The Basmalah in this verse, compensates the missing Basmalah from the beginning of chapter 9, exactly 19 chapters before. This extra Basmalah here, thus, completes the number of Basmalahs being 114 (19x6). See 1:1; 74:1-56.

Did Solomon violate the principle of "no compulsion in religion" by issuing such a threat? Or, was he just bluffing? Even if he did not mean what he said, didn't he risk the possibility of a war? The above questions in the first printing of the QRT, also occupied some other students of the Quran. The traditional translation the freedom in religion (2:256), the freedom to reject the truth (2:193; 10:99; 18:29), and the promotion of peace among people (2:208). For instance, El Mehdi Haddou, a researcher colligue of mine pulled my attention to the word taMLiKuhum in verse 27:23 and reminded me its meaning, "own them, posess them." He proposed "owning" instead of "leading." Indeed, the derivatives of this word occur 44 times in the Quran and all are relate ownership and posession. I would like to quote from Mehdi's article on this verse: "What really made Solomon angry is the state of slavery that affects the people owned by the Queen of Sheba and not their religion. Solomon’s reaction against slavery and oppression should be an example for every leader who has the power, the means and the potential to free slaves and fight for the rights of oppressed people even if they are living in another country. What Solomon did in the past is what the United States should do in our time. Their resemblance is reflected in their military power but the difference resides in the fact that only Solomon has submitted to God’s laws. If Solomon was living in the 21st century, who would you think will be at the top of his black list? Yes, many from the so called Muslim countries."

It is interesting that Queen is criticizing Kings for their corruption and aggression. The Queen is depicted by the Quran as someone who is not a tyrant, but a reasonable leader who consults others in her affairs, which is one of the main principles in the Quran (42:38). The Queen of Sheba tested Solomon by sending him some gifts. When she learned that he was not interested in her wealth or her country's resources, she became curious about Solomon and accepted his invitation. The event implies more communication between the two leaders and the emergence of a trust between them. Ultimately, she realizes that Solomon is not one of those corrupt kings, but a servant of God with great morals. The Bible mentions this meeting but it contains some differences. For instance, in I Kings 10:1-13 we learn that Solomon accepted her valuable gifts, but the Quran tells us that Solomon showed no interest. The same biblical passage is repeated at II Chronicles 9:1- 12.

My interpolation, at the beginning of this verse, of the words "God says" is based on the fact that, within the context of the above legend, the information brought by the hoopoe is the very first link between the kingdoms of Sheba and of Solomon. In the absence of any previous contact, hostile or otherwise, there would have been no point whatever in Solomon's telling the people of Sheba that they should not "exalt themselves" against or above himself. On the other hand, the narrative of the hoopoe makes it clear that the Sabaeans did "exalt themselves" against God by worshipping the sun and by being convinced "that they ought not to worship God" (verses 24-25 above). Hence, Solomon, being a prophet, is justified in calling upon them, in the name of God, to abandon this blasphemy and to surrender themselves to Him. (Cf. the almost identical phrase, "Exalt not yourselves against God", in 44:19.)

Lit., "on this case [or "problem"] of mine".

In this context - as pointed out by all classical commentators - the term dukhul undoubtedly connotes "entering by force (anwatan)", whether it be by armed invasion or by usurpation of political power from within the country. The term muluk, lit., "kings", may he understood to denote also persons who, while not being "kings" in the conventional sense of this word, wrongfully seize and forcibly hold absolute power over their "subjects".

Thus, the Queen of Sheba rules out force as a suitable method for dealing with Solomon. Implied in her statement is the Quranic condemnation of all political power obtained through violence (anwatan) inasmuch as it is bound to give rise to oppression, suffering and moral corruption.

I.e., not only worldly wealth but also faith, wisdom and an insight into realities normally hidden from other men.

I.e., people who prize only material things and have no inkling of spiritual values.

Lit., "and they will be humbled". Since the Qur'an explicitly prohibits all wars of aggression (see 2:190-194 and the corresponding notes), it is not plausible that this same Qur'an should place a crude threat of warlike aggression in the mouth of a prophet. We must, therefore, assume that here again, as in verse 31 above, it is God who, through His prophet, warns the people of Sheba of His "coming upon them" - i.e., punishing them - unless they abandon their blasphemous belief that they "ought not" to worship God. This interpretation finds considerable support in the sudden change from the singular in which Solomon speaks of himself in the preceding (as well as in the subsequent) verses, to the majestic plural "We" appearing in the above sentence.

I.e., evidently in response to his message (Razi, Ibn Kathir).

Lit., "before they come unto me as people who surrender themselves (muslimin)" i.e., to God (see verse 31 above). The term "throne (arsh) is used here and in the sequence - as well as at the end of verse 23 - in its metonymic sense of "dominion" or "regal power" (Raghib). It appears that Solomon intends to confront his guest with an image of her worldly power, and thus to convince her that her "throne" is as nothing when compared with the awesome almightiness of God.

The Kingdom of Queen Bilqees Sheba of Yemen-Abyssinia had hostile plans towards the North

The intelligent Queen made a prudent decision disregarding the advice of her loyal chiefs. She was cognizant of King Solomon's might, and she was impressed by the benevolent message in the letter

Historically, the gift was studded with precious jewels and diamonds. Solomon, being a prophet and a powerful emperor expected the Queen to denounce her hostile intentions in the region and to reflect about the One True God

Historically the Kingdom of Sheba flourished from 1100 To 115 BC. At their zenith they were the richest nation in the world. Their economy was based on excellent agriculture and international trade. They had the most advanced irrigation systems of the times, with great water dams. Their Kingdom included today's whole of Yemen, Somalia and Ethiopia, and boasting a strong army, they frequently had expansive designs further south and up north. As the inevitable result of worshiping multiple false deities, including the sun, their society was not without inequities of caste and creed. Solomon, the King and the prophet, planned to subdue the Sheba Empire to thwart their aggressive designs and to protect the region from oppression. And he succeeded magnificently. Queen Bilqees of Sheba and her people embraced Solomon's message and reverted to the worship and obedience of the One True God

1500 miles between Ma'aarib, the capital of Sheba to Jerusalem