For lexicography of walada, see Appendix-4.

    Keeping introduction and statements, in first two verses of this Surah, in mind, it is unthinkable of God, having children, parents, etc. Such a conjecture has no logical and scientific basis. We have seen that in different religions, claims based on conjecture attribute sons, daughters, wives, parents and all sorts of other relations to God. They also assign divinity in many human relations, and even in relations with the prophets. They also give names and designations to such relations besides assigning powers and functions to them, as discussed earlier. Questions arise, who is right?, how many sons, daughters, fathers, mothers, other relations, etc., through innumerable processes, have been assigned? (Nauudhubillaahi minahaa: I seek refuge with God, from all these). Why should He need them? This amounts to assigning temporal and animal qualities to Him, for which there is no authority or proof. Mixing falsehood with truth is shirk. Hiding truth with conjecture and its denial or rejection is kufr. This Ayah (112-3) negates Jewish, Christian and other ideas of, 'the Father', 'Father and Son', 'the only begotten son' (Christ, Ezra), 'emanation from cosmos', or 'birth from heavenly body', etc.:

"And High Exalted is the Majesty of our Lord; He has taken neither wife nor son." 72-3

"Say: 'All thankful-praises are to Allah, Who begets no son, And has no partner in His dominion, Nor (needs) He any to protect Him from humiliation, Yea, magnify Him, For His Greatness and Glory." 17-111

Attribution of ancestry

Polytheists of different times believed that gods, like animals and human beings, also belonged to some species, having relationships, parents, wives, consorts, concubines, children, ancestry, lineage, etc. They could not conceive of a Supreme God above mundane matters of mortals who are cast into cause and effect equation of dimensional world of matter-space-time.

Basic flaw with polytheism is that it is mainly based on conjecture which assigns God or gods qualities of physical creatures, particularly those of human beings and jinn, who are subject to laws of cosmos [ayyuhassakalaan: both creatures: men and jinn: cast into the gravitational setting. (55-31)].

Polytheists of Arabia regarded angels as daughters of God, and some prophets or saintly persons as His sons. It is important to note that mostly they did not assign any father to God, although in some religions and regions, some of their gods in higher hierarchy too were assigned even father or mother.

There were basically two concepts about assigning son to God. Some people thought that son descended from Him and others thought that He had adopted some one as a son. This led to questions of sex and procreation. This further led to considerations like hereditary qualities, inheritance, power, etc, as in family and tribe. That is why polytheists of Mecca asked about inheritance to and from God.

"Birth is descent and multiplication; and implies a developed being after incompleteness or nothingness. It requires espousal which is based on similarity of being and structure. All this is utterly impossible in the case of Allah. So the quality of One includes the renouncement of a father and a son." (Sayyid Qutub, In the Shade of the Quran, Translation M.Adil Salahi and Ashur A. Shamis, p. 353)

S.A.A.Maududi in his 'The Meaning of the Quran' (pp.345-346) has explained this polytheistic conjecture about God begetting and its implications

"First, that God should not be One, but there should be a species of gods, and its members should be associates in the attributes, acts and powers of divinity. This not only follows from assuming God begetting but also from assuming that He has adopted someone as a son, for the adopted son of somebody can inevitably be of his kind. And when, God forbid, he is of the same kind as God, it cannot be denied that he too possesses attributes of godhead.

"Second,..the assumption that God begets children necessitates that He should, God forbid, be a material and physical entity, should have a wife of His own species, physical processes for reproduction should follow.

"Third, sex and procreation are necessary for survival of species and continuity of race. This is necessary among mortals. If these assumptions are attached to the concept of God, then God forbid, he is also considered to die. This leads to further assumptions then that he should have and end and so beginning also.

"Fourth object of adopting some one as a son is that a childless person needs a helper in life and an heir after that. Therefore it amounts to ascribing all these weaknesses of mortal beings to the Sublime Being."

In elaboration of 112-4, :Muhammad Asad has quoted his following notes, given at different places in "The Message of the Quran', "The idea that God might have a son - either in the real or the metaphorical sense of this term - would presuppose a degree of innate likeness between the father and the son: God is in every respect Unique, so that 'there is nothing like unto Him' (42-11) and 'nothing that could be compared with Him' (112-4). Moreover, the concept of progeny implies an organic continuation of the progenitor, or part of him, in another being and, therefore presupposes a degree of incompleteness before the act of procreation (or incarnation, if the term sonship is used metaphorically): and the idea of incompleteness, in whatever sense, negates the very concept of God. But even if the idea of sonship is meant to express no more than of the different aspects of the One Deity (as is claimed in the Christian dogma of the Trinity), it is described in the Quran as blasphemous inasmuch as it amounts to an attempt at defining Him Who is 'sublimely exalted above anything that men may devise by way of definition'. (Verse 19-92, footnote 77, The Message of the Quran, p.468)

"And yet some (people) have come to attribute to all manner of invisible beings,

a place side by side with God - although it is He Who has created them (all); and

in their ignorance, they have invented for Him sons and daughters!

Limitless is He in His Glory, and sublimely exalted above anything

that men may devise by way of definition." 6-100 (Translation: M.Asad)

"'They have invented for Him (or 'falsely attributed to Him' sons and daughters without (having any) knowledge': a reference to the beliefs of the pre-Islamic Arabs who regarded the angels as 'God's daughters' (a designation which they also applied to certain of their goddesses), as well as to the Christian view of Jesus as 'the son of God". (Verse 6-100, Footnote 87, The Message of the Quran, p.187)

The Prophet (Peace be upon him) said: "There is no one more patient with something harmful that he hears than Allah. They attribute a son to Him, while it is He Who gives them sustenance and cares them." (Sahih Bukhari) Abu Hurayrah reported that the Prophet (Peace be upon him) said:

"Allah the Mighty and Majestic says: 'The son of Adam denies Me and he has no right to do so, and he abuses Me and he has no right to do so. In reference to his denial of Me, it is his saying: 'He (Allah) will never re-create me like He created me before.' But the re-creation of him is easier than his original creation. As for his cursing Me, it is his saying: 'Allah has taken a son.' But I am the One, the Self-Sufficient Master. I do not give birth, nor was I born, and there is none comparable to Me." (Bukhari) Abdul Maajd Daryabadi has given following notes in explanation of 'Lamyalid wa-lamyuulad' (112-3):

"Compare and contrast the Christian creed:' God the Father, the First Person of the Blessed Trinity.is Truly Father as He begets a co-eternal and co-equal son, to whom He imparts the plenitude of His nature and in Whom He comtemplates His own perfect image.' (Pallen and Wynne's New Catholic Diictionary, New York, p.360)

"According to popular Hinduism, the creation was brought about by Brahma's incest with his daughter. (Hasting's Encyclopdaedia of Religion and Ethics, Clark London, Vol-II, p.811). "Giving or taking birth, bursting, exploding, growing, developing, etc., etc., are all refuted in this brief statement of this Ayah. It also refutes any allusion to Him as the Singularity which went off in the Big Bang creating cosmos, i.e, it totally refutes even the concepts of pantheism and panentheism (wahdatal wujjuud).

"In Vedic India, for example, the father Heaven and the mother Earth 'were regarded as the parents not only of men but of the gods.' (Frazer's Worship of Nature', Macmillan, London, Vol-I, p.23). In the Vedas, the gods themselves 'had been the earliest products of creation. They were semi-anthropomorphised forces of nature.' (Tara Chand, Influence of Islam on Indian Culture, p.4)

'The account which became popular was that the primeval being created the waters on which floated the golden egg, he then entered it, and was born from it as Brahma, the first of created things. Brahma then created gods, heaven, earth, sky, sun, moon, universe and man.' (ib.pp.2-3) Many of the Hindu gods are the results of 'the union of a male divinity with a female being, conceived almost always as irregular, and very often incestuous.' (Barth, Religions of India, p.27)

(Abdul Majid Daryabadi, Tafsirul Quran, Vol-IV, pp.540-541) Abdul Wahab Chachar in the interpretation of the translation of the Quran by Taj Muhammad Amroti, (p.1739), explains that those who believe that Muhammad (Peace be upon him) has emanated from the Essence-Light of Allah (in other words, offspring of Allah), they all hold wrong concept and are in Shirk, in the light of this Aayah (112-3), because being born, or being offspring, offshoot, or emanation is the same thing. There is difference only in the use of different words. 17-111 eloquently and quite clearly explains this Aayah (112-3) further.

Maulana Hidayatullah, (Panjabi Translation of the Quran, p.618), explains that there is none of His kind or essence who could match to be His offspring or pair. There can't be His part or portion which could be separated and joined or conjoined to mix or combine with anything. Maulana, in fact, conversely explains the fundamentally underlying scientific facts that define that created material or physical existence or contingent can not be part of the Necessary, Real or Creator. Nothing has been duplicated, replicated or could ever be fashioned, imagined or mirror imaged, like unto to Him, in aught.

Misinterpretations

More than conjecture, in fact, confusion has mainly been compounded by misinterpretation, out of context, of the terminology of son and father, used in the Bible. Jews claimed that Ezra was son of God, as Christians claimed for Messiah son of Mary. So they worshiped them. The Quran has refuted all such claims:

"And the Jews said: 'Ezra is the son of Allah', and the Christians said: 'Messiah is the son of Allah.' That is their saying with their mouths. They imitate the saying of those who disbelieved of old. Allah's curse be on them. How they are deluded away from the truth." 9-30

"According to the Biblical term in the Old and New Testaments, every God-fearing righteous person is called 'son of God':

"Blessed are the peace-makers, for they shall be called the children of God." Mathew 5-9

"That ye may be children of your Father, which is in heaven." Mathew 5-45

Jesus never called himself "son of God, as far as I know, but he used to call himself the 'son of Man.'" Mark 2-10

Also see Quranic verses 5-116 to 118

It is interesting for research and important to study, and know as to how any idea against monotheism, which in fact is basic in faith in Christianity, became acceptable to them. Although rooted in Jewish monotheism, it was basically the Christian belief in the divinity of Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit that led to the development of the doctrine of the Trinity. In fact in any religion belief in the divinity of any created thing or being has led to plurality and polytheism.

Doctrine of Trinity envisages that the One God reveals Himself in three persons of Father, Son (Jesus Christ), and Holy Spirit. These three persons are taken as a unity, sharing one substance. Early Councils and theologians, defined it as 'three persons in one substance' (homoousion). This was basically an attempt to keep a distinction between persons so conceived, while claiming their unity, equality, and eternity in substance. This was denied, e.g., by Sabellius (3rd century CE), and forcefully opposed, e.g., by Arianism (4th century CE). On the issue of procession of the one person from the other, the concept underwent many changes. According to 'Filioque' clause added to the Nicene Creed, the Holy Spirit is believed to proceed from the 'Father' and the 'Son'. But this is rejected by Orthodox Church, which claims 'procession' of the Spirit from the 'Father' through the 'Son'. The doctrine itself and such amendments have always been influenced by current philosophy. At the same time, these views have not been there, without being challenged (e.g., by Process Theology).

Early history of Christianity is painful because of persecution by Jews, and struggle against Romans and then within itself. Its course remained bumpy and checkered. After rift between Paul and Barnabas, their parting of ways became intensive. Ultimately it came to be decisive in favour of the former, when Athanasius and Arius took respective opposite positions. Because of Paul's compromise with Roman beliefs and legends, followers of Pauline Christianity grew in numbers and gained strength. Then kings were used as pawns to promote the cause of the Church. But followers of Barnabas could never develop a central organization. (Introduction, 'The Gospel of Barnabas', Islamic Publications, Lahore, p.x)

Yet all did not fall in line. Up to 4th century C.E., the sect, known as Hypisistarians, refused to worship God as Father. They revered God as Almighty Ruler of the world, the Highest of all and no one equal to Him. Paul of Samasata, a Bishop of Antioch, believed that Christ was not God but a man and a prophet, different only in degree from other prophets (2-253), and that God did not become man substantially. Lucian, another Bishop of Antioch, opposed Trinity vehemently. He deleted all mention of Trinity from the Bible as he believed it was a later interpolation not found in the earlier Gospels. He was martyred in 312 C.E. Then comes Arius, the most famous disciple of Lucian. Peter Bishop of Alexandria ordained him a Deacon but later excommunicated him. Achilles the successor of Peter again ordained Arius as priest. Alexander the next Bishop of Alexandria once again excommunicated him. Arius, however, had gathered substantial following, by that time, that he became a problem for Trinitarians. If kept out, he could be a danger, but he could not be accommodated within the Church, as he proclaimed Unity and Simplicity of the Eternal God. He believed that in whatever degree Christ may be above other creatures, he himself could not be of the same substance as God. He was a human being as any other man.

Attempts at Syncretism

Besides historical course taking its own shape, there have been many efforts and attempts at intercultural fusion. Yet, interaction of cults, in its course, has created more schism: It may be interesting to understand process of religious developments, e.g., Graeco-Roman, Ancient Indian, and Modern Movements, both in the developed and developing worlds. In intercultural interaction, fusion of religious cults or movements is called Syncretism. The extent to which syncretism takes place is a matter for historical investigation.

Emperor Constantine brought a greater part of Europe under his rule. He supported Christians without accepting Christianity. Queen Mother was, however, inclined towards Pauline Christianity. Emperor's sister, Princess Constantina, was a follower of Arius. Not exactly, but an example of Aurangzeb and Dara Shikoh, in the Indo-Pak sub-continent, may be quoted as one of such religious divisions within a palace. Constantine wavered between the two faiths. As an administrator he wanted to unite Christians within one Church. Akbar made somewhat similar efforts in India to bring people to one faith, called Diin-e-Ilaahii (Religion of God).

Conflict between Arius and Bishop Alexander, mentioned above, became so wide spread and violent that it developed into a law and order situation. The Emperor intervened. In 325 C.E., a meeting of all denominations of Christianity was held in Nicea (Now Isnik, a village). Bishop Alexander was not able to attend the conference. He deputed his lieutenant Athanasius, who succeeded him as Bishop of Alexandria. The conference had many prolonged sessions. Constantine could not grasp full implications of the conflict, but he understood importance of support and cooperation of the Church for maintaining peace. Therefore, he threw his weight behind Athanasius and banished Arius. Trinity, thus became official religion of the empire.

Massacre of those who did not accept Trinity followed. It became a penal offence to possess a Bible not authorized by the Church. About 270 different versions of the Bible were burnt. Princess Constantina was not happy with these developments. Therefore, the emperor was persuaded to accept the faith which did not endorse Trinity. Arius was called back. The day Arius was scheduled to visit the Cathedral of Constantinople, he died 'suddenly'. The opponents called it a miracle. The emperor knew that it was a murder, therefore, this time, he banished Athanasius and two other Bishops. The emperor formally accepted Christianity and was baptized by an Arian Bishop. Thus Monotheism became the official religion. The next emperor Constantanius also accepted this faith. In 341 a conference was held in Antioch and Monotheism was accepted as a correct interpretation in Christianity. This was further confirmed in another Council held in Sirmium in 351. As a result, Arianism was accepted by an overwhelming majority. St. Jerome wrote in 359 that 'the whole world groaned and marvelled to find itself Arian.'

Pope Honorius, contemporary of Prophet Muhammad (Peace be upon him), saw Islam rising, very much close to the faith of Arius. In his letters he supported the doctrine of One Mind, logic pointing to belief in one God. If God has three independent minds the result would be chaos. The Quran explains the point as follows:

"Say: 'If there had been gods with Him, as they say; behold! they would certainly have sought a way to the Lord of the Throne." 17-42

For man, God tells us that He has placed one mind in his body:

"Allah has not made for any man two hearts in his body. .." 33-4

In Byzantine court the new message of Islam, inviting to monotheism, came under discussion. In this regard, as an example, a brief extract from a detailed Hadiith from Abdullah bin Abbas is given below:

Abu Sufyan bin Harb informed Abdullah bin Abbas that Heraclius, the Byzantine emperor, sent a messenger to him, while he was accompanying a trade caravan in Syria, at the time when Allah's Apostle had truce with Abu Sufyan and Quraish infidels. Abu Sufyan and his companions went to Heraclius at Ilya (Jerusalem). Heraclius called them in the court and he had all the senior Roman dignitaries around him..

Heraclius: "Who amongst you is closely related to that man who claims to be a Prophet?" Abu Sufyan: "I am the nearest relative to him (amongst the group)."..

After Abu Sufyan's answers to curious queries of Heraclius, the latter, recapitulated the following:

Heraclius: "I asked you about his family and your reply was that he belonged to a very noble family. In fact all the Apostles come from noble families amongst their respective peoples. I questioned you whether anybody else amongst you claimed such a thing, your reply was in the negative. If the answer had been in the affirmative, I would have thought that this man was following the previous man's statement. Then I asked you whether anyone of his ancestors was a king. Your reply was in the negative, and if it had been in the affirmative, I would have thought that this man wanted to take back his ancestral kingdom. I further asked whether he was ever accused of telling lies before he said what he said, and your reply was in the negative. So I wondered how a person who does not tell a lie about others could ever tell a lie about Allah. I, then asked you whether the rich people followed him or the poor. You replied that it was the poor who followed him. And in fact all the Apostles have been followed by this very class of people. Then I asked you whether his followers were increasing or decreasing. You replied that they were increasing, and in fact this is the way of true faith, till it is complete in all respects. I further asked you whether there was anybody, who, after embracing his religion, became displeased and discarded his religion. Your reply was in the negative, and in fact this is (the sign of) true faith, when its delight enters the hearts and mixes with them completely. I asked you whether he had ever betrayed. You replied in the negative and likewise the Apostles never betray. Then I asked you what he ordered you to do. You replied that he ordered you to worship Allah and Allah alone and not to worship any thing along with Him and forbade you to worship idols and ordered you to pray, to speak the truth and to be chaste. If what you have said is true, he will very soon occupy this place underneath my feet and I knew it (from the scriptures) that he was going to appear but I did not know that he would be from you, and if I could reach him definitely, I would go immediately to meet him and if I were with him, I would certainly wash his feet."

Heraclius then asked for the letter addressed by Allah's Apostle which was delivered by Dihya to the Governor of Busra, who forwarded it to Heraclius to read. The contents of the letter were as follows:

"In the name of Allah the Beneficent, the Merciful. (This letter is) from Muhammad, the slave of Allah and His Apostle, to Heraclius, the ruler of Byzantine.

Peace be upon him, who follows the right path. Furthermore, I invite you to Islam, and if you become a Muslim you will be safe, and Allah will double your reward, and if you reject this invitation of Islam you will be committing a sin by misguiding your Arisiyin (peasants). (And I recite to you Allah's Statement:)

"O people of the Scripture! Come to a word common to you and us that we worship none but Allah, and that we associate nothing in worship with Him, and that none of us shall take others as lords beside Allah. Then, if they turn away, say: 'Bear witness that we are Muslims (those who have surrendered to Allah)." (3.64).

Abu Sufyan then added: "When Heraclius had finished his speech and had read the letter, there was a great hue and cry in the Royal Court. So we were turned out of the court. I told my companions that the question of Ibn-Abi-Kabsha (the Prophet Muhammad) has become so prominent that even the King of Bani Al-Asfar (Byzantine) is afraid of him."

The sub- narrator adds: "Ibn An-Natur was the Governor of Ilya' (Jerusalem) and Heraclius was the head of the Christians of Shaam. Ibn An-Natur narrates that once while Heraclius was visiting Ilya' (Jerusalem), he got up in the morning with a sad mood. Heraclius invited all the heads of the Byzantines to assemble in his palace at Homs. When they assembled, he ordered that all the doors of his palace be closed. Then he came out and said:

'O Byzantines! If success is your desire and if you seek right guidance and want your empire to remain then give a pledge of allegiance to this Prophet (i.e., embrace Islam).' Compare this with the dialogue of Queen Sheba in her court when she received letter from Solomon (Peace be upon him:

(The Queen) said: "You chiefs! Here is delivered to me a letter worthy of respect. (29) "It is from Solomon and is (as follows): `In the Name of Allah Most Gracious Most Merciful: (30) `Be you not arrogant against me, but come to me in submission (to the true Religion).' (31) She said: "You chiefs! Advise me in (this) my affair. No affair have I decided, except in your presence." (32) 27-29 to 33

From Sheba's court we come back to the court of Heraclius, and continue with the sub-narrator, mentioned above: (On hearing Heraclius's views),

"The people ran towards the gates of the palace, like onagers but found the doors closed. Heraclius realized their hatred towards Islam and when he lost the hope of their embracing Islam, he ordered that they should be brought back in audience.

(When they returned) he said: 'What already said was just to test the strength of your conviction and I have seen it.'

"The people prostrated before him and became pleased with him.." (6, Vol-I, Bukhari)

Dr Hafiz Haqqani Mian Qadri in his book 'Quran, Science, and Civilization and Culture' (pp. 136-146), has quoted some names of European emperors, events and some 'Councils' held in latter centuries upto Napolean Bonapart, in this connection that point towards continued strain of struggle for monotheistic trends within the church and the state, and in the relationship between them.

Pope Honorius died in October 638, C.E. In a Council held in 680 C.E., in Constantinople, he was anathematized. This is unique in the history of Papacy that a Pope was denounced by a succeeding Pope and the Church. But struggle against Trinity did never die.

L.F.M. Sozzini (1525-1565), projected doctrine of Arius, denied divinity of Christ and repudiated doctrine of Original Sin and Atonement. He was followed by his nephew Fausto P. Sozzini (1539-1604). In 1562 he published a work on St. John's Gospel denying divinity of Jesus.. There are sects within Christianity who still continue to believe in monotheism, e.g., a sect of Racovian Catechism, derives its name from Racow in Poland.. the stronghold of followers of Arius. (Life and Message of Barnabas, The Gospel of Barnabas, Islamic Publications, Lahore, pp.xiii to xiv)

It would thus be seen that, against all odds, there has always remained alive a constant Christian tradition of Unitarianism, who reject doctrines of Trinity and divinity of Jesus Christ, as inimical to the Unity of God, together with Fall, Atonement, and Eternal Punishment. Socinians (from Fausto Sozzini), and 18th-century Arians were strongly biblical. They believed in special status for Christ. (J.R.Hinnells, Dictionary of Religions, p.340)

For contrast between a Unitarian and a disbeliever, in respect of their belief and behaviour, see verses 18-32 to 44.

Birth of Jesus (Peace be upon him) explained in the Quran:

Glad tidings of the birth of Jesus (Peace be upon him):

"Behold! The angels said: 'O Mary! Allah gives you glad tidings of a Word from Him: his name will be Jesus Christ, son of Mary, held in honour in this world and the Hereafter, and of those nearest to Allah. (45) "He shall speak to the people, in childhood and in maturity, and he shall be of the righteous. (46) "She said: 'O my Lord! How shall I have a son? when no man has touched me?' He said: ' Even so: Allah creates, what He wills. When He has decreed a Plan, He but, says to it: 'Be! And it is." (47) "And He (Allah) will teach him the Book and Wisdom, the Law and the Gospel." (48) "And (appoint him) a Messenger to the Children of Israel.." (49) 3-45 to 49

"And remember her (Mary), who guarded her chastity. We (Allah) breathed into her of Our Spirit, and We made her and her son a Sign for all peoples." 21-91 "He (Jesus Christ) was no more than a servant. We (Allah) granted Our favours to him, and We made him an example to the Children of Israel." 43-59 In this connection see following verses: 6-101, 19-88 to 95, 21-26 & 27, 37-158 & 159.

Besides biological process of parthenogenesis (reproduction from an ovum without fertilization, e.g. a normal process in invertebrates and lower plants), reproduction by manipulation of female chromosomes, has now been made through processes of genetic engineering and cloning. God is the Creator of all sciences and He is ever all Able-Powerful over all things. He simply says to it, "Be and it is"!

Taints of Trinity and Different Beliefs in Ancient Religions

It is interesting to examine as to how Hinduism, Zoroastrianism, Egyptian and other ancient religions, originally monotheistic, introduced their own versions of trinity, and even associated demigods with God, and paved way for proliferation of polytheism.

Brahma is the first of the gods in the Hindu Trinity: Brahma (the Creator), Vishnu (the sustainer of the worlds) and Shiva (the destroyer). Vishnu and Shiva represent opposite forces, e.g., existence and annihilation, light and darkness, and so on, respectively. Brahma is supposed to keep balance between them. The key distinction between `Brahman' and `Brahma', two gods, is that the latter has attributes, whereas the former hasn't. Brahma began the creation by meditation and thought, thus producing the Golden Egg. He is regarded as the all-inclusive deity, behind all other gods in the pantheon. Brahma, the creator, is not worshiped in India, although represented iconographically. Brahman is the ultimate. According to Vedanta, god (Brahman) is not in the image of man, nor can it be described by any human words or categories of thought. He is an impersonal principle, and of neuter gender. Brahma is personal and of masculine gender. Brahman-Aatman is the connection between universe and humanity i.e., the ultimate and the individual, God and man.

But originally Hinduism is monotheistic: "He who knows Me as the Unborn, as the Beginningless, as the Supreme Lord of all the worlds.." -"the Supreme Personality of Godhead, the Proprietor of everything".:

"Here the Lord is described by the word aja, meaning unborn. The Lord is different from the living entities who are taking birth and dying due to material attachment. Lord Krishna is the Supreme Proprietor of the planetary systems of the universe. He was existing before the creation, and He is different from His creation. He is not created. And because He is the Creator of Brahma, Siva and all the other demigods (it is the concept of gods, demigods, devis, etc., that Hinduism has proliferated polytheism, shirk). He is the Supreme Person of all planets. Sri Krishna is therefore different from everything that is created, and anyone who knows Him as such immediately becomes liberated from all sinful reactions.One should not try to understand Krishna as a human being." (A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada, The Opulence of the Absolute, Bhagavad-Gita as it is, pp. 353, 354)

Zurvanism, concept of Time (Zurvan), added trinity to Zoroastrianism. It is heresy within Zoroastrianism. It remained dominant in Sasanian court (24-642 CE) till advent of Islam. Concept of Time as source and controller of all things may be due to Babylonian influence on Zoroastrianism. Zurvan was thought to be father of twin spirits: Ahura Mazda and Angra Mainyu. It is above good and evil. With Zurvan as father of the twin spirits, Ahura Mazda was no longer considered sole creator and alone worthy of absolute worship. Zurvanism seems to be an aberrant movement within Zoroastrianism.

Time as Mystery in Creation and Re-creation

Time is one of the most elusive mysteries of the universe. Some scientists believe that time has a direction, but physicists like Michael Berry, Thomas Gold and Stephen Hawking. propose that time may reverse when universe begins to contract. Reversal of time, if so, may lead to raising of men from their graves, becoming alive again! Although scientists agree that journey of world and universe will end one day, but besides mode and method of conclusion of journey, basic question of resurrection, still remain to be explained in scientific terms.

Resurrection, (whether it takes place through reversal of time or through DNA or in any manner or form, in new plane of existence), definitely has to be under the relevant set of laws applicable in that world. Israrul Haque explains this in these words:

"The physical laws of life and death prevailing in this world will not most probably hold good on the day of Judgement which will take place when the earth and the heaven will have been changed."

Also see verse 14-48.

These theories, however, present some clues for consideration in elaboration of verse 21-104.

Time has been variously referred to in the Quran, depending upon its point(s) of reference, e.g. Asr: (The over all concept of time: 103-1), Dahar: (Epoch, Eon, Age: 45-24, 76-1), Ayyaam: (Periods: 3-140), Yaum: (Day: 2-259), Hiin: (Small duration: 76-1, 39-42), Saa'at: (Moment: 16-77), Ajalam-musamma: (Determined term: 6-2), Idh, Idha: (In point of time: 2-34, 11-1).

Zoroastrians divided time in three great eras: (i) era of creation, (ii) period when good and evil were mixed together (bundahishn), and (iii) final state after renovation, i.e., the time of separation of good and evil. Renovation of creation or making wonderful at the end of the historical process is known as Frashokereti (Frashegird). The Quran, however, refers to general creation, creation of planetary systems, creatures, and man at many places and, also re-creaton e.g., in 21-104.

According to Zoroastrian tradition, history of world is divided into four periods, each of 3,000 years, the last one begins with Zoroaster, i.e., present time is in the last period. They are traditionally awaiting coming of a saviour (Saoshyant or Sashyant), who will be born of a virgin, from posterity of Zoroaster. They believe that he will raise the dead and introduce universal judgement.

Above signs of coming of a saviour, resemble those of Jesus (Peace be upon him). From this point of view, it would mean that he had already come. Then are they waiting for his second coming? Muslims interpret verse 3-55 accordingly.

Zoroastrians consider this world as the good creation of Ahura Mazda. They do not look for the end of the world, instead they believe that it will ultimately be cleansed from all impurity with which evil has afflicted it. In Islamic Tradition, Abu Dawuud has reported from Anas (may Allah be pleased with him) that the Holy Prophet (Peace be upon him said:

"Religious fight will continue since Allah sent me, till the last of this people will fight against Dajjal (Antichrist)."

Zoroastrians believe that first or individual judgement will take place, for soul only, immediately after death, by passing through Chinvat Bridge. Muslims also believe in a similar passing over a bridge which is considered sharper and finer than a sword. For whole man, a second judgement after resurrection will be held so that he will be judged, rewarded or corrected in body as well as in soul. Here, particularly religions of the Book, have a convergence, but they differ in details of and after resurrection. Against the idea of annihilation, the Quran discloses the emergence of a new active phase (Yaum) of life, after the fixed Moment (Saa'ah), which concludes the term of existence in this world and starts the new phase. The term Yaum refers to the phase in the process of time and not a point in time. The latter is referred to as the Moment (Saa'ah).

Death of God' Theories

Once questions of material nature of birth and emanation from God were entertained, this led to coin 'death of God' theories, the latest being proclaimed in 1960s. All questions raised in this regard have been answered in detail at appropriate places in the Quran: He is Al-Hayyu, Al-Qayyumu, Al-Muhyii, Al-Mumiitu, Laa-Yamuut:

"And put your trust in the Ever Living One, Who dies not; and glorify His Praises; and Sufficient is He as the Ever All-Knower of the faults of His slaves." 25-58

"It is Allah who has created you. Further He has provided for your sustenance. Then He will cause you to die, and again He will give you life. Are there any of your partners who can do any single one of these things? Glory is to Him, and High is He above partners they attribute ." 30-40

Also see 15-23, 50-43, 2-258, 3-156, 7-158, 9-116, 10-56, 23-80, 40-68, 44-8, 57-2.

Narrated Ibn Abbas (may Allah be pleased with him): "The Prophet (Peace be upon him) used to say:

'I seek refuge (with You), by Your 'Izzat' (Honour). None has the right to be worshipped but You, Who does not die, while the jinns and the human beings die." (Bukhari, 480, Vol-IX) "Everything will perish, save His (Allah's) Countenance." 28-88 Also see 28-60