The Ocean of the Quran

A verse by verse explanation of The Ultimate Scripture

Al-Kahf – Verse 77

فَانطَلَقا حَتّىٰ إِذا أَتَيا أَهلَ قَريَةٍ استَطعَما أَهلَها فَأَبَوا أَن يُضَيِّفوهُما فَوَجَدا فيها جِدارًا يُريدُ أَن يَنقَضَّ فَأَقامَهُ ۖ قالَ لَو شِئتَ لَاتَّخَذتَ عَلَيهِ أَجرًا

So they went on. When they came to the people of a town, they asked its people for food, but they refused to extend them any hospitality. There they found a wall which was about to collapse, so he erected it. He said: ‘Had you wished, you could have taken a wage for it.’

EXEGESIS

Qaryah (town) can mean a settlement of any size, but here it indicates a city, as is clarified when it is referred to as a madīnah in verse 82.‎[1] The word qaryah is used to refer to cities in other verses too, such as How many a town (qaryah) there has been which was more powerful than your town which expelled you (47:13), or 43:31, where it refers to Mecca and Taif.

Yurīdu an yanqaḍḍa (about to collapse). Yurīdu literally means to want, and is not usually used for insentient beings. The wall is anthropomorphised here, and such expressions are common and used extensively in classical Arabic.‎[2] It certainly does not mean it had a will of its own.‎[3]

Yanqaḍḍa comes from inqiḍāḍ meaning to fall swiftly,‎[4] or to just fall down and collapse. It originates from qiḍah, meaning small stones. This is because if it falls down it will crumble into small stones.‎[5]

EXPOSITION

Khiḍr (a) accepted Moses’ (a) apology and allowed him one very last chance, with Moses (a) realising he had used up all his excuses, promising that if he asked Khiḍr (a) about anything hereon he would not object to their parting ways.

So they went on: it seems that they may have journeyed for quite a while after the killing of the boy.‎[6] Perhaps after that event Moses (a) was especially careful not to say anything, and knowing he was on his last chance, he guarded his tongue. There may have been other surprising events on the way for which Moses (a) kept silent and the story is silent about them too. In any case they ran out of supplies and money and reached a city.

We may note that this is the third time this statement is repeated in this story. The usage of anaphora serves at least a dual purpose. First of all, it adds rhythm to the verses, making it more enjoyable to recite and more memorable. Secondly, it further draws the reader’s attention to the fact that Moses (a) indeed was given many chances by Khiḍr (a).

When they came to the people of a town: it is reported from the Prophet that ‘they were people of a city of mean populace’.‎[7] It is not clear which specific city they visited although the interpreters have suggested certain cities.

They asked its people for food, but they refused to extend them any hospitality: hospitality to travellers is highly emphasised in the Quran,‎[8] Give the relatives their [due] right, and the needy and the traveller [as well], but do not squander wastefully (17:26). This was especially important in that time when modern methods of communication were not available, and if a traveller became stranded in a location far from home, they would have been dependent on the kindness of strangers to help them get back.

Some might think that asking others for food and handouts is not suitable for great personalities like prophets of God. However, the reality is that this practice was normal at the time and there was no shame associated with it; rather, the shame was accorded to those who refrained from offering hospitality. Secondly, to do so is permissible (and this verse can be considered evidence for that), and in situations of dire necessity even becomes an obligation.‎[9]

Asking its people implies that they did not ask just one or two people in the city, but several of them, each refusing them in turn. In any case, the miserliness of the people of the city got the better of them and Moses (a) and his companion were left hungry.

There they found a wall which was about to collapse: There is referring to the city,‎[10] meaning the wall was in the city.

So he erected it: some have suggested that Khiḍr (a) miraculously repaired the wall.‎[11] True, God does not specify the manner in which it actually was repaired and there is nothing inherently wrong with attributing such a miracle to Khiḍr (a); however, the fact that Moses (a) comments that he could have asked payment for it suggests it was not miraculous, as it would not be befitting to ask for a reward in exchange for a miracle.‎[12]

Interestingly, only Khiḍr (a) is described as reconstructing the wall (he erected it), without any help from Moses (a). This might be construed as leading credence to the claim that he did so miraculously. It is also quite possible that Moses (a) was reserved, after having witnessed the strange actions of Khiḍr (a), deciding not to interfere with what he was doing and simply observing unless instructed to assist.

Had you wished, you could have taken a wage for it: Moses (a), who was about to go to sleep hungry and deeply disappointed in the miserly attitude of the people of the city, says this to Khiḍr (a), intending that Khiḍr (a) could have at least asked for food in exchange for the task of repairing the wall so they could have sated their hunger,‎[13] although some have said he meant getting a wage for it.‎[14] However, they were not owed any wages since they had not agreed on performing the task.

Moses’ (a) interjection can be considered more a suggestion than a direct challenge to Khiḍr’s (a) actions, but like in the previous two events, it was still calling him into question, which was reason enough for Khiḍr (a) to terminate their company, especially considering the second and third chances that Moses (a) had already received.

In any case, Moses (a) was surely not against helping someone altruistically without wishing for anything in return. However, his interjection here is because he wished not to ask strangers for food when they could have earned it through their own labour. That is also an important ethical point and one mentioned in many narrations, for example it is reported from the Prophet and Imam al-Ṣādiq (a): ‘Charity (ṣadaqah) is not allowed [to be received] by the wealthy and the one in possession of able-bodied strength.’‎[15] Viewed like this, we could once again construe Moses’ (a) interjection to be made on moral grounds, which fits in with the previous two events. So, we could understand the statement as: ‘Why did you make us go around and ask people for free handouts, when you were planning on repairing this wall? We could have just asked for wages for this instead.’

Finally, we could note how hunger and food played a role in this story. It was their hunger that reminded Moses (a) and his lad of their fish, leading them to find Khiḍr (a). It was also hunger that caused Moses (a) to interject that they could have asked for a payment instead of asking for handouts. This allows us to reflect on the reality of our needs and base desires. They have been created for a purpose and they serve a benefit, but at the same time they may act as distractions, causing us to lose focus of what is important. Hunger also connects to the story of the People of the Cave; they woke up also feeling hungry and sent someone to the city, which led to their discovery. In that case, hunger included both negative (being discovered) and positive (being discovered) aspects. Being discovered was negative in the sense that he did not wish to be discovered, but positive in the sense that it was God’s plan.

INSIGHTS FROM HADITH

  1. Regarding the people of that city, it is reported from Imam al-Ṣādiq (a): ‘They did not extend them any hospitality, nor would they do so to anyone until the onset of the final hour.’‎[16]

REVIEW OF TAFSĪR LITERATURE

There are different opinions regarding the identity of the city:

  1. From Imam al-Ṣādiq (a), that it was Nazareth, where Prophet Jesus (a) was born.‎[17]
  2. From Ibn Abbas, that it was Antioch,‎[18] an important city in the ancient Levant.
  3. From Ibn Sīrīn and others, that it was Īlah/Aylah,‎[19] modern-day Eilat (Īlāt).

Other opinions have also been mentioned besides these,‎[20] but these three are most commonly mentioned by the exegetes. If we consider what we said about the likely location of the confluence of the two seas (verse 60), then of these Eilat would be the closest and the only one on the Red Sea coast. In any case, all of these are quite far away from the likely start point of their journey so it is no surprise they ran out of supplies/money and had to ask the people of the city for food. Having said that, we should not take the claims that specify the city too seriously.

There are also different assertions as to how Khiḍr (a) repaired the wall:

  1. From Saʿīd ibn Jubayr, that he rebuilt it with his hands and it stayed up.‎[21]
  2. From Ibn Abbas, that he demolished it and then rebuilt it.‎[22]
  3. That it was repaired miraculously.‎[23]
  4. That he propped it up with a support beam.‎[24]

These are all speculative and there is no evidence for any of them.

Rāzī says that Moses (a) was extremely hungry and they had not eaten for days, and when he commented what he commented to Khiḍr (a) he did so out of anger, even though he had promised not to question Khiḍr (a), and it was extreme hunger that motivated him to do so.‎[25] This does not fit with the tone of the statement though, which seems to be more of suggestion. It seems that Moses (a) had not been keen on asking the people for food, but they had done so on Khiḍr’s (a) instructions.

Finally, some have argued that the general legal maxim is that one is not allowed to interfere in the property of others. Even though repairing the wall was a kind act, one should generally not do so without first seeking the permission of the owner.‎[26] However, it can be easily argued, as we did, that Khiḍr’s (a) actions did not fall under the scope of general legal maxims since he was not operating on the basis of these, but rather on the final outcome, as evidenced by him for example killing the young boy and scuttling a ship.

INSIGHTS FROM OTHER TRADITIONS

  1. If among you, one of your brothers should become poor, in any of your towns within your land that the Lord your God is giving you, you shall not harden your heart or shut your hand against your poor brother … For there will never cease to be poor in the land. Therefore I command you, ‘You shall open wide your hand to your brother, to the needy and to the poor, in your land.’‎[27]
  2. But if anyone has the world’s goods and sees his brother in need, yet closes his heart against him, how does God’s love abide in him?‎[28]
  3. If you pour yourself out for the hungry and satisfy the desire of the afflicted, then shall your light rise in the darkness and your gloom be as the noonday.‎[29]
  4. For you yourselves know how you ought to imitate us, because we were not idle when we were with you, nor did we eat anyone’s bread without paying for it, but with toil and labour we worked night and day, that we might not be a burden to any of you.‎[30] 
[1] Nemuneh, 12/495. That being said, Tabatabai considers the town in this verse to be different to the city in verse 82 (Mizan, 13/348). See the commentary on that verse for more.
[2] Asides from the many poems quoted by the exegetes, see for example verses such as 7:154 and 47:21.
[3] See Tabrisi, 6/751; Tabari, 15/186-187; Thalabi, 6/185.
[4] Tibyan, 7/76; Tabrisi, 6/750.
[5] Muhit, 7/210.
[6] See also the Review of Tafsīr Literature section.
[7] Tabrisi, 6/751; Thalabi, 6/185.
[8] Helping the ibn al-sabīl (the traveller) is mentioned eight times.
[9] Razi, 21/487.
[10] Tibyan, 7/76.
[11] This is also what is mentioned in a hadith attributed to Imam al-Ṣādiq (a) in Ilal, 1/61.
[12] Mizan, 13/346.
[13] Tabrisi, 6/752; Thalabi, 6/185.
[14] Tabari, 15/187-188.
[15] Tibyan, 9/422; Tabari, 27/26; Thalabi, 9/136; Ahmad, 2/164; Darimi, 1/286; Ibn Majah, 1/589; Tirmidhi, 2/82. For the slightly different variant from Imam al-Ṣādiq (a) see Kafi, 3/560; Wasail, 9/231. In this variant, wealthy (ghanī) is replaced with muḥtarif, the one who is capable of working. In another variant the Imam adds that: ‘He said it regarding the wealthy, and he did not say it regarding the one in possession of able-bodied strength.’ (Faqih, 3/177; Wasail, 9/232).
[16] Tabrisi, 6/751.
[17] Tabrisi, 6/751; Nur, 3/278. This opinion is also found without attribution; see for example Qurtubi, 11/24.
[18] Tabrisi, 6/751; Razi, 21/487; Alusi, 8/326.
[19] Tabrisi, 6/751; Tabari, 15/186; Thalabi, 6/185.
[20] See Baghawi, 3/208; Qurtubi, 11/24; Alusi, 8/326; Furqan, 18/159.
[21] Tibyan, 7/76; Tabrisi, 6/752; Tabari, 15/187; Qurtubi, 11/24.
[22] Tabari, 15/187.
[23] Baghawi, 3/208; Razi, 21/488; Qurtubi, 11/27.
[24] Zamakhshari, 2/740.
[25] Razi, 21/488.
[26] Furqan, 18/160.
[27] Deuteronomy 15:7-11.
[28] 1 John 3:17.
[29] Isaiah 58:10.
[30] 2 Thessalonians 3:7-8.