In the Shade of the Qur'an by Sayyid Qutb

A number of factors link the opening of this passage and the central theme of the sūrah on the one hand, and the main topics discussed in the last passage on the other.

This passage starts with fresh effort to regulate the life of the Muslim community, purging it of the remaining traces of the state of ignorance that prevailed in pre- Islamic days and giving more prominence to the main features of the new Islamic life. It adds a clear warning against the scheming of the people of former religions, particularly the Jews in Madinah. Evil is ingrained in their characters. It is the mark of all their dealings with the new Muslim community in Madinah. They exert strenuous efforts to disrupt its growth and progress, particularly in morality, in mutual co-operation and in solidarity which are the basic source of its strength.

The new passage reiterates the basic rule that is the central foundation of the new Muslim community. That is the belief in the absolute oneness of God. Indeed, the very life of the Muslim community and its code of living emanate from this basic belief.

Prior to this passage, the sūrah addressed several topics, including the family system and the social organisation of the Muslim community. The last passage dealt with the family, its structure, the methods for its protection and the ties which consolidate its structure. This new passage deals with social ties inside the Muslim community that go beyond the family, but which remain related to it. The link between these issues is provided by the reference to parents and to relationships that go beyond parenthood. Indeed, the perception of these ties takes place as a result of the caring and loving relationships within the family. Such care and love soon begin to transcend strict family relatives, so as to care for others. Without the love and kindness that prevail within the family, people would not be able to show much care for others with whom they have no family ties.

As the new passage includes directives to take good care of the immediate family and the large, human family, and to establish values and standards in this regard for the kind and generous on the one hand and the miserly on the other, it begins with the basic concept which gives rise to all values and standards. This is the concept of the oneness of God that is the basis of the Islamic way of life in its totality. The Islamic system relates every action, effort and feeling to the basic principle of submission to God and of worshipping Him. This is the ultimate objective of every human activity in the life of every Muslim.

As the passage speaks of submission and worship being due to God alone, the second part of the passage outlines some of the rulings concerning purity and prayer.

It also takes the first step towards the prohibition of intoxicating drinks: when this sūrah was revealed, alcohol had not as yet been prohibited. This first step should be seen as a part of the ever-active method of educating the new Muslim society.

Furthermore, this step is closely related to worship, prayer and belief in God’s oneness. This is sufficient to show how all parts of the sūrah are inter-related, serving its central theme.

Worship God alone and do not associate with Him any partners. Be kind to your parents and near of kin, to orphans, the needy, the neighbour who is related to you and the neighbour who is a stranger, the friend by your side, the wayfarer, and those whom your right hands possess. God does not love those who are arrogant and boastful.

(Verse 36)

The passage starts with a clear commandment to worship God alone and a clear prohibition against associating partners with Him. We note that this verse begins with a conjunction which links it with the preceding orders that relate to the family and its affairs. This serves to stress the total unity that pervades all aspects of Islamic faith. Islam is not merely a number of beliefs that our minds accept, nor is it a host of rituals and acts of worship, nor a worldly system divorced from faith and worship. It is a way of life that combines all these aspects and unites them together on the basis of believing in the Oneness of God and deriving all systems and legislation from Him alone. There can be no split between accepting God’s unity and implementing His legislation.

This is followed by an order to extend kind treatment to certain groups of one’s immediate family and of the human family at large. Miserliness, conceit, boastfulness and suppression of God’s favours, of whichever type, are denounced. This is coupled with a warning against following Satan, together with raising the prospect of punishment in the hereafter and all that attends on it of public humiliation. Again, all this is linked to the belief in God’s oneness and to acknowledging that He is the only source of legislation.

In the Islamic system, all directives, laws, and legislation are derived from faith and are based on the basic concept of God’s oneness. Hence, they are interlinked, mutually complementary and perfectly coherent. As a result, it is very difficult to isolate one part of Islamic legislation from the rest. The study of any one part without reference to its essential origin is unscholarly. The implementation of some parts of these laws to the exclusion of others falls short of implementing Islam and does not yield the full benefits to humanity which are sure to result from the actualisation of the Islamic system.

Under Islam, all concepts of human and universal relationships upon which all social, economic, political and moral systems are founded, and which affect all aspects of human relations are derived from believing in God. It is these concepts which give shape to human conscience and which characterise the basic set-up of human society. They make ordinary human dealings acts of worship because they are conducted in accordance with the Divine system, and they make worship the basis of all dealings because it refines conscience and improves behaviour. Thus, the whole of human life becomes a single solid unit, guided by the Divine system and seeks its ultimate fulfilment, both in this world and in the world to come, with God, the only source of legislation.

“Worship God alone and do not associate with Him any partners.” (Verse 36) The first commandment is to worship God, which is followed by a prohibition of worshipping anyone other than Him. This is a total and absolute prohibition of all sorts of worship which man has practised in all ages and communities. False gods, be they animate or inanimate objects, angels or devils, have been ascribed as partners to God in one way or another. No claim of this sort is ever allowed in Islam. It is absolutely forbidden for all time.

This is followed by a commandment to extend kindness to parents in particular and relatives in general. Most Divine orders in this particular area tend to emphasise the need to be kind to one’s parents, although they do not overlook the other area of requiring parents to be kind to children. God is more merciful and compassionate to children than their own parents. But it is children who need to be directed more strongly to look after the older generation who stand in need of kindness. In most cases, the younger generation direct their feelings, sympathies and concerns to the generation which will follow them, not the preceding one, simply because in life people tend to look forward without turning back. Hence, these directives from the All-Merciful, the Compassionate, who does not neglect a parent or a child. It is He who has taught His servants how to be kind and compassionate to one another.

We also note in this verse, as in many others, that Divine directives begin by emphasising the need to be kind to one’s relatives before widening their concern to include all those who need to be looked after in society or in humanity at large. This fits in perfectly with human nature. Compassion towards others begins at home, in one’s own immediate family. A person who has not himself been a recipient of compassion in his childhood, within his family, hardly ever feels compassionate towards others. Moreover, man tends to look more favourably towards his relations, extending his kindness to them. There is no harm in this, as long as such compassion is continually enhanced and extended to a wider area so as to benefit more people.

Moreover, this directive to be kind to parents, relatives and other people fits in most coherently with the Islamic view of social organisation. It ensures that social security begins within the family before it is carried further to include the whole community. It does not entrust it to government machinery except when the smaller, more directly involved machinery of the family becomes incapable of meeting the challenge. Normally, smaller local units are more able to ensure that mutual social security is given at the right time, and with an ease and compassion that make the whole social set-up worthy of man.

In this particular verse, the directive begins by emphasising the need to be kind to parents, before widening the area to include kinsfolk, and then at a later stage, extending this to orphans and the needy. These are given precedence over one’s neighbours because their need may be more pressing and they must be looked after more immediately. Kindness is then urged towards a neighbour who may be a relation, and so to any other neighbour. Both take precedence over friends, because a neighbour always remains next to us. We meet our friends intermittently.

Commentators on the Qur’ān have defined this type of friend as the one with whom we meet socially and whom we may choose as a travelling companion. The next type of person who deserves our kindness is a stranded wayfarer. This is followed by slaves who suffer the hardships of bondage, but with whom we have human ties common to all mankind.

This commandment to extend our kindness to all these groups is followed by a comment which denounces conceit and arrogance, miserliness, suppression of God’s favours, boastfulness and showing off. All these are attributed to one basic cause, namely, lack of faith in God and the Day of Judgement.

The verse which commanded all types of kindness ends with a comment denouncing such shameful qualities as arrogance, boastfulness, miserliness, concealment of God’s bounty and deliberately giving foul impressions: “God does not love those who are arrogant and boastful; [nor] those who are niggardly and bid others to be niggardly, and conceal whatever God has bestowed on them of His bounty. We have prepared humiliating suffering for the unbelievers. And [God does not love] those who spend their wealth for the sake of ostentation, and do not believe in God and the Last Day. He who chooses Satan for a companion, an evil companion has he.” (Verses 36-38)

Here again we note an especially important characteristic of the Islamic way of life which relates to all aspects of behaviour, and from which all feelings and all social relationships to faith are derived. When a person worships God alone and derives his values and principles from Him only, he will definitely extend his kindness to people, seeking to please God and hoping to receive reward in the hereafter. His kindness is characterised by a humble and gentle attitude which demonstrates his genuine belief that he only spends what God has granted him. He does not create his wealth. A person who denies God and the Day of Judgement is often arrogant and boastful. He is also a niggardly creature who encourages others to be niggardly. He tries to conceal the favours that God has bestowed on him, which is the opposite attitude of one who demonstrates his gratitude to God by extending his kindness to others. He may, on the other hand, spend some of what he has been given by God in order to publicise his generosity and to seek praise from others. Essentially, however, he does not believe in any other reward than people’s adoration.

Here, then, the two opposite types of morality generated by faith and unfaith are clearly demonstrated. Motivation to do good and behave in a goodly manner is essentially the belief in God and the Day of Judgement and the eagerness to earn God’s pleasure which ensures reward in the hereafter. It is indeed a sublime motivation, one which is not based in social tradition and which does not expect to be rewarded by other people. When faith is absent and a person does not believe in the Day of Judgement, the Day when he will receive reward for his actions, worldly values predominate. These do not remain constant even during the span of a single generation, let alone for all time and all places. When these constitute the basic motivation, values change in the same way as people change their likes and dislikes.

We then have a breeding ground for all the bad qualities thus far mentioned, whether boastfulness, arrogance, niggardliness or hypocrisy.

The Qur’ānic statement says that God “does not love” such people. What we have to understand is that love and hate are not responses applicable to God. What is meant here is the result that is associated with such feelings in people’s lives § : “We have prepared humiliating suffering for the unbelievers.” (Verse 37) Humiliation is the proper response to arrogance and boastfulness. The Qur’ānic verse is couched in such a way as to arouse contempt of such people and disgust at their attitude, especially via the statement that Satan is their intimate friend: “He who chooses Satan for a companion, an evil companion has he.” (Verse 38)

Some reports suggest that these verses refer to a group of Jews who lived in Madinah. These qualities certainly apply to Jews as well as to hypocrites. Both types were present in the Muslim society at the time. The reference to their concealment of the favours God has bestowed on them may also mean their concealment of the truth that is recorded in their Scriptures about Islam and the Prophet Muĥammad. The verse, however, is expressed as a general statement within the context of charity and kind treatment. It is better, therefore, that we understand it in this context.

This is followed by the rhetorical question: “What would they have to fear if they would only believe in God and the Last Day, and spend (for His sake) out of that with which He has provided them. Indeed God has full knowledge of them. Indeed God does not wrong anyone by as much as an atom’s weight. And if there be a good deed, He will multiply it, and will bestow a great reward out of His Grace.” (Verses 39-40)

Indeed, what do they have to fear from believing in God and the Last Day and spending of the provisions given to them by God. Since God knows their motives and what they have in their hearts and since He does not deny anyone his due reward for even the slightest of actions, then they cannot fear that their good actions will go unnoticed or that their reward will not be forthcoming. Indeed, they will have an increase and a multiplication for their good deeds.

Even in the narrow sense of material loss and gain, faith gives better returns in all eventualities. Why should they, then, fear to believe in God and the Last Day and to spend of God’s provisions? After all, they do not spend of something that they themselves have created. God provides it all for them. He, nevertheless, multiplies to them their reward and gives them an unlimited increase of His provisions. It is the sort of investment that is only rejected by an ignorant loser.

These orders, prohibitions and encouragements are concluded with a scene of the Day of Judgement in which we see feelings and attitudes fully animated before our eyes. All are portrayed in the Qur’ān’s uniquely vivid style: “How will it be [on Judgement Day] when We shall bring a witness from every community, and call you as a witness against these people? Those who disbelieved and disobeyed God’s Messenger will on that Day wish that the earth may swallow them. They shall be able to conceal nothing from God.” (Verses 41-42)

This scene is depicted immediately after the preparations that began by the statement that God does not deny anyone an atom’s weight of what is due to him or her. His scales maintain absolute justice. Furthermore, He multiplies good actions and gives them a great reward. This equates with mercy and compassion to those who deserve them. These are the ones who combine faith with action. As for the others, who have neither faith nor good actions, their state will be different. The question asked here is what will their state be when God brings a witness from every nation, i.e. the Prophet sent specifically to it, and, hence, when the Prophet Muĥammad will be a witness against the Arabs?

The scene is very vivid indeed, portrayed against a panoramic background in which every nation is present with its witness. We almost see those unbelievers:

boastful, hypocritical, arrogant and niggardly people who conceal God’s favours. We see them there when God’s Messenger is asked to testify against them. We see them in the presence of the Creator whom they denied, the Provider whose favours they have concealed, on the Last Day in which they did not believe, and facing the Messenger whom they disobeyed. The Qur’ān asks: How then? It is certainly utter humiliation. Their shame is too great to bear. They regret what they have done and they acknowledge it since denial is of no value.

The Qur’ān does not describe all this as an apparent attitude. It portrays a mental attitude which gives us all these impressions so that we see the effect of humiliation, shame and regret: “Those who disbelieved and disobeyed God’s Messenger will on that Day wish that the earth may swallow them. They shall be able to conceal nothing from God.” (Verse 42) It is through this fine expression and imagery that we sense all these ideas and recognise the unbelievers’ feelings as they experience them. This approach is what makes the Qur’ānic style absolutely unique.

As we have seen, this passage started with the commands to worship God alone, associating no partners with Him. Prayer is the closest of all rituals to the central concept of worship. The following verse outlines some of the rulings connected with prayer and the purification which is required for its validity: “Believers, do not attempt to pray when you are drunk, [but wait] until you know what you are saying; nor when you are in a state of ceremonial impurity, except if are on your way, until you have bathed. But if you are ill, or travelling, or if one of you has come from the toilet, or if you have cohabited with a woman and can find no water, then have recourse to pure dust, passing therewith lightly over your faces and your hands. God is indeed Most Lenient, Much-Forgiving.” (Verse 43)

This verse represents one aspect of the Qur’ānic method for cultivating the Muslim community, enhancing its moral sense and refining its values. We should remember here that Islam picked up the Muslim community from the depths of ignorance, when drinking was a well-established social institution, as it is in almost all ignorant societies, ancient and modern. Drinking was a common habit in Roman, Byzantine and Persian societies, when they were at the zenith of their civilisation. It is also characteristic of contemporary European and American societies which are at the same stage. Similarly, it is very common in backward African societies.

In Sweden, which is considered one of the most civilised of contemporary societies, it used to be the case during the first half of the 19th century that every family brewed its own wine and other alcohol. On average, an individual consumed 20 litres.1 The Swedish Government recognised the seriousness of this state of affairs, and that it led to major alcohol addiction. It, therefore, monopolised the production of intoxicants, thereby limiting individual consumption, and also restricted drinking in public places. More recently these restrictions have been relaxed. 2 Drinking was then allowed in restaurants, provided that wine was taken with a meal. Later, drinking was allowed in a limited number of public places until midnight.

Thereafter, people could only drink beer and similar beverages with a lower alcohol content. Nevertheless, the number of alcoholics among teenagers is growing steadily.

In America, the Government once tried to abolish drinking altogether, and promulgated a law to this effect in 1919, which was ridiculed as the “dry” law. It remained in force for 14 years until the American government found itself compelled to abolish it in 1933. All methods of enhancing public awareness of the harmful effects of drinking were utilised, including publications, the radio, cinema and public lectures. It is estimated that altogether the American administrations spent over 60

million dollars in campaigning against drink; a very large sum indeed by the standards of that period. Millions of pages were written against drinking in the form of books, pamphlets and the like. Moreover, at least 250 million dollars were spent on enforcing the law during those 14 years. Three hundred people were executed and more than half a million were imprisoned and fines exceeding 16 million dollars were imposed. The Government also confiscated properties worth more than 400

million dollars. In spite of all this, the pressure was too great for the American administrations and they were finally forced to cancel their prohibition laws.3

Islam, on the other hand, was able to successfully eradicate this well- entrenched habit, deploying only a few verses of the Qur’ān to do so. This is a striking example of the difference between Divine and human methods in dealing with man and in treating social ills. Pre-Islamic poetry is full of descriptions by Arab poets which show that drinking was a firmly rooted social habit in Arabia. Moreover, certain events took place in the early days of Islam, involving personalities from among the best renowned of the Prophet’s Companions, such as `Umar, `Alī, Ĥamzah and `Abd al-Raĥmān ibn `Awf. These again indicate how deeply entrenched the drinking of intoxicants was in Arabian society. It is sufficient for our purposes here to give only a few examples.

`Umar ibn al-Khaţţab begins his report of how he became a Muslim by saying: “I used to drink heavily in my pre-Islamic days. I once decided to go to a particular public house to drink... “`Umar continued to drink when he became a Muslim until the revelation of the Qur’ānic verse stating: “They ask you about drinking and gambling.

Say: `In both there is great evil although they have some benefits for people, but their evil far exceeds their benefit.’’’ (2: 219) When `Umar heard this Qur’ānic verse he said: “My Lord, give us a clear, categorical statement on wines.” He continued to drink and uttered the same prayer when the Qur’ānic verse, which is the subject of this commentary was revealed. When the express prohibition stated in Sūrah 5, entitled The Repast, or Al-Mā’idah was given, `Umar declared his submission and stopped drinking.

There are two reports involving `Alī, `Abd al-Raĥmān ibn `Awf [both from the Muhājirīn] and Sa`d ibn Mu`ādh [from the Anşār] which give the reasons behind the revelation of the present Qur’ānic verse. The first report quotes Sa`d as saying: “Four verses were revealed on my account. A man from the Anşār invited a number of the Muhājirīn and a number of the Anşār to a meal. We all ate and drank heavily. Some of us began boasting about our tribes. One man took the chin bone of a camel and pierced it into Sa`d’s nose. Since then, Sa`d has had a pierced nose. This was prior to the prohibition of intoxicants. Shortly afterwards, the verse saying, `Believers, do not attempt to pray when you are drunk”‘ (Verse 43), was revealed.

The other report is attributed to `Alī ibn Abī Ţālib who is quoted as saying: “`Abd al-Raĥmān ibn `Awf invited us to a meal and gave us a great deal to drink. We were under the influence of drink when it was time for prayer. One person was asked to lead us in prayer and he recited the sūrah entitled The Unbelievers, or al-Kāfirūn, changing its text so as to mean: `Unbelievers, I do not worship what you worship, but we do worship what you worship.’ (This is the opposite of its meaning.) God then revealed this verse: “Believers, do not attempt to pray when you are drunk, [but wait] until you know what you are saying.’” (Verse 43)

We do not need any more examples or stories to tell us how common the habit of drinking was in ignorant Arabian society. Both drinking and gambling were well- established social habits. How did the Islamic method deal with these phenomena?

How did it combat this evil which makes it impossible to establish a good healthy society? We have to remember that social traditions and economic interests are involved in the promotion of such phenomena.

As we have already said, the Divine method dealt with these evils by simply using a few verses of the Qur’ān. Its approach was easy and gradual. It managed to win the battle without any need to fight, shed blood or sacrifice. The only thing that was shed was the wine itself. All barrels and other containers were spilt. Indeed, some of the Prophet’s Companions were in the process of drinking when they heard of the prohibition and they spat out what was in their mouths.

When Islam did not have a state or the authority to rule in Makkah, there was only the authority of the Qur’ān. This was simply a moral authority. Therefore, only an indication of the forthcoming attitude towards drinking was given, which we may understand when we contemplate the verse which occurs in Sūrah 16, entitled The Bee, or Al-Nahl: “From the fruits of date palm and vines you derive intoxicants as well as wholesome sustenance.” (16: 67) Thus, intoxicants were placed as opposites to the wholesome sustenance made of the fruits of palm and vineyard trees. This suggests that intoxicants were something different from the sustenance described as “wholesome”. All in all, this was merely a fine touch influencing an Islamic conscience that was still in its infancy. Drinking, however, was far more than an individual’s habit. It was a social tradition with far-reaching economic effects. This fine touch was not calculated to end this tradition.

In Madinah, however, Islam established a state which wielded proper authority.

Nevertheless, intoxicants were not forbidden by the authority of the state and the force of law. The Islamic approach relied on the Qur’ān, working its gentle, steady and firm way, to make use of the Divine insight into man and his social realities.

The Islamic approach is gentle, gradual. It benefits from God’s absolute knowledge of man, what is suitable for him and his social environment. The first statement in this approach was a verse revealed in Sūrah 2, entitled The Cow, or Al- Baqarah. This was given by way of an answer to questions which indicate that people with a fine Islamic conscience had begun to feel uneasy about drinking and gambling: “They ask you about drinking and gambling. Say: ‘In both there is great evil although they have some benefits for people, but their evil far exceeds their benefit.‘“ (2: 219)

This was the first loud knock on the door that was bound to have its effect on an Islamic conscience. The criterion which makes something lawful, discouraged or forbidden is whether its harm or evil is greater than its benefit. In this verse we have a clear statement that the case is such with regard to intoxicants and gambling. Their evil is far greater than their benefit. The question, however, went deeper than that.

We find `Umar, who was, perhaps, endowed with the finest Islamic sense, uttering this prayer: “My Lord, give us a clear, categorical statement on wines.” This shows how well entrenched the habit of drinking was in Arabian society.

Incidents like the ones quoted above took place. Hence, the verse we are now discussing was revealed to tell the believers: “Do not attempt to pray when you are drunk, [but wait] until you know what you are saying.” (Verse 43) Here we find the wise, gentle approach in action, the verse representing the middle stage between showing drink as repugnant because its harm is greater than its benefit and a state of total prohibition where drink is seen as an impurity of Satan’s work. The purpose of this middle stage being to break the habit of drinking by prohibiting it near prayer times, which span the whole day. Some prayers are too close to each other to allow anyone who is given to alcohol time to take one or two drinks and regain enough sobriety to be fully aware of what he is saying. Besides, there were special times for drinking, either early in the day or in the evening. Plus there were prayers that must be offered both in between these times and following them. Hence, a person with an Islamic sense was sure to weigh up the enjoyment he derives from drinking against neglecting his duty of prayer. At this stage, a good Muslim would not abandon his prayers for anything. Nevertheless, `Umar repeated his prayer: “My Lord, give us a clear, categorical statement on wines.” Time passed and events took place, and the moment arrived when the gradual approach would give its final verdict. Two verses in the next sūrah, The Repast, or Al- Mā’idah, were revealed to state: “Believers: intoxicants, gambling, idolatrous practices and the divining of the future are but a loathsome evil of Satan’s doing. Keep away from them so that you may prosper. By means of intoxicants and gambling Satan seeks only to sow the seeds of enmity and hatred among you, and to turn you away from the remembrance of God and from prayer. Will you not, then, desist?” (5: 90-1) All Muslims stopped drinking.

Once the commandment was given, all wine containers were emptied and broken throughout Madinah. Indeed, those who were in the process of drinking did not swallow what was in their mouths when they were informed of the prohibition. It was, thus, a great triumph for the Qur’ān and its approach.

How did it all happen? How was this miracle, unparalleled in human history, achieved? It was all made possible because the Islamic approach works on man in a unique way. Essentially, it employs God’s authority and a Muslim’s keenness to please Him. To a Muslim, God oversees him at all times. Hence, he cannot lose sight of his top priority of trying to please God. Moreover, Islam gives its followers greater concerns to spend their time on, and these replace that time which was wasted on drinking and any pleasure derived from it. Any sense of loss, which weighs heavily on people in un-Islamic societies, is replaced with a pleasant feeling of fulfilment in the light of Islam, its freedom, and its sense of openness which unites this life with the life to come.

More importantly, Islam gives man the sense of fulfilment generated by faith. To a Muslim, this life becomes pleasant, happy, forward looking, enlightened with a sense of intimacy with God. Intoxicants, which work on the imagination and generate false feelings of happiness and also cause a real headache, no longer present any temptation for a Muslim. Like gambling and other such fun, drinking is a craze, which is not really different from any other craze, such as sporting events, speed races, cinema, fashion and bull fighting. These are simply a manifestation of a spiritual emptiness reflected in the absence of faith and a lack of high concern consuming one’s energy. They are, in themselves, evidence of the bankruptcy of modern civilisation that finds itself unable to fulfil natural needs and to tap the natural resources of man in a clean, healthy way. It is such emptiness and bankruptcy that leads people to fill the vacuum they feel in their lives with wine and gambling. What is more, these social diseases are not only the cause of perversion but also of mental and nervous disorders.1

That miracle, which remains unique in the history of man, was not the result of mere words. It was the result of a complete approach defined by those words and formulated by the Lord of mankind, not by ordinary human beings. This is what distinguishes this approach from all man-made approaches, which, generally speaking, achieve very little.

The question is not how a certain idea or rule is stated. Philosophers, intellectuals, poets and rulers write extensively and formulate rules and maxims. Any philosopher or man of letters may write fine words which may appear to constitute a complete approach or a doctrine. However, such a doctrine has but little effect on people’s minds and consciences because it has no authority behind it. It is the source of the statement that gives it authority. How can the words of a human being acquire an authority similar to that which is intrinsic in the system given to us by God? When the answer is clear in people’s minds, they will stop formulating for themselves systems and rules which are different from those given to us by God, the Lord of mankind. Only He knows what is suitable for man and only His wisdom and ability are limitless. Yet people’s conceit still prevents them from recognising these facts.

But if you are ill, or travelling, or if one of you has come from the toilet, or if you have cohabited with a woman and can find no water, then have recourse to pure dust, passing therewith lightly over your faces and your hands. God is indeed Most Lenient, Much- Forgiving. (Verse 43)

Let us now look at this verse in detail: “Believers, do not attempt to pray when you are drunk, [but wait] until you know what you are saying; nor when you are in a state of ceremonial impurity, except if you are on your way, until you have bathed” (Verse 43) This stage of prohibiting intoxicants forbids the believers from even trying to pray when they are drunk, until they know fully what they are saying. Furthermore, this verse forbids believers from praying when they are in a state of ceremonial impurity, or janābah, before they have removed it by washing themselves, except in situations when they are “on their way”.

Different interpretations have been given to the expression translated here as, “on your way”. Similarly, different views are expressed with regard to the meaning of “attempting to pray” which may be rendered in a strictly literal translation as “do not come near to prayer”, which this verse forbids. Some scholars say that a person who is in a state of ceremonial impurity, i.e. after sexual intercourse or seminal discharge, must not enter a mosque or stay in it until he has taken a bath. An exception is made in the case of he who wants only to pass through the mosque without staying. A number of the Prophet’s Companions had their houses surrounding the Prophet’s mosque, with their doors opening onto it. They had to go through the mosque when they wanted to go out or when they came back home. A concession, then, is given to those people to pass through the mosque when they are in a state of ceremonial impurity, provided that they do not stay in the mosque or pray until they have had a bath.

Other scholars suggest that what is meant by the prohibition is the prayer itself.

Muslims are not allowed to pray when they are in a state of ceremonial impurity without washing themselves first, unless they are travelling. In this case, a traveller is allowed to go to the mosque and pray, without having had a bath first, provided that he has had dry ablution, i.e. tayammum, which, in this case, replaces both lesser ablution, i.e. wudū’ and full ablution, i.e. ghusl.

The first view seems to be the weightier one, because travelling is mentioned later on in the same verse. To say that the expression “on your way” means “travelling” would make the same rule be unnecessarily repeated twice in the same verse: “But if you are ill, or travelling, or if one of you has come from the toilet, or if you have cohabited with a woman and can find no water, then have recourse to pure dust, passing therewith lightly over your faces and your hands. God is indeed Most Lenient, Much-Forgiving.” (Verse 43) This part of the Qur’ānic verse mentions a traveller who finds himself in a state of ceremonial impurity and who needs to take a bath, or who answers the call of nature and thus needs to perform simple ablution in order to pray. The traveller is given, in this case, the same concession as a person who is ill and who needs to perform either simple or full ablution. The same applies to one who has come from the toilet, which is an expression indicating what people do there.

Different views have also been expressed concerning the meaning of lāmastum-un- nisā’, which we have translated as meaning “cohabitation with a woman”, while some scholars interpret is as “touching a woman”. Some scholars believe that it refers to sexual intercourse, which makes it necessary for both partners to have a full bath.

Another view explains touching women in any simple body contact. According to some schools of thought, such contact requires simple ablution, i.e. wuđū’. Other schools of thought do not make such a requirement. The case is discussed in great detail in books of Fiqh. We sum up these different views as follows: (1) touching a woman in any situation or any place requires ablution; (2) a touch requires ablution if the man who touches her is normally excited by such a touch and if she is one to excite a man when touched; (3) a touch requires ablution only if that particular touch stirs some feeling within the man, as he himself determines in every case; (4) a touch does not require ablution in every situation, not, for example, when it involves embracing or kissing one’s wife.

Each of these views is supported by evidence from actions or statements attributed to the Prophet. Such differences are common in matters of detail. We are more inclined to the view that states “if you have touched women” signifies an action requiring full ablution, i.e. a bath, which is cohabitation. In opting for this view, we bypass all differences of opinion with regard to simple ablution or wuđū In all the cases mentioned in this verse, whether they require full ablution or a simple one before one prays, tayammum or dry ablution is considered adequate compensation when water is not available, or when it is available but harmful to use.

This is what is meant by the statement “then have recourse to pure dust”. (Verse 43) We are thus instructed to find a place where we can have pure dust, whether it is soil, stone, a wall, or indeed dust which settles on the body of a horse or a donkey or on a bed or a piece of furniture. If we strike such a surface with our hands and dust appears, then it is a suitable place at which to have dry ablution. The way to do this is to strike that dusty surface once with both hands, and to shake the dust off before passing one’s hands over one’s face and over one’s hands up to the elbows. Some scholars require two strikes, then passing our hands over our faces after the first strike. We then follow the second strike by passing each of our palms over our opposite hand up to each elbow. There is no need to speak about such differences of opinion in detail here. What we know is that this religion of ours is made easy and the whole idea of dry ablution is symbolic of the ease with which God wants us to follow His instructions.

“God is indeed Most Lenient, Much-Forgiving.” (Verse 43) This comment at the end of the verse stresses how God makes things easier for us. He knows that we are weak and assures us that He sympathises with our weaknesses, that He treats us with leniency and forgives us our failings.

Before we conclude our discussion of the present passage we need to reflect a little on certain points, and to try to understand the wisdom behind tayammum, or dry ablution.

Sometimes people who try to explain what lies behind certain Islamic legislation or aspects of Islamic worship, put their points of view very forcefully, implying that they have understood everything there is to understand. This is not the proper way to explain Qur’ānic statements and Islamic legislation, except where the reasons for such legislation are expressly stated in the Qur’ān or the Sunnah. It is always preferable to state our point of view adding that it is all that we have been able to understand of the wisdom behind a certain piece of legislation. The possibility cannot be excluded that there may be other reasons behind it which we have not been able to determine. In this way, we assign our human mind to its proper position, vis-a-vis Qur’ānic statements and Divine legislation.

What motivates me to say this is that some of us, who may have the best of intentions, try to present such statements and legislation to people within the context of a definite purpose which they may determine according to human knowledge or scientific analysis. This is fine provided that it is put in the right perspective to which I have just alluded in the preceding paragraph. It has often been said that the purpose of having ablution before prayer is to maintain cleanliness. It may be true that cleanliness is intended through ablution, but to emphasise that it is the only reason why ablution is required before prayer is to follow an approach which is neither correct nor safe. Indeed, there came a time when some people suggested that there was no longer any need for this “primitive” method of cleanliness when we live in a clean environment, with people taking care of their daily cleanliness. If ablution had been legislated for this purpose, then it would no longer be necessary before prayer. Indeed, there is no longer any need for prayer itself.

People have often tried to identify the wisdom behind prayer. At times it has been described in terms of a series of exercises which benefit the whole body, and at other times as providing a good training to maintain discipline, in timing, movement and lining up in congregation. Some people have also suggested that it provides a direct relationship with God with what it contains of recitation and supplication. All these may be intended in prayer, but to stress that any of them, or indeed all of them put together are the only reasons behind the requirement of prayer, is to depart from the correct and safe approach.

There were times when some people suggested that we no longer need the physical exercise which prayers provide, since physical exercise has become much more sophisticated. Other people suggested that the army provides a better place and a better system to give everyone the sense of discipline so needed. Another group suggested that there was no need to impose this particular form of prayer, since the relationship with God could be better maintained with a more direct, personal and private communion with Him, which need not be encumbered with physical movement.

In short, if we try to determine the wisdom behind every aspect of worship or piece of legislation, according to a rational analysis or in line with what contemporary science may reveal, stressing always that this is the only reason for it, we move away from the proper method of understanding religious statements and Divine legislation. We, thus, open the way to sophistry and futile argument. In addition, we leave ourselves open to mistakes, especially when our analysis is based on what contemporary science and research reveal, when it is always changing or amending what it used to consider a proven fact.

With respect to the subject we are discussing, namely, tayammum or dry ablution, it seems to me that ablution of both types, simple and full, was not ordered simply for the maintenance of cleanliness. Otherwise, the alternative for either type does not serve the same purpose. There must be some other purpose which is served by simple ablution [wuđū‘], full ablution [ghusl] as well as by dry ablution [tayammum].

We do not wish to make the same mistake and categorically affirm that our view provides the complete answer. We wish merely to say that perhaps ablution has been ordered as an intermediate step taking us away from our daily preoccupation in order to prepare us psychologically for prayer, which is a great meeting with God.

Taken in this light, tayammum appears to serve the same purpose as simple or full ablution. Having said that, we realise that God’s knowledge is absolute. He knows our inner selves as we do not know them. It behoves us well to learn how to think or speak of God the Almighty and how to view His commandments.

We should also reflect a little on the place of prayer in Islam. We realise that it is so important to attend to prayers, despite any reasons or circumstances which may prevent us from praying. Islam gives us every facility to offer our prayers on time, removing all obstacles that may lie in our way. This is particularly apparent in replacing dry ablution for either or both types of ablution when water is not available or when it is harmful to use, or when the quantity of water available is needed for drinking and other essentials, as well as when we are travelling. Later on in this sūrah, we will speak of how prayers are offered in the battlefield, when soldiers fear a treacherous attack by the enemy. All these aspects emphasise how Islam views prayer as a most essential duty, which should not be neglected for any reason. This is again reflected when one is ill and cannot stand up or sit down. Such a person can pray seated, reclining, or lying down. They can even pray by signalling the normal movements with their eyes only, if they cannot move any part of their body.

Prayer is a communion between the Lord and His servants, which He does not like them to sever, because He knows how important it is for them. God does not need the worship of any of His servants. Indeed, their worship benefits them. They feel that prayer helps them discharge their duties, gives them self satisfaction, reassurance and a feeling of happiness as they realise that they have a relationship with God which is suitable for them and which they can maintain. Needless to say, God knows human nature best and He knows what suits it.

Perhaps we should reflect a little on how certain points are expressed in this Qur’ānic verse. Note for example the expression: “or if one of you has come from the toilet”. The Qur’ānic verse does not say when you do this or that; it simply speaks of coming back from a certain place in order to refer to what a person does there.

Moreover, it does not attribute that action to the addressees by saying when you come back from the toilet, but it speaks of “one of you” coming back. This is a fine touch, which provides us with an example of how to speak about such situations.

Similarly, the expression “or if you have touched women” refers to the physical relationship between man and woman. It is more in keeping with the Islamic standards of propriety to use such an expression. Touching a woman may be a preliminary step to, or an expression of, the action itself. In either case, we have an example of how such matters should be referred to in conversation when propriety is observed.

Again, pure dust is described as “good” dust, suggesting that what is pure is good and what is impure is evil. Again, the expression is most effective, a fine touch.

Praise be to the Lord, our Creator who knows our human nature best.