Verses 32–40
These verses narrate and respond to another criticism of the polytheists against the Qur’an: Why has it not been revealed all at once?
Commentary
وَ قالَ الَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا لَوْ لا نُزِّلَ عَلَيْهِ الْقُرْآنُ جُمْلَةً واحِدَةً كَذلِكَ لِنُثَبِّتَ بِهِ فُؤادَكَ وَ رَتَّلْناهُ تَرْتِيلاً ٣٢
(25:32) And those who disbelieve say: Why has not the Qur’an been sent down to him all at once? Thus, that We may strengthen your heart by it and We have arranged it well in order.
The speakers in this verse are the Arab polytheists who rejected the Qur’an’s call. They are the same people who were mentioned when narrating a previous criticism: And those who disbelieve say: This is nothing but a lie which he has forged ().
… Why has not the Qur’an been sent down (nuzzila, from tanzīl) to him all at once?…: We have already noted that the only difference between inzāl and tanzīl is that inzāl is a sudden descent, while tanzīl is a gradual descent.
Some exegetes have said: Tanzīl, in this verse, does not include its gradual aspect. Otherwise, the verse would be self-contradictory, in which case their statement would mean, “Why has not the Qur’an been sent down to him all at once gradually, in separation and differentiation?” This is self-contradictory because being sent “all at once” is inconsistent with being sent “gradually, in separation and differentiation.” Instead, the meaning of the verse is: “Why has not the Qur’an been sent down to him all at once, not in pieces, just like how the Torah, the Gospel and the Psalms were revealed?”
However, it should be noted that the Torah, for instance, was revealed at once in written form on tablets, as attested by the Qur’an. This was different from how the Qur’an was sent to the Prophet. The Prophet received the Qur’an from God through the Trustworthy Spirit (al-rūḥ al-amīn) [that is, the angel Gabriel], much like when a person hears a speech from a speaker. The giving and receiving of a book in written form [as in the case of the Torah] is an immediate act, which necessarily means that all of its parts come together at once. Speaking and hearing, on the other hand [as in the case of the Qur’an], do not contradict gradualness and separation between the parts of the speech. Rather, a speaker necessarily speaks one word after another, and the hearer also hears the speech gradually, in portions.
The request mentioned here—that the Qur’an should be sent down all at once—was made by people who had seen or heard how the Qurʾan was revealed to the Prophet (which was by receiving the exact text of the verses from the angel of revelation). Therefore, their demand was that even though the angel of revelation reads the Qur’an to the Prophet chapter by chapter and verse by verse, and even though he himself receives the verses in the same gradual manner, he should read it to the people all at once. In other words, they wanted the entire Qur’an to be recited by the angel, and heard by the Prophet, in a single occasion—even though that occasion would span some time because of the gradual nature of recitation and hearing. This interpretation is more compatible with the usage of the verbal pattern tanzīl, which indicates gradualness.
Contrary to a common view among the exegetes, what the polytheists say in this verse does not indicate that they wanted the Qur’an to be sent down to the Prophet in the form of a written book, as was the case of the Torah, the Gospel and the Psalms. Not to mention that the polytheists did not believe in the actual revelation of these scriptures [by God], let alone believing in their sudden form of revelation.
Either way, “Why has not the Qur’an been sent down to him all at once?” is a criticism made against the way in which the Qur’an was revealed. Given the polytheists’ criticism, and the Qur’an’s response to it, their argument can be elaborated as follows: If this were really a scripture which included a religion that God has prescribed for the people, then that religion should be complete with all of its components. Its roots and branches should be known, and it should include all of its obligatory and recommended rituals.
Moreover, a book containing a divine religion should be well organized, with its parts following one another in order. The Qur’an, however, is not like that. Instead, it is a collection of disunited speeches that Muḥammad has come up with, in different events and various times. As different events occurs, he makes some statements about them, calls them “verses,” attributes them to God, and claims that they are “a recitation” (qurʾān) sent to him from God. But the fact is that whenever something happens, he sits down and thinks about it, then he makes up some speech and falsely attributes it to God. He is an apostate who is lost in wilderness. Therefore, this is not a divine book sent from God to the people through His messenger.
… Thus (kadhālika), that We may strengthen (li-nuthabbita, from tathbīt) your heart (fuʾādaka) by it and We have arranged it well in order (rattalnāhu tartīlan): Thubāt (stability, establishment, fixedness) is the opposite of zawāl (disappearance, vanishing). Ithbāt and tathbīt have the same meaning (to stabilize, to establish, to fix), except that ithbāt is sudden while tathbīt is gradual. Fuʾad is synonymous with qalb, meaning “heart.” As we have repeatedly said, “heart” in the Qur’an refers to the rational soul of human beings, which is characterized by understanding and cognition. Tartīl has been defined as tarsīl, which means “to bring things one after another.”
The theme and flow of the verse shows that the word kadhālika (thus, as such) pertains to an omitted verb, which is then justified and explained by “that We may strengthen.” The phrase “and We have arranged it” then adds to that. The implied meaning of the this part is: “We have sent it”: the Qur’an; “thus”: gradually and in differentiated series, as opposed to suddenly and all at once; “that We may strengthen your heart.” Some exegetes have said that kadhālika is part of what “those who disbelieve” say, but this is a very implausible view.
The complete explanation for why the Qur’an has been sent in pieces is: That We may strengthen your heart by it. This can be elaborated by contemplating the different methods of teaching and education. If any field of knowledge, especially a discipline that has a practical component, is taught to the students through a continuous lecture that covers the chapters one after another, the result is that the students will only have some overall mental understanding of the general topics of the discipline, with some details being kept in the repository of their minds to a certain extent, where they would have to recall them whenever there is a need for them. However, if these teachings are to be established and rooted in the soul, such that they would transform the person and would make the soul grow, they should be applied and put into practice in the real world, whenever a need for them arises.
For instance, there is a clear difference between conveying a medical issue to students of medicine only by teaching, and conveying it to them while they have to apply it to a patient whom they have to cure at hand. This is the application of speech to practice.
The above should clarify that if one wants to learn and internalize any piece of knowledge, doing so when there is a practical need for it makes it more stabilized in the soul, stronger in the heart, and more deeply settled in the mind. This is especially true in teachings that pertain to our innate human nature and disposition (fiṭrah), because our innate nature is more prepared for receiving and accepting something when it feels a need for it.
The teachings of Islam—which are represented by the Qur’an—consist of certain practices and laws, at both the individual and the social levels, which bring about a happy human life. These laws are based on moral virtues, which are in turn related to fundamental religious beliefs. These beliefs, if analyzed, can be tracked down to the unity of God (tawḥīd). Likewise, tawḥīd, if elaborated, will unfold as the entire religious belief system, which then gives rise to ethics, and then in turn to practical laws.
Given the above, the best method of teaching and the most complete way of discipline for these noble teachings is to convey them gradually. The teachings should be imported upon the occurrence of particular events which call for some explanation of theoretical belief, moral virtues, and practical laws. Such teaching would be most effective if it is mixed with means of admonition and awareness, such as the stories of the past nations and the end of the transgressors, the haughty, and the extravagant.
This is how the Qur’an has been expressed, and how its verses have been revealed, as God says: And it is a Qur’an which We have revealed in portions so that you may read it to the people by slow degrees, and We have revealed it, revealing in portions (). This is the meaning of: Thus, that We may strengthen your heart by it (). And God knows best.
There remains a problem to be resolved with the above method: If the total learning components are separated from one another, and are taught to the learner in portions, then it may jeopardize the purpose and effect of teaching; by the time the next piece of information is taught, the material covered previously has lost its effect or has been forgotten, and the student may no longer have the determination and focus to retain the following information. If the components of knowledge are connected and continuous, on the other hand, they train the mind and prepare the brain to better understand and retain that knowledge—a goal that is not achieved otherwise.
God refers to this matter when He says: And We have arranged it well in order (). This statement, in this context, means that even though Our revelation is gradual and differentiated, We have made its parts follow one another logically. We have sent them consecutively, such that the connections between them are not lost and the effect of each part does not fade away. The teachings are sent in chapters and verses that are revealed one after another, well arranged in a proper order. Therefore, the purpose and effect of teaching is not defeated.
Besides the above, there is another aspect to consider: The Qur’an is a book of argument and clarification. It engages in debate with its followers and its opponents alike, and addresses their problems, doubts and objections. It clarifies their misunderstandings with regards to the teachings and wisdom found in the previous nations and religions, as well as the distortions and misinterpretations of the previous scriptures by the scholars. The Qur’an’s elucidating argumentations can be seen clearly in the Qur’an’s discussions about what the two Testaments say about the previous prophets, the knowledge of God, and the hereafter. It can also be seen in what the Qur’an has to say concerning the idolaters’ beliefs about God, the angels, the jinn, and the human saints.
The disbelievers used to raise doubts against the Prophet and pose temptations to the believers on a regular basis. To clear these points and provide counter arguments, the revelation should be gradual, as the problems come up one after the other. This is what is meant by the next verse:
وَ لا يَأْتُونَكَ بِمَثَلٍ إِلاَّ جِئْناكَ بِالْحَقِّ وَ أَحْسَنَ تَفْسِيراً ٣٣
(25:33) And they shall not bring to you any description (bi-mathal), but We have brought to you (one) with truth and best in exposition (tafsīran).
According to al-Rāghib, the verb fasr means to “convey an idea and disclose some meaning in an intelligible way.” Tafsīr means the same, but with more emphasis and exaggeration; it is to convey a meaning very clearly. Mathal means waṣf (description, attribute). The meaning is: “Whenever the disbelievers come up with an incorrect and misinterpreted description—of you or of others [O Muḥammad]—We bring to you the truth about it or the best interpretation of it.” What they bring is either totally false, in which case the truth will replace it; or it is some truth that has been distorted from its real position and taken out of its context, in which case the best exposition will clarify where it belongs and will make it right.
Given the above, these two verses—from “Thus, that We may strengthen your heart” () to “and best in exposition” ()—respond to the disbelievers’ objection: Why has not the Qur’an been sent down to him all at once? (). The verses essentially provide two reasons for the gradual revelation of the Qur’an: (1) It is sent gradually in order to strengthen the Prophet’s heart. This reason pertains to the Prophet. (2) It is sent gradually in order to provide the truth in response to the false accounts offered by the disbelievers. This reason pertains to the people. It refers to the Qur’an’s clarification of the false claims and descriptions that they made against the Prophet, as well as their distorted and misplaced accounts of the facts.
This answer is followed by the verse: Those who shall be gathered upon their faces to hell, they are in a worse plight and straying farther away from the path (), which serves as a complement to the above points, as we shall discuss below.
It should also be clear that these three verses [] are all in line with each other, and pursue the same purpose: answering the disbelievers’ criticism against the Qur’an. The exegetes, however, have separated these verses from one another.
Here is how they have disintegrated the verses: (1) “Thus, that We may strengthen your heart” () responds to the disbelievers’ claim, “Why has not the Qur’an been sent down to him all at once?” (). (2) “And We have arranged it well in order” () simply states that the revelation—and/or the recitation—of the Qur’an to the Prophet has been arranged and ordered, without any specific connection to the previous part of the verse. (3) “And they shall not bring to you any description” () is an elaboration of “Thus, that We may strengthen your heart” (), in the sense that it explains how the Prophet’s heart is strengthened. Alternatively, verse responds specifically to the disbelievers’ description of the Prophet, by saying that God has clarified the truth about the Prophet’s attributes, and has brought the best exposition of it. There are also other views about this verse. (4) The last verse—“Those who shall be gathered…” ()—is completely irrelevant to the purpose of the two verses before it.
However, our explanations above (concerning the first two verses, ) and below (concerning the third one, ) should clarify that all of these views are unsatisfactory. Instead, the three verses have the same purpose, which is responding to the disbelievers’ criticisms and disrespect of the Qur’an with regards to its gradual revelation.
The exegetes have further added that there are more benefits to a differentiated revelation of the Book than the answer given by God here: Thus, that We may strengthen your heart (). Some of these benefits are:
(1) The scriptures before the Qur’an were sent at once because they were revealed to prophets who could read and write. That is also why they were sent in written form, all at once. The Qur’an, on the contrary, was revealed to an unschooled prophet who could not read or write. That is why it had to be sent gradually.
(2) The previous scriptures were not miracles that would prove them to be truly sent from God. As with the Qur’an, however, the evidence showing its authenticity as a revelation from God is its miraculous order. This is a unique miracle throughout history, and a miracle which is found in all parts of the book, such that it challenges others to bring even one sūrah like the smallest chapters of it. There is also no doubt that a miracle has to be compatible with the external conditions, which necessitates a gradual sending of the Book, so that it remains updated as newer events occur.
(3) The Qur’an’s content necessitates its gradual revelation, for the following reasons: (i) It contains abrogating (nāsikh) and abrogated (mansūkh) verses that cannot be sent all at once given the contradictions that it would create. (ii) It consists of questions that people asked the Prophet. (iii) It involves disapproval of certain events that had occurred. (iv) It narrates the account of certain events that had happened. (v) It contains news of future events during the life of the Prophet, such as the news about the conquest of Mecca, entering the Sacred Mosque, the victory of Romans over the Persians, and so on.
Response: However, these are weak considerations that do not contradict a one-time revelation of the Book.
(1) As with the first view, even though the Prophet was unschooled and did not read or write, the Qur’an could still have been sent to him all at once, as he had many faithful Companions who could have written down the revelation for him. Moreover, God has assured the Prophet that He will protect him against forgetting: We will make you recite so you shall not forget (). In addition, He has promised to preserve the revealed Reminder: Surely We have revealed the Reminder and We will most surely be its guardian (); Falsehood shall not come to it from before it nor from behind it; a revelation from the Wise, the Praised One (). God’s power to preserve the Book is equally applicable, whether the Qur’an were to be sent in portions or entirely at once.
(2) As with the second view, just the way a book that is sent gradually must have a certain order and meet certain conditions for it to be eloquent, a book sent in its complete form can also be eloquent if it meets certain conditions—even though its parts and chapters are sent all at once. In other words, the eloquence of speech is not limited to books that are produced in portions over a period of time.
(3) As with the points in the third view: (i) Abrogation does not mean the cancellation or rejection of a previous law. Instead, it refers to the expiration of its time, and the termination of its applicability. Therefore, abrogating and abrogated verses could be revealed together, by stating beforehand when the first law’s applicability shall end—if there is wisdom and good reason to do so. (ii) It is possible to answer a question before it is posed, so that there would be no need to ask later on. Then, whenever the people ask anything, they would be referred to the given earlier. (iii) Similarly, it is possible to disapprove events before their occurrence. (iv) & (v) It is also possible to narrate the accounts of events before they happen, and give forecasts of future occurrences.
In short, none of the suggested points by the exegetes contradicts the Qur’an being sent all at once. It should also be noted that if we analyze these suggested benefits and wisdoms in sending the book in portions, some of them reduce to the strengthening of the heart. Therefore, they would not be additional views and considerations. Overall, we can conclude that the verse’s answer is a complete view that is not missing any other consideration.
الَّذِينَ يُحْشَرُونَ عَلى وُجُوهِهِمْ إِلى جَهَنَّمَ أُوْلئِكَ شَرٌّ مَكاناً وَ أَضَلُّ سَبِيلاً٣٤
(24:34) Those who shall be gathered upon their faces to hell, they are in a worse plight and straying farther away from the path.
Given the context of the previous verses, and assuming that this verse follows the same thread, we can infer that those who made the above criticism against the Qur’an [], made an incorrect conclusion about the Prophet based on their objections: they described him as being in an evil plight, and straying from that which is right. God did not explicitly mention this along with their statement about the Qur’an, in order to honor and preserve the position of prophethood from evil description. Instead, He only referred to it indirectly by revealing the above verse.
Therefore, “Those who shall be gathered upon their faces to hell” alludes to the disbelievers who criticized the Qur’an and described the Prophet wrongly. Such allusion is more expressive than explicit naming. The verse is telling the Prophet: “The only people who are in an evil plight and stray away from the right path are those who mock the Qur’an and describe you inappropriately, not you.” In other words, this statement reverses the two sides in order to counter their statement in the same format. This means that being “worse” and “farther away” are not meant in a comparative sense [but they are said only to match their statement]. It could also be that the adjectives are comparative, assuming a tone of rebuke or the like.
Those who shall be gathered upon their faces to hell…: This alludes to those who deny the hereafter, whose questions, excuses and objections are rather captious. God leaves them on their own to stray into error. He says: And whomsoever Allah guides, he is the follower of the right way, and whomsoever He causes to err, you shall not find for him guardians besides Him; and We will gather them together on the day of resurrection on their faces, blind and dumb and deaf; their abode is hell; whenever it becomes allayed We will add to their burning. This is their retribution because they disbelieved in Our communications ().
In addition to being more expressive and eloquent, such indirect reference threatens the disbelievers that they are facing an evil plight and a painful punishment. The greatest straying is when one moves on his face, in a position where he cannot see what is in front of him. Therefore, the above expression also shows their utmost error and misguidance. Being resurrected and gathered in such a way, to hell, is a manifestation of their error and straying in this world. It is as if the verse is saying: “These are the people who are genuinely in error, because they shall be gathered on their faces, which is something that only applies to those who strayed in this world.”
The exegetes disagree on the connection of this verse with the previous verses. Some have kept silent about it. Majmaʿ al-bayān says that the disbelievers described Prophet Muḥammad and the believers as: “They are the worst creatures of God.” Thus, God answered them by saying: They are in a worse plight and straying farther away from the path. Some have connected this verse to an earlier verse: The dwellers of the garden shall on that day be in a better abiding-place and a better resting-place (). However, by now you should know that the connection lies in what is implied through the theme and context of the verse.
The exegetes also disagree about what is meant by “being gathered on their faces.” Here are some of their interpretations:
It is meant in its apparent and literal sense; they will move from one place to another while being flat on their faces.
It means being dragged.
It means moving from one place to another upside down, which is the opposite of walking regularly on the feet.
The problem with this view, specifically, is that if this were the intended meaning, the verse should have said “gathered upon their heads” not “upon their faces.” In another verse, God describes their condition after their gathering as follows: On the day when they shall be dragged upon their faces into the fire ().
This is a metaphorical expression for their humiliation, disgrace and failure.
The problem with this view is that metaphorical interpretation can only be granted if a direct interpretation of the text is impossible.
This is according to an Arabic expression, where they say, “So-and-so is going ‘on his face.’” This expression is used when the speaker does not know where someone is going.
The problem with this view is that the verse is qualified by “to hell,” which is therefore not compatible with the implied ignorance in the above expression.
This is a metonymy or figurative expression. What is meant is that they will be gathered while their hearts are attached to basic material things, and while their faces are directed to the ornaments of this world.
Some have objected to the last interpretation as follows: Upon resurrection, people will be so preoccupied with the reality of the hereafter that they will be unable to pay any attention to this world or be engaged with it. However, this expression might be a reference to the remaining traces and impacts of their material engagement and attachment.
With regards to the last two views, we should clarify that according to verses about the embodiment of deeds (tajassum al-aʿmāl), the disbelievers’ punishment will be a representation of being attached to the world and being directed toward it throughout their life. Therefore, their only occupation and engagement on that day will be their material engagement and attachment.
وَ لَقَدْ آتَيْنا مُوسَى الْكِتابَ وَ جَعَلْنا مَعَهُ أَخاهُ هارُونَ وَزِيراً ٣٥
(25:35) And certainly We gave Moses the Book and We appointed with him his brother Aaron an aider.
This verse talks about Moses being appointed as a messenger, being given a Book, and having his brother as a partner in his mission. These points are meant to confirm the truth of Prophet Muḥammad’s messengership and the revelation of the Qur’an to him, in response to the disbelievers’ denial of him and his Book. The verse sets the stage for talking about the punishment and extermination of Pharaoh’s clan. The meaning of the verse is clear.
فَقُلْنَا اذْهَبا إِلَى الْقَوْمِ الَّذِينَ كَذَّبُوا بِآياتِنا فَدَمَّرْناهُمْ تَدْمِيراً ٣٦
(25:36) Then We said: Go you both to the people who rejected Our signs (bi-āyātinā); so We destroyed them with utter destruction (dammarnāhum tadmīran).
Majmaʿ al-bayān says:
Tadmīr is “to destroy in an unusual way,” such as torturing someone. The verb dammara is used when someone attacks another person in an unpleasant way.
Āyāt (signs, communications), here, mean God’s signs in the horizons and in the souls, which point to God’s unity. That is what the disbelievers rejected. Abū al-Suʿūd says in his Tafsīr:
In this verse, āyāt refers to the nine miracles that Moses performed. Of course, when Moses and Aaron where told “Go you both,” the people had not yet “rejected Our signs,” because rejection of a sign necessarily occurs after being exposed to it. The right chronological order is that the two prophets were first ordered to go to the people, so they went, then they showed them the signs, and only then did the people reject the signs. Yet, the verse describes them as “the people who rejected Our signs” because here God is talking to Prophet Muḥammad, long after their time. This description is meant to explain and justify their destruction, which is mentioned next. That is: The two prophets went to them, showed them all of Our signs, yet they consistently rejected them, and thus We destroyed them.
This is an acceptable interpretation, if there is evidence to support that āyāt, in this verse, specifically refers to the [nine] miracles of Moses.
This verse, and the previous one are related to the earlier discussion, which was about those who mocked the Prophet’s Book and message. The verses threaten the audience by comparing the Prophet’s mission to Moses, whom was given a Book by God, and sent with his brother to Pharaoh’s tribe. Since they refused to accept his call, God destroyed them with utter destruction.
That is why the verses first say, “We gave Moses the Book” () before talking about their dispatch to the people and subsequent destruction of the deniers, even though the Torah was sent only after the drowning of the Pharaoh and his hosts. This order is used because the purpose of referring to this story is to mention the revelation of a Book to Moses, his appointment as a messenger, and the destruction of his people due to their rejection.
Some exegetes have said that these two verses are related to an earlier verse: and sufficient is your Lord as a Guide and a Helper (). However, this is unlikely.
وَ قَوْمَ نُوحٍ لَمَّا كَذَّبُوا الرُّسُلَ أَغْرَقْناهُمْ وَ جَعَلْناهُمْ لِلنَّاسِ آيَةً وَ أَعْتَدْنا لِلظَّالِمِينَ عَذاباً أَلِيماً ٣٧
(25:37) And the people of Noah, when they rejected the messengers, We drowned them, and made them a sign for humankind, and We have prepared a painful punishment for the unjust.
The word “people” is in the accusative case (qawma, which is manṣūb in terms of inflection), because it is apparently the object of an omitted verb that is implied by: We drowned them.
… they rejected the messengers …: They rejected Noah in particular, but this is equivalent to rejecting all messengers, because they are united on the message of truth. Moreover, these people were idolaters, meaning that they denied prophethood and messengership altogether.
… and made them a sign for humankind…: They were made a sign for their descendants who remained after them. The rest is clear.
وَ عاداً وَ ثَمُودَ وَ أَصْحابَ الرَّسِّ وَ قُرُوناً بَيْنَ ذلِكَ كَثِيراً ٣٨
(25:38) And ʿĀd and Thamūd and the dwellers of the Rass and many generations between them.
According to Majmaʿ al-bayān, rass means “unfenced well.” Some exegetes have said that “the dwellers of the Rass” were people who came after the people of Thamūd and settled next to a well. God sent a messenger to them, but they rejected him, and thus God exterminated them. It is also said that al-Rass is the name of a river that was located where these people lived. This view is supported by some Shia narrations.
And ʿĀd…: The conjunction “and” connects to: the people of Noah (). The implied meaning is: And We also destroyed ʿĀd, Thamūd, and the people of the Rass…
… and many generations (qurūnan) between them: Qarn (singular of qurūn) means “people who live in the same era.” Sometimes qarn is used to refer to the very time and era [of contemporary generations]. The pronoun “them” in “between them” refers to the abovementioned people, starting from the people of Noah and ending with either the dwellers of the Rass or Pharaoh’s people. The meaning of the verse is: We destroyed ʿĀd, who were the people of Hūd, Thamūd, who were the people of Ṣāliḥ, the dwellers of the Rass, and many generations between the abovementioned groups, from the time of Noah onwards.
وَ كُلاًّ ضَرَبْنا لَهُ الْأَمْثالَ وَ كُلاًّ تَبَّرْنا تَتْبِيراً ٣٩
(25:39) And to everyone (kullan) We gave examples and everyone did We destroy with utter destruction (tabbarnā tatbīran).
The word kullan is in the accusative case (as its inflectional mood is manṣūb), showing that it is the object of a verb that is implied by: We gave examples. Ḍarb al-amthāl (giving examples, drawing parables) effectively means “admonishing, advising, and warning.” Tatbīr means taftīt (to crumble, to fragment, to grind). The meaning of the verse is: And We admonished all of these nations by examples, but We had to obliterate them all because of their denial and defiance.
وَ لَقَدْ أَتَوْا عَلَى الْقَرْيَةِ الَّتِي أُمْطِرَتْ مَطَرَ السَّوْءِ أَ فَلَمْ يَكُونُوا يَرَوْنَها بَلْ كانُوا لا يَرْجُونَ نُشُوراً ٤٠
(25:40) And certainly they have (often) passed by the town on which was rained an evil rain; did they not then see it? Nay! They did not hope to be raised again.
“The town” refers to the people of Lot, as God sent down rain of stones of clay upon them. Their story was already discussed in the previous chapters.
… did they not then see it?…: This is a rebuke in the form of a rhetorical question, because their town was in the way of the people going from Hijaz to the Levant.
… Nay! They did not hope to be raised again: There are two possible meanings for the word “hope” in this verse: (1) They were not afraid of any form of resurrection. (2) They totally dismissed the likelihood of a resurrection. This sentence is similar to what God said above [about the Arab polytheists]: Nay, they reject the Hour (). This signifies the main reason that causes them to: (1) reject God’s Book and His Messenger; (2) not take heed of these healing admonitions; and (3) not learn from what they should learn from [that is, the stories of the previous nations being destroyed for their denial]. The root cause of all this is that they do not believe in the hereafter. That is why they turn a deaf ear to the religious call, and no words of wisdom or admonition sits in their hearts.
Examining Narrations
- Here is a summary of a long hadith where Imam ʿAlī narrates the story of “the dwellers of the Rass”: They used to worship a spruce tree (ṣanawbarah) called Shāh-Dirakht [lit. “King Tree,” in Persian]. It had been planted by Japheth (Yāfith), son of Noah, after the flood, and was located next to a spring called Rawshan-Āb [lit. “Luminous Water”]. They had twelve prosperous towns on the bank of a river called al-Rass. These towns were named: Ābān, Ādhar, Day, Bahman, Isfandār, Farwardīn, Urdībihisht, Khurdād, Murdād, Tīr, Mihr, and Shahrīwar. The Persians derived the names of their months from these twelve.
The people of the Rass took blossoms from that spruce tree and planted one in each of their towns, then channeled a stream from the spring next to the tree to pass by their local spruce. They prohibited themselves and their animals from drinking from that water, and enforced a death penalty for doing so, on the account that it is the source of life of their gods; no one shall dare reduce the life of the gods.
Each town had a feast day every month, when they would go out of the town to their spruce tree, with offerings and sacrifices that they would burn in a fire. When the smoke of their offerings rose and filled the sky, they would prostrate before the tree, weep and plead to it. At that point, a devil used to talk to them from the tree.
This was their custom in each town. They had a main town where their king, named Isfandār, used to live. On the day of the main town’s feast, the people of all towns would gather and celebrate for twelve days. They would offer the maximum amount of sacrifice and worship that they could to the tree. Satan (Iblīs) would talk to them and give them hopes and promises, more than the other devils who used to speak through the trees of the other towns in their feasts.
When their disbelief in God and their worship of the tree persisted for too long, God sent a messenger to them who was from the Children of Israel, from the descendants of Judah. The messenger urged the people of the Rass to worship God and abandon polytheism. He propagated God’s religion for a period of time, but the people refused to believe in him. Thus, he imprecated the tree, and the tree dried out. The people were disturbed to see this. Some of them said, “This man has put our gods under a spell.” Others said, “Our gods are angry with us because of him. They saw this man calling us to dissociate from them, but we let him to be free, without taking any action in support of our gods.”
Thus they agreed to kill the messenger. They dug a deep well, threw him in it, and closed the well tight. They let him stay there, while hearing his wailing, until he died. Consequently, God sent a severe punishment to their towns and destroyed them all.
- Imam ʿAlī said: Where are the dwellers of the cities of al-Rass—those who killed the prophets, extinguished the customs of the messengers and revived the customs of the oppressors?
- Once, a group of women went to see Imam al-Ṣādiq. One of them asked him about saḥq (female homosexuality). He said, “Its penalty is the same as the penalty for zinā (adultery, fornication).” The woman said, “But God has not mentioned it in the Qur’an.” “Of course He has,” the Imam responded. She asked, “Where?” He answered, “They were [the women of] al-Rass.”
- Once, two women asked [Imam] Jaʿfar b. Muḥammad, “Does the Book of God prohibit intercourse between two women?” He said, “Yes. This was practiced by women at the time of Tubbaʿ, and also by the dwellers of the Rass—although the word rass is used for any river or well.” He then added, “For these women, there shall be veils of fire, armors of fire, belts of fire, crowns of fire, and boots of fire; and worse than all these: coarse, itchy, ragged and stinking clothes of fire.” [Imam] Jaʿfar then said, “Teach this to your women.”
Author’s comment: Al-Qummī has narrated a tradition to the same effect on the authority of his father, on the authority of Ibn Abī ʿUmayr, on the authority of Jamīl, from Imam al-Ṣādiq.
- Concerning tabbarnā tatbīran (utter destruction) in the verse “and everyone did We destroy with utter destruction (tabbarnā tatbīran)” () Imam al-Ṣādiq said, “It means: We broke them with utter breaking (kassarnā taksīran).” He then added, “It is a word that is used by the Nabṭīs [a people in Iraq].”
- Imam al-Bāqir said: “The town on which was rained an evil rain” () was Sodom, where the people of Lot lived. God sent upon them a rain of sijjīl, which means clay.
See verses and . (Trans.) ↩︎
The meaning suggested by these exegetes would be: And those who disbelieve say: Why has not the Qur’an been sent down to him all at once, like that (kadhālika)? It is because We may strengthen your heart by it… It is implausible because it is not a direct meaning of the text that springs to mind at first. (Trans.) ↩︎
In education, these two methods are sometimes classified, broadly, as “passive learning” “active learning,” respectively. (Trans.) ↩︎
See verses and . (Trans.) ↩︎
It is more expressive because it also expresses their evil end and punishment, which gives the statement a sense of threat. (Trans.) ↩︎
In other words, the verse is not saying that “both sides—the Prophet and his mockers—are in an evil plight and straying from the path, but one is worse and farther away.” Rather, it is saying that “those who are truly in an evil plight and stray from the path are the mockers, not the Prophet.” The use of comparative in a context of rebuke and derision was mentioned as a last possibility under verse . It is similar to being sarcastic. It is as if the verse is saying, sarcastically, “So the Prophet is in an evil plight and straying from the path,” then adding, “but the mockers are in a worse plight and more straying.” (Trans.) ↩︎
The verse implies that the disbelievers had also claimed that the Prophet is in an evil plight and straying from the right path. (Trans.) ↩︎
In other words, their punishment will be the real and otherworldly form of their highest realization in this life, which is to be resurrected on their faces. Also see verse for more insight on this. (Trans.) ↩︎
This expression is taken from verse , and it refers to the signs of God’s power both without and within; what one finds in the external universe, and what one finds in one’s own soul. Alternatively, and based on verse , “signs in the souls” are events that affect the lives of the people, and “signs in the horizons” are other events that one observes to occur in the world. (Trans.) ↩︎
In other words, only those parts of Moses’ story are mentioned here that serve the purpose of threatening the disbelievers. And among these parts, the revelation of scripture is mentioned first because that was the main subject of the previous verses. (Trans.) ↩︎
That is, these verses comfort the Prophet and promise him assistance and victory from God. (Trans.) ↩︎
Given the conjunction “and” at the beginning of the verse, the implied verb is apparently dammarnā (We destroyed), which was mentioned at the end of the last verse. The meaning would be: “And We destroyed the people of Noah as follows: When they rejected the messengers, We drowned them…” (Trans.) ↩︎
In other words, their rejection of the whole concept and possibility of human prophets and messengers is equivalent to their rejection of all messengers. (Trans.) ↩︎
The meaning is: “We gave examples for every one of the above tribes,” where the object—“everyone”—is mentioned before the verb—“gave examples”—for emphasis. (Trans.) ↩︎
What follows as the meaning of the verse is missing in the original Arabic. (Trans.) ↩︎
See verses , and . (Trans.) ↩︎
ʿUyūn-i Akhbār al-Riḍā, via its chain of narration, on the authority of Abū al-Ṣalt al-Harawī, from Imam al-Riḍā. ↩︎
Nahj al-balāghah. ↩︎
Al-Kāfī, via its chain of narration, on the authority of Muḥammad b. Abī Ḥamzah, Hishām and Ḥafṣ. ↩︎
Al-Durr al-manthūr, on the authority of al-Bayhaqī, Ibn ʿAsākir and Ibn Abī al-Dunyā—concerning the reprehensibility of means of distraction. ↩︎
Tafsīr al-Qummī, via its chain of narration, on the authority of Ḥafṣ b. Ghiyāth. ↩︎