Genesis, 2:4 This is the account of the

heavens and the earth when they were

created – when the Lord(Yahweh) God1
made the earth and heavens.

(1) Advocates of the so-called documentary hypothesis of pentateuchal

authorship argue that the introduction of the name Yahweh (Lord)
here indicates that a new source (designated J), a parallel account of
creation, begins here. In this scheme Gen 1:1-2:3 is understood as the
priestly source (designated P) of creation. Critics of this approach often
respond that the names, rather than indicating separate sources, were
chosen to reflect the subject matter (see U. Cassuto, The Documentary
Hypothesis). Gen 1:1–2:3 is the grand prologue of the book, showing
the sovereign God creating by decree. The narrative beginning in 2:4 is
the account of what this God invested in his creation. Since it deals
with the close, personal involvement of the covenant God, the
narrative uses the covenantal name Yahweh (Lord) in combination
with the name God. For a recent discussion of the documentary
hypothesis from a theologically conservative perspective, see D. A.
Garrett, Rethinking Genesis. For an attempt by source critics to
demonstrate the legitimacy of the source critical method on the basis
of ancient Near Eastern parallels, see J. H. Tigay, ed., Empirical Models
for Biblical Criticism. For reaction to the source critical method by
literary critics, see I. M. Kikawada and A. Quinn, Before Abraham Was;
R. Alter, The Art of Biblical Narrative, 131-54; and Adele Berlin, Poetics
and Interpretation of Biblical Narrative, 111-34.
Genesis, 3:20 The man named his wife
Eve, because she was the mother of all
the living.2

(2) The explanation of the name forms a sound play (paronomasia)

with the name. “Eve” is ‫חָוה‬ ַ (khavvah) and “living” is ‫חי‬ַ (khay). The
name preserves the archaic form of the verb ‫חָיה‬ ָ (khayah, “to live”)
with the middle vav (‫ )ו‬instead of yod (‫)י‬. The form ‫חי‬ ַ (khay) is derived
from the normal form ‫חָיה‬ ַ (khayyah). Compare the name Yahweh (
‫ )ְיהָוה‬explained from ‫( הָָיה‬hayah, “to be”) rather than from ‫( הַָוה‬havah).
The biblical account stands in contrast to the pagan material that
presents a serpent goddess hawwat who is the mother of life. See J.
Heller, “Der Name Eva,” ArOr 26 (1958): 636-56; and A. F. Key, “The
Giving of Proper Names in the OT,” JBL 83 (1964): 55-59.
Genesis, 4:1 Now the man had marital
relations with his wife Eve, and she
became pregnant and gave birth to Cain.
 Then she said, “I have created a man just
as the Lord did!”(3)

(3) Heb “with the Lord.” The particle ‫’( אֶת־‬et) is not the
accusative/object sign, but the preposition “with” as the ancient
versions attest. Some take the preposition in the sense of “with the
help of” (see BDB 85 s.v. ‫את‬ ֵ ; cf. NEB, NIV, NRSV), while others prefer
“along with” in the sense of “like, equally with, in common with” (see
Lev 26:39; Isa 45:9; Jer 23:28). Either works well in this context; the
latter is reflected in the present translation. Some understand ‫ אֶת־‬as
the accusative/object sign and translate, “I have acquired a man – the
Lord.” They suggest that the woman thought (mistakenly) that she had
given birth to the incarnate Lord, the Messiah who would bruise the
Serpent’s head. This fanciful suggestion is based on a questionable
allegorical interpretation of Gen 3:15 (see the note there on the word
“heel”).
Since Exod 6:3 seems to indicate that the name Yahweh (‫ְיהָוה‬, y
‫ے‬hvah, translated Lord) was first revealed to Moses (see also Exod
3:14), it is odd to see it used in quotations in Genesis by people who
lived long before Moses.
This problem has been resolved in various ways: (1) Source
critics propose that Exod 6:3 is part of the “P” (or priestly) tradition,
which is at odds with the “J” (or Yahwistic) tradition. (2) Many propose
that “name” in Exod 6:3 does not refer to the divine name per se, but
to the character suggested by the name.
God appeared to the patriarchs primarily in the role of El
Shaddai, the giver of fertility, not as Yahweh, the one who fulfills his
promises. In this case the patriarchs knew the name Yahweh, but had
not experienced the full significance of the name. In this regard it is
possible that Exod 6:3b should not be translated as a statement of
denial, but as an affirmation followed by a rhetorical question implying
that the patriarchs did indeed know God by the name of Yahweh, just
as they knew him as El Shaddai. D. A. Garrett, following the lead of F.
Andersen, sees Exod 6:2-3 as displaying a paneled A/B parallelism and
translates them as follows: (A) “I am Yahweh.” (B) “And I made myself
known to Abraham…as El Shaddai.” (A') “And my name is Yahweh”;
(B') “Did I not make myself known to them?” (D. A. Garrett, Rethinking
Genesis, 21). However, even if one translates the text this way, the
Lord’s words do not necessarily mean that he made the name Yahweh
known to the fathers. God is simply affirming that he now wants to be
called Yahweh (see Exod 3:14-16) and that he revealed himself in
prior times as El Shaddai. If we stress the parallelism with B, the
implied answer to the concluding question might be: “Yes, you did
make yourself known to them – as El Shaddai!” The main point of the
verse would be that El Shaddai, the God of the fathers, and the God
who has just revealed himself to Moses as Yahweh are one and the
same. (3) G. J. Wenham suggests that pre-Mosaic references to
Yahweh are the product of the author/editor of Genesis, who wanted
to be sure that Yahweh was identified with the God of the fathers. In
this regard, note how Yahweh is joined with another divine name or
title in Gen 9:26-27; 14:22; 15:2, 8; 24:3, 7, 12, 27, 42, 48; 27:20; 32:9.
The angel uses the name Yahweh when instructing Hagar concerning
her child’s name, but the actual name (Ishma-el, “El hears”) suggests
that El, not Yahweh, originally appeared in the angel’s statement
(16:11). In her response to the angel Hagar calls God El, not Yahweh
(16:13). In 22:14 Abraham names the place of sacrifice “Yahweh Will
Provide” (cf. v. 16), but in v. 8 he declares, “God will provide.” God
uses the name Yahweh when speaking to Jacob at Bethel (28:13) and
Jacob also uses the name when he awakens from the dream (28:16).
Nevertheless he names the place Beth-el (“house of El”). In 31:49
Laban prays, “May Yahweh keep watch,” but in v. 50 he declares,
“God is a witness between you and me.” Yahweh’s use of the name in
15:7 and 18:14 may reflect theological idiom, while the use in 18:19 is
within a soliloquy. (Other uses of Yahweh in quotations occur in 16:2,
5; 24:31, 35, 40, 42, 44, 48, 50, 51, 56; 26:22, 28-29; 27:7, 27; 29:32-
35; 30:24, 30; 49:18. In these cases there is no contextual indication
that a different name was originally used.) For a fuller discussion of
this proposal, see G. J. Wenham, “The Religion of the Patriarchs,”
Essays on the Patriarchal Narratives, 189-93.
Exodus, 3:13, Moses said to God, “If I go
to the Israelites and tell them, ‘The God of
your fathers has sent me to you,’ and they
ask me, ‘What is his name?’ (4) what should
I say to them?”
(4) There has been considerable debate about the name of Yahweh in
the Pentateuch, primarily because of theories that have maintained
that the name Yahweh was not known in antiquity (see also 6:3 and
notes there). The argument of this whole section nullifies that view.
The idea that God’s name was revealed only here raises the question
of what he was called earlier.
The word “God” is not a name. “El Shaddai” is used only a few times in
Genesis. But Israel would not have had a nameless deity – especially
since Genesis says that from the very beginning people were making
proclamation of the name of Yahweh (Gen 4:26; 12:8). It is possible
that they did not always need a name if they were convinced that only
he existed and there was no other God. But probably what Moses was
anticipating was the Israelites’ wanting to be sure that Moses came
with a message from their God, and that some sign could prove it.
They would have known his name (Yahweh), and they would have
known the ways that he had manifested himself. It would do no good
for Moses to come with a new name for God, for that would be like
introducing them to a new God. That would in no way authenticate to
them Moses’ call, only confuse; after all, they would not be expecting a
new name – they had been praying to their covenant God all along.
They would want to be sure that their covenant God actually had sent
Moses. To satisfy the Israelites Moses would have had to have been
familiar with the name Yahweh – as they were – and know that he
appeared to individuals. They would also want to know if Yahweh had
sent Moses, how this was going to work in their deliverance, because
they had been crying to him for deliverance. As it turned out, the
Israelites had less problem with this than Moses anticipated – they
were delighted when he came. It is likely that much of this concern
was Moses’ own need for assurance that this was indeed the God of
the fathers and that the promised deliverance was now to take place.
Exodus, 3:14 God said to Moses, “I am
that I am.” (5) And he said, “You must say
this to the Israelites, ‘I am has sent me to
you.’”

(5) The verb form used here is ‫’( אֶהְֶיה‬ehyeh), the Qal imperfect, first
person common singular, of the verb ‫( הָָיה‬haya, “to be”). It forms an
excellent paronomasia with the name. So when God used the verb to
express his name, he used this form saying, “I am.” When his people
refer to him as Yahweh, which is the third person masculine singular
form of the same verb, they say “he is.” Some commentators argue for
a future tense translation, “I will be who I will be,” because the verb
has an active quality about it, and the Israelites lived in the light of the
promises for the future. They argue that “I am” would be of little help
to the Israelites in bondage. But a translation of “I will be” does not
effectively do much more except restrict it to the future. The idea of
the verb would certainly indicate that God is not bound by time, and
while he is present (“I am”) he will always be present, even in the
future, and so “I am” would embrace that as well (see also Ruth 2:13;
Ps 50:21; Hos 1:9). The Greek translation of the OT used a participle to
capture the idea, and several times in the Gospels Jesus used the
powerful “I am” with this significance (e.g., John 8:58). The point is that
Yahweh is sovereignly independent of all creation and that his
presence guarantees the fulfillment of the covenant (cf. Isa 41:4; 42:6,
8; 43:10-11; 44:6; 45:5-7). Others argue for a causative Hiphil
translation of “I will cause to be,” but nowhere in the Bible does this
verb appear in Hiphil or Piel. A good summary of the views can be
found in G. H. Parke-Taylor, Yahweh, the Divine Name in the Bible.
See among the many articles: B. Beitzel, “Exodus 3:14 and the Divine
Name: A Case of Biblical Paronomasia,” TJ 1 (1980): 5-20; C. D. Isbell,
“The Divine Name ehyeh as a Symbol of Presence in Israelite
Tradition,” HAR 2 (1978): 101-18; J. G. Janzen, “What’s in a Name?
Yahweh in Exodus 3 and the Wider Biblical Context,” Int 33 (1979):
227-39; J. R. Lundbom, “God’s Use of the Idem per Idem to Terminate
Debate,” HTR 71 (1978): 193-201; A. R. Millard, “Yw and Yhw Names,”
VT 30 (1980): 208-12; and R. Youngblood, “A New Occurrence of the
Divine Name ‘I AM,’” JETS 15 (1972): 144-52.
Exodus, 3:15 God also said to Moses, “You
must say this to the Israelites, ‘The Lord (6)
– the God of your fathers, the God of
Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of
Jacob – has sent me to you. This is my
name forever, and this is my memorial
from generation to generation.’

(6) Heb “Yahweh,” traditionally rendered “the Lord.” First the verb “I
AM” was used (v. 14) in place of the name to indicate its meaning and
to remind Moses of God’s promise to be with him (v. 12). Now in v. 15
the actual name is used for clear identification: “Yahweh…has sent
me.” This is the name that the patriarchs invoked and proclaimed in
the land of Canaan.
Exodus, 3:16 “Go and bring together the
elders of Israel and tell them, ‘The Lord,
the God of your fathers, (7) appeared to me
– the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob –
saying, “I have attended carefully to you
and to what has been done to you in
Egypt,

(7) “The God of your fathers” is in simple apposition to the name “the
Lord” (Heb “Yahweh”) as a recognizable identification. If the holy
name were a new one to the Israelites, an explanation would have
been needed. Meanwhile, the title “God of my/your/our father(s)” was
widely used in the ancient Near East and also in Genesis (26:24; 28:13;
31:5, 29; 46:1, 3; N. M. Sarna, Exodus [JPSTC], 268).
Exodus, 6:2 God spoke to Moses and said
to him, “I am the Lord. (8)

(8) The announcement “I am the Lord” (Heb “Yahweh”) draws in the

preceding revelation in Exod 3:15. In that place God called Moses to
this task and explained the significance of the name “Yahweh” by the
enigmatic expression “I am that I am.” “I am” (‫אֶהְֶיה‬, ’ehyeh) is not a
name; “Yahweh” is. But the explanation of the name with this
sentence indicates that Yahweh is the one who is always there, and
that guarantees the future, for everything he does is consistent with
his nature. He is eternal, never changing; he remains. Now, in Exodus
6, the meaning of the name “Yahweh” will be more fully unfolded.
6:3 I appeared to Abraham, to Isaac, and
to Jacob as God Almighty, but by my name
‘the Lord’9 I was not known to them.10

9tn Heb “Yahweh,” traditionally rendered in English as “the Lord.”

The phrase has been placed in quotation marks in the translation to
indicate it represents the tetragrammaton.

10tn The verb is the Niphal form ‫תי‬ ִ ‫ע‬

ְ ‫ד‬
ַ ‫( נו‬noda’ti). If the text had
wanted to say, “I did not make myself known,” then a Hiphil form
would have been more likely. It is saying, “but by my name Yahweh I
was not known to them.”
sn There are a number of important issues that need clarification in
the interpretation of this section. First, it is important to note that “I am
Yahweh” is not a new revelation of a previously unknown name. It
would be introduced differently if it were. This is the identification of
the covenant God as the one calling Moses – that would be proof for
the people that their God had called him. Second, the title “El
Shadday” is not a name, but a title. It is true that in the patriarchal
accounts “El Shadday” is used six times; in Job it is used thirty times.
Many conclude that it does reflect the idea of might or power. In some
of those passages that reveal God as “El Shadday,” the name
“Yahweh” was also used. But Wellhausen and other proponents of the
earlier source critical analysis used Exod 6:3 to say that P, the so-
called priestly source, was aware that the name “Yahweh” was not
known by them, even though J, the supposed Yahwistic source, wrote
using the name as part of his theology. Third, the texts of Genesis
show that Yahweh had appeared to the patriarchs (Gen 12:1, 17:1,
18:1, 26:2, 26:24, 26:12, 35:1, 48:3), and that he spoke to each one of
them (Gen 12:7, 15:1, 26:2, 28:13, 31:3). The name “Yahweh” occurs
162 times in Genesis, 34 of those times on the lips of speakers in
Genesis (W. C. Kaiser, Jr., “Exodus,” EBC 2:340-41). They also made
proclamation of Yahweh by name (4:26, 12:8), and they named places
with the name (22:14). These passages should not be ignored or
passed off as later interpretation. Fourth, “Yahweh” is revealed as the
God of power, the sovereign God, who was true to his word and could
be believed. He would do as he said (Num 23:19; 14:35; Exod 12:25;
22:24; 24:14; 36:36; 37:14). Fifth, there is a difference between
promise and fulfillment in the way revelation is apprehended. The
patriarchs were individuals who received the promises but without the
fulfillment. The fulfillment could only come after the Israelites became
a nation. Now, in Egypt, they are ready to become that promised
nation. The two periods were not distinguished by not having and by
having the name, but by two ways God revealed the significance of his
name. “I am Yahweh” to the patriarchs indicated that he was the
absolute, almighty, eternal God. The patriarchs were individuals
sojourning in the land. God appeared to them in the significance of El
Shadday. That was not his name. So Gen 17:1 says that “Yahweh
appeared…and said, ‘I am El Shadday.’” See also Gen 35:11, 48:2,
28:3. Sixth, the verb “to know” is never used to introduce a name
which had never been known or experienced. The Niphal and Hiphil of
the verb are used only to describe the recognition of the overtones or
significance of the name (see Jer 16:21, Isa 52:6; Ps 83:17ff; 1 Kgs
8:41ff. [people will know his name when prayers are answered]). For
someone to say that he knew Yahweh meant that Yahweh had been
experienced or recognized (see Exod 33:6; 1 Kgs 18:36; Jer 28:9; and
Ps 76:2). Seventh, “Yahweh” is not one of God’s names – it is his only
name. Other titles, like “El Shadday,” are not strictly names but means
of revealing Yahweh. All the revelations to the patriarchs could not
compare to this one, because God was now dealing with the nation. He
would make his name known to them through his deeds (see Ezek
20:5). So now they will “know” the “name.” The verb ‫דע‬ ַ ָ ‫( י‬yada’) means
more than “aware of, be knowledgeable about”; it means “to
experience” the reality of the revelation by that name. This harmonizes
with the usage of ‫שם‬ ֵ (shem), “name,” which encompasses all the
attributes and actions of God. It is not simply a reference to a title, but
to the way that God revealed himself – God gave meaning to his name
through his acts. God is not saying that he had not revealed a name to
the patriarchs (that would have used the Hiphil of the verb). Rather, he
is saying that the patriarchs did not experience what the name
Yahweh actually meant, and they could not without seeing it fulfilled.
When Moses came to the elders, he identified his call as from Yahweh,
the God of the fathers – and they accepted him. They knew the name.
But, when they were delivered from bondage, then they fully knew by
experience what that name meant, for his promises were fulfilled. U.
Cassuto (Exodus, 79) paraphrases it this way: “I revealed Myself to
Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob in My aspect that finds expression in the
name Shaddai…I was not known to them, that is, it was not given to
them to recognize Me as One that fulfils his promises.” This generation
was about to “know” the name that their ancestors knew and used, but
never experienced with the fulfillment of the promises. This section of
Exodus confirms this interpretation, because in it God promised to
bring them out of Egypt and give them the promised land – then they
would know that he is Yahweh (6:7). This meaning should have been
evident from its repetition to the Egyptians throughout the plagues –
that they might know Yahweh (e.g., 7:5). See further R. D. Wilson,
“Yahweh [Jehovah] and Exodus 6:3,” Classical Evangelical Essays in
Old Testament Interpretation, 29-40; L. A. Herrboth, “Exodus 6:3b: Was
God Known to the Patriarchs as Jehovah?” CTM 4 (1931): 345-49; F. C.
Smith, “Observation on the Use of the Names and Titles of God in
Genesis,” EvQ 40 (1968): 103-9.
6:4 I also established my covenant with
them11 to give them the land of Canaan,
where they were living as resident
foreigners.

11tn The statement refers to the making of the covenant with

Abraham (Gen 15 and following) and confirming it with the other
patriarchs. The verb ‫תי‬ִ ‫מ‬
ֹ ‫ק‬
ִ ֲ‫( ה‬haqimoti) means “set up, establish, give
effect to, conclude” a covenant agreement. The covenant promised the
patriarchs a great nation, a land – Canaan, and divine blessing. They
lived with those promises, but now their descendants were in bondage
in Egypt. God’s reference to the covenant here is meant to show the
new revelation through redemption will start to fulfill the promises and
show what the reality of the name Yahweh is to them.
Exodus 33:19 And the Lord said, “I will
make all my goodness pass before your
face, and I will proclaim the Lord by name
before you; I will be gracious to whom I
will be gracious, I will show mercy to
whom I will show mercy.” (12)

(12) God declares his mercy and grace in similar terms to his earlier
self-revelation (“I am that I am”): “I will be gracious to whom I will be
gracious.” In other words, the grace and mercy of God are bound up in
his own will. Obviously, in this passage the recipients of that favor are
the penitent Israelites who were forgiven through Moses’ intercession.
The two words are at the heart of God’s dealings with people. The first
is ‫נן‬
ַ ‫ח‬
ָ (khanan, “to be gracious, show favor”). It means to grant favor or
grace to someone, grace meaning unmerited favor. All of God’s
dealings are gracious, but especially in forgiving sins and granting
salvation it is critical. Parallel to this is ‫חם‬
ַ ָ ‫( ר‬rakham), a word that
means “show compassion, tender mercy.” It is a word that is related to
the noun “womb,” the connection being in providing care and
protection for that which is helpless and dependent – a motherly
quality. In both of these constructions the verbs simply express what
God will do, without explaining why. See further, J. R. Lundbom, “God’s
Use of the Idem per idem to Terminate Debate,” HTR 71 (1978): 193-
201; and J. Piper, “Prolegomena to Understanding Romans 9:14-15: An
Interpretation of Exodus 33:19,” JETS 22 (1979): 203-16.
 Exodus, 34:6 The Lord passed by before
him and proclaimed: “The Lord, the Lord,
(13)
the compassionate and gracious God,
slow to anger, and abounding in loyal love
and faithfulness,

(13) U. Cassuto (Exodus, 439) suggests that these two names be

written as a sentence: “Yahweh, He is Yahweh.” In this manner it
reflects “I am that I am.” It is impossible to define his name in any
other way than to make this affirmation and then show what it means.

---------------------------------------------------------

Arberry

The people were one nation; then God sent forth the Prophets, good
tidings to bear and warning, and He sent down with them the Book
with the truth, that He might decide between the people touching their
differences; and only those who had been given it were at variance
upon it, after the clear signs had come to them, being insolent one to
another; then God guided those who believed to the truth, touching
which they were at variance, by His leave; and God guides
whomsoever He will to a straight path.

George sale

Mankind was of one faith, and GOD sent prophets bearing good tidings,
and denouncing threats and sent down with them the scripture in
truth, that it might judge between men of that concerning which they
disagreed: and none disagreed concerning it, except those to whom
the same scriptures were delivered, after the declarations of GOD'S will
had come unto them, out of envy among themselves. And GOD
directed those who believed, to that truth concerning which they
disagreed, by his will: for GOD directeth whom he pleaseth into the
right way

Dr. T.B. Irving

Mankind was [once] one nation, so God dispatched prophets as heralds and
warners. He sent the Book down along with them to bring the Truth, so as to
decide among mankind concerning whatever they had been disagreeing
 about. However only those to whom it was given disagreed about it out of
envy towards one another, after explanations had been brought them. By
His permission God has guided those who believe to any Truth they may
have disagreed about. God guides anyone He wishes to a Straight Road.
Rodwell

Mankind was but one people; 88 and God sent prophets to

announce glad tidings and to warn; and He sent down with them
the Book of Truth, that it might decide the disputes of men; and
none disputed but those to whom the Book had been given, after
the clear tokens had reached them,--being full of mutual jealousy.
And God guided those who believed to the truth of that about
which, by his permission, they had disputed; for God guideth whom
he pleaseth into the straight path.
The Monotheist Group
www.Free-Minds.Org

2:213 The people used to be one nation, then God sent the prophets
as bearers of good news and warners, and He sent down with them the
Scripture with the facts so that they may judge between the people in
what they were disputing. But after receiving the clarity, the people
disputed in it due to animosity between them. And God guided those
who believed with His permission regarding what they disputed in of
the truth. And God guides whoever He wishes to a straight path.

{Mid East Web for Coexistence}

http://www.mideastweb.org
Revised, June 1, 2004

Mankind was one nation having one religion. Later when people
invented other religions, Allah appointed Prophets as bearers of good
news and warnings; and revealed to them the Book with the True
Guidance to settle the matters of dispute between mankind. But the
very people to whom it was given, started disputes after the clear
arguments had come to them, because of rivalry between one another.
Allah has guided the believers by His will to the truth in those matters
in which they had differences. Allah guides whom He pleases towards
the Right Way. [213] 2: [13]

Asad
213. ALL MANKIND were once one single community; [then they began
to differ] whereupon God raised up the prophets as heralds of glad
tidings and as warners, and through them bestowed revelation from on
high, setting forth the truth, so that it might decide between people
with regard to all on which they had come to hold divergent views.
(197) Yet none other than the selfsame people who had been granted
this [revelation] began, out of mutual jealousy, to disagree about its
meaning after all evidence of the truth had come unto them. But God
guided the believers unto the truth about which, by His leave, they had
disagreed: for God guides onto a straight way him that wills [to be
guided]. (198)

By using the expression ummah wdhidah ("one single community") to

describe the original state of mankind, the Qur'an does not propound,
as might appear at first glance, the idea of a mythical "golden age"
obtaining at the dawn of man's history. What is alluded to in this verse
is no more than the relative homogeneity of instinctive perceptions
and inclinations characteristic of man's primitive mentality and the
primitive social order in which he lived in those early days. Since that
homogeneity was based on a lack of intellectual and emotional
differentiation rather than on a conscious agreement among the
members of human society, it was bound to disintegrate in the
measure of man's subsequent development. As his thought-life
became more and more complex, his emotional capacity and his
individual needs, too, became more differentiated, conflicts of views
and interests came to the fore, and mankind ceased to be "one single
community" as regards their outlook on life and their moral valuations:
and it was at this stage that divine guidance became necessary. (It is
to be borne in mind that the term al-kitdb refers here - as in many
other places in the Qur'an - not to any particular scripture but to divine
revelation as such.) This interpretation of the above Qur'anic passage
is supported by the fact that the famous Companion `Abd Allah ibn
Mas'dd used to read it thus: "All mankind were once one single
community, and then they began to differ (fakhtalafu)-whereupon God
raised up etc. Although the word fakhtalafu interpolated here by Ibn
Mas'ud does not appear in the generally accepted text of the Qur'an,
almost all of the authorities are of the opinion that it is implied in the
context.
"God guides whomever He wills onto a straight way." As is made clear
in the second part of verse 253 of this sarah, man\'s proneness to
intellectual dissension is not an accident of history but an integral,
God-willed aspect of human nature as such: and it is this natural
circumstance t6which the words "by His leave" allude. For an
explanation of the phrase \"out
of mutual jealousy", see 23:53 and the corresponding note 30.
Shabbir Ahmed, M.D.

Lighthouse
6440 NW 53 St
Lauderhill, Fl 33319 USA
Phone: (954)746-2115
Website: www.galaxydastak.com
E-mail: drshabbir@comcast.net
drshabbir@galaxydastak.com

2:213 Mankind were once one single community. (But Satan, their selfish desire,
divided them. 2:36, 10:19.) So, Allah sent Prophets as heralds of good news and
as Warners, and with them sent the Revelation as the Absolute Truth in order to
decide among the people in their disputes. But again, out of mutual rivalry, they
divided among themselves although all evidence of the Right had come to them!
Hence, Allah shows the Lighted Road, according to His Laws, to all those who
would acknowledge the Truth, to resolve their disputes. Allah guides to the
Straight Path of real success him who wills to be guided.
[Using the perceptual and conceptual faculties helps people achieve guidance,
while selfishness, arrogance and blind following leads them astray. 2:170, 4:88,
6:56, 7:173, 7:179, 17:36, 27:80-81, 30:22, 37:113, 40:34-35, 41:17, 56:79.]

G.A. Pervez

213 Not only the history of Bani-Isr’ael but that of humanity bears
witness to what has been stated above. As mentioned in the story of
Adam (2/30) originally mankind was a single community, free of
dissension. Then human beings created mutual differences (10/19) and
since these differences could not be resolved by means of human
intellect alone, Allah sent a series of Anbia and Books for this purpose,
who would give them glad tidings provided they lived together as one
family and warn them about the consequences of a disintegrated
society and resolve their differences in accordance with the revealed
book. After departure of the Anbia who had accomplished their
appointed tasks, their followers again created differences amongst
themselves in their desire to outdo and out-strive each other. Those
from amongst them who followed Allah’s Guidance were able again to
resolve their mutual differences. This is how Allah, according to His
Laws shows the right path to those who seek it (2/136, 3/83, 3/183,
16/92, 57/25).