Tafsir of Surah Ta-Ha - Verse 92

What happened between Musa and Harun after Musa returned

Allah informs of what happened when Musa returned to his people and saw the great matter that had taken place among them. With this he became filled with anger and he threw down the Divine Tablets that he had in his hand. Then, he grabbed his brother Harun by his head and pulled him towards himself. We expounded upon this previously in Surat Al-A`raf, where we mentioned the Hadith,

«لَيْسَ الْخَبَرُ كَالْمُعَايَنَة»

(Information is not the same as observation.) Then, he began to blame his brother, Harun, by saying,

مَا مَنَعَكَ إِذْ رَأَيْتَهُمْ ضَلُّواْأَلاَّ تَتَّبِعَنِ

(What prevented you when you saw them going astray; that you followed me not) meaning, "You should have informed me of this matter as soon as it happened."

أَفَعَصَيْتَ أَمْرِى

(Have you then disobeyed my order) "In that which I entrusted to you," referring to Musa's statement,

اخْلُفْنِى فِى قَوْمِى وَأَصْلِحْ وَلاَ تَتَّبِعْ سَبِيلَ الْمُفْسِدِينَ

(Replace me among my people, act in the right way and follow not the way of the mischief-makers.)7:142

قَالَ يَبْنَؤُمَّ

(He (Harun) said: "O son of my mother!") This mentioning of the mother was Harun's attempt to soften Musa's anger, because he was Musa's biological brother and they had the same parents. The mentioning of the mother here is more delicate and profound in bringing about gentleness and mildness. This is why he said,

يَبْنَؤُمَّ لاَ تَأْخُذْ بِلِحْيَتِى وَلاَ بِرَأْسِى

(O son of my mother! Seize (me) not by my beard, nor by my head!) This was Harun's excuse to Musa for being delayed from coming to him and informing him of the great mishap that took place. He said,

إِنِّى خَشِيتُ

(Verily, I feared) meaning, "I was afraid to come after you and inform you of this, because I thought you might accuse me of leaving them alone and causing division between them."

وَلَمْ تَرْقُبْ قَوْلِى

(and you have not respected my word!) This means, "And you did not take care of what I commanded you to do when I left you in charge of them." Ibn `Abbas said, "Harun was respectful and obedient to Musa."

Commentary

When the Bani Isra'il were smitten with the mischief of calf-worship Sayyidna Harun (علیہ السلام) as the deputy of Sayyidna Musa (علیہ السلام) remonstrated with them but to no avail. They split into three factions. Those who remained loyal to Sayyidna Harun (علیہ السلام) and refused to be misled by Samiri and who numbered, according to Qurtubi, twelve thousand. The second faction adopted calf-worship with the reservation that if Sayyidna Musa (علیہ السلام) ، on his return, forbade them they would give it up. The third faction consisted of zealots who believed that Sayyidna Musa علیہ السلام would approve of their action and would himself join them in calf-worship but even if he did not, they themselves would never give up their new faith. When Sayyidna Musa (علیہ السلام) returned to his people he rebuked them for the mischief they had caused (as related in the earlier verses). Then he turned to Sayyidna Harun (علیہ السلام) and in a rage seized him by his beard and the hair of his head. He asked him that when the unbelief (کُفر) of the Bani Isra'il had become obvious, why he did not follow him to the Tur mountain and why he disobeyed his orders.

مَا مَنَعَكَ إِذْ رَ‌أَيْتَهُمْ ضَلُّوا ﴿92﴾ أَلَّا تَتَّبِعَنِ (What did prevent you from following me when you saw them going astray. - 20:92-93) One meaning of ittiba' (following) referred to in this verse is that when Sayyidna Haran (علیہ السلام) discovered that the Bani Isra'il had strayed from the righteous path, and were beyond recall, he should have abandoned them and joined Sayyidna Musa (علیہ السلام) at the Tur mountain. The other meaning of the word 'follow', as adopted by some commentators is that when the Bani Isra'il had forsaken the True Faith, Sayyidna Haran (علیہ السلام) should have fought them as Sayyidna Musa (علیہ السلام) would have done had he been present there. In any case Sayyidna Musa blamed Sayyidna Haran (علیہ السلام) that he should either have fought the Bani Isra'il or should have parted company with them and joined Sayyidna Musa (علیہ السلام) at the Tur mountain, and that his continuing to live with them was an unwise act. Sayyidna Haran (علیہ السلام) addressed him as يَا ابْنَ أُمَّ (0 my mother's son! ) which implied a plea not to judge him too harshly. His excuse was that if he had fought the Bani Isra'il or abandoned them with his twelve thousand men, it would have caused discord and strife among them. He said that he had understood the parting advice of Sayyidna Musa اخْلُفْنِي فِي قَوْمِي وَأَصْلِحْ (Take my place among my people and keep things right - 7:142) to mean that he should maintain harmony among the people and prevent differences at all cost. Besides, he said, he had hoped that when he (Sayyidna Musa علیہ السلام) would return, he would be able to handle the situation satisfactorily. A further excuse which he offered and which is reported elsewhere in the Qur'an was: إِنَّ الْقَوْمَ اسْتَضْعَفُونِي وَكَادُوا يَقْتُلُونَنِي (7:150) which means that the Bani Isra'il have taken me as weak because of the small number of my supporters and were about to kill me. Sayyidna Musa (علیہ السلام) did not press the matter any further with his brother. He then turned to Samiri and asked him to explain his conduct in this whole affair. Qur'an-does not indicate whether he accepted the excuses offered by Sayyidna Haran (علیہ السلام) or whether he considered the latter's mistake as one of ijtihad (assessment) and dropped the matter.

Differences between two prophets when the opinions of both could be right

In this affair the considered opinion of Sayyidna Musa (علیہ السلام) ، by way of ijtihad was that in the situation as it took shape Sayyidna Harun (علیہ السلام) should have totally dissociated himself from the Bani Isra'il by removing himself and his followers from their company, and that by continuing to stay with them he had compromised his position. On the other hand Sayyidna Harun (علیہ السلام) felt, by way of ijtihad, that such an action would have caused a permanent split among the Bani Isra'il and divided them into factions, and since there was hope that they would see the error of their way when Sayyidna Musa (علیہ السلام) returned, he thought it wise to adopt a conciliatory attitude towards them. The purpose of both the prophets was a strict adherence to the commands of Allah and to ensure that the Bani Isra'il remained steadfast in the observance of the True Faith and in their belief in the Oneness of Allah. Where they differed, however, was the manner in which these objectives could be achieved whether to make a complete break with the dissidents or to bear with them in the hope those things would improve ultimately. Both these views have merit and it is not possible to pass a firm and final judgment on them. The differences among the jurists based on ijtihad are of a similar nature and those holding different opinions cannot be charged of having broken any religious laws. As regards Sayyidna Musa (علیہ السلام) seizing his brother by the hairs, it only shows his anger and frustration with the situation which had developed during his absence, but on hearing his explanation, he prayed to Allah to forgive them both.

Moses took his brother severely to task. Aaron explained that it was not that he had not tried to reform the people, or that he had reconciled himself to their ignorance. On the contrary, he had tried with all the force at his command to dissuade them from adopting such idolatrous practices. However, the problem was that the majority of the people had been influenced by Samiri’s guile and had become his supporters. When Aaron persisted, they were ready to fight and shed blood. Therefore, he was afraid that if he continued his efforts, there would be strife and bloodshed within the community. Aaron said that when matters had reached this stage, he had to choose between two alternatives: either internal strife or postponement of the issue till Moses’ return. Aaron adopted the second alternative as being the more advisable. In many instances, to avoid bloodshed, remaining non-commital is a better option, for the other option may prove to be greater evil.