By Defending-Islam Team

We have seen a number of non-Muslims and even a few Muslims asking about the meaning of the following Verse of the Qur’an:

حَتَّىٰ إِذَا بَلَغَ مَغْرِبَ ٱلشَّمْسِ وَجَدَهَا تَغْرُبُ فِي عَيْنٍ حَمِئَةٍ وَوَجَدَ عِندَهَا قَوْماً قُلْنَا يٰذَا ٱلْقَرْنَيْنِ إِمَّآ أَن تُعَذِّبَ وَإِمَّآ أَن تَتَّخِذَ فِيهِمْ حُسْناً

Yusuf Ali’s translation renders it as: (Until, when he reached the setting of the sun, he found it set in a spring of murky water: Near it he found a People: We said: "O Zul-qarnain! (thou hast authority,) either to punish them, or to treat them with kindness.")

The main objection raised about this Verse it would seem to contradict obvious sensory knowledge pointing to the fact that the Sun never enters any part of the Earth at all. Many of our opponents from among the non-Muslims insist that the meaning of the Verse has to be taken literally, thus rendering Islam as a flawed religion.

In this work, we seek not to provide our own explanation of what some of the key words and phrases may mean in this Verse, but rather we will present what the Muslim Mufassirun[1] have forwarded about this Verse throughout the course of Islamic history.

Before delving into how the masters of Qur’anic interpretation viewed this verse, one matter has to be remembered when discussing the meaning of the Quranic Verses, especially if these meanings are brought up by objectionable personalities: The analysis being done by such people may sound correct and in harmony with the Arabic language, yet it will not stand any chance if the scholars and the exegesists of this nation do not take their interpretation seriously, or if the interpretation provided by our opponents is one of many different possibilities relating to the Verse in question, and it is clear that some of the Mufassirun have adopted one possibility over the other. Even if the person forwarding an interpretation of a Verse of the Qur’an were a lay Muslim, it would be incumbent upon us to check his words against the writings of the ‘Ulama (scholars) of Islam, to verify whether such an interpretation has any validity within scholarly Islamic discourse. If this is the case with a Muslim who fully believes in the Qur’an, follows it, and would never desecrate it, what should our attitude be then towards those who have malice in their hearts against Islam?

We have to always remember that our religion is not decided by our Christian, Atheist, and other non-Muslim opponents, but by the Muslim scholars, as it is clear that if we let every non-Islamic interpretation stand as a possibly valid explanation, our religion would have suffered great losses at the hands of our opponents. This, in addition to the well-established rule that the saying of a non-Muslim with respect to a Verse of the Qur’an is not paid any attention unless it is corroborated by a Muslim ‘Aalim. So, if the non-Muslims cannot show that there is consensus from our scholars saying that the Verse is to be taken literally then the rest of their talk is in vain, in that they try to make it incumbent on us to follow their interpretation of the Verse as opposed to what our scholars believed.

After mentioning this very important matter, we move on to the issues and objections we are to tackle:

Issue #1: The interpretations of the exegesists of the Qur’an

In contrast to what the non-Muslims may try to present as “interpretation”, almost all of the interpretations carried out by the exegesists explicitly mention that the meaning of this Ayah is not that Dhul-Qarnayn reached the point in the sky where the sun sets, but rather it refers to what he saw with his vision.

For example, Abdur-Rahman As-Sa’di’s (d. 1376 AH) Taysir al-Karim ar-Rahman mentions:[2]

حتى رأى الشمس في مرأى العين، كأنها تغرب في عين حمئة، أي: سوداء، وهذا هو المعتاد لمن كان بينه وبين أفق الشمس الغربي ماء، رآها تغرب في نفس الماء وإن كانت في غاية الارتفاع

Until he (Dhul-Qarnayn) say the Sun with his eyes as if it was setting in a muddy spring, that is: a black (spring), and this is customary for the one who has water between him and the western sun (the sunset), and he saw it setting in the water, even though in reality it was up (in the sky).

Also, in Allamah Alusi’s (d. 1270 AH) Ruh al-Ma’ani[3] it is stated:

فإن جرم الشمس أكبر من جسم الأرض بأضعاف مضاعفة فكيف يمكن دخولها في عين ماء في الأرض، وهو مدفوع بأن المراد وجدها في نظر العين كذلك إذ لم ير هناك إلا الماء لا أنها كذلك حقيقة وهذا كما أن راكب البحر يراها كأنها تطلع من البحر وتغيب فيه إذا لم ير الشط والذي في أرض ملساء واسعة يراها أيضاً كأنها تطلع من الأرض وتغيب فيها

…

 أن وجد يكون بمعنى رأى كما ذكره الراغب فليكن هنا بهذا المعنى

For the weight of the Sun is much greater than the weight of the Earth, so how is it possible for it to enter in a spring inside the Earth, and this is a pointer that the meaning of “he found it” is by his vision. Thus, if he saw nothing other than water, it does not mean that it was like that in reality (i.e. it does not mean that the sunset occurred inside the water). And this is like when the seaman sees it (the sun) as if it rises from the sea and sets therein, if he does not see the coast (i.e. any landmass), and the one who is on open land would see it as if it is rising from the Earth and setting therein…

in this case “Wujud” in  means he saw, as was mentioned by ar-Raghib and this is the meaning in here.

ومن الناس من زعم أن الآية على ظاهرها ولا يعجز الله تعالى شيء ونحن نقر بعظم قدرة الله عز وجل ولا

 نلتفت إلى هذا القول، ومثله ما نقله الطرطوشي من أنها يبلعها حوت بل هذا كلام لا يقبله إلا الصبيان ونحوهم فإنها قد تبقى طالعة في بعض الآفاق ستة أشهر وغاربة كذلك كما في أفق عرض تسعين وقد تغيب مقدار ساعة ويظهر نورها من قبل المشرق في بعض العروض كما في بلغار في بعض أيام السنة فالشمس على ما هو الحق لم تزل سائرة طالعة على قوم غاربة على آخرين بحسب آفاقهم بل قال إمام الحرمين: لا خلاف في ذلك

And from among the people there are those who think that the Ayah is to be taken literally; we do not consider anything impossible for Allah the Exalted, and we agree with the great power of Allah the Majestic and Sublime, but nonetheless we do not consider such statements, and other such statements like what was said by at-Tartooshi that a whale swallows it (the sun) up, and such things are not accepted except by little children and people like them. For it is known that it (the Sun) stays in the sky in some of the horizons for six months and it sets likewise (for six months), and in some horizons it travels (stays visible) and then sets for a period of one hour, and its light is visible before the sunrise in some lands as is the case in Bulgaria in some of the days of year. So the sun continues to remain over some people, and it remains set upon others depending on their horizons (lands), nay, Imam Al-Haramayn[4] said: There is no difference (of opinion) on this matter.

So it is clear from looking at these interpretations that the meaning is not that a literal place for the sunset was found, but rather that it refers to that which was seen with Dhul-Qarnanyn’s vision.

Issue #2: An Objection: These interpretations were written in the past century or in the past two centuries, so now it is so well-known that the Sun never sets in any place in the Earth that taking an opposite position is silly

This objection was actually dealt with when the Tafsir of Allamah Alusi was presented, in that Imam al-Haramayn’s statement proves that it was a matter of common knowledge that the Sun never touches any place on Earth, and that there was no difference of opinion in this regard even one thousand years ago. To further show that this is not a new idea, we will provide some of the Tafsirs written many centuries ago, all of which show that the exegesists knew that the Sun does not set inside the Earth, but that the Verse rather refers to that which is seen in the field of vision.

Thus, in Ibn Kathir’s (d.774 AH) in Tafsir al-Qur’an al-Karim it is written[5]:

أي: فسلك طريقاً حتى وصل إلى أقصى ما يسلك فيه من الأرض من ناحية المغرب، وهو مغرب الأرض، وأما الوصول إلى مغرب الشمس من السماء فمتعذر، وما يذكره أصحاب القصص والأخبار من أنه سار في الأرض مدة، والشمس تغرب من ورائه، فشيء لا حقيقة له، وأكثر ذلك من خرافات أهل الكتاب، واختلاق زنادقتهم وكذبهم،

means, he followed a route until he reached the furthest point that could be reached in the direction of the sun's setting, which is the west of the earth. (As for the idea) of his reaching the place in the sky where the sun sets, this is something impossible, and the tales told by storytellers that he traveled so far to the west that the sun set behind him are not true at all. Most of these stories come from the myths of the People of the Book and the fabrications and lies of their heretics.

And in al-Qurtubi’s (d. 671 AH) Al-Jami’s Li Ahkam al-Qur’an it is written[6]:

قال بعض العلماء: ليس المراد أنه انتهى إلى الشمس مغرباً ومشرقاً حتى وصل إلى جرمها ومسّها؛ لأنها تدور مع السماء حول الأرض من غير أن تلتصق بالأرض، وهي أعظم من أن تدخل في عين من عيون الأرض، بل هي أكبر من الأرض أضعافاً مضاعفة، بل المراد أنه انتهى إلى آخر العمارة من جهة المغرب ومن جهة المشرق، فوجدها في رأى العين تغرب في عين حمئة

And some of the 'Ulama say: It does not mean that he reached the end of the Sun in the West and East until he reached its starting point, for it travels along with the heavens around the Earth without making contact with the Earth, and it is bigger than it should enter a spring from among the springs of the Earth, nay it is much bigger than the Earth, but the meaning is that he (Dhul Qarnayn) reached until the last buildings in the direction of the West and in the direction of the East, so he found in the perception of his eyes that it set in the murky spring.

Fakhrudeen ar-Razi (d. 606 AH) in his Mafatih al-Ghayb says:[7]

أنه ثبت بالدليل أن الأرض كرة وأن السماء محيطة بها، ولا شك أن الشمس في الفلك، وأيضاً قال: { وَوَجَدَ عِندَهَا قَوْماً } ومعلوم أن جلوس قوم في قرب الشمس غير موجود، وأيضاً الشمس أكبر من الأرض بمرات كثيرة فكيف يعقل دخولها في عين من عيون الأرض، إذا ثبت هذا فنقول: تأويل قوله: { تَغْرُبُ فِى عَيْنٍ حَمِئَةٍ } من وجوه. الأول: أن ذا القرنين لما بلغ موضعها في المغرب ولم يبق بعده شيء من العمارات وجد الشمس كأنها تغرب في عين وهدة مظلمة وإن لم تكن كذلك في الحقيقة كما أن راكب البحر يرى الشمس كأنها تغيب في البحر إذا لم ير الشط وهي في الحقيقة تغيب وراء البحر، هذا هو التأويل الذي ذكره أبو علي الجبائي في تفسيره

…

إن الشمس تغيب في عين كثيرة الماء والحمأة وهذا في غاية البعد، وذلك لأنا إذا رصدنا كسوفاً قمرياً فإذا اعتبرناه ورأينا أن المغربيين قالوا: حصل هذا الكسوف في أول الليل ورأينا المشرقيين قالوا: حصل في أول النهار فعلمنا أن أول الليل عند أهل المغرب هو أول النهار الثاني عند أهل المشرق بل ذلك الوقت الذي هو أول الليل عندنا فهو وقت العصر في بلد ووقت الظهر في بلد آخر، ووقت الضحوة في بلد ثالث ووقت طلوع الشمس في بلد رابع، ونصف الليل في بلد خامس، وإذا كانت هذه الأحوال معلومة بعد الاستقراء والاعتبار. وعلمنا أن الشمس طالعة ظاهرة في كل هذه الأوقات كان الذي يقال: إنها تغيب في الطين والحمأة كلاماً على خلاف اليقين وكلام الله تعالى مبرأ عن هذه التهمة، فلم يبق إلا أن يصار إلى التأويل الذي ذكرناه.

It is established with proofs that the Earth is round and that the sky surrounds it, and there is no doubt that the Sun is in an orbit, and also His saying: (Near it he found a people), and it is clear that there is no settlement of a people close to the Sun, and also that the Sun is much bigger than the Earth, so how can it occur to anyone that it enters into one of the springs of the Earth. So if this established then we say: The interpretation of His saying: (he found it set in a spring of murky water) has a number of possibilities. First: That when Dhal-Qarnayn reached his location in the West- and there was nothing left of habitation after that- he found the Sun as if it was setting in a dark spring, even though it was nt like so in reality, in the same way that the seaman sees the Sun as if it was setting in the sea if he does not see the coast – and in reality it sets behind the sea- and this is the interpretation mentioned by Abu ‘Ali al-Jaba’i[8] in his Tafsir…

(with respect to the saying that) the Sun sets in a spring with an abundance of water and heat, this is a far-fetched interpretation, and this is because whenever a lunar eclipse occurs, when we consider the issue we see that those living in the West say: This eclipse occurred in the beginning of the night, and that those live in the East say: This occurred in the beginning of the day, so we know that the first of the night for the people of the West is the beginning of the morning of the next day for the people of the East. Nay, this time which is the beginning of the night for us is the time of ‘Asr for a land, and the time of Dhuhr for another land, and the time of Dhuha for a third land, and the time of the sunrise for a fourth land, and midnight in a fifth land, and if this is the clear case after investigation and consideration. And we also know that the Sun has evidently arisen in all these places, so for us to say that it (literally) sets in the spring of water is a contradiction to certain (observable data) and the Word of Allah is above such accusations, so there is no choice but to avail to the interpretation which was presented before.  

Abdul Rahman al-Jawzi (d. 597 AH) mentions in Zad al-Masir[9]:

وربما توهم متوهم أن هذه الشمس على عظم قدرها تغوص بذاتها في عين ماء وليس كذلك فانها أكبر من الدنيا مرارا فكيف تسعها عين ماء

…

 وإنما وجدها تغرب في العين كما يرى راكب البحر الذي لا يرى طرفه ان الشمس تغيب في الماء وذلك لأن ذا القرنين أنتهى الى آخر البنيان فوجد عينا حمئة ليس بعدها أحد

And it may be that their imaginations made them fancy that this Sun, in spite of its great power, was able to go down in itself (i.e. really) in a spring of water, and it is not like this for it is much bigger than the Earth so how can it fit inside a spring of water… and verily he found it setting in a spring in the same manner that a seaman who cannot see beyond (the sea) that the Sun sets in the water, and this is so because Dhul-Qarnayn reached until the end of the habitations and he found a muddy spring after which there was no one.

In the Tafsir of Imam at-Tabarani (d. 360 AH)[10] it is written:

أي إلَى قومٍ لَم يكن بينَهم وبين مغرب الشَّمس أحدٌ ؛ لأنه لا يُمكنه أن يبلُغَ موضعَ غروب الشَّمس.

That is, to a people that did not have anything between them and the setting of the Sun, since it is impossible to reach the location of the sunset.

In the extracts above we have shown that the Mufassirun knew as a matter of common knowledge that the Earth and we see the same pattern of not taking the Verse literally. Note that even at the times when it was accepted that the Sun went around the Earth[11], it never occurred to them that the Sun actually ever touched the Earth nor that it set in reality in the murky water.

Another point which has to be mentioned that even those Tafsirs that do not invoke the size of Sun nor its orbit also consider that the meaning of the Verse is not necessarily literal, by means of grammatical considerations regardless of any physical data. For example, Al-Baidhawi (d. 685 AH) in his Anwar al-Tanzil says[12]:

ولعله بلغ ساحل المحيط فرآها كذلك إذ لم يكن في مطمح بصره غير الماء ولذلك قال { وَجَدَهَا تَغْرُبُ } ولم يقل كانت تغرب

And it could be that he (Dhul Qarnayn) reached the coast of the ocean and saw it like this, even though his eyes reached nothing other than the water, and for this reason He (Allah the Exalted) says: “he found it setting” and did not say “it was setting”.

Likeise, Al-Baghawi (d. 516 AH) in Ma’alim at-Tanzil[13] states :

قال القتيبي: يجوز أن يكون معنى قوله: { فِى عَيْنٍ حَمِئَةٍ } أي: عندها عين حمئة، أو في رأي العين.

Al-Qutaibi said: It is possible that the meaning of His saying “Fi ‘Aynin Hamia” is: there was a spring of muddy water, or it was so in his vision

Abi Ja’far an-Nuhas (d. 338 AH) in Ma’ani al-Quran al-Karim mentions:

Al-Qutubi[14] said: it is also possible that the Sun set behind it, or with it, or at its place, (and in that case) the describing word (the adjective) would replace (the original word).

The existence of such quotes is important for our discussion, since it proves that even more than 11 centuries ago, masters of the Arabic language and interpretation did not see a need to restrict the meaning of this Verse to strict literalism, and they knew that the meaning of the Verse was open to poetic and figurative meanings, without considering the characteristics of the Sun or any other observational phenomena.

Issue #3: Objection: There are narrations in the Hadith books and the Tafsirs which clearly show that the Sun sets inside a spring from among the springs of the Earth

It is said by some that there are narrations pointing to the fact that the sun indeed does set in a spring of water, so this would override any interpretations given by the Mufassirun. In this respect, the following narrations are brought up:

وقال عبد الله بن عمرو: نظر النبيّ صلى الله عليه وسلم إلى الشمس حين غربت، فقال: " نار الله الحامية لولا ما يَزَعُها من أمر الله لأحرقت ما على الأرض "[15]

And Abdullah ibn ‘Amru said: The Prophet (Salla Allahu Alayhi Wa Sallam) saw the sun while it was setting and said: “A hot blazing Fire, was it not restrained by the Order of Allah it would burn everything on Earth”.

" عن أبـي ذر قال: كنت ردف رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم وهو على حمار فرأى الشمس حين غربت فقال: أتدري حيث تغرب؟ قلت: الله ورسوله أعلم قال: فإنها تغرب في عين حامية "[16]

I was behind the Messenger of Allah (Salla Allahu Alayhi Wa Sallam) while he was riding on a donkey, and he saw the Sun while it was setting and he said: Do you know where it sets? I said: Allah and His Messenger know best. He Said: Verily it sets in a spring of hot water.”

There a number of considerations in this regard:

1. The authenticity of such narrations is a matter of dispute among the masters of Hadith: In the case of the first Hadith presented, it appears in Imam Ahmad’s Musnad[17] where the authenticator (Shaykh Shu’ayb Arnaut) mentions that the chain is weak. In the case of the second Hadith, there is contention as to whether one of the narrators (Sufyan bin Husayn) is reliable. One may refer to Tahdhib at-Tahdhib[18], where different authorities label him as reliable, and others consider him as being lenient and/or weak in transmitting Ahadith. It is known that whenever one is faced with such a situation in terms of the chain of narrators for a narration, it can never be said that such narrations constitute proof.
2. It is important to note that such narrations are found in many of the Tafsirs which mention that the Verse is not to be taken literally, but is rather an indication of what Dhul-Qarnayn saw. One may confirm that this is the case for Fakhirudeen ar-Razi’s Mafatihul Ghayb, Ibn Kathir’s Tafsir al-Qur’an al-Karim, Al-Qurtubi’s Al-Jami’s Li Ahkam al-Qur’an, Al-Baghawi’s  Ma’alim at-Tanzil, and Alusi’s Ruh al-Ma’ani. In the cases where the narration does come up, it is used as identifying alternative readings for the word ‘Hamiah’ and showing that this word can mean both muddy and hot. In none of these Tafsirs does it occur in the context of forwarding the claim that the Sun literally sets in a spring inside the Earth.
3. Finally it has to be stressed, that if it had been truly established by the Prophet (Salla Allahu Alayhi Wa Sallam), the Sahabah, and the Tabi'in that the meaning of the Verse was literal and the meaning was also established as being that the Sun really did set in a spring of murky water then this would have been a matter of the necessities of the religion due to irrefutable reports from the Prophet (Salla Allahu Alayhi Wa Sallam) and irrefutable consensus on the meaning, and this would be a matter that could never be denied by the subsequent generations at all. But what we find is the exact opposite, with authorities from the earliest periods of Islam stating the possibility of the words meaning something other than their literal meaning, and many of the masters of Islamic belief and interpretation taking it as common knowledge that the Sun was always in the sky and never literally touched anywhere on the surface of the Earth.

To conclude, from this research it has been shown that the claims of certain non-Muslims attacking the Islamic religion by presenting their own interpretations of Verse 18:86 is baseless and has no backing from the authoritative Islamic interpretations. It has been shown that the authoritative exegesis all point to the fact that the Verse refers to what Dhul-Qarnayn saw with his eyes rather than the setting of the Sun inside a spring inside the Earth. Also, even from the grammatical viewpoint alone it has been shown that there is a possibility for the Verse to be taken in a meaning other than its apparent literal connotation. Finally, it has been seen that some narrations attributed to the Prophet (Salla Allahu Alayhi Wa Sallam) which would seem to indicate a literal setting place for the Sun inside the Earth are doubtful, and that in any case the lesson from such narrations had nothing to do with a literal setting place for the sun. With these facts in mind, we hope that the doubts of many Muslims who may have concerning this Verse have been laid to rest, and that the non-Muslims will also open their eyes and see the truth of the Qur’anic message and of the Islamic religion in general.