قَالَ لَقَدْ ظَلَمَكَ بِسُؤَالِ نَعْجَتِكَ إِلَىٰ نِعَاجِهِۦ وَإِنَّ كَثِيرًا مِّنَ ٱلْخُلَطَآءِ لَيَبْغِى بَعْضُهُمْ عَلَىٰ بَعْضٍ إِلَّا ٱلَّذِينَ ءَامَنُوا۟ وَعَمِلُوا۟ ٱلصَّٰلِحَٰتِ وَقَلِيلٌ مَّا هُمْ وَظَنَّ دَاوُۥدُ أَنَّمَا فَتَنَّٰهُ فَٱسْتَغْفَرَ رَبَّهُۥ وَخَرَّ رَاكِعًا وَأَنَابَ
<p>A man of stature should observe patience to the best of his ability over errors made by those in need</p><p>This tells us that a person whom Allah has blessed with some high rank - and the needs of people are tied to him should do his best to remain patient over their irregular behavior and errors of expression, for this is the demand of his rank or office. Particularly so, a Hakim (official of the government), a Qadi (judge of the judiciary) and a Mufti (authentic consultant responsible for giving fatwa in the light of Islam's sources of jurisprudence) should pay full attention to this need. (Ruh-ul-Ma’ ani)</p><p>Verse 24 opens with the words: قَالَ لَقَدْ ظَلَمَكَ بِسُؤَالِ نَعْجَتِكَ إِلَىٰ نِعَاجِهِ (He said, 'He has certainly wronged you by demanding your ewe to be added to his ewe.' ). Two things are worth pondering here. First of all, Sayyidna Dawud (علیہ السلام) made this statement simply after having listened to the plaintiff. He did not hear the statement of the respondent. About it, some elders have said that this was the slip for which he sought forgiveness from Allah. But, other commentators have said that, in reality, full details of the litigation are not being described here. Taken up here is only what was necessary. Sayyidna Dawud (علیہ السلام) must have surely heard the stand of the defendant. But, it was not described here for the reason that this is the recognized method when judgments are delivered. Everyone can understand that the part relating to asking the defendant at this place is elided (understood).</p><p>In addition to that, it is also possible that, though the visitors had asked Sayyidna Dawud (علیہ السلام) for a court judgment, but that was no time for a court session, nor was it a judicial sitting, nor Sayyidna Dawud (علیہ السلام) had the necessary resources available at hand in order to implement his judgment, therefore, he did not give his judgment in the status of a qadi (judge), instead, what he gave was a fatwa (ruling) in his status as a mufti (juri-consult) - and it is not the job of a mufti to go about investigating into the nature of an event, rather, the thing depends on the question asked, and it is in accordance with it that he has to give his answer.</p><p>Soliciting contribution, or even gift, under pressure of any kind is usurpation</p><p>Something else worth pondering here is that Sayyidna Dawud (علیہ السلام) equated the act of a person demanding simply an ewe with injustice or oppression - although, casually asking someone for something is not a crime. The reason is that the form in which it was being asked did have the outward anatomy of a request. But, in the presence of the amount of verbal and practical pressure being put behind this asking, this thing had assumed the proportions of usurpation, something being taken forcibly, compulsively, illegally or by extortion.</p><p>From here we learn that, should a person ask for something from someone in a manner that the addressee, whether willing or unwilling, is left with no way out other than giving it, then, (soliciting aside) even demanding a gift in that manner is also included under ghasb or usurpation. Therefore, if the person asking is a man of office or power, or someone respectable and elegant-looking - and the addressee cannot afford to say no because of the pressure of this man's personality - then, even if the form of the situation is that of soliciting a gift, but in reality, it translates as nothing but ghasb or usurpation, and, the use of the thing acquired in this manner is never permissible for the person asking for it. This point needs the particular attention of those who solicit and receive contributions for مَدَارس madaris and makatib (religious schools), masajid (mosques) or societies and associations in the religious field. For them, only that donation is halal and good that has been given to them by the donor voluntarily and cheerfully. If those seeking such contributions use the pressure of their personality or eight or ten of them simultaneously descend on someone, render him helpless, and succeed in gouging that contribution out of him, then, this would be a flagrantly impermissible act on their part. The Hadith carries a very clear statement of the Holy Prophet ﷺ in this matter:</p><p>لَا یحِلّ مال امریءِ مسلم اِلَّا بطیب بفس منہ</p><p>The property of a Muslim is not halal unless it is with his sweet will.</p><p>Partnership in transactions needs great caution</p><p>In verse 24, it was said: وَإِنَّ كَثِيرً‌ا مِّنَ الْخُلَطَاءِ لَيَبْغِي بَعْضُهُمْ عَلَىٰ بَعْضٍ (And many partners oppress one another). By saying this, we have been alerted that it is not unusual when mutual rights are compromised between two persons having a partnership deal. There are occasions when one of them would take something as ordinary, and goes ahead and does it. But, in reality, it becomes the cause of sin. Therefore, great caution is needed in this matter.</p><p>Later, in the same verse, it was said: وَظَنَّ دَاوُودُ أَنَّمَا فَتَنَّاهُ (And Dawud realized that We had put him to a test,- 38:24). If the form of the litigation is taken to be a similitude of the slip of Sayyidna Dawud (علیہ السلام) ، then, the occurring of such a thought is fairly obvious. And if the form of the litigation has nothing to do with it, even then, the overall condition of the parties involved was enough to show that the two of them have been sent by way of a test. On the one hand, these disputants were in such hurry to get their litigation resolved that they were audacious enough to jump the wall and barge in. On the other hand, when the case was presented, the defendant sat silent and accepted, verbally or practically, the plea of the plaintiff without any ifs and buts.</p><p>If the defendant agreed with the event as described by the plaintiff, he hardly had the need to come to Sayyidna Dawud (علیہ السلام) seek a verdict in the dispute. Even a person of average intelligence could have gathered that, in this situation, Sayyidna Dawud (علیہ السلام) will invariably decide in favor of the plaintiff. This mysterious conduct of the two disputants was betraying that it was an event of some extraordinary nature. Sayyidna Dawud (علیہ السلام) had no difficulty in seeing through it, that they had come as sent from Allah and their objective was to test him. In some narrations, it also appears that, after having heard the verdict, they exchanged furtive smiles, and in no time disappeared into the skies. Allah knows best.</p><p>In the last sentence of verse 24, it was said: فَاسْتَغْفَرَ‌ رَ‌بَّهُ وَخَرَّ‌ رَ‌اكِعًا وَأَنَابَ (so he prayed to his Lord for forgiveness, and bowing down, he fell in prostration, and turned [ to Allah ].). It should be noted that the word used here is that of: رُکُوع (ruku`) which literally means 'to bow down' while, with most commentators, it denotes سَجدَہ (sajdah: prostration). According to the Hanafiyyah, by reciting this verse, sajdah becomes obligatory.</p><p>By doing ruku` the sajdah of tilawah (recitation) stands performed</p><p>And Imam Abu Hanifah (رح) has proved from this verse that, in case a verse requiring sajdah has been recited within the Salah, then, forming the intention of sajdah in the ruku' makes the obligation of sajdah stand performed. The reason is that here Allah Ta’ ala has used the word: رُکُوع (ruku) for: سَجدَہ (sajdah) which proves that ruku` too can become the replacement of sajdah. But, in this connection, a few necessary points should be borne in mind.</p><p>The sajdah of tilawah (recitation): Some rulings.</p><p>1. Sajdah when being performed through an obligatory ruku` in Salah can only be performed validly on condition that the verse of sajdah has been recited within the Salah. When reciting the Qur'an outside the Salah, the sajdah of tilawah cannot be performed validly through a ruku`. The reason is that ruku` is an act of ` ibadah only in Salah - outside Salah, it is not recognized as an act of worship. (Bada’ i).</p><p>2. A ruku` can stand for sajdah of tilawah only when ruku` has been done soon after having recited the verse of sajdah or having recited at the most two or three additional verses. And if, after the verse of sajdah, one has made a long recitation in the standing position, the ruku` would not stand for sajdah.</p><p>3. If one is thinking of performing the sajdah of tilawah in the position of ruku`, then, he should better make the intention of the sajdah of tilawah while bowing down for the ruku`, otherwise, the obligation of sajdah will not stand discharged by this ruku`. Yes, once the person starts going for sajdah, the sajdah will stand performed even without the intention.</p><p>4. The preferred practice, however, in any case is that the sajdah of tilawah is performed as a regular sajdah before ruku`, and then, one rises from the state of sajdah, recites one or two verses and then goes for ruku `, rather than it is performed in the obligatory ruku` of the Salah. (Bada'I ' ).</p>
A man of stature should observe patience to the best of his ability over errors made by those in needThis tells us that a person whom Allah has blessed with some high rank - and the needs of people are tied to him should do his best to remain patient over their irregular behavior and errors of expression, for this is the demand of his rank or office. Particularly so, a Hakim (official of the government), a Qadi (judge of the judiciary) and a Mufti (authentic consultant responsible for giving fatwa in the light of Islam's sources of jurisprudence) should pay full attention to this need. (Ruh-ul-Ma’ ani)Verse 24 opens with the words: قَالَ لَقَدْ ظَلَمَكَ بِسُؤَالِ نَعْجَتِكَ إِلَىٰ نِعَاجِهِ (He said, 'He has certainly wronged you by demanding your ewe to be added to his ewe.' ). Two things are worth pondering here. First of all, Sayyidna Dawud (علیہ السلام) made this statement simply after having listened to the plaintiff. He did not hear the statement of the respondent. About it, some elders have said that this was the slip for which he sought forgiveness from Allah. But, other commentators have said that, in reality, full details of the litigation are not being described here. Taken up here is only what was necessary. Sayyidna Dawud (علیہ السلام) must have surely heard the stand of the defendant. But, it was not described here for the reason that this is the recognized method when judgments are delivered. Everyone can understand that the part relating to asking the defendant at this place is elided (understood).In addition to that, it is also possible that, though the visitors had asked Sayyidna Dawud (علیہ السلام) for a court judgment, but that was no time for a court session, nor was it a judicial sitting, nor Sayyidna Dawud (علیہ السلام) had the necessary resources available at hand in order to implement his judgment, therefore, he did not give his judgment in the status of a qadi (judge), instead, what he gave was a fatwa (ruling) in his status as a mufti (juri-consult) - and it is not the job of a mufti to go about investigating into the nature of an event, rather, the thing depends on the question asked, and it is in accordance with it that he has to give his answer.Soliciting contribution, or even gift, under pressure of any kind is usurpationSomething else worth pondering here is that Sayyidna Dawud (علیہ السلام) equated the act of a person demanding simply an ewe with injustice or oppression - although, casually asking someone for something is not a crime. The reason is that the form in which it was being asked did have the outward anatomy of a request. But, in the presence of the amount of verbal and practical pressure being put behind this asking, this thing had assumed the proportions of usurpation, something being taken forcibly, compulsively, illegally or by extortion.From here we learn that, should a person ask for something from someone in a manner that the addressee, whether willing or unwilling, is left with no way out other than giving it, then, (soliciting aside) even demanding a gift in that manner is also included under ghasb or usurpation. Therefore, if the person asking is a man of office or power, or someone respectable and elegant-looking - and the addressee cannot afford to say no because of the pressure of this man's personality - then, even if the form of the situation is that of soliciting a gift, but in reality, it translates as nothing but ghasb or usurpation, and, the use of the thing acquired in this manner is never permissible for the person asking for it. This point needs the particular attention of those who solicit and receive contributions for مَدَارس madaris and makatib (religious schools), masajid (mosques) or societies and associations in the religious field. For them, only that donation is halal and good that has been given to them by the donor voluntarily and cheerfully. If those seeking such contributions use the pressure of their personality or eight or ten of them simultaneously descend on someone, render him helpless, and succeed in gouging that contribution out of him, then, this would be a flagrantly impermissible act on their part. The Hadith carries a very clear statement of the Holy Prophet ﷺ in this matter:لَا یحِلّ مال امریءِ مسلم اِلَّا بطیب بفس منہThe property of a Muslim is not halal unless it is with his sweet will.Partnership in transactions needs great cautionIn verse 24, it was said: وَإِنَّ كَثِيرً‌ا مِّنَ الْخُلَطَاءِ لَيَبْغِي بَعْضُهُمْ عَلَىٰ بَعْضٍ (And many partners oppress one another). By saying this, we have been alerted that it is not unusual when mutual rights are compromised between two persons having a partnership deal. There are occasions when one of them would take something as ordinary, and goes ahead and does it. But, in reality, it becomes the cause of sin. Therefore, great caution is needed in this matter.Later, in the same verse, it was said: وَظَنَّ دَاوُودُ أَنَّمَا فَتَنَّاهُ (And Dawud realized that We had put him to a test,- 38:24). If the form of the litigation is taken to be a similitude of the slip of Sayyidna Dawud (علیہ السلام) ، then, the occurring of such a thought is fairly obvious. And if the form of the litigation has nothing to do with it, even then, the overall condition of the parties involved was enough to show that the two of them have been sent by way of a test. On the one hand, these disputants were in such hurry to get their litigation resolved that they were audacious enough to jump the wall and barge in. On the other hand, when the case was presented, the defendant sat silent and accepted, verbally or practically, the plea of the plaintiff without any ifs and buts.If the defendant agreed with the event as described by the plaintiff, he hardly had the need to come to Sayyidna Dawud (علیہ السلام) seek a verdict in the dispute. Even a person of average intelligence could have gathered that, in this situation, Sayyidna Dawud (علیہ السلام) will invariably decide in favor of the plaintiff. This mysterious conduct of the two disputants was betraying that it was an event of some extraordinary nature. Sayyidna Dawud (علیہ السلام) had no difficulty in seeing through it, that they had come as sent from Allah and their objective was to test him. In some narrations, it also appears that, after having heard the verdict, they exchanged furtive smiles, and in no time disappeared into the skies. Allah knows best.In the last sentence of verse 24, it was said: فَاسْتَغْفَرَ‌ رَ‌بَّهُ وَخَرَّ‌ رَ‌اكِعًا وَأَنَابَ (so he prayed to his Lord for forgiveness, and bowing down, he fell in prostration, and turned [ to Allah ].). It should be noted that the word used here is that of: رُکُوع (ruku`) which literally means 'to bow down' while, with most commentators, it denotes سَجدَہ (sajdah: prostration). According to the Hanafiyyah, by reciting this verse, sajdah becomes obligatory.By doing ruku` the sajdah of tilawah (recitation) stands performedAnd Imam Abu Hanifah (رح) has proved from this verse that, in case a verse requiring sajdah has been recited within the Salah, then, forming the intention of sajdah in the ruku' makes the obligation of sajdah stand performed. The reason is that here Allah Ta’ ala has used the word: رُکُوع (ruku) for: سَجدَہ (sajdah) which proves that ruku` too can become the replacement of sajdah. But, in this connection, a few necessary points should be borne in mind.The sajdah of tilawah (recitation): Some rulings.1. Sajdah when being performed through an obligatory ruku` in Salah can only be performed validly on condition that the verse of sajdah has been recited within the Salah. When reciting the Qur'an outside the Salah, the sajdah of tilawah cannot be performed validly through a ruku`. The reason is that ruku` is an act of ` ibadah only in Salah - outside Salah, it is not recognized as an act of worship. (Bada’ i).2. A ruku` can stand for sajdah of tilawah only when ruku` has been done soon after having recited the verse of sajdah or having recited at the most two or three additional verses. And if, after the verse of sajdah, one has made a long recitation in the standing position, the ruku` would not stand for sajdah.3. If one is thinking of performing the sajdah of tilawah in the position of ruku`, then, he should better make the intention of the sajdah of tilawah while bowing down for the ruku`, otherwise, the obligation of sajdah will not stand discharged by this ruku`. Yes, once the person starts going for sajdah, the sajdah will stand performed even without the intention.4. The preferred practice, however, in any case is that the sajdah of tilawah is performed as a regular sajdah before ruku`, and then, one rises from the state of sajdah, recites one or two verses and then goes for ruku `, rather than it is performed in the obligatory ruku` of the Salah. (Bada'I ' ).