the Lectures of Nekounam, (Session 1240)
This book is a profound exploration into the meanings and concepts of verse 137 of Surah Al-Anm from the Holy Quran. By reflecting upon the behaviour of the polytheists and universal human values, it examines polytheism, altruism, and defence from a monotheistic and rational perspective. Employing eloquent language and a coherent structure, this work aims to elucidate fundamental questions regarding shared human values and their distinctions within the context of faith and polytheism. The discourse presented herein analytically and interpretatively explains these concepts, linking Quranic verses and traditions to guide the reader towards a deeper understanding of the Divine Word.
The Holy Quran, in verse 137 of Surah Al-Anm, condemns with clear eloquence the behaviour of the polytheists who sacrificed their children to idols. This verse, with unparalleled subtlety, unveils the distortion of religion and the misguidance of the polytheists.
"Thus did many of the polytheists partners embellish for many of them the killing of their children, to destroy them and to confuse their religion for them. And if Allah had willed, they would not have done it. So leave them and what they invent."
This verse, by referring to the embellishment of child killing by the partners (idols), speaks of an act rooted in misguidance and religious distortion. The partnersnamely the idols and the agents of idolatryjustify this heinous act and thereby lead the polytheists to destruction. This behaviour not only violates human nature but also constitutes a clear distortion of religion.
The polytheists, by justifying the killing of their children, adorned their religion as if it were a commendable act. This distortion, aimed at misguidance (to destroy them) and confusing religion (to confuse their religion for them), is explicitly condemned by the Holy Quran. The Quran regards this act as the result of the partners insinuations. This distortion not only diverts religion from the path of monotheism but also tramples upon human nature.
One of the central questions in this discourse is the comparison between the sacrifice of the son by the Prophet Abraham (peace be upon him) and the act of the polytheists. Abraham (PBUH), with a monotheistic intention and divine command, was prepared to sacrifice his son, whereas the polytheists, motivated by idol worship, committed the act. This difference lies in the intention; a monotheistic intention elevates the deed, while a polytheistic intention leads it astray.
Abraham (PBUH), with steadfast faith, accepted the divine command, but the polytheists, relying on idols, committed a similar act devoid of monotheistic merit. This distinction demonstrates the importance of intention in evaluating deeds.
In Abrahams story, after testing his faith, God commanded the release of his son. This deliverance was not due to Abrahams weakness but as a sign of Divine mercy and completion of the test. In contrast, the polytheists, lacking divine guidance, sacrificed their children to idolsan act condemned by the Holy Quran.
Altruism and self-sacrifice are values embedded in human nature. Whether believer or non-believer, a person might sacrifice their life for homeland, family, or beliefs. These values, like an innate jewel, lie within every human being. The question remains whether the altruism of a non-believer holds equal value to that of a believer.
Examples of defence of homeland or sacrifice for family are common among believers and non-believers alike. For instance, a person may donate a kidney to save their mother regardless of faith. This act is rooted in human nature and cannot be confined merely to religious belief.
Despite commonality in nature, the altruism of a believer gains a higher value due to its connection to monotheism. The polytheists, sacrificing their children for idols, presumed that such acts would bring them blessing and goodness. The Quran condemns this belief with the phrase "to destroy them and to confuse their religion for them." In contrast, Abrahams (PBUH) altruism for God exemplifies monotheistic self-sacrifice.
One discussed issue is self-defence under difficult conditions, such as imprisonment. The question arises whether self-defence in prison resembles defence of the homeland in war. The ruling "Kill yourselves; that is better for you" found in some traditions, refers to self-defence in desperate circumstances. According to some religious scholars, this ruling means resistance against oppression and preservation of human dignity.
For example, a prisoner may take an action that leads to death to preserve their honour. This act resembles defence of the homeland on the battlefield, where one sacrifices life to uphold values. This defence is rooted in human nature and cannot be confined merely to religious faith.
Certain interpretations within religious sciences limit the ruling "Kill yourselves" to resistance against oppression. This viewpoint requires reflection, as self-defence, while a human value, must be accompanied by wisdom and rationality. The critique is not aimed at religious scholars but at superficial readings of religious texts that may cause misunderstanding.
The Holy Quran in the concluding part of verse 137 of Surah Al-Anm states: "And if Allah had willed, they would not have done it. So leave them and what they invent." This phrase refers to human free will. God created humans free to choose their path. This freedom is the basis for divine testing.
The partners, by embellishing the killing of
