Dear brothers and sisters, we are now into the 18th post of the series titled “Literary Elegance of the Noble Qur’an.” In this series we have been explaining that in the Qur’an there are verses which are not meant to be understood only in their literal meaning but are used in a figurative or literary sense for rhetorical effect.
Suicide in Islam
One such verse is related to the issue of suicide. In Islam, suicide is clearly forbidden. Under no circumstance is a person allowed to take his own life. However, there is a verse that appears — on the surface — to command suicide. If a verse seems to contradict the overall teachings of the Qur’an, then we must interpret it properly. We cannot give it a meaning that contradicts the clear principles of Islam.
The verse in question is in Surah Al-Baqarah (2:54). In that verse, Musa (Alahis Salam) says to his people: “O my people! You have indeed wronged yourselves by taking the calf for worship. So repent to your Creator and kill yourselves. That is better for you in the sight of your Creator.”
At first glance it appears as if Musa (Alahis Salam) told them to kill themselves. The background is that the people had worshipped the golden calf. When Musa returned and saw what they had done, he became extremely angry and rebuked them.
Now many commentators take the phrase “kill yourselves” literally and say Musa commanded them to commit suicide. Some scholars, however, argue that this cannot be the intended meaning.
Those who insist on the literal interpretation try to support it with another verse — Surah Al-Baqarah (2:56) — which says: “Then We revived you after your death so that you might be grateful.”
From this they argue that Musa told them to kill themselves, they did so, they died, and then Allahﷻ brought them back to life. But this conclusion comes from ignoring the verse in between. They connect verse 54 and verse 56, but they leave out verse 55.
When we read verse 55, the misunderstanding becomes clear. Verse 55 says that the people said to Musa: “We will not believe you until we see Allahﷻ openly.”
Because of this demand, a thunderbolt struck them, and they died. Then Allahﷻ revived them. So, the death mentioned in verse 56 is not because they committed suicide. It was because they demanded to see Allahﷻ directly, and they were struck by the thunderbolt as a punishment.
Therefore the death in verse 56 has nothing to do with suicide.
Now what did Musa mean when he said “kill yourselves”?
This was an expression spoken in intense anger, similar to expressions we use in everyday speech. When someone is extremely angry, people say things like “go die,” or “just disappear,” or “you should be ashamed to live.” These are not literal commands to die. They are expressions used to show how terrible the action was.
Such expressions exist in every language, including Arabic.
We have already seen that Musa (Alahis Salam) was extremely angry. The Qur’an describes how he threw down the tablets and even grabbed his brother by the beard and hair in anger. His anger was intense because his people had committed a grave act of shirk.
In that state of anger he said something equivalent to: “What you have done is so terrible that you might as well die.” That is the rhetorical meaning.
If we read verse 54 alone, someone might misunderstand it. If we jump from verse 54 to verse 56 and ignore verse 55, it may seem as if they committed suicide. But once verse 55 is included, it becomes clear that their death happened because of the thunderbolt when they demanded to see Allahﷻ.
Furthermore, the Qur’an clearly prohibits suicide elsewhere. In Surah An-Nisa (4:29) Allahﷻ says: “Do not kill yourselves. Indeed Allahﷻ is merciful to you.”
So how can Musa (Alahis Salam), a Prophetﷺ of Allahﷻ, command something that Allahﷻ Himself forbids? This shows that the phrase must be understood in a figurative or rhetorical sense, not literally.
There are also many hadiths where the Prophetﷺ strongly warned against suicide.
For example, in Sahih Bukhari, the Prophetﷺ said that whoever throws himself from a mountain and kills himself will continue falling in Hell forever. Whoever drinks poison and kills himself will keep drinking poison in Hell forever. Whoever kills himself with a weapon will keep stabbing himself with that weapon in Hell.
These narrations show how severe the crime of suicide is. It is such a grave sin that a person who commits suicide is threatened with eternal punishment.
How then could Musa (Alahis Salam) command such an act?
Another narration illustrates this severity. During the Battle of Khaybar, a man fought bravely alongside the Muslims. His courage in battle was extraordinary. Yet the Prophetﷺ said about him: “He is among the people of Hell.”
The companions were surprised. They saw him fighting heroically. Later, that man was severely wounded. Unable to bear the pain, he placed his spear on the ground and threw himself onto it, killing himself.
When the companions saw this, they realized why the Prophetﷺ had said he would be among the people of Hell — because he would eventually commit suicide.
The Prophetﷺ then said that Allahﷻ may support His religion even through a sinful person.
The lesson is that no matter how many good deeds a person performs, suicide can destroy everything. Because suicide is such a serious crime, it is impossible that Musa (Alahis Salam) literally commanded his people to kill themselves.
Rather, the phrase was an expression of anger, condemning their terrible action of worshipping the calf. Therefore, when we interpret the Qur’an, we must consider the context, the surrounding verses, and the overall teachings of Islam.
When all of these are considered together, it becomes clear that the phrase in Surah Al-Baqarah was not a literal command for suicide, but a rhetorical expression showing the severity of their wrongdoing.
Prophetﷺ did not lead the janāzah prayer for someone who had killed himself
The special power lies in the supplication (duʿā) of the Messengerﷺ of Allahﷻ . Your supplication or the supplication of a thousand people is not the same as the supplication of the Messengerﷺ of Allahﷻ. The duʿā of the Messengerﷺ has a unique status and distinction. This is a special ruling specific to him, and it cannot be taken as a general proof that people should go and pray at graves.
Why did the Messengerﷺ of Allahﷻ sometimes pray at a grave? Because he said: “My supplication should reach him.” Everyone else had prayed for that person, but his own duʿā had not reached him. That is why he prayed there. It was a special situation, not a general permission.
Similarly, when a funeral (janāzah) was brought, the Prophetﷺ would ask certain questions. Normally he himself would lead the janāzah prayer for everyone. But there was one situation in which he would initially refuse: when the deceased had unpaid debts.
If a person who had debts was brought for the funeral prayer, the Prophetﷺ would ask: “Did he leave any wealth behind?”
If they said yes, he would ask: “Did he leave enough wealth to repay his debts?”
If they said yes, he would instruct that the debts be paid from the inheritance and then the remaining wealth distributed among the heirs.
But if someone died leaving debts and no property, in the early days the Prophetﷺ would say: “Pray over your companion yourselves.” He would not lead the prayer himself.
Why? Because if people knew that the Prophetﷺ’s own supplication would not be given for someone who died with unpaid debts, they would fear dying with debt. This created strong pressure on the community to settle debts before death.
Sometimes, when the Prophetﷺ said he would not pray over the debtor, some companions would step forward and say: “We will take responsibility for his debt.”
Once someone guaranteed the debt, the Prophetﷺ would then lead the janāzah prayer.
In the later period, when the Muslim treasury (Bayt al-Māl) became strong and wealth increased, the Prophetﷺ said: “Whoever leaves wealth, it belongs to his heirs. Whoever leaves debt, it is upon me.” Meaning the debt would be paid from the public treasury. So, in the early stage he used this method to teach people the seriousness of debt.
Now compare that with suicide.
In the case of suicide, the Prophetﷺ did something even more severe. He did not lead the janāzah prayer for someone who had killed himself with a weapon.
A man who had killed himself with an iron weapon was brought to the Prophetﷺ for the funeral prayer. The Prophetﷺ refused to pray over him.
Why? Because janāzah prayer is a supplication for the deceased — asking Allahﷻ to forgive him, widen his grave, and grant him mercy. But suicide is such a severe crime that the Prophetﷺ refused to personally make that supplication for the one who committed it.
If suicide is treated with such seriousness in Islam — to the point that the Prophetﷺ would not lead the funeral prayer — how could it be said that Musa (Alahis Salam) commanded his people to commit suicide? That interpretation cannot be correct.
Therefore, when Musa said “kill yourselves”, it must be understood as an expression of anger, not a literal command. We also know that Musa (Alahis Salam) was extremely angry at that moment. In Surah Al-Aʿrāf (7:150) it is mentioned that he threw down the tablets of the Torah and even grabbed his brother by the hair in anger.
So the statement was spoken in intense anger, expressing how severe their wrongdoing was. This is why we say: even though the literal wording appears to say “kill yourselves,” we cannot interpret it literally, because that would contradict the basic teachings of Islam which clearly forbid suicide.
This is an example of literary expression. Sometimes words are spoken whose literal meaning is different, but their intended meaning is rhetorical.
Now let us look at another example where incorrect interpretation can create serious problems.
This example concerns Prophet Dawud (Alahis Salam), mentioned in Surah Ṣād (38).
Dawud(AS) was not only a Prophet; he was also a king. Allahﷻ gave him revelation — the Zabūr — and after him his son Sulaiman (Alahis Salam) also became both a Prophet and a king.
The Qur’an narrates an incident: two men suddenly appeared before Dawud(AS) in his private chamber. They had entered without coming through the normal gates, which startled him. They said: “Do not be afraid. We have come with a dispute. Judge between us with justice.”
One of them explained the case: “This is my brother. He has ninety-nine sheep, and I have only one sheep. Yet he demands that I hand over my one sheep to him, and he overpowered me in argument.”
After hearing the case, Dawud judged that the man with ninety-nine sheep had indeed wronged the one who had only one. Then Dawud realized something. He understood that this incident was actually a test from Allahﷻ. The two men were not ordinary people but angels sent as a test.
At that moment Dawud realized he had made some mistake earlier, and he immediately sought forgiveness from Allahﷻ, fell in prostration, and repented. Allahﷻ then says He forgave him. Now here is the problem.
Some commentaries influenced by Biblical stories say that Dawud(AS) had ninety-nine wives and desired the wife of another man. According to that story, he arranged for the man to be killed in battle and then married his widow. This story exists in the Bible, and unfortunately some early commentators copied it into Islamic explanations.
But this interpretation is unacceptable. Why? Because Prophets can make minor mistakes, but they would never commit such a disgraceful act — arranging someone’s death in order to take his wife. That would destroy the credibility of a Prophet and make people lose trust in his message.
The Qur’an never says anything like that. It only indicates that Dawud(AS) made some mistake and later realized it and repented.
Therefore we must interpret the incident in a way that preserves the dignity of the Prophet.
The basic lesson in the story is simple: someone who had much wealth tried to take the property of someone who had very little. The example of ninety-nine sheep versus one sheep illustrates oppression by the powerful against the weak.
Perhaps Dawud had once made a decision or action that unintentionally favored someone who already had much wealth over someone who had little. When he heard the case of the two men, he recognized the similarity and realized his own mistake. So he sought forgiveness.
That is all the Qur’an indicates. But turning the story into a scandal about ninety-nine wives and murder is a distortion taken from other traditions.
When interpreting Qur’anic verses, we must always consider the dignity and character of Prophets. They may make small mistakes, but they would never commit acts that destroy their moral integrity.
If someone gives an interpretation that insults the honor of a Prophet, that interpretation must be rejected.
Allahﷻ will grant us from His bounty, and His Messengerﷺ will also give us
Finally, there is another example related to provision (rizq). Everyone knows that Allahﷻ alone provides sustenance. Even the Prophetﷺs themselves depend on Allahﷻ for provision.
However, some verses may appear — if read superficially — to suggest that the Prophetﷺ also gives provision.
For example, when speaking about the distribution of charity (zakāt), the Qur’an mentions people who criticize the Prophetﷺ regarding how he distributes it. If they receive something, they are pleased; if they do not receive anything, they become angry.
Then Allahﷻ says that if they had been satisfied with what Allahﷻ and His Messengerﷺ gave them, and said “Allahﷻ is sufficient for us; Allahﷻ will grant us from His bounty, and His Messengerﷺ will also give us,” that would have been better.
Some people take the phrase “Allahﷻ will give and His Messengerﷺ will give” literally and claim that the Prophetﷺ independently provides sustenance. But that is a misunderstanding.
The Prophetﷺ distributed wealth that belonged to Allahﷻ’s law — zakāt and charity entrusted to him. He did not create provision himself. He simply distributed what Allahﷻ had already provided. So once again, if we take the wording without understanding the context, we can fall into serious errors.
These examples show why the Qur’an must be interpreted carefully, with knowledge of language, context, and the principles of Islam.
Otherwise people may take a verse literally and reach conclusions that contradict the core teachings of the religion.
In the same way, Allahﷻ says that Allahﷻ will grant from His bounty, and the Messengerﷺ will also give. If they had thought, “Whatever Allahﷻ and His Messengerﷺ give us is correct,” and had been satisfied with it instead of complaining, that would have been better for them. This is the simple and correct meaning of the verse. There is nothing mysterious or extraordinary about it.
However, what some people do is take this verse and use it as a proof for grave-worship practices. They say: “Look, the verse says that the Messengerﷺ of Allahﷻ also gives from Allahﷻ’s bounty.” Then they argue that the Messengerﷺ and Allahﷻ share the same authority in giving.
If Allahﷻ gives and the Messengerﷺ also gives, they claim it means the Messengerﷺ has the same authority as Allahﷻ in providing. Therefore, if you are in difficulty, you can ask the Messengerﷺ just as you ask Allahﷻ.
Groups involved in grave-worship use this verse as one of their major evidences. But what is actually happening in that verse?
The verse is speaking about the distribution of zakāt from the public treasury. The Messengerﷺ of Allahﷻ ﷺ distributed the zakāt wealth that came into the treasury. If someone distributes charity, the same expression could be used about him.
If I distribute something, it could be said that I gave it. If you distribute something, it could be said that you gave it. That is the meaning here.
The verse clearly relates to the distribution of zakāt. Even if it had only said “the Messengerﷺ gave,” that would have been sufficient. But Allahﷻ includes Himself in the statement to show that the distribution carried out by the Messengerﷺ is done under Allahﷻ’s authority.
In reality, who physically handed out the wealth? The Messengerﷺ of Allahﷻ did.
But Allahﷻ says: “If they had been satisfied with what Allahﷻ and His Messengerﷺ gave them…” — meaning the Messengerﷺ distributed what belonged to Allahﷻ’s law. Yet some people twist this wording to claim that the Messengerﷺ independently provides divine bounty.
Allahﷻ and His Messengerﷺ enriched them
Similarly, there is another verse that they misuse for the same purpose. It is Surah At-Tawbah (9:74).
In that verse it says that these people did not become hostile except because Allahﷻ and His Messengerﷺ enriched them.
Now they take this phrase — “Allahﷻ and His Messengerﷺ enriched them” — and say: “Look, the Messengerﷺ also makes people wealthy.”
But what does it actually mean? It simply means that the Messengerﷺ distributed wealth from the treasury and thereby some people became wealthy.
During his lifetime, the Messengerﷺ was the leader of the community, and the keys to the treasury were with him. If he gave large amounts of wealth to someone, naturally that person could become wealthy.
Does that mean he possessed divine power to create wealth out of nothing?
Of course not. It only means he gave from what already existed. Any wealthy person could do the same. If you are rich, you could give someone a large amount of money and make him wealthy. That does not make you divine. Therefore, the verse is referring to giving from existing resources, not creating provision. But some people twist it into something completely different. They claim that the Prophetﷺ has a divine ability to grant wealth even after his death, and that people can ask him for provision.
This interpretation is completely incorrect. The verse is clearly about something that happened during his lifetime, when he was distributing wealth.
You can also make someone wealthy while you are alive by giving him money. But that does not mean after your death people can come to you and ask you for provision. The meaning is simply that the Messengerﷺ distributed wealth generously from the treasury.
To understand this properly, we must compare it with other verses. For example, Allahﷻ says that those whom you call besides Allahﷻ do not possess the power to provide provision. Provision must be sought from Allahﷻ alone.
In Surah Al-ʿAnkabūt (29:17) Allahﷻ says that sustenance should be sought from Him.
There is also another clear statement where Allahﷻ commands the Prophetﷺ to declare: “Say: I do not tell you that I possess the treasures of Allahﷻ.”
This command appears in Surah Al-Anʿām (6:50) and again in Surah Hūd (11:31).Allahﷻ tells the Prophetﷺ to clearly announce that he does not possess Allahﷻ’s treasuries.
What does this mean? It means that people should not think the Prophetﷺ controls Allahﷻ’s treasure and can give from them whenever he wishes.
If someone wants something from the treasury, they should ask according to normal worldly means — from someone who actually possesses wealth.
But divine treasury belongs only to Allahﷻ.
There is also another instruction to the Prophetﷺ in Surah Ṭā-Hā (20:132).
Allahﷻ tells the Prophetﷺ: Command your family to pray and remain patient in it. We do not ask you for provision; rather We provide for you.
If the Prophetﷺ had authority over provision, why would Allahﷻ say that He is the One providing for the Prophetﷺ? This clearly shows that the authority over sustenance belongs to Allahﷻ alone.
During his lifetime, the Prophetﷺ sometimes gave generously to people. But he could only give what was available. Sometimes people came asking and there was nothing left.
At times he even borrowed animals to give charity because nothing remained in the treasury.
This shows that he was giving from available resources, not from divine treasury.
Anyone can give from what they possess. That is not a divine attribute. But those who misunderstand the verses interpret them as if the Prophetﷺ possesses unlimited divine power to give anything. This is a serious misinterpretation.
Another verse clarifies the matter clearly. In Surah Saba (34:24) Allahﷻ instructs the Prophetﷺ to ask: “Who provides for you from the heavens and the earth?”
Then Allahﷻ tells him to answer: “Allahﷻ.”
This is the fundamental teaching of Islam: Allahﷻ alone provides sustenance.
Even the Prophetﷺ himself experienced poverty earlier in life. The Qur’an mentions this in Surah Ad-Duḥā (93:8): Allahﷻ found you in need and made you self-sufficient.
The Prophetﷺ grew up in hardship, raised under the care of his grandfather and then his uncle. Later he became financially stable through trade.
But the Qur’an makes it clear that Allahﷻ is the One who enriched him.
There are also many reports describing how little food sometimes existed in his house — at times for days there was no fire lit for cooking, and they lived on simple provisions like water and dates.
Even Prophetﷺ’s wives (Mothers of beleivers) once asked for more financial support. At that time Allahﷻ revealed a verse telling the Prophetﷺ to say: if they desire worldly luxury, he will give them a proper separation; but if they desire Allahﷻ and the Hereafter, they should remain with him.
This is mentioned in Surah Al-Aḥzāb (33:29). If the Prophetﷺ had unlimited divine power to provide wealth, would such a situation have occurred?
These examples clearly show that the verses about “Allahﷻ and His Messengerﷺ giving” refer to distribution of existing wealth, not divine power to grant provision.
Misunderstanding these verses leads to serious errors. Understanding them correctly preserves the fundamental belief that provision belongs only to Allahﷻ.
In shā’ Allāh, we will continue examining more examples of such literary expressions in the Qur’an in the upcoming posts.