Surah al-Ma'idah (The Table) 5 : 27

Overview (Verses 27 - 30)
 
This passage begins to outline some fundamental legislation concerning human life. Some of these are concerned with life protection in a Muslim community that applies Divine law. Others relate to the protection of the system against any rebellion that may seek to undermine the authority administering Divine law in such a society. All in all, these measures aim to provide proper protection for the Muslim community, as well as wealth and private property in a social set-up based on Divine guidance and ruled by Divine law.
 
The legislation covering these important aspects of social life take up this whole passage, after an introduction relating the story of Adam’s two sons. This story exposes the nature of crime and its motives, and reveals its ugly face, showing the need to stand up to crime and to stamp it out of the life of Islamic society altogether. It stresses the need to punish the criminal and to counter the motives for crime.
 
The story appears to be firmly welded to the rulings and legislation that are subsequently detailed in this sūrah. A reflective reader is bound to feel that the story is given at the right place to fulfil an important function, and present a profound argument that penetrates the reader’s consciousness. It thus puts hearts and minds in the right frame to receive the severe penalties Islam legislates for crimes committed against human life, public order, and personal property. These must be put into effect in an Islamic society which implements Divine law.
 
Islamic society runs all its life affairs, relations and commitments on the basis of the Divine constitution, implementing God’s law. Thus, it guarantees for every individual, and for the community as a whole, all elements of justice, stability, reassurance and needful provisions. It protects both the individual and the community against all factors of provocation, oppression, injustice and poverty. Hence, in such a just, balanced society that guarantees mutual solidarity, aggression against personal life, public order, or individual property becomes a horrid crime, without any “extenuating” circumstances. When all factors encouraging a law- abiding life have been provided and motives for crime removed from the life of both individual and society, then a stringent attitude to crime and criminals is totally justified. Nevertheless, Islam ensures for the criminal all that guarantees proper investigation, interrogation and fair judgement, explaining any doubt in his favour, and opening the door to repentance which pardons some crimes in this life and ensures forgiveness of all crimes in the life to come.
 
We see examples of all this in the present passage and the legislation it puts in place. But before we start our discussion of such legislation we need to say a brief, general word about the environment and social set-up in which such legislation is implemented and the conditions that give its provisions the necessary force.
 
The legal provisions included in this passage, whether relating to aggression against life, public order or private property have the same status as the rest of Islamic law, prescribing mandatory or discretionary punishments. They are all applicable in Islamic society, in the “land of Islam”. In order to understand this, we need to remember that, from the Islamic point of view, the whole world is divided into two parts. The first is the land of Islam, or the land of peace. This includes any area where Islamic law is implemented, whether its population are all Muslims, or they include non-Muslims living under Islamic rule, or they are all non-Muslims but living under an Islamic government implementing Islamic law. It also includes any area which has been occupied by non-Muslims, but its local population, who may all be Muslims or having non-Muslims among them, are able to implement Islamic law in their own life and judge their disputes accordingly. The main criterion in considering an area as a “land of Islam” is whether Islamic law is implemented in it or not.
 
The second is ‘hostile land’ which includes any area where Islamic legal provisions and Islamic law in general are not implemented, regardless of what population it may have. Thus, even if its population, or the majority of them describe themselves as Muslims, or followers of other Divine religions, or non-believers, any area that does not implement Islamic law is considered a hostile land to Muslims, both individuals and community.
 
Islamic society is that which is established in the land of Islam, as defined above. It is such a society which implements Islamic law that deserves to have the full protection of life, property and public order. In such a society it is only appropriate that the punishments outlined by Islamic law should be inflicted on those whose actions threaten its peace and security. It is a noble, free and just society, which ensures work and sufficient provisions for everyone whether they are able or unable to work. It is a society where motives for goodness are plenty and those encouraging evil are few. It is only right that such a society should impose on every one of its subjects the duty of protecting this splendid state of affairs, respecting other people’s rights to live in peace and security. It is natural that it should preserve the security of the “land of Islam” in which everyone lives peacefully, with all his rights and privileges guaranteed. Whoever violates the law of such a peaceful society is an evil aggressor who deserves severe punishment, allowing him, however, all the guarantees that ensure fair trial and which interpret doubt in his favour.
 
The people of a hostile land, as defined above, have no right to enjoy the guarantees provided by Islamic legal provisions and the deterrent they represent. This is because such a land neither implements nor recognises Islamic law. To Muslims who live in the land of Islam, such land is not a land of peace unless it enters into suitable treaties and agreements with the land of Islam. Moreover, Islamic law provides the same guarantees and rights to hostile individuals who come from hostile lands when they enter the land of Islam under a pledge of safety. This applies for the duration of that pledge, and within the area ruled by a Muslim ruler, implementing Islamic law.
 
Having made this explanation, we may now discuss this passage in detail.
 
A Murder is Committed
 
Relate to them in all truth the story of the two sons of Adam: how each offered a sacrifice, and it was accepted from one of them while it was not accepted from the other. [The latter] said: ‘I will surely kill you.” [The other] replied: “God accepts only from those who are God-fearing. Even if lay your hand on me to kill me, I shall not lay my hand on you to kill you; for I fear God, the Lord of all the worlds. I would rather you should add your sin against me to your other sins, and thus you will be destined for the Fire; since that is the just retribution of wrongdoers.” His evil soul drove him to kill his brother; and he murdered him, and thus he became one of the lost. God then sent forth a raven which scratched the earth, to show him how he might conceal the nakedness of his brother’s body. He cried out: “Woe to me! Am I then too weak to do what this raven has done, and to conceal the nakedness of my brother’s body?” He was then overwhelmed by remorse. (Verses 27-31)
 
This story gives us a clear example of the nature of evil and totally unjustified aggression. It also gives us an example showing the nature of goodness and a peaceful attitude towards everyone. The two examples are set in clear contrast. The result is a sordid crime, which makes us feel the need for a legal code to impose just retribution and to stop aggressors even before they commit their crimes. If they, nevertheless, do commit crimes, they are certain to receive a punishment commensurate to their crimes. The legal code will thus be able to protect those who are good and ensure their right to live. It is indeed such people that should feel secure and safe under the protection of the law that deters crime and administers justice.
 
The Qur’ān does not specify the time or place of the story it relates. Nor does it mention the names of its main characters. Although reports mention the names of Cain and Abel as the two sons involved in the story, and although these reports mention some details about the conflict between them over two of their sisters, we prefer to confine our comments to the story as it is related in the Qur’ān, without adding any details. All reports mentioning details have an element of doubt, in the sense that they are given by people who follow earlier religions. The story is mentioned in the ‘Old Testament with details of names, place and time, as given in these reports. The single ĥadīth which refers to the story and has been verified as authentic does not give any details. It is a ĥadīth in which `Abdullāh ibn Mas`ūd quotes the Prophet as saying: “For every soul that is killed unjustly, a share of responsibility is borne by the first son of Adam, who was the first to commit murder.” All that we can say about this story is that it took place during humanity’s childhood stage. It was the first cold-blooded murder. The perpetrator did not know that dead people should be buried.
 
Leaving the story in the general terms in which it is given in the Qur’ān ensures that the purpose of relating it is fulfilled and its lessons are understood. Providing more details does not add anything to these basic purposes. Hence, our preference to discuss it as it is given.
 
Relate to them in all truth the story of the two sons of Adam: how each offered a sacrifice, and it was accepted from one of them while it was not accepted from the other. [The latter] said: “I will surely kill you.” [The other] replied: “God accepts only from those who are God-fearing.” (Verse 27)
 
Having related to his followers an account of certain events in the history of the Children of Israel with their Prophet, Moses, the Prophet Muĥammad (peace be upon him) is told by God to relate the story of two people representing two types of human being. The account should be given in all honesty, because it tells of the truth deeply entrenched in human nature. It also emphasises the need for a deterrent legal code to ensure justice.
 
Adam’s two sons were in a situation that gives no rise to any thought of aggression in a good person’s mind. The situation is one of obedience to God and offering a sacrifice to draw closer to God: “How each offered a sacrifice and it was accepted from one of them while it was not accepted from the other.” (Verse 27) We note that the passive mode is used here to indicate that the acceptance or rejection of the offered sacrifice is done by a higher power in a metaphysical way. This mode of expression suggests to us two points: the first is that we should not try to determine how exactly the offering was accepted. We need not discuss reports mentioned in books of commentary on the Qur’ān because these reports are most probably derived from Old Testament fables.
 
The second point suggests that the one whose offering was accepted had not committed any crime that might cause anyone else to be angry with him to any extent, let alone that that person should plot a murder. He had no say in the acceptance of this offering. The nature of the One who accepted the offering was beyond the perception of either of the two brothers. Hence, thoughts of anger or murder should have been far removed from the minds of both brothers. They were in a situation that is close to worship, since it involves offering a sacrifice for God’s sake.
 
“[The latter] said: I will surely kill you.‘“ (Verse 27) This is a statement of confirmed intention which is met by our disapproval because it is totally unjustified. Indeed, it could only be the result of blind envy which is alien to a good heart. Thus, from the very first moment, we take an attitude of total disapproval of aggression. The sūrah, however, greatly enhances the ghastliness of this act of aggression by showing the peaceful, good-natured attitude of the other brother: “[The other] replied: ‘God accepts only from those who are God-fearing.’’’ (Verse 27)
 
This is a simple statement which puts matters in their proper perspective. It indicates that the person saying this is a believer who understands the reason for the acceptance of sacrifices offered to God. Also implied in this statement is a gentle advice to the aggressor to fear God, because this is the way through which he could gain acceptance. It is all done very gently so that his brother might remain responsive and unirritated. Adopting a completely peaceful attitude, the good believer of the two brothers tries further to pacify his brother and quieten him: “Even if you lay your hand on me to kill me, I shall not lay my hand on you to kill you; for I fear God, the Lord of all the worlds.” (Verse 28)
 
What we have here is a case of a peaceful man making clear that his attitude is based on fearing God and implementing His commandments. This attitude fills us with enthusiastic support for the victim of aggression, as we admire his calmness, reassurance and the fact that he fears God alone. His gentle words should have been sufficient to quench his brother’s rage and reduce his anger. A good response would have been sufficient to re-establish the feelings of brotherhood and the reassurance of faith. To achieve this desirable result, however, the good-natured brother adds a word of warning: “I would rather you should add your sin against me to your other sins, and thus you will be destined for the Fire; since that is the just retribution of wrongdoers.” (Verse 29)
 
We may paraphrase this statement by the God-fearing brother as follows: If you were to stretch your hand to me to kill me, it is not in my nature to do the same thing to you. The thought of murder does not occur to me in the first place, not because I cannot do it, but because I fear God, the Lord of all creation. I will leave you to bear the sin of murdering me so as to add it to your other sins which have caused your offering not to be accepted by God. Thus, you end up with a double burden of sin and a double punishment. This is a just reward for a heinous crime.
 
He, thus, depicted to his brother how loathsome to him was the very thought of committing murder. He did so in the hope that he would help his erring brother to resist all evil thoughts towards him, especially when he, himself, was of a peaceful disposition. He explained to him that the sinful burden of a murder was too heavy and that he would do well to avoid it in order not to end up with a double punishment. The only way to rid himself of it was through fearing God. In his persuasion, he went as far as any man could go. But the example of an evil man cannot be properly depicted until we know what sort of response he made to such persuasion: “His evil soul drove him to kill his brother; and he murdered him, and thus he became one of the lost.” (Verse 30)