20. Sura Taha, Mecca 45

The Quranic Text & Ali’s Version:

قَالَ فَمَا خَطْبُكَ يَا سَامِرِيُّ ﴿٩٥﴾

20: 95.  (Moses) said: "What then is thy case, O Samiri?"

C2620. Moses now turns to the Samiri, and the Samiri's reply in the next verse sums up his character in a few wonderful strokes of character-painting.

The lesson of the whole of this episode is the fall of a human soul that nominally comes to Allah's Truth in a humble position but makes mischief when and as it finds occasion. It is no less dangerous and culpable than the arrogant soul, typified by Pharaoh, which gets into high places and makes its leadership the cause of ruin of a whole nation.

قَالَ بَصُرْتُ بِمَا لَمْ يَبْصُرُوا بِهِ...   

20: 96.  He replied:

"I saw what they saw not:

فَقَبَضْتُ قَبْضَةً مِّنْ أَثَرِ الرَّسُولِ...

so I took a handful (of dust) from the footprint of the Messenger,

...فَنَبَذْتُهَا وَكَذَلِكَ سَوَّلَتْ لِي نَفْسِي ﴿٩٦﴾

and threw it (into the calf): thus did my soul suggest to me."

C2621. This answer of the Samiri is a fine example of unblushing effrontery, careful evasion of issues, and invented falsehoods.

He takes upon himself to pretend that he had far more insight than anybody else: he saw what the crowd did not see. He saw something supernatural.

"The Messenger" is construed by many Commentators to mean the angel Gabriel. Rasul (plural, rusul) is used in several places for "angels" e.g., in 11:69, 77; 19:19; and 35:1.

But if we take it to mean the Messenger Moses, it means that the Samiri saw something sacred or supernatural in his footprints: perhaps he thinks a little flattery would make Moses forgive him. The dust became sacred, and his throwing it into the calf made the calf utter a lowing sound! As if that was the point at issue!

He does not answer the charge of making an image for worship. But finally, with arrogant effrontery, he says, "Well, that is what my soul suggested to me, and that should be enough!"

Asad’s Version:

20:95

Said [Moses]: "What, then, didst thou have in view, O Samaritan?"

(20:96) He answered: "I have gained insight into something which they were unable to see: 81 and so I took hold of a handful of the Apostle's teachings and cast it away: for thus has my mind prompted me [to act]." 82

[[ Asad’s notes - 81 It is to be noted that the verb basura (lit., "he became seeing") has the tropical significance of "he perceived [something] mentally", or "he gained insight" or "he understood". Hence, Abu Muslim al-Isfahani (whose interpretation of the whole of this verse Razi analyzes and finds most convincing) explains the above phrase as meaning, "I realized what they [i.e., the rest of the people] did not realize - namely, that some of thy beliefs, O Moses, were wrong". It would seem that the samaritan objected to the idea of a transcendental, imperceivable God, and thought that the people ought to have something more "tangible" to believe in. (See also next note.)

82 Contrary to the fanciful interpretations advanced by some of the other commentators, Abu Muslim (as quoted by Razi) explains the term athar (lit., "vestige" or "trace") in its tropical sense of the "practices and sayings" or - collectively - the "teachings" of any person, and particularly of a prophet; thus, he makes it clear that the phrase gabadtu gabdatan min athari 'r-rasul fa-nabadhtuha signifies "I took hold of a handful [i.e., "something"] of the teachings of the Apostle, and discarded it" : it being understood that "the Apostle" referred to by the Samaritan in the third person is Moses himself. (As already mentioned in the preceding note, Razi unreservedly subscribes to Abu Muslim's interpretation of this passage.) In my opinion, the Samaritan's rejection of a part of Moses' teachings is meant to explain the subconscious tendency underlying all forms

of idolatry and of the attribution of divine qualities to things or beings other than God: a futile, self-deceiving hope of bringing the Unperceivable closer to one's limited perception by creating a tangible "image" of the Divine Being or, at least, of something that could be conceived as His "emanation". Inasmuch as all such endeavours obscure rather than illuminate man's understanding of God, they defeat their own purpose and destroy the misguided devotee's spiritual potential: and this is undoubtedly the purport of the story of the golden calf as given in the Qur'an. ]]

[[Ali’s notes - 2620 Moses now turns to the Samiri, and the Samiri's reply in the next verse sums up his character in a few wonderful strokes of character-painting. The lesson of the whole of this episode is the fall of a human soul that nominally comes to Allah's Truth in a humble position but makes mischief when and as it finds occasion. It is no less dangerous and culpable than the arrogant soul, typified by Pharaoh, which gets into high places and makes its leadership the cause of ruin of a whole nation. (20.95)

2621 This answer of the Samiri is a fine example of unblushing effrontery, careful evasion of issues, and invented falsehoods. He takes upon himself to pretend that he had far more insight than anybody else: he saw what the crowd did not see. He saw something supernatural. "The Messenger" is construed by many Commentators to mean the angel Gabriel. Rasul (plural, rusul) is used in several places for "angels" e.g., in xi. 69, 77; xix. 19; and xxxv. 1. But if we take it to mean the Messenger Moses, it means that the Samiri saw something sacred or supernatural in his footprints: perhaps he thinks a little flattery would make Moses forgive him. The dust became sacred, and his throwing it into the calf made the calf utter a lowing sound! As if that was the point at issue! He does not answer the charge of making an image for worship. But finally, with arrogant effrontery, he says, "Well, that is what my soul suggested to me, and that should be enough!" (20.96) ]]