Surah Al-Kahf (18): Read Online and Download - English Translation

The habitation mentioned أَهْلَ قَرْ‌يَةٍ (the people of a town - 77) which Sayyidna Musa and al-Khadir (علیہ السلام) passed through and whose inhabitants refused to host them was Antakiah, as in the report of Sayyidna Ibn ` Abbas ؓ ، and Aikah, as in the report of Ibn Sirin. It has also been reported from Sayyidna Abu Hurairah ؓ that it was some habitation of al-Andulus (Spain) (Mazhari). Allah knows best.

Commentary

In the first verse, it was said: أَمَّا السَّفِينَةُ فَكَانَتْ لِمَسَاكِينَ (As for the boat, it belonged to some poor people - 79). About the poor people to whom this boat belonged, it has been reported from Sayyidna Ka'b al-Ahbar ؓ that they were ten brothers. Five of them were handicapped while the other five worked hard to eke out a living for all of them by plying a boat against whatever fare they could collect.

The definition of a Miskin

A miskin has been defined as one who has nothing. But, from this verse, we learn the true definition of a miskin: Anyone who does not have the amount of wealth and property that exceed his need, basic and necessary, to the limit of legal nisab (threshold of zakah). One who has less than that is also included under the definition of miskin. The reason is that people called 'al-masakin' (plural of miskin: poor people) had at least one boat the price of which will not be less than the amount of nisab (threshold). But, as it was engaged in earning what those people needed, basically and necessarily, they were still called 'masakin' (poor people). (Mazhari)

Regarding the last sentence of verse 79: مَّلِكٌ يَأْخُذُ كُلَّ سَفِينَةٍ غَصْبًا ، al-Baghawi has reported from Sayyidna Ibn ` Abbas ؓ that the direction in which this boat was sailing, there was a cruel king who used to take boats ferrying people through by force. Al-Khadir (علیہ السلام) found it expedient to pull out a plank from the boat so that the cruel king, seeing this damaged boat, would let it go and thus those poor people would remain safe from the likely mishap. Comments sage Rumi:

گَر خضر در بحر کشتی را شکست صد درستی شکست خضر ہست

Yes, al-Khidr did break the boat while sailing at sea But,

a hundred saving graces in his breaking we see

The opening sentence of verse 80: وَأَمَّا الْغُلَامُ (As for the boy) means the boy who was killed by al-Khadir (علیہ السلام) . The reality behind it, as stated by him, was that the boy was cut out for infidelity and rebellion against parents. But, his parents were pious people. Al-Khadir (علیہ السلام) said that they apprehended that, once this boy grew up, he would harass his parents and cause them pain. And when he took to infidelity as a young man, he would not only become a live trial for the parents but would also endanger the very faith of his parents because of their love for him.

In verse 81, it was said: فَأَرَ‌دْنَا أَن يُبْدِلَهُمَا رَ‌بُّهُمَا خَيْرً‌ا مِّنْهُ زَكَاةً وَأَقْرَ‌بَ رُ‌حْمًا " We, therefore, wished that their Lord would replace him with someone better than him in piety [ having good deeds and morals ] and more akin to affection [ fulfilling due rights of the parents ]."

It will be noticed that the form used in this situation is plural: خَشِينَا (we apprehended) and: أَرَ‌دْنَا (we wished). One reason for it could be that al Khadir (علیہ السلام) attributed this apprehension and wish to himself and to Allah Ta` ala both. And it is also possible that he may have attributed it to himself alone - if so, the expression: أَرَ‌دْنَا (we wished) would mean: 'we prayed to Allah' because this matter of replacing a boy with a better one is an act which falls in the exclusive domain of Allah Ta` ala. Al-Khadir (علیہ السلام) or some other human being cannot be associated with it.

If, at this point, someone were to say: If it was in the knowledge of Allah Ta’ ala that this boy will grow into an infidel and mislead his parents as well, then, this event - true to the knowledge of Allah Ta` ala - should have necessarily transpired as it did. Then this doubt would be incorrect for the reason that nothing can come into being contrary to Divine knowledge.

It can be answered by saying that it was there in Divine knowledge with the appendage and condition: If he reached maturity, he will not only become a disbeliever himself but would pose a danger for other Muslims also. Then, as he was killed before reaching the age of maturity, the ensuing event is not contrary to Divine Knowledge. (Mazhari)

Ibn Abi Shaibah, Ibn al-Mundhir and Ibn Abi Hatim have reported from Ibn ` Atiyyah that Allah Ta` ala had blessed the parents of the slain boy with a girl in his place who became the mother of a prophet. And, as in a report from Sayyidna Ibn ` Abbas ؓ she gave birth to two prophets. Some other reports say that through the prophet she gave birth to, Allah Ta` ala gave guidance to a large community.

About the statement: وَكَانَ تَحْتَهُ كَنزٌ لَّهُمَا (and there was beneath it a treasure for them - 82), Sayyidna Abu al-Dard' ؓ has reported from the Holy Prophet ﷺ that it was a treasure chest of gold and silver. (Narrated by Tirmidhi and a1-Hakim, from Mazhari)

Sayyidna Ibn ` Abbas ؓ said that it was a tablet of gold inscribed with the following good counsel. This report was also narrated by Sayyidna ` Uthman ibn ` Affan ؓ عنہ with its chain of narrators ascending to the Holy Prophet ﷺ : (Qurtubi)

1. بسم اللہ الرحمٰن الرحیم Bismillahir-Rahmanir-Rahim: With the name of Allah, the Most Merciful, the Very Merciful).

2. Amazing is the person who believes in destiny, then how could he despair.

3. Amazing is the person who believes that Allah Ta’ ala is the sponsor of all in their sustenance, still, why would he consume himself in striving for more than he needs and in achieving what is redundant.

4. Amazing is the person who believes in death yet, how could he remain all happy.

5. Amazing is the person who believes in the reckoning of the Hereafter yet, how could he afford to be heedless.

6. Amazing is the person who knows the world and its vicissitudes yet, how could he sit relaxed about it.

7. لا إله إلا اللہ محمد رسول اللہ (la ilaha illallah Muhammad rasulullah: There is no god but Allah Muhammad is a messenger of Allah).

The benefit of the righteousness of parents reaches children, and their children.

The statement: وَكَانَ أَبُوهُمَا صَالِحًا (and their father was a pious man - 82) carries a hint that arrangements were made to have the buried treasure secured for the orphan children through al-Khadir for the reason that the father of the orphan children was some pious man dear in the sight of Allah. Therefore, it was to grant his wish and to bring benefit to his children that Allah Ta’ ala made this arrangement. Muhammad ibn al-Munkadir says: 'It is because of the piety and righteousness of a servant of His that Allah Ta’ ala protects his children, and the children of his children, and his family, even the homes built around his own.' (Mazhari)

As in al-Qurtubi, sage Shibli used to say that he was a guarantee of peace for the city and the area adjoining it. When he died, it was soon after his burial that the disbelievers of Dailam crossed Euphrates and took over Baghdad. At that time, everyone was saying that they were struck by double distress - the death of Shibli and the sack of Dailam, (Qurtubi, p. 29, v. 11)

According to Tafsir Mazhari, this verse also indicates that people too should show consideration and affection for the children of the learned and the pious - unless, of course, they were to succumb to disbelief and sin.

Later, the word: اَشُدّ (ashudd) in: أَن يَبْلُغَا أَشُدَّهُمَا (that they reach their maturity - 82) is a plural form of: شدّہ (shiddah) meaning maturity, the age when one reaches full maturity and becomes able to decide what is good or bad for him. According to Imam Abu Hanifah (رح) ، this is the age of twenty-five years. Others put it at forty years because it appears in the Qur'an: حَتَّىٰ إِذَا بَلَغَ أَشُدَّهُ وَبَلَغَ أَرْ‌بَعِينَ سَنَةً (until when he reaches his maturity and reaches [ the age of ] forty years - al-Ahqaf, 46:15)

Prophetic Eloquence and the Nuances of Etiquette: An Example

Before we turn to this example, let us first understand that nothing can happen in this world, good or bad, without the will and intention of Allah Ta` ala. All phenomena of good and evil is as created by Him and is subservient to His intention and will. Things understood or named as evil or bad do deserve to be called as evil or bad in terms of particular individuals and particular circumstances. But, given a total world-view, they all are necessary and nothing but good in terms of being a Divine creation as based on wisdom.

In short, whatever calamity or accident stands activated in this world simply cannot materialize without the will and intention of Allah Ta` ala. In that respect, every good and evil can also be attributed to Allah Ta’ ala. But, the fact is that, given the creation of Allah Ta’ ala, no evil is evil. Therefore, etiquette demands that evil should not be attributed towards Allah Ta` ala. The words of Sayyidna Ibrahim (علیہ السلام) mentioned in the Qur'an: وَالَّذِي هُوَ يُطْعِمُنِي وَيَسْقِينِ وَإِذَا مَرِ‌ضْتُ فَهُوَ يَشْفِينِ (It is He who gives me [ things ] to eat and drink, [ 26:79] and when I am sick, it is He who cures me - 26:80) are a good example. They teach us the same etiquette when the provision of food and drink has been attributed to Allah Ta` ala. Then comes the provision of cure from sickness. This too has been attributed to Him. In between came the mention of sickness. He attributed it to himself in the words: وَإِذَا مَرِ‌ضْتُ فَهُوَ يَشْفِينِ and when I am sick, it is He who cures me) - not in the manner: When He makes me fall sick, He cures me too.

Let us now consider the diction of al-Khadir (علیہ السلام) . When he formed the intention of breaking the boat - which was obviously a vicious act - he attributed this intention to himself and said: اَرَدتُ (ara[ d ] tu: I wanted to make it defective - 79). After that, he mentioned the killing of the boy and wished someone would replace him who would be better than him. Here, there was evil in the act of killing while being blessed with better progeny in his place was something good. Therefore, because of this common factor, the form used was that of the first person, plural. It was said: اَرَدنَا (aradna: we wished - 81) so that whatever obvious evil there lies in it is beamed back to his own self and whatever good lies in it stands attributed to Allah Ta’ ala. As for the third event - setting the wall right to secure the property of the orphans - it was nothing but good. This was attributed entirely to Allah Ta` ala by saying: فَأَرَ‌ادَ رَ‌بُّكَ (fa arada rabbuk: So your Lord willed - 82).

Is al-Khadir (علیہ السلام) alive, or is he dead?

The event related to al-Khadir (علیہ السلام) mentioned in the Qur'an has nothing to do with the question of his life or death after it. Therefore, no clear statement in this regard is present in the Qur'an, and Sunnah. Some reports suggest his being alive till now while others tell us otherwise. Thus, scholarly opinion has always been at variance in this matter. Those who hold that he is alive argue on the basis of the narrative from. Sayyidna Anas ؓ carried by al-Hakim in his al-Mustadrak. It says, when the Holy Prophet ﷺ left this mortal world, there came a person in black and white beard. Tearing the crowd of people, he reached inside and started weeping. Then, turning to the noble Companions ؓ ، he said the following words:

اِنَّ فِی اللہِ عَزَآءً مَّن کُلِّ مُصِیبَۃِ وَّعِوَضاً مِّن کُلِّ فَآیٔتِ ، وَّ خَلَفاً مِّن کُلِّ ھَالِکِ ، فَاِلَی اللہِ فَاَنِیبُوا وَاِلَیہِ فَاَرغَبُوا وَنَظَرُہ ، اِلَیکُم فِی البَلَاء فَنظُرُوا فَاِنَّمَا المُصَابُ مَن لَّم یُجبَر

Indeed, in Allah there is endurance against all distress, and recompense of everything taken away, and He is the real caretaker for He alone survives after everyone is dead. So, return to Allah, turn to Him passionately and long for Him alone - because, deprived is he who has been deprived of the reward of enduring distress.

After having said these words, when the visitor departed, Sayyidna Abu Bakr and Sayyidna ` Ali ؓ said, he was al-Khadir. This narrative has also been reported by Ibn al-Jazri in his al-Hisn al-Hasin where the compiler is particular about including nothing but what is authentic.

And in Sahih Muslim, it appears that Dajjal (Imposter) will reach a point close to Madinah when a man of Madinah will come out to confront him. He will be the best of men during that time, or among the better ones. Abu Ishaq said, this person will be al-Khadir (علیہ السلام) .' (Qurtubi)

And Ibn Abi ad-Dunya has reported in Kitab al-Hawatif with necessary chains of authority that Sayyidna ` Ali ؓ met al-Khadir (علیہ السلام) who told him about a Du` a' which, if recited by anyone after every Salah, would bring for him great reward, forgiveness and mercy. That prayer is given below:

یَامَن لَّا یُشغِلُہ، سَمعِ ، َّیَا مَن لَّا تُغلِطُہُ المَسَآیٔلُ ، وَیَا مَن لَّا یَبرَمُ مَن اِلحَاحِ المُلِحَّینَ ، اَذِقنِی بَردَ عَفوِکَ وَ حِلَاوَۃَ مَغفِرَتِکَ

O He whose hearing of one thing does not hamper His hearing of the other,

And 0 He who never errs in responding to (millions of) requests simultaneously,

And 0 He who never becomes weary of the plaints made repeatedly by those who make them in prayers, let me, in Your mercy, have a cool taste of Your forgiveness and sweetness of Your pardon. (Qurtubi)

Then, within the same book, exactly the same event, the same prayer and the same incidence of meeting with al-Khadir (علیہ السلام) has been reported from Sayyidna ` Umar ؓ as well. (Qurtubi)

Similar to this, there are countless events relating to al-Khadir (علیہ السلام) that have been attributed to the community's men of Allah ( اَولِیَاء awliya' ).

As for those who do not accept the likelihood of al-Khadir (علیہ السلام) being alive, their major argument comes from the Hadith of Sayyida ` Abdullah ibn ` Umar ؓ appearing in Sahih Muslim. He says, 'one night, the Holy Prophet ﷺ led the ` Isha' prayer for us during the latter days of his blessed life. After having turned for salam, he rose and said these words:

اَرَیٔتکُم لَیلُتَکُم ھٰذِۃٖ فَاِنَّ عَلٰی رَاسِ مِایٔۃِ سَنَۃِ مَّنھَا لَا یَبقٰی مِمَّن ھُوَعَلٰی ظَھرِ الاَرضِ اَحَدُ

Do you see this night of yours? And after a hundred years from this night, not one of those present over the land will be alive!

After having narrated this report, Sayyidna Ibn ` Umare ؓ said, 'people say different things about it. But, what the Holy Prophet ﷺ meant to say was that this age will be over after hundred years.'

This narrative has been reported in Sahih Muslim also from Sayyidna Jabir ibn ` Abdullah, almost in the same words. But, after having quoted this report, Allamah al-Qurtubi said, 'it offers no conclusive argument for those who hold that the notion of al-Khadir (علیہ السلام) being alive is false because, in this narrative, the words used for the entire progeny of Sayyidna Adam (علیہ السلام) are general with a strong emphasis on the generality. Yet, it contains no decisive authority (nass) to prove that this generality covers the entire progeny of Sayyidna Adam (علیہ السلام) necessarily. The reason is that Sayyidna ` Isa (علیہ السلام) too is among the progeny of Sayyidna Adam (علیہ السلام) who has not died, nor was he killed. Therefore, as obvious, the letters: الف لام (alif-lam) in the words: عَلٰی الاَرضِ ('ala al-ard: over the land) is the alif-lam of 'ahd,' (which points out to something familiar to the addressees), and means the land of Arabia. It does not include the whole land mass of the world out of which the Arabs had never heard even the names of the land of Gog and Magog (Ya'juj and Ma'juj), the far East and the Islands of the West.' This was the view of ` Allamah al-Qurtubi.

Similarly, some people have taken the issue of the Finality of Prophethood as contrary to the notion of al-Khadir (علیہ السلام) being alive. The answer to this is also clear. It can be said that the way the 'life' of Sayyidna ` Isa (علیہ السلام) is not contrary to the Finality of Prophethood, the 'life' of al-Khadir can also be quite similar.

Some people have raised a doubt about the 'life' of al-Khadir` (علیہ السلام) . They say, if he were present during the blessed period of the Holy Prophet ﷺ ، it would have been mandatory for him to come to him and to serve the cause of Islam under him. Because, it was said in Hadith: لَو کَانَ مُوسٰی حَیَّاً لَّمَا وَسِعَہ، اِلَّا اِتِّبَاعِی "Had Musa been alive [ today ], he would have had no choice but to follow me [ for my coming has resulted in the abrogation of the Faith of Musa But, not far out is the possibility that the 'life' and prophethood of al-Khadir 'still may be different from that of the usual Shari` ah-bearing prophets. Since he is charged with the duty of carrying out certain affairs of creation (takwin) entrusted with him by Allah Ta` ala, He takes care of this appointed duty staying aloof from people at large. As for following the Shari’ ah of the Last Prophet ﷺ ، it is not a far out proposition that he may have started acting in accordance with it after the advent of the prophethood of Sayyidna Muhammad al-Mustafa ﷺ . (Allah knows best).

In Tafsir al-Bahr al-Muhit, Abu Hasan has reported events of several pious elders having met al-Khadir (علیہ السلام) but, along with it, he has also said:

وَالجُمھُورُ عَلٰی اَنَّہ ، مَاتَ

As for the majority of religious scholars, they hold the position that al-Khadir (علیہ السلام) has died. (al-Bahr al-Muhit, p. 147, vol.6)

In Tafsir Mazhari, Qadi Thana'ullah of Panipati has said, 'the resolution of all these difficulties lies in what Sayyid Ahmad al-Sarhandi, known as the reviver of the second Islamic millennium, said on the basis of his mukashafah (discovery through induced illumination). His words are: 'I personally asked al-Khadir (علیہ السلام) about this matter in a state of kashf. He said', "I and Ilyas (علیہ السلام) are both not alive. But, Allah Ta’ ala has granted us the ability to appear in the guise of living men and help people in different ways." (Allah, the Pure, the Exalted, knows best)

Conclusion

I have said earlier that none of our articles of faith or problems of religious practice is connected with the death or life of al-Khadir (علیہ السلام) . Therefore, no clarification or explanation was given in the Qur’ an and Sunnah about it. So, there is just no need to enter into unnecessary discussion or debate in it, nor have we been obligated to believe in any one of the sides of the issue. But, as this problem has found currency on a wider level, details have been provided..

Commentary

Verse 84 opens with the statement: يَسْأَلُونَكَ (They ask you). Who is asking? Related narratives show that they were the Quraysh of Makkah, those who were coached to ask three questions from the Holy Prophet ﷺ . The purpose was to test his prophethood and veracity. The questions were about Ruh (spirit), Ashab al-Kahf (People of Kahf) and Dhul-Qarnain. Two of these have already been answered. The story of the People of Kahf has appeared earlier in this Surah, 9-26. The question about 'Ruh' has appeared towards the later part of the previous Surah (Bani Isra'il 17:85). Who was Dhul-Qarnain and what happened to him? This is the third question. (Al-Bahr al-Muhit)

Dhul-Qarnain: His identity, period and country and the reason why he was so named

Why was he named Dhul-Qarnain? (the one having two horns) Regarding its reason, there are numerous sayings, and strong differences. Some said that he had two curly locks of hair, therefore, he was called Dhul-Qarnain. Some others said that he ruled countries of the East and West, therefore, he was named Dhul-Qarnain. There was someone who also said that he had marks on his head that resembled those of horns. It appears in some narratives that he had wound marks on both sides of his head, therefore, he was identified as Dhul-Qarnain. Allah knows best. But, this much already stands determined that the Qur’ an has certainly not given him the name of Dhul-Qarnain. In fact, this name came from the Jews. He may have been known by this name with them. Whatever part of the event of Dhul-Qarnain has been mentioned by the Holy Qur'an is no more than what is described below:

He was a righteous and just king who reached the East and the West and conquered countries in between and ruled there justly. All sorts of means had been provided to him by Allah Ta` ala in order to help him achieve his objectives. On the route of his conquests, he traveled in three directions: to the far West, to the far East and then to the mountain range in the North. At the last mentioned place, he closed the pass in between two mountains by a wall cast in molten metal which made it possible for the people of the area to stay protected against the pillage of Gog and Magog."

As for the question posed by the Jews to test the veracity and prophet-hood of the Holy Prophet ﷺ ، the answer given had left them satisfied.

They did not ask any_ more questions, such as: Why was he given the name, Dhul-Qarnain? Which country did he come from? What period of time did he belong to? This tells us that the Jews themselves took such questions to be unnecessary and redundant. And it is obvious that the Qur'an mentions only that part of history or stories which relates to what is beneficial in the present life or in the life to come, or on which depends the understanding of something necessary. Therefore, neither did the Qur'an take these things up nor were there any details about it described in any authentic Hadith. And it was for the same reason that the most righteous forbears of Islam, the Sahabah and the Tabi` in also paid no particular attention to it. Now the thing that remains to be addressed is this matter of historical narratives or that of the present Torah and Injil. Then it is also evident that perennial interpolations and alterations have not left even the present Torah and Injil intact as revealed Scriptures. Their status can now be that of history at the most. As for ancient historical narratives, they are overwhelmingly filled with Isra'ili tales, that come from no authentic source, nor have they been found trustworthy in the sight of the learned of any time. Whatever the commentators have said in this mat-ter is a compendium of these very historical narratives. Therefore, there are countless differences in them. Europeans have given great importance to history in modern times. No doubt, they have carried out pains-taking research in this field. Through archaeological excavations and collection of inscriptions and artifacts, they have tried to reach the reality behind past events and in this process, they have come up with achievements not matched in earlier times. But, archaeological finds, inscriptions etc., can certainly help support an event but it is not possible to read a whole event through these. For it, therefore, historical narratives alone have become the basis. As for the validity of old historical narratives in these matters, we have just now learnt that their status is no more than that of a story. In their books, scholars of Tafsir, classical or modern, have reported these narratives in their historical status only - no Qur'anic objective depends on the element of their authenticity. Here too, that which is necessary is being written with the same status in view. A comprehensive research relating to this event appears in 'Qasas al-Qur'an' by Maulana Hifzur-Rahman (رح) . Readers with a taste for history may see it there.

In some narratives, it appears that there have been four kings who ruled over the whole world - two believers, and two, disbelievers. The believing kings are Sayyidna Sulaiman (علیہ السلام) and Dhul-Qarnain while the disbelieving ones are Nimrod (Namrud) and Nebuchadnezzar (Bukht Nassar).

About Dhul-Qarnain, it is a strange coincidence that several men have been famous in the world while bearing the same name. And it is equally strange that the title Sikandar (Alexander) is also attached with the Dhul-Qarnain of every period of time.

Approximately three hundred years before Sayyidna Masih (علیہ السلام) ، there is a king known as Sikandar (Alexander). He is identified with the appellations of the Greek, the Macedonian, the Roman etc. He was the one who had Aristotle (Arastu) as his minister, who fought a war against Dara (Darius) and who conquered his country after killing him. This was the very last person to have become known in the world by the name Sikandar (Alexander). Stories relating to him are comparatively more famous around the world, so some people have also equated him with the Dhul-Qarnain mentioned in the Qur’ an. This is totally wrong because this person was a fire-worshipping polytheist. As for the Dhul-Qarnain mentioned by the Qur'an, he may not be a prophet for ` Ulama' have differed about his being a prophet. But, everyone unanimously agrees that he was a righteous believer - then, there is the textual authority of the Qur'an in its own right which bears testimony to it.

Quoting Ibn ` Asakir, Hafiz Ibn Kathir has given his complete family tree in al-Bidayah wa an-Nihayah which ascends to Sayyidna Ibrahim (علیہ السلام) . He has said, this is the Sikandar who is recognized as the Greek, the Egyptian and the Macedonian, who founded the city of Iskandariyah (Alexandria) after his name and the Roman calendar dates back to his time. This Sikandar Dhul-Qarnain appeared after a long passage of time from the first one. This time has been identified as being more than two thousand years. He was the one who killed Dara (Darius), overpowered the Persian monarchy and conquered their country. But, this person was a polytheist. Declaring him to be the one mentioned in the Qur’ an is totally wrong. Ibn Kathir's own words are being quoted below:

فاما ذولقرنین فھوا سکندر بن فیلبس بن مصریح بن برس بن مبطون بن رومی بن نعطی بن یونانبن یافث بن بونہ بن شرخون بن رومہ بن شرخط بن توفیل بن رومی بن لاصفر بن یقزبن العیص بن اسحٰق بن ابرٰھیم خلیل علیہ الصلوٰۃ والسلام ۔ کذا نسبہ الحافظ ابن عساکر فی تاریخہ المقدونی، الیونانی المصری بانی الاسکندریۃ الذی یؤرخ بایامہ الروم ، وکان متاٌخراً عن الاول بدھر طویل، وکان ھٰذی قبن المسیح بنحو من ثلثمایٔۃ سنۃ و کان ارسطا طالیس الفیلسوف وزیرہ و ھو الذی قتل دارا و اذل ملوک الفرس واوطاٌ ارضھم وانما نبھنا علیہ ، لان کثیرا من الناس یعتقد انھما واحد ، وان المذکور فی القران ھو الذی کان ارطاطلیس وزیرہ، فیقع بسبب ذلک خطاء کبیروفساد عریض طویل، فان الاوَّل کان عبداً مؤمنا صالحاوملکا عادلاً ، وکان وزیرہ الخضر، وقد کان بین زمانیھما ازید من الفی سنۃ، فاین ھذامن ھذا ؟ لا یستویان ولا یشتبھان الا علی غبی لا یعرف حقایٔق الامور (البدایۃ والنھایۃ ص 106/ج 2)

First of all, this research of Imam ibn Kathir, the great scholar of Hadith and history, helps remove a misconception. It clarifies that this Iskandar, who lived three hundred years before Sayyidna Masih (علیہ السلام) who fought Dara (Darius) and the Persian kings, and who is the founder of Alexandria, is not the Dhul-Qarnain mentioned in the Qur’ an. This misconception seems to have affected some leading commentators as well. Abu Hayyan in al-Bahr al-Muhit and ` Allamah 'Alusi in Ruh al-Ma'ani have said that this very Dhul-Qarnain is the one mentioned in the Qur’ an.

The second point emerges from the sentence of Ibn Kathir: وَ اَنَّہ کان نَبِیِّاً (he was a prophet). It shows that, in the sight of Ibn Kathir, the weightier opinion was that he was a prophet. Although, according to the majority of scholars, the weightier opinion is what Ibn Kathir has himself reported on the authority Abi al-Tufayl from Sayyidna Ali ؓ that he was neither a prophet nor an angel, rather was a righteous believer. Therefore, some ` Ulama have explained it by saying that the pronoun in: اَنَّہ کان (he was) reverts to Al-Khadir (علیہ السلام) and not to Dhul-Qarnain - which is closer in sense.

This leaves us with a problem. The Qur’ an mentions Dhul-Qarnain. Who is he? Which period of time did he belong to? Regarding this, sayings of ` Ulama' differ. According to Ibn Kathir, his time was the time of Sayyidna Ibrahim (علیہ السلام) two thousand years before the time of Alexander, the Greek, the Macedonian. Al-Khadir (علیہ السلام) was his minister. Ibn Kathir has also reported from the early righteous elders in al-Bidayah wa an-Nihayah that Dhul-Qarnain went for Hajj traveling on foot. When Sayyidna Ibrahim (علیہ السلام) found out about his arrival, he went out of Makkah to greet him. It is said that Sayyidna Ibrahim (علیہ السلام) also prayed for him and passed out some good counsel to him. (Al-Bidayah, p. 108, v. 3) Tafsir Ibn Kathir reports from Adhraqi that he did tawaf with Sayyidna Ibrahim (علیہ السلام) and offered sacrifice.

And Abu al-Raihan al-Bairuni has said in his book al-'Athar al-Baqiyah ` an al-Qurun al-Khaliyah that 'this Dhul-Qarnain mentioned in the Qur'an is Abu Bakr ibn Samma ibn ` Umar ibn Ifriqis al-Himyari, the one who conquered the East and West of the Earth. Tubba' al-Himyari al-Yamani has shown pride in his poetry that his grandfather, Dhul-Qarnain, was a believer. He says:

قد کان ذوالقرنین جدی مسلماً ملکاً علافی الرض غیر مبعَّد

بَلَغ المشارِقَ والمغارِبَ یَبتَغِی اسباب مُلکِ مَّن کَرِیمِ سَیِّدٖ

Dhul-Qarnain, my grandfather, was a believing Muslim

A king who conquered the non-believing Earth

He reached the Easts and the Wests seeking

Means of power from the noble Master.

Abu Hayyan has reported this narrative in al-Bahr al-Muhit. Ibn Kathir has also mentioned it in al-Bidayah wa an-Nihayah. Ibn Kathir adds that 'this Dhul-Qarnain is the first Tubba' (the title of the kings of Yaman). He was among the Tababi'ah (plural of Tubba' ) of Yaman and this is the same person who had ruled in favour of Sayyidna (علیہ السلام) in the case of Bi'r Sab’ (seven wells) ' - (al-Bidayah, p. 105, v. 2). In all these narratives, irrespective of the difference regarding the elements of his identity, his time period has been identified as that of Sayyidna Ibrahim (علیہ السلام) .

As for the detailed discussion relating to Dhul-Qarnain provided by Maulana Hifzur-Rahman in his book, Qasas a1-Qur'an, it can be stated in a nutshell. It can be said that the Dhul-Qarnain mentioned in the Qur'an is the king of Persia who is called Khorus by the Jews, Cyrus by the Greeks, Gorush by the Persians and Kai-Khusro by the Arabs. His period is said to be the period of Daniyal (Daniel) from among the prophets of Bani Isra'i1 - much later than the time of Sayyidna Ibrahim (علیہ السلام) . This brings it closer to the time of Iskandar al-Maqduni (Alexander, the Macedonian), the killer of Dara (Darius). But, the learned Maulana - like Ibn Kathir - has also strongly maintained that Alexander, the Macedonian who had Aristotle as his minister cannot be the Dhul-Qarnain. The former was a fire-worshipping polytheist while the later, a righteous believer.

According to his research about the detailed description of Bani Isra'il falling into wrongdoing and rebellion twice, and of the respective punishment given to them twice, as in Surah Bani Isra'il (al-''Isra' ), the Qur’ an says on the occasion of the first transgression of Bani Isra'il: بَعَثْنَا عَلَيْكُمْ عِبَادًا لَّنَا أُولِي بَأْسٍ شَدِيدٍ فَجَاسُوا خِلَالَ الدِّيَارِ‌ (We sent upon you some of Our servants having strong aggressive power, who combed through the houses - 17:5). Here, the men with 'strong aggressive power' are Nebuchadnezzar and his supporting troops who killed forty thousand - seventy thousand in some narratives - men from the Bani Isra'il in Baytul-Maqdis, while taking more than one hundred thousand of them driven like a flock of sheep to his city of Babel. After that, as regards the second statement of the Qur’ an: ثُمَّ رَ‌دَدْنَا لَكُمُ الْكَرَّ‌ةَ عَلَيْهِمْ (Then We gave you your turn to overpower them - 17:6), this event transpired at the hands of the same king, Kai-Khusraw (Khorus or Cyrus). He was a righteous believer. He con-fronted Nebuchadnezzar, secured the release of Bani Isra'il held as captives by him and rehabilitated them back into Palestine. He even went on to resettle and repopulate the city of Baytul-Maqdis that was ran-sacked earlier to the limit that he managed to have all treasures and major effects of Baytul-Maqdis carried away by Nebuchadnezzar from there returned back into the possession of Bani Isra'il. Thus, this person proved to be the savior of Bani Isra'il (the Jews).

It is likely that of the questions the Jews of Madinah had set for the Quraysh of Makkah which they would ask the Holy Prophet ﷺ to test his prophethood, was this question about Dhul-Qarnain and that it had an underlying reason. This question was special since the Jews took him to be their savior and respected him.

In short, Maulana Hifzur-Rahman has collected a sufficiently large number of evidences from the prophesies of the prophets of Bani Isra'il with reference to the present Old Testament as well as from historical narratives to present his research on this subject. Anyone who finds it imperative to proceed towards additional research may consult it. My purpose in reporting all these narratives was simply to bring into focus sayings of leading Muslim scholars, historians and commentators as they relate to the life and time of Dhul-Qarnain. To decide as to whose saying is weightier and worthier out of these is not part of my objective. The reason is that things not claimed by the Qur’ an nor explained by Hadith are things we have not been obligated to fix and clarify on our own for that responsibility does not rest on our shoulders. Thus, whichever saying turns out to be regarded as more weighty, worthy and sound, the aim of the Qur'an will stand achieved after all. Allah knows best. Let us now proceed to the explanation of the verses.

Let us look at the first verse cited above: قُلْ سَأَتْلُو عَلَيْكُم مِّنْهُ ذِكْرً‌ا (I shall now recite to you a narration about him - 83). It prompts us to find out as to why the Holy Qur'an has elected to bypass the possible shorter expression ذِکرَہ dhikrahu (his narrations) at this place and has opted for two words: مِنہُ ذِکراً ('minhu dhikra' ) (some narration about him)? A little reflection would reveal that these two words have been used as indicators. They tell us that the Qur'an has not promised to narrate the entire story of Dhul-Qarnain in its historical setting. Instead, it has stated that it will mention it in part. This is evident from the use of the particle: مِن (min) and the nunnation (tanwin) of 'dhikra' - a distinct feature of Arabic grammar. As for the historical debate relating to the name, lineage and time period of Dhul-Qarnain reported earlier, the Holy Qur’ an has already said in advance that it has skipped it as something unnecessary.