كَذَٰلِكَ وَأَوْرَثْنَٰهَا بَنِىٓ إِسْرَٰٓءِيلَ
<p>Commentary</p><p>وَأَوْرَ‌ثْنَاهَا بَنِي إِسْرَ‌ائِيلَ</p><p>And We made the children of Isra it inherit all these. [ 59]</p><p>Apparently it is elucidated in this verse that Bani Isra'il were made the owners of all the material wealth and property left by the people of the Pharaoh after their drowning. But there is a historical issue involved in this statement. The issue is that many Qur'anic verses indicate the Bani Isra'il did not return to Egypt after the drowning of the Pharaoh's people. As a matter of fact they went back towards their original home, the holy land of Syria. There they were commanded to fight (wage jihad) with an infidel nation in order to enter their city. Bani Isra'il refused to comply with this command, as a punishment of which the open plain where they were camping was made a natural prison for them. They could not come out of that plain and spent forty years over there. It was in that place, which is also known as a valley of Tit (Sinai), where their two prophets, Sayyidna Musa and Harun (علیہما السلام) ، died. Even after these incidents it is not reported in the books of history that Bani Isra'il as a nation or in collective form had entered Egypt, which might prove that they had taken possession of the wealth and property of the Pharaoh's people. Tafsir Ruh ul-Ma` ani has reproduced two explanations on the authority of eminent commentators, Sayyidna Hasan and Qatadah ؓ . Sayyidna Hasan ؓ has explained that the verse in question does have a mention that Bani Isra'il were made the heirs of the property of the Pharaoh's people, but it does not say that this had happened immediately after the death of the Pharaoh. If the Bani Isra'il entered Egypt some forty or fifty years after the incident of the valley of Tih, there is no inconsistency in the verse. As for the argument that their collective entry into Egypt is not proved historically, it is not worth taking any notice, because the history of that period was written by Jews and Christians and is full of distortions. There is absolutely no need for interpreting the Qur'anic verse differently for bringing it in line with the history, whose authenticity itself is questionable.</p><p>Sayyidna Qatadah ؓ has explained the situation in another way. He says that although all the Qur'anic verses which have quoted this incident, for instance, verses 128 and 137 of Surah Al-A` raf, 5 of Surah Al-Qassas, 25 to 28 of Surah Ad-Dukhan, and the verse under reference of Surah Ash-Shu'ara', invite the attention to the point that Bani Isra'il were given the custody of that very wealth and property which the people of the Pharaoh had left in Egypt, for which it was necessary for the Bani Isra'il to return to Egypt to take possession. But all these verses can be interpreted to mean that Bani Isra'il were given the wealth and property equal and similar to that which was possessed by the Pharaoh's people. For this it was not necessary that the same lands and wealth of Egypt are given to Bani Isra'il. These bounties might have been granted in Syria. This interpretation is more likely in the verse of Surah Al-A` raf where the land possessed by Bani Isra'il is referred to by the words, الَّتِي بَارَ‌كْنَا فِيهَا (i.e. the land blessed by Us) because the word Barakna is used for the land of Syria in many verses of the Qur'an. Therefore, Sayyidna Qatadah ؓ has opined that it is not correct to attribute Qur'anic verses toward something which is in conflict with the history. The gist of the whole explanation is that if it is established through proved facts that Bani Isra'il did not occupy the land of Egypt at any time after the death of the Pharaoh, then according to explanation of Sayyidna Qatadah ؓ the land of Syria is purported for the wealth and property which was granted to Bani Isra'il. (Only God knows best)</p>
Commentaryوَأَوْرَ‌ثْنَاهَا بَنِي إِسْرَ‌ائِيلَAnd We made the children of Isra it inherit all these. [ 59]Apparently it is elucidated in this verse that Bani Isra'il were made the owners of all the material wealth and property left by the people of the Pharaoh after their drowning. But there is a historical issue involved in this statement. The issue is that many Qur'anic verses indicate the Bani Isra'il did not return to Egypt after the drowning of the Pharaoh's people. As a matter of fact they went back towards their original home, the holy land of Syria. There they were commanded to fight (wage jihad) with an infidel nation in order to enter their city. Bani Isra'il refused to comply with this command, as a punishment of which the open plain where they were camping was made a natural prison for them. They could not come out of that plain and spent forty years over there. It was in that place, which is also known as a valley of Tit (Sinai), where their two prophets, Sayyidna Musa and Harun (علیہما السلام) ، died. Even after these incidents it is not reported in the books of history that Bani Isra'il as a nation or in collective form had entered Egypt, which might prove that they had taken possession of the wealth and property of the Pharaoh's people. Tafsir Ruh ul-Ma` ani has reproduced two explanations on the authority of eminent commentators, Sayyidna Hasan and Qatadah ؓ . Sayyidna Hasan ؓ has explained that the verse in question does have a mention that Bani Isra'il were made the heirs of the property of the Pharaoh's people, but it does not say that this had happened immediately after the death of the Pharaoh. If the Bani Isra'il entered Egypt some forty or fifty years after the incident of the valley of Tih, there is no inconsistency in the verse. As for the argument that their collective entry into Egypt is not proved historically, it is not worth taking any notice, because the history of that period was written by Jews and Christians and is full of distortions. There is absolutely no need for interpreting the Qur'anic verse differently for bringing it in line with the history, whose authenticity itself is questionable.Sayyidna Qatadah ؓ has explained the situation in another way. He says that although all the Qur'anic verses which have quoted this incident, for instance, verses 128 and 137 of Surah Al-A` raf, 5 of Surah Al-Qassas, 25 to 28 of Surah Ad-Dukhan, and the verse under reference of Surah Ash-Shu'ara', invite the attention to the point that Bani Isra'il were given the custody of that very wealth and property which the people of the Pharaoh had left in Egypt, for which it was necessary for the Bani Isra'il to return to Egypt to take possession. But all these verses can be interpreted to mean that Bani Isra'il were given the wealth and property equal and similar to that which was possessed by the Pharaoh's people. For this it was not necessary that the same lands and wealth of Egypt are given to Bani Isra'il. These bounties might have been granted in Syria. This interpretation is more likely in the verse of Surah Al-A` raf where the land possessed by Bani Isra'il is referred to by the words, الَّتِي بَارَ‌كْنَا فِيهَا (i.e. the land blessed by Us) because the word Barakna is used for the land of Syria in many verses of the Qur'an. Therefore, Sayyidna Qatadah ؓ has opined that it is not correct to attribute Qur'anic verses toward something which is in conflict with the history. The gist of the whole explanation is that if it is established through proved facts that Bani Isra'il did not occupy the land of Egypt at any time after the death of the Pharaoh, then according to explanation of Sayyidna Qatadah ؓ the land of Syria is purported for the wealth and property which was granted to Bani Isra'il. (Only God knows best)