the light of qur'an,sura balad,quran,tafsir

sura balad
(the city)
no. 90 (verses 1-7)

in the name of allah, the beneficent, the merdful
1. "nay! i swear by this city (mecca),"
2. "and you are an inhabitant of this city,"
3. "and by the begetter and whom he begot,"
4. "certainly we have created man to be in distress."
5. "does he think that no one has power over him?"
6. "he says: i have squandered wealth abundant!"
7. "does he think that no one sees him?"

commentary:

by this sacred city!
it is the style of the qur'an when stating facts of very great
importance, to often begin with oaths. these oaths, themselves, evoke
thought and intelligence in man.

here, too, in order to state the fact that man's life, in the present
world, is always associated with toil and struggle, it begins with a new
oath and says:

"nay! i swear by this city (mecca),"

* * * *
"and you are an inhabitant of this city".

mecca is not directly mentioned in these verses, but regarding the
sura, on the one hand, which is meccan, and the extraordinary
importance of this sacred city, on the other hand, it is clear that it is in
reference to mecca. the consensus of commentators concur.

of course, the holiness and greatness of mecca requires that
allah makes oath to it. the first center of monotheism and worship to
the lord has been built here and great prophets have circumambulated
it. but the verse: "and you are an inhabitant of this city" contains a new
matter. it says that this city is so highly sacred and holy because of the
prophet (p.b.u.h.), and his blessed existence in it, that it deserves to be
sworn to.

the fact is that the spiritual value of land is due to the value of
those who dwell there. the pagans should not think that the qur'an
has made worthy this land and made oath to it because it is their home
or that it is the central place of their idols. nay, it is not so. the value
of this city, besides its special historical background, is for the sake of
the blessed existence, in it, of mohammad (p.b.u.h.); allah's unique
servant.

there is also another commentary which says: `we do not swear by
this sacred city when they treated you disrespectfully and bid that your life,
wealth and honour be free and permissible for all.'

this is a terrible disgrace to the pagans of quraish who
considered themselves the servitors and protectors of the temple of
mecca and respected it so highly that if a murderer of their father were
seen there, he would be left safe. it is said that even those who took
the bark of the trees of mecca with them were safe because of this
respect. ironically, in showing this kind of respect they did not observe
these customs and traditions regarding the prophet (p.b.u.h.).

why did the pagans hurt him and his companions with every kind
of torment that they could, so that they even counted the slaying of
them lawful?

this commentary is also narrated in a tradition from imam sadiq
(p.b.u.h.).1

* * * *
"and by the begetter and whom he begot".

to answer the question of who is the parent and who is the child,
different commentaries have been cited:

1. the father is abraham and the child is ismail. referring to the
oath in the previous verse made to the city of mecca, and we do know
that abraham and his son were the founders of kaaba and mecca, this
commentary seems very appropriate; in particular, that the pagan arabs
maintained an extraordinary importance for abraham and his son and
they were very proud of them. many of them have claimed that they
have descended from abraham.
2. the begetter is adam and whom he begot is his children.
3. the meaning is adam and all of the prophets who came from
his descendents.
4. it is an oath to any father and child because the process of
human reproduction and its survival throughout history is one of the
most wonderful things in the creation to which allah has sworn.
to gather these four commentaries, together, is not impossible,
but the first one seems the most fitting.

* * * *

then, the attention is paid to a thing which is the final purpose of
these oaths:

"certainly we have created man to be in distress."

the term /kabad/, as tabarsi cites in majma'-al-bayan, originally
means `intensity'.

but, as raqib cites in mufradat, the word /kabad/ means `a
disease in the liver of a person'. and, so, it is used for any trouble and
misery. whatever the root of this word might be, its present use means
trouble and misery.

yes, from the early moments of life, even as a foetus in the womb,
man passes through different, difficult stages with pain and toil until the
time he is born, and even from then on; during his childhood, the period
of his adolescense, and the most difficult times, his mature years, he is
always faced with many kinds of trouble and misery. this is the nature
of the present world. those who have other expectations, about this
world, other than that there is pain and toil, here, are wrong.

the lives of the prophets and saints of allah, who have been the
best of all creatures, have been full of diverse difficulties and painful
situations. when the world has been like this for them, then, the status
of others is clear.

we may see some people or some societies which have no
apparent trouble and seem to live in ease. it is either because of our
insufficient information about them, and, when we approach them and
study their outwardly comfortable lives, we see the depth of their pain
and suffering; or their comfortable situation exists for a short time or in
an exceptional period, but, however, it does not change the general law
of the world.

* * * *
"does he think that no one has power over him?"

the verse denotes that the life of man, which is mixed with pain
and toil, is an evidence that he has no power.

but, man is proud and commits any sin and crime as if he were
quite safe and were out of the limits of allah's punishment. when he
gains power, he neglects all the laws of allah and disobeys him, totally.
does he really think that he can escape from the grips of divine
punishment? what a great error!

it is also probable that the objective point of the verse is directed
toward the rich people who thought no one could take their wealth
from them.

also it has been cited that the objective point is of those who
thought that they will never be questioned about their deeds. the
scope of the concept, of the verse, is so vast and wide that it may cover
all of these commentaries, combined.

some have said that the above verse is about a man from the tribe
of jamh by the name of abu-l-asad. he was so powerful that when he
sat on a piece of leather and ten men tried to take the leather out from
under him they failed. sometimes the leather might have been torn to
pieces, but he would remain sitting.2

in any case, the verse pointing to these arrogant people does not
limit the generality of its meaning.

* * * *

then, on the same theme, it continues stating:

"he says: i have squandered wealth abundant!"

the verse is about those of whom when they were told to spend
some money on good deeds, they would respond, boastfully, that they
had spent much in that way; but they had spent nothing; and if they had
given something to anyone it had been for personal intentions and
hypocritical aims.

some have said that the verse refers to the ones who had spent
much wealth on enmity against islam and the holy prophet (p.b.u.h.) and
for the plots against islam, and for this they boasted. as an evidence, a
tradition says that in the battle of khandaq when hazrat ali (p.b.u.h)
invited `amr-ibn-i-'abdud to islam he protested thus: "what about that
which i have spent, abundantly from my wealth, against you?".3

some have also said that the verse points to some of the chiefs of
quraish such as one of the worst enemies of the prophet (p.b.u.h.).
harith-ibn-'amir, who had committed a sin and asked the prophet
(p.b.u.h.) what he should do about it and hazrat ordered him to pay
atonement, then he replied: "from the day i became a muslim i have
squandered wealth abundant.".4
it is of no consequence whether all of these three commentaries
are combined, though the first one is more fitting with the next verse.
the term /ahlakta/ `i have squandered' denotes that he has,
indeed, wasted his wealth, but has not gained anything beneficial
the term /lubad/ means 'a dense crowd or thing' and, here, it
means `much wealth'.

"does he think that no one sees him?"

he does not pay attention to the fact that allah not only sees
the deeds he has done in private and in public, but also he knows all
that goes through his mind and what he keeps hidden in the depth of his
heart or what he intends to do in the future. is it possible for the
infinite creator who knows everything not to be able to see or know
about a single thing? these neglectful people think that they are out of
the scope of his constant watch, but it is because of their own
ignorance.

yes, allah knows where they have obtained their wealth and
how and for what purpose they have used it.

a tradition is narrated by ibn-abbas that the prophet (p.b.u.h.)
said: "(on dooms day,) no servant can walk forth unless he is asked about
four things: 1) about his lifetime and how he spent it, 2) about his
wealth and where he gathered it from and what he spent it for, 3)
about his deeds and what he has done, and, 4) about his love for
us; the ahlul-bait".5

in short, how can man be proud of his wealth and boast that he is
powerful while all his life is spent in pain and toil, and if he has some
wealth it can disappear in one day and if he has strength it can be
removed by a fever?

furthermore, how can a person claim that he has spent much
wealth for the sake of allah when he knows his intentions? allah
knows both the source of that unlawful wealth, and how he spent it
hypocritically and grudgingly.

1 majma-al-bayan, vol. 10, p.493.
2 majma'-al-bayan, vol. 10, p.493.
3 nur-al-thaqalayn, vol. 5, p. 580. tradition 10.
4 majma'-ai-bayan, vol. 10, p. 493.
5 majma'-al-bayan, vol. 10, p. 494 .(also, ruh-al-bayan, vol. 10, p. 435.)