ضَرَبَ اللَّهُ مَثَلًا رَجُلًا فيهِ شُرَكاءُ مُتَشاكِسونَ وَرَجُلًا سَلَمًا لِرَجُلٍ هَل يَستَوِيانِ مَثَلًا ۚ الحَمدُ لِلَّهِ ۚ بَل أَكثَرُهُم لا يَعلَمونَ
Allah draws an example: a man jointly owned by several contending masters, and a man belonging entirely to one man: are the two equal in comparison? All praise belongs to Allah! But most of them do not know.
EXEGESIS
Mutashākis is one who quarrels and disagrees with another person in a rigid and implacable way, taking it hard on himself and the other side. The verse talks about a slave who has several owners that can never reach an agreement. This is an expressive way of describing a condition of tension, incongruity, and strife.
Salaman is an infinitive, used here as an adjective for emphasis. It means agreement and congruity in every aspect and dimension, both inwardly and outwardly. It is the opposite of quarrel and enmity. Therefore, a man who is salaman to another is one who is completely submissive, docile, and in agreement with his master. It has also been recited as silman and salman, which are synonyms of salaman. It is also recited as sāliman, which means either purely dedicated, or submissive and obedient, but without the exaggeration involved with using an infinitive.
Mathal has two meanings in the Quran based on the context and usage: 1. Attribute, quality, description. 2. Similitude, example, likeness, analogy. Here, at the beginning of the verse, the second meaning is intended. However, the subsequent usage can bear either meaning: are these two men equal in terms of their attribute and description? Or are they equal in terms of likeness and comparison? The first meaning is more straightforward.
It should be noted that man in this verse simply means person or individual, not man as opposed to woman. Furthermore, the same term is used in both the positive and negative examples, which means that there is no positive or negative value attached to the term per se.
EXPOSITION
One of the miracles of the Quran is that it presents deep philosophical and theological arguments in the form of simple and tangible examples. Examples and parables, as opposed to theoretical discussions, can be understood by everyone. Quranic parables allow the masses to relate to them, without preventing the intellectual elites from taking them to farther horizons. The example provided in this verse relates to God’s unity (tawḥīd). The verse is essentially saying: Are diverse masters better, or Allah, the one, the all-paramount? (12:39). The argument in this verse is presented in a more philosophical and abstract form in the famous verse: Had there been gods in them [the heavens and the earth] other than Allah, they would surely have fallen apart (21:22).
The first man in this parable is a slave who is owned by several owners who are in constant disagreement and conflict with one another. Such a slave is pulled from every side by a different master. He is expected and ordered to perform a distinct and contradictory task by each owner. How would the condition of such a servant be? He is left undecided whom to obey and whom to refer to for his needs and troubles. He will not be able to go far on any path to achieve any desired destination, will be left unresolved, and will lose his peace of mind and composure of heart. As Imam Ali (a) said: ‘If one aims for various goals, he will be let down by his plans.’ This is the state of one who tries to satisfy several people, regimes, or standards at the same time; he will be torn into pieces by his multiple objectives. Whoever ascribes partners to Allah is as though he had fallen from a height to be devoured by vultures, or to be blown away by the wind far and wide (22:31).
The second man in this verse is a slave who has a single master, to whom he is completely submissive and obedient. Such a person is not pulled from every side but is directed in a single path, and finds no difficulty or strife in performing what he is instructed. Hence, the verse is an answer to the polytheists who used to say: Has he reduced the gods to one god? This is indeed an odd thing! (38:5).
Based on the above, the sense of tawḥīd (monotheism) presented in this verse goes far beyond the ritualistic worship of one or several gods. In fact, it is certainly not about merely physical idols, for there is no contention or rivalry among inanimate objects. It is about how we set our values and criteria in every aspect of our lives. The values and standards that we follow are essentially the masters of our lives, just like the masters of the two slaves in this Quranic example. Should we follow the values outlined by a single source, or should we try to incorporate several schools, ideologies, and parameters? It is intuitively clear that the only way to avoid contradiction is to follow a single source. The next step is to realise that the best source for acquiring our code of conduct and a consistent system of views and values is that which is sent by God. His religion is based on our creation (30:30) and His book is without any deviousness (verse 28). Say: ‘Shall we invoke besides Allah that which can neither benefit us nor harm us, and turn back on our heels after Allah has guided us, like someone seduced by the devils and bewildered on the earth, who has companions that invite him to guidance, [saying:] ‘‘Come to us!’’?’ Say: ‘Indeed it is the guidance of Allah which is [true] guidance. And we have been commanded to submit to the Lord of all the worlds’ (6:71). At a much deeper level, the verse hints at the need to go beyond engagement with multiplicity to being immersed in unity.
It is also possible that the above analogy compares between the deniers of Prophet Muhammad (s) and his followers. His enemies and deniers subscribe to multiple other values, standards, and systems, while his followers have submitted to a single code of conduct. This explanation has not been suggested explicitly by any of the exegetes, but it has the following merits: 1. It is more in line with the previous verses which were about deniers (verse 25) and the Quran as a manual of life (verses 23 and 27-28). 2. The servants and the masters are equally called man in the verse, instead of one side being called a servant and the other side being called a master or owner to imply a hierarchy. This is while other Quranic examples that illustrate the relationship between men and God use such different terms (16:75-76, 30:28). Nevertheless, this explanation also reduces to monotheism, for the Prophet is only a representative and messenger of God.
All praise belongs to Allah! What is the connection between the praise of God and the preceding parable? There are a few possible explanations: 1. All praise belongs to Allah because being a servant of Him alone is better than being a servant of multiple conflicting gods. This is a special reminder to the monotheists to be grateful for having one master alone, and also to be patient if this great bounty comes with some trouble from enemies. 2. All praise belongs to Allah for supporting His Messenger by solid proofs and clear examples that clarify the truth. 3. This is a Quranic custom to praise God after establishing a fact or completing an argument. There are many other verses that ask the reader to reflect upon a question and answer it in their conscience. Such reflection brings about an inner realisation of some fact. This realisation is an existential achievement, which, like all other existential achievements and perfections, traces back to the source of all perfections. Hence, All praise belongs to Allah! 4. The above comparison involves an admiration and praise of one who belongs entirely to one master. However, this achievement of true monotheism and sincerity is itself a blessing from God. Any good or perfection that any being has is only a reflection of God’s excellence and perfection. Thus, All praise belongs to Allah clarifies that the apparent admiration of the second man in the earlier example should not be viewed independent of God, because, at the end of the day, the one who truly deserves all praise is God alone. All of these meanings could be true, at different levels of subtlety and depth. The third explanation is perhaps the most plausible as it also explains other Quranic verses with similar contexts (although the second one has this quality as well).
But most of them do not know. There are three possible interpretations for this: 1. What is meant here is not the intellectual complexity of the material discussed in the verse, but rather it is about not accepting and following the intuitive judgement of one’s own reason and conscience. In other words, it is not about lack of mental knowledge, but it is about failure to apply that knowledge in practice. Everyone with a sound heart and mind understands that serving a single lord is better than having multiple lords, but when it comes to practice, most people associate others with God (12:106). In other words, they act as if they do not know. Otherwise, total lack of knowledge would make the example and the praise given to God to be vain. This is clearly seen in two other verses where it is told that the people know the answer to the question, yet the verses end by saying But most of them do not know (29:63, 31:25). This is the most plausible interpretation. 2. Anyone who applies his reason to the least extent and reflects slightly about this example would grasp the matter. Despite this, most of the people do not even do this little contemplation. Hence, these facts that can be easily understood remain at the level of potentiality, and the understanding is not actualised for most people. This interpretation is essentially another formulation of the first one. 3. Most of them do not know that All praise belongs to Allah. This is an unlikely possibility because it disjoints the subsequent part of the verse from the initial and main part, unless All praise belongs to Allah is in turn linked back to the main part of the verse.
INSIGHTS FROM HADITH
- There are several narrations that identify a man belonging entirely to one man as Imam Ali (a), the Imams, and their followers.
Note: These are some specific applications of the general sense of the verse, which is the idea of being submissive to the truth.
INSIGHTS FROM OTHER TRADITIONS
- No servant can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon.
[1] Raghib; Tahqiq, under sh-k-s.
[2] Raghib; Tahqiq, under s-l-m.
[3] Zamakhshari, 4/125.
[4] Tabari, 23/137; Razi, 26/450.
[5] Lisan; Bahrayn, under m-th-l.
[6] Razi, 26/451.
[7] Razi, 26/451.
[8] Nahj, saying 403.
[9] Razi, 26/450.
[10] Abd al-Razzaq, 2/202.
[11] Mizan, 17/295.
[12] Alusi, 12/252.
[13] Kashif, 6/410.
[14] Tabrisi.J, 3/456.
[15] Mizan, 17/295.
[16] Razi, 26/451; Alusi, 12/252.
[17] Kafi, 8/224, h. 283; Maani, p. 60. Hasakani, 2/176-177; Tabrisi, 8/775; Kanz, 11/300-302.
[18] Luke 16:13.