In the Shade of the Qur'an by Sayyid Qutb

This second passage of the sūrah provides the final rulings concerning the relations between the Muslim community and the people of earlier revelations, just like the first passage defined the final rulings on relations between the Muslim community and the idolaters in Arabia. However, the first passage addressed the situation that prevailed at the time in Arabia, speaking about the Arab idolaters and referring to their attitudes and events relating specifically to them. In this second passage we note that its statements are more general in phraseology and import, and are applicable to all people of earlier revelations, whether in Arabia or elsewhere.

These new rulings include a number of substantial amendments to the rules governing relations between the Muslim community and people of earlier revelations, particularly the Christians. By the time this sūrah was revealed, all encounters and military conflicts with the Jews had already taken place, but no such conflict took place with any Christian community.

The main amendment the new rulings include is the order given to fight those who deviate from the divine faith until they pay the jizyah, or submission tax, after they have been humbled. No peace agreement may be made with them except on this basis of submission evident by the payment of a special tax which gives them the right to live in peace with the Muslims. On the other hand, if they become convinced of the truth of Islam and accept it, they are considered part of the Muslim community.

Never will they be forced to accept the Islamic faith. A basic and definitive Islamic rule states: “There shall be no compulsion in religion.” (2: 256) But they are not given a peaceful status unless they are bound by covenant with the Muslim community on the basis of paying the submission tax.

This last amendment cannot be clearly understood unless we are fully aware of the nature of the inevitable relations between the divine system and other systems opposed to it. We must also understand the nature of the Islamic method of action, with its progressive stages and the different means it employs to face up to a changing situation in human life.

Inevitably, coexistence between the divine system and human systems opposed to it is possible only in certain situations and under specific conditions. These ensure that no material impediments are placed in the way of the implementation of the universal Islamic declaration of the liberation of man from submission to any authority other than God. The divine system wants to prevail so that people are liberated from submission to other human beings and can submit to God alone. By contrast, the other systems want to defend their own status by crushing the movement aiming to establish the divine system in human life.

By nature, the Islamic method of action will confront this human situation with similar and more powerful action, progressing from one stage to another and employing the proper methods that suit every stage. These methods and means are represented in the provisional and final rulings governing relations between the Muslim community and other communities. In order to define the nature of these relations the sūrah explains in this passage the beliefs and attitudes adopted by the people of earlier revelations, making it clear that these are `a form of idolatry, representing disbelief and are certainly false.’ The passage cites the basis of this judgement. We find that it relies on the actual beliefs of those people and the similarity between these beliefs and those of the unbelievers of old. It also relies on their actions and behaviour.

The present text states that those people of earlier revelations:

1. Do not truly believe in God and the Last Day; 2. Do not forbid what God and His Messenger have made forbidden; 3. Do not follow the religion of truth; 4. The Jews among them claim that Ezra was the son of God, while the Christians claim that Jesus Christ was the son of God. In making these false claims they are merely echoing the false claims of the unbelievers of old times, Greeks, Romans, Indians and Egyptians, or other idolaters. [We will show that the concept of the Trinity was borrowed by the Christians from old idolatrous beliefs, as were the Christian and Jewish claims that God has a son. None of these was part of the origin of Christianity or Judaism.] 5. They treated their rabbis and monks, as well as Jesus himself, as lords alongside God. Thus they transgressed the principles of God’s oneness they were bid to uphold. As such, they are idolaters; 6. They are hostile to God’s faith, trying to put out God’s light with their mouths.

As such, they are unbelievers; and 7. Many of their monks and rabbis devour people’s money and property against all right, and they turn people away from God’s path.

It is on the basis of such beliefs and practices that the truth of the people of earlier revelations is stated, and the final rulings governing their relations with the believers who implement God’s message are defined.

This definitive statement may come as a surprise and may be seen as contrary to what the Qur’ān had stated previously about the people of earlier revelations.

Certainly the Orientalists and the Christian missionaries, as well as their disciples make such claims, saying that the Prophet changed his attitude when he felt he was strong enough to confront them.

However, a thorough review of Qur’ānic statements, revealed both in Makkah and Madinah, concerning the people of earlier revelations will clearly show that nothing has changed in the Islamic view about their beliefs. The Qur’ān has always made it clear that they upheld deviant, false and polytheistic beliefs, while they disbelieved in the true divine religion, or even its portion given to them. The new amendments are confined to the way the Muslim community should deal with them. This is subject to the prevailing practical conditions, which change all the time.

We will look now at some of the Qur’ānic statements about the people of earlier revelations and the concepts and beliefs they uphold. We will then consider their practical attitude to Islam and its followers which led to the final rulings on how to deal with them.

There were no Jewish or Christian communities to reckon with in Makkah. There were only some individuals whom the Qur’ān states to have been overjoyed when they heard of the new message and they believed in Islam. They confirmed that the Prophet Muĥammad was God’s Messenger who confirmed what they had of God’s revelations. Those must have been among the minority of Jews and Christians who continued to believe in God’s oneness. It is in reference to these that Qur’ānic verses like the following ones were revealed: “Those to whom We vouchsafed revelation in former times believe in this; and whenever it is recited to them, they say: ‘We believe in it, for it is the truth from our Lord. Even before this have we surrendered ourselves to Him.’” (28:

52-53) “Say, ‘You may believe in it or you may not.’ Those who were given knowledge before it has been revealed fall down on their faces in humble prostration when it is recited to them, and say, ‘Limitless in His glory is our Lord. Truly has the promise of our Lord been fulfilled.’ And upon their faces they fall down, weeping, and [its recitation] increases their humility.” (17:107-109) “Say, ‘Consider, if this be truly [a revelation] from God and yet you deny its truth? — even though a witness from among the Children of Israel bears witness to one like it, and has believed while you glory in your arrogance.’ God does not grace evildoers with His guidance.” (46: 10) “Thus have We bestowed this Book on you from on high. Those to whom We previously gave revelations believe in it, just as some among these do believe in it. None will reject Our revelations other than those who deny the truth.” (29: 47) “Am I to seek for judge anyone other than God, when it is He who has revealed the Book to you, clearly spelling out the truth. Those to whom We previously gave revelations know that it is the truth revealed by your Lord. So, do not be among the doubters.” (6: 114) “Those to whom We have given this revelation rejoice at what has been bestowed on you from on high, but among different factions there are some who deny part of it. Say: ‘I have only been bidden to worship God, and not to associate partners with Him. To Him I pray, and to Him do I return.’” (13:

36)

Similarly, a positive response was given by a number of individuals in Madinah, and we find mention of these in some sūrahs revealed in Madinah. These references make it clear that those people were Christians. The Jews in Madinah, apprehensive about the rise of Islam, took a different attitude to that adopted by some individual Jews in Makkah. “There are indeed among the people of earlier revelations some who believe in God and in what has been bestowed from on high upon you and in what has been bestowed upon them, humbling themselves before God. They do not barter away God’s revelations for a trifling price. They shall have their reward with their Lord. Swift is God’s reckoning.” (3:

199) “You will certainly find that, of all people, the most hostile to those who believe are the Jews, and those who associate partners with God; and you will certainly find that the nearest of them in affection to the believers are those who say, ‘We are Christians.’ This is so because there are priests and monks among them and because they are not given to arrogance. When they listen to what has been revealed to God’s Messenger, you see their eyes overflow with tears because of the Truth they recognize. They say: ‘Our Lord, we do believe; so enrol us among those who bear witness to the truth. How could we fail to believe in God and the truth that has come to us when we dearly hope that our Lord will admit us among the righteous?’ And for this their prayer God will reward them with gardens through which running waters flow, where they will abide. Such is the reward of those who do good.” (5: 82-85)

However, the attitude of these individuals was not representative of the attitude of the majority of the people of earlier revelations in the Arabian Peninsula, particularly the Jews. Once they felt that Islam represented a threat to them, the Jews in Madinah launched a wicked campaign against it, using all the methods mentioned in several places in the Qur’ān. Needless to say, they refused to adopt Islam, and denied the references in their own Scriptures to the Prophet Muĥammad (peace be upon him), and the fact that the Qur’ān confirmed what remained with them of their true revelations. By contrast, those goodly and honest individuals acknowledged all that openly. The Qur’ān records all their denials and points out their deviation and corruption. However, the Qur’ān also includes clear statements of the beliefs of the people of earlier revelations, such as: “When Jesus came with all evidence of the truth, he said: I have now come to you with wisdom, and to make clear to you some of that on which you are at variance. Hence, fear God and pay heed to me. God is indeed my Lord and your Lord; so worship Him alone: this is a straight way!’ But factions from among them began to hold divergent views. Woe, then, to the evildoers for the suffering [they will endure] on a painful day!” (43: 63-65) “They broke up their unity, through their own wickedness, only after knowledge was given to them. And but for a word that had already gone forth from your Lord, [postponing a decision] until an appointed term, all would have been decided between them. Those who inherited the Scriptures after them are now in grave doubt.” (42: 14) “It was said to them: Dwell in this city and eat of its food whatever you may wish, and say: “Lord, relieve us of our burden,” and enter the gate in humility. We will forgive you your sins, and We will richly reward those who do good. ‘But the wrongdoers among them substituted other words for those which they had been given. Therefore We let loose against them a scourge from heaven in requital for their wrongdoing. Ask them about the town which stood by the sea: how its people profaned the Sabbath. Each Sabbath their fish appeared before them breaking the water’s surface, but they would not come near them on other than Sabbath days.

Thus did We try them because of their disobedience.” (7: 161-163) “Then your Lord declared that He would most certainly raise against them people who would cruelly oppress them till the Day of Resurrection. Your Lord is swift indeed in His retribution, yet He is certainly Much forgiving, Merciful.” (7: 167) “They were succeeded by generations who inherited the Book. Yet these are keen to enjoy the fleeting pleasures of this lower world and say, ‘We shall be forgiven.’ Should some similar pleasures come their way, they would certainly be keen to indulge them. Have they not solemnly pledged through their Scriptures to say nothing but the truth about God? And have they not studied well what is in [the Scriptures]? Surely the life in the hereafter is better for all who are God-fearing. Will you not use your reason?” (7: 169)

The Qur’ānic sūrahs revealed in Madinah provide the final word about the people of earlier revelations and their attitudes. The Qur’ān describes in detail the wicked tactics and the spiteful methods they employ in their campaign against Islam.

Examples of these are found in long passages of Sūrahs 2-5 and elsewhere in the Qur’ān. In this sūrah the final verdict on them is given. Here are only a few examples of what the Qur’ān says about them:

Do you hope that they will accept your message when some of them would listen to the word of God then, having understood it, knowingly distort it? When they meet the believers, they say, ‘We believe,’ but when they find themselves alone, they say to one another, Need you inform them that which God has disclosed to you? They will only use it in argument against you before your Lord? Will you not use your reason?’ Do they not know that God is well aware of all that they conceal and all that they reveal?

There are among them illiterate people who have no real knowledge of the Scriptures, entertaining only wishful beliefs and conjecture. Woe, then, to those who write down, with their own hands, [something which they claim to be of] the Scriptures, and then say, ‘This is from God’, in order to get for it a trifling price. Woe to them for what their hands have written and woe to them for what they earn. (2: 75-79)

We gave Moses the Book and caused a succession of messengers to follow him. To Jesus, son of Mary, We gave clear proofs and supported him with the Holy Spirit.

Why is it that every time a messenger comes to you with a message that does not suit your fancies, you glory in your arrogance, charging some (messengers) with lying and slaying others? They say, ‘Our hearts are sealed. ‘No! God has cursed them for their disbelief. They have but little faith. And now that a Book confirming their own has come to them from God, and they had repeatedly forecast its coming to the unbelievers, they have denied what they know to be the truth. God’s curse be upon the unbelievers! Vile is that for which they have bartered their souls, because they have denied what God has revealed, grudging that He should, by His grace, send down His revelations to whom He chooses from among His servants. Thus they have incurred God’s wrath over and over again. Ignominious suffering is in store for the unbelievers. When it is said to them, ‘Believe in what God has revealed,’ they say, ‘We believe in what has been revealed to us.’ They deny everything else, although it is the truth, corroborating the revelations they have. Say, ‘Why, then, did you in the past kill God’s prophets, if you were true believers?’ (2: 87-91)

Say: People of earlier revelations, why do you disbelieve in God’s revelations, when God Himself is witness to all that you do?’ Say: ‘People of earlier revelations, why do you try to turn those who have come to believe away from the path of God, seeking to make it appear crooked, when you yourselves bear witness [to its being straight]? God is not unaware of what you do. (3: 98-99)

Are you not aware of those who, having been granted a share of Divine revelations, now believe in falsehood and arrogant deviation [from Divine faith], and they say to the unbelievers that they are better guided than the believers. These are the ones whom God has rejected; anyone whom God rejects shall find none to succour him. (4: 51-52)

Unbelievers indeed are those who say: ‘God is the Christ, son of Mary’ The Christ himself said: Children of Israel, worship God, my Lord and your Lord. Whoever associates partners with God, God shall forbid him entrance into Paradise and his abode will be the Fire. Wrongdoers will have no helpers. Unbelievers indeed are those who say: ‘God is the third of a trinity’ Of certain, there is no god save the One God.

Unless they desist from so saying, grievous suffering will surely befall those of them who are unbelievers. Will they not, then, turn to God in repentance and seek His forgiveness? God is Much-Forgiving, Merciful. The Christ, son of Mary, was but a Messenger: other messengers have passed away before him. His mother was a saintly woman. They both ate food [like other human beings]. Behold how clear We make [Our] revelations to them and behold how perverted they are. (5: 72-75)

A review of these texts and many similar ones in the Qur’ān is sufficient to show that these latest revelations maintain the same view concerning the deviation of the people of earlier revelations from the true divine faith. Their description in this sūrah as deviant, transgressors, unbelievers and idolaters is by no means a new development. We also note that the Qur’ān continues to praise those of them who accept God’s guidance and follow it. Thus we find statements like: “Yet among the folk of Moses there are some who guide [others] by means of the truth and act justly in its light.” (7: 159) “Among the people of earlier revelations there is many a one who, if you trust him with a treasure, will return it to you intact; and there is among them many a one who, if you trust him with a small gold coin, will not return it to you, unless you keep standing over him.

For they say: ‘We have no obligation to keep faith with Gentiles.’ Thus they deliberately say of God what they know to be a lie.” (3: 75) “Ignominy shall be pitched over them wherever they may be, save when they have a bond with God and a bond with men. They have incurred the wrath of God and humiliation shall overshadow them. That is because they persisted in denying God’s revelations and killing the Prophets against all right. That is because they persisted in their disobedience and transgression. They are not all alike. Of the people of earlier revelations there are some upright people who recite the revelations of God in the depth of night, and prostrate themselves in worship. They believe in God and the Last Day and enjoin the doing of what is right and forbid what is wrong and vie with one another in doing good works. These belong to the righteous. Whatever good they do, they shall never be denied its reward. God knows those who fear Him.” (3: 112-115)

The modifications which were introduced concerned the rules on how to deal with the people of earlier revelations. The changes occurred stage after stage, as events took place, and in line with the practical Islamic approach to other people and their behaviour towards Muslims.

There was a time when Muslims were given instructions like: “Do not argue with the people of earlier revelations except in a most kindly manner — unless it be such of them as are bent on evildoing. And say: ‘We believe in that which has been bestowed on us from on high, as well as that which has been bestowed upon you. For our God and your God is one and the same, and it is to Him that We all submit ourselves.’” (29: 46) “Say [all of you], ‘We believe in God and in what has been revealed to us, and in what was revealed to Abraham, Ishmael, Isaac, Jacob and their descendants, and in what was given to Moses and Jesus, and in what all prophets have been given by their Lord. We make no distinction between any of them, and to God we have surrendered ourselves.’ If they come to believe in the way you believe, they will be rightly guided; but if they turn away, they will be in schism, but God will protect you from them; He hears all and knows all.” (2: 136-137) “Say: ‘People of earlier revelations.

Let us come to an agreement which is equitable between you and us: that we shall worship none but God, that we shall associate no partners with Him, and that we shall not take one another for lords beside God.’ And if they turn away, then say: Bear witness that we have surrendered ourselves to God.’” (3: 64) “Many among the people of earlier revelations would love to lead you back to unbelief now that you have embraced the faith. This they do out of deep-seated envy, after the truth has become manifest to them; so forgive and forbear until God makes known His decree. Indeed, God has power over all things.” (2: 109)

And then God issued His decree to the believers: events took place, rulings were modified and the practical Islamic method of action followed its course leading to the final rulings we have in this sūrah. Nothing was modified in the way Islam views the deviant beliefs of the people of earlier revelations, their disbelief and association of partners with God. What were modified were the rules regulating dealings with them. These are governed by the principles we have outlined at the beginning of this Overview: this last amendment cannot be clearly understood unless we are fully aware of the nature of the inevitable relations between the divine system and other systems opposed to it, and we understand the nature of the Islamic method of action, with its progressive stages and the different means it employs to face up to the changing situation in human life.

We will now discuss the nature of relations between the Muslim community and the followers of earlier religions, putting it in both its substantial and historical contexts. These were the major elements in defining the final rulings governing these relations.

In order to form a clear and accurate idea of the nature of such relations, it is important first to study what God states concerning these relations in His Book which is the absolutely true word that admits no error or falsehood. Such statements are free of errors resulting from human bias and faults of reasoning and deduction.

Then we have to look at the events and attitudes which confirm these statements.

The nature of the attitude of the people of the earlier revelations towards the Muslims is stated several times in the Qur’ān. On certain occasions, God speaks of them alone, while on others, He groups them with the unbelievers, since the two groups are united in their attitudes towards Islam and the Muslim community. At times, the Qur’ān speaks of certain positions they have taken which expose their alliance against Islam. The statements themselves are too clear and decisive to require any comment: ‘Neither the unbelievers among the people of earlier revelations nor the idolaters would like to see any blessing ever bestowed upon you by your Lord.” (2: 105)

“Many among the people of earlier revelations would love to lead you back to unbelief now that you have embraced the faith. This they do out of deep-seated envy, after the truth has become manifest to them.” (2: 109) “Never will the Jews nor yet the Christians be pleased with you unless you follow their faith.” (2: 120) “A party of the people of earlier revelations would love to lead you astray.” (3: 69) “A party of the people of earlier revelations say [to one another]: ‘Declare at the beginning of the day that you believe in what has been revealed to the believers, and then deny it at the end of the day, so that they may go back on their faith. But do not really trust anyone who does not follow your own faith.” (3: 72-73) “Believers, if you pay heed to some of those who have been given revelations, they will cause you to renounce the truth after you have accepted the faith.” (3: 100) “Are you not aware of those who, having been granted a share of divine revelations, now barter it away for error, and want you too to lose your way? But God knows best who are your enemies.” (4: 44-45) “Are you not aware of those who, having been granted a share of divine revelations, now believe in falsehood and arrogant deviation [from divine faith], and they say to the unbelievers that they are better guided than the believers.” (4: 51)

These examples are sufficient to make the attitude of the people of earlier revelations towards the believers absolutely clear. They would dearly love the believers to sink back into disbelief, although they know them to be following the truth. Their only motive is selfishness. They define their final and irrevocable attitude towards the believers in terms of insistence that they must become Jews or Christians. They will not enter into true peace with them unless the believers do so and thus abandon their faith altogether. They go further than this and testify to the idolaters that their idolatry is better guided than Islam.

To determine the ultimate objectives of their attitudes towards Islam and the Muslims, we may recall the following statements God has revealed in the Qur’ān:

“They shall not cease to fight you until they force you to renounce your faith, if they can.” (2:

217) “The unbelievers would love to see you oblivious of your weapons and your equipment, so that they might swoop on you with one assault.” (4: 102) “If they could overcome you, they would surely remain your enemies, and would stretch forth their hands and their tongues against you with evil intent. They dearly desire that you should disbelieve.” (60: 2) “Should they prevail over you, they will respect neither agreement made with you, nor obligation of honour towards you.” (Verse 8) “They respect neither agreement nor obligation of honour with regard to any believer” (Verse 10)

When we review God’s statements, we find that the unbelievers’ ultimate objectives towards the believers are identical to the objectives of those who are described as the people of earlier revelations. Indeed both sets of statements are expressed in more or less the same words. This shows that the nature of the attitudes of both groups is exactly the same.

The Qur’ānic statements concerning both groups are expressed as if they are stating established facts. God says about the unbelievers: “They shall not cease to fight you until they force you to renounce your faith, if they can.” (2: 217) He also says about the people of earlier revelations: “Never will the Jews nor yet the Christians be pleased with you unless you follow their faith.” (2: 120) This method of expression suggests that these are definitive statements describing permanent attitudes not individual or temporary cases.

When we cast a quick glance at the history of these relations, on the basis of the attitudes adopted by the Jews and the Christians towards Islam and the Muslims in all periods of history, we will appreciate the full import of these true statements by God Himself. We also realize that such hostile attitudes are the rule, not the exception.

There have certainly been some exceptions. Indeed the Qur’ān reports, and historical facts speak of, the cases of certain individuals or small communities who have been friendly to the Muslims, and who made it clear that they believed in the truth preached by the Prophet Muĥammad, and in his message. They eventually adopted Islam. However, beyond these instances, we find nothing but a long history of determined hostility to, and wicked scheming against, this faith of Islam which have continued unabated ever since God vouchsafed His message to His final Messenger, the Prophet Muĥammad (peace be upon him).

Several sūrahs in the Qur’ān refer to the Jews’ hostility towards Islam which manifested itself in wicked scheming and conspiracies aiming to undermine the Muslim community. Indeed this hostility has always been manifest, ever since their first confrontation with Islam in Madinah up to the present moment. It is beyond the scope of this commentary to provide a full account of such a hostile history, but we will make only a few brief references to episodes of the unabating war the Jews have launched against Islam.

When the Prophet migrated to Madinah, the Jews there gave him the worst reception that could have been given by the followers of a divine message to a Messenger of God whom they knew to be honest and conveying a true message.

They invented lies and raised doubts among the followers of the new faith, resorting to the most devious means to spread these fabrications. They expressed doubts about the Prophet himself when they were certain of his honesty and true position. They allied themselves with the hypocrite Arabs and taught them how to make false accusations and spread them around. They manipulated every possible event, such as the change in direction when Muslims offer their prayers and the false accusations levelled against the Prophet’s wife, as well as numerous other instances. Several comments in the Qur’ān, in Sūrahs 2, 3, 4, 5, 9, 33 and 59, refer directly to such incidents. Here are some examples:

And now that a Book confirming their own has come to them from God, and they had repeatedly forecast its coming to the unbelievers, they have denied what they know to be the truth. God’s curse be upon the unbelievers! Vile is that for which they have bartered their souls, because they have denied what God has revealed, grudging that He should, by His grace, send down His revelations to whom He chooses from among His servants. Thus they have incurred God’s wrath over and over again. Ignominious suffering is in store for the unbelievers. (2: 89-90)

Now that a Messenger from God has come to them, confirming what is already in their possession, some of those who had been given the Scriptures cast God’s Book behind their backs as though they know nothing. (2: 101)

The weak-minded among people will say, ‘What has turned them away from the direction of prayer which they have so far observed?’ Say, ‘To God belong the east and the west. He guides whomever He wills to a straight path.’ (2: 142) People of earlier revelations! Why do you disbelieve in God’s revelations when you yourselves bear witness [to their truth’? People of earlier revelations! Why do you cloak the truth with falsehood, and knowingly conceal the truth? A party of the people of earlier revelations say [to one another]: ‘Declare at the beginning of the day, that you believe in what has been revealed to the believers, and then deny it at the end of the day, so that they might go back on their faith.’ (3: 70-72)

There are some among them who twist their tongues when quoting the Scriptures, so that you may think that [what they say] is from the Scriptures, when it is not from the Scriptures. They say: ‘It is from God,’ when it is not from God. Thus, they deliberately say of God what they know to be a lie. (3: 78)

Say: ‘People of earlier revelations, why do you disbelieve in God’s revelations, when God Himself is witness to all that you do?’ Say: ‘People of earlier revelations, why do you try to turn those who have come to believe away from the path of God, seeking to make it appear crooked, when you yourselves bear witness [to its being straight’? God is not unaware of what you do.’ (3: 98-99)

The people of earlier revelations ask you to have a book sent down to them from heaven. They asked Moses for something even greater than that, when they said: Make us see God with our own eyes.’ The thunderbolt smote them for this their wrongdoing.

After that, they took to worshipping the calf even after clear evidence of the truth had come to them. (4: 153)

They want to extinguish God’s light with their mouths, but God will not allow anything but to bring His light to perfection, however hateful this may be to the unbelievers. (Verse 32)

History witnessed repeated violations by the Jews of their treaties with the Muslim state in Madinah, as also their scheming against the Muslims. These violations led to the encounters with the Jewish tribes of Qaynuqā`, al-Nadīr and Qurayzah and also the Battle of Khaybar. Their efforts to bring together all the forces hostile to Islam in an unholy alliance, with the aim of exterminating Islam altogether, are well known.

They have continued to scheme against Islam and the Muslim community ever since. They were instrumental in the chaotic events that led to the assassination of the third rightly-guided Caliph, `Uthmān ibn Affān, and to the emergence of division in the Muslim community. They were the main culprits in the conflict that took place between `Alī and Mu`āwiyah. They led the way in the fabrication of false statements attributed to the Prophet, historical reports and baseless interpretations of Qur’ānic statements. They also paved the way to the victory of the Tartars and their conquest of Baghdad and the fall of the Islamic Caliphate.

In modern history, the Jews have been behind every calamity that has befallen the Muslim communities everywhere. They give active support to every attempt to crush the modern Islamic revival and extend their protection to every regime that suppresses such a revival.

The other people of earlier revelations, the Christians, have been no less hostile.

Enmity between the Byzantines and the Persians went back for centuries.

Nevertheless, as soon as the Church felt that Islam, the new faith, represented a threat to its concocted version of Christianity, which was no more than a collection of ancient pagan legends, misguided inventions and a handful of statements from the Prophet Jesus, both camps buried all their past enmity and age-old hatred to confront the new faith together.

The Byzantines, and their puppet Arab regime of Ghassān, started to raise forces to fight the new faith. They killed the Prophet’s messenger, when messengers were traditionally given full protection. When the Prophet sent a force of 3,000 men to stop the provocation, they were confronted by an army that included, according to historical reports, 100,000 of the Byzantines and a similar force of Christian Arabs under their rule. This was the Battle of Mu’tah, which took place in year 8 H, corresponding to 630 CE, and in which three Muslim commanders, Zayd ibn Ĥārithah, Ja`far ibn Abī Ţālib and `Abdullāh ibn Rawāĥah, fell as martyrs.

Then the expedition to Tabūk, which is the major subject of discussion in this sūrah, took place, followed by the march of the army commanded by Usāmah ibn Zayd. This was prepared by the Prophet and dispatched by his successor, Abū Bakr, in a demonstration of power to confront the Byzantine forces being mobilized to suppress the voice of Islam. Then the Muslims achieved a great victory in the Battle of Yarmūk against the Byzantines. This ushered in the liberation of wide areas of Syria, Egypt, North Africa and the Mediterranean from Byzantine colonialism, and the consolidation of an Islamic base in Andalusia. From then on the hostility of the Crusaders to Islam was in full swing.

Everybody has heard of the campaigns known as the Crusades, but these were not the only ones launched by the Church against Islam. Indeed there were much earlier campaigns, which started when the Byzantines patched up their long hostility with the Persians to lend them a helping hand against Islam in the southern areas of Arabia. The Battle of Mu’tah was another early confrontation, but there were more battles to come after the great victory achieved by the Muslims in Yarmūk. This hostility was at its most brutal when Europe, motivated by Crusader zeal, swept over the Islamic base in Spain and committed atrocities without parallel in history. The same sort of hatred and unscrupulous brutality were demonstrated during the Crusades that showed no respect for any value or pledge of honour.

Gustav Le Bon, a French Christian author who wrote a book speaking favourably of the Arab Civilization refers to the compassionate treatment Muslims extended to their enemies. He states that during the Crusades, the first thing Richardo did was that he killed at the Muslim camp 3,000 prisoners who had surrendered to him after he had given them his pledges of honour to spare them. He then ran riot with his soldiers killing and looting. This angered Saladin who had extended noble and compassionate treatment to the Christians in Jerusalem, and went as far as sending medicines, drinks and provisions to Philip and Richard, the Lion-Heart when they were ill.

Another Christian writer also quoted in Arabic sources reflects that the Crusaders made the worst start to their march to Jerusalem. A group of Christian pilgrims went about killing those whom they found in the palaces that fell to them. They demonstrated their brutality by opening their victims’ stomachs to look for any gold articles they might have swallowed. In contrast, when Saladin conquered Jerusalem, he granted security to the Crusaders, and fulfilled all his pledges to them. The Muslims showed their beaten enemies unparalleled magnanimity. King al-`Ādil, Saladin’s brother, set 1,000 prisoners free, and ensured the safety of all the Armenians. He allowed the Patriarch to hold and carry the Cross and all church ornaments. The Queen and the princesses were also allowed to visit their husbands.

A proper examination of the long line of Christian hostility to Islam over the centuries is beyond the scope of this commentary. We will only say, however, that this hostility has never ended. We need only recall what happened recently in Zanzibar, when an extermination campaign was launched against the Muslims there.

About 12,000 were killed and the remaining 4,000 Muslims were put to sea to go into exile. We may also recall the brutality witnessed in Cyprus where neither food nor drink was allowed to reach the Muslim areas, with the aim of starving the Island’s Muslim inhabitants to death. We only need to remember the atrocities committed by Ethiopia in Eritrea and other Muslim areas, and the persecution of about 100,000

Muslims of Somali origin in Kenya, only because they wanted to join their people in Somalia. Indeed we need go no further than what the Christian missionaries have been trying to do in the south of the Sudan.22

To describe the Christians’ hostile view of Islam we may quote the following paragraph by a European author, George Brown, writing in 1944:23

We used to be warned against dangers posed by different nations, but experience has shown that there is no cause for worry. We were warned against the Jewish threat and the threat of the yellow races and the Bolshevik threat. But none of these warnings has come true. We have found the Jews to be very good friends, which means that anyone who persecutes them is our enemy. We have also found out that the Bolsheviks are our allies. The yellow races are being taken care of by powerful democracies. The only real threat is that of Islam because of its dynamism and ability to spread and attract new followers. It is the only real obstacle that stands up to Western imperialism.

We cannot go much further than this to review the various aspects of the determined war that continues to be launched by Christianity against Islam. We have referred on various occasions to the nature of this age-long war and its various aspects. The preceding remarks should be sufficient and further details may be sought elsewhere.

Let us now recall that, on the one hand, Islam represents a general declaration for the liberation of mankind and that, on the other, the camp of jāhiliyyah the world over seeks to crush any implementation of this declaration. With this in mind, we realize that the final rulings contained in this sūrah on the relationship between Islam and other camps are the cumulative and natural reaction to all these facts. They are not limited to a particular period or a special case. At the same time, the earlier provisional rulings are partially abrogated, in the sense that they can be implemented in situations and conditions similar to those which prevailed at the time of their revelation. It is in the nature of Islam that real situations are faced with attitudes and actions that are suited to them.

These final rulings, as they are stated in this sūrah, deal with a specific situation that obtained in Arabia, and serve, in a sense, as a legislative prelude to the Tabūk campaign, the central issue of the sūrah, which sought to confront the Byzantine mobilization close to the Arabian borders. But the attitude of the people of earlier revelations and their hostility to Islam and the Muslim community were not the result of any particular historical event, or limited to any stage. That is a permanent reality. They will continue to be at war with Islam until the Muslims have abandoned their faith altogether. This hostility and the war it launches will continue to be fed by all possible means. Hence, the rulings outlined in this sūrah remain in full effect, unlimited to a particular period of history. However, implementation of rulings must come within the framework of putting into effect the proactive Islamic approach.

People must study this approach fully before they start to talk about the rulings themselves and before those latter-day Muslims, who know nothing about Islam except its name, blame Islam for their weakness and subjugation.

Legal Islamic rulings have always been, and will continue to be, the result of action taken in accordance with the Islamic method and approach. There is a great deal of difference between looking at Qur’ānic statements as theoretical models and looking at them within the context of action taken according to the Islamic approach.

This last qualification, `according to the Islamic approach’, is extremely important.

We are not talking here about any action, in which any situation is acceptable as a basis. Any human situation will become an important factor if it results from the implementation of Islam.

If we keep this rule in mind, we can see the final rulings determining the relationship between the people of earlier revelations and the Muslim community. We will now look more closely at the verses included in the present passage.

Fight against those who — despite having been given Scriptures — do not truly believe in God and the Last Day, and do not treat as forbidden that which God and His Messenger have forbidden, and do not follow the religion of truth, till they [agree to] pay the submission tax with a willing hand, after they have been humbled. (Verse 29)

This verse and the ones that follow were meant to prepare the Muslims for their expedition to Tabūk and the confrontation with the Byzantines and their puppet regime of Christian Arabs, known as the Ghassānīd. This suggests that the descriptions we have here were true of the people on the other side of the confrontation. They simply show the reality of those people. These descriptions are not mentioned here as conditions for fighting the people of earlier revelations, but as qualities inherent in their distorted beliefs and the actual reality of those people.

Hence they provide the justification for fighting them. The ruling also applies to all those who share the same beliefs and characteristics.

This verse specifies three such characteristics. (1) They do not believe in God and the Last Day; (2) they do not treat as forbidden what God has forbidden; and (3) they do not believe in the religion of truth. The verses that follow show how these characteristics apply to them.

Firstly, the Jews claim that Ezra is the son of God, and the Christians assert that Christ is His son. These claims echo similar ones made by the pagans of former times. Hence, they are to be treated on the same basis as people who do not believe in God and the Last Day.

Secondly, they treat their rabbis and their monks, as well as Jesus Christ, as their Lords, in place of God. This is in total conflict with the principles of the faith of truth which is based on total submission to God alone, who has no partners. As they make such claims they demonstrate that they are idolaters who do not follow the true faith.

Thirdly, they try to put out the light of God’s guidance with their mouths. In other words, they are at war with the divine faith. No one is ever at war with the divine faith if he truly believes in God.

Fourthly, many of their monks and rabbis devour people’s property without any justification. They do so knowing that their claims to such property are false. Hence they do not treat as forbidden what God and His Messenger have made forbidden, whether we take this statement as referring to the Messenger sent to them or to the Prophet Muĥammad.

All these characteristics were true of the Christians in Syria and the Byzantines, as well as other Christians ever since Church Synods distorted the faith preached by Jesus Christ and claimed that he was the son of God and invented the concept of the Trinity, the conflict between the different sects and churches over the concept of Trinity notwithstanding.

What we have here then is a general order stating a universal rule that applies to all those among the people of earlier revelations who share the same characteristics as the Christians of Syria and Byzantium. This general application is not restricted by the exceptions the Prophet made with regard to how Muslims behave in war towards women, children, the elderly, or monks who stay in places of worship, on account of the fact that these are not fighters. Islam indeed does not allow attacks against such non-fighters whatever their religion may be.

These exceptions were not made by the Prophet because such groups did not launch an aggression, but rather because they do not normally launch any aggression at all. Therefore it is not right to try to interpret this exception as restricting the general order by saying that it applies only to aggressors, as done by those who adopt an apologetic attitude in trying to defend Islam. Aggression has been committed in the first place, against God’s Lordship of the universe and against human beings who are forced to submit to deities other than God. As Islam tries to defend God’s Lordship and human dignity, ignorance will try to stop it by aggression and war. This is the reality we have to realize.

This Qur’ānic verse commands the Muslims to fight against those among the people of earlier revelations who “do not believe in God and the Last Day.” A person who claims that Ezra or Jesus is the son of God cannot be described as a believer in God. The same applies to a person who says that the Christ is the Lord, or that God is one of a Trinity, or that He manifested Himself in Jesus. It further applies to all concepts formulated by the Synods, diverse as these concepts are.

Nor can we describe as believers in God and the Last Day those who say that they will suffer God’s punishment only for a few days no matter what sins they may commit because God loves them as His sons and daughters, or because they are God’s chosen people. The same applies to those who claim that all sins are forgiven through a holy communion with Jesus Christ, which is the only way to achieve forgiveness. Neither of these two groups can be described as believers in God or in the Last Day.

This verse also describes the people of earlier revelations as ones who do not treat as forbidden what God and His Messenger have made forbidden. Whether the term ‘His Messenger’ refers to the Messenger whom God sent to them in particular or to the Prophet Muĥammad, the import is the same. The following verses explain this by saying that they devour other people’s property by false claims, an action which has been forbidden in all divine messages and by all God’s messengers. Some of the clearest examples of this are usurious transactions, the sale of bonds of forgiveness by the Church, opposition to the divine faith with brutal force as well as trying to turn believers away from their faith. Another clear example is forcing people to submit to beings other than God, and forcing them to implement laws other than those revealed by God. All these examples are covered by the description: “who do not treat as forbidden what God and His Messenger have forbidden.” All this applies today to the people of earlier revelations as was applicable to them when this verse was revealed.

The Qur’ānic verse also describes them as not following `the religion of truth.’ This is clear from what we have already said. It is not part of the religion of truth to believe in the Lordship of anyone other than God, or to apply a law different from God’s law, or to accept legislation enacted by any authority other than God, or to submit to anyone other than Him. All these qualities are today true of the people of earlier revelations, as it was true of them then.

The condition which the Qur’ānic verse lays down for not fighting them is not that they should accept Islam. No. There is simply no compulsion in matters of faith, and no one is forced to accept Islam at any time. The condition is simply that they should pay the tribute, or the submission tax, with a willing hand and that they be utterly subdued. What is the purpose of this condition, and why is it the end at which all fighting must stop?

The answer is found in the fact that with such characteristics, the people of earlier revelations place themselves at war with the divine faith, both in belief and in practical terms. They are also at war with Islamic society because of the inherent conflict between the codes of living derived from the divine faith on the one hand and ignorance, or jāhiliyyah, on the other. As described in these verses, the people of earlier revelations belong to jāhiliyyah in both beliefs and practices. History also proves the nature of conflict, and the impossibility of coexistence between the two codes. The people of earlier revelations were determined in their opposition to the Islamic faith in the period preceding the revelation of this verse, and in the period following it, up to the present day.

As the only religion of truth that exists on earth today, Islam takes appropriate action to remove all physical and material obstacles that try to impede its efforts to liberate mankind from submission to anyone other than God. That submission is translated in following the religion of truth, provided that every human being is given free choice. There must be no pressure either from the religion itself or from those forces putting up the physical obstacles.

The practical way to ensure the removal of those physical obstacles while not forcing anyone to adopt Islam is to smash the power of those authorities based on false beliefs until they declare their submission and demonstrate this by paying the submission tax. When this happens, the process of liberating mankind is completed by giving every individual the freedom of choice based on conviction. Anyone who is not convinced may continue to follow his faith. However, he has to pay the submission tax to fulfil a number of objectives:

Firstly, by paying this tax, known as jizyah, he declares that he will not stand in physical opposition to the efforts advocating the true Divine faith. Secondly, he contributes to the defence expenses for himself, his property, honour and family.

Islam guarantees such protection for those who pay the jizyah to place themselves under Islamic protection. To ensure this, Islam defends those under its protection against all internal and external enemies with its own soldiers. Thirdly, he contributes to the treasury of the Muslim state which guarantees a decent standard of living for all those who are unable to work, including those who pay the submission tax, without any distinction between them and those Muslims who pay zakāt. We do not here want to enter into polemics on who should pay the submission tax and who are exempt from it, and how much each one or each category should pay, and the methods of imposing this tax and its collection. The whole question is not under discussion today as it was at the time when Muslim scholars gave their different rulings on these matters on the basis of scholarly discretion, or ijtihād. So today this question is considered historic rather than practical. Nowadays Muslims do not engage in jihād, because there is practically no Muslim community in the real sense of the term. Indeed the issue to be discussed is that of the existence of Islam and Muslims.

As we have said on several occasions, Islam takes a very serious approach which refuses to enter into any discussion of hypothetical matters. It is simply against the nature of this approach to engage in academic discussion on matters that have no practical relevance, since there is no single Islamic society that conducts all its affairs in accordance with God’s law. Indeed Islam has little time for people who occupy themselves with issues that are far removed from the realities of the present day.

Such people are given a funny Arabic nickname which means `the hypothesists’, because they are always putting forward hypotheses and trying to find answers to them.

The starting point today is the same as it was in the early days of Islam. There must be a group of people, living in a certain area, who believe in the religion of truth and declare that they believe in God’s oneness and in Muĥammad as God’s Messenger. They also believe that all sovereignty belongs to God, which means that He alone has the authority to legislate. They implement all this in their lives and move on to implement Islam’s general declaration to liberate mankind. Only when this happens will there be a chance to implement Islamic rules governing the relations between the Muslim community and other societies and communities. At that time it is possible to enter such discussions about the rules that are applicable to situations that the Muslim community face in practice.

We have only discussed this verse in principle because it relates to a question of faith and to the nature of the Islamic approach. We limit our discussion to this aspect, without entering into the legal differences out of respect for the Islamic approach which is always serious, practical and realistic.

As we have seen, God issued His order to the Muslims to fight the people of earlier revelations, i.e. the Jews and the Christians, “till they pay the submission tax with a willing hand, after they have been humbled.” (Verse 29) When this order was given certain circumstances, discussed in the Prologue to this sūrah, affected the Muslim community in Madinah at that time. These circumstances required that this order should be reiterated and emphasized. Its reasons needed to be clarified. The uneasiness felt by some Muslims about its purpose required reassurance. To obey this order meant opposing the Byzantines in southern Syria. Before the advent of Islam, the Arabs held the Byzantines in awe, particularly because they held control over the north of Arabia for a long time. Some Arab tribes collaborated with them, and they had a puppet state where the Ghassān tribe assumed power.

This was not the first encounter the Muslims had with the Byzantines. With Islam, God gave the Arabs a sense of dignity which enabled them to stand up to both the Persians and the Byzantines. Formerly, all the bravery they demonstrated was in internal conflict and the looting raids they launched against one another, tribe against tribe. Yet there was still a lingering fear of the Byzantines, particularly among those who had not yet acquired the true Islamic attitude. Moreover, the last major encounter with the Byzantines had not gone in favour of the Muslims. In that battle, the Byzantines and their Arab stooges marshalled large forces which some reports put at no less than 200,000 men.

All these circumstances, whether relating to the structure of the Muslim community at the time, or to the old fear of the Byzantines, or to the expedition itself which was termed ‘the expedition of hardship,’ and also the feeling that the Byzantines and the Christian Arabs allied with them followed earlier Scriptures required further clarification and more categorical statements to show that the fight against them was inevitable. All doubts had to be removed and unease needed to be countered with reassurance by explaining the reasons for that inescapable eventuality.

In this verse, the Qur’ān makes it clear why those people of earlier revelations were following deviant beliefs which echoed those of the Arab idolaters, Roman idolaters of old as also other nations and communities. They had not maintained the right faith which was outlined in their Scriptures. Hence they could not be considered as followers of any divine message, since they held beliefs contrary to all messages revealed by God. What is worth noting is the mention of the Jews and their assertion that Ezra was the son of God when these verses are meant to prepare the Muslims for a confrontation with the Byzantines and their Arab Christian allies. Most probably there are two reasons for this:

The first relates to the fact that these verses are given as a general statement, and the order to fight the people of earlier revelations until they pay the submission tax with a willing hand and are subdued is also of general import. In view of this it is necessary to outline the ideological basis of this general order that applies to both Christians and Jews.

The second reason is that the Jews had to be included in this order because they were in a position to put up obstacles to impede the Muslim expansion into southern Syria. They had moved from Madinah to areas close to Syria after a hard fight against the Muslims which had led to the evacuation of the tribes of Qaynuqā` and al- Nadīr.

The Christian claim that Jesus Christ is the son of God is well known. This has been their belief ever since Paul distorted the Christian faith. On the other hand, the claim by the Jews that Ezra was the son of God is not known today. What we find today in Jewish religious writings about Ezra is a description which shows him as a skilful scribe of the Torah and that he dedicated himself to the pursuit of knowledge of the Lord’s law. Nevertheless, the fact that the Qur’ān attributes to them this assertion that Ezra was the son of God is irrefutable evidence that at least some of them, particularly the Jews of Madinah, used to believe so and that this was commonly accepted among them. The Qur’ān faced the Jews and the Christians in an open and clear way. Had there been anything untrue in what it attributed to them, they would have found in it a valid argument to support their denial of the truth of the Prophet’s message.

The late Shaikh Rashīd Riđā’ gives a useful summary about Ezra’s position and status as viewed by the Jews and adds his own comments. It is useful to quote a few of these paragraphs here so that we have an insight into what the Jews believe.24

The Jewish Encyclopaedia (1903 edition) mentions that Ezra marks the springtime in the national history of Judaism. “The flowers appear on the earth” refers to Ezra and Nehemiah. Ezra was worthy of being the vehicle of the Law, had it not been already given through Moses. It was forgotten but Ezra restored it. But for its sins, Israel in the time of Ezra would have witnessed miracles as in the time of Joshua... Ezra re-established the text of the Pentateuch, introducing therein the Assyrian or square characters, apparently as a polemical measure against the Samaritans. He showed his doubts concerning the correctness of some words of the text by placing points over them... the beginnings of the Jewish calendar are traced back to him.

In the Dictionary of the Bible, Dr George Box says that Ezra was a Jewish priest, a famous scribe who lived for a time in Babylon in the reign of Artaxerxes, of the long hands. In the seventh year of his reign he permitted Ezra to take a large number of the Jewish people to Jerusalem around 457 BC. (Ezra p. 7)

The journey took them four months...

`In Jewish tradition, Ezra’s position is comparable to that of Moses and Iliya.

It is said that he founded the large assembly, collected the books of the Holy Book, introduced the Chaldean alphabet in place of the old Hebrew alphabet, and wrote the books of Chronicles, Ezra and Nehemiah of the Old Testament.

The book of Ezra (pp. 4: 8, 6: 19 and 7: 1-27) is written in the Chaldean language because when the people returned from exile, they could understand Chaldean better than Hebrew.’ It is widely known to historians, including Jews and Christians, that the Torah which Moses wrote and kept in or near the casket was lost before the time of Solomon. When the casket was opened during his reign, there was nothing in it other than the two tablets containing the ten commandments,25

as seen in the first book of Kings. It was Ezra who, after the end of slavery, wrote the Torah and other things in Chaldean letters, and the Chaldean language mixed with whatever was left of the old Hebrew, which the Jews had largely forgotten. The people of earlier revelations maintain that Ezra wrote it as it originally was, having been inspired by God. But this is not accepted by other communities. Many objections are raised which we find at the appropriate place in specialized books, even those authored by them, such as Dhakhīrat al-Albāb for Catholics, written originally in French. The author devotes Chapters 11 and 12 to objections to the view that the five books were those of Moses. Concerning this, he says:

`It is mentioned in the book of Ezra (4: 14.21) that all holy books were burnt with fire at the time of Nebuchadnezzar, when he said: “The Law is burnt, and no one knoweth the works that thou hast done,26 or what thou art about to do.”27 It is added that with inspiration by the Holy Spirit, Ezra re-wrote the five books burnt with fire, and he was assisted by five contemporary scribes.

Therefore, we see St Thertholianus, St Irinaous, St Ironemus, St John the Golden, St Basilius and others call Ezra `the one who revived Jewish holy books’28

Shaikh Rashīd Riđā’ further:

This is sufficient for our purposes. We wish to make it clear that all the people of earlier revelations are indebted to Ezra with regard to the foundation of their faith and their holy books. We wish also to show that this foundation is feeble, relying on weak support. This has been clearly shown by European freethinking scholars.29 Under his entry in the Encyclopaedia Britannica his writing of the law — confirmed in the books of Ezra and Nehemiah — is mentioned. Then the entry says that later reports claim that he did not merely re-write for them the law that had been burnt, but also all the Hebrew books which had been lost. He further re-wrote 70 unauthorized books. The writer of the entry comments that this legend about Ezra has been written by some historians of their own accord, relying on no other reference. Hence, modern writers consider it as mere fabrication.

To sum up, the Jews venerated and still venerate Ezra, to the extent that some of them call him the son of God. We do not know if using this description was a kind of honouring Ezra, in the same way as Israel, David and others were honoured, or it was akin to what their philosopher Philo later claimed.

This latter claim is close to Indian philosophy, which is the origin of Christian beliefs.30 Qur’ānic commentators are in agreement that the claim attributed to the Jews about Ezra being the son of God was made by some Jews, not all of them.

The Jews who said this were some of those who lived in Madinah. It is the same as the Qur’ānic reference: “The Jews say: ‘God’s hand is shackled!’ It is their own hands that are shackled. Rejected [by God] are they for what they say. Indeed, both His hands are outstretched. He bestows [His bounty] as He wills.” (5:64) The same applies to others whom the Qur’ān mentions in the following verse:

“God has certainly heard the words of those who said: ‘God is poor, and we are rich.— (3:181) These people uttered this mouthful in reply to God’s invitation:

“Who is it that will offer up to God a goodly loan, which He will amply repay?” (57:11) It may be that some earlier ones said the same thing, but it was not reported to us.

Ibn Isĥāq and others report: “Sallām ibn Mishkam, Nu`mān ibn Awfā, Abū Anas, Shās ibn Qays and Mālik ibn al-Sayf said to the Prophet: `How can we follow you when you have abandoned our qiblah [i.e. the direction faced in prayer] and you do not accept that Ezra was the son of God.” It is well known that some Christians who claimed that Jesus was the son of God were originally Jews. Philo, a Jewish philosopher from Alexandria who was a contemporary of Jesus, says that God has a son who is His word with which He creates all things. Hence, it is perfectly possible that some Jews claimed prior to the advent of Islam that Ezra was the son of God.31

By quoting this Jewish assertion in this context the Qur’ān makes clear that some of the people of earlier revelations held such distorted beliefs as could not fit with their being believers in God or their following the religion of truth. These are the main characteristics which form the basis for the ruling given to the Muslims to fight them. The purpose of such a fight is not to compel them to be Muslims, but to subdue them so that they do not stand in opposition to Islam and so that they accept its authority. Thus individuals would be free of all influences restricting their freedom to make a choice to believe in God and follow His message.

As we have said, the Christian assertion about Jesus being the son of God is very widely known. Indeed all Christian churches have been making this assertion ever since Paul distorted the message of Jesus Christ which, like all divine messages, was based on God’s oneness. The Church Synods carried the distortion further and practically killed the concept of God’s oneness.

For a summary of Christians’ beliefs we will similarly quote from Shaikh Muĥammad Rashīd Riđā’s commentary on the Qur’ān, Al-Manār. Under the heading ‘Trinity’, we read:

The Trinity is a term used by Christians to refer to three manifestations of God. These are the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. This is part of the teachings of the Catholic and Eastern Churches, as well as almost all Protestants. Those who adhere to this concept allege that it is absolutely in line with the Holy Bible. Scholars of Divinity have written extensively in interpreting and explaining this concept, based on the teachings of the old Synods and the writings of the former fathers of the Church. Much of their writings discuss the way the second manifestation was born and how the third manifestation came about, and the relationships of the three manifestations, their distinctive qualities, names and titles. The term, `Trinity’, is not used in the Bible. No verse of the Old Testament specifically mentions the Trinity. Yet old Christian writers cite many verses that refer to a collective presence of God. The point here is that if these verses admit more than one interpretation, they cannot be cited as clear evidence in support of the concept of the Trinity. They are used as reference to clear revelations they believe to be included in the New Testament. Two large sets of verses from the New Testament are quoted in support of this concept. The first set consists of verses that mention the Father, Son and Holy Spirit together, and the second mentions them separately, emphasizing some of their attributes and the relationship between them.

Dispute about the three persons of the Trinity started at the time of the Apostles. Most probably it emanated from the ideas of Hellenic philosophers.

Theophilus, the second century Bishop of Antioch, used the Greek word trinus, while subsequently Tertiliyanus was the first to use its synonym trinitas, which means three. Much dispute about this concept took place prior to the Council of Nicea, particularly in the East. The Church branded many views as heretic. Among these were the views of the Abionians who believed that Christ was no more than a human being, the Sabilians who believed that the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit were three different manifestations by which God shows Himself to people, the Airisis who believed that the Son was not ever present like the Father; rather, the Father created the Son before creating the universe. Hence, the Son has a lower status and is subject to the Father’s will, and the Macedonians deny that the Holy Spirit is a person of God.

The Church concept was approved by the Council of Nicea in 325 CE, and the Constantinople Synod in 381. Both ruled that the Son and the Holy Spirit are equal to the Father in the Trinity, and while the Son was born through the father before the start of time, the Holy Spirit emanated from Him. The Toledo Synod of 589 CE also ruled that the Holy Spirit emanated from the Father. The Latin Church unanimously accepted this addition and held on to it. As for the Greek Church, it showed little resistance at the beginning, but later gave its argument against changing the law, considering that as heresy.

The phrase ‘And also from the Son’ continues to be a barrier preventing the unity between the Greek and Catholic Churches. The writings of the followers of Martin Luther and the Reformist churches adopt the same concept of the Trinity as the Catholic Church. However, beginning with the thirteenth century, a large number of divinity specialists have opposed this, as also some new groups such as the Susinians, Germans, Unitarians and the Universalists, who all consider that concept contrary to the Holy Bible and to reason. Suweid Tiragh makes the Trinity the Christ given a tri-mark. He speaks of one in three, not three in one. What he understands is that the divine in Christ is the Father, while the divine which is in union with the human in Christ is the Son, and the divine that emanated from Him is the Holy Spirit. The influence of the rationalists on the Protestant and Reformist churches weakened the Trinity concepts among many German divines.

Kant considers that the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit signify three essential attributes of God, which are power, wisdom and love, or three main activities, which are creation, protection and control. Both Higgins and Shling tried to establish an abstract basis to the concept of the Trinity, and they were followed by later German divines who tried to defend the concept on abstract lines. Some divines who rely on the Scriptures do not strictly follow the Church line as stated by the Nicea and Constantinople Councils. In later years many tried to defend the views of the Sabilians in particular.32

Indeed, no longer do any Christian churches believe in the religion of truth based on God’s oneness; nor do they accept that nothing and no one is similar to Him in any way, or that He does not beget anyone; limitless indeed is He in His glory.

It is often mentioned that some groups of Christians, particularly those referred to in Islamic literature as the Arīsīs, believed in God’s oneness. To say this is inaccurate.

This group is not unitarian in the sense we find in the divine faith. Their concepts are rather confused. While they state that, unlike God, Jesus Christ is not eternal — which is true — they also claim that he is the Son, and that he has been created by the Father before the universe. All this has nothing to do with the proper concept of God’s oneness.

Indeed a clear verdict has been given by God that those who say that Christ is the son of God, or say that Christ is God, or say that God is one of a Trinity are unbelievers. The same faith cannot lead to belief and unbelief at the same time. No one can simultaneously be a believer and an unbeliever.

Commenting on the assertions by the Jews and the Christians that Ezra or Jesus is the son of God, the Qur’ān emphasizes that they echo the assertions and concepts of unbelievers in former times: “Such are the assertions they utter with their mouths, echoing assertions made by the unbelievers of old.” (Verse 30) First of all this comment emphasizes that these assertions were made by them and not reported by others.

This is the reason for mentioning `their mouths’ to add a physical image, following the Qur’ānic method of expression. It is evident that whatever they say or assert must be said by word of mouth. The deliberate mention of their mouths is neither redundant — far be it from God to unnecessarily add what is redundant — nor does it make the statement verbose. The Qur’ānic style pictures how they make their assertions and gives us a very real image that we can see as we listen to the statement. There is also an additional connotation stressing that the words do not describe any thing that exists in reality. These are merely words uttered and have no real significance.

Then we have another aspect of the uniqueness of the Qur’ān which points to its origin and that it is God’s revelation. This we find in the statement: “echoing assertions made by the unbelievers of old.” (Verse 30) Commentators on the Qur’ān used to say that this means that their assertions about God having a son are similar to what the Arab idolaters used to say that the angels were God’s daughters. The similarity between the two assertions is true, but this statement has a wider implication which has transpired only recently when the faiths of idolaters in India, ancient Egypt and Greece were studied. The study has brought to light the origins of the distorted beliefs of the people of earlier revelations, particularly the Christians. They were simply derived from those forms of pagan faiths which found their way firstly into Paul’s teachings and finally into those of the Church Synods.

The Egyptian trinity of Osiris, Isis and Horus forms the basis of Pharaonic idolatry, with Osiris representing the ‘father’ while Horus represents the ‘son’. In the Alexandrian divinity, which was taught many years before Christ, the assertion is made that “the word is the second deity,” and it is also called “the first son of God”.

The Indians believed that God might take three different states: Brahma which signified creation, Vishnu which signified lordship and the provision of sustenance, and Siva which signified destruction. In this faith Vishnu is considered the son of Brahma.

The Assyrians believed in the ‘Word’ which they called Mardookh whom they described as the first son of God.

The Greeks also believed in three states of God. When their priests slaughtered for sacrifice, they sprinkled the alter with holy water three times, and they handled incense from the censer with three fingers, and they splashed those around the alter with the holy water three times. All these rituals are symbols of the trinity. Together with the pagan beliefs they represented, these rituals were introduced by the Church into Christianity, to echo the beliefs of the unbelievers of old times.

A careful look at the ideologies of the ancient idolaters, which were not known to people at the time when the Qur’ān was revealed, in the light of this Qur’ānic statement: “echoing assertions made by the unbelievers of old, “ (Verse 30) will prove two points. It shows that the people of earlier revelations do not follow the faith of truth and do not have the right concepts of God. It also reveals a certain aspect of the uniqueness of the Qur’ān, pointing to its source and that it is revealed by God whose knowledge is perfect, absolute. This verse, which makes it clear that the people of earlier revelations have adopted idolatrous beliefs, is concluded with these words: “May God destroy them! How perverse they are!” (Verse 30) Yes indeed. “May God destroy them!” How they overlook the simple truth which is clear and straightforward to adopt ambiguous and complex idolatrous concepts which have no logical or coherent basis.

The sūrah then describes another type of deviation from the truth manifested by the people of earlier revelations. This time the deviation is not confined to verbal statements and beliefs only; it translates itself into practices based on erroneous beliefs: “They make of their rabbis and their monks, and of the Christ, son of Mary, lords besides God. Yet they have been ordered to worship none but the One God, other than whom there is no deity. Exalted be He above those to whom they ascribe divinity.” (Verse 31)

This verse comes at its most appropriate place in this passage which dispels all lingering doubts that those people may still be following a divine faith. For this verse states that they are no longer following any religion revealed by God. This is proven by their beliefs and practices. They were ordered to worship God alone, but they took their rabbis and monks as lords besides God. They also made Jesus Christ the Lord. All this is a form of idolatry which associates partners with God. From the standpoint of beliefs, they are not true believers in God, and in practice, they do not follow the religion of truth.

Before we explain how they took their monks and rabbis for lords, we wish to mention some authentic reports which include the Prophet’s own interpretation. His is undoubtedly the correct and final interpretation.

Al-Tirmidhī and several major scholars of Ĥadīth report on the authority of `Adiy ibn Ĥātim, who was a Christian before he met the Prophet and adopted Islam:

“When I first came to see the Prophet, he was reciting this verse of the sūrah entitled Repentance: ‘They make of their rabbis and their monks, and of the Christ, son of Mary, lords besides God.’ He explained: “They certainly did not worship these (rabbis and monks). But when they permitted them something they treated it as permissible, and when they prohibited something they treated it as forbidden.” A second authentic report is transmitted by Imām Aĥmad, al- Tirmidhī and alŢabarī on the authority of `Adiy ibn Ĥātim:

When `Adiy, who in pre-Islamic days was a Christian, heard of the Islamic message, he fled to Syria. His sister was taken prisoner together with a group of his tribesmen. The Prophet treated his sister kindly, granted her freedom and gave her some gifts. She went to her brother and urged him to adopt Islam and to meet the Prophet. `Adiy took his sister’s advice and travelled to Madinah. He used to be the chief of his tribe, Ţayyi’, and his father was widely renowned for his unparalleled generosity. People were speaking about his arrival in Madinah. When he went to see the Prophet he was wearing a silver crucifix which he hung around his neck. The Prophet was reading this verse: ‘They make of their rabbis and their monks...lords besides God.’ ‘Adiy said: `They have not worshipped them.’ The Prophet said: `Yes, indeed they did. They followed them when they forbade them what was lawful and permitted them what was forbidden. That is how they worshipped them.’ Al-Suddī, a learned commentator on the Qur’ān says: “They have sought the advice of human beings and abandoned God’s Book. Hence He says: ‘Yet they have been ordered to worship none but the One God,’ which means the One who may forbid something and it is treated by all as forbidden and may permit another and it is treated as lawful. His law is to be obeyed and His verdict is final.” In his commentary on the Qur’ān, al-Ālūsī, a scholar of the modern period says:

“That they made them lords does not mean that they treated them as if they were gods in control of the universe. What is meant is that they obeyed them in what they have bidden and forbidden.” From the very clear Qur’ānic statement and its interpretation by the Prophet, which provides the ultimate judgement, and also from the observations of scholars, old and new, we may deduce a number of very important conclusions concerning religion and beliefs which we will state here very briefly:

• According to the Qur’ān and the Prophet’s interpretation, worship means the following of the law. The Jews and the Christians did not make their rabbis and monks as lords in the sense that they treated them as gods or that they offered their worship rituals to them. Yet God describes them in this verse as `associating partners with Him’ and, in a later verse in the sūrah, as `unbelievers’ only because they followed the laws they devised for them. This alone, regardless of beliefs and rituals, is sufficient to make anyone who does it a person who associates partners with God, which takes him out of faith altogether and puts him in the category of unbelievers.

• The Qur’ānic statement attaches the descriptions of `associating partners with God’ and `unbelief’ to both the Jews who accepted the laws made for them by their rabbis and put those laws into practice and the Christians who believe that Christ is their Lord and offer worship rituals to him. Both actions are the same in the sense that both make their perpetrators polytheists ascribing lordship to beings other than God.

• Polytheism, or idolatry, comes into being merely by assigning the authority to legislate to anyone other than God, even though this is not accompanied by a belief that such a legislator is a deity or by offering worship rituals to it.

The primary aim of pointing out these facts is to deal with the circumstances of the Muslim society at the time, particularly the reluctance to confront the Byzantines and the feeling that they were believers on account of their having received revelations.

Yet these facts are of general application and serve to emphasize the nature of the true religion.

The religion of truth which is the only one that is acceptable to God from any human being is ‘self surrender’. Such surrender is manifested by implementing God’s law, after having believed in His oneness, and offering worship to Him alone.

If people are to implement a law other than that of God, then what God has said about the Jews and the Christians will apply to them as well. In other words, they would be idolaters and unbelievers, no matter how emphatically they assert that they believe in God. Those descriptions will apply to them once they willingly implement a law devised by human beings in total disregard of God’s law, unless they protest that they only follow such laws against their will and they have no power to repel that compulsion.

The term ‘religion’ has nowadays lost much of its significance in the minds of most people, so much so that they confine it to beliefs to which they may hold and rituals they may offer. This was exactly the situation of the Jews who are described by this categorical verdict, as interpreted by the Prophet (peace be upon him), as unbelievers, associating partners with God and disobeying His clear command not to worship anyone besides Him. This same Qur’ānic statement tells us that they have taken their rabbis as lords besides God.

The most essential meaning of ‘religion’ is `to submit and to follow’. This is most clearly evidenced by following the law as it is proven by offering worship. The matter is very serious. It admits no ambiguity of the sort that considers people who follow laws other than God’s law, without being compelled to do so, as believers and as Muslims, simply because they profess to believe in God and because they offer their worship to Him.

This ambiguity is perhaps the most serious threat to this religion of Islam at the present time. It is the worst weapon levelled at it by its enemies who depict some people and situations as Muslim and Islamic, even though these people are similar to the ones God describes as unbelievers taking as lords beings other than God and turning away from the religion of truth. If the enemies of this religion try to associate such people and situations with Islam, then it is the duty of the advocates of Islam to deny them that description and to uncover their reality. They would thus show them as they are: people who do not believe in God’s oneness and who take for themselves lords other than God when “they have been ordered to worship none but the One God, other than whom there is no deity. Exalted be He above those to whom they ascribe divinity.” (Verse 31)

The sūrah goes a step further in encouraging the believers to fight: “They want to extinguish God’s light with their mouths, but God will not allow anything but to bring His light to perfection, however hateful this may be to the unbelievers. It is He who has sent His Messenger with guidance and the religion of truth, so that He may cause it to prevail over all [other] religions, however hateful this may be to the idolaters.” (Verses 32-33)

The people of earlier revelations do not stop at mere deviation from the religion of truth and worshipping lords and other beings instead of God, as well as refusing to believe in God and the Last Day in the true sense of such a belief. They go further by declaring war against the religion of truth and trying hard to extinguish God’s light, represented by this religion, the movement advocating it and the system it provides for human life.

“They want to extinguish God’s light with their mouths.” (Verse 32) So, they are hostile to God’s light, trying to prevent its spread. They fabricate lies and sew the seeds of discord and division. They also mobilize their followers to stand in opposition to this religion and its followers, as was the case when these verses were revealed. This has continued to be the case ever since. Although this statement aimed primarily at enhancing the determination of the Muslims at the time, it also describes the true nature of the attitude the people of earlier revelations always adopt towards God’s light as reflected by His true faith providing guidance for mankind.

“But God will not allow anything but to bring His light to perfection, however hateful this may be to the unbelievers.” (Verse 32) This is a true promise by God reflecting His permanent law which ensures that His light will always be perfected and that His religion will always prevail in spite of the unbelievers’ attempts to stifle it. This promise will reassure the believers and motivate them to continue along their way, full as it may be with hardships, and to stand up to all the unbelievers’ wicked scheming. In this instance, the term `unbelievers’ refers to those people who were given Scriptures in former times. The promise also implies a clear threat to those unbelievers and all who follow in their footsteps.

The sūrah re-emphasizes the promise and the threat at the same time: “It is He who has sent His Messenger with guidance and the religion of truth, so that He may cause it to prevail over all (other) religions, however hateful this may be to the idolaters.” (Verse 33)

It is clear from this statement that the religion of Islam, preached by God’s last Messenger, is the one to which reference is made in the previous Qur’ānic statement:

“Fight against those who — despite having been given Scriptures — do not truly believe in God and the Last Day, and do not treat as forbidden that which God and His Messenger have forbidden, and do not follow the religion of truth, till they [agree to] pay the submission tax with a willing hand, after they have been humbled.” (Verse 29) It is also clear that this order to fight is targeted against those who do not believe in this religion.

This is true however we may interpret this verse. Generally speaking, the religion of truth means submission to God alone as reflected in beliefs, worship rituals and laws. This is the basic foundation of all divine faith which takes its final form in the message of the Prophet Muĥammad (peace he upon him). Any individual and any community who do not clearly submit totally to God alone in beliefs, worship and laws may be described as ones who do not believe in the religion of truth. Therefore, they are included among those to whom the verse of fighting applies. However, we have always to consider the nature of the Islamic method of action, and the different stages the message of Islam may go through and the tools and means it may employ.

“It is He who has sent His Messenger with guidance and the religion of truth, so that He may cause it to prevail over all [other] religions, however hateful this may be to the idolaters.” (Verse 33) This statement confirms God’s first promise: “But God will not allow anything but to bring His light to perfection, however hateful this may be to the unbelievers.” (Verse 32) The confirmation, however, takes a much more specific form. The light which God, who is limitless in His glory, has decided to bring to full perfection is the religion of truth with which He has sent His last Messenger so that He may cause it to prevail over all other religions.

As we have already explained, the religion of truth is submission to God in beliefs, worship and laws altogether. It is represented in every divine message given to any former prophet. Needless to say, it does not include any form of the distorted versions that the Jews and Christians of today profess, as these have been adulterated with pagan beliefs. Nor can be included under it any situation that raises the banner of faith while at the same time assigning lordship to beings other than God, and associating partners with God in the form of following laws and legislations enacted by those partners without reference to God’s law.

God, limitless is He in His glory, says that He has sent His Messenger with guidance and the religion of truth in order to make it prevail over all other religions.

We must take the term ‘religion’ in its broader sense which we have outlined in order to appreciate the scope of God’s promise. Since ‘religion’ means ‘submission’, then it includes every creed and system which requires people to submit to its edicts and follow its rules. God also declares His ruling that the religion of truth will surely prevail over all religion, in this broad sense of the word. This means that all submission will be to God alone, and the final triumph will be for the system which reflects this total submission.

This promise was fulfilled once at the hands of God’s Messenger (peace be upon him) and his successors, as well as those who succeeded them, for a very long period of time when the religion of truth was the one which prevailed. All other religions, which were not based on true submission to God alone, stood in awe. Then there followed a time when those who professed to believe in the religion of truth started to abandon it, step by step, due to various factors relevant to the internal structure of Muslim societies on the one hand, and to the long war against this religion by its different enemies. In this war a wide variety of weapons and tactics are employed in order to suppress Islam. But this is not the end of the road. God’s promise will always come true. It will be fulfilled by the Muslim community which will raise the banner of Islam and start its activities at the very beginning where the Prophet himself started when he began his call, preaching the religion of truth and guided by God’s light.

The sūrah takes the final step in this passage, describing how the people of earlier revelations do not treat as forbidden what God and His Messenger have declared forbidden. A reference to this fact has already been made in the statement: “They make of their rabbis and monks, and of the Christ, son of Mary, lords besides God.” (Verse (Verse 31) We have already mentioned the Prophet’s explanation of this statement:

“They (i.e. the rabbis and monks) permitted them what is forbidden and forbade them what is lawful, and they followed them.” This means that they listen to their monks and rabbis, not to God and His Messenger, in determining what is lawful and what is forbidden.

This last step in exposing the reality of those people of earlier revelations who have distorted God’s message is given in two verses addressed to the believers:

“Believers, some of the rabbis and monks wrongfully devour people’s property and turn people away from God’s path. To those who hoard up gold and silver and do not spend them in God’s cause, give the news of a painful suffering, on the day when it will all be heated in the fire of hell, and their foreheads, sides and backs will be branded with them. [They will be told]: ‘This is what you have hoarded up for yourselves. Taste, then, what you have been hoarding.’” (Verses 34-35)

The first verse elaborates on the roles of the rabbis and monks whom those people of earlier revelations have made as lords, following their bidding in their day-to-day transactions, and also in their worship.

Indeed the rabbis and monks enjoy being treated as lords whose orders are always obeyed. In what they legislate for their followers, they devour people’s property on the basis of false claims and they also turn people away from God’s path.

Devouring people’s property always takes various forms. One of these is the money they receive in return for issuing rulings that make lawful what is really forbidden and prohibiting what is permissible. Such rulings are always meant to serve the interests of those who possess wealth or power or both. Another way is what a priest might receive for listening to people’s confessions and his forgiveness of their sins, using the authority allegedly given to the Church. The worst and most common way of devouring people’s property without lawful basis is usury. There are, however, many other methods.

Another method of such wrongful devouring of people’s wealth is the raising of funds which they use to fight the religion of truth. Many were the priests, bishops, cardinals and popes who raised millions and millions to finance the successive Crusades. They continue to do so in order to finance missionary work and Orientalist research, all of which aim at turning people away from God’s path.

It is important to note here the care exercised in giving an accurate and honest statement which is characteristic of divine justice. In this verse, God says: “Many of the rabbis and monks...” This is to guard against making a generalization that would be unfair to the few who do not indulge in such wrongful practices. In any community there will always be good individuals who maintain virtuous and honest practices.

God will never do any injustice to anyone.

Many of those rabbis and monks hoard up the wealth they acquire by wrongful means. The history of those communities has seen great wealth amassed by rabbis, clerics and churches. In certain periods of history they were wealthier than despotic kings and emperors. The Qur’ān describes in detail how they will be punished in the hereafter and the suffering of all those who hoard up gold and silver and do not spend them to serve God’s cause. This is portrayed in a very vivid way that produces an awesome effect: “To those who hoard up gold and silver and do not spend them in God’s cause, give the news of a painful suffering, on the day when it will all be heated in the fire of hell, and their foreheads, sides and backs will be branded with them. [They will be told]: ‘This is what you have hoarded up for yourselves. Taste, then, what you have been hoarding.’” (Verses 34-35)

The scene is portrayed in full detail, with the whole operation described from its first step to its conclusion. Thus the scene is deliberately made to linger in our minds so that we contemplate it longer.

The description starts with a general statement: “To those who hoard up gold and silver and do not spend them in God’s cause, give the news of a painful suffering.” (Verse 34)

The verse ends here with a general reference to the punishment of the hereafter. But then the full details are given: “On the day when it will all be heated in the fire of hell.” (Verse 35) As we listen we wait for the heating up to be completed, then we see it red hot and gathered in readiness. Now the suffering starts with foreheads being branded with all that gold and silver. When all foreheads have been branded, those who are being punished are made to turn on their sides so that they can be branded there as well. With that over, they are made to turn yet again in order to brand them a third time with the red hot gold and silver on their backs. When this type of their punishment is completed, they are severely rebuked: “This is what you have hoarded up for yourselves.” (Verse 35) It is the very thing you were keen to have and keep for your pleasure and enjoyment. It is now a means to inflict on you this grievous suffering:

“Taste, then, what you have been hoarding.” (Verse 35) Taste it in reality, because it is the very thing which is branding your foreheads, sides and backs.

It is a horrifying scene, portrayed at length, in full detail, so as to bring the image it describes in sharp relief. The scene is portrayed here in order to explain first the destiny that awaits many of the rabbis and monks. It also describes in detail the destiny of those who hoard gold and silver without spending to serve God’s cause.

Portraying it at this juncture also serves as a prelude to the ‘expedition of hardship’, which is the subject matter of the longer part of the sūrah.

We need to pause a little here to comment on God’s statement which explains the true nature of the faith of the people of earlier revelations, the religion to which they adhere, the moral values they adopt and also their practices. We have referred to these previously, but we need to add more here.

Making the reality of the people of earlier revelations clear is a more pressing need than showing the truth of the idolaters who openly admit their idolatry, and participate in rituals based on such beliefs. Exposing the reality that those people of earlier revelations are devoid of any true belief in God is necessary because the Muslims will not wholeheartedly confront jāhiliyyah unless they are aware of its absolute reality. Such a reality is well known in the case of the idolaters, but it is not so commonly accepted in the case of the people of earlier revelations. (This also applies to people who similarly claim to follow the divine faith, as is the case with the majority of today’s Muslims.)

Setting out to confront the idolaters has required that a long portion of this sūrah be devoted to explaining their true situation and attitude. We have explained the reasons for this in the Prologue and in the Overview of Chapter 1. In the opening passage, God says to the believers:

How can there be a treaty with God and His Messenger for the idolaters, unless it be those of them with whom you have made a treaty at the Sacred Mosque? So long as they are true to you, be true to them; for God loves those who are God-fearing. How [else could it be] when, should they prevail over you, they will respect neither agreement made with you, nor obligation of honour towards you? They try to please you with what they say, while at heart they remain adamantly hostile. Most of them are transgressors. They barter away God’s revelations for a paltry price and debar others from His path. Evil indeed is what they do. They respect neither agreement nor obligation of honour with regard to any believer. Those indeed are the aggressors.

(Verses 7-10)

Will you not fight against people who have broken their solemn pledges and set out to drive out the Messenger, and who were the first to attack you? Do you fear them? It is God alone whom you should fear, if you are true believers. Fight them: God will punish them at your hands, and will bring disgrace upon them; and will grant you victory over them and will grant heart felt satisfaction to those who are believers, removing all angry feelings from their hearts. God will turn in His mercy to whom He wills. God is All-knowing and Wise. (Verses 13-15)

It is not for the idolaters to visit or tend God’s houses of worship; for they are selfconfessed unbelievers. Vain shall be their actions and they shall abide in the fire.

(Verse 17)

Believers, do not take your fathers and brothers for allies if they choose unbelief in preference to faith. Those of you who take them for allies are indeed wrongdoers.

(Verse 23)

Although the reality of the idolaters was very clear, confronting them on the battlefield required a carefully prepared campaign by the Muslim community. By contrast, the confrontation with the people of earlier revelations required an even stronger and more profound campaign which aimed, at the outset, to expose the reality of those people. It also required the removal of their nameplate which no longer reflected their reality. They needed to appear as they truly were: unbelievers, associating partners with God, and at war with God and His message. Moreover, they were too far astray, devouring people’s wealth and property without justification and turning people away from God’s path. This exposure comes in statements like the following:

Fight against those who — despite having been given Scriptures — do not truly believe in God and the Last Day, and do not treat as forbidden that which God and His Messenger have forbidden, and do not follow the religion of truth, till they [agree to] pay the submission tax with a willing hand, after they have been humbled. The Jews say: Ezra is the son of God,’ while the Christians say: ‘The Christ is the son of God.’ Such are the assertions they utter with their mouths, echoing assertions made by the unbelievers of old. May God destroy them! How perverse they are! They make of their rabbis and their monks, and of the Christ, son of Mary, lords besides God. Yet they have been ordered to worship none but the One God, other than whom there is no deity. Exalted be He above those to whom they ascribe divinity. They want to extinguish God’s light with their mouths, but God will not allow anything but to bring His light to perfection, however hateful this may be to the unbelievers. It is He who has sent His Messenger with guidance and the religion of truth, so that He may cause it to prevail over all [other] religions, however hateful this may be to the idolaters. Believers, some of the rabbis and monks wrongfully devour people’s property and turn people away from God’s path... (Verses 29-34)

To this should be added all the decisive statements in several sūrahs, some of which are of the Makkah period while others were revealed in Madinah. These explain the ultimate reality of the people of earlier revelations and that they no longer belong to the divine faith preached by their prophets. Added to this must be their attitude to God’s final message. It is on the basis of this attitude that it may be determined whether they are believers or not.

Earlier sūrahs confronted them with the fact that they no longer had any solid foundation of divine faith to support their claims to be believers: “Say: ‘People of earlier revelations, you have no ground to stand upon unless you observe the Torah and the Gospel and that which has been revealed to you by your Lord’ That which is revealed to you by your Lord is bound to make many of them even more stubborn in their arrogance and disbelief But do not grieve for unbelieving folk.” (5: 68)

Other Qur’ānic statements describe them, Jews or Christians or both, as having no belief in God and group them with the idolaters. As examples of these we may cite the following: “The Jews say: ‘God’s hand is shackled!’ It is their own hands that are shackled. Rejected [by God] are they for what they say. Indeed, both His hands are outstretched. He bestows [His bounty] as He wills. But that which has been revealed to you by your Lord is bound to make many of them more stubborn in their overweening arrogance and unbelief” (5: 64) “Unbelievers indeed are those who say: ‘God is the Christ, son of Mary.’” (5: 72) “Unbelievers indeed are those who say: ‘God is the third of a trinity.’” (5: 73)

“Those who disbelieve among the people of earlier revelations and the idolaters could have never departed [from their erring ways] until there had come to them the Clear Proof.” (98: 1)

We have also cited other examples. Indeed statements of this nature are numerous in the Qur’ān. It is true that the Qur’ān also gives certain privileges to the people of earlier revelations which are not given to the idolaters, such as allowing the Muslims to eat of their food and to marry their chaste women. Such privileges are not based on any acknowledgement that the beliefs they profess have any basis in divine faith. Most probably, they have been given such privileges because originally they had divine Scriptures and a true faith, although they no longer implemented that faith. It is then possible to deal with them on the basis of that original code they claim to follow. In this respect, they are different from the idolaters who have no scriptures and no original faith to be taken as a basis. As to the present beliefs and religion of the people of earlier revelations, the Qur’ānic statements are very clear and decisive in maintaining that they have nothing to do with the faith revealed by God. They had indeed abandoned that in order to follow their rabbis, clerics, monks, synods and churches in what they had devised for them. What God says is the final verdict which may not be subject to any argument.

What does this exposure by God of the beliefs of the people of earlier revelations signify?

The deceptive front they present acts as a check on the advocates of the Islamic message in their confrontation with the jāhiliyyah. Hence, it must be removed, so that they can no longer present a false image. We must not overlook the importance of the prevailing circumstances of the Muslim community at the time, including the organic structure of that community and the fact that the Tabūk Expedition took place at a time of economic hardship which was not made any easier by the extreme heat of the Arabian summer. Moreover, the Muslims were reluctant to confront the Byzantines in open warfare, because the Arabs had always held them in awe. They were even more uneasy about the general order given to them to fight the people of earlier revelations, when they were following divine Scriptures revealed by God.

The enemies of this faith who are watching carefully the Islamic revivalist movements of today are fully aware of what may influence human nature, and of the history of Islam as well. Therefore, they are keen to give an outward `Islamic’ appearance to the regimes, movements, values, traditions and philosophies they nurture and support in order to crush the Islamic revivalist movements the world over. They do so, because this outward `Islamic’ appearance may prevent the true advocates of Islam from confronting the jāhiliyyah reality that lies behind this false appearance.

They were forced, in certain instances, to reveal the reality of such regimes and movements and their hostility to Islam. The clearest example of these was in the case of Ataturk and his movement in Turkey which was uncompromising in its enmity to everything Islamic. They needed to reveal its reality because of the urgency they felt to bury the Caliphate system which was the last aspect of Muslim unity. Although it was merely a formal aspect, they needed to do away with it before they could attack more fundamental aspects such as worship and prayer. This reminds us of the Prophet’s statement: “This religion will be undermined, one aspect after another. The first aspect to be undermined is government and the last is prayer.” Once the need for open hostility was over, those atheists and self- proclaimed followers of earlier religions, who revive their alliance only when they fight Islam, reverted to their secret ways. They were now even keener to give an Islamic appearance to other regimes which were in reality of the same orientation in opposing Islam as Ataturk’s. They have become so inventive in hiding the reality of these regimes which they support politically, economically and culturally. Their intelligence services, wide-reaching media and other resources are all used to protect such regimes. Atheists and religious enemies of Islam alike cooperate in supporting such regimes which try to achieve for them the task left unfulfilled by the Crusades, old and new.

Some Muslims, including many of those who advocate the need for an Islamic revival, are deceived by this `Islamic’ appearance which is portrayed by present-day jāhiliyyah. Hence they are reluctant to unmask these hostile regimes and show them as they truly are. All this impedes an open confrontation with jāhiliyyah. Thus the false `Islamic’ appearance exercises a sedative influence on the Islamic revivalist movements. It creates a barrier that prevents the launching of a determined effort to stand up to contemporary jāhiliyyah which tries to pull out the last remaining roots of this faith.

In my view, those naïve advocates of Islam present a more serious threat to the Islamic revivalist movement than the sly enemies of Islam who give a false `Islamic’ appearance to regimes, set-ups, movements, values, traditions and social trends which they manipulate so that they can crush Islam for them.

This religion of Islam will always be victorious when its advocates, in any generation and any place, achieve a certain degree of awareness of its reality and the reality of the jāhiliyyah trying to suppress it. The real danger to this religion does not come from strong and skilful open enemies. The real danger is that posed by naïve friends who allow its enemies to wear an Islamic mask while they mount their unwavering efforts to uproot it. Indeed the first duty of the advocates of Islam is to remove these masks so that the reality of regimes and set-ups hostile to Islam and determined to crush it is laid bare. Indeed the starting point for every truly Islamic movement is to remove the false attire of jāhiliyyah and expose it for what it is:

unbelief and idolatry. It must describe people as they really are. Only then can the Islamic movement go onwards to achieve its goals. Indeed, these people themselves will only then be aware of their own situation, which is similar to that with which the people of earlier revelations ended up, as we are told by the One who is aware of all things and who knows the reality of all situations. Who knows but such a new awareness may provide such people with a motive to mend their ways hoping that God will then replace their misery and suffering with happiness and bliss.

This unnecessary reluctance and unwise acceptance of false appearances can only delay the initial march of any Islamic movement. Consequently, it serves the goals of the enemies of Islam for which they have given such regimes a false `Islamic’ appearance. Such enemies are well aware that when Ataturk and his movement were exposed and appeared for what they truly were, they could not serve any new purpose after they had ended the last forum to unite the Muslims of the world on the basis of faith. Indeed a very sly, shrewd and cunning Orientalist has tried to give Ataturk’s movement a cover to hide its reality. In his book, Islam in Modern History, Wilfred Cantwell Smith tries to deny that the Ataturk movement was of atheistic orientation. He describes it as the greatest and wisest movement of Islamic revival in modern history.