غُلِبَتِ ٱلرُّومُ
<p>Commentary</p><p>Backdrop of revelation of the Surah - the story of war between Rum and Persia</p><p>In the last verse of Surah ` Ankabut' Allah Ta’ ala had given the good tiding to those who would strive and struggle in His way. It was promised that for such people, He would open the doors toward Him, and that they would succeed in their objectives. The story that marks the beginning of Surah Ar-Rum is a manifestation of that very Divine help. The war referred to in this Surah was fought between Romans and Persians, who were both disbelievers, and had nothing to do with the Muslims. The people of Persia were fire-worshippers, while those of Rum were Christians, and hence, the People of the Book. So, naturally the people of Rum were relatively closer to Muslims. Many of their beliefs, such as faith in the Hereafter, the prophethood, and revelations, were common to Islamic beliefs. The Holy Prophet ﷺ made use of this part of their beliefs in his letter when he wrote to the king of Rum ( Rome) inviting him to accept Islam تَعَالَوْا إِلَىٰ كَلِمَةٍ سَوَاءٍ بَيْنَنَا وَبَيْنَكُمْ (come to a word common between us and you - 3:64). In fact it was this affinity between Islam and Christianity that caused the Persians to attack رُوم Rum. It happened when the Holy Prophet ﷺ was still living in Makkah. According to Hafiz Ibn Hajar, this war was fought in Syria at a place between Adhru’ at and Busra. The Pagans of Makkah aspired for the victory for the Persians in this war, because the Persians shared them in their belief in polytheism, but the Muslims wished the triumph of the Christians, as they were closer to Islam in their beliefs. But as it happened, the Persians defeated the Christians, and conquered the land right up to Constantinople, and built a temple there for worshipping fire. This victory was the last for Chosroe Parvez. After that, his decline sat in, and ultimately he was removed by the Muslims. (Qurtubi).</p><p>At the defeat of Christians, the infidels of Makkah rejoiced, and taunted the Muslims that their favourites have lost. They also claimed that as the Persian infidels defeated the Roman Christians, the same way Makkans would also beat down the Muslims. This claim hurt the Muslims to some extent. (Ibn Jarir, Ibn Abi Hatim)</p><p>The opening verses of Surah Ar-Rum relate to this incident in which it is predicted as a good tiding that the people of Rum will overcome the Persians again in a few years time.</p><p>When Sayyidnu Abu Bakr ؓ learnt about these verses, he went to the infidels in the market place and suburbs of Makkah and announced that there was no occasion for them to be happy as after a few years, the Christians would overcome the Persians again. Hearing this 'Ubayy ibn Khalaf challenged him and said it could not be so, and that he was only telling a lie. Sayyidna Abu Bakr ؓ said "0 enemy of Allah! You are a liar, I am willing to bet on this issue that in case the Christians would not overcome the Persians in three years time, I will give you ten camels, and if they did overcome, then you will have to give me ten camels". (This was a case of gambling, but gambling was not prohibited by then). After saying that Sayyidna Abu Bakr ؓ went to the Holy Prophet ﷺ and narrated the episode. On that, the Holy Prophet ﷺ said to him that he did not fix the time of three years, because Qur'an has used the word Bid' Sinin (a few years) under which the time limit could be anything between three to nine years. Therefore, the Holy Prophet ﷺ asked Sayyidna Abu Bakr ؓ to go back to the person with whom he had made the bet and ask him that he would bet for hundred camels instead of ten, but the time limit would be nine (and according to some other reports, seven) years and not three. Sayyidna Abu Bakr ؓ followed the instructions of the Holy Prophet ﷺ ، and 'Ubayy Ibn Khalaf also agreed on the terms of the new bet. (Ibn Jarir) (1)</p><p>(1) 'Ubayy readily accepted the new terms because he was fully confident that the Romans could not defeat the Persians. Given the circumstances prevalent at that time, such an unshaken confidence of 'Ubayy was not misconceived. The way the Persians had beaten the Roman Empire had left no room for their uprising again. The prediction that the Romans will be victorious against Persians had no basis in the visible possibilities, when it was made. Nobody could foresee, in the world of causes and effects, that such an event might take place. Edward Gibbon, the famous historian of the Roman Empire, has observed:</p><p>"Placed on the verge of the two great empires of the East, Muhammad observed with secret joy the progress of their mutual destruction; and in the midst of the Persian triumphs he ventured to foretell that, before many years should elapse, victory would again return to the banners of the Romans. At the time when this prediction is said to have been delivered, no prophecy could be more distant from its accomplishment, since the first twelve years of Heraclius announced the approaching dissolution of the empire”.</p><p>It is gathered from various ahadith that this incident had happened five years before the hijrah. After the passage of exactly seven years, at the time of the battle of Badr, the Romans defeated Persians. By that time, 'Ubayy Ibn Khalaf had died. So Sayyidna Abu Bakr ؓ demanded a hundred camels from his heirs according to the terms of the bet, to which they complied and handed over the agreed number of camels.</p><p>Some versions of the incident state that before the hijrah, Ubayy Ibn Khalaf expressed his apprehension to Sayyidna Abu Bakr ؓ that the latter might leave Makkah, and in such a situation he would not let him go unless he appointed a guarantor for himself. It was to ensure that when the period of the bet would expire, the guarantor should arrange to deliver a hundred camels. Sayyidna Abu Bakr ؓ appointed his son, ` Abdur Rahman ؓ ، as his guarantor.</p><p>When Sayyidna Abu Bakr ؓ won the bet according to the agreement and got hold of one hundred camels, he took them to the Holy Prophet ﷺ ، who asked him to give them in charity (sadaqah). Abu Ya` la has quoted these words in Ibn ` Asakir on the authority of Sayyidna Bra' Ibn ` Azib ھٰذا السُحتُ تَصَدَّق بِہٰ. That is, 'this is prohibited. Give it in charity (sadaqah).' (Ruh ul-Ma ani).</p><p>Gambling</p><p>Qimar, that is, gambling, is absolutely prohibited according to the categorical Qur'anic injunction. After hijrah to Madinah when liquor was banned, gambling was also prohibited simultaneously. It was declared an act of Shaitan: إِنَّمَا الْخَمْرُ‌ وَالْمَيْسِرُ‌ وَالْأَنصَابُ وَالْأَزْلَامُ رِ‌جْسٌ مِّنْ عَمَلِ الشَّيْطَانِ (The truth is that wine, gambling, altar-stones and divining arrows are filth, a work of Shaitan - 5:90) Maysir (مَیسِر) and Azlam (' اَزلَام) are nothing but different forms of gambling, which have been prohibited in this verse.</p><p>Betting, in which money or commodities are placed on stake and won or lost according to conditions agreed, is also a form of gambling. The bet made between Sayyidna Abu Bakr ؓ and 'Ubayy ibn Khalaf was also a form of gambling. But this incident had happened before the hijrah, when the injunction for banning the gambling was not revealed. Therefore, the commodity won in this case was not حَرَام haram (prohibited).</p><p>(Gibbon, The decline and fall of the Roman Empire, chapter 46, vol. 2, p. 125, Great Books, V.38, published by the University of Chicago, 1990) Had it not been a news given by Allah Ta’ ala, nobody could have dared to predict such an unlikely event. In particular, it was impossible for a claimant to prophethood that he would put his future at stake by predicting an event that was so improbable. This foretelling, therefore, is one of the solid proofs of the prophethood of Sayyidna Muhammad ﷺ . (Muhammad Taqi ` Usmni )</p><p>The question that arises here is that why did the Holy Prophet ask Sayyidna Abu Bakr 4 to give away the camels in charity when they were not haram (prohibited), especially when in some other versions of the hadith the word سُحت suht is used, which is commonly understood as haram? The answer to this query, as given by the religious jurists, is that although at that time those camels were halal (permitted) but the Holy Prophet ﷺ did not like earning through gambling, even at that time. He therefore, asked Sayyidna Abu Bakr to give them away in charity, as they were below his stature. It is identical to the situation that the Holy Prophet ﷺ ، and Sayyidna Abu Bakr ؓ did not taste liquor ever, even during the time when it was not prohibited.</p><p>As regards the use of the word suht (سُحت), in the first place the scholars of hadith did not accept this narration as correct; and even if it is accepted as authentic, it should be kept in mind that this word has several meanings. One meaning is haram (prohibited), and the other is abominable and undesirable. It is related in one had ith that once-the Holy Prophet ﷺ said خَسبُ الحَجَّامِ سُحتُ that is, ` The earning of the one who undertakes treatment by cupping is suht'. The majority of religious scholars have taken the meaning of suht here as undesirable or disgusting. Imam Raghib Isfahani in his Mufradat-ul-Qur'an and Ibn Athir in his Nihayah have proved the different meanings of the word suht in the usage of Arabic language and ahadith of the Prophet ﷺ .</p><p>Acceptance of this interpretation of the religious scholars is also necessary because if in fact these camels were haram, then according to religious law this was to be returned to the person from whom it was taken. The commodity, which is haram, can only be given in charity (sadaqah) under any one of the three situations: One, when the owner of the commodity is not known. Two, when it is not possible to deliver the commodity to the owner. And third, when there is any religious complication in the delivery of the commodity. وَاللہُ سبحانَہُ و تعالیٰ اَعلَم</p>
CommentaryBackdrop of revelation of the Surah - the story of war between Rum and PersiaIn the last verse of Surah ` Ankabut' Allah Ta’ ala had given the good tiding to those who would strive and struggle in His way. It was promised that for such people, He would open the doors toward Him, and that they would succeed in their objectives. The story that marks the beginning of Surah Ar-Rum is a manifestation of that very Divine help. The war referred to in this Surah was fought between Romans and Persians, who were both disbelievers, and had nothing to do with the Muslims. The people of Persia were fire-worshippers, while those of Rum were Christians, and hence, the People of the Book. So, naturally the people of Rum were relatively closer to Muslims. Many of their beliefs, such as faith in the Hereafter, the prophethood, and revelations, were common to Islamic beliefs. The Holy Prophet ﷺ made use of this part of their beliefs in his letter when he wrote to the king of Rum ( Rome) inviting him to accept Islam تَعَالَوْا إِلَىٰ كَلِمَةٍ سَوَاءٍ بَيْنَنَا وَبَيْنَكُمْ (come to a word common between us and you - 3:64). In fact it was this affinity between Islam and Christianity that caused the Persians to attack رُوم Rum. It happened when the Holy Prophet ﷺ was still living in Makkah. According to Hafiz Ibn Hajar, this war was fought in Syria at a place between Adhru’ at and Busra. The Pagans of Makkah aspired for the victory for the Persians in this war, because the Persians shared them in their belief in polytheism, but the Muslims wished the triumph of the Christians, as they were closer to Islam in their beliefs. But as it happened, the Persians defeated the Christians, and conquered the land right up to Constantinople, and built a temple there for worshipping fire. This victory was the last for Chosroe Parvez. After that, his decline sat in, and ultimately he was removed by the Muslims. (Qurtubi).At the defeat of Christians, the infidels of Makkah rejoiced, and taunted the Muslims that their favourites have lost. They also claimed that as the Persian infidels defeated the Roman Christians, the same way Makkans would also beat down the Muslims. This claim hurt the Muslims to some extent. (Ibn Jarir, Ibn Abi Hatim)The opening verses of Surah Ar-Rum relate to this incident in which it is predicted as a good tiding that the people of Rum will overcome the Persians again in a few years time.When Sayyidnu Abu Bakr ؓ learnt about these verses, he went to the infidels in the market place and suburbs of Makkah and announced that there was no occasion for them to be happy as after a few years, the Christians would overcome the Persians again. Hearing this 'Ubayy ibn Khalaf challenged him and said it could not be so, and that he was only telling a lie. Sayyidna Abu Bakr ؓ said "0 enemy of Allah! You are a liar, I am willing to bet on this issue that in case the Christians would not overcome the Persians in three years time, I will give you ten camels, and if they did overcome, then you will have to give me ten camels". (This was a case of gambling, but gambling was not prohibited by then). After saying that Sayyidna Abu Bakr ؓ went to the Holy Prophet ﷺ and narrated the episode. On that, the Holy Prophet ﷺ said to him that he did not fix the time of three years, because Qur'an has used the word Bid' Sinin (a few years) under which the time limit could be anything between three to nine years. Therefore, the Holy Prophet ﷺ asked Sayyidna Abu Bakr ؓ to go back to the person with whom he had made the bet and ask him that he would bet for hundred camels instead of ten, but the time limit would be nine (and according to some other reports, seven) years and not three. Sayyidna Abu Bakr ؓ followed the instructions of the Holy Prophet ﷺ ، and 'Ubayy Ibn Khalaf also agreed on the terms of the new bet. (Ibn Jarir) (1)(1) 'Ubayy readily accepted the new terms because he was fully confident that the Romans could not defeat the Persians. Given the circumstances prevalent at that time, such an unshaken confidence of 'Ubayy was not misconceived. The way the Persians had beaten the Roman Empire had left no room for their uprising again. The prediction that the Romans will be victorious against Persians had no basis in the visible possibilities, when it was made. Nobody could foresee, in the world of causes and effects, that such an event might take place. Edward Gibbon, the famous historian of the Roman Empire, has observed:"Placed on the verge of the two great empires of the East, Muhammad observed with secret joy the progress of their mutual destruction; and in the midst of the Persian triumphs he ventured to foretell that, before many years should elapse, victory would again return to the banners of the Romans. At the time when this prediction is said to have been delivered, no prophecy could be more distant from its accomplishment, since the first twelve years of Heraclius announced the approaching dissolution of the empire”.It is gathered from various ahadith that this incident had happened five years before the hijrah. After the passage of exactly seven years, at the time of the battle of Badr, the Romans defeated Persians. By that time, 'Ubayy Ibn Khalaf had died. So Sayyidna Abu Bakr ؓ demanded a hundred camels from his heirs according to the terms of the bet, to which they complied and handed over the agreed number of camels.Some versions of the incident state that before the hijrah, Ubayy Ibn Khalaf expressed his apprehension to Sayyidna Abu Bakr ؓ that the latter might leave Makkah, and in such a situation he would not let him go unless he appointed a guarantor for himself. It was to ensure that when the period of the bet would expire, the guarantor should arrange to deliver a hundred camels. Sayyidna Abu Bakr ؓ appointed his son, ` Abdur Rahman ؓ ، as his guarantor.When Sayyidna Abu Bakr ؓ won the bet according to the agreement and got hold of one hundred camels, he took them to the Holy Prophet ﷺ ، who asked him to give them in charity (sadaqah). Abu Ya` la has quoted these words in Ibn ` Asakir on the authority of Sayyidna Bra' Ibn ` Azib ھٰذا السُحتُ تَصَدَّق بِہٰ. That is, 'this is prohibited. Give it in charity (sadaqah).' (Ruh ul-Ma ani).GamblingQimar, that is, gambling, is absolutely prohibited according to the categorical Qur'anic injunction. After hijrah to Madinah when liquor was banned, gambling was also prohibited simultaneously. It was declared an act of Shaitan: إِنَّمَا الْخَمْرُ‌ وَالْمَيْسِرُ‌ وَالْأَنصَابُ وَالْأَزْلَامُ رِ‌جْسٌ مِّنْ عَمَلِ الشَّيْطَانِ (The truth is that wine, gambling, altar-stones and divining arrows are filth, a work of Shaitan - 5:90) Maysir (مَیسِر) and Azlam (' اَزلَام) are nothing but different forms of gambling, which have been prohibited in this verse.Betting, in which money or commodities are placed on stake and won or lost according to conditions agreed, is also a form of gambling. The bet made between Sayyidna Abu Bakr ؓ and 'Ubayy ibn Khalaf was also a form of gambling. But this incident had happened before the hijrah, when the injunction for banning the gambling was not revealed. Therefore, the commodity won in this case was not حَرَام haram (prohibited).(Gibbon, The decline and fall of the Roman Empire, chapter 46, vol. 2, p. 125, Great Books, V.38, published by the University of Chicago, 1990) Had it not been a news given by Allah Ta’ ala, nobody could have dared to predict such an unlikely event. In particular, it was impossible for a claimant to prophethood that he would put his future at stake by predicting an event that was so improbable. This foretelling, therefore, is one of the solid proofs of the prophethood of Sayyidna Muhammad ﷺ . (Muhammad Taqi ` Usmni )The question that arises here is that why did the Holy Prophet ask Sayyidna Abu Bakr 4 to give away the camels in charity when they were not haram (prohibited), especially when in some other versions of the hadith the word سُحت suht is used, which is commonly understood as haram? The answer to this query, as given by the religious jurists, is that although at that time those camels were halal (permitted) but the Holy Prophet ﷺ did not like earning through gambling, even at that time. He therefore, asked Sayyidna Abu Bakr to give them away in charity, as they were below his stature. It is identical to the situation that the Holy Prophet ﷺ ، and Sayyidna Abu Bakr ؓ did not taste liquor ever, even during the time when it was not prohibited.As regards the use of the word suht (سُحت), in the first place the scholars of hadith did not accept this narration as correct; and even if it is accepted as authentic, it should be kept in mind that this word has several meanings. One meaning is haram (prohibited), and the other is abominable and undesirable. It is related in one had ith that once-the Holy Prophet ﷺ said خَسبُ الحَجَّامِ سُحتُ that is, ` The earning of the one who undertakes treatment by cupping is suht'. The majority of religious scholars have taken the meaning of suht here as undesirable or disgusting. Imam Raghib Isfahani in his Mufradat-ul-Qur'an and Ibn Athir in his Nihayah have proved the different meanings of the word suht in the usage of Arabic language and ahadith of the Prophet ﷺ .Acceptance of this interpretation of the religious scholars is also necessary because if in fact these camels were haram, then according to religious law this was to be returned to the person from whom it was taken. The commodity, which is haram, can only be given in charity (sadaqah) under any one of the three situations: One, when the owner of the commodity is not known. Two, when it is not possible to deliver the commodity to the owner. And third, when there is any religious complication in the delivery of the commodity. وَاللہُ سبحانَہُ و تعالیٰ اَعلَم