Al-Nūr – Verse 63

لَا تَجْعَلُوا دُعَاء الرَّسُولِ بَيْنَكُمْ كَدُعَاء بَعْضِكُم بَعْضًا قَدْ يَعْلَمُ اللَّهُ الَّذِينَ يَتَسَلَّلُونَ مِنكُمْ لِوَاذًا فَلْيَحْذَرِ الَّذِينَ يُخَالِفُونَ عَنْ أَمْرِهِ أَن تُصِيبَهُمْ فِتْنَةٌ أَوْ يُصِيبَهُمْ عَذَابٌ أَلِيمٌ

Do not consider the Apostle’s summons amongst you to be like your summoning one another. Allah certainly knows those of you who slip away under cover. So let those who disobey his orders beware lest an ordeal should visit them or a painful punishment should befall them.

EXEGESIS

Duʿāʾ (summons) means to call out to someone and can be used interchangeably with nidāʾ, although it is said that duʿāʾ is used generally with a name.[1] It is also used to describe the act of supplication when entreating the Lord.

Yatasallalūna (slip away) is from sall, to draw something out from something else, like the act of drawing a blade from its scabbard.[2] Tasallul is used for those who sneak out of a place.[3]

Liwādh (under cover) is to seek refuge with someone else and hide amongst them. In other words, God knows those who try to slip away and hide amongst or blend in with others, ignoring the summons of the Prophet.[4]

Tuṣībahum (visit them) and yuṣībahum (befall them). It is said that the verb repeats for emphasis of the warning given,[5] but perhaps more likely it is to differentiate between the two types of consequences, worldly and otherworldly.

It has been said that the ʿan in ʿan amrihī (his orders) is redundant (zāʾidah), whilst others have said that it has the meaning of baʿd (after), to mean: those who disobey after his order has come to them.[6]

EXPOSITION

Continuing from the previous verse, God emphasises the importance of obeying the Prophet when he commands the believers to cooperate on some matter. Some hypocrites or those of weak faith would try to flake on their duty by quietly slipping away. God reminds in this verse that their actions do not go unnoticed by Him and He will recompense them accordingly.

Do not consider the Apostle’s summons amongst you to be like your summoning one another: some have understood duʿāʾ here to mean those who would call out to the Prophet either in greeting or to get his attention. Accordingly, the verse would mean that people should not call out to the Prophet as they would call out to a friend of theirs, but should show due respect. They should not say ‘O Muhammad!’ but rather they should say ‘O Messenger of God!’ or ‘O Prophet of God!’[7]

Another option suggested is that duʿāʾ here means supplication. In other words, be careful of his supplication, if he were to make a supplication invoking God’s curse upon you, this would be fulfilled.[8]

Preferable though is to understand it as the summons of the Prophet when he calls upon the believers to join him in a collective affair (verse 62).[9] This is the only acceptable option out of the three as the first two are completely divorced from the context of the previous verse and what immediately follows.[10] In other words, they should not delay or come late, nor should they view the summons of the Prophet like when their friends ask them to do something, which is optional, because obeying the commands of the Prophet is incumbent upon the believers.[11]

Allah certainly knows those of you: even if people might not notice what they do, there is no hiding their actions from God.[12]

Who slip away under cover: this has been said to mean slip away from jihad.[13] Considering however the generality of the collective affair mentioned in the previous verse, jihad can be simply an example of one such collective duty from which some tried to slip away. Some other examples were also mentioned in the commentary of the previous verse.

So let those who disobey his orders beware: his is apparently here referring to the orders of the Prophet, as the verse is speaking of his summons,[14] although some have preferred it to be referring to the orders of God.[15] In either case, there is no practical difference as both must be obeyed and that is in fact the point these verses are trying to make.

This is once again a reminder that the commands of the Prophet must be obeyed and that disobedience can result in punishment.[16]

Lest an ordeal should visit them: an ordeal in which their true nature will be revealed,[17] or any sort of consequence of their evil actions.[18]

Or a painful punishment should befall them: the phrasing of the verse indicates some uncertainty and leeway with regards to the ordeal and punishment visiting them. This is because it may be that such a person might die before such ordeals befall them in this world,[19] or it could be that they repent and avert from themselves both that and the punishment of the hereafter.

Finally, we may note how this and the previous verse beautifully tie up the surah with allusions to the themes presented throughout the surah – faith as light and faithlessness as darkness. The faithful are those who always look to the command of God and His Prophet before engaging in any action, doing so only with his leave, whilst the faithless are those who sneak away from their duty.

INSIGHTS FROM HADITH

  1. From Imam al-Ṣādiq (a), that when this verse was revealed, Lady Fatimah (a) ceased to call the Prophet ‘my father’, but would rather call him the Messenger of God. The Prophet ignored this two or three times, until he eventually turned to her and said: ‘Fatimah, this [verse] was not revealed concerning you or your family or your offspring. You are from me, and I am from you. This was revealed about the brash and boisterous ones in Quraysh, the haughty and proud ones. Say: “My father”, as that livens the heart and is more pleasing to the Lord.’[20]
  2. From Abū al-Jārūd, that Imam al-Ṣādiq (a) said regarding this verse: ‘Do not say “O Muhammad” nor “O Abū al-Qāsim”, but rather say “O Prophet of God”, and “O Messenger of God”.’[21]

Note: As we mentioned earlier, this meaning is not congruent with the context of the verses, unless we wish to assume that it is a secondary meaning included in the scope of the verse.[22]

  1. Zamakhsharī relates that Imam al-Ṣādiq (a) said concerning an ordeal should visit them, that it means ‘God will place a tyrant in authority over them’.[23]

Note: Faḍl-Allāh explains that this will result from the fact that when people turn away from the authority of a pure leader such as the Prophet, it will make way for unscrupulous characters and tyrants to rise to power in society.[24]

REVIEW OF TAFSĪR LITERATURE

It is reported from Sufyān ibn ʿUyaynah, that one day a man came to Mālik ibn Anas and asked him from where he should wear the iḥrām for hajj. Mālik advised him that he should do so from Dhū al-Ḥulayfah, where the Prophet wore iḥrām. The man said he wished to proceed in iḥrām from Masjid al-Nabī. Mālik advised him not to so do. The man insisted once again that he wished to do that beside the grave of the Prophet in the mosque, so Mālik said: ‘Do not do that, for I fear lest you fall into sedition (fitnah).’ The man retorted: ‘What sedition could there be in this? It is just some extra miles that I am adding.’ Mālik said: ‘What sedition is greater than you thinking you can do some virtuous act which the Messenger of God (s) failed to do? Have you not heard God’s word: So let those who disobey his orders beware lest an ordeal should visit them or a painful punishment should befall them?’[25]

Although the meaning of fitnah in the argument of Mālik is slightly different from its usage in the verse, there are some good points raised in this story, the most important of which is that obedience to the commands of God and His Messenger means to submit to them without trying to add and subtract from them based on one’s whims.

This verse has been used as evidence by some scholars that a command defaults to compulsory, since those who disobey his orders are warned with a painful punishment, and the threat of punishment may only be levied for refusing to comply with a compulsory order.[26]

Some exegetes have pointed out that in the Quran God does not address the Prophet with the phrase yā muḥammad, always opting for expressions such as yā ayyuha al-rasūl, or as yā ayyuha al-nabī, whereas for other prophets this is not the case, and we see the use of yā ādam (2:35), yā nūḥ (11:48), and yā ibrāhīm (37:104).[27]

[1] Raghib, p. 315, d-ʿ-w.
[2] Raghib, p. 418, s-l-l; Mizan, 15/167; Nemuneh, 14/566.
[3] Nemuneh, 14/566.
[4] Mizan, 15/167.
[5] Alusi, 9/416.
[6] Qurtubi, 12/323.
[7] Qummi, 2/110; Tantawi, 10/160. Related also in Tibyan, 7/466; Tabrisi, 7/248; Tabari, 18/134; Baghawi, 3/433; Thalabi, 7/121. Qummī even reports a hadith via Abū al-Jārūd from Imam al-Ṣādiq (a) that mentions this. Thaʿlabī, Baghawī, and others attribute this opinion to Qatādah and Mujāhid. If we accept this opinion duʿāʾ al-rasūl should be considered a case where the verbal noun (maṣdar) is utilised in a possessive construct (iḍāfah) with an object of a verb (mafʿūl), in other words ‘summoning the Messenger’ or ‘calling out to the Messenger’. See Ahkam, 3/1411; Tantawi, 10/160.
[8] Tabari, 18/134-135. Related in Tibyan, 7/466; Tabrisi, 7/248; Baghawi, 3/433; Thalabi, 7/121. This opinion has been attributed to Ibn Abbas.
[9] Zamakhshari, 3/260; Alusi, 9/414; Mizan, 15/166; Nemuneh, 14/566. Related in Tabrisi, 7/248-249; Ahkam, 3/1411.
[10] See also Muhit, 8/75; Andulusi, 4/198; Mizan, 15/166-167; Nemuneh, 14/566-568; Fadlallah, 16/369; Munyah, 19/142.
[11] Fadlallah, 16/368.
[12] Nemuneh, 14/566.
[13] Related in Tibyan, 7/466.
[14] Mizan, 15/167.
[15] Tabrisi, 7/249. Others are undecided on the matter (Tibyan, 7/467; Zamakhshari, 3/260).
[16] Tibyan, 7/466.
[17] Tibyan, 7/467; Ahkam, 3/1412.
[18] See Ahkam, 3/1412; Nemuneh, 14/567.
[19] Razi, 24/427.
[20] Manaqib, 3/102; Nur, 3/628-629.
[21] Qummi, 2/110.
[22] Nemuneh, 14/567-568.
[23] Zamakhshari, 3/260; Razi, 24/427; Qurtubi, 12/323; Nur, 3/629; Fadlallah, 16/370.
[24] Fadlallah, 16/370.
[25] Ahkam, 3/1413.
[26] See Tibyan, 7/466; Ahkam, 3/1412. See also the long discussions in Razi, 24/425-427; Alusi, 9/416-417. Makārim Shīrāzī briefly alludes to this, but says it is a problematic stance (Nemuneh, 14/568).
[27] Sharawi, pp. 10344-10345; Tantawi, 10/160.