سُوْرَةُ هُوْدٍ

Surah Hud (11) — Ayah 87

Hud · Meccan · Juz 12 · Page 231

قَالُوا۟ يَـٰشُعَيْبُ أَصَلَوٰتُكَ تَأْمُرُكَ أَن نَّتْرُكَ مَا يَعْبُدُ ءَابَآؤُنَآ أَوْ أَن نَّفْعَلَ فِىٓ أَمْوَٰلِنَا مَا نَشَـٰٓؤُا۟ ۖ إِنَّكَ لَأَنتَ ٱلْحَلِيمُ ٱلرَّشِيدُ ﴿87﴾
They said: "O Shu‘aib! Does your Salât (prayer) command that we give up what our fathers used to worship, or that we give up doing what we like with our property? Verily, you are the forbearer, right-minded!" (They said this sarcastically).
قَالُوا۟ qālū They said
يَـٰشُعَيْبُ yāshuʿaybu O Shuaib
أَصَلَوٰتُكَ aṣalatuka Does your prayer
تَأْمُرُكَ tamuruka command you
أَن an that
نَّتْرُكَ natruka we leave
مَا what
يَعْبُدُ yaʿbudu worship
ءَابَآؤُنَآ ābāunā our forefathers
أَوْ aw or
أَن an that
نَّفْعَلَ nafʿala we do
فِىٓ concerning
أَمْوَٰلِنَا amwālinā our wealth
مَا what
نَشَـٰٓؤُا۟ ۖ nashāu we will
إِنَّكَ innaka Indeed you
لَأَنتَ la-anta surely you
ٱلْحَلِيمُ l-ḥalīmu (are) the forbearing
ٱلرَّشِيدُ l-rashīdu the right-minded

Tafsir Taiseer ul-Quran (Facilitation of the Quran) is a comprehensive Quran commentary by Maulana Abdul Rahman Kilani, a renowned Salafi (Ahl al-Hadith) scholar from Pakistan. Known for his eloquent and accessible writing style, Kilani authored this tafsir with a focus on clarity — making Quranic meanings understandable to the common reader. The tafsir provides detailed historical context for verses related to battles and expeditions, and firmly refutes modernist ideologies using strong scriptural evidence. It is widely regarded as an invaluable resource for understanding the Quran and countering deviant interpretations. The tafsir is originally written in Urdu, translated to English by tohed.com.

87. They said, "O Shu‘ayb! Does your prayer command you that we should abandon what our forefathers worshipped, or that we should stop disposing of our wealth as we please? Indeed, you are surely the forbearing, the sensible one!"

[97]
The Effects of Performing Prayer Properly:

If prayer is truly performed with understanding and with humility and submission, then indeed it teaches exactly those things which the people of Shu‘ayb understood. But it is unfortunate that we Muslims do not even understand those things which the people of Madyan understood. Prayer is a great means of developing taqwa (God-consciousness) in a person, and taqwa is that very thing which saves a person from all kinds of doctrinal, moral, and social evils. Reflect: can a person who thoughtfully recites ﴿اِيَّاكَ نَعْبُدُ وَاِيَّاكَ نَسْتَعِيْنُ﴾ dozens of times a day remain a polytheist? Can a person who, dozens of times a day, prostrates before Allah and seeks forgiveness for his sins, then fail to remember Allah during his work and business, and not abandon dishonesty, and not keep in mind the distinction between halal and haram? Allah the Exalted has expressed this same point at another place: ﴿اِنَّ الصَّلٰوةَ تَنْهيٰ عَنِ الْفَحْشَاءِ وَالْمُنْكَرِ﴾ [9تا 45] And the meanings of the words “fahsha” and “munkar” are so broad that all kinds of evils are included in them. In other words, the very criterion for the validity of prayer is that it should produce taqwa in a person, that he should abandon all kinds of evils and incline towards good deeds. And if prayer does not produce such an effect in someone, then understand that he is not performing prayer, but merely going through the motions.

[98]
Is Prayer and Worship a Private Matter Between Allah and the Servant?

The meaning of those people’s claim to dispose of their wealth was that, whether we earn wealth through lawful or unlawful means, or spend it on whatever we wish, there should be no restriction upon us. If you want to perform prayers, then do so, but why do you trouble us in this matter? Does your prayer teach you to impose it upon others as well? You are a sensible and intelligent person—what wisdom is there in interfering in the affairs of others? In other words, their view regarding acts of worship was the same as that of today’s so-called civilized world: that worship is a personal and private matter between the servant and God, and it should not have any effect on worldly affairs. In other words, the same old ignorance has returned in the guise of new enlightenment.