At first sight, the 103^rd verse of Sura Maidah seems to be talking about a phenomenon limited to the time of the Holy Prophet (saw). What follows is an initial overview of the various Sunni and Shi’i tafasir that describe the terms of the verse before describing what has been mentioned by the Sunni commentator Syed Qutb, and supported by the Shi’i scholar Syed Muhammad Hussain Fadhlullah, in order to make this verse relevant to the 21^st century.

The commentators are unanimous that Sura Maidah is a Madani chapter and according to some, was revealed as a whole. It is also accepted that it was the last chapter that was revealed to the Holy Prophet (saw) and thus narrations from both Sunni and Shi’i sources say it is the abrogating chapter and not the abrogated.

The verse under discussion is as follows:

مَا جَعَلَ اللَّهُ مِن بَحِيرَةٍ وَلَا سَائِبَةٍ وَلَا وَصِيلَةٍ وَلَا حَامٍ ۙ وَلَٰكِنَّ الَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا يَفْتَرُونَ عَلَى اللَّهِ الْكَذِبَ ۖ وَأَكْثَرُهُمْ لَا يَعْقِلُونَ

[5:103] “God has not established baḥīrah, or sāʾibah, or waṣīlah, or ḥām. But those who disbelieve fabricate lies against God, and most of them do not understand.” 

In general, this verse is talking about the pagan practice of forbidding the consumption, riding and milking of some types of animals and emphasizing that this law is not from Allah (swt). Rather, these polytheists had made up these laws themselves and ascribed them to Allah (swt). There are a plethora of opinions regarding the identity of these animals and the different views shall be presented below.

Baḥīrah

The various opinions that exist as to what was meant by Baḥīrah;

• A female camel who had borne five offspring^[1]
• A female camel who had borne five offspring, the fifth of which had to be a male^[2]
• A female camel who had borne five offspring, the fifth of which had to be a female^[3]
• The Daughter of Sa’ibah^[4]
• That camel whose milk is consecrated to idols and whom no human may milk^[5]

Regardless of its definition, it is said they would split the ears of such an animal and let it wander freely and would not kill it. Baḥīrah comes from the root of Baḥr which means expanding and spreading. The Arabs would call the ocean Bahr because of its vastness and this animal was called Baḥīrah because of the wide hole in its ear.^[6] They even refrained from riding it and it was never driven away from any water or pasture. Even if a tired traveler would come across it, he would not ride it. Its fur was not shorn. Women were forbidden to taste even a drop of its milk or to get any benefit from it – its milk and benefits were reserved for men until it died; when it died, men and women joined in eating it.^[7]

Sa’ibah

The various opinions that exist as to what was meant by Sa’ibah;

• A female camel that was consecrated to the gods voluntarily by its owner as a supplicatory offering for overcoming illness, for protection on a journey, or as a means of giving thanks for some good fortune^[8]
• A camel which had brought forth twelve off springs^[9]
• A she-camel that was freed for idols. Usually, a man freed whatever he wished from among his property; then he brought it to the custodians of the idols and they fed wayfarers of its milk and so on.^[10]
• A Male camel freed for the idols^[11]
• A she-camel that gave birth to ten females consecutively, without any male calf coming in between^[12]

Sa’ibah comes from the root Sab which means running of water or freedom in walking. They left that camel free so that no one would ride on it. They did not shear its fur, and except for a guest, no one could drink its milk.^[13] Based on the 4^th opinion, the custodians of the idols would offer it to male travellers who passed by – excluding women. The animals offered were also male and never female. When these died, both men and women shared its meat.^[14]

Waṣīlah

The various opinions as to what waṣīlah means;

• A female camel who had given birth to many female offspring —particularly valuable for their milk^[15]
• A female camel who had given birth to a male and a female offspring^[16]
• A lamb which could bring forth a child seven times^[17]
• A lamb that could bring forth twins.^[18]
• When a sheep had delivered seven times, they used to check the seventh birth. If it were male, they used to slaughter it and its meat was shared by men and women. If it were female, women would not be allowed to benefit from it until the animal died. When the animal died, both men and women shared its meat. If it were a twin delivery, male and female, both were spared for the benefit of men only, until their death. When the animal died, both men and women shared their meat.^[19]
• A she-camel that gave birth to two she-camels consecutively^[20]
• A female sheep that was the twin of a male sheep^[21]
• If a sheep gives birth to a female, those in charge of the idols took it. Should it give birth to a male, they would slaughter it as an offering to their deities. Now if she gave birth to twins: a male and a female, they would say that the female had spared its brother and they would not slaughter the male as an offering^[22]
• A goat that brought forth ten female kids in five pregnancies, without there being any male among them. Then they said she has joined. Then whatever was born to her after that, was reserved for men, the women being excluded from it.^[23]

Waṣīlah comes from the root waṣl meaning inter-connectedness.

Ḥām

The different opinions as to what Ḥām means;

• A male camel who had sired many offspring^[24]
• A male camel whose offspring had sired another generation of offspring^[25]
• A male animal which had been used for fecundating female animals of the same kind for ten times and each time a new progeny was brought forth from its seed.^[26]

Ḥām is the ism fā’il (active participle) of Himāyat meaning supporter. It could also mean being an obstacle.^[27] It could graze freely and could not be ridden or made to carry any burden.^[28] Nothing was loaded on it, nor was it prevented from water or pasture.^[29] It could not be stopped from copulating with any she-camel that came its way. When it would get too old or die, its meat was shared by men and women.^[30]

These sacred camels would often be marked by slit ears so that people who came upon them would be aware of their sacred status and not disturb them.^[31]

Although there is all this difference in meanings of these names, there is a strong probability that it portrays the variation in different tribes’ usage and customs, because such superstitions were widespread among ancient barbaric nations.^[32]

These practices are reported to be some of the first ways in which the pre-Islamic Arabs deviated from the monotheistic religion of Abraham.^[33] The pagans would ascribe these superstitious beliefs to Allah (swt) and would say that these laws are from Him. According to some commentators, this tradition was invented by ‘Amr ibn Luhay and his followers.^[34]

Ibn Abbãs has narrated from the Prophet (saw) that he said: “Verily ‘Amr ibn Luhay ibn Qam‘ah ibn Khandaf became king of Mecca. He was the first who changed the religion of Ismã‘īl and obtained idols and put up graven images and invented Bahīrah, Sãibah, Wasīlah and Hãm.”(The Messenger of Allãh (saw) said:) “And indeed I saw him in the Fire, the smell of his guts troubles the people of the Fire.” Also, it is narrated that [the Holy Prophet said, “I saw him] dragging his guts in the Fire.”^[35]

Although the literal translation of the beginning of the verse would be “Allah (swt) has not made…”, it is clear that this negation is related to the attributes of the cattle and not the cattle themselves. This is because, without a doubt, the cattle themselves are creatures of Allah (swt). What is being negated is the rulings or laws which were ascribed to these cattle.^[36]

Regarding the final clause of the verse, “and most of them do not understand,” It means that their positions differ in this fabrication; most of them fabricate against Allah (swt) what they do and they do not understand; while the remaining small group do understand the Truth, knowing well that what they ascribe to Allah (swt) is mere fabrication. These are the leaders whose words are listened to and who manage the affairs of the masses; and they are the obstinate and stubborn ones.^[37] Also, most of the people would not ponder on what they were imitating from their forefathers and leaders.^[38]

Some commentators have taken this verse to argue against the claims of the Mujbira who believed that Allah (swt) is the creator of belief and disbelief, of good and evil, and of idol worship. The verse clearly states that this kind of worship is not from Allah (swt). Thus, the Mujbira are actually belying Allah (swt).^[39]

Regarding why the Qur’an so vehemently condemned this practice several reasons are given by commentators. The main reason why Allah (swt) disliked this act was because, firstly, not using the blessings of Allah (swt) is a form of ungratefulness and these animals are blessings from Allah (swt). Secondly, after all the hardships that these animals went through, the pagans refused to feed them or treat them kindly but left them alone. Hence this was another reason for their being reproached. Furthermore, it is known through some narrations that they would do these acts for the pleasure of their idols or as a form of gift to the idols.^[40] Syed Qutb, on the other hand, sees this action of theirs as a direct attack on monotheism (see below).

Another reason given by some commentators is that the purpose of the creation of man is worship and the purpose of the creation of these animals is to help man in this journey of his. These laws that the polytheists had created were taking man away from his purpose and was forbidding something that Allah (swt) had made as a tool to aid man.^[41]

The Views of Syed Qutb and Syed Fadhlullah

Syed Qutb’s tafsir, known as Fi Zilal al-Qur’an, is one of the most influential tafasir which takes a societal approach. Regarding the verse under discussion, after mentioning the various opinions about the different types of animals (see above), he explicitly says that these were myths. He then goes on to espouse that there are no limits when myth and personal desires are the ultimate arbiters. Endless rituals will emerge with continuous omissions and additions – this was the case in pre-Islamic Arabia. Based on this understanding, he states that this phenomenon can take place anywhere and anytime, once human conscience deviates from pure monotheism. The appearance may differ, but the essence of ignorance remains the same.^[42]

Syed Qutb, on many occasions, discusses the consequence of associating partners with Allah (swt) in the promulgation of law. Under verse 137 of Sura An’aam (6), he propounds that the problem which Islam faces today is the fact that certain tyrannical powers usurp God’s authority and give themselves the right to promulgate laws, making certain allowances and restrictions concerning people’s lives, fortunes, wealth and children. It is indeed the same problem the Qur’ān addresses with such clear and decisive statements, establishing a direct link between it and the concept of Godhead and people’s submission to God.

The main battle which Islam fought to establish itself was not against atheism, nor did it aim at the mere adoption of certain Islamic practices. Furthermore, the fight was not against social or moral corruption. These battles came later, after the battle seeking to establish the very existence of faith had been won. The main battle Islam fought to establish itself was over sovereignty and to whom it belonged. This was indeed the battle fought in Makkah, when Islam was striving to establish the faith, making no reference to its law or social system. The aim of that effort was to establish in people’s minds that sovereignty cannot be claimed by a Muslim, nor can a Muslim accept that it belongs to anyone other than God. When this basic concept of faith was truly established in the minds of the small Muslim community in Makkah, God facilitated for them its implementation when they migrated to Madinah.

Such blurred, confused concepts and the social traditions they establish to weigh heavily on the masses are not limited to the types known in bygone ignorant or jāhiliyyah societies. We find clearer versions of them in modern societies, in the form of customs and traditions which people feel to be inescapable, even though they are very hard to observe. Take, for example, the case of fashion and other observances that impose themselves on people, costing them at times what they cannot afford, taking a high position on their list of concerns and ultimately corrupting their moral values and whole lives. Nevertheless, people feel that they must comply with all these dictates: a particular fashion for morning, another for afternoon, and a different one for evening. One fashion imposes short dress, another dictates tight clothes, and a third makes people wear that which is ridiculous. In addition, there is an endless variety of cosmetics, and hairstyles, etc. Who imposes all this humiliating subjugation and who lends it support and backing? When we look for the facts we find that it is backed by the major fashion houses, manufacturers and dressmakers, as well as the usurious banks and finance companies who lend money to the industry in order that they themselves win a large share of the profits. It is also supported by the Zionists who work hard to weaken all mankind so that they become the masters of the world. They do not give their support in the shape of heavy armour and military prowess. They support it by the concepts and values they initiate and then formulate in the shape of theories and cultural beliefs. Then they help to translate these into a code of social behaviour. They realize that theories are of little effect unless they are seen in practice, in the form of systems of government, a social structure and an unambiguous social code that people accept without question because its roots and branches are irretrievably interlinked. It is all perpetrated by evil human beings and the jinn. The result is different forms and shapes of jāhiliyyah, but they all have the same roots and origins. We certainly do not give the Qur’ān its due position if we read and understand it as a reference only to ancient forms of jāhiliyyah. It, indeed, refers to its countless forms in all periods of human life. It confronts every deviant situation, trying to put it back on the straight path defined by God.^[43]

Returning to the verse under discussion, he says that Jahilliyah was not a period of time but was a state of mind. The mind itself is usually influenced by desires therefore it is necessary to be controlled by faith. He then goes on to say that he has personally seen in the Egyptian countryside numerous forms of myth, in which certain types of animals are consecrated for alleged saints and shrines, in the same way as they were consecrated for false deities in olden times.^[44]

Syed Fadhlullah, in his tafsir, also alludes to the social aspect of this verse. He says that during the period of Jahiliyyah, rituals and customs of the ancestors were given the special attribute of sacredness. This attribute stopped people from thinking and thus there was a halt in the process of discernment of errors of the past. Islam came and changed this form of thinking. History was to be taken lessons from and not clothed in sacredness. Islam emphasized that the good and bad that a man would do, should remain with him and should not hinder his offspring from critiquing his actions.^[45]

It is possible that this belief, discussed in this verse, might be the purport of verse 119 of Sura Nisa (4) which says that Shaytan vowed to mislead people by many things among which was slitting the ears of livestock:

وَلَأُضِلَّنَّهُمْ وَلَأُمَنِّيَنَّهُمْ وَلَآمُرَنَّهُمْ فَلَيُبَتِّكُنَّ آذَانَ الْأَنْعَامِ وَلَآمُرَنَّهُمْ فَلَيُغَيِّرُنَّ خَلْقَ اللَّهِ ۚ وَمَن يَتَّخِذِ الشَّيْطَانَ وَلِيًّا مِّن دُونِ اللَّهِ فَقَدْ خَسِرَ خُسْرَانًا مُّبِينًا

[4:119] and I will lead them astray and give them [false] hopes, and prompt them to slit the ears of cattle, and I will prompt them to alter Allah’s creation.’ Whoever takes Satan as a guardian instead of Allah has certainly incurred a manifest loss. 

Similarly, in Sura Al-An’aam verse 138 and 139, a similar belief is criticized:

وَقَالُوا هَٰذِهِ أَنْعَامٌ وَحَرْثٌ حِجْرٌ لَّا يَطْعَمُهَا إِلَّا مَن نَّشَاءُ بِزَعْمِهِمْ وَأَنْعَامٌ حُرِّمَتْ ظُهُورُهَا وَأَنْعَامٌ لَّا يَذْكُرُونَ اسْمَ اللَّهِ عَلَيْهَا افْتِرَاءً عَلَيْهِ ۚ سَيَجْزِيهِم بِمَا كَانُوا يَفْتَرُونَ وَقَالُوا مَا فِي بُطُونِ هَٰذِهِ الْأَنْعَامِ خَالِصَةٌ لِّذُكُورِنَا وَمُحَرَّمٌ عَلَىٰ أَزْوَاجِنَا ۖ وَإِن يَكُن مَّيْتَةً فَهُمْ فِيهِ شُرَكَاءُ ۚ سَيَجْزِيهِمْ وَصْفَهُمْ ۚ إِنَّهُ حَكِيمٌ عَلِيمٌ

[6:138-139] And they say, “These animals and crops are forbidden; no one may eat from them except whom we will,” by their claim. And there are those [camels] whose backs are forbidden [by them] and those upon which the name of Allah is not mentioned – [all of this] an invention of untruth about Him. He will punish them for what they were inventing. And they say, “What is in the bellies of these animals is exclusively for our males and forbidden to our females. But if it is [born] dead, then all of them have shares therein.” He will punish them for their description. Indeed, He is Wise and Knowing. 

Footnotes

[1] Qurtubi, Al-Jami` li-Ahkam al-Qur’an, Volume 6 Page 335.

[2] Fakhr Razi, Tafsir al-Kabir, Volume 16 Page 447; Allama Tabrisi, Majma al-Bayaan Fi Tafsir al-Qur’an, Volume 3 Page 389; Syed Qutb, Fi Zilal al-Qur’an, Volume 6 Page 989-991; Syed Abul A’la Mawdudi, Tafheem al-Quran

[3] Ayatullah Nasir Makarim Shirazi, Tafseer Namuneh, Volume 5 Page 103-105; Allama Muhammad Hussain Tabataba’i, Al Mizan Fi Tafsir al-Qur’an, Volume 6 Page 156-159; Tanwir al-Miqbas min Tafsir Ibn Abbas

[4] Allama Muhammad Hussain Tabataba’i, Al Mizan Fi Tafsir al-Qur’an, Volume 6 Page 156-159

[5] Suyuti, Syed Qutb, Fi Zilal al-Qur’an, Volume 6 Page 989-991

[6] Ayatullah Nasir Makarim Shirazi, Tafseer Namuneh, Volume 5 Page 103-105

[7] Allama Muhammad Hussain Tabataba’i, Al Mizan Fi Tafsir al-Qur’an, Volume 6 Page 156-159; Syed Qutb, Fi Zilal al-Qur’an, Volume 6 Page 989-991

[8] Fakhr Razi, Tafsir al-Kabir, Volume 16 Page 447; Allama Tabrisi, Majma al-Bayaan Fi Tafsir al-Qur’an, Volume 3 Page 389; Syed Abul A’la Mawdudi, Tafheem al-Quran

[9] Ayatullah Nasir Makarim Shirazi, Tafseer Namuneh, Volume 5 Page 103-105

[10] Allama Muhammad Hussain Tabataba’i, Al Mizan Fi Tafsir al-Qur’an, Volume 6 Page 156-159; Fakhr Razi, Tafsir al-Kabir, Volume 16 Page 447; Syed Qutb, Fi Zilal al-Qur’an, Volume 6 Page 989-991, Suyuti, Tafsir al-Jalalayn, Page 127

[11] Tanwir al-Miqbas min Tafsir Ibn Abbas

[12] Mawdudi; Allama Muhammad Hussain Tabataba’i, Al Mizan Fi Tafsir al-Qur’an, Volume 6 Page 156-159

[13] Allama Muhammad Hussain Tabataba’i, Al Mizan Fi Tafsir al-Qur’an, Volume 6 Page 156-159

[14] Tanwir al-Miqbas min Tafsir Ibn Abbas

[15] Suyuti, Tafsir al-Jalalayn, Page 127

[16] Fakhr Razi, Tafsir al-Kabir, Volume 16 Page 447

[17] Ayatullah Nasir Makarim Shirazi, Tafseer Namuneh, Volume 5 Page 103-105

[18] Ayatullah Nasir Makarim Shirazi, Tafseer Namuneh, Volume 5 Page 103-105

[19] Allama Muhammad Hussain Tabataba’i, Al Mizan Fi Tafsir al-Qur’an, Volume 6 Page 156-159; Tanwir al-Miqbas min Tafsir Ibn Abbas

[20] Syed Qutb, Fi Zilal al-Qur’an, Volume 6 Page 989-991

[21] Syed Qutb, Fi Zilal al-Qur’an, Volume 6 Page 989-991

[22] Syed Qutb, Fi Zilal al-Qur’an, Volume 6 Page 989-991; Allama Muhammad Hussain Tabataba’i, Al Mizan Fi Tafsir al-Qur’an, Volume 6 Page 156-159; Allama Tabrisi, Majma al-Bayaan Fi Tafsir al-Qur’an, Volume 3 Page 389; Syed Abul A’la Mawdudi, Tafheem al-Quran

[23] Allama Muhammad Hussain Tabataba’i, Al Mizan Fi Tafsir al-Qur’an, Volume 6 Page 156-159

[24] Suyuti, Tafsir al-Jalalayn, Page 127

[25] Fakhr Razi, Tafsir al-Kabir, Volume 16 Page 447; Allama Muhammad Hussain Tabataba’I, Al Mizan Fi Tafsir al-Qur’an, Volume 6 Page 156-159; Tanwir al-Miqbas min Tafsir Ibn Abbas; Syed Abul A’la Mawdudi, Tafheem al-Quran

[26] Ayatullah Nasir Makarim Shirazi, Tafseer Namuneh, Volume 5 Page 103-105; Allama Muhammad Hussain Tabataba’i, Al Mizan Fi Tafsir al-Qur’an, Volume 6 Page 156-159; Syed Qutb, Fi Zilal al-Qur’an, Volume 6 Page 989-991; Syed Abul A’la Mawdudi, Tafheem al-Quran

[27] Ayatullah Nasir Makarim Shirazi, Tafseer Namuneh, Volume 5 Page 103-105

[28] Fakhr Razi, Tafsir al-Kabir, Volume 16 Page 447

[29] Allama Muhammad Hussain Tabataba’i, Al Mizan Fi Tafsir al-Qur’an, Volume 6 Page 156-159

[30] Tanwir al-Miqbas min Tafsir Ibn Abbas

[31] Syed Hussein Nasr, The Study Quran

[32] Allama Muhammad Hussain Tabataba’i, Al Mizan Fi Tafsir al-Qur’an, Volume 6 Page 156-159

[33] Muhammad Ibn Jarir al-Tabarri, Jami` al-Bayan fi Tafsir al-Qur’an, Volume 7 Page 56

[34] Fakhr Razi, Tafsir al-Kabir, Volume 16 Page 447; Tanwir al-Miqbas min Tafsir Ibn Abbas

[35] Tanwir al-Miqbas min Tafsir Ibn Abbas

[36] Allama Muhammad Hussain Tabataba’i, Al Mizan Fi Tafsir al-Qur’an, Volume 6 Page 156-159

[37] Allama Muhammad Hussain Tabataba’i, Al Mizan Fi Tafsir al-Qur’an, Volume 6 Page 156-159

[38] Ayatullah Nasir Makarim Shirazi, Tafseer Namuneh, Volume 5 Page 103-105; Suyuti, Tafsir al-Jalalayn, Page 127

[39] Sheikh Tusi, Al-Tibyan Fi Tafsir al-Qur’an, Volume 4 Page 37; Abul-Futouh Razi, Rawd al-Jinan wa Rawh al-Janan fi Tafsir al-Quran, Volume 7, Page 175.

[40] Ayatullah Nasir Makarim Shirazi, Tafseer Namuneh, Volume 5 Page 103-105

[41] Fakhr Razi, Tafsir al-Kabir, Volume 16 Page 447

[42] Syed Qutb, Fi Zilal al-Qur’an, Volume 6 Page 989-991

[43] Syed Qutb, Fi Zilal al-Qur’an, Volume 3 Page 1219-1221

[44] Syed Qutb, Fi Zilal al-Qur’an, Volume 6 Page 989-991

[45] Syed Muhammad Hussayn Fadhlullah, Min Wahy al-Qur’an, Volume 8 page 367