Back to Surah Al-Isra

Tafsir of Surah Al-Isra - Verse 43

Surah 17
Verse 43
111 verses
43

سُبۡحَـٰنَهُۥ وَتَعَـٰلَىٰ عَمَّا یَقُولُونَ عُلُوࣰّا كَبِیرࣰا

Exalted is He and high above what they say by great sublimity.

Scholarly Interpretations(3)

|
You are reading a tafsir for the group of verses 17:42 to 17:43

سُبْحَانَهُ وَتَعَالَى عَمَّا يَقُولُونَ

(Glorified and Exalted is He high above what they say!) meaning these idolators who transgress and do wrong when they claim that there are other gods besides Him.

عُلُوّاً كَبِيراً

(high above) means, far above. He is Allah, the One, the Self-Sufficient Master, Whom all creatures need. He begets not, nor was He begotten, and there is none comparable or coequal unto Him.

You are reading a tafsir for the group of verses 17:42 to 17:43

Commentary

According to the proof of Tauhid (the Oneness of Allah) given in the verse: إِذًا لَّابْتَغَوْا إِلَىٰ ذِي الْعَرْ‌شِ سَبِيلًا (then they would have found out a way to the Lord of the Throne - 42), Allah alone is the creator, owner and master of the entire universe. The argument is if it was not so and He had other partners in this godhead, differences would have necessarily emerged among them. And, in the eventuality of a difference, the whole universal system would have gone to ruins - because, ever abiding peace among them is habitually impossible. Though, this argument has been enunciated here in a prohibitive manner, but there are books of Scholastic Theology (` Ilm al-Kalam) where the logical rationale behind this argument has also been described in great details. The learned may consult these at their discretion.

You are reading a tafsir for the group of verses 17:40 to 17:44

The truth is so complete and perfect in itself that, if any untruth is placed next to it, the truth immediately stands out as such. One example of an untruth is ascribing partners to God. Worshippers of deities call their supposed partners God’s children, but this in itself is a refutation of their claim. Firstly, if these so-called partners are given feminine gender and called God’s daughters, then immediately an objection may be raised, for the disbelievers hold that daughters belong to the weaker sex. Why then would God approve of a member of this weaker class as His partner? How surprising it would be if He gave man sons as his loving children and chose daughters for Himself! Secondly, if the partner is taken to be God’s son, —who, in the experience of man is a symbol of power and strength—this again would defy understanding, for, power is indivisible. If in any system there is more than one person invested with power, a struggle between them is bound to take place, for each one of them would want to have absolute power. Now, if there had been more than one powerful being in this universe, there would certainly have been a struggle for power and this would have created disorder and dissension. But, as there is no disorder or dissension in the universe, this proves that no such being or beings exist as have a share in God’s power. Whether God’s supposed partners are called sons or daughters, the notion of partnership clashes with reality. The truth is that the entire universe rejects all ideas that ascribe partners to God’s divinity.