Verses 15–21
This is the second section of the story of Moses (in this sūrah). It contains a description of some of the events that happened after his attaining maturity, which consequently led him to leave Egypt for Midian.
Commentary
وَدَخَلَ الْمَدِينَةَ عَلَىٰ حِينِ غَفْلَةٍ مِنْ أَهْلِهَا فَوَجَدَ فِيهَا رَجُلَيْنِ يَقْتَتِلَانِ هَٰذَا مِنْ شِيعَتِهِ وَهَٰذَا مِنْ عَدُوِّهِ ۖ فَاسْتَغَاثَهُ الَّذِي مِنْ شِيعَتِهِ عَلَى الَّذِي مِنْ عَدُوِّهِ فَوَكَزَهُ مُوسَىٰ فَقَضَىٰ عَلَيْهِ ۖ قَالَ هَٰذَا مِنْ عَمَلِ الشَّيْطَانِ ۖ إِنَّهُ عَدُوٌّ مُضِلٌّ مُبِينٌ ١٥
(28:15) And he entered the city at a time of invigilance on the part of its people, so he found therein two men fighting, one being of his party and the other of his foes, and he who was of his party cried out to him for help against him who was of his enemies, so Moses struck him with his fist and killed him. He said: This is on account of Satan’s doing; he is an enemy, openly leading astray.
Regarding And he entered the city at a time of invigilance on the part of its people, there is no doubt that the city which Moses entered at a time when its inhabitants were not vigilant was a city in Egypt while he used to live with the Pharaoh. It may be deduced from this that the royal palace in which the Pharaoh resided was beyond the city and that Moses came out from it and went into the city at a time when its inhabitants were not vigilant. What confirms and endorses what we have deduced is a verse that we shall encounter shortly, which reads: And a man came running from the remotest part of the city… (). This verse will serve as vindication [for our assertion that the Pharaoh’s palace was beyond the city or far from its central district].
At a time of invigilance on the part of its people refers to a time when the people retire to their homes and consequently the markets become inactive while the streets and alleyways become deserted of people and passers-by such as at midday and in the middle of the night.
So he found therein two men fighting means that “the two men were disputing, arguing, and fighting with each other, having had come to blows,” while one being of his party and the other of his foes () relates the state which the incident portrays, and its meaning is that one of the two was an Israelite from among the followers of Moses, with respect to his faith. This is because the Children of Israel during those times attributed their religious origin to their ancestors Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, deriving it from them, even though nothing of the faith remained for them save the name, while they used to simulate the worship of the Pharaoh. The other man was a Copt who was Moses’ enemy, for the Copts were the enemies of the Children of Israel. Another piece of evidence that attests to the second of the two contending persons being a Copt is the verse that occurs at another place in the Qur’an, where Moses addresses his Lord thus: And they [the Copts] have a crime against me; therefore, I fear that they may slay me ().
And he who was of his party cried out to him (fa istaghāthahu, from istighātha) for help against him who was of his enemies: The verbal noun al-istighātha means “to seek or ask for aid, relief, and succor” and “to call or cry out to someone for help.” This means that the Israelite called out to Moses to help him against his enemy the Copt.
So Moses struck him with his fist (fa wakazahu, from al-wakz) and killed (fa qaḍā) him: The pronoun “him” that occurs twice in this section of the verse refers to “him who was of his enemies.” The verbal noun al-wakz means “to thrust,” “to jab,” “to punch,” and “to strike with the entirety of the fist” as mentioned by al-Rāghib and others, while the term al-qaḍā means “to render judgment” and “to sentence.” Thus the construct al-qaḍāu ʿālayhi (or as it appears in this verse: fa qaḍā ʿalayhi) means “to put an end to the Copt’s affair by his death.” Therefore the meaning obtained is that Moses shoved the Copt or punched or struck him with the entirety of his fist and consequently the Copt died. This was a case of manslaughter or accidental homicide; that is, a killing that occurred by error and mistake. Had it been otherwise, it would have been more appropriate and worthy of the speech of God to express the deed with the term al-qatl (“murder”).
The part of this verse which reads He said: This is on account of [or from] Satan’s doing; he is an enemy, openly leading astray () refers to what transpired of the fight between the two contenders till it led to the death of the Copt where Moses attributed it to Satan when he said This is on account of [or from] Satan’s doing (). The preposition min signifies “a class or a type” of thing or something coming into being, originating, or resulting from something. Thus the meaning obtained is that this incident of antagonism and fighting that occurred was a kind or a type of deed attributable to Satan or one which came about or resulted from Satan’s instigation, for it was Satan who caused enmity, hostility, and hatred between them and seduced them to fight till it led to the intervention of Moses and the killing of the Copt at his hands. This deed, in turn, placed Moses in grave danger, for he knew that the incident would not remain secret and hidden and that the Copts, their leaders, and their dignitaries would rise against him, and at their head the Pharaoh, would severely retaliate against him and against whoever had a role in that incident.
At that point Moses realized that he had made a mistake in what he had done in terms of striking the Copt, an act which had brought about a difficult and destructive situation upon him. An occurrence of mistake such as this is not attributed to God since He only guides to the truth and to that which is right; thus, Moses consequently determined that what had transpired was attributable to Satan.
His was not a sin or a wrong-doing on his part since it had happened by mistake, and had happened while he was defending and supporting the Israelite, which was a defense against an unjust disbeliever. Still, just as Satan causes the human being to disobey and fall into sin by means of his evil whisperings and insinuations, similarly he causes the human being to fall into everything that is contrary to what is right, due to which the human being suffers trouble and hardship just as Satan caused Adam and his spouse to fall into what he made them fall into, which was partaking from the forbidden tree which consequently led to their dismissal from the garden.
Therefore Moses’ statement reported in this verse This is on account of Satan’s doing () was in the form of a harsh reproof and a castigation from himself for what had transpired of the violent altercation which subsequently led to the killing of the Copt and to him falling into grave danger, as well as his regret for that. Moses’ subsequent statement reported in this verse that says he is an enemy, openly leading astray () is an indication from himself that his deed was due to error, attributable to Satan even if it was not due to disobedience of God which results in sin and punishment. Rather, it was a sheer mistake which could not be ascribed to God but to Satan who is an enemy, openly leading astray. Hence the deed that ensued from him was a kind of bad planning or a bad move and a mistaken or misplaced effort driving him to a harmful and detrimental consequence. Thus when the Pharaoh remonstrated with him at a later time as reported in: And you did [that] deed of yours which you did, and you are one of the ungrateful (), Moses responded by saying: I did it then while I was of those unable to see the right course ().
قَالَ رَبِّ إِنِّي ظَلَمْتُ نَفْسِي فَاغْفِرْ لِي فَغَفَرَ لَهُ ۚ إِنَّهُ هُوَ الْغَفُورُ الرَّحِيمُ ١٦
(28:16) He said: My Lord! Surely I have done harm to myself, so do Thou forgive me. So He forgave him; He is the Forgiving, the Merciful.
The part of the verse which reads He said: My Lord! Surely I have done harm to myself, so do Thou forgive me. So He forgave him; He is the Forgiving, the Merciful serves as an acknowledgment from Moses to his Lord that he had wronged himself, in the sense that the deed had led him to a situation of danger, casting him into jeopardy. From this it becomes clear that the intent of the forgiveness asked by Moses in so do thou forgive me () means a request for the nullification of the negative consequence of his deed, and his deliverance from grief and sorrow as well as his deliverance from the evil of the Pharaoh and his people. This meaning also comes to the fore in: And you killed a man, then We delivered you from grief (wa qatalta nafsan fa najjaynāka min al-ghamm). ()
This admission of the wrong and the plea for forgiveness by Moses is similar to what transpired from Adam and his spouse, which is narrated in: They said: Our Lord! We have been unjust to ourselves, and if Thou forgive us not, and have [not] mercy on us, we shall certainly be of the losers ()
قَالَ رَبِّ بِمَا أَنْعَمْتَ عَلَيَّ فَلَنْ أَكُونَ ظَهِيرًا لِلْمُجْرِمِينَ ١٧
(28:17) He said: My Lord! Because Thou hast bestowed a favor on me, I shall never be a backer of the guilty ones.
With respect to He said: My Lord! Because Thou hast bestowed a favor on me, I shall never be a backer of the guilty ones, it has been suggested that the letter bāʾ in the phrase bimā anʿamta (“because thou hast bestowed a favor”) serves to indicate causality or the reason for an action (bāʾ al-sababiyya). Thus the meaning obtained is: “My Lord, because of (or due to) what You have favored me with, it is incumbent on me due to or because of Your obligation (on me) that I shall not be a helper of the guilty ones.” Thus it was a promise from him to God. It is also suggested that the letter bāʾ serves as the particle of oath while the predicate of the oath is elided. Hence the meaning obtained is: “I swear by what You have favored me with, I shall certainly turn to You in repentance or that I shall certainly desist and consequently I shall never be a backer of the guilty ones.” It is also suggested that it serves as a particle of oath that specifically denotes a conciliatory entreaty or a plea that seeks compassion and sympathy, which is an oath that occurs in rhetorical composition such as the imploring oath billāhi zurnī (“I plead with you in the name of God, visit me”). In this case, the meaning of the verse under discussion becomes: “I adjure You to be compassionate towards me and to protect me, and that I shall never be a helper of the guilty ones.”
However the first interpretation is the best since the intent of because Thou hast bestowed a favor on me is in line with what they have mentioned. As for the bestowal of favors on him by God, it refers to God’s protection of him and saving him from being killed by the Pharaoh and God’s returning him to his mother. It also refers to God accepting his penitence for killing the Copt and forgiving him. This is understood on the basis that Moses learned of God’s forgiveness of himself by means of inspiration or a dream or by means of a medium similar to these. Nevertheless and however it may be, [if the latter two explanations are considered for the letter bāʾ, which suggest an oath], it is an oath in the name of other than God. Hence the meaning obtained is: “My Lord, I swear by Your protection of me” or “I swear by Your pardoning me.” However, an oath of this kind, where the oath taker is other than God and where the subject of the oath is other than God, does not occur elsewhere in the Qur’an.
As for I shall never be a backer of the guilty ones (mujrimīn), it has been suggested that the term mujrimīn (“guilty ones”) is a reference to those who cause others to fall into a crime, or it is a reference to persons, helping whom leads to a crime such as the Israelite whom the Copt provoked and consequently aiding him caused Moses to commit a crime of manslaughter. Thus the term mujrimīn (“guilty ones”) serves as a figurative attribution where one being causes another being to fall into a crime and is figuratively called “the guilty one.” However, it is also suggested that those meant by the term “guilty ones” are the Pharaoh and his people. Thus the meaning would be: “I swear by Your favors on me, I shall certainly turn to You in penitence and shall never be a helper of the Pharaoh and his people by associating with them and keeping their company or by augmenting their numbers as I used to till now.” This second interpretation has been rejected by some on the grounds that it does not suit the context; however, the truth of the matter is that the verse which reads: My Lord! Because Thou hast bestowed a favor on me, I shall never be a backer of the guilty ones is a promise by Moses in that he would not aid a guilty person in his crime due to his gratitude towards God on account of the favors He had bestowed on him. The term “favor” (al-niʿmah) in this verse refers to divine leadership (al-wilāyah al-ilāhiyya). Such an understanding of the term “favor” is because the term has been applied to divine leadership (in the Qur’an). An example is the following verse that attests to such an application: And whoever obeys Allah and the Messenger, these are with those upon whom Allah has bestowed favors (fa ulāʾika maʿa alladhīna anʿam Allāhu ʿalayhim) from among the prophets and the truthful and the martyrs and the good, and a goodly company are they ().
These people are the people of the straight path who are safe from deviation and the wrath of God as is attested in: Keep us on the right path; the path of those upon whom Thou hast bestowed favors (ṣirāṭ alladhīna anʿamta ʿalayhim). Not [the path] of those upon whom Thy wrath is brought down, nor of those who go astray. ()
The necessary consequence of abstaining from aiding the guilty due to the bestowal of favors in this sense is unambiguously apparent and clear.
Consequently, it becomes clear that the ones meant by the term mujrimīn (“guilty ones”) are the likes of the Pharaoh and his people rather than the likes of the Israelite whom Moses helped. This is because helping the Israelite did not constitute a crime nor was striking the Copt a crime that Moses would repent for. How could that be? For Moses was from the people of the straight path. The people of the straight path do not go astray by disobeying God, and God has emphasized Moses’ status as being from the “purified ones”—those towards whom Satan has no recourse such that he may seduce, tempt, and lead them astray, as is attested in the following verse And mention Moses in the Book; he was one purified, and he was a messenger, a prophet (). This is in addition to what God has emphasized previously in this sūrah, that He had granted Moses wisdom and knowledge and that he was among the good-doers and the pious. A person of such caliber does not let partisan bigotry provoke, incite or induce him to the point that he gets inappropriately angry or helps a criminal in his crime.
The (third person singular perfect tense) verb qāla (“He said”) recurs thrice (in these verses under discussion): He said: This is on account of Satan’s doing… (); He said: My Lord! Surely I have done harm to myself… (); He said: My Lord! Because Thou hast bestowed a favor on me… ().
This recurrence of the verb is due to the different contexts in these three sentences where the first denotes Moses’ judgment, the second denotes Moses’ repentance and supplication, and the third denotes Moses’ promise and determined commitment.
فَأَصْبَحَ فِي الْمَدِينَةِ خَائِفًا يَتَرَقَّبُ فَإِذَا الَّذِي اسْتَنْصَرَهُ بِالْأَمْسِ يَسْتَصْرِخُهُ ۚ قَالَ لَهُ مُوسَىٰ إِنَّكَ لَغَوِيٌّ مُبِينٌ ١٨
(28:18) Next morning, he was in the city, fearful and vigilant, when behold, the one who had sought his help the day before shouted for his help [once again] (yastaṣrikhuhu, from al-istiṣrākh). Moses said to him: You are indeed manifestly errant (ghawī, from al-ghiwāyah)!
The qualification of the phrase fa-aṣbaḥa in this verse (“next morning, he was”) by fī al-madīnah (“in the city”) proves that he remained in the city till the next day and did not return to the palace of the Pharaoh, while the verbal noun al-istiṣrākh means “to call for help with a raised voice,” similar to shouting out or crying out loud. Al-ghiwāyah means “erroneous,” “to deviate from or to fall short of rightness or correctness,” “to go completely astray,” “the state of being contrary to right guidance.”
Thus the meaning obtained is that Moses became fearful of the Pharaoh, awaiting and anticipating his evil reprisal whilst still in the city, not having had returned to the royal palace, when suddenly he was taken by surprise in that the Israelite who had sought his help against the Copt the other day was calling him for help with a raised voice against yet another Copt, which is when Moses said to him in censure and reproof: You are indeed manifestly errant!, meaning “you do not follow the path of reason, wisdom, and rightness.” This was because he was provoking and fighting a people, antagonizing and fighting whom would result in nothing save certain evil.
فَلَمَّا أَنْ أَرَادَ أَنْ يَبْطِشَ بِالَّذِي هُوَ عَدُوٌّ لَهُمَا قَالَ يَا مُوسَىٰ أَتُرِيدُ أَنْ تَقْتُلَنِي كَمَا قَتَلْتَ نَفْسًا بِالْأَمْسِ ۖ إِنْ تُرِيدُ إِلَّا أَنْ تَكُونَ جَبَّارًا فِي الْأَرْضِ وَمَا تُرِيدُ أَنْ تَكُونَ مِنَ الْمُصْلِحِينَ ١٩
(28:19) But when he wanted to strike him who was an enemy to them both, he said: Moses, do you want to kill me as you killed a person yesterday? You just want to be a tyrant in the land, and you do not desire to be of those who bring about reform.
Prominent scholars have said that the pronoun “he” inherent to the verb qāla (“he said”) refers to the Israelite who was crying out to Moses, and that is because the Israelite thought that Moses wanted to strike him when he heard his reprimand in the statement: You are indeed manifestly errant! () Thus when he realized Moses’ intent to strike him, it frightened and horrified him, whereupon he said: Moses, do you want to kill me as you killed a person yesterday? You just want to be a tyrant in the land, and you do not desire to be of those who bring about reform. At this point, the Copt realized that Moses was the person who had killed the other Copt the day before and so he returned to the Pharaoh and informed him of the news, whereupon the Pharaoh and his people conferred together to deliberate upon Moses and subsequently resolved to kill him.
What these scholars have suggested as interpretation is due to the testimony of the context in its favor and therefore what is suggested contrary to it—such as that the pronoun “he” refers to the Copt rather than to the Israelite—is inconsequential, while the meaning of the rest of the verse is manifestly clear.
But when he wanted to strike him who was an enemy to them both… serves as a critical allusion to what exists in the current Torah, since the latter says that the two contenders were both Israelites, while the statement in this verse that says Moses! Do you want to…? confirms that the one uttering these words is the Israelite rather than the Copt since the context is that of blame, reproach, and complaint.
وَجَاءَ رَجُلٌ مِنْ أَقْصَى الْمَدِينَةِ يَسْعَىٰ قَالَ يَا مُوسَىٰ إِنَّ الْمَلَأَ يَأْتَمِرُونَ بِكَ لِيَقْتُلُوكَ فَاخْرُجْ إِنِّي لَكَ مِنَ النَّاصِحِينَ ٢٠
(28:20) And a man came running from the remotest part of the city. He said: O Moses! Surely the chiefs are consulting together (yaʾtamirūna, from al-iʾtimār) to slay you, therefore depart [at once]; I am of those who wish well to you.
The verbal noun al-iʾtimār means: “to consult,” “to confer,” “to counsel,” “to advise and recommend,” thus being contrary to treachery and betrayal.
It is clear that the part of this verse that reads from the remotest part of the city qualifies the verb jāʾa (“he came”) which occurs in this verse. Thus the context of the narrative suggests that the consultation was taking place with the Pharaoh and due to his instruction and orders while this man came from there and that the palace of the Pharaoh was situated in the remotest part of the city and therefore lay beyond it. So the man informs Moses that he might be killed and suggested that he leave the city. This inference or understanding from this verse under discussion supports what was previously suggested that the palace of the Pharaoh in which he resided lay beyond the city, and the meaning of the verse is clear.
فَخَرَجَ مِنْهَا خَائِفًا يَتَرَقَّبُ ۖ قَالَ رَبِّ نَجِّنِي مِنَ الْقَوْمِ الظَّالِمِينَ ٢١
(28:21) So he left the city, fearful and vigilant, [and] he said: My Lord! Deliver me from the unjust people.
This verse contains evidence in support of the idea that Moses did not consider his killing of the Copt as a crime.
Examining Narrations
- ʿAlī b. Ibrāhīm al-Qummī relates:
Moses continued to live with the Pharaoh in the best of dignity and honor [that is, in the best of states] till he reached adulthood. The Pharaoh used to negate and deny what Moses used to say about monotheism till the Pharaoh became concerned and planned to do away with him. Consequently, Moses left the [palace of the] Pharaoh and entered the city where he came across two people fighting. One of them professed what Moses professed while the other professed what the Pharaoh professed. Thus the one who was from Moses’ partisans called out to him for help, and so Moses went over and struck the Pharaoh’s partisan with his fist and killed him, and then hid in the city. When the next day dawned, another one [of the Pharaoh’s partisans] came and took hold of the man who professed what Moses professed, refusing to let him go whereupon he [Moses’ partisan] called out to Moses for help again. When the other contender saw Moses, he said to him: Do you intend to kill me as you killed a person yesterday? () Thereafter he let go of him and fled.
- It is narrated from ʿAlī b. Muḥammad b. al-Jahm:
I once attended the gathering of al-Maʾmūn while Imam al-Riḍā was with him there. Al-Maʾmūn said to the Imam: “Son of the Messenger, do you not hold that the prophets are infallible?” He replied in the affirmative, whereupon al-Maʾmūn said: “Then explain to me so Moses struck him with his fist and killed him. He said: This is on account of Satan’s doing; he is an enemy, openly leading astray ().”
Imam al-Riḍā replied: “Moses entered one of the Pharaoh’s cities at a time of invigilance on the part of its people (), and that time was between sunset (al-maghrib) and night-time (al-ʿishā). There he found two men fighting, one being of his party and the other of his foes (). Thus he sentenced the foe according to the judgment of God and struck him with his fist; consequently, the foe died. He said: This is on account of Satan’s doing (). This refers to the fighting that occurred between the two men and not to what Moses had done with respect to killing the foe. Surely he is an enemy, openly leading astray ().”
Al-Maʾmūn asked: “Then what is the meaning of Moses’ statement: My Lord! Surely I have done harm to myself so do Thou forgive me ()?”
The Imam replied: “He meant: I placed myself in a situation that was inappropriate for me to be in by entering this city, so do Thou forgive me (), meaning: conceal me from Your enemies so that they may not seize me for then they would kill me. As a result, God protected him; He is the Forgiving, the Merciful (). Moses said: My Lord! Because Thou hast bestowed a favor on me () which favor is that of strength such that I killed a man with a single blow, I shall never be a backer of the guilty ones (); rather I shall strive against them with this strength till You are pleased. And Moses found himself in the city, fearful and vigilant, when behold, the one who had sought his help the day before, shouted for his help [once again]. (). Moses said to him: You are indeed manifestly errant! (). You fought a man yesterday and are fighting another today! I shall certainly teach you a lesson. And he meant to seize him. But when he intended to seize the one who was an enemy to them both, which in this case was his partisan, the latter said: Moses, do you want to kill me as you killed a person yesterday? You just want to be a tyrant in the land, and you do not desire to be of those who bring about reform ().”
At this al-Maʾmūn said: “May God reward you well on behalf of his prophets, O Abū al-Ḥasan!”