chapter twelve

idol-worship in pre-islamic arabia

religious conditions in pre-islamic arabia
kabah was built in mecca, by abraham and his son ishmael as a first-ever
monument dedicated to one god. built around the famous black stone
(probably a meteorite) in the remotest antiquity, the kabah ever remained the
holiest and the most sacred of the temples and this gave mecca an
overwhelming predominance over the other cities of arabia. with the passage
of many thousands years, the descendants of ishmael abandon worship of
one god alone and were seduced by idol worship. at the time of
muhammad’s birth, kabah was the bastion of paganism and idol-worship.
there were 360 idols, one for each day, arranged around the great god hubal,
two gazelles of gold and silver, and image of abraham and his son ishmael.
here the tribes came from all over arabia, year after year, to kiss the black
stone, and circumambulate around kabah seven times, usually naked. human
sacrifices were also frequent.
the three moon-goddesses – al-lat, the bright moon, al-manat the dark moon,
and al-uzza, the union of the two were regarded as the daughters of the high
god. the goddess uzza was represented by a tree at a place called nakhla. the
goddess lat was located in taif. manat was represented by a rock on the
caravan road between mecca and syria. arabs also worshipped animal and
plants, the gazelle, the horse, the camel, the palm tree, inorganic matter like
pieces of rock, stones, etc. belief in jins, ghouls, and oracles were rendered
by their idols, which they consulted by means of pointless arrows.
each tribe had its particular idols and temples. the priest and hierophants
attached to these temples received rich offering from the devotees. and often,
there arose sanguinary conflicts between the followers of rival temples.
besides specials idols located in the temples each family had household
penates, which exacted rigorous observations. they often carried their idols
with them when they traveled, presuming that the idol had permitted its
worshiper to travel. all these statues, whether in kabah or scattered around
the tribes, were regarded as intermediaries and a means of rapprochement
between their worshipers and supreme god. the idea of a supreme deity,
however was not unrecognized but it influence was confined to a minority.
the prestige of the kabah, the chapel of abraham and ishmael, stood
unimpeached among all. the custody of this temple was an object of great
jealousy among the tribes, as it conferred on the custodians the most
honorable functions and privileges in the sight of the arabs. at the time of
muhammad’s birth this honor was possessed by his family and his
grandfather was the venerable chief of the theocratic commonwealth which
was constituted around the kabah. the translation of the quran is presented
below in bold letters and explanation in parentheses.
polytheism verses monotheism - an islamic perspective
(6:151) say: “come, let me convey unto you what god has [really]
forbidden to you: “do not ascribe divinity, in any way, to aught beside
him.” [in the stories of pre-islamic prophets, implications have - as is always
the case with quranic stories and parables - a universal, timeless import. the
stress is on the intrinsic impossibility of reconciling belief in the one god,
whose omniscience and omnipotence embraces all that exists, with an
attribution of divine or semi-divine qualities and functions to anyone or
anything else. all religious attitudes based on a desire to bring god closer to
man through the interposition of alleged mediators between him and man. in
primitive religions, this interposition led to the deification of various forces
of nature and, subsequently, to the invention of imaginary deities, which
were thought to act against the background of an undefined, dimly-perceived
supreme power (for instance, the moira of the ancient greeks). in higher
religious concepts, this need for mediation assumes the form of personified
manifestations of god through subordinate deities (as is the case, in
hinduism, with the personifications of the absolute brahma of the upanishads
and the vedanta in the forms of vishnu or shiva), or in his supposed
incarnation in human form (as represented in the christian idea of jesus as
god’s son and the second person of the trinity). and, lastly, god is supposedly
brought closer to man by the interposition of a hierarchy of saints, living or
dead, whose intercession is sought even by people who consider themselves
to be monotheists - and this includes many misguided muslims who do not
realize that their belief in saints as mediators between men and god conflicts
with the very essence of islam. the ever-recurring quranic stress on the
oneness and uniqueness of god, and the categorical denial of the idea that
anyone or anything - whether it be a concrete being or an abstract force -
could have the least share in god’s qualities or the least influence on the
manner in which he governs the universe aims at freeing man from the self-
imposed servitude to an imaginary hierarchy of mediating powers, and at
making him realize that “wherever you turn, there is god’s countenance”
(2:115), and that god is “always near, responding to the call of whoever calls
unto him” (2:186). whenever the term shuraka (pl. of sharik) is used in the
quran with reference to beliefs, it invariably denotes real or imaginary
beings or forces to whom one ascribes a share in god’s divinity:
consequently, this concept - and its utter condemnation in islam - relates not
merely to the worship of false deities but also to the attribution of semi-
divine qualities and powers to saints (in the liturgical sense of this word), as
well as to abstract notions like wealth, social status, power, nationality, etc.,
to which men so often ascribe an objective influence on human destinies.
the following are the arguments put forth by pagans of arabia and the
quranic response to them.]
do not give god any compeers
(2:21-22) o mankind! worship your sustainer, who has created you and
those who lived before you, so that you might remain conscious of him
who has made the earth a resting-place for you and the sky a canopy,
and has sent down water from the sky and thereby brought forth fruits
for your sustenance: do not, then, claim that there is any power that
could rival god, when you know [that he is one]. [lit., “do not give god
any compeers”. this term implies any object of adoration to which some or
all of god's qualities are ascribed, whether it be conceived as a deity “in its
own right” or a saint supposedly possessing certain divine or semi-divine
powers. this meaning can be brought out only by a free rendering of the
above phrase.]
following ancestral beliefs blindly
abraham’s criticism of idol-worship, his people merely stress its antiquity,
forgetting - that ancient usage and precedence in time are no proof of a
concept soundness (see part 1, under abraham).
(5:103-105) and most of them never use their reason: for when they are
told, “come unto that which god has bestowed from on high, and unto
the apostle” - they answer, “enough for us is that which we found our
forefathers believing in and doing.” why, even though their forefathers
knew nothing, and were devoid of all guidance? o you who have attained
to faith! it is [but] for your own selves that you are responsible: those
who go astray can do you no harm if you [yourselves] are on the right
path. unto god you all must return: and then he will make you [truly]
understand all that you were doing [in life].
(11:109, 111) and so, [o prophet,] be not in doubt about anything that
those [misguided people] worship: [do not think that their beliefs are based
on reason: a reference, primarily, to the pagan arabs who rejected god’s
message on the plea that it conflicted with their; and, more generally, to all
people who are accustomed to worship (in the widest sense of this word)
false values handed down from their ancestors and who, consequently,
observe false standards of morality: an attitude which must unavoidably - as
the last sentence of this verse shows - result in future suffering, be it in this
world or in the hereafter, or in both.] they but [thoughtlessly] worship as
their forefathers worshipped aforetime; and, behold, we shall most
certainly give them their full due [for whatever good or evil they have
earned], without diminishing aught thereof. [we shall repay them their
portion in full, undiminished.] and, verily, unto each and all will thy sus-
tainer give their full due for whatever [good or evil] they may have
done: behold, he is aware of all that they do!
(31:21-24) and when such [people] are told to follow that which god has
bestowed from on high, they answer, “nay, we shall follow that which we
found our forefathers believing in and doing!” why - [would you follow
your forefathers] even if satan had invited them unto the suffering of the
blazing flame? [as in many other places in the quran, the above verse
expresses an oblique condemnation of blindly following religion of
forefathers.] now whoever surrenders his whole being unto god, and is a
doer of good withal, has indeed taken hold of a support most unfailing:
for with god rests the final outcome of all events. but as for him who is
bent on denying the truth - let not his denial grieve you: unto us they
must return, and then we shall make them [truly] understand all that
they were doing [in life]: for, verily, god has full knowledge of what is in
the hearts [of men]. we will let them enjoy themselves for a short while -
but in the end we shall drive them into suffering severe.
worshipping of idols bring us nearer to god
(39:1-3) the bestowal from on high of this divine writ issues from god,
the almighty, the wise: for, behold, it is we who have bestowed this
revelation upon you (muhammad) from on high, setting forth the truth:
so worship him, sincere in your faith in him alone! is it not to god alone
that all sincere faith is due? and yet, they who take for their protectors
aught beside him [are wont to say], “we worship them for no other
reason than that they bring us nearer to god.” [this relates not only to the
worship of saints, angels and deified persons as such, but also to that of their
symbolic representations (statues, pictures, relics, etc.) and, in the case of
defunct human personalities, of their real or reputed tombs. since all such
practices are based on the worshipper’s hope of mediation between himself
and god, they obviously conflict with the concept of his omniscience and
justice, and are, therefore - notwithstanding their widespread occurrence -
utterly rejected by the quran.] behold, god will judge between them [on
resurrection day] with regard to all wherein they differ [from the truth]:
[i.e., between those worshippers and the spiritual leaders who have led them
astray.] for, verily, god does not grace with his guidance anyone who is
bent on lying [to himself and is] stubbornly ingrate!
worship of angels and goddesses
god chosen for himself daughters
(37:149) and now ask them to enlighten you: has thy sustainer
daughters, whereas they would have [only] sons? [this reference to people
who ascribe divinity to beings other than god.]
(43:15-18) and yet, they attribute to him offspring from among some of
the beings created by him! verily, most obviously bereft of all gratitude
is man! [despite the fact that most people readily admit that god has created
all that exists, some of them tend to forget his uniqueness.] or [do you
think], perchance, that out of all his creation he has chosen for himself
daughters, and favored you with sons? [the people thus addressed were
the pagan arabs, who believed that some of their goddesses, as well as the
angels, were god’s daughters. since pre-islamic arabs regarded daughters as
a mere liability and their birth as a disgrace, this verse is obviously ironical.]
for [thus it is:] if any of them is given the glad tiding of [the birth of]
what he so readily attributes to the most gracious, [i.e., female offspring,
which implies a natural likeness to its progenitor.] his face darkens, and he
is filled with suppressed anger: “what! [am i to have a daughter -] one
who is to be reared [only] for the sake of ornament?” [one who, from the
viewpoint of the pre-islamic arabs, would have no function other than
embellishing a man’s life.] - and thereupon he finds himself torn by a
vague inner conflict. [he finds himself in an invisible inner conflict, which
he does not quite admit to his consciousness. he debates within himself, shall
he keep this child despite the contempt which he feels for it - or shall he
bury it in the dust?]
(52:39) or, [if you believe in god, how can you believe that] he has
[chosen to have] daughters, whereas you yourselves would have [only]
sons? [this is addressed to the pagan contemporaries of the prophet,
implying that you not only blaspheme by ascribing progeny to god, but you
intensify your blasphemy by ascribing to him something that you yourselves
despise, i.e., female offspring.]
god has begotten a son
(37:150-157) is it that we have created the angels female, and they [who
believe them to be divine] have witnessed [that act of creation]? oh,
verily, it is out of their own [inclination to] falsehood that some people
assert, “god has begotten [a son]”; and, verily, they are lying [too, when
they say], “he has chosen daughters in preference to sons”! [they have
invented for him sons and daughters.] what is amiss with you and your
judgment? will you not, then, bethink yourselves? or have you,
perchance, a clear evidence [for your assertions]? produce, then, that
divine writ of yours, if you are speaking the truth!
angels as female deities
(17:40-41) has, then, your sustainer distinguished you by [giving you]
sons, and taken unto himself daughters in the guise of angels? verily,
you are uttering a dreadful saying! [an allusion to the pre-islamic arabian
belief that the angels - conceived of as a kind of female sub-deities - were
god’s “daughters”, and this despite the pagan arabs’ contempt for female
offspring. in its wider implication, this rhetorical question is meant to bring
out the absurdity of the supposition that god’s divinity could be projected
into, or shared by, any other being.] and, indeed, many facets have we
given [to our message] in this quran, so that they [who deny the truth]
might take it to heart: but all this only increases their aversion.
(43:19) and [yet] they claim that the angels - who in themselves are but
beings created by the most gracious - are females: [but] did they witness
their creation? [or, who are but creatures of the most gracious stressing
their having been created and, hence, not being divine.] this false claim of
theirs will be recorded, and they will be called to account [for it on
judgment day]! [regarding the sex of the angels, who are spiritual in nature
and, therefore, sexless.]
worship of jinn
the plural noun jinn (popularly, but incorrectly, taken to denote “genii” or
“demons”) is derived from the verb janna, “he was (or “became”)
concealed” or “veiled from sight”; thus, the veiling darkness of night is
called jinn. according to arab philologists, the term jinn signifies primarily,
“beings that are concealed from man’s senses”, and is thus applicable to all
kinds of invisible beings or forces. (6:100) and yet, some [people] have
come to attribute to all manner of invisible beings a place side by side
with god - although it is he who has created them [all].
(37:158) and some people have invented a kinship between him and all
manner of invisible forces- although [even] these invisible forces know
well that, verily, they [who thus blaspheme against god] shall indeed be
arraigned [before him on judgment day]. [people who refuse to believe in
god often tend to regard those elemental forces as mysteriously endowed
with a purposeful creative power, the quran states that their votaries invent a
“kinship” between them and god, i.e., attribute to them qualities and powers
similar to his.]
mediators and intercessors
those who believe in the existence of other deities or divine powers apart
from god regard them as no more than mediators between man and him, the
argument runs thus: if those alleged divine or semi-divine “mediators”
would really exist, then it is obvious that, being no more than mediators,
even they would have to recognize him as the supreme being - which would
amount to admitting that they have no power of their own but are, in the last
resort, entirely dependent on and subject to him: and this unavoidable
conclusion implies a negation of any divinity in those imaginary mediators.
this being so, is it not far more reasonable for man to turn directly to god,
who is almighty, all-seeing, all-hearing, and has therefore no need of any
mediator.
worship of intercessors
(39:43-45) and yet, they choose [to worship], side by side with god,
[imaginary] intercessors!” [despite all the evidence of god’s almightiness,
many people tend to disregard it and choose to worship intercessors who
could not act as such independently of god’s permission.] say: “why - even
though they have no power over anything, and no understanding?” [this
is a reference to the adoration of dead saints or their tombs or relics, as well
as of inanimate representations of saints, of imaginary deities, etc.] say:
“god’s alone is [the power to bestow the right of] intercession: his
[alone] is the dominion over the heavens and the earth; and, in the end,
unto him you will all be brought back.” and yet, whenever god alone is
mentioned, the hearts of those who will not believe in the life to come
contract with bitter aversion - whereas, when those [imaginary powers]
are mentioned side by side with him, lo, they rejoice! [since cognition of
god must have a sense of moral responsibility as its correlate, the godless
shrink from it, and joyfully turn to the worship - real or metaphoric - of
imaginary powers which make no such moral demand.]
saints and angels are powerless
(17:42) say: “if there were - as some people assert - [other] deities side
by side with him, surely [even] they would have to strive to find a way
unto him who is enthroned on his almightiness?” [the term “seat of
power” is used in the quran to denote god’s absolute sway over all that
exists; the expression may be suitably rendered as “he who is enthroned in
his almightiness”.] (17:56-57) say: [to those who believe in the existence of
any divine power apart from god] “call upon those [beings] whom you
imagine [to be endowed with divine powers] beside him”- [as the
sequence shows, this relates to the worship of saints or angels] and [you will
find that] they have it not in their power to remove any affliction from
you, or to shift it [elsewhere]. [i.e., to transfer it onto themselves: obviously
an allusion to the christian doctrine of vicarious atonement.] those [saintly
beings] whom they invoke are themselves striving to obtain their
sustainer’s favor - [even] those among them who are closest [to him]
[i.e., the greatest of the prophets, as well as the angels.] hoping for his
grace and dreading his chastisement: for, verily, thy sustainer’s
chastisement is something to beware of!
(34:22-23) say: “call upon those [beings] whom you imagine [to be
endowed with divine powers] beside god: they have not an atom’s
weight of power either in the heavens or on earth, nor have they any
share in [governing] either, nor does he [choose to] have any helper from
among them.” [i.e., anybody who would mediate between him and any of
his creatures. as is evident from the sequence (as well as from 17:56- 57),
this passage relates, in particular, to the attribution of divine or semi-divine
qualities to saints and angels and to the problem of their “intercession” with
god.] and, before him, intercession can be of no avail [to any] save one in
whose case he may have granted leave [therefore]: so much so that when
the terror [of the last hour] is lifted from their hearts, they [who have
been resurrected] will ask [one another], “what has your sustainer
decreed [for you]?” - [to which] the others will answer, “whatever is true
and deserved - for he alone is exalted, great!” [i.e., whatever god decides
regarding his grant or refusal of leave for intercession (which is synonymous
with his redemptive acceptance or his rejection of the human being
concerned) will conform with the requirements of absolute truth and justice.]
god’s omniscience and intercessors
(13:33-34) is, then, he who has every living being in his almighty care,
[the term nafs has here apparently the general meaning of “soul” or “living
being”, applying both to humans and animals.] [dealing with each]
according to what it deserves [i.e., according to the exigencies of its life,
and - in the case of a human being - according to his or her moral deserts as
well.] – [is, then, he like anything else that exists]? and yet, they ascribe
to other beings a share in god’s divinity! say: “give them any name [you
please] [this phrase is an expression of utter contempt for those allegedly
divine beings: i.e., they are so unreal and meaningless as not to deserve even
a name. those false objects of worship and imaginary intercessors are but
empty names which you have invented.
the concept of intercessors directly contradicts god’s omniscience which the
next sentence refers to.] but do you [really think that you could] inform
him of anything on earth that he does not know - or [do you] but play
with words?” nay, goodly seems their false imagery [lit., “their cunning or
artful device”:] to those who are bent on denying the truth, and so they
are turned away from the [right] path: and he whom god lets go astray
can never find any guide. for such, there is suffering in the life of this
world; but, truly, [their] suffering in the life to come will be harder still,
and they will have none to shield them from god.
superstitions related to idol worship
arbitrary prohibitions due to superstitions
(5:103) it is not of god’s ordaining that certain kinds of cattle should be
marked out by superstition and set aside from the use of man; yet those
who are bent on denying the truth attribute their own lying inventions
to god. [lit., “god has not ordained anything (in the nature) of a bahirah, nor
a saibah, nor a wasilah, nor a ham.” these expressions denote certain
categories of domestic animals, which the pre-islamic arabs used to dedicate
to their various deities by setting them free to pasture and prohibiting their
use or slaughter. they were selected mainly on the basis of the number, sex
and sequence of their offspring; but the lexicographers and commentators
are by no means unanimous in their attempts at definition. for this reason -
as well as because of their inherent complexity - the above four terms cannot
be translated into any other language; these terms are rendered in the text as
“certain kinds of cattle marked out by superstition and set aside from the use
of man”: this being the common denominator of the four categories. it is
obvious that their mention at this place (as also in 6:138-139 and 143-144)
serves as an illustration of the arbitrary invention of certain supposedly
religious obligations and prohibitions.]
conjectures and artificial rituals
(6:116-121) now if you pay heed unto the majority of those [who live] on
earth, they will but lead you astray from the path of god: they follow but
[other people’s] conjectures, and they themselves do nothing but guess.
[i.e., regarding the true nature of human life and its ultimate destiny, the
problem of revelation, the relationship between god and man, the meaning of
good and evil, etc. apart from leading man astray from spiritual truths, such
guesswork gives rise to the arbitrary rules of conduct and self-imposed
inhibitions to which the quran alludes, by way of example, in verses below.]
verily, thy sustainer knows best as to who strays from his path, and best
knows he as to who are the right-guided. eat, then, of that over which
god’s name has been pronounced, if you truly believe in his messages.
[the purpose of this and the following verse is not, as might appear at first
glance, a repetition of already promulgated food laws but, rather, a reminder
that the observance of such laws should not be made an end in itself and an
object of ritual. the “errant views” spoken of in next verse are such as lay
stress on artificial rituals and taboos rather than on spiritual values.] and
why should you not eat of that over which god’s name has been
pronounced, seeing that he has so clearly spelled out to you what he has
forbidden you [to eat] unless you are compelled [to do so]? but, behold,
[it is precisely in such matters that] many people lead others astray by
their own errant views, without [having any real] knowledge. verily, thy
sustainer is fully aware of those who transgress the bounds of what is
right. but abstain from sinning, be it open or secret [this injunction
connects with the previous verse, thus: “eat, then, of that over which god’s
name has been pronounced....., but abstain from sinning” - i.e., do not go
beyond that which god has made lawful to you.] - for, behold, those who
commit sins shall be requited for all that they have earned. hence, eat
not of that over which god’s name has not been pronounced: for this
would be sinful conduct indeed. and, verily, the evil impulses [within
men’s hearts] whisper unto those who have made them their own [lit.,
“the satans whisper unto those who are near to them”'.] that they should
involve you in argument [as to what is and what is not a sin]; and if you
pay heed unto them, 1o! you will become [like] those who ascribe
divinity to other beings or forces beside god. [i.e., your own evil impulses
are trying to draw you into argument as to what does and what does not
constitute a sin in order to make you lose sight of god’s clear ordinances in
this respect; and if you follow their arbitrary, deceptive reasoning, you will
elevate them, as it were, to the position of moral law-givers, and thus ascribe
to them a right that belongs to god alone.]
dedicating shares to deities
(6:136) and out of whatever he has created of the fruits of the field and
the cattle, they assign unto god a portion, saying, “this belongs to god”-
or so they [falsely] claim – “and this is for those beings who, we are
convinced, have a share in god’s divinity.” [the pre-islamic arabs used to
dedicate a part of their agricultural produce and cattle to some of their
deities, and a part to god, whom they regarded as one - albeit the greatest -
of them. this is a false claim because everything that exists belongs, in the
last resort, to god alone. in consonance, however, with the method of the
quran, the above verse does not allude merely to this historical aspect of pre-
islamic arabian life but has a wider, more general implication as well: that is,
it refers not only to the apportioning of devotional shares between god and
the imaginary deities, but also to the attribution of any share in his creative
powers to anyone or anything beside him.] but that which is assigned to
the beings associated in their minds with god does not bring [them]
closer to god - whereas that which is assigned to god brings [them but]
closer to those beings to whom they ascribe a share in his divinity. bad,
indeed, is their judgment! [i.e., the fact that they assign a share of their
devotions to god does not strengthen their belief in him but, rather, implies a
negation of his transcendental uniqueness and, thus, makes them more and
more dependent on imaginary divine or semi-divine mediators.]
arbitrary prohibitions and questioning grant of free will
(16:35, 56) now they who ascribe divinity to aught beside god say, “had
god so willed, we would not have worshipped aught but him - neither we
nor our forefathers; nor would we have declared aught as forbidden
without a commandment from him.” [the arbitrary, unwarranted
prohibitions and taboos alluded to in the present verse are discussed in
6:136-153. the derision of god’s messages by the deniers of the truth is
implied in their questioning his grant of free will to man - that is to say, the
ability to choose between right and wrong, which is the basis of all
morality.] even thus did speak those [sinners] who lived before their
time; but, then, are the apostles bound to do more than clearly deliver
the message [entrusted to them]? [i.e., the apostles could not force anyone
to make the right choice.] as it is, they ascribe - out of what we provide
for them as sustenance - a share unto things of which they know
nothing. by god, you shall most certainly be called to account for all
your false imagery! [this relates to the custom of the pagan arabs - of
dedicating a part of their agricultural produce and cattle to their deities; and
because those deities were mere figments of imagination, they are described
here as things of which they know nothing.]
slaying children
(6:137) and, likewise, their belief in beings or powers that are supposed
to have a share in god’s divinity makes [the expression “their associates”
denotes here the evil beings or forces (shayatin) from among men and jinn.]
[even] the slaying of their children seem goodly to many of those who
ascribe divinity to aught beside god, thus bringing them to ruin and
confusing them in their faith. [this is a reference to the custom prevalent
among the pre-islamic arabs of burying alive some of their unwanted
children, mainly girls, and also to the occasional offering of a boy-child in
sacrifice to one or another of their idols. apart from this historical reference,
the above quran-verse seems to point out, by implication, the fact that an
attribution of divinity to anyone or anything but god brings with it an ever-
growing dependence on all kinds of imaginary powers which must be
propitiated by formal and often absurd and cruel rites: and this, in turn, leads
to the loss of all spiritual freedom and to moral self-destruction.] yet, unless
god had so willed, they would not be doing all this: stand, therefore,
aloof from them and all their false imagery! [i.e., he allows them to
behave as they do because he wants them to make use of their reason and of
the free will with which he has endowed man.]
arbitrary rules related to idol worship
(6:138-140) and they say, “such-and-such cattle and fruits of the field
are sacred; none may eat thereof save those whom we will [to do so]”- so
they [falsely] claim; [the pre-islamic arabs falsely claimed that these taboos
were ordained by god, as is made clear in the last part of this verse. one of
these supposed, arbitrary ordinances laid down that only the priests of the
particular idol and some men belonging to the tribe could eat the flesh of
such dedicated animals, while women were not allowed to do so.] and [they
declare that] it is forbidden to burden the backs of certain kinds of
cattle; and there are cattle over which they do not pronounce god’s
name - falsely attributing [the origin of these customs] to him. [i.e., while
sacrificing them to their idols (see 5:103). as a rule, the pagan arabs did
pronounce the name of god - whom they regarded as the supreme deity -
over the animals, which they slaughtered; in the above mentioned
exceptional cases, however, they refrained from doing so in the belief that
god himself had forbidden it.] [but] he will requite them for all their false
imagery. and they say, “all that is in the wombs of such-and-such cattle
is reserved for our males and forbidden to our women; but if it be
stillborn, then both may have their share thereof.” [god] will requite
them for all that they [falsely] attribute [to him]: behold, he is wise, all-
knowing. lost, indeed, are they who, in their weak-minded ignorance,
slay their children and declare as forbidden that which god has
provided for them as sustenance, falsely ascribing [such prohibitions] to
god: they have gone astray and have not found the right path. (6:142-
144) and of the cattle reared for work and for the sake of their flesh, eat
whatever god has provided for you as sustenance, and follow not satan’s
footsteps: behold, he is your open foe! [i.e., by superstitiously declaring as
forbidden what god has made lawful to man. all the references to pre-islamic
taboos given in these verses are meant to stress the lawfulness of any food
(and, by implication, of any other physical enjoyment) which god has not
expressly forbidden through revelation.] [his followers would have it that,
in certain cases, any of these] four kinds of cattle of either sex [is
unlawful to man]: either of the two sexes of sheep and of goats. [lit.,
“eight (in) pairs - of sheep two and of goats two” (the two other pairs are
mentioned in the next verse). this is an outstanding example of the
ellipticism often employed in the quran: a mode of expression, which cannot
be correctly rendered in any other language without the use of explanatory
interpolations. the term zawj denotes a pair of things as well as each of the
two constituents of a pair: hence my rendering of thamaniyat azwaj (lit.,
“eight in pairs”) as “four kinds of cattle of either sex”. the particular
superstition to which this and the next verse refer is probably identical with
the one mentioned in 5:103.] ask [them]: “is it the two males that he has
forbidden, or the two females, or that which the wombs of the two
females may contain? tell me what you know in this respect, if what you
say is true.” [i.e., not on the basis of guesswork but of knowledge acquired
through authentic revelation. the preceding and subsequent ironical
questions are meant to bring out the vagueness and inconsistency which
characterizes all such superstitious, self-imposed prohibitions.] and
[likewise they declare as unlawful] either of the two sexes of camels and
of bovine cattle. [lit., “and of camels two, and of bovine cattle two”- thus
completing the enumeration of the “eight kinds (i.e., four pairs) of cattle”.]
ask [them]: “is it the two males that he has forbidden, or the two
females, or that which the wombs of the two females may contain? is it,
perchance, that you [yourselves] were witnesses when god enjoined [all]
this upon you?” and who could be more wicked than he who, without
any [real] knowledge, attributes his own lying inventions to god, and
thus leads people astray. behold, god does not grace [such] evildoing
folk with his guidance. (6:150) say: “bring forward your witnesses who
could bear witness that god has forbidden [all] this!” [a reference to the
arbitrary prohibitions mentioned in the preceding passages.] - and if they
bear witness [falsely], do not bear witness with them; and do not follow
the errant views of those who have given the lie to our messages, nor of
those who believe not in the life to come, and who regard other powers
as their sustainer’s equals! [i.e., attribute divine or almost-divine qualities
to certain ill-defined natural powers - e.g., believe in spontaneous creative
evolution, or in a self-created universe, or in a mysterious, impersonal elan
vital that supposedly underlies all existence, etc.]
foretelling of future through divination
(5:3) and [you are forbidden] to seek to learn through divination what
the future may hold in store for you: this is sinful conduct. [lit., “to aim
at divining (the future) by means of arrows”. this is a reference to the
divining-arrows without a point and without feathers used by the pre-islamic
arabs to find out what the future might hold in store for them. (a
comprehensive description of this practice may be found in lane iii, 1247.)
as is usual with such historical allusions in the quran, this one, too, is used
metonymically: it implies a prohibition of all manner of attempts at divining
or foretelling the future.]
 why worship one god alone and not idols
(6:19-20) say: “what could most weightily bear witness to the truth?”
say: “god is witness between me and you; and this quran has been
revealed unto me so that on the strength thereof i might warn you and
all whom it may reach.” could you in truth bear witness that there are
other deities side by side with god? say: “i bear no [such] witness!” say:
“he is the one god; and, behold, far be it from me to ascribe divinity, as
you do, to aught beside him!” they unto whom we have vouchsafed re-
velation aforetime know this as they know their own children; [i.e., the
truth of god’s transcendental uniqueness and oneness stressed in all authentic
scriptures.] yet those [of them] who have squandered their own selves - it
is they who refuse to believe.
(30:35) have we ever bestowed upon them from on high a divine writ
[lit., “a warrant” or “authority” (sultan), in this context obviously denoting a
revelation.] which would speak [with approval] of their worshipping
aught beside us? [lit., “of that which they were wont to associate with us”.]
(30:40) it is god who has created you, and then has provided you with
sustenance, and then will cause you to die, and then will bring you to life
again. can any of those beings or powers to whom you ascribe a share in
his divinity do any of these things? limitless is he in his glory, and
sublimely exalted above anything to which men may ascribe a share in
his divinity!
all deities are but one god
(38:4-10) now these [people] deem it strange that a warner should have
come unto them from their own midst - and [so] the deniers of the truth
are saying: “a [mere] spellbinder is he, a liar! [although this passage
describes, in the first instance, the attitude of the pagan quraysh towards the
prophet, it touches upon the reluctance of most people, at all times, to
recognize a man from their own midst - i.e., a human being like themselves -
as god-inspired.] does he claim that all the deities are [but] one god?
verily, a most strange thing is this!” [divorced from its purely historical
background, this criticism acquires a timeless significance, and may be thus
paraphrased: does he claim that all creative powers and qualities are inherent
exclusively in what he conceives as one god?, which illustrates the tendency
of many people to attribute a decisive influence on human life and, hence, a
quasi-divine status to a variety of fortuitous phenomena or circumstances
(like wealth, luck, social position, etc.) rather than to acknowledge the
overwhelming evidence, in all observable nature, of god’s unique existence.]
and their leaders launch forth [thus]: “go ahead, and hold steadfastly
onto your deities: this, behold, is the only thing to do! [i.e., a sensible
course of action.] never did we hear of [a claim like] this in any faith of
latter days! it is nothing but [a mortal man’s] invention! [i.e., in any of
the faiths prevalent in our days: an oblique reference to christianity and its
dogma of the trinity, which contrasts with the quranic concept of god’s
oneness and uniqueness, as well as to any other faith based on the belief in a
multiplicity or multiform incarnation of divine powers (e.g., hinduism with
its triad of brahma, vishnu and shiva).] what! upon him alone from among
all of us should a [divine] reminder have been bestowed from on high?”
nay, but it is my own reminder that they distrust! [i.e., it is not the
personality of the prophet that fills them with distrust, but, rather, the
substance of the message proclaimed by him - and, in particular, his
insistence on god’s absolute oneness and uniqueness, which runs counter to
their habits of thought and social traditions.] nay, they have not yet tasted
the suffering which i do impose! [on people who refuse to accept the truth]
or do they [think that they] own the treasures of thy sustainer’s grace -
[the grace] of the almighty, the giver of gifts? [i.e., do they think that it is
for them to decide as to who should and who should not be graced with
divine revelation?] or [that] the dominion over the heavens and the earth
and all that is between them is theirs? why, then, let them try to ascend
[to god-like power] by all [conceivable] means! [i.e., do they think that
human beings are so highly endowed that they are bound to attain, some day,
to mastery over the universe and all nature, and thus to god-like power?]
god alone is your protector and not idols
(39:36-40) is not god enough for his servant? and yet, they would
frighten you with those [imaginary divine powers which they worship]
beside him! [the godless always stress the supposed necessity of paying
attention to all these imaginary forces and values, and frighten themselves
and their fellow-men by the thought that a neglect to do so might have evil
consequences in their practical life.] but he whom god lets go astray can
never find any guide, whereas he whom god guides aright can never be
led astray. [god only help those, who help themselves.] is not god
almighty, an avenger of evil? and thus it is [with most people]: if you ask
them, “who is it that has created the heavens and the earth?” - they will
surely answer, “god.” say: “have you, then, ever considered what it is
that you invoke instead of god? if god wills that harm should befall me,
could those [imaginary powers] remove the harm inflicted by him? or, if
he wills that grace should alight on me, could they withhold his grace
[from me]?” say: “god is enough for me! in him [alone] place their trust
all who have trust [in his existence].” say: “o my [truth-denying] people!
do yet all that may be within your power, [whereas] i, behold, shall labor
[in god’s way]: in time you will come to know who it is that shall be
visited [in this world] by suffering which will cover him with ignominy,
and upon whom long-lasting suffering shall alight [in the life to come]!”
[implying that surrender to false values inevitably leads to man’s spiritual
decay and, if persisted in by many, to social catastrophes and widespread
suffering.]
parable of frailty of spider’s web
(29:41-42) the parable of those who take [beings or forces] other than
god for their protectors is that of the spider which makes for itself a
house: for, behold, the frailest of all houses is the spiders house. could
they but understand this! verily, god knows whatever it is that men
invoke instead of him - for he alone is almighty, truly wise. [i.e., he
knows the nothingness of those false objects of worship, irrespective of
whether they be imaginary deities, or deified saints, or forces of nature, or
even false concepts or ideas; but he also knows the weakness of the human
heart and mind and, hence, the hidden motivation of all such irrational
worship.]
god alone is your sustainer
(10:31-33) say: “who is it that provides you with sustenance out of
heaven and earth, [the provision of sustenance is used here in both the
physical and spiritual connotations of this word, which explains the
reference to “heaven and earth” and, subsequently, “man’s hearing and
sight”.] or who is it that has full power over [your] hearing and sight?
and who is it that brings forth the living out of that which is dead, and
brings forth the dead out of that which is alive? and who is it that
governs all that exists?” and they will [surely] answer: “[it is] god.” [the
people referred to here are those who believe, firstly, that there are beings
endowed with certain divine or semi-divine qualities, thus having a share in
god’s divinity; and secondly, that by worshipping such beings men can come
closer to god. this idea obviously presupposes belief in god’s existence but it
offends against the concept of god’s oneness and uniqueness, it deprives
those people’s belief in god of its true meaning and spiritual value.] say,
then: “will you not, then, become [fully] conscious of him - seeing that
he is god, your sustainer, the ultimate truth? [i.e., seeing that, on your
own admission, he is the one who creates and governs all things and is the
ultimate reality behind all that exists (see 20:114): which implies a
categorical denial of the possibility that any other being could have a share,
however small, in his divinity.] for, after the truth [has been forsaken],
what is there [left] but error? how, then, can you lose sight of the
truth?” thus is thy sustainer’s word proved true with regard to such as
are bent on sinful doings: they will not believe. [in this particular context,
“the sustainer’s word” seems to be synonymous with the way of god (sunnat
allah) concerning deliberate sinners and deniers of the truth.]
god alone guides unto the truth
(10:35) say: “does any of those beings to whom you ascribe a share in
god’s divinity guide unto the truth?” say: “it is god [alone] who guides
unto the truth. which, then, is more worthy to be followed - he who
guides unto the truth, or he who cannot find the right way unless he is
guided? what, then, is amiss with you and your judgment?” [since the
concept of “finding the right way” cannot apply to lifeless idols and
idolatrous images, the above passage obviously relates to animate beings -
whether dead or alive - to whom a share in god’s divinity is falsely
attributed: that is, to saintly personalities, prophets or angels whom popular
fancy blasphemously endows with some or all of god’s qualities, sometimes
even to the extent that they are regarded as a manifestation or incarnation of
god on earth. as for the act of god’s guidance, it is displayed, primarily, in
the power of conscious reasoning as well as of instinctive insight with which
he has graced man, thus enabling him to follow the divine laws of right
conduct.]
idols do not answers prayers
(7:191-198) will they, then, ascribe divinity, side by side with him, unto
beings that cannot create anything - since they themselves are created -
[lit., “that which does not create anything”: a phrase expressed in the
singular, but having the plural meaning of beings - that is, either animate
beings (like saints or supposedly divine personalities) or their inanimate
representations.] and neither are able to give them succor nor can succor
themselves. if you pray to them (idols) for guidance, do not respond to
you? as far as you are concerned, it is all one whether you invoke them
or keep silent. verily, all those whom you invoke beside god are but
created beings like yourselves: [i.e., created beings subservient to god’s
will. this refers to saints, living or dead, as well as to inanimate objects of
every description, including idols, fetishes and representational images -
physical or mental - of saints or deified persons.] invoke them, then, and
let them answer your prayer - if what you claim is true! have these
[images], perchance, feet on which they could walk? or have they hands
with which they could grasp? or have they eyes with which they could
see? or have they ears with which they could hear? say [o prophet]:
“summon to your aid all those to whom you ascribe a share in god’s
divinity, and thereupon contrive [anything you may wish] against me,
and give me no respite! verily, my protector is god, who has bestowed
this divine writ from on high: for it is he who protects the righteous,
whereas all those whom you invoke in his stead are neither able to give
you succor nor can succor themselves; and if you pray unto them for
guidance, they do not hear; and though you may imagine that they
behold you, they do not see.”
deities cannot create anything
(10:34) say: “can any of those beings to whom you ascribe a share in
god’s divinity create [life] in the first instance, and then bring it forth
anew?” say: “it is god [alone] who creates [all life] in the first instance,
and then brings it forth anew. how perverted, then, are your minds!”
[the rhetorical question above is connected with the false belief that those
idolatrously worshipped beings are no more than “intercessors” between
their followers and god: and so, even their misguided votaries cannot
possibly attribute to them the power to create and to resurrect. in its wider
sense, this question (and the subsequent answer) relates to the god-willed,
cyclic process of birth, death and regeneration evident in all organic nature.]
(25:2-3) he to whom the dominion over the heavens and the earth
belongs, and who begets no offspring, and has no partner in his
dominion: for it is he who creates every thing and determines its nature
in accordance with [his own] design. [i.e., in accordance with the function
assigned by him to each individual thing or phenomenon.] and yet, some
choose to worship, instead of him, imaginary deities that cannot create
anything but are themselves created, [i.e., whether they be inanimate
“representations” of imaginary deities, or personified forces of nature, or
deified human beings, or simply figments of the imagination.] and have it
not within their power to avert harm from, or bring benefit to,
themselves, and have no power over death, nor over life, nor over
resurrection!
can idols have shared in creation?
(16:17-21) is, then, he who creates comparable to any [being] that
cannot create? will you not, then, bethink yourselves? for, should you
try to count god’s blessings, you could never compute them! behold, god
is indeed much forgiving, a dispenser of grace; and god knows all that
you keep secret as well as all that you bring into the open. now those
beings that some people invoke [this refers to dead saints invested by their
followers with divine or semi-divine qualities.] beside god cannot create
anything, since they themselves are but created: they are dead, not
living, and they do not [even] know when they will be raised from the
dead!
(46:2-6) the bestowal from on high of this divine writ issues from god,
the almighty, the wise. we have not created the heavens and the earth
and all that is between them otherwise than in accordance with [an
inner] truth, and for a term set [by us]: [the reference to the term set by
god to all creation is meant to stress the fact of its finality in time as well as
in space, in contrast with his own timelessness and infinity.] and yet, they
who are bent on denying the truth turn aside from the warning which
has been conveyed unto them. [they refuse to heed the warning not to
attribute divine qualities to any being or force beside god.] say: “have you
[really] given thought to what it is that you invoke instead of god? show
me what these [beings or forces] have created anywhere on earth! or
had they, perchance, a share in [creating] the heavens? [if so,] bring me
any divine writ preceding this one, or any [other] vestige of knowledge -
if what you claim is true!” [that is in support of your claim that there are
other divine powers besides god.] and who could be more astray than one
who invokes, instead of god, such as will not respond to him either now
or on the day of resurrection, [or will not respond to him till the day of
resurrection, i.e., never.] and are not even conscious of being invoked? -
such as, when all mankind is gathered [for judgment], will be enemies
unto those [who worshipped them], and will utterly reject their
worship? [this is symbolic “enmity” of all false objects of worship.]
can idols govern the heavens?
(35:40) say: “have you ever [really] considered those beings and forces
to whom you ascribe a share in god’s divinity, [and] whom you invoke
beside god? show me what it is that they have created on earth - or do
[you claim that] they have a share in [governing] the heavens?” have we
ever vouchsafed them [i.e., to those who ascribe divinity to beings or forces
other than god.] a divine writ on which they could rely as evidence [in
support of their views]? [30:35 - “have we ever bestowed upon them from
on high a divine writ which would speak [with approval] of their
worshipping aught beside us?” the reference to a “divine writ” makes it clear
that the people spoken of here are the erring followers of earlier revelation,
and not atheists.] nay, [the hope which] the evildoers hold out to one
another [is] nothing but a delusion. [i.e., their expectation that the saints
whom they invest with divine or semi-divine qualities will “mediate”
between them and god, or “intercede” for them before him, is based on
nothing but wishful thinking.]
multiplicity of divine powers and chaos
(23:91-94) never did god take unto himself any offspring, [this allusion to
the pre-islamic arabian belief in angels as god’s daughters and the christian
dogma of jesus as son of god.] nor has there ever been any deity side by
side with him: [for, had there been any,] lo! each deity would surely have
stood apart [from the others] in whatever it had created, [implying that
in such a hypothetical case each of the gods would have been concerned
only with his own sector of creation, thus causing complete confusion in the
universe.] and they would surely have [tried to] overcome one another!
limitless in his glory is god, [far] above anything that men may devise by
way of definition, knowing all that is beyond the reach of a created
being’s perception as well as all that can be witnessed by a creature’s
senses or mind - and, hence, sublimely exalted is he above anything to
which they may ascribe a share in his divinity! say: “o my sustainer! if it
be thy will to let me witness [the fulfillment of] whatever they [who
blaspheme against thee] have been promised [to suffer] - do not, o my
sustainer, let me be one of those evildoing folk!”
parable of several masters
(39:29) god sets forth a parable: a man who has for his masters several
partners, [a metaphor for belief in a plurality of divine powers.] [all of
them] at variance with one another, and a man depending wholly on one
person: can these two be deemed equal as regards their condition?
[nay,] all praise is due to god [alone]: but most of them do not
understand this. [in the present instance, the term mathal is used as a
synonym for state or condition, as it alludes to man’s condition arising from
either of two contrasting attitudes: a belief in god’s transcendental oneness
and uniqueness, on the one hand, and a readiness to ascribe divine powers
and qualities to a variety of created beings or supposed incarnations of god,
on the other.]
sin of idol worship
unforgivable sin (idol worship is invoking satan)
(4:116-120) verily, god does not forgive the ascribing of divinity to aught
beside him, although he forgives any lesser sin unto whomever he wills:
for those who ascribe divinity to aught beside god have indeed gone far
astray. in his stead, they invoke only lifeless symbols - thus invoking
none but a rebellious satan whom god has rejected for having said,
“verily, of thy servants i shall most certainly take my due share, and
shall lead them astray, and fill them with vain desires; and i shall
command them - and they will cut off the ears of cattle [in idolatrous
sacrifice]; and i shall command them - and they will corrupt god’s
creation!” [the pre-islamic arabs used to dedicate certain of their cattle to
one or another of their idols by cutting off or slitting the ears of the animal,
which was thereupon considered sacred. in the above context, this reference
is used metonymically to describe idolatrous practices, or inclinations, in
general. the allusion to satan’s inducing man to “corrupt god’s creation” has
a meaning to which sufficient attention is but seldom paid: since this
creation, and the manner in which it manifests itself, is an expression of
god’s planning will, any attempt at changing its intrinsic nature amounts to
corruption.] but all who take satan rather than god for their master do
indeed, most clearly, lose all: he holds out promises to them, and fills
them with vain desires: yet whatever satan promises them is but meant
to delude the mind. [the term ghurur signifies anything by which the mind
is beguiled or deceived - for instance, utter self-abandonment to earthly joys,
or the absurd belief that there is no limit to man's aims and achievements.]
all works in vain
(39:65) and yet, it has already been revealed to you [o man,] as well as to
those who lived before you, that if you ever ascribe divine powers to
aught but god, all your works shall most certainly have been in vain: for
[in the life to come] you shall most certainly be among the lost. [i.e., “it
has been conveyed to you through the divine messages revealed to the
prophets”. the above reminder is being addressed to man in general,
irrespective of time and circumstance, concerning the deadly sin of ascribing
divine powers to aught beside god.]
prayers for forgiveness not accepted
(9:113, 115) it does not behove the prophet and those who have attained
to faith to pray that they who ascribed divinity to aught beside god be
forgiven [by him] - even though they happened to be [their] near of kin
- after it has been made clear unto them that those [dead sinners] are
destined for the blazing fire. [this prohibition relates to the dead among
such sinners - i.e., those who have died without repentance - and not to those
who are still living: for a prayer for forgiveness in respect of a living sinner,
amounts to asking god that he grace him with his guidance and this is
permissible.] and god would never - after having invited them to his
guidance - condemn people for going astray [it is not compatible with
god’s omniscience and majesty that he should cause people to go astray after
he has guided them or after he has invited them to the way of rectitude.]
before he has made [entirely] clear unto them of what they should
beware. verily, god has full knowledge of everything. [the people referred
to are the believers who, before the revelation of verse 113, used to pray to
god that he grant his forgiveness to their relatives and friends who had died
in the state of shirk (ascribing divinity to aught beside god): in other words,
the believers need not fear to be taken to task for something which they did
before the prohibition laid down in verse 113 was revealed (i.e., “before he
has made clear unto them of what they should beware”). an alternative
interpretation of verse 115 is meant to explain the severity with which the
whole of this surah condemns the deniers of the truth and the hypocrites who
are going astray after god has made clear unto them of what they should
beware. this interpretation is perhaps the more plausible of the two, and
particularly so in view of the sequence (verse 116).] (18:51) i did not make
them witnesses of the creation of the heavens and the earth, nor of the
creation of their own selves; [i.e., since they are but created beings, and not
co-existent with me, how can you take them for your masters? - an allusion
to the beings, real or imaginary, to which men ascribe divine qualities, either
consciously or (as in the case of ones submission to the whisperings of
satan) by subconscious implication.] and neither do i [have any need to]
take as my helpers those [beings] that lead [men] astray [since god is
almighty, all-knowing and self-sufficient, the belief that any being or power
could have a helping share in his divinity, or could mediate between him and
man, causes the latter to go utterly astray.] (18:52) hence, [bear in mind]
the day on which he will say, “call [now] unto those beings who, you
imagined to have a share in my divinity!” – whereupon they will invoke
them, but those [beings] will not respond to them: for we shall have
placed between them, an unbridgeable gulf. [or: a barrier of perdition: an
allusion to the wide gulf of unreality that separates those sinners from the
blasphemous figments of their imagination or, more probably, the gulf that
separates them from the saintly persons whom they were wont to worship
despite the fact that the latter had never made any claim to divine status.]
(18:53) and those who were lost in sin will behold the fire, and will know
that they are bound to fall into it, and will find no way of escape there
from.
man’s ingratitude as a cause of idol worship
remembering god in hard-time and invoking idols in good-times
(16:53-55) for, whatever good thing comes to you, comes from god; and
whenever harm befalls you, it is unto him that you cry for help - yet as
soon as he has removed the harm from you, lo! some of you [begin to]
ascribe to other powers a share in their sustainer’s divinity, [i.e., by
attributing the change in their luck to what they regard as extraneous factors
and influences, they invest the latter, as it were, with divine qualities and
powers.] [as if] to prove their ingratitude for all that we have granted
them! enjoy, then, your [brief] life: but in time you will come to know
[the truth]!
(39:8) now [thus it is:] when affliction befalls man, he is likely to cry out
to his sustainer, turning unto him [for help]; [i.e., instinctively, and as a
rule] but as soon as he has bestowed upon him a boon by his grace, he
forgets him whom he invoked before, and claims that there are other
powers that could rival god - and thus leads [others] astray from his
path. say [unto him who sins in this way]: “enjoy yourself for a while in
this your denial of the truth; [yet,] verily, you are of those who are
destined for the fire!
birth of a healthy child and share in divinity
(7:189-190) it is he who has created you [all] out of one living entity, and
out of it brought into being its mate, so that man might incline [with
love] towards woman. [for an explanation of “one living entity” and “its
mate”, see 4:1.] and so, when he has embraced her, she conceives [what
at first is] a light burden, and continues to bear it. then, when she grows
heavy [with child], they both call unto god, their sustainer, “if thou
indeed grant us a sound [child] we shall most certainly be among the
grateful!” and yet, as soon as he has granted them sound [offspring],
they begin to ascribe to other powers beside him a share in bringing
about what he has granted them! sublimely exalted, however, is god
above anything to which men may ascribe a share in his divinity! [many
of them look upon the contributing factors of sound childbirth as something
independent of god, forgetting that all these contributing factors are - like the
birth of the child itself - but an outcome of god’s will and grace: a
manifestation of what the quran calls the way of god (sunnat allah).]