In the Shade of the Qur'an by Sayyid Qutb

The surah opens with a straightforward attack against the unbelievers, without any introduction or preparatory remarks. These unbelievers, who debar others from God’s path, are faced with the prospect of their deeds going astray and ending up with nothing. This applies to all unbelievers whether they are those who debar others on their own initiative, or they themselves are debarred and then debar others from God’s path. At the outset, the surah gives us a sense of deeds being animated, physically on the move, but their movements are erroneous, far astray, and without any defining goal. The result brings utter loss and destruction. Such animation is employed to provide an image of a battle in which the deeds separate themselves from the people who perform them: the result is that both go further astray from each other, and all ends in ruin.

These deeds that are brought to nothing may refer, in particular, to the ones that the unbelievers hoped would bring them good results; in other words, they appeared to them as good deeds. However, a good deed that is not based on faith loses its value; its goodness is superficial.

What is important is the motive that gives rise to the deed, not the form of the deed. Even if the motive is good, unless it relies on faith it may be only temporary or the result of sudden impulse. Faith, on the other hand, links all mans actions and feelings to a solid base. This gives deeds their meaning and aim, bringing them consistency and ensuring that their effects are in line with the Divine system that links all parts of the universe together. Thus, every action is seen to contribute to the overall progress of the universe, fulfilling a role and serving an end.

On the other side stand “ those who have faith and do righteous deeds, and believe in what has been revealed to Muhammad, for it is indeed the truth from their Lord." (Verse 2) These people are described as having faith, which certainly includes believing in Muhammad’s revelations, but this aspect of belief is specifically highlighted in order to give it prominence since “it is indeed the truth from their Lord." Faith that is established in ones heart and conscience must be accompanied by action that is clearly seen in life. Such action is the fruit of faith that indicates its presence. Such people have a special status: “He will forgive them their bad deeds” (Verse 2) This contrasts with what happens to the deeds of the unbelievers: they go astray, even though they may initially seem to be good. Thus, while even good deeds done by unbelievers end up in nothing, the bad deeds of the believers are forgiven. The contrast here is perfect and absolute, emphasizing the value of faith in Gods sight and in real life. Yet their reward goes further than this as God will “bring them to a happy state.” (Verse 2) This is a great blessing which is second to faith in importance and effect. The verse gives here connotations of perfect comfort, assurance, peace and happiness. When a person is in such a happy state, his thoughts are sound, his heart is reassured, his feelings are at ease, and his soul enjoys a sense of peace and security. What other blessing would anyone want?

Why do things go in these two opposite directions? There is no question of favouritism or coincidence in all this. Instead, it all relies on the fundamental law upon which the universe was established when God created the heavens and the earth in accordance with the truth, making the truth its basic foundation: “This is because the unbelievers follow falsehood, whereas those who believe follow the truth from their Lord.” (Verse 3) Falsehood cannot put down deep roots in the universe.

Therefore, it ends up in nothing, as does everything founded upon it.

Since the unbelievers follow falsehood, their deeds go astray and are brought to nothing. By contrast, the truth is the foundation on which the structure of the universe is built. Therefore, everything related to it stays on. Since the believers follow the truth from their Lord, He will forgive them their sins and bring them to a happy state. It is all clear, based on solid principles. “ Thus does God lay down for mankind their rules of conduct ” (Verse 3) The believers are clear about these rules, they know the basis around which they should make their choices.

The principle stated in the first verse of the surah is made the basis of the directive to the believers to fight the unbelievers. The believers are the ones who follow the truth that must be established in human life on earth. It, truth, should be given the power to conduct life’s affairs. Thus, human life becomes based on the truth and refers everything to it. The unbelievers, on the other hand, follow falsehood.

This should be removed with all its effects on human life: “Now when you meet the unbelievers in battle, smite their necks. Then when you have thoroughly subdued them, bind them firmly. Thereafter, set them free either by an act of grace or against ransom, until war shall lay down its burden.” (Verse 4) This verse refers specifically to meeting in battle, not any other meeting between believers and unbelievers. Up to the revelation of this surah, idolaters lived in the Arabian Peninsula, some of whom were at war with the believers and some bound by peace treaties. Surah 9, Repentance, had not as then been revealed giving notice that treaties specifying dates of expiry would not be renewed.

On the other hand, treaties without a specific term were given a four- month notice of termination. Thereafter, idolaters were to be killed if they were found anywhere in the Arabian Peninsula. The aim of these rules was to make the Peninsula the permanent base of Islam.2

The verse tells the believers specifically to smite the unbelievers’ necks, but this only occurs after Islam is explained to them and they reject the call to accept it. The order is given in a way that describes the actual killing and the action it requires, so as to fit with the general ambience of the surah.

“ Then when you have thoroughly subdued them, bind them firmly (Verse 4) The Arabic verb 'athkhana', translated here as ‘subdue’, also connotes strong fighting involving killing of opponents. The situation the verse envisages as a result of fighting is the total collapse of the enemy’s power so as to leave the enemy incapable of putting up any defence, let alone launching a counterattack. At this point only, captives are taken. While the enemy still has substantial force, the fight goes on to remove the danger it presents.

Thus, like most commentators on the Qur’an, we see no conflict between this verse and the one in Surah 8, The Spoils of War, which remonstrates with the Prophet and the Muslims for taking many captives of war during the Battle of Badr. At the time, continuing the battle to kill more of the unbelievers was a better option. The relevant verses state: “It does not behove a Prophet to have captives unless he has battled strenuously in the land. You may desire the fleeting gains of this world, but God desires for you the good of the life to come. God is Almighty, Wise. Had it not been for a decree from God that had already gone forth, you would have been severely punished for what you have taken.”3 (8:

67-68) This means that killing the enemy and breaking its power comes first. When this has been accomplished, captives may be taken. The wisdom in all this is clearly apparent. To remove aggression by forces hostile to Islam must be the first objective of fighting, particularly when the numerical strength of the Muslim community is well below that of the unbelievers. In such circumstances as prevailed at the time of the Battle of Badr, killing an enemy fighter was far more important in the balance of power between the two sides. However, this ruling remains valid in general, and it should be applied in any armed conflict with the aim of making the enemy powerless.

The verse then sets the ruling concerning those who are taken captive in war. This is the only Qur’anic text stating a ruling on such captives:

“Thereafter, set them free either by an act of grace or against ransom.” (Verse 4) This means that captives of war are to be set free gratis, without any compensation. No specified ransom or exchange of prisoners is required. The Qur’anic verse does not mention any third option, such as putting idolater captives to death or binding them into slavery.

Nevertheless, what happened in practice was that the Prophet and the caliphs succeeding him put some war captives into slavery, and killed specifically named individuals. We will quote what Imam Abu Bakr al-Jassas, of the Hanafl school of Islamic law, says about this verse in his book al-Qur’an, making some comments as necessary. We will then conclude by stating our view of the relevant rulings:

God says in this verse: “Now when you meet the unbelievers in battle, smite their necks.” On the surface, the statement makes it clear that killing the unbelievers is the only option until they have been thoroughly subdued. This is consistent with what God says in the other verse: “It does not behove a Prophet to have captives unless he has battled strenuously in the land.” (8: 67) Ibn 'Abbas is quoted as saying that this last statement applied to the Battle of Badr, when the Muslims were a small minority. When their numbers increased and they became more powerful, God established the ruling: “ Thereafter, set them free either by an act of grace or against ransom.” Thus, God allowed the Prophet and the believers all options: to kill their prisoners, enslave them or set them free. However, the transmitter of this hadith doubts whether Ibn 'Abbas mentioned enslaving prisoners.

Since the reporter was uncertain that Ibn 'Abbas mentioned slavery in this context, we discard that option altogether. As for killing such prisoners of war, we see no basis for this in the verse under discussion.

The verse mentions only freeing them either as an act of grace or against ransom.4

Al-Suddi is reported to have commented on the ruling, “set them free either by an act ofgrace or against ransom f saying that it has been abrogated by the subsequent verse in Surah 9, stating: “slay the idolaters wherever you find them” (9: 5) However, we say that the Qur’anic statements: “Now when you meet the unbelievers in battle, smite their necksf and “It does not behove a Prophet to have captives unless he has battled strenuously in the land” and “Should you meet them in battle, make of them a fearsome example for those who follow them,” are most probably outlining valid rulings, none of which has been abrogated. God commanded His messenger to kill the unbelievers and not to take captives from among them until they had been thoroughly subdued. This was the case when the Muslims were small in number, compared with their enemy. In that situation, only when the unbelievers were subdued after being killed in numbers and were made an example of to those who followed them, was it then permissible to take some of them captive, keeping them alive. This should be a permanent rule, applicable at any time when the Muslims are in a similar situation to that which prevailed in the early days of Islam.

In comment, we say that the order to kill the idolaters wherever they were found applied specifically to the idolaters in the Arabian Peninsula. The verse in the present surah is general in its import. When the enemy is thoroughly subdued and its power is smashed, it is permissible to take prisoners. This was the practice followed by the caliphs after the Prophet. Prisoners were killed only in particular cases which we will explain presently.

The statement, “set them free either by an act of grace or against ransom” provides for one of two alternatives: freeing the prisoners either by an act of grace or against ransom, which suggests that killing them was prohibited. However, early scholars differ on this point. Al-Hasan is reported to have objected to killing prisoners of war, saying that they should be freed against ransom or indeed without it. ’Ata’ is also reported to have held this view.

When asked what to do with prisoners, al-Hasan answered: ‘Do with them what the Prophet did with the prisoners taken in the Battle of Badr: they were freed by an act of grace or against ransom.’ Ibn (Umar was given a prisoner, a man of high position from the city of Istakhr, so that he could kill him, but he refused to do so citing the Qur’anic statement: “set them free either by an act ofgrace or against ransom.” Likewise, Mujahid and Ibn Sirin are reported to have spoken against killing prisoners of war. We have already mentioned al-Suddi’s view that this ruling was abrogated by the other Qur’anic instruction: “slay the idolaters wherever you find them.” (9: 5) Likewise, Ibn Jurayj is of this view. He cited the case of ‘Uqbah ibn Abi Mu‘ayt whom the Prophet ordered to be killed after he was taken prisoner during the Battle of Badr.

Scholars from all provinces are unanimous that a prisoner of war may be killed, and we do not know of any taking a different view. Reports are numerous that the Prophet sanctioned such killing. He ordered the execution of ‘Uqbah ibn Abi Mu'ayt and al-Nadr ibn al-Harith after the Battle of Badr, and Abu ‘Azzah, the poet, after the Battle of Uhud. He also put the Qurayzah prisoners to death when they accepted Sa‘d ibn Mucadh’s judgement to the effect that their men must be executed and their offspring be enslaved. From among them, he set al-Zubayr ibn Bata free by an act of grace. When he conquered Khaybar, partly by war and partly by peaceful agreement, he stipulated a clear condition on Ibn Abi al-Huqayq, but when his treachery was exposed, he ordered his execution. When he later entered Makkah, he ordered the killing of a number of people, stating that they should be killed, ‘even if found clinging to the robes of the Ka(bah.’ However, he freed the people of Makkah and took nothing of their property.

Abu Bakr is quoted to have said: “I wish I had not ordered al- Fuja’ah to be burnt when he was brought to me. I wish I had ordered his execution normally or set him free.” Abu Musa al- Ash ‘ari mentions that he executed the chief priest of al-Sus, after he had given him a guarantee of safety for a number of people whom the priest named. However, he forgot to include himself, and therefore, the guarantee of safety did not apply to him. So, Abu Musa ordered his execution.

All these reports and ahadlth confirm, without any doubt, that the Prophet and his Companions approved the execution of prisoners of war or setting them free. This is the consensus of scholars in all regions.

The permissibility of executing prisoners of war cannot, however, just be based on the Qur’anic statement. It should instead be viewed against the actions of the Prophet and some of his Companions. When we carefully consider all the cases where prisoners were killed, we find that they were all special; in other words, there were additional militating factors other than merely fighting against Muslims and subsequent captivity. The men killed after the Battles of Badr and Uhud, namely, cUqbah, al-Nadr and Abu (Azzah, respectively, were all hostile opponents who were determined to harm the Prophet. The case of the Qurayzah Jews was also special, given they had agreed, in advance, for judgement to be passed on them by Sa'd ibn Mu(adh. In all these cases we find special reasons placing them outside the general rule on prisoners of war stated in this verse: “set them free either by an act of grace or against ransom. ” (Verse 4)

Scholars differed on setting prisoners free against ransom. Those of our school, the Hanafl, maintain that a prisoner cannot be set free against financial ransom, and cannot be sold to the enemy so as to join them again in fighting. Abu Hanifah also states that a prisoner of war cannot be set free in exchange for Muslim prisoners. In no way should he ever be returned to join an enemy army. Abu Yusuf and Muhammad ibn al-Hasan differ with Abu Hanifah on this point, allowing the exchange of prisoners of war between Muslims and non-Muslims. This last view is subscribed to by major scholars like al-Thawri and al-Awza1!. Al-Awza(i adds that it is permissible to sell prisoners of war to the enemy, but the men among them may not be sold except in an exchange of prisoners. On the other hand, al-Muzni quotes al-Shaffi as saying that a Muslim ruler may set male prisoners of war free by an act of grace or against ransom after their defeat.

Those who approve of exchange of prisoners and setting enemy prisoners free against financial ransom cite in support of their view the Qur’anic statement: “set them free either by an act of grace or against ransom? This apparently permits setting them free against ransom and in exchange for Muslim prisoners. They also cite the fact that the Prophet set Quraysh prisoners from the Battle of Badr free against financial ransom. As for the permissibility of an exchange of prisoners, they cite in support a hadlth reported by ‘Imran ibn Husayn: “TheThaqif tribe took two Companions of the Prophet prisoner, and the Muslims took a man from the tribe of ‘Amir ibn Sa'sa'ah prisoner. The Prophet passed by this prisoner when he was tied up, and the man called him. The Prophet went to him. He asked: ‘Why am I taken prisoner?’ The Prophet said: ‘Because of your allies’ offence.’ The man said: ‘But I am a Muslim.’ The Prophet replied: ‘Had you said this when you were free, you would have greatly prospered.’ The Prophet moved away, but the man called him again. When the Prophet went to him, he said: ‘Feed me, for I am hungry.’ The Prophet said: ‘This is what you need.’ The Prophet then exchanged him for the two men taken captive by the Thaqif.” In our view, the evidence in support of those who say that prisoners of war may be set free against ransom is weightier and more valid than that stated in support of the view of al-Jassas’s school. This is true even though they differ concerning the form of ransom and whether it is financial or in exchange with Muslim prisoners of war. Imam al-Jassas concludes his discussion by endorsing the view of his Hanafi school of Islamic law:

As for the mention in this verse of freeing prisoners as an act of grace or against ransom, along with what is reported of the action concerning the prisoners during the Battle of Badr, all this is abrogated by the Qur’anic verse that says: “Slay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them captive, besiege them, and lie in wait for them at every conceivable place. Yet if they should repent, take to prayer and pay the zakat, let them go their way” (9:

5) We have mentioned that this is the view of al-Suddl and Ibn Jurayj. Further confirmation of the abrogation is seen in the verse that says: “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.” (9: 29) Both verses speak of the duty to fight against the unbelievers until they accept Islam or pay tribute, or jizyah. To free them against ransom runs contrary to this. All commentators on the Qur’an and scholars of hadith agree that Surah 9, Repentance, was revealed later than Surah 47, Muhammad, which means that the rulings it states abrogate the earlier ones including that of freeing them against ransom.

We have already stated that this ruling to kill idolaters unless they adopt Islam is specific to idolaters living in the Arabian Peninsula.

Others living outside it can live in the Muslim state and pay a tribute, just like the payment of tribute is accepted from followers of earlier religions. That the tribute is accepted from them when they submit to the rule of the Muslim state does not preclude that some of them may fall prisoner before such submission. What ruling applies to such prisoners, then? We say that a Muslim ruler may free them by an act of grace if he determines that this serves the interests of the Muslim community. He may also free them against financial ransom or in exchange for Muslim prisoners, when their people continue to have a fighting force and remain hostile. When the enemy renounces hostility by agreeing to pay tribute to the Muslim state, a different situation applies with clearly specified rulings. This means that the ruling concerning prisoners of war continues to be valid in cases that are not settled by the payment of tribute.

To sum up, this is the only Qur’anic text providing a ruling on prisoners of war. All other texts relate to situations other than that of taking prisoners. Therefore, this represents the permanent basis for dealing with this question. In those cases where the practice differed, this was the result of specific and temporary situations. Putting some prisoners to death applied only in individual cases, which could be similar to future ones. Those individuals were executed for actions they committed before being taken prisoner. They were not killed merely for fighting the Muslims. A spy, for example, may be taken prisoner and tried. In this case, he is tried for spying, not for being an enemy soldier taken prisoner in open battle. His captivity merely brought him under the authority of the Muslim state.

A word needs to be said about placing prisoners of war in slavery.

We have already stated on more than one occasion that this was in response to prevalent universal situations and common practices in war. These situations made it impossible for Islam to implement in all circumstances the general statement “set them free either by an act of grace or against ransom” when enemy camps used to put any Muslim taken prisoner into slavery. Therefore, this ruling was applied by the Prophet in certain situations: he set free some prisoners in acts of grace, while in other cases he exchanged prisoners and in still other cases, he accepted financial ransom. In some cases prisoners were made slaves in order to deal with situations that could not be otherwise dealt with.

Should all camps agree not to treat prisoners of war as slaves, Islam reverts to its single positive ruling in the matter: “set them free either by an act of grace or against ransom.” Putting prisoners into slavery is not an Islamic rule; it is a procedure dealing with special circumstances.

This is the view that we derive from this clear Qur’anic statement and from carefully studying different cases, events and situations.

I should perhaps make it clear that I support this view because the Qur’anic statements and the study of events and cases support it. It does not occur to me that I should defend Islam against the accusation that it puts prisoners into slavery. Such a thought I never entertain.

Had Islam adopted this practice, it would have been the right and better one. No human being with any degree of good manners would ever say that his view is better than Gods ruling. I only look at the Qur’anic text, its wording and spirit. It is on this basis that I have formulated my view.

All this, i.e fighting, smiting the necks of unbelievers, binding them firmly and dealing with the captives according to this rule, continues “until war shall lay down its burden” (Verse 4) This means until war is over between Islam and its opponents. It remains the permanent Islamic rule. According to a hadith related by Abu Dawud on Anas’s authority, the Prophet says: “Jihad shall continue until the Day of Judgement.” Its purpose is to ensure that God’s word remains supreme.

God does not require believers to fight and go on jihad because He needs their help against the unbelievers. Far be it from Him to need help. He is able, should He wish, to destroy those unbelievers utterly.

It is all a test for mankind which determines everyone’s position:

Thus [shall it be]. Had God so willed, He could have punished them Himself, but it is His will that He tests you all by means of one another. And as for those who are slain in God's cause, never will He let their deeds go to waste. He will grant them guidance, and bring them to a happy state, and will admit them to the Garden He has already made known to them, (verses 4-6)

Those unbelievers who debar people from God’s path, and their ilk throughout the earth, at all times, and those despots who exercise power unjustly and appear to command force and authority, behaving in all arrogance, are no more than a handful of creatures living on earth. The earth is nothing but a tiny little planet floating in the midst of countless other planets, stars, celestial systems and galaxies whose sizes and numbers are known only to God. In the universal expanse, worlds and galaxies appear merely as scattered points, and as though they float aimlessly. None other than God controls them all and ensures harmony between them.

Despots, their entourages and followers, indeed all people on earth, are no more than small ants when compared with Gods power. No indeed, they are not even like tiny particles blown everywhere by a light breeze. They are just nothing. When God commands believers to smite the necks of unbelievers and to bind them firmly after they have been utterly subdued, He only makes of them a tool of His power.

Had He so willed, He would have dealt with them directly, as He did with those whom he destroyed by floods, a stunning blast or wind.

He can indeed punish them Himself, without using any of these forces.

God, however, wants the best for the believers. Therefore, He tests them and cultivates what is good in them, making it easier for them to do the best of good works.

God wants to test the believers, bringing out the best potential in man. The highest level a human being attains is when the truth he believes in becomes so dear to him that he will fight for it, exposing himself to death, but also being willing to kill his opponents. He simply will not compromise on this truth he believes in, and cannot live or love life unless it be under such truth. God wants to cultivate the believers, so that every desire and aspiration pertaining to this transitory life on earth, dear as it may be normally to man, is progressively weakened. He wants to purge them of their weaknesses and compensate them for their shortcomings until all their desires respond to the call to jihad and the earning of His pleasure. God will thus know that those people have successfully passed the test and have been properly cultivated. They do not make their choices on impulse, but on the basis of careful consideration.

God also wants to elevate the believers. When they go through the hardships of jihad, exposing themselves to the danger of death at every turn, they learn to care little for this danger. For most people, however, this is so frightening that they shed much of their moral values and dignity to avoid it. Yet it is of little consequence to those who are used to exposing themselves to it, whether they eventually avoid it or not.

To turn to God alone at every moment of danger produces an effect which is best compared to an electric shock. It is like remoulding people’s hearts and souls in full clarity and purity.

Moreover, such a test provides the means to put the affairs of the whole community on the right basis, placing its leadership in the hands of those who strive so strenuously for God’s cause ready to sacrifice themselves for it. Such people care little for worldly riches and luxuries.

When they are the ones who have the leadership of human society, the whole world will be set on the right footing. Furthermore, it facilitates the way for people to earn Gods pleasure and His reward without having to face the reckoning. By contrast, those in the opposite camp find it easy to do what incurs God’s displeasure and exposes them to His punishment. Everyone will have his way made easy for him to follow, according to God’s knowledge of the true nature of all.

Thus, God tells us about those who are killed, fighting for His cause: “And as for those who are slain in God's cause, never will He let their deeds go to waste. He will grant them guidance, and bring them to a happy state, and will admit them to the Garden He has already made known to them, (verses 4-6) The first thing to note here is the contrast between what happens to the deeds of martyrs and what happens to those of unbelievers. In the case of the unbelievers, the surah started with the statement that “their deeds [are] brought to nothing,” by God.

Here the verse says of martyrs: “never will He let their deeds go to waste." Theirs are good deeds, done in accordance with Divine guidance, linked to the solid truth by which they are motivated and in defence of which they are undertaken. They will remain because the truth is permanent and will never be lost.

We then face the great truth of the continuing life of martyrs killed in God’s cause. This is a fact already stated in the Qur’an: “Do not say of those who are killed in God's cause, 'They are dead.' They are alive, although you do not perceive that." (2: 154) This great truth is presented here in a new light. We see the life of the martyr extending and growing in the way it followed before it left this world, the way of obedience to God and sacrifice for His cause: “He will grant them guidance, and bring them to a happy state." (Verse 5) It was for the cause of God that they were slain and so He will continue to guide them after their martyrdom, promising them that they will attain to a happy state, as their souls will be purged of any traces of earthly life’s burdens. They will grow in purity so as to be suited to the absolute purity of the ones on high to which they are raised. This means that theirs is a continuing, uninterrupted life except in an earthly sense. God takes care of their lives, increases them in guidance, purity and shining. Ultimately, He fulfils His promise to them, for He “will admit them to the Garden He has already made known to them. (Verse 6)

A hadith related by Ahmad quotes the Prophet as saying: “A martyr is given six special privileges: with the first drop of his blood, he is forgiven every sin he has ever committed; he sees his position in heaven; and he is given his maiden companions, security from the greatest fear, torment in the grave and his adornment of true faith.” Another hadith related by al-Tirmidhl and Ibn Majah specifically states that a martyr is made to see his position in heaven. This is how God makes heaven known to martyrs, and such is the end of continuing guidance and the happy state they are brought into after departing life on earth.

The surah then urges the believers to dedicate themselves to God and the implementation of His code in human life. It promises them His support in battle as well as defeat and hardship for His and their enemies:

Believers! If you support [the cause of] God, He will support you and will make your steps firm; but as for the unbelievers, ill fortune awaits them as He will bring their deeds to nothing. This is because they hate what God has bestowed from on high, and thus He causes their deeds to go to waste. (Verses 7-9)

How do believers support God so as to fulfil the condition and receive what He has promised them of His support and steadying their step? What God requires of them is that they should be fully dedicated to Him, associating no partners with Him whatsoever, whether in a subtle or open way. They must love God more than they love themselves or their desires. They must refer to His rulings on everything they desire or wish for, as well as on their public and private actions, their thoughts and feelings. Such is the way to support God within ourselves.

Moreover, we know that God has laid down a complete code for life, based on certain rules and values; in short, a complete concept of life and the universe. In practical life, our supporting God is fulfilled when we make this code the arbiter of everything we do, when we implement His way of life in all aspects.

We need to reflect for a moment on the two phrases: “those who are slain in God's cause” and “If you support God.” In both cases of being slain and giving support, the basic condition is that the action should be dedicated to God and serve His cause. Although this goes without saying, it is often blurred when faith suffers from deviation in one generation or another. In such cases we notice that words like martyrdom and jihad are twisted to serve cheap causes. It should be clear that there is no such thing as jihad, martyrdom or admission into heaven unless such jihad is for God’s cause only, death for His sake alone, and the support we give within ourselves and in society is to Him alone. The objective must be that His word should be supreme; that His law and code of living should rule over people’s consciences, morality, behaviour, laws and systems. Abu Musa al-Ash‘arT reports:

“The Prophet was asked about a person who fights to prove his bravery, support his people or to show off: which of these could be fighting in God’s cause? He answered: ‘Only the one who fights so that God’s word remains supreme fights for God’s cause.’” [Related by al-Bukhari, Muslim, Abu Dawud, al-Nasa’i and al-Tirmidhl.J There can be no other banner or goal under or for which people can fight and fall martyrs to be included in God’s promise of admission to heaven other than His banner and His cause. This is true no matter what banner is raised and no matter what goals are defined under deviant systems and governments.

Advocates of Divine faith are best advised to understand this truth and keep it in their minds pure of any deviant concept. They must never allow thoughts that are alien to the Islamic faith to creep into their minds. If people strive for any purpose other than making God’s word supreme, then their striving is not for Him, and when they are killed they do not earn martyr status. They cannot expect God’s help and cannot hope to be in heaven. Advocates of Divine faith must make their vision clear. If they find this hard, the least they can do is to free

their thoughts and feelings from the concepts of their environment which are in conflict with the essence of God’s conditional statement:

“ Believers! If you support [the cause of] God, He will support you and will make your steps firm” (Verse 7)

Such is the condition God requires to be fulfilled by believers. What He gives them in return is His support, ensuring victory and making their steps firm. This is God’s promise which never fails. If it is delayed at some point, its delay serves another purpose which is accomplished when God’s support, victory and firmness of step are fulfilled.5

We need to reflect a little on the way God’s promise is stated: “He will support you and will make your steps firm.” The Arabic word, yansurkum, translated here as ‘support you , also means ‘gives you victory.

We tend to think first that firmness of step is necessary before victory can be achieved; in fact, it is an important element in gaining victory.

This is so true. That it occurs second in this text indicates a different meaning. What is intended here is that believers remain firm when victory has been achieved so that they can shoulder the responsibilities that come with victory. Victory is not the end of the battle between faith and unfaith, the truth and falsehood. Victory imposes certain duties within the minds of the victorious and in life generally. Those who achieve victory must not allow conceit to creep into their minds, nor should they grow complacent. Many people may remain steadfast when the going is tough and the hardships are plenty, but few are those who do not weaken after victory or when life is easy and comfortable. To remain steadfast, upholding the truth after victory, is an even higher grade than gaining victory. Perhaps this is the meaning intended in this verse, but God knows best.

“As for the unbelievers, ill fortune awaits them as He will bring their deeds to nothing.” (Verse 8) This is the opposite of granting help and firmness of step. This is an invocation of ill fortune which means that they will inevitably have ill fortune, humiliation and lack of support.

Furthermore, their deeds will come to nothing, which means utter loss. The reason for all this is stated: “ This is because they hate what God has bestowed from on high, and thus He causes their deeds to go to waste. (Verse 9)

This describes what they entertain of hatred to what God has revealed: the Qur’an containing His law and the code He lays down for human life. This is what prompts them to stubbornly reject the faith and entertain futile argument about it. Many are those with corrupt minds who hate the sound Divine code and find themselves, by nature, in conflict with it. We often meet such people and we sense their deep hatred of Islam and everything related to it. They are scared by the mere mention of it. In fact, such hatred is easily noticed these days.

Because of their hatred of God’s revelations, He let their deeds go to waste. Again the Qur’an uses its preferred method of drawing images.

The Arabic word, ahbata, translated here as 'cause to go to waste, normally describes cattle with swollen bellies as a result of feeding on poisoned grass. This ends in certain death. In the same way, those people who hate God’s revelations find their deeds swollen and apparently growing, only to end in waste and utter loss. It is a vivid image that shows motion, and an end corresponding to that of the ones who hate God’s revelations and admire their own works that appear to them great. Yet they are only swollen in the same way as the bellies of cattle grazing on poisonous grass.

The unbelievers’ attention is forcibly drawn to the fates of earlier ignorant communities:

Have they never travelled through the land and seen what was the end of those who lived before their time? God destroyed them utterly.

A similar fate awaits the unbelievers, (Verse 10)

This is a strong and forceful statement accompanied by loud noises and an image of the earlier communities witnessing the destruction of everything around them. All their possessions are amassed in heaps while they themselves are buried under the debris; it is an image of total destruction. They are told that such a fate awaits all unbelievers; they will reap nothing but devastation and ruin: “A similar fate awaits the unbelievers.” (Verse 10) This fearful prospect contrasts with that of the believers who will receive support and victory: "This is because God protects the believers, while the unbelievers have no one to protect them.” (Verse 11) The constant rule being that when God is his protector, man need not worry about anything. Whatever happens to him should be seen as a test that heralds something good. It is never a sign of being abandoned by God, nor can it be seen as failure by God to fulfil His promise to support His servants. The one who is not so protected by God, however, will have no protection, even if all of mankind and the jinn are his patrons and supporters. Ultimately, he will be lost even though all means of protection and all sources of power known to mankind are at his disposal.

Having explained the lots of both believers and unbelievers when conflict and war erupt between them, the surah outlines their shares of enjoyment, making clear the distinction between the two:

God will indeed admit those who believe and do righteous deeds into gardens through which running waters flow, while those who disbelieve will enjoy their life [in this world] and eat as cattle eat; but the fire shall be their abode. (Verse 12)

Believers who do good may sometimes be given luxuries and comforts of the best type to enjoy, but the comparison here is drawn between the believers’ truly great share in heaven on the one hand and the total lot of the unbelievers on the other. The believers receive their share from God’s hand in the heavens through which running waters flow. It is God who admits them there. Hence, it is a great, noble share given to them in reward for their faith and good deeds. By contrast, the share of the unbelievers is merely some enjoyment and the partaking of food 'as cattle eat*. This is a miserable image unfit for man. It is an image of vulgar enjoyment and an animal-like approach to food, lacking both taste and manners. It is an enjoyment that is subject to no control; man has neither will, choice nor conscience in all this. Furthermore, it is unchecked by any sense of fear of God.

Regardless of their beliefs, people may have very fine culinary tastes and may be very selective in what they enjoy. This is certainly true of most people who grow up in wealthy families. This is not, however, what is referred to here. Rather, what the verse points to is that when man is in control of his will and has his values in place, he will choose only what is good in Gods sight. He makes his choice using his will, free of the pressure of desire and cheap enjoyment. With such a will, he does not look at life as if it is a sumptuous feast of food and drink, or as though it is a chance for uncontrolled pleasure, paying little or no attention to what is lawful or unlawful.

The essential difference between man and animals is that man is equipped with free will and has a concept of life based on values stated by God, the Creator of all life. When man loses this, he sheds the most important qualities that distinguish him from other creatures and for which God has granted him special honour.

This series of comparisons between believers and unbelievers is interrupted by a reference to the city that drove the Prophet out, comparing it with other cities and communities that perished even though they were far more powerful: “How many cities of greater power than this your city which has driven you out have We destroyed, and they had none to help them." (Verse 13) This verse is reported to have been revealed when the Prophet was on his way from Makkah to Madinah, having been driven out by the unbelievers. It was revealed by way of consolation to him, reminding him that those unbelievers who had opposed his message so determinedly, until he and his followers had to abandon their land and property and migrate for the sake of their faith, are truly powerless. In the end, they are subject to Gods power.

The comparison between the two groups continues. This by virtue of an explanation outlining why the believers are admitted into gardens of bliss in the life to come after they have been given support and honour in this present life. It also explains why the unbelievers who lived a life of animal enjoyment in this world, are subjected to punishment in the next life:

Is he who takes his stand on a clear evidence from his Lord like one to whom the evil of his own deeds seems goodly, or like those who follow their own desires? (verse 14)

There is a fundamental difference between the conditions, codes of life and behaviour of the two groups. The believers are equipped with clear evidence from their Lord. They recognize the truth and are certain of its source. They receive their directives and instructions from God and are sure of what they receive. No deception or error exists in their way of life. The unbelievers, by contrast, are deceived, thinking their deeds to be good when they are essentially bad. They do not make certain of what they receive nor whether it is true or good. They only follow their own desires with no standard of control to refer to and with no light to help them distinguish what is true and what is false.

Are these two groups alike? The answer can only be in the negative for they are fundamentally different in their conditions and practices.

Hence, they cannot be the same in their rewards and destinies.

Then follows an image of the differences between the two in the ends to which they are heading:

Such is the paradise which the God-fearing are promised: In it are rivers of water for ever pure, rivers of milk the taste of which never alters, rivers of wine, a delight for those who drink, and rivers of honey pure and clarified. In it they shall have all kinds of fruit.

And they receive there forgiveness by their Lord. Are they to be compared to those who are to abide in the fire and be given a drink of scalding water that tears their bowels? (Verse 15)

Such physical descriptions of reward and punishment in the hereafter occur in several places in the Qur’an. They may be accompanied with other mental images or given on their own. Likewise, mental images are often given on their own in the Qur’an. It is God who has created mankind, and He knows best what affects and influences them and what is conducive to cultivating the better elements in their nature.

He also knows what enjoyment or suffering is best in bringing out the best in them. People possess different qualities and characteristics that are all combined within human nature but differ in their manifestation in each individual. Hence, God has given us detailed accounts of the types of comfort and suffering, pleasure and pain, according to His absolute knowledge of His creatures.

Some people are best motivated to good action and most contented with their reward when they are told that they shall have rivers of pure water, healthy milk, pure, clarified honey and delightful wine, as well as fruits of all kinds, together with forgiveness that ensures their admission to heaven. These people are given what is suitable to cultivate the best in them and ensure that they receive their fitting reward. There are others who worship God because they want to thank Him for the countless blessings He has given them, or because they love Him and try to draw closer to Him through their worship, just as lovers lean towards each other, or because they are too ashamed to be seen in any condition that does not please God. In their worship, they do not look up to heaven and hell, bliss or suffering. These are best motivated when they read Gods words: “As for those who believe and do righteous deeds, God will certainly bestow love on them” (19: 96) They feel their greatest bliss when they learn that they will be “in a seat of truth, in the presence of an all-powerful Sovereign” (54: 55)

It is reported that the Prophet used to stand up in night worship until his feet swelled. ‘A’ishah, his wife, asked him why he did so when God had assured him of total forgiveness for all his sins, past and future. He replied: “‘A’ishah! Should I not, then, be a grateful servant of God?” [Related by Muslim.] Rabi(ah al-‘Adawiyyah wondered: “Would it be true that without heaven and hell, no one would have worshipped or feared God?” When Sufyan al-Thawri, a leading scholar of the Tdbi (in generation, asked her about the nature of her faith in God, she said to him: “I do not worship God for fear of hell or craving for heaven. I would then be no better than a miserable hired servant. I worship Him because I yearn to meet Him.” In between these two types there is a wide range of different natures and mentalities. They all find in what God describes of bliss and suffering, reward and punishment, what ensures the cultivation of what is best in them in this present life and what is fitting as a reward in the life to come. It should be noted that the images of happiness and suffering grow in sophistication as the listeners become more refined by greater exposure to the Qur’an, and according to the types of situations being addressed. This is true of all generations and communities.

The requital is of two types: the first includes all these rivers together with plentiful and varied fruit as well as God’s forgiveness. The other is thus outlined: “Are they to be compared to those who are to abide in the fire and be given a drink of scalding water that tears their bowels?

(Verse 15) Again, this is a physical image of fierce torture that fits the ambience of the surah. It also fits the crude nature of the unbelievers, for they are the ones who approach their enjoyments and their food like animals. It is a crude atmosphere. Hence, they are requited with boiling water that tears at their bowels and bellies. The two groups are totally different in their nature and code of life. Most certainly their requital will not be the same.