses’ reply, The knowledge thereof is with my Lord … can be summarized as a knowledge of that to God—as it is of the unseen which is unknown to anyone apart from the great Knower of the unseen things.
الَّذِي جَعَلَ لَكُمُ الْأَرْضَ مَهْدًا وَسَلَكَ لَكُمْ فِيهَا سُبُلًا وَأَنْزَلَ مِنَ السَّمَاءِ مَاءً فَأَخْرَجْنَا بِهِ أَزْوَاجًا مِنْ نَبَاتٍ شَتَّىٰ ٥٣ كُلُوا وَارْعَوْا أَنْعَامَكُمْ ۗ إِنَّ فِي ذَٰلِكَ لَآيَاتٍ لِأُولِي النُّهَىٰ ٥٤
(20:53-54) Who made the earth for you an expanse and made for you therein paths and sent down water from the cloud; then thereby We have brought forth many species of various herbs. Eat and pasture your cattle; most surely there are signs in this for those endowed with understanding.
The reader already knows that his [Pharoah’s] question, Then what is the state of the former generations? is linked to the universal guidance God is described with, including guiding Mankind to happiness in the Hereafter which is eternal life. Similarly his [Moses’] reply to him—The knowledge thereof is with my Lord … is also linked (to the same). Thus the clause, Who made the earth for you an expanse, continues the discourse about general guidance, mentioning prominent examples of that. Thus, God placed Mankind on the earth to live an earthly life and to take provision for his higher, Heavenly life like an infant settled in his cot being raised for a life nobler and more sublime than that. God has laid out paths for Mankind so that he may realize that between him and his objective—which is proximity to Him and entrance in the threshold of munificence—is a path which he must travel just as he travels paths on the earth for his earthly needs. He sends down water from the Heavens that is rainwater, which is the source of the water in the earth’s springs, rivers and seas. He thus makes various kinds and similar species of plants grow from that, guiding you to eat them. These signs direct the possessors of intellect to His guidance and Lordship. Thus, His Words, Who made the earth for you an expanse, is an indication of Man’s placement on earth to perpetuate life. That is part of His guidance. His Words, and made for you therein paths allude to Man’s paths which he takes on the earth in order to satisfy his needs. That is also part of His guidance. His Words, and sent down water from the cloud; then thereby (bihi) We have brought forth many species (azāwjan) of various herbs. Eat and pasture your cattle, allude to guiding Man and cattle to eat plants and herbs to perpetuate life. It involves guiding the sky to rain, the rainwater to fall and the plants to grow. The letter bāʾ in bihi (thereby) is causative. It confirms the relationship of cause and effect between things in the universe. The plants’ being azwājan means their being similar kinds and species, as interpreted by some exegetes. Alternatively it could refer to the pairing of males and females in plants, which is a reality that this Mighty Book has informed about.
His Words, then thereby We have brought forth many species of various herbs, contain a grammatical shift for rhetorical purposes (iltifāt), from the third person to the first person plural. It is related that the reason for this, is due to the extraordinariness in this amazing creation, which is the originator of various forms and species of existence, providing a variety of life therein and all emanating from one source, water. Astounding creation can only bring forth other wonderful existents. Here, fascinating beings and others —namely, their helpers—are being spoken about. For rhetorical purposes the grammatical shift is used in regards to yielding plants with water, in various places in the Qur’an, example: Do you not see that God sends down water from the cloud, then We bring forth therewith fruits of various colors () … and sent down for you water from the cloud; then We cause to grow thereby beautiful Gardens (). And He it is Who sends down water from the cloud, then We bring forth with it buds of all (plants) ().
… most surely there are signs in this for those endowed with understanding: [The word] nuhā is the plural of nuhyah which means mind. It is so-called because it forbids (li nahyihi ʿan) following caprice.
مِنْهَا خَلَقْنَاكُمْ وَفِيهَا نُعِيدُكُمْ وَمِنْهَا نُخْرِجُكُمْ تَارَةً أُخْرَىٰ ٥٥
(20:55) From it We created you and into it We shall send you back and from it will We raise you a second time.
The pronoun [it] refers to the earth. The verse describes the origin of Man’s creation from the earth followed by his return to it and becoming part of it followed by his being brought forth from it, to return to God. There is in [the verse] a complete course of guidance for Mankind.
وَلَقَدْ أَرَيْنَاهُ آيَاتِنَا كُلَّهَا فَكَذَّبَ وَأَبَىٰ ٥٦
(20:56) And truly We showed him Our signs, all of them, but he rejected and refused.
It is likely that “Our signs” mean the staff, the hand and all the other signs which Moses showed Pharaoh during the days of his propagation before he drowned as previously referred to in, Go you and your brother with My signs. Thus it means all the signs which he [Pharaoh] was shown even if they were not brought all together at the beginning of the propagation. Similarly, but he rejected and refused means all his rejection and refusal and not when the propagation began.
قَالَ أَجِئْتَنَا لِتُخْرِجَنَا مِنْ أَرْضِنَا بِسِحْرِكَ يَا مُوسَىٰ ٥٧
(20:57) Said he: Have you come to us that you should turn us out of our land by your magic, O Moses?
The pronoun [he] refers to Pharaoh. He accused Moses:
(i) of sorcery so that he would not be forced to concede the truthfulness of the miraculous signs he brought and the truth of his invitation, and
(ii) of wanting to turn the Egyptians out of their land—Egypt.
It was a political accusation by which he wanted to distract people and stir their minds against him by [saying] that he was an enemy who wanted to cast them out of their homes and motherland through his trickery. There is no life for someone who does not have a home.
فَلَنَأْتِيَنَّكَ بِسِحْرٍ مِثْلِهِ فَاجْعَلْ بَيْنَنَا وَبَيْنَكَ مَوْعِدًا لَا نُخْلِفُهُ نَحْنُ وَلَا أَنْتَ مَكَانًا سُوًى ٥٨
(20:58) So we too will produce before you magic like it, therefore make between us and you an appointment, which we should not break, (neither) we nor you, (in) a central place.
It is likely, as evidenced by the subsequent verse that mawʾid is a noun denoting time. Ikhlāf al-waʾd means not acting in accordance with it [the appointment]. Makān suwā means, (i) in the middle of the expanse or, (ii) level with the edges without any elevation or inclination.
Al-Mufradāt says: Makān suwā or siwaʾ means center. One says either siwāʾ or suwā. Suwā or siwā means its edges are level [with it]. It can be used as an adjective or space/time qualifier (ẓarf). It is originally an infinitive.
It means: “So swear, that we may bring you (our) magic to match yours (in order) to refute your proof and defeat your will. So set (up) an appointed time between us and you, which we should not break, in a place between us or in a place the edges of which are level with [it], or, make a place like that between us and you”.
قَالَ مَوْعِدُكُمْ يَوْمُ الزِّينَةِ وَأَنْ يُحْشَرَ النَّاسُ ضُحًى ٥٩
(20:59) He said: Your appointment is the day of the Festival and let the people be gathered together in the early forenoon.
The pronoun [he] refers to Moses. The appointment was made for the day of festival (zīnah). It is apparent from the context that it was a day of feast for them. The wording of the verse also shows that they would dress up (yatazayyanūn) and decorate the markets. According to al-Rāghib, ḥashr al-nās means getting people out of their dwellings and rousing them to war and similar such [pursuits]. The ḍuhā means the time of day when the sun spreads.
His Words, and let the people be gathered together in the early forenoon is joined with a conjunction to festival (zīnah) or day (yawm), where the word yawm or waqt (time) or the like is also implied here. It means, Moses said: “Your appointment is on the day of finery—the day people are gathered in the early forenoon”. It would not be surprising if it were an object along with it, meaning: “Your appointment is the day of the festival along with the gathering of the people in the early forenoon”. This boils down to conditionality. It was only made conditional so that what he and they would do would be before people’s eyes, at a time of high visibility.
فَتَوَلَّىٰ فِرْعَوْنُ فَجَمَعَ كَيْدَهُ ثُمَّ أَتَىٰ ٦٠
(20:60) So Pharaoh turned his back and settled his plan, then came.
It is apparent from the context that Pharaoh’s turning his back means his leaving the gathering [convened] to set the appointment and to prepare for what he had promised. The “settling of his plans” means putting together his schemes—the magicians along with everything else he used to blind and confuse people. Jam kaydihi could also mean gathering those included in his plan [dhawī kaydihi: literally the owners of his plan]. That which is annexed is omitted. It means the magicians and all his other workers and helpers. Thumma ʿaṭā means: Then he came to and attended the appointment.
قَالَ لَهُمْ مُوسَىٰ وَيْلَكُمْ لَا تَفْتَرُوا عَلَى اللَّهِ كَذِبًا فَيُسْحِتَكُمْ بِعَذَابٍ ۖ وَقَدْ خَابَ مَنِ افْتَرَىٰ ٦١
(20:61) Moses said to them: Woe to you! Do not forge a lie against God, lest He destroy you by a punishment, and he who forges (a lie) indeed fails to attain (his desire).
The word wayl is a word of punishment and threat. Its etymology is a sense of punishment. Waylakum means: May God punish you [severely]. Saḥt means extirpating hair by shaving, plucking, uprooting and destroying.
His Words, Moses said to them: Woe to you! Do not forge a lie against God: The third and second person plural pronouns refer to Pharaoh and his kayd that is the magicians and all his other helpers against Moses. They were referred to in the previous verse. As for [kayd] referring to the magicians alone, they were not mentioned or indicated by any of the wording.
This is what Moses said by way of an admonition and warning to them about forging a lie against God. Part of their lie—referred to above—was Pharaoh’s calling the divine communications magic and accusing the true propagation of being a means to turn them out of their land. Also part of the lie was the magic. However iftirāʾ al-kadhib ʿalā Allah (forging a lie against God)—only means attributing something to God which is not from Him. Deeming the miraculous sign to be magic and the true propagation to be a political plot means not attributing them to God. Likewise, is the case of coming up with magic against miracle despite acknowledging that it is magic and not real. None of these counts as forging a lie against God. It is likely that forging a lie against God means believing in the fundamentals of idolatry such as the divinity and intercession of the gods and the regulation of the world’s being attributable to them—as the exegetes have explained the verse. In several places in the Qur’an that is called forging a lie against God, example: Indeed we shall have forged a lie against God If we go back to your religion ().
The clause, lest He destroy you by a punishment follows on consequentially from the interdiction, that is: “Do not attribute partners to God such that He exterminates you and destroys you with a punishment because of your polytheism”. The use of ʿadhāb in the indefinite indicates its severity and mightiness.
Regarding His Words, and he who forges (a lie) indeed fails to attain (his desire), the word khaybah means despair of achieving the aspired result. This statement is made as a universal principle to be adhered to, and it is indeed as such. An iftirāʾ is a type of lying and it is caused by false factors. False causes do not lead to true causes or true consequences so their results are unsuitable for eternity and do not lead to happiness. Nothing but misfortune and loss are the consequence of them. Thus the meaning of the verse is more comprehensive than (the verse): Say: Those who forge a lie against God shall not be successful (), because it confirms disappointment with regard to all iftirāʾ as opposed to the second verse. There was a discussion about lying (kadhib) not succeeding with regard to the end of (the verse): And they brought his shirt with false blood (damin kadhib) upon it () in the (Ar. vol. 11) of this book.
فَتَنَازَعُوا أَمْرَهُمْ بَيْنَهُمْ وَأَسَرُّوا النَّجْوَىٰ ٦٢ قَالُوا إِنْ هَٰذَانِ لَسَاحِرَانِ يُرِيدَانِ أَنْ يُخْرِجَاكُمْ مِنْ أَرْضِكُمْ بِسِحْرِهِمَا وَيَذْهَبَا بِطَرِيقَتِكُمُ الْمُثْلَىٰ ٦٣ فَأَجْمِعُوا كَيْدَكُمْ ثُمَّ ائْتُوا صَفًّا ۚ وَقَدْ أَفْلَحَ الْيَوْمَ مَنِ اسْتَعْلَىٰ٦٤
(20:62-64) So they disputed with one another about their affair and kept the discourse secret. They said: These are most surely two magicians who wish to turn you out from your land by their magic and to take away your best traditions. Therefore settle your plan, then come standing in ranks and he will prosper indeed this day who overcomes.
The meaning of tanāzuʾ is very similar to ikhtilāf (disagreement). [It] is derived from nazʾ which means pulling something out of its place to extirpate [it] from it. Tanāzuʾ can be transitive as in the verse or it can be made transitive with fi as in, then if you quarrel about (tanazaʾtum fī) anything. Najwā means secret discourse. Etymologically it is a verbal noun (maṣdar) meaning munajāt that is talking secretly. Muthlā is the feminine of amthal (most ideal) as fuḍlā is of afḍal (best). It means the closest and most likely. Al-Tarīqā al-muthlā means the tradition (sunnah) which is closest to the truth or to their hope that is the tradition (sunnah) of idolatry by which Egypt was administered at that time that is the worship of [many] gods at the forefront of whom was Pharaoh the god of the Egyptians. Ijmaʾ—according to Al-Rāghib—means gathering something together on the basis of thought and reflection. Ṣaff means arranging things in a straight line like people, trees and so on. It is used as a gerund (maṣdar) or verbal noun (ism maṣdar). It is possible that ṣaffan is a gerund in His Words, then come standing in ranks and that it means ṣāffīn that is, come to it unified and agreed without disagreeing, splitting into groups and becoming weak and be united in the plot against him. It is clear from, So they disputed with one another being made consequential to what the previous verse says, Moses said … that the dispute and disagreement only appeared among them as a result of the warning given to them by Moses. It had some effect on them. It is in its nature to do so because it is naught but a word of truth with nothing ambiguous about it. In summary it can be said: “You have no knowledge of what you claim—the divinity of the gods and their intercession. Your attributing partners and intercessors to God is a lie forged against Him. He who forges a lie indeed fails to attain [his desire]”. This is a clear proof—not veiled or covered in dust.
It can be deduced from His subsequent words where the magicians say, Surely we believe in our Lord that He may forgive us our sins and the magic to which you compelled us that the disagreement initially broke out among the magicians themselves. His subsequent words, then come standing in ranks gives the impression that those of them who were hesitant or determined not to confront Moses at all were some of the magicians, if the discourse is addressed to them. The context may support that.
Whatever the case may be, when Pharaoh and his aides saw the people’s dispute, a matter that could bring about disgrace and failure for them, they kept the discourse secret and did not speak to [people] about what wisdom and warnings that Moses had spoken to them. On the contrary, they turned away from that to what Pharaoh had accused him of—magic and drawing up a political plot to turn the Egyptian nation out of their land. The nation would not be pleased with that; it involves their leaving their homes and properties and falling from the pinnacle of their happiness to the lowest point of misery, enduring the same suffering as the Israelites had among them. They added to that another matter, the issue of evacuating and leaving their dwellings and property [which would mean] the end of their best traditions—their national tradition—which was the religion of idolatry that had ruled them for many centuries and generations. Their bones had become firm and their flesh had grown on the basis of it. The public consider national traditions to be sacred especially those which they are accustomed to and which they have conceded are clear, Heavenly traditions. This is in reality a temptation for them to remain firm and steadfast within the idolatrous faith, but doubtless, not because it is the religion of truth—because Moses’ argument had made clear its invalidity and uncovered its futility—but rather because it was a sacred national tradition upon which their sectarian identity (milliyyah) depended and relied. Their might and greatness was based on it and their life depended on it. If they disagreed and failed to confront Moses, who (eventually) overcame them, that would mean their end once and for all. The consensus was to gather all their artifice, set aside their differences, and come standing in ranks to overcome [him], because he will prosper indeed this day who overcomes. They kept enticing them into uniting, agreeing and not weakening with regard to protecting their nation and civilization, and launching unitedly against their enemy. Pharaoh coupled that with sweet promises to them as seen elsewhere where He says: … they said to Pharaoh: Shall we get a reward if we are the vanquishers? He said: Yes, and surely you will then be of those who are made near ().
Overall, they used every incentive and disincentive to make them remain steadfast and confront Moses in order to overcome him. This is what can be understood by reflecting upon the meaning of the verses given the context, the text of these verses and the text of verses elsewhere. Thus, So they disputed with one another about their affair is an allusion to their disagreement following Moses’ admonition and the proof he pointed out. And kept the discourse secret refers to their secret discussion about Moses and their attempt to remove the disagreement which stemmed from listening to Moses’ warning.
They said: These are most surely two magicians…: This is an explanation of the secret discourse amongst themselves. Its meaning was explained above. Ina hādhāni la sāḥirān (these are most surely two magicians) is the canonical reading, in with a kasrah under the hamzah and a sūkun above the nūn. It is really inna (truly, indeed, surely), where the stress (shadda) has been dropped. That is why it no longer has the effect of making the noun manṣūb (accusative) and the predicate marfūʿ (nominative).
قَالُوا يَا مُوسَىٰ إِمَّا أَنْ تُلْقِيَ وَإِمَّا أَنْ نَكُونَ أَوَّلَ مَنْ أَلْقَىٰ ٦٥ قَالَ بَلْ أَلْقُوا ۖ فَإِذَا حِبَالُهُمْ وَعِصِيُّهُمْ يُخَيَّلُ إِلَيْهِ مِنْ سِحْرِهِمْ أَنَّهَا تَسْعَىٰ ٦٦
(20:65-66) They said: O Moses! will you cast, or shall we be the first who cast down? He said: Nay! cast down. then lo! their cords (ḥibāluhum) and their rods (ʿiṣiyyuhum)—it appeared to him on account of their magic as if they were running.
The word ḥibāl is the plural of ḥabl (rope) and ʿiṣiyy is the plural of ʿaṣā (cane, staff). The magicians used them to create the illusion of serpents and snakes in people’s eyes like that which appeared from Moses’ staff. There is brevity and succinctness as if to say: “So they came to the appointment and Moses attended it. There came the question: What did they do? There came the reply: They said: O Moses! will you cast your staff or shall we be the first who cast down?”
This was the choice they gave Moses between his being the first to cast or to wait until they had cast, then bring [about] what he would.
[Moses] said: Nay! cast down. He gave way to them to bring what they might while he relied on his Lord, confident in His promise, without worry or agitation. One of the things his Lord had told him was: I do hear and see. When the verse says, then lo! their cords and their rods—it appeared to him on account of their magic as if they were running, it implies “So they cast then lo! their cords and their rods … ”, where the implied part is omitted to add to the surprise as if, when he said to them, Nay! Cast down, he immediately witnessed what he did without their casting their cords and rods in the interim. What appeared to Moses appeared to other people watching, as referred to elsewhere: … they deceived the people’s eyes and frightened them ().
The difference here is that He says that Moses is among them. It is as if it is a prelude to what is in the subsequent verse.
فَأَوْجَسَ فِي نَفْسِهِ خِيفَةً مُوسَىٰ ٦٧
(20:67) So Moses conceived a fear within his soul.
Al-Rāghib says in his Mufradāt: Wajs means a secret voice. Tawajjus means listening secretly. Ijās means the presence of that in one’s soul. Fa awjasa minhum khīfah means “he conceived a fear of them”. Hence wajs is a state of mind (nafs) which occurs after the notion because the notion is the beginning of the idea then the conception is what comes [to mind].
Thus, ijās al-khīfah fī al-nafs means feeling it in the soul. It is only light, its effect not appearing on the surface of the skin. Its presence in the soul is followed by the appearance of a bad feeling (khāṭir sūʾ) in [the soul] without yielding to what that would necessitate—being wary and on one’s guard. Otherwise, it would definitely show on the surface of the skin and in a person’s actions. That is what the use of the indefinite for khīfah (that is a “fear”) indicates, as if to say: He felt in his soul a kind of fear, one not to be paid any attention to. It is amazing what one of them says—that the use of the indefinite was for emphasis and the fear was great. It is a mistake. If this is how it was, its effect would have shown on the surface of his skin and there would have been no reason to qualify the fear as being within his soul.
Therefore, it is apparent that the fear which he conceived in his soul was a momentary feeling. The same is true about the thought that crossed his mind afterwards. The mightiness of their magic touched his heart, and he felt that their magic can appear to be equal or close to his sign [that is, miracle]. Thus he conceived a fear due to this thought; a fear which, like the thought itself, had no external effect.
Claim: He feared that people would be confused and they would not distinguish between his sign and their magic because of the similarity between them. They would not believe or follow him. He did not yet know that his staff would devour the lies they had told.
Reply: That contradicts God’s assurance and his trust in His commandment. His Lord had told him before that: …(go) with Our signs; you two and those who follow you shall be uppermost ().
Claim: He feared that people would disperse after seeing their magic and not not wait for him to cast his staff, a draw would be declared and the effort would go to waste.
Reply: It contradicts the apparent meaning of the verse. It is likely that the clause, So Moses conceived a fear in his soul … follows on consequentially from the clause, then lo! their cords and their rods—it appeared to him… which means that he feared what appeared to him of their magic, not that he feared the people dispersing before the matter became clear through his casting his staff. If he had feared that, he would not have allowed them to cast their cords and rods first. Furthermore, this explanation is incompatible with what He says to strengthen his soul: We said: Fear not, surely you shall be the uppermost (). Instead [he would have been] told: “Fear not, We will not let them disperse until you cast the staff”.
Whatever the case may be, it is clear from his conceiving a fear in his soul that they made their magic appear to the people similar or close to his miraculous sign appearing to the people, even though what they brought about was illusionism and not real whereas what he brought about was a miraculous sign which was real. God regards their enchantment to be mighty because He says: He said: Cast. So when they cast, they deceived the people’s eyes and frightened them, and they produced a mighty enchantment ().
That is why, at this juncture, God supports him with what can leave the spectator in no doubt at all: the staff’s devouring everything they have conjured.
قُلْنَا لَا تَخَفْ إِنَّكَ أَنْتَ الْأَعْلَىٰ ٦٨ وَأَلْقِ مَا فِي يَمِينِكَ تَلْقَفْ مَا صَنَعُواۖ إِنَّمَا صَنَعُوا كَيْدُ سَاحِرٍ ۖ وَلَا يُفْلِحُ السَّاحِرُ حَيْثُ أَتَىٰ ٦٩
(20:68-69) We said: Fear not, surely you shall be the uppermost. And cast down what is in your right hand; it shall devour what they have wrought; they have wrought only the plan of a magician, and the magician shall not be successful wheresoever he may come from.
It is a negative imperative with the purpose of strengthening and supporting [him]. It is explained by the clause, surely you shall be the uppermost. It means you shall surpass them in every respect. If that is how it is, none of their scheming or magic will do you any harm so there is no need to fear.
His Words, And cast down what is in your right hand; it shall devour what they have wrought … is a commandment to cast down the staff for it to become a serpent and devour what they had wrought with magic. Referring to the staff as, what is in your right hand is one of the subtlest and most profound expressions because there is therein an allusion to the fact that a thing has no reality apart from what God wills. If He wants what is in his right hand to be a staff, it will be a staff but if He wants it to be a serpent it will be a serpent. Thus it has nothing of itself. The verse refers to their serpents and snakes as “what they have wrought”. This is to show that in this contest on one side there is that absolute power that the names and realities of all things are subject to it, and on the other side there is human fashioning which goes no further than being a futile scheme: … the word of God, that is the highest (); … and God is the master of His affair ().
There is in this sentence—And cast down what is in your right hand; it shall devour what they have wrought—an explanation that senses perceive him to be uppermost just as the end of it explains his truly being uppermost because there is no truth to falsehood. Whoever is in the right should not fear falsehood over his [own] truth.
His Words, they have wrought only the plan of a magician, and the magician shall not be successful wheresoever he may come from, is an explanation on the basis of the wording for, it shall devour what (mā) they have wrought. [The word] mā (what) has a verbal noun equivalence or it is a relative pronoun and it does in fact explain his being uppermost because what they had [wrought] was a magician’s artifice without any reality to it whereas what he had was a miraculous sign which was real. The truth is uppermost and nothing rises above it. His Words, and the magician shall not be successful wheresoever he may come from, is like the universal rule governing the clause, they have wrought only the plan of a magician, because what a magician achieves with his magic is the spectators’ fantasy. There is no truth to it and no success. No true happiness is attained in an imaginary thing which has no reality to it.
The clause, and the magician shall not be successful wheresoever he may come from, are similar to: Surely God does not guide the unjust people (); and God does not guide the transgressing people () and other verses.
All are branches of: … surely falsehood is a vanishing (thing) (); and God will blot out the falsehood and confirm the truth with His Words ().
Falsehood still adorns matters and makes them look like the truth. The truth still blots it out and quickly or slowly devours what it has made appear to the fancy of the spectators. Thus, the parable of Moses’ staff vs. the sorcery of the magicians applies to every falsehood that appears and the truth that devours it and makes it disappear. There was a discussion, which is of benefit to the current one, regarding the exegesis of: He sends down water from the cloud, then watercourses flow (with water) according to their measure ().
فَأُلْقِيَ السَّحَرَةُ سُجَّدًا قَالُوا آمَنَّا بِرَبِّ هَارُونَ وَمُوسَىٰ ٧٠
(20:70) And the magicians were cast down making obeisance; they said: We believe in the Lord of Aaron and Moses.
There is an implication and brevity in these words; that which is implied is: “So he cast down what was in his right hand and it devoured what they had wrought. Thereafter, the magicians were cast down”. The use of the passive—And the magicians were cast down—instead of saying: “And the magicians prostrated”, is an indication of their humiliation by the divine power and their defeat by the truth prevailing, such that they found no recourse but to throw themselves on the ground and prostrate—as if they had no will [of their own] with regard to that and they had just been thrown down by someone else, unknown to them.
Their words, We believe in the Lord of Aaron and Moses, are a testimony of faith by them. They described Him as the Lord of Moses and Aaron as a way of testifying to His Lordship as well as the Messengership of Moses and Aaron. The separation (of the clause, they said) without a conjunction as opposed to a conjunction preceding they said, is because it is like the answer to an implied question: Then what did they say? They said, We believe in the Lord of Aaron and Moses.
قَالَ آمَنْتُمْ لَهُ قَبْلَ أَنْ آذَنَ لَكُمْ ۖ إِنَّهُ لَكَبِيرُكُمُ الَّذِي عَلَّمَكُمُ السِّحْرَ ۖ فَلَأُقَطِّعَنَّ أَيْدِيَكُمْ وَأَرْجُلَكُمْ مِنْ خِلَافٍ وَلَأُصَلِّبَنَّكُمْ فِي جُذُوعِ النَّخْلِ وَلَتَعْلَمُنَّ أَيُّنَا أَشَدُّ عَذَابًا وَأَبْقَىٰ ٧١
(20:71) [Pharaoh] said: You believe in him before I give you leave; most surely he is the chief of you who taught you enchantment, therefore I will certainly cut off your hands and your feet on opposite sides, and I will certainly crucify you on the trunks of the palm trees, and certainly you will come to know which of us is the more severe and the more abiding in chastising.
Kabīr means chief. Cutting off hands and feet on opposite sides means cutting off the right hand and the left foot and crucifying. The use of the second form taṣlīb to indicate severity and abundance is like the use of the second form in taqtīʾ to indicate severity and abundance. Judhūʾ is the plural of jidhaʾ which is the trunk of a palm tree. His Words, You believe in him before I give you leave are a threat Pharaoh made to the magicians because they believed (in Moses). The sentence is [either]:
(i) interrogative, the [interrogative] particle left implied, interrogative to [express] disapproval (inkār) or
(ii) declarative (khabariyyah) meant to describe their offence.
The clause, most surely he is the chief of you who taught you enchantment is an accusation against them of a political plot against the Egyptian people in Egypt as if they had plotted with their chief for Moses to claim to be a Prophet, call the people of Egypt to God, and, as part of that, to perform magic. This way they [Pharaoh and his clan] would seek the help of the magicians, who would come and gather to defeat him. However, they would then betray and desert Pharaoh and believe in Moses instead. Thus, the masses would follow them, their ideal way would slip away from them, and whoever among them did not believe would be expelled. He says elsewhere: Surely this is a plot which you have secretly devised in this city, that you may turn out of it its people ().
He [Pharaoh] only accused them of this to incite the masses against them just as he had accused Moses of something similar at the outset. His Words, therefore I will certainly cut off your hands and your feet on opposite sides, are a promise and threat to them of severe punishment. He does not mention in the Qur’an (kalāmihi) whether he did so or not.
قَالُوا لَنْ نُؤْثِرَكَ عَلَىٰ مَا جَاءَنَا مِنَ الْبَيِّنَاتِ وَالَّذِي فَطَرَنَا ۖ فَاقْضِ مَا أَنْتَ قَاضٍ ۖ إِنَّمَا تَقْضِي هَٰذِهِ الْحَيَاةَ الدُّنْيَا ٧٢
(20:72) They said: We do not prefer you to what has come to us of clear arguments and to He Who made us, therefore decide what you are going to decide; you can only decide about this world’s life.
These words are eloquent in their utterance, profound in their import, far-reaching in their meaning and elevated in their status. Knowledge and wisdom burst and gush forth from them. A while ago, Pharaoh’s awe-inspiring appearance and splendor had filled their hearts. [People] were humbled by the adornments and embellishments of the world which he had—which were nothing but the false imaginations and vain illusions. They would call him the highest lord and (would) say when they cast their cords and rods: “By the might of Pharaoh, verily we will be those who overcome”. No sooner did the signs of truth appear to them, their eyes were dazzled. Thereat, the might and power they had believed that Pharaoh had, fell, as did the value and status of embellishment and adornment he had in this world. Their hearts were overcome and the vices of cowardice, adulation, following desire and infatuation with the mirage of the embellishment of life in this world were taken away and replaced by attachment to the truth, entering under God’s authority and feeling empowered by His Might. They only wanted what God desired and only wished for what God wished. They feared none other than God, Mighty is His Name.
All that is clear from reflecting on the conversation which took place between Pharaoh and them; if a comparison is made between the two statements [that is Pharaoh’s words and the magicians’ reply], Pharaoh is (seen as) inadvertent to his Lord’s status. He sees nothing but himself. He adds to that, that he is the lord of the Egyptians, he rules the kingdom of Egypt and has armies mobilized. He has full authority over whatever he wants and decides. However, in terms of the fact of the matter, these are nothing but empty claims. His ignorance deluded him into thinking that the truth follows his falsehood and reality is subject and obedient to his claim. Thus, he expects that people’s souls—even though in their disposition they have understanding and judgement—will only ever feel anything through their feelings and disposition by his leave. Their hearts will only ever submit and be certain of a truth with his permission. That is what His Words to the magicians [mean], You believe in him before I give you leave. He [Pharaoh] believes that humans have no reality beyond this bodily construct which lives, then rots and ceases to exist and that he has no happiness apart from attaining these ephemeral, material pleasures. That is what (the Words), therefore I will certainly cut off your hands and your feet on opposite sides, and I will certainly crucify you on the trunks of the palm trees, and certainly you will come to know which of us is the more severe and the more abiding in chastising, mean. One should ponder over the end of his statement.
On the other hand there are these believers whom the Truth [that is God] has overtaken and encompassed. He has purified them and chosen them for Himself. As a result, they see the worldly pleasures of possession and position that Pharaoh counts to be real as nothing but an imagined mirage and a deceitful glamor that is void. They see that being given a choice between these adornments and what they have believed in is [just like] being given a choice between falsehood and truth, or mirage and reality. But the people of certitude would never doubt their certainty and choose falsehood over truth or mirage over reality, because they are direct witnesses to that. That is why they said, “We do not prefer you”—that is, we would never choose you over—“to what has come to us of clear arguments and to He Who made us”. What they meant here was not preferring a person as a human body with a soul, but preferring a person who claimed to possess the entire world with all its wealth and pleasures.
What Pharaoh threatened them with—horrific killing, severe punishment and eradicating life in this world, believing Man to have nothing beyond life therein, his happiness or misery all in [that life]—they believed the opposite to be true: That Man has an eternal, everlasting life, compared to this immediate and ephemeral life which has no value. If he has a happy eternal life then having a miserable life in this world will not be of any harm to him, and if he has a miserable eternal life then nothing will be of any avail to him.
Thus, they did not fear losing their life in this transient world if they were to profit in the eternal afterlife. That is the meaning of their reply to Pharaoh—a response to his threat to kill them, therefore decide what you are going to decide; you can only decide about this world’s life. Then the subsequent verses which quote the end of their reply to Pharaoh are an explanation and clarification of their words, We do not prefer you to what has come to us of clear arguments and to He Who made us. There is in their words, what has come to us of clear arguments an allusion to the fact that they deemed what they witnessed—in terms of what happened to the staff—to be several signs for example its turning into a serpent, its devouring the cords and rods and its turning back into its original state. [Alternatively] it is possible that the particle min [“of” in “of clear arguments”] is partitive meaning they witnessed a single sign and believed that God had many other signs. [However] this is unlikely.
إِنَّا آمَنَّا بِرَبِّنَا لِيَغْفِرَ لَنَا خَطَايَانَا وَمَا أَكْرَهْتَنَا عَلَيْهِ مِنَ السِّحْرِ ۗ وَاللَّهُ خَيْرٌ وَأَبْقَىٰ٧٣
(20:73) Surely we believe in our Lord that He may forgive us our sins and the magic to which you compelled us; and God is better and more abiding.
[The word] khaṭāyā is the plural of khaṭīʾah which is similar in meaning to al-sayyiʾah (sin). To which you compelled us is joined with a conjunction to, our sins. Min al-siḥr [lit., of the magic] is explanatory [of the magic]. It means: “That He may forgive us for the magic to which you compelled us”. Therein is an indication that they were forced to do it either when they were assembled before Pharaoh from their homes or when they disputed over their affair among themselves and kept the dialogue secret and were forced to confront and duel. The beginning of the verse is an explanation of what they said, We do not prefer you … that is We choose only God—Who created us—over you and believe in Him that He might forgive us our sins and the magic to which you compelled us. The end of the verse, and God is better and more abiding completes the explanation. It is like an elucidation for the beginning of [the verse] as if to say: “We only choose His forgiveness over your kindness because it is better and more enduring, that is, better than everything which is good and more abiding than everything which is lasting” because of the lack of any qualification (iṭlāq). Thus nothing is preferred to Him. The ending of the verse serves as a contrast to the end of Pharaoh’s statement, and certainly you will come to know which of us is the more severe and the more abiding in chastising. They refer to Him firstly as, He Who made us, secondly as, our Lord and thirdly as, God. The first is because, He created us, that is, He brought us out of the cover of non-existence into existence. It follows from that, that every goodness is attributable to Him. No one else when compared to Him has anything but the illusion of vanity, the source of every favoring—the context being one of favoring—of Him over Pharaoh. The second is because it talks about belief in Him. His attribute which touches mostly on belief and servitude is that of His being Lord which includes a sense of Ownership and regulation. The third is because the reason for a thing’s goodness is its perfection. He has all the Attributes of Perfection which dictate His being absolutely good. Thus it was appropriate to refer to Him by His knowledge which is indicative of the Essence which has all the Attributes of Perfection. Thus the words about the three stations in spite of their apparent simplicity comprise a proof for their claim. They are essentially saying: “We will not prefer you over Him Who has created us because He is our Creator. Verily we believe in our Lord because He is our Lord. God is best because He is God, Mighty is His Name”.
إِنَّهُ مَنْ يَأْتِ رَبَّهُ مُجْرِمًا فَإِنَّ لَهُ جَهَنَّمَ لَا يَمُوتُ فِيهَا وَلَا يَحْيَىٰ ٧٤
(20:74) Whoever comes to his Lord (being) guilty, for him is surely hell; he shall not die therein, nor shall he live.
This is a justification for their claim that they have believed in God so that He may forgive their sins. That is, Surely we believe in our Lord that He may forgive us our sins, because one whose sins are not forgiven is guilty, and whoever comes to his Lord (being) guilty for him is surely hell…
وَمَنْ يَأْتِهِ مُؤْمِنًا قَدْ عَمِلَ الصَّالِحَاتِ فَأُولَٰئِكَ لَهُمُ الدَّرَجَاتُ الْعُلَىٰ ٧٥ جَنَّاتُ عَدْنٍ تَجْرِي مِنْ تَحْتِهَا الْأَنْهَارُ خَالِدِينَ فِيهَا ۚ وَذَٰلِكَ جَزَاءُ مَنْ تَزَكَّىٰ ٧٦
(20:75-76) And whoever comes to Him a believer (and) he has done good deeds indeed, those it is who shall have the high ranks. The Gardens of perpetuity, beneath which rivers flow, to abide therein; and this is the reward of him who has purified himself.
According to what Al-Rāghib says, a darajah is a level but it has to go up for example the rungs (darajāt) of a ladder. The opposite of it is a darakah which is a level going down. That is why one says darajāt (levels) of Heaven but darakāt (levels) of hell. Al-tazākki means growing properly. It means a person living with true belief and pious deeds.
The two verses describe what belief and good deeds inevitably lead to just as the previous verse describes what sin resulting from disbelief or disobedience inevitably leads to. The three verses describing the consequence of sin and belief are with reference to Pharaoh’s threat and promise to them. Pharaoh had threatened them that he would cut off their limbs and crucify them for believing in Moses and claimed that he was most severe and most abiding in punishment. They countered him by saying that the sinner will have hell according to his Lord wherein he will not die or live, not dying to save himself from the cruelty of the pain of its punishment. The worst punishment in the world is death in which there is an escape for a criminal (who has been) punished. He does not live in [Hellfire] because there is nothing there which makes his life pleasant. No good is hoped for him therein except to suffer the punishment awaiting him.
Before that, he [Pharaoh] promised them status by making some of his favorites. The reward is as God quotes: [they] said: We must surely have a reward if we are the prevailing ones. He said: Yes, and you shall certainly be of those who are near (to me) ().
They countered that by saying that whoever comes to Him as a believer and has done good deeds will have the highest ranks. The use of the remote demonstrative pronoun “those” (fa ulāʾika) is an aggrandizement of their status. “These it is who shall have the high ranks”: This counters Pharaoh’s promise that he will make them among those who are near to him.
The Gardens of perpetuity, beneath which rivers flow, to abide therein; and this is the reward of him who has purified himself: In other words, this is the reward of him who purifies himself by faith and good deeds. This counters Pharaoh’s promise of reward.
وَلَقَدْ أَوْحَيْنَا إِلَىٰ مُوسَىٰ أَنْ أَسْرِ بِعِبَادِي فَاضْرِبْ لَهُمْ طَرِيقًا فِي الْبَحْرِ يَبَسًا لَا تَخَافُ دَرَكًا وَلَا تَخْشَىٰ ٧٧ فَأَتْبَعَهُمْ فِرْعَوْنُ بِجُنُودِهِ فَغَشِيَهُمْ مِنَ الْيَمِّ مَا غَشِيَهُمْ ٧٨ وَأَضَلَّ فِرْعَوْنُ قَوْمَهُ وَمَا هَدَىٰ ٧٩
(20:77-79) And certainly We revealed to Moses, saying: Travel by night (asri) with My servants, then make (fa-ḍrib) for them a dry (yabasan) path (ṭarīqan) in the sea, not fearing to be overtaken (darakan), nor being afraid. And Pharaoh followed them with his armies, so there came upon them of the sea that which came upon them. And Pharaoh led astray his people and he did not guide (them) aright.
[The word] isrāʾ means travelling at night. “My servants” means the Israelites.
… then make for them a dry path in the sea: It is claimed that: ḍarb means striking with the staff as indicated by His Words elsewhere. Ṭarīqan (path) is the object of iḍrib by way of extended [meaning]. It is a rational metaphor. It means: Strike the sea so that there will be a path for them.
Ḍarb could mean building and erecting like ḍuribat al-khaymah (the tent was put up) or ḍuribat al-qāʿidah (the base was set up). According to al-Rāghib, yabas means a place that had water in it which subsequently disappeared. Darak is the consequence of something.
So there came upon them of the sea that which came upon them: Using the same term—“came upon them”—as both the verb and the complement of the sentence in an indefinite form is a very expressive way of depicting the horror of the situation.
It is claimed that the clause, And Pharaoh led astray his people and he did not guide (them) aright refutes what Pharaoh told his people when he addressed them: … and I do not make you follow any but the right way ().
Thus the clause, and he did not guide is not an emphasis and repetition of, And Pharaoh led astray his people.
Examining Narrations
- According to Nahj al-Balāghah, ʿAlī said: Moses did not entertain fear for his own self. Rather he apprehended mastery of the ignorant and deviation [having its] turn. It means what was said above by way of exegesis of the verse.
- God’s Messenger said: If you catch a magician, kill him. He then recited, and the magician shall not be successful wheresoever he may come from. He said: And he is not safe wherever he may be found.
Author’s comment: It is difficult to see how the explanation given in the hadith applies to the verse with its context.
Democritus (d. 370 BC) was a Hellenic philosopher who believed that matter is made of indivisible units he called atoms. (Trans.) ↩︎
This shows that the sentence is not an additional point, but a continuation and completion of what was said before. (Trans.) ↩︎
Based on the author’s explanations, the verse can be interpreted as follows: The Lord that I am describing has knowledge of the former generations in a book, and by the way, I should clarify that the Lord that I am describing neither errs nor forgets. (Trans.) ↩︎
A verbal noun (ism maṣdar) is a noun that has the meaning of a maṣdar (infinitive, gerund). The difference is that a maṣdar is primary and then the verb conjugates and the ism maṣdar are derived from it. For example, “to remove” is an infinitive, and “removal” is a verbal noun. In English, gerunds (like “removing”) can match both maṣdar and ism maṣdar in Arabic. (Trans.) ↩︎
That is, the verse is really saying: inna hādhayni la-sāḥirāni. However, since the particle inna has been shortened to in, it no longer makes the subject manṣūb and that is why it says hādhān instead of hādhayn. (Trans.) ↩︎
I think the author is making a comparison here between the condition in hell where the sinner shall neither live nor die and the death in this world where there is an escape of punishment for the sinner, though temporary. (Ed.) ↩︎
Al-Durr al-Manthūr cited by Ibn Abī Ḥātim and Ibn Mardawayh on the authority of Jundub ibn ʿAbdullāh al-Bajālī: ↩︎