Lit.. "there overwhelmed them [that] of the sea which overwhelmed them"-expressing the inevitability of the doom which encompassed them.

See note 38 on 19:52. As regards God's "covenant" with the children of Israel, see 2:63 and 83.

The reference to God's bestowal of "manna (mann) and quails (salwa)" upon the Israelites during their wanderings in the Sinai Desert after their exodus from Egypt is found in the Qur'an in two other places as well (namely, in 2:57 and 7:160). According to Arab philologists, the term mann denotes not only the sweet, resinous substance exuded by certain plants of the desert, but also everything that is "bestowed as a favour", i.e., without any effort on the part of the recipient. Similarly, the term salwa signifies not merely "a quail" or "quails", but also "all that makes man content and happy after privation" (Qamus). Hence the combination of these two terms denotes, metonymically, the gift of sustenance freely bestowed by God upon the followers of Moses.

Or: "do not behave in an overweening manner" - i.e., "do not attribute these favours to your own supposed excellence on account of your descent from Abraham".

There is almost complete unanimity among the classical commentators in that God's "condemnation" (ghadab, lit., "wrath") is a metonym for the inescapable retribution which man brings upon himself if he deliberately rejects God's guidance and "transgresses the bounds of equity".

This passage relates to the time of Moses' ascent of Mount Sinai, mentioned in 2:51 and 7:142.

Lit., "what has hastened thee ahead of thy people?" - implying that he should not have left them alone, without his personal guidance, at so early a stage in their freedom. In this inimitable elliptic manner the Qur'an alludes to the psychological fact that a community which attains to political and social freedom after centuries of bondage remains for a long time subject to the demoralizing influences of its past, and cannot all at once develop a spiritual and social discipline of its own.

The classical commentators understand this phrase in its physical sense, i.e.. "they are coming up behind me and are now close by". Since, however. Moses was obviously meant to be alone on his ascent of Mount Sinai, I am of the opinion that his answer has a tropical sense, expressing his assumption that the children of Israel would follow his guidance even in his absence: an assumption which proved erroneous, as shown in the sequence.

The designation as-samiri is undoubtedly an adjectival noun denoting the person's descent or origin. According to one of the explanations advanced by Tabari and Zamakhshari, it signifies "a man of the Jewish clan of the Samirah", i.e., the ethnic and religious group designated in later times as the Samaritans (a small remnant of whom is still living in Nablus, in Palestine). Since that sect as such did not yet exist at the time of Moses, it is possible that-as Ibn `Abbas maintained (Razi) -the person in question was one of the many Egyptians who had been converted to the faith of Moses and joined the Israelites on their exodus from Egypt (cf. note 92 on 7:124): in which case the designation samiri might be connected with the ancient Egyptian shemer, "a foreigner" or "stranger". This surmise is strengthened by his introduction of the worship of the golden calf, undoubtedly an echo of the Egyptian cult of Apis (see note 113 on 7:148). In any case, it is not impossible that the latter-day Samaritans descended -or were reputed to descend - from this personality, whether of Hebrew or of Egyptian origin; this might partly explain the persistent antagonism between them and the rest of the Israelite community.

Or, according to Zamakhshari: "Did, then, the time [of my absence] seem too long to you?" (It is to be noted that the term `ahd signifies a "time" or "period" as well as a "covenant" or "promise''.)

Lit., "Or have you decided that condemnation by your -Sustainer should fall due upon you ? , "are you determined to disregard the consequences of your doings?"

It is mentioned in Exodus xii, 35 that, immediately before their departure from Egypt, the Israelites "borrowed of the Egyptians jewels of silver and jewels of gold". This "borrowing" was obviously done under false pretences, without any intention on the part of the Israelites to return the jewellery to its rightful owners: for, according to the Biblical statement (ibid., verse 36), "they spoiled [i.e., robbed] the Egyptians" by doing so. While it is noteworthy that the Old Testament, in its present, corrupted form, does not condemn this behaviour. its iniquity seems to have gradually dawned upon the Israelites, and so they decided to get rid of those sinfully acquired ornaments (Baghawi, Zamakhshari and - in one of his alternative interpretations - Razi).

An example, that the top leadership could make or break a community

2:57, right-hand slope 19:52

Aaron is criticized for being a passive bystander here. However, the Biblical version of the story puts Aaron in the rank of idolaters. See Old Testament, Exodus 32:2.