بِهِۦ
Appears 244 times in Quran
Occurrences in Quran
Found 50 verses containing "بِهِۦ".
ٱلَّذِى جَعَلَ لَكُمُ ٱلْأَرْضَ فِرَٰشًا وَٱلسَّمَآءَ بِنَآءً وَأَنزَلَ مِنَ ٱلسَّمَآءِ مَآءً فَأَخْرَجَ بِهِۦ مِنَ ٱلثَّمَرَٰتِ رِزْقًا لَّكُمْ ۖ فَلَا تَجْعَلُوا۟ لِلَّهِ أَندَادًا وَأَنتُمْ تَعْلَمُونَ
20:54; 27:62; 43:11; 51:49; 71:20; 78:7.
51:48; 78:13; 79:28-29.
这话意指:正如一幢大楼或一个顶篷可以作为住在其中或其下的人们的一种保护物, 宇宙的较远许多部分相似地可以作为我们这颗行星 (地球) 的一种保护物; 那些研究星球、云层与其他大气现象的科学家知道那些其他天体如何在地球四周高空的浩瀚空间沿着它们的轨道穿越运行, 使地球安稳地运行着。这也暗示着, 物质世界的完美存在必须依靠天地之间各种力量的协作。
اَلسَّمَآءُ کے معنے عربی زبان میں اَلسَّحَابُ کے بھی ہوتے ہیں۔ یعنی بادل (اقرب) اسی لئے ہم نے وَ اَنْزَلَ مِنَ السَّمَآءِ مَآءً کے معنے یہ کئے ہیں ’’اور بادلوں سے پانی اتارا ہے۔‘‘
20:54; 27:62; 43:11; 51:49; 71:20; 78:7.
51:48; 78:13; 79:28-29.
The expression suggests that just as a building or a roof is a means of protection for those living in or under it, similarly the remoter parts of the universe serve as a protection for our planet (earth); and those who have studied the science of the stars, the clouds and other atmospheric phenomena, know how the other heavenly bodies, running their courses through the boundless expanse rising high above the earth on all sides, make for its safety and stability. It is also hinted here that the perfection of the material world depends upon the co-ordination between earthly and heavenly forces.
20:54; 27:62; 43:11; 51:49; 71:20; 78:7.
51:48; 78:13; 79:28, 29.
Important Words:
فراش (a bed) is derived from فرش. They say فرش الشیء i.e. he spread out the thing; he expanded it. فراش means, a thing that is spread upon the ground: a thing that is spread for one to sit or lie upon: a bed on which one sleeps; a wide or spacious plain or tract of land (Lane).
بناء (a roof) is derived from بنی meaning, he built; he constructed. So بناء means, a building; a structure; a thing that is built or constructed; also the roof or ceiling of a house or of a chamber or the like (Lane).
الثمرات (fruits) is the plural of ثمرة meaning, a fruit. The word is derived from the verb ثمر which means, the fruit became ripe. اثمر means, the tree, etc. produced fruit. The word ثمرة is also used figuratively, meaning, son or offspring; or profit of a thing (Taj).
انداد (equals) is the plural of ند which means, the like of a person or thing; or the like of a thing by participation of substance. It is a more specialised term than مثل which signifies alike by participation of anything. The word ند also means, a thing which does or may supply the place of another thing; or a like that is contrary or opposed to another thing; a thing taken as an object of worship instead of the true God (Lane). ند is to be distinguished from شریك; for whereas ند is the like of a thing, being contrary or opposed to it, شریك is simply a participant that shares the attributes or work of a thing (Aqrab under شریك and ند)
Commentary:
The subject matter of the last verse has been completed in this. It was said in that verse that رب should be worshipped because He is the Creator and He alone can foster man’s powers. In the present verse it is said that not only man but the heavens and the earth also have been created by God. It is evident that human actions depend upon environment. Trade, agriculture, industry, travel, etc. are made possible ultimately by the nature and influence of the heavens and the earth. So human actions can be guided aright only by a Being Who has made the heavens and the earth. It is only He Who can harness them for the use of man. None else has such knowledge, power or authority. So man should worship God alone.
The expression, and Who made the heaven a roof, suggests that just as a building or a roof is a source of protection for those living in or under it, similarly the remoter parts of the universe are a protection for our planet; and those who have studied the science of the stars, the clouds and other atmospheric phenomena know how the other heavenly bodies, running their courses through the boundless expanse rising high above the earth on all sides, make for its safety and stability.
In the clause, caused water to come down from the clouds, the word سماء has been used in the sense of "cloud", whereas in the preceding clause, and Who made the heaven a roof, it signifies "heaven". Had it meant the same thing in the two places, it would have been replaced in the second place by a pronoun. The repetition of the word is intended to convey a difference of meaning in the second place.
After making it clear that everything in this world is the creation of God, attention is drawn to the fact that God has no equal. There is nothing in the whole universe which can show any part of it to have been created by anyone other than God. Why, then, should man worship anyone else?
In this verse it is also hinted that the perfection of the material world depends upon a co-ordination of earthly and heavenly forces. When water is made corrupt by men on earth, fresh and pure water is supplied from heaven. Breathing makes the air foul but it is purified by nature. The eye is useful, but of what avail is it without the rays of the sun? In short, if the earth is a bed for man, the heaven is a roof. So is the case with the spiritual world. Man is gifted with reason but, like the eye, reason cannot function properly without the help of divine revelation. Human instincts are pure but they become polluted by greed, malice, etc. They can only be cleansed by the water of revelation. Hence man cannot attain to spiritual success without attaching himself to God. By showing material life to be dependent upon both earth and heaven, God points to a parallel in the spiritual world, and teaches that in spiritual matters also man should not trust earthly means alone. The intellect is not enough. Like the material world, the spiritual world also requires heavenly help. Just as there is a heaven above the earth, there is a heaven above the heart and brain of man. This is God’s guidance received through revelation.
An interesting question arises here. According to a widespread modern belief, the idea of God has evolved out of a primitive belief in spirits, ghosts and fairies. It is also said that in primitive times man worshipped beasts and poisonous insects and then gradually advanced to the idea of God. Modern critics appear to be in agreement that the idea of many gods has always preceded the idea of one God. The history of man’s beliefs is cited as evidence.
Some of those who hold such a view seem anxious to reconcile it with religion. They claim that their view does not go against religion. They say that God revealed the laws of nature by degrees; therefore there is nothing surprising if He should have revealed Himself also by degrees. Now, all religions base themselves upon revelation. And if the basis of religion is revelation, then the belief—that God revealed Himself by degrees and that He first guided the world to other gods, and then to Himself—at once falls to the ground. It is against all reason that God should first guide man to spirits, stones, rivers and snakes and then reveal Himself. What was there to hinder Him from guiding man to Himself from the very beginning? The living religions of the world have ever believed in revelation. Hinduism, Judaism, Christianity, Zoroastrianism and Islam, all teach that revelation began with the creation of man. This being the case, there can have been no gradual evolution of the idea of God. Evolutionary accounts, therefore, conflict with religion. Those who hold them must deny revelation, the basis of religion.
The denial of revelation is, of course, very common in the Christian West. Christendom has failed for a long time to provide any examples of persons with revelation experience. Little wonder that those speculators, who have had no such experience themselves and who have not been made aware of such experience in others, should deny revelation outright. According to the Quran, however, God has spoken to man in all ages. The Quran itself is a record of revelation and, according to the Quran, the followers of Islam must continue to receive revelation. The recipient in our age is the Holy Founder of the Ahmadiyya Movement. Nobody who knows all this can be impressed by denials of revelation. He can only treat them as mere ignorant conjectures.
Evolutionary accounts have little foundation in fact. It is said that the idea of God found amongst uncivilised peoples of the world today is polytheistic, therefore the idea of one God must have originated in polytheism. But it is not realized that the uncivilized peoples of today are not samples of the earliest human beings. Civilization has known many ages. Greece, Iran, Iraq, Egypt, India and China were centres of civilization and culture in their own days, but now they seem engulfed in darkness and ignorance. If ignorance can grow out of civilization, why not polytheism out of monotheism? In India, Krishna preached the doctrine of the Unity of God, but after his time a wave of idolatry swept over the country; and when Muslims came here, they found idol-worship rampant throughout the land. In Judaism false gods have taken the place of Jehovah. Jesus preached a simple faith in One God, but Christendom now believes in Trinity. A lower conception can easily supplant a higher one. Islam is an historical religion. Even its enemies admit that it teaches belief in the pure Unity of God. But today even Muslims have degenerated to the worship of things other than God. These examples refute the doctrine that monotheism has necessarily grown out of polytheism.
Moreover, a study of primitive religion itself shows that among the primitive people the idea of a perfect Deity exists side by side with their worship of many deities. Only, God is known by different names among different peoples. There also exists among the primitives the idea of revelation; they hold it to be the medium through which they came to have a knowledge of God.
b
20:54; 27:62; 43:11; 51:49; 71:20; 78:7.
c
51:48; 78:13; 79:28-29.
29P
这话意指:正如一幢大楼或一个顶篷可以作为住在其中或其下的人们的一种保护物, 宇宙的较远许多部分相似地可以作为我们这颗行星 (地球) 的一种保护物; 那些研究星球、云层与其他大气现象的科学家知道那些其他天体如何在地球四周高空的浩瀚空间沿着它们的轨道穿越运行, 使地球安稳地运行着。这也暗示着, 物质世界的完美存在必须依靠天地之间各种力量的协作。
3
اَلسَّمَآءُ کے معنے عربی زبان میں اَلسَّحَابُ کے بھی ہوتے ہیں۔ یعنی بادل (اقرب) اسی لئے ہم نے وَ اَنْزَلَ مِنَ السَّمَآءِ مَآءً کے معنے یہ کئے ہیں ’’اور بادلوں سے پانی اتارا ہے۔‘‘
a
20:54; 27:62; 43:11; 51:49; 71:20; 78:7.
b
51:48; 78:13; 79:28, 29.
29
Important Words:
فراش (a bed) is derived from فرش. They say فرش الشیء i.e. he spread out the thing; he expanded it. فراش means, a thing that is spread upon the ground: a thing that is spread for one to sit or lie upon: a bed on which one sleeps; a wide or spacious plain or tract of land (Lane).
بناء (a roof) is derived from بنی meaning, he built; he constructed. So بناء means, a building; a structure; a thing that is built or constructed; also the roof or ceiling of a house or of a chamber or the like (Lane).
الثمرات (fruits) is the plural of ثمرة meaning, a fruit. The word is derived from the verb ثمر which means, the fruit became ripe. اثمر means, the tree, etc. produced fruit. The word ثمرة is also used figuratively, meaning, son or offspring; or profit of a thing (Taj).
انداد (equals) is the plural of ند which means, the like of a person or thing; or the like of a thing by participation of substance. It is a more specialised term than مثل which signifies alike by participation of anything. The word ند also means, a thing which does or may supply the place of another thing; or a like that is contrary or opposed to another thing; a thing taken as an object of worship instead of the true God (Lane). ند is to be distinguished from شریك; for whereas ند is the like of a thing, being contrary or opposed to it, شریك is simply a participant that shares the attributes or work of a thing (Aqrab under شریك and ند)
Commentary:
The subject matter of the last verse has been completed in this. It was said in that verse that رب should be worshipped because He is the Creator and He alone can foster man’s powers. In the present verse it is said that not only man but the heavens and the earth also have been created by God. It is evident that human actions depend upon environment. Trade, agriculture, industry, travel, etc. are made possible ultimately by the nature and influence of the heavens and the earth. So human actions can be guided aright only by a Being Who has made the heavens and the earth. It is only He Who can harness them for the use of man. None else has such knowledge, power or authority. So man should worship God alone.
The expression, and Who made the heaven a roof, suggests that just as a building or a roof is a source of protection for those living in or under it, similarly the remoter parts of the universe are a protection for our planet; and those who have studied the science of the stars, the clouds and other atmospheric phenomena know how the other heavenly bodies, running their courses through the boundless expanse rising high above the earth on all sides, make for its safety and stability.
In the clause, caused water to come down from the clouds, the word سماء has been used in the sense of "cloud", whereas in the preceding clause, and Who made the heaven a roof, it signifies "heaven". Had it meant the same thing in the two places, it would have been replaced in the second place by a pronoun. The repetition of the word is intended to convey a difference of meaning in the second place.
After making it clear that everything in this world is the creation of God, attention is drawn to the fact that God has no equal. There is nothing in the whole universe which can show any part of it to have been created by anyone other than God. Why, then, should man worship anyone else?
In this verse it is also hinted that the perfection of the material world depends upon a co-ordination of earthly and heavenly forces. When water is made corrupt by men on earth, fresh and pure water is supplied from heaven. Breathing makes the air foul but it is purified by nature. The eye is useful, but of what avail is it without the rays of the sun? In short, if the earth is a bed for man, the heaven is a roof. So is the case with the spiritual world. Man is gifted with reason but, like the eye, reason cannot function properly without the help of divine revelation. Human instincts are pure but they become polluted by greed, malice, etc. They can only be cleansed by the water of revelation. Hence man cannot attain to spiritual success without attaching himself to God. By showing material life to be dependent upon both earth and heaven, God points to a parallel in the spiritual world, and teaches that in spiritual matters also man should not trust earthly means alone. The intellect is not enough. Like the material world, the spiritual world also requires heavenly help. Just as there is a heaven above the earth, there is a heaven above the heart and brain of man. This is God’s guidance received through revelation.
An interesting question arises here. According to a widespread modern belief, the idea of God has evolved out of a primitive belief in spirits, ghosts and fairies. It is also said that in primitive times man worshipped beasts and poisonous insects and then gradually advanced to the idea of God. Modern critics appear to be in agreement that the idea of many gods has always preceded the idea of one God. The history of man’s beliefs is cited as evidence.
Some of those who hold such a view seem anxious to reconcile it with religion. They claim that their view does not go against religion. They say that God revealed the laws of nature by degrees; therefore there is nothing surprising if He should have revealed Himself also by degrees. Now, all religions base themselves upon revelation. And if the basis of religion is revelation, then the belief—that God revealed Himself by degrees and that He first guided the world to other gods, and then to Himself—at once falls to the ground. It is against all reason that God should first guide man to spirits, stones, rivers and snakes and then reveal Himself. What was there to hinder Him from guiding man to Himself from the very beginning? The living religions of the world have ever believed in revelation. Hinduism, Judaism, Christianity, Zoroastrianism and Islam, all teach that revelation began with the creation of man. This being the case, there can have been no gradual evolution of the idea of God. Evolutionary accounts, therefore, conflict with religion. Those who hold them must deny revelation, the basis of religion.
The denial of revelation is, of course, very common in the Christian West. Christendom has failed for a long time to provide any examples of persons with revelation experience. Little wonder that those speculators, who have had no such experience themselves and who have not been made aware of such experience in others, should deny revelation outright. According to the Quran, however, God has spoken to man in all ages. The Quran itself is a record of revelation and, according to the Quran, the followers of Islam must continue to receive revelation. The recipient in our age is the Holy Founder of the Ahmadiyya Movement. Nobody who knows all this can be impressed by denials of revelation. He can only treat them as mere ignorant conjectures.
Evolutionary accounts have little foundation in fact. It is said that the idea of God found amongst uncivilised peoples of the world today is polytheistic, therefore the idea of one God must have originated in polytheism. But it is not realized that the uncivilized peoples of today are not samples of the earliest human beings. Civilization has known many ages. Greece, Iran, Iraq, Egypt, India and China were centres of civilization and culture in their own days, but now they seem engulfed in darkness and ignorance. If ignorance can grow out of civilization, why not polytheism out of monotheism? In India, Krishna preached the doctrine of the Unity of God, but after his time a wave of idolatry swept over the country; and when Muslims came here, they found idol-worship rampant throughout the land. In Judaism false gods have taken the place of Jehovah. Jesus preached a simple faith in One God, but Christendom now believes in Trinity. A lower conception can easily supplant a higher one. Islam is an historical religion. Even its enemies admit that it teaches belief in the pure Unity of God. But today even Muslims have degenerated to the worship of things other than God. These examples refute the doctrine that monotheism has necessarily grown out of polytheism.
Moreover, a study of primitive religion itself shows that among the primitive people the idea of a perfect Deity exists side by side with their worship of many deities. Only, God is known by different names among different peoples. There also exists among the primitives the idea of revelation; they hold it to be the medium through which they came to have a knowledge of God.
b
20:54; 27:62; 43:11; 51:49; 71:20; 78:7.
c
51:48; 78:13; 79:28-29.
43
The expression suggests that just as a building or a roof is a means of protection for those living in or under it, similarly the remoter parts of the universe serve as a protection for our planet (earth); and those who have studied the science of the stars, the clouds and other atmospheric phenomena, know how the other heavenly bodies, running their courses through the boundless expanse rising high above the earth on all sides, make for its safety and stability. It is also hinted here that the perfection of the material world depends upon the co-ordination between earthly and heavenly forces.
وَبَشِّرِ ٱلَّذِينَ ءَامَنُوا۟ وَعَمِلُوا۟ ٱلصَّٰلِحَٰتِ أَنَّ لَهُمْ جَنَّٰتٍ تَجْرِى مِن تَحْتِهَا ٱلْأَنْهَٰرُ ۖ كُلَّمَا رُزِقُوا۟ مِنْهَا مِن ثَمَرَةٍ رِّزْقًا ۙ قَالُوا۟ هَٰذَا ٱلَّذِى رُزِقْنَا مِن قَبْلُ ۖ وَأُتُوا۟ بِهِۦ مُتَشَٰبِهًا ۖ وَلَهُمْ فِيهَآ أَزْوَٰجٌ مُّطَهَّرَةٌ ۖ وَهُمْ فِيهَا خَٰلِدُونَ
3:16, 134, 196, 199; 4:14, 58, 123; 5:13, 86; 7:44; 9:72, 89, 100; 10:10; 13:36; 22:15, 24; 25:11; 2:18; 47:16; 58:23; 61:13; 64:10.
3:16; 4:58.
古兰经» 教导说, 每一种被创造出来的东西, 为了它充分的发展都需要一个配偶。天园中, 正直的男女将有纯洁的配偶来完成他们的精神发展, 成全他们的幸福。他们将成为哪种配偶, 只是在后世才能真正认识。
这节经文简单描绘了信教者后世将受得的酬报。批评伊斯兰教的人对这一描绘提出了各种各样的异议。这种批评的基础是, 完全误解了伊斯兰教对后世赐福的教导。«古兰经» 着重地声言人们是无法知道那些赐福的性质的 (32:18)。相传穆圣曾经说过: “没有眼睛看到过它们, 也没有耳朵听到过它们, 也没有人们的头脑能想象它们” (布哈里)。自然会产生这样一个问题:为什么后世赐福的名称要用这个世界的物质东西来称呼?这是因为 «古兰经» 中的话不是仅对智力高的人们说的, 因此要用大家都能懂得的简单的语言。在描绘后世赐福时, «古兰经» 中用的一般都是这个世界上看来是好的东西的名称, 并告诉信教者他们将在后世以较好的形式来得到所有这些东西。为了显示这种重要对照, 才使用熟悉的用词, 否则, 在今世欢乐与来生赐福之间就会没有共同的东西。而且, 根据伊斯兰教教义, 将来的生命在这种意义上并不是精神的, 即:并不只是由内心状态组成的, 即使在将来的生命, 人的灵魂也还有一个身体, 不过那个身体不是物质的。人们可由梦境形成一些这种观念。一个人在梦中见到的许多景象不能称为内心的或纯精神的, 因为在那种状态下他也有身体。有时发现他自己在流着河水的天园中, 吃着果实、喝着牛奶。很难说梦中的情况只是内心的状态。在梦中快活地喝着牛奶, 无疑是一种经验, 但没有人能说这是他在这个世界上喝的物质的牛奶。来生的精神幸福不会只是我们今世享受的主的馈赠的主观现实。我们今生有的东西仅是人们在来生将看到的主的真实馈赐的一种表现。此外,”天园” 代表信仰,”河流” 代表善行。天园无河流则不能旺盛, 信仰也不可无善行。因此, 为达到灵魂的拯救, 信仰与善行不可分离。在后世, 天园将提醒信教者们今生的信仰而河流将提醒他们的善行。他们会知道, 信仰与善行不是徒劳的。如果从 “这是我们以前受赐的” 这句话中得出结论说: 在天园中信教者将会得到他们在今生享受的这样的果实, 那是错误的。因为, 正如已说明了的那样, 这两种赏赐并不是等同的。后世的果实, 实际上是他们自身信仰品质的形象。当他们在吃这些果实时, 他们立刻认识到也记起这是他们今生信仰的果实; 他们为了感激这种情况, 就说: “这是我们以前受赐的。” 这句话也可意味着,”这是过去答应给我们的东西。”
تَجْرِیْ مِنْ تَحْتِھَا الْاَنْھٰرُ سے مراد یہ ہے کہ وہ نہریں ان باغوں سے تعلق رکھتی ہیں اور یہ ظاہر ہے کہ جس شخص کا باغ ہوگا اس میں بہنے والی نہر بھی اسی کی ملکیت ہوگی۔ پس تَجْرِیْ مِنْ تَحْتِھَا الْاَنْھٰرُ کے الفاظ رکھ کر یہ بتانا مقصود ہے کہ جنت میں بہنے والی نہریں مومنوں کی ملکیت ہوں گی۔
اَزْوَاجٌ جوڑے یعنی ایسے وجود جن کے ساتھ مل کر ان کی تمام ترقیات اور تمام آرام مکمل ہوں گے۔ قرآن کریم سے معلوم ہوتا ہے کہ سوائے ذات باری کے ہر چیز ایک جوڑے کی محتاج ہے۔ اس قاعدہ کے تحت جنتی بھی جوڑے کے محتاج ہوں گے خواہ مرد ہوں خواہ عورتیں۔ باقی رہا یہ سوال کہ وہ جوڑے کس قسم کے ہوں گے یہ تفصیل اللہ تعالیٰ کے علم میں ہے انسان اس کو تفصیلاً اسی وقت معلوم کرے گا جب وہ جنت میں جائے گا۔
3:16, 134, 196, 199; 4:14, 58, 123; 5:13, 86; 7:44; 9:72, 89, 100; 10:10; 13:36; 22:15, 24; 25:11; 2:18; 47:16; 58:23; 61:13; 64:10.
3:16; 4:58.
The Qur’an teaches that every created thing stands in need of a mate for its full development. In Paradise righteous men and women will have pure mates for perfecting their spiritual development and completing their happiness. What kind of mates these will be, will be realized only in the Hereafter.
This verse gives a brief description of the rewards which the believers will have in the next world. Critics of Islam have raised all sorts of objections to this description. The criticism is based upon a complete misunderstanding of the Islamic teaching about heavenly blessings. The Qur’an emphatically declares that it is beyond human mind to comprehend their nature (32:18). The Holy Prophet is reported to have said: "No eye has seen them, nor has any ear heard of them, nor can the mind of man conceive of them" (Bukhari). The question naturally arises, why have the blessings of Heaven been given the names used for material things in this world? This is because the address of the Qur’an is not merely to those people who are intellectually advanced. Therefore, it has used simple words which can be understood by all. While describing the heavenly blessings, the Qur’an has used the names of things generally looked upon as good in this world, and believers are told that they would get all these thi
3:16, 134, 196, 199; 4:14, 58, 123; 5:13, 86; 7:44; 9:72, 89, 100; 10:10; 13:36; 22:15, 24; 25:11; 32:20; 47:16; 58:23; 61:13; 64:10.
3:16; 4:58.
Important Words:
بشر (give glad tidings) is derived from بشر (bashshara), i.e. he gave glad tidings, which again is derived from بشر(bashara). They say بشر i.e. he laid bare its skin. Thus البشرة means, the outer and visible part of the skin. So بشر(bashshara) means, he gave or imparted news which changed the colour of the listener. The word has generally come to be used in connection with good or happy news. But it is also sometimes used in connection with bad news (e.g. 3:22). بشیر means, one who announces good news to a people or a person. All Prophets are spoken of as بشیر and نذیر i.e. givers of good news to those who believe in them and givers of bad news to those who reject them (Aqrab & Mufradat).
الصالحات (good works) is the plural of الصالحة which is derived from the verb صلح (the opposite of فسد) meaning, he or it became good or suitable and proper. ھذا الشیء یصلح لك means, this thing is suitable to you or is fit or meet for you (Aqrab). So الصالحات would be used about all those deeds and actions which are not only good intrinsically but are also meet and suitable. See also under 2:12.
جنات (gardens) which is the plural of جنة (a garden) is derived from جن meaning, it veiled, concealed, or covered a thing. So جنة means, any garden having trees by which the ground is covered or concealed; an orchard or garden having luxuriousness and denseness of verdure (Aqrab & Lane). Heaven has been called جنة or garden, because: (1) the mercy of God will 'cover' its dwellers just as trees in an orchard cover the ground thereof; or (2) because the blessings of Heaven are 'hidden' from the eyes of man"; or again (3) because Heaven is like a garden in which the trees represent good faith and the streams good actions.
الانھار (streams) is the plural of نھر (nahr) or نھر (nahar). They say نھرالماء i.e. the water flowed on the earth and cut out a channel for itself. Thus نھر (nahr) or نھر (nahar) means, a channel through which a stream or a river flows; a stream or river itself. نھر (nahar) also means, abundance (Aqrab).
ازواج (mates) is the plural of زوج which signifies, anything that is one of a pair or couple; it does not mean a pair but only one of a pair, whether male or female (Aqrab). The word زوج also means, a comrade (Lane).
خالدون (shall abide) is derived fromخلد which means, he remained and lived on. خلدبمکان means, he stayed or abided in a place. خلود means, staying on, or living without change or deterioration for a long time but not necessarily forever (Aqrab & Mufradat).
Commentary:
This verse gives a brief description of the rewards which the believers will have in the next world.
Critics of Islam have raised all sorts of objections to this description. They say that: (1) The promise of such rewards is only an appeal to greed and a faith based upon greed is not worth the name. (2) The Quran promises material rewards to the believers and this is objectionable. (3) If the rewards of the next world are going to be material, then it must be supposed that the same body which one has in this life will be resurrected after death and this is against all reason, because this body perishes and the particles of one body are used in the making of several other bodies. To whom and to how many will then the same body be given in the next world? (4) Believers are promised wives in Heaven which shows that sex relations will continue in the next world. An appeal to sex is very objectionable for spiritual ends. Sex relations are necessary only for the continuation of the race in this world. Why should there be such a thing in the next? (5) The Quranic Paradise appears to be a place of luxury and sensual pleasures. There is thus nothing spiritual about the Islamic conception of the next life.
This criticism is based on a failure to understand the real Islamic teaching. The Quran has made it clear that in this life it is not possible for man to comprehend the nature of the rewards of the next. It says: No soul knows what joy of the eyes is kept hidden for them, as a reward for their actions (32:18). That is to say, whatever the Quran says about Heaven and Hell is only metaphorical. The descriptions are not to be taken in the sense in which they are ordinarily taken in this world. The Holy Prophet says of the blessings of the next world: "No eye has seen them, nor has any ear heard of them; nor can the mind of man form any conception of them" (Bukhari). If the blessings of the next life are to be like the joys of this life, we should be able to form some idea of them, no matter how remote they may be. The blessings of the next life, therefore, must be quite different from the blessings of this life.
At another place in the Quran we read: The similitude of the Heaven promised to the God-fearing is that through it flow streams; its fruit is everlasting, and so is its shade. That is the reward of those who are righteous, and the reward of the disbelievers is Fire (13:36). Now the fruit of this world is not everlasting, so in order to be everlasting the fruit of the next world as well as its streams will have to be taken as something other than material. Again we read: A similitude of the Paradise promised to the righteous: Therein are rivers of water which corrupts not; and rivers of milk of which the taste changes not; and rivers of wine, a delight to those who drink; and rivers of clarified honey (47:16). There is nothing material in this. About the wine of Heaven we read: Wherein there will be no intoxication, nor will they be exhausted thereby (37:48). Again, And their Lord will give them to drink a beverage that is pure (76:22). Thus, wine in Heaven will not only be pure itself but will purify the drinkers as well. Elsewhere the Quran says that the pure wine of Paradise will be tempered with Tasnim (83:28), which means 'abundance' and 'height '. In the cup of wine that will pass from hand to hand in Heaven God says there will be neither vanity nor sin (52:24). As against this, the wine of this world is described in the Quran as: Wine and the game of hazard and idols and divining arrows are only an abomination of Satan’s handiwork. So shun each one of them that you may prosper. Satan desires only to create enmity and hatred among you by means of wine and the game of hazard and to keep you back from the remembrance of Allah and from Prayer (5:91, 92). This proves that the wine of the next world is quite different; it is pure and purifying and nothing material.
The blessings of Heaven have indeed nothing in common with their counterparts of this world except the name. Ibn ‘Abbas, the Prophet’s cousin, also says the same thing (Jarir).
Now the question arises: Why have the blessings of Heaven been given the names used of material things in this world? This is so because Islam is meant for all kinds of people. It does not address only the intellectually advanced but also all others. Therefore it uses simple words which can be understood by all. The disbelievers used to say that the Prophet disallowed the good things of the world, and his followers were thus deprived of all blessings. Therefore, while describing the blessings in store for the Muslims, God used the names of things generally looked upon as good in this world and told the believers that they would get all these things in a better form. The water of this world spoils, but believers would have water in the next which will not spoil. Gardens are blessings but they decay; so believers will have gardens which will last forever. The unbelievers drank intoxicating wine which made them drunk and which dulled their senses; but the wine which the believers will get in Heaven will be pure and purifying. It is to bring out this important contrast that familiar words are used; otherwise there is nothing common between the delights of this world and the blessings of the next.
It may be added here that, according to Islam, the next life is not spiritual in the sense that it will just consist of a mental state and nothing else. Even in the next life the human soul will have a kind of body; only, it will not be material. One can glean some idea of this from the phenomenon of dreams. The Quran says: Allah takes the souls of human beings at the time of their death; and (He also takes the souls of), those that have not died, during their sleep. Then He retains those against which He has decreed death, and sends (back) the others till an appointed term. In that surely are signs for a people who reflect (39:43). Death and sleep resemble each other, the difference being that whereas in death the human soul is completely and permanently severed from the body, in sleep the severance is only temporary and partial. Now the scenes which a man witnesses in a dream cannot be called purely mental or spiritual, because he has a body also in his dreams and finds himself sometimes in gardens and streams, and eats fruits and drinks milk. It is hard to say that the contents of dreams are only mental states. The milk enjoyed in a dream is no doubt a real experience, but no one can say that it is the material milk found in this world. Dreams have a meaning of their own. For instance, eating mangoes in a dream symbolizes a righteous child or a righteous heart; eating grapes signifies love and fear of God; and eating bananas, a good and lawful subsistence which is also easy of attainment. In short, the spiritual blessings of the next life will not be a mere subjective realization of the gifts of God with which we become familiar in this world. As a matter of fact, what we enjoy here is just a representation of the real and true gifts of God which man will find in the next world.
Again, gardens represent faith; and streams, good actions. Gardens cannot prosper without streams, nor faith without good actions. Therefore faith and actions are inseparable for the attainment of salvation. In the next world, gardens will remind the believers of their faith in this life and streams will remind them of their good works. They will know, then, that their faith and good works have not gone in vain.
The flowing of streams or rivers beneath the gardens also implies that every person in Heaven will have a free and unrestricted enjoyment of his portion. In this world, a single stream often serves several gardens and there is the possibility of a quarrel over it; but in Heaven each garden will have its own stream exclusively meant for itself. See also 10:10.
It is wrong to conclude from the words, This is what was given us before, that in Heaven the believers will be given such fruit as they will have enjoyed in this world, because, as already explained, the two are not the same. The fruit of the next world will, in fact, be the image of the quality of their own faith. When they will eat it, they will at once recognize and remember that it is the fruit of the faith they had in this world; and it will be out of gratitude for this that they will say: This is what was given us before.
The expression rendered as, was given us, may also mean, 'was promised us'; and in this sense it would mean, this is what was promised to us in the world.
The word متشابھا (mutually resembling) refers to the resemblance between the acts of worship performed by believers in this world and the fruits thereof in Heaven. The acts of worship performed in this life will appear to believers as fruit in the next. The more sincere and the more appropriate a man’s worship, the more will he enjoy his portion of the fruit in Paradise and the better in quality will it be. It, therefore, lies in one’s own power to improve the quality of one’s fruit as one likes.
The expression, mutually resembling, also implies that in Paradise one spiritual food will completely harmonize with the other, so that the possibility of spiritual disease will be eliminated altogether. It also means that the food in Heaven will be suited to each and every individual and to his stage of progress and degree of development.
The words, they will abide, signify that the believers will go on abiding in Heaven and will not be subject to any change or decay. Man dies only when he cannot assimilate food or when someone kills him. But since the food of Paradise will be perfectly suited to every individual and since man will have pure and peaceful companions, death and decay will automatically disappear.
The Faithful will also have pure mates in Heaven. A good wife is a joy and a comfort. The Faithful try to have good wives in this world, and they will have good and virtuous company in the next. Yet these joys of Heaven are not physical.
A typical Christian comment on this subject is made by Sir William Muir: "It is very remarkable that the notices in the Coran of this voluptuous paradise are almost entirely confined to a time when, whatever the tendency of his desires, Mohammad was living chaste and temperate with a single wife of three score years of age. It is noteworthy that in the Medina Surahs, that is, in all the voluminous revelations of the ten years following the Hegira women are only twice referred to as constituting one of the delights of paradise and on both occasions in these simple words: 'And to them (believers) there shall be therein pure wives'. Was it that the soul of Mohammad had at that period no longings after what he had then to satiety the enjoyment of? Or that a closer contact with Jewish principles and morality repressed the budding pruriency of the revelation, and covered with merited confusion the picture of his sensual paradise which had been drawn at Mecca?" (Muir, page 76).
It is amazing how these Christian critics with pretensions to culture and learning will draw on sheer speculation to attack the honour of a Teacher who is held in the deepest reverence and devotion by many millions of men and women all over the world. They seem emboldened to do so, because Christians today hold political sway over the Muslims. A few centuries of power have made them forget that Muslims ruled over Christendom for a full 1,000 years, and during this time they never said anything unbecoming about Jesus. They respected Christian susceptibilities when Christians were quite unprotected and were much weaker than Muslims are today. Would to God Christians did not feel so elated!
Sir William conveniently ignores the fact that there are other things besides women which are mentioned in the Meccan chapters and to which there is no reference in the Medinite chapters. We read in the Meccan chapters that there will be wine, honey and rivers of milk in Paradise. Was the Holy Prophet deprived even of these things at Mecca that he should have compensated himself by imagining them in Paradise? Nothing could be more absurd than this. Personally the Holy Prophet was much better off at Mecca than he was at Medina. His rich wife Khadijah was then alive and she had placed all her wealth at his disposal. By the time he reached Medina, most of this wealth had been spent in good works and the Holy Prophet was left a poor man with little to live on. If the picture of Paradise was an imaged compensation for his wants, it should have emerged at Medina instead of at Mecca.
Supposing Sir William is right, cannot critics of Christianity say justifiably that Jesus imagined himself the king of the Jews because he was persecuted everywhere? Could they not also say that as Jesus saw nothing of sex life in this world, he remained obsessed with the idea of a second advent and imagined himself a bridegroom taking no less than five virgins for wives? In the words of the New Testament, he is reported to have said: "Then shall the kingdom of heaven be likened unto ten virgins which took their lamps, and went forth to meet the bridegroom. And five of them were foolish, and five were wise. For the foolish, when they took their lamps, took no oil with them: but the wise took oil in their vessels with their lamps…And the foolish said unto the wise, Give us of your oil; for our lamps are going out. But the wise answered, saying, Peradventure there will not be enough for us and you: go ye rather to them that sell, and buy for yourselves. And while they went away to buy, the bridegroom came; and they that were ready went in with him to the marriage feast; and the door was shut" (Matt. 25:1-10). A bridegroom surrounded by a bevy of virgins—is not this the Heaven of Jesus’ imagination?
But to revert to the subject; the disbelievers at Mecca used to taunt the Muslims about their poverty, saying they had nothing of the good things which they had, so God took over their own phrases and said that the rewards which believers would have in Paradise would be even better. When Islam was established at Medina, the disbelievers gave up their taunts. So God also dropped the earlier descriptions of Paradise. The descriptions in their deep significance, however, hold for all time.
At Mecca, moreover, it was necessary to explain and emphasize the basic belief of Islam. Therefore, greater detail of doctrine is found in the Meccan chapters, and as Paradise, the abode of believers in the afterlife, is an important item of belief, it is dealt with in detail in them. At Medina, on the contrary, practical matters like personal ethics and social legislation became more important. Therefore, greater attention was given to them in the Medinite chapters. The Meccan Surahs also abound in descriptions of Hell. What are they a compensation for?
Sir William Muir also suggests that the Holy Prophet changed his views about Paradise under the influence of the Jews and the Christians of Medina. But he forgets that the stock criticism made by Christian writers is that some Christian slaves had taught the Holy Prophet the Christian scriptures, the substance of which was incorporated in the Quran. Sir William himself alleges that the Holy Prophetlearnt Christianity from Suhaib, a Roman slave at Mecca (The Life of Mahomet, p.67). If the Holy Prophet at Mecca already knew the Christian teachings, he need not have waited for their influence until his arrival at Medina. In point of fact, in the Jewish and the Christian scriptures, there are no descriptions of Paradise. The Jews and the Christians have remained so engrossed in the affairs of this life that their Books do not say much about the life to come. The promises made by their Prophets about the next life have always been taken by them to pertain only to this life. It cannot be imagined that anybody could be influenced by such a teaching.
b
3:16, 134, 196, 199; 4:14, 58, 123; 5:13, 86; 7:44; 9:72, 89, 100; 10:10; 13:36; 22:15, 24; 25:11; 2:18; 47:16; 58:23; 61:13; 64:10.
c
3:16; 4:58.
29T
古兰经» 教导说, 每一种被创造出来的东西, 为了它充分的发展都需要一个配偶。天园中, 正直的男女将有纯洁的配偶来完成他们的精神发展, 成全他们的幸福。他们将成为哪种配偶, 只是在后世才能真正认识。
29U
这节经文简单描绘了信教者后世将受得的酬报。批评伊斯兰教的人对这一描绘提出了各种各样的异议。这种批评的基础是, 完全误解了伊斯兰教对后世赐福的教导。«古兰经» 着重地声言人们是无法知道那些赐福的性质的 (32:18)。相传穆圣曾经说过: “没有眼睛看到过它们, 也没有耳朵听到过它们, 也没有人们的头脑能想象它们” (布哈里)。自然会产生这样一个问题:为什么后世赐福的名称要用这个世界的物质东西来称呼?这是因为 «古兰经» 中的话不是仅对智力高的人们说的, 因此要用大家都能懂得的简单的语言。在描绘后世赐福时, «古兰经» 中用的一般都是这个世界上看来是好的东西的名称, 并告诉信教者他们将在后世以较好的形式来得到所有这些东西。为了显示这种重要对照, 才使用熟悉的用词, 否则, 在今世欢乐与来生赐福之间就会没有共同的东西。而且, 根据伊斯兰教教义, 将来的生命在这种意义上并不是精神的, 即:并不只是由内心状态组成的, 即使在将来的生命, 人的灵魂也还有一个身体, 不过那个身体不是物质的。人们可由梦境形成一些这种观念。一个人在梦中见到的许多景象不能称为内心的或纯精神的, 因为在那种状态下他也有身体。有时发现他自己在流着河水的天园中, 吃着果实、喝着牛奶。很难说梦中的情况只是内心的状态。在梦中快活地喝着牛奶, 无疑是一种经验, 但没有人能说这是他在这个世界上喝的物质的牛奶。来生的精神幸福不会只是我们今世享受的主的馈赠的主观现实。我们今生有的东西仅是人们在来生将看到的主的真实馈赐的一种表现。此外,”天园” 代表信仰,”河流” 代表善行。天园无河流则不能旺盛, 信仰也不可无善行。因此, 为达到灵魂的拯救, 信仰与善行不可分离。在后世, 天园将提醒信教者们今生的信仰而河流将提醒他们的善行。他们会知道, 信仰与善行不是徒劳的。如果从 “这是我们以前受赐的” 这句话中得出结论说: 在天园中信教者将会得到他们在今生享受的这样的果实, 那是错误的。因为, 正如已说明了的那样, 这两种赏赐并不是等同的。后世的果实, 实际上是他们自身信仰品质的形象。当他们在吃这些果实时, 他们立刻认识到也记起这是他们今生信仰的果实; 他们为了感激这种情况, 就说: “这是我们以前受赐的。” 这句话也可意味着,”这是过去答应给我们的东西。”
2
تَجْرِیْ مِنْ تَحْتِھَا الْاَنْھٰرُ سے مراد یہ ہے کہ وہ نہریں ان باغوں سے تعلق رکھتی ہیں اور یہ ظاہر ہے کہ جس شخص کا باغ ہوگا اس میں بہنے والی نہر بھی اسی کی ملکیت ہوگی۔ پس تَجْرِیْ مِنْ تَحْتِھَا الْاَنْھٰرُ کے الفاظ رکھ کر یہ بتانا مقصود ہے کہ جنت میں بہنے والی نہریں مومنوں کی ملکیت ہوں گی۔
3
اَزْوَاجٌ جوڑے یعنی ایسے وجود جن کے ساتھ مل کر ان کی تمام ترقیات اور تمام آرام مکمل ہوں گے۔ قرآن کریم سے معلوم ہوتا ہے کہ سوائے ذات باری کے ہر چیز ایک جوڑے کی محتاج ہے۔ اس قاعدہ کے تحت جنتی بھی جوڑے کے محتاج ہوں گے خواہ مرد ہوں خواہ عورتیں۔ باقی رہا یہ سوال کہ وہ جوڑے کس قسم کے ہوں گے یہ تفصیل اللہ تعالیٰ کے علم میں ہے انسان اس کو تفصیلاً اسی وقت معلوم کرے گا جب وہ جنت میں جائے گا۔
a
3:16, 134, 196, 199; 4:14, 58, 123; 5:13, 86; 7:44; 9:72, 89, 100; 10:10; 13:36; 22:15, 24; 25:11; 32:20; 47:16; 58:23; 61:13; 64:10.
b
3:16; 4:58.
32
Important Words:
بشر (give glad tidings) is derived from بشر (bashshara), i.e. he gave glad tidings, which again is derived from بشر(bashara). They say بشر i.e. he laid bare its skin. Thus البشرة means, the outer and visible part of the skin. So بشر(bashshara) means, he gave or imparted news which changed the colour of the listener. The word has generally come to be used in connection with good or happy news. But it is also sometimes used in connection with bad news (e.g. 3:22). بشیر means, one who announces good news to a people or a person. All Prophets are spoken of as بشیر and نذیر i.e. givers of good news to those who believe in them and givers of bad news to those who reject them (Aqrab & Mufradat).
الصالحات (good works) is the plural of الصالحة which is derived from the verb صلح (the opposite of فسد) meaning, he or it became good or suitable and proper. ھذا الشیء یصلح لك means, this thing is suitable to you or is fit or meet for you (Aqrab). So الصالحات would be used about all those deeds and actions which are not only good intrinsically but are also meet and suitable. See also under 2:12.
جنات (gardens) which is the plural of جنة (a garden) is derived from جن meaning, it veiled, concealed, or covered a thing. So جنة means, any garden having trees by which the ground is covered or concealed; an orchard or garden having luxuriousness and denseness of verdure (Aqrab & Lane). Heaven has been called جنة or garden, because: (1) the mercy of God will 'cover' its dwellers just as trees in an orchard cover the ground thereof; or (2) because the blessings of Heaven are 'hidden' from the eyes of man"; or again (3) because Heaven is like a garden in which the trees represent good faith and the streams good actions.
الانھار (streams) is the plural of نھر (nahr) or نھر (nahar). They say نھرالماء i.e. the water flowed on the earth and cut out a channel for itself. Thus نھر (nahr) or نھر (nahar) means, a channel through which a stream or a river flows; a stream or river itself. نھر (nahar) also means, abundance (Aqrab).
ازواج (mates) is the plural of زوج which signifies, anything that is one of a pair or couple; it does not mean a pair but only one of a pair, whether male or female (Aqrab). The word زوج also means, a comrade (Lane).
خالدون (shall abide) is derived fromخلد which means, he remained and lived on. خلدبمکان means, he stayed or abided in a place. خلود means, staying on, or living without change or deterioration for a long time but not necessarily forever (Aqrab & Mufradat).
Commentary:
This verse gives a brief description of the rewards which the believers will have in the next world.
Critics of Islam have raised all sorts of objections to this description. They say that: (1) The promise of such rewards is only an appeal to greed and a faith based upon greed is not worth the name. (2) The Quran promises material rewards to the believers and this is objectionable. (3) If the rewards of the next world are going to be material, then it must be supposed that the same body which one has in this life will be resurrected after death and this is against all reason, because this body perishes and the particles of one body are used in the making of several other bodies. To whom and to how many will then the same body be given in the next world? (4) Believers are promised wives in Heaven which shows that sex relations will continue in the next world. An appeal to sex is very objectionable for spiritual ends. Sex relations are necessary only for the continuation of the race in this world. Why should there be such a thing in the next? (5) The Quranic Paradise appears to be a place of luxury and sensual pleasures. There is thus nothing spiritual about the Islamic conception of the next life.
This criticism is based on a failure to understand the real Islamic teaching. The Quran has made it clear that in this life it is not possible for man to comprehend the nature of the rewards of the next. It says: No soul knows what joy of the eyes is kept hidden for them, as a reward for their actions (32:18). That is to say, whatever the Quran says about Heaven and Hell is only metaphorical. The descriptions are not to be taken in the sense in which they are ordinarily taken in this world. The Holy Prophet says of the blessings of the next world: "No eye has seen them, nor has any ear heard of them; nor can the mind of man form any conception of them" (Bukhari). If the blessings of the next life are to be like the joys of this life, we should be able to form some idea of them, no matter how remote they may be. The blessings of the next life, therefore, must be quite different from the blessings of this life.
At another place in the Quran we read: The similitude of the Heaven promised to the God-fearing is that through it flow streams; its fruit is everlasting, and so is its shade. That is the reward of those who are righteous, and the reward of the disbelievers is Fire (13:36). Now the fruit of this world is not everlasting, so in order to be everlasting the fruit of the next world as well as its streams will have to be taken as something other than material. Again we read: A similitude of the Paradise promised to the righteous: Therein are rivers of water which corrupts not; and rivers of milk of which the taste changes not; and rivers of wine, a delight to those who drink; and rivers of clarified honey (47:16). There is nothing material in this. About the wine of Heaven we read: Wherein there will be no intoxication, nor will they be exhausted thereby (37:48). Again, And their Lord will give them to drink a beverage that is pure (76:22). Thus, wine in Heaven will not only be pure itself but will purify the drinkers as well. Elsewhere the Quran says that the pure wine of Paradise will be tempered with Tasnim (83:28), which means 'abundance' and 'height '. In the cup of wine that will pass from hand to hand in Heaven God says there will be neither vanity nor sin (52:24). As against this, the wine of this world is described in the Quran as: Wine and the game of hazard and idols and divining arrows are only an abomination of Satan’s handiwork. So shun each one of them that you may prosper. Satan desires only to create enmity and hatred among you by means of wine and the game of hazard and to keep you back from the remembrance of Allah and from Prayer (5:91, 92). This proves that the wine of the next world is quite different; it is pure and purifying and nothing material.
The blessings of Heaven have indeed nothing in common with their counterparts of this world except the name. Ibn ‘Abbas, the Prophet’s cousin, also says the same thing (Jarir).
Now the question arises: Why have the blessings of Heaven been given the names used of material things in this world? This is so because Islam is meant for all kinds of people. It does not address only the intellectually advanced but also all others. Therefore it uses simple words which can be understood by all. The disbelievers used to say that the Prophet disallowed the good things of the world, and his followers were thus deprived of all blessings. Therefore, while describing the blessings in store for the Muslims, God used the names of things generally looked upon as good in this world and told the believers that they would get all these things in a better form. The water of this world spoils, but believers would have water in the next which will not spoil. Gardens are blessings but they decay; so believers will have gardens which will last forever. The unbelievers drank intoxicating wine which made them drunk and which dulled their senses; but the wine which the believers will get in Heaven will be pure and purifying. It is to bring out this important contrast that familiar words are used; otherwise there is nothing common between the delights of this world and the blessings of the next.
It may be added here that, according to Islam, the next life is not spiritual in the sense that it will just consist of a mental state and nothing else. Even in the next life the human soul will have a kind of body; only, it will not be material. One can glean some idea of this from the phenomenon of dreams. The Quran says: Allah takes the souls of human beings at the time of their death; and (He also takes the souls of), those that have not died, during their sleep. Then He retains those against which He has decreed death, and sends (back) the others till an appointed term. In that surely are signs for a people who reflect (39:43). Death and sleep resemble each other, the difference being that whereas in death the human soul is completely and permanently severed from the body, in sleep the severance is only temporary and partial. Now the scenes which a man witnesses in a dream cannot be called purely mental or spiritual, because he has a body also in his dreams and finds himself sometimes in gardens and streams, and eats fruits and drinks milk. It is hard to say that the contents of dreams are only mental states. The milk enjoyed in a dream is no doubt a real experience, but no one can say that it is the material milk found in this world. Dreams have a meaning of their own. For instance, eating mangoes in a dream symbolizes a righteous child or a righteous heart; eating grapes signifies love and fear of God; and eating bananas, a good and lawful subsistence which is also easy of attainment. In short, the spiritual blessings of the next life will not be a mere subjective realization of the gifts of God with which we become familiar in this world. As a matter of fact, what we enjoy here is just a representation of the real and true gifts of God which man will find in the next world.
Again, gardens represent faith; and streams, good actions. Gardens cannot prosper without streams, nor faith without good actions. Therefore faith and actions are inseparable for the attainment of salvation. In the next world, gardens will remind the believers of their faith in this life and streams will remind them of their good works. They will know, then, that their faith and good works have not gone in vain.
The flowing of streams or rivers beneath the gardens also implies that every person in Heaven will have a free and unrestricted enjoyment of his portion. In this world, a single stream often serves several gardens and there is the possibility of a quarrel over it; but in Heaven each garden will have its own stream exclusively meant for itself. See also 10:10.
It is wrong to conclude from the words, This is what was given us before, that in Heaven the believers will be given such fruit as they will have enjoyed in this world, because, as already explained, the two are not the same. The fruit of the next world will, in fact, be the image of the quality of their own faith. When they will eat it, they will at once recognize and remember that it is the fruit of the faith they had in this world; and it will be out of gratitude for this that they will say: This is what was given us before.
The expression rendered as, was given us, may also mean, 'was promised us'; and in this sense it would mean, this is what was promised to us in the world.
The word متشابھا (mutually resembling) refers to the resemblance between the acts of worship performed by believers in this world and the fruits thereof in Heaven. The acts of worship performed in this life will appear to believers as fruit in the next. The more sincere and the more appropriate a man’s worship, the more will he enjoy his portion of the fruit in Paradise and the better in quality will it be. It, therefore, lies in one’s own power to improve the quality of one’s fruit as one likes.
The expression, mutually resembling, also implies that in Paradise one spiritual food will completely harmonize with the other, so that the possibility of spiritual disease will be eliminated altogether. It also means that the food in Heaven will be suited to each and every individual and to his stage of progress and degree of development.
The words, they will abide, signify that the believers will go on abiding in Heaven and will not be subject to any change or decay. Man dies only when he cannot assimilate food or when someone kills him. But since the food of Paradise will be perfectly suited to every individual and since man will have pure and peaceful companions, death and decay will automatically disappear.
The Faithful will also have pure mates in Heaven. A good wife is a joy and a comfort. The Faithful try to have good wives in this world, and they will have good and virtuous company in the next. Yet these joys of Heaven are not physical.
A typical Christian comment on this subject is made by Sir William Muir: "It is very remarkable that the notices in the Coran of this voluptuous paradise are almost entirely confined to a time when, whatever the tendency of his desires, Mohammad was living chaste and temperate with a single wife of three score years of age. It is noteworthy that in the Medina Surahs, that is, in all the voluminous revelations of the ten years following the Hegira women are only twice referred to as constituting one of the delights of paradise and on both occasions in these simple words: 'And to them (believers) there shall be therein pure wives'. Was it that the soul of Mohammad had at that period no longings after what he had then to satiety the enjoyment of? Or that a closer contact with Jewish principles and morality repressed the budding pruriency of the revelation, and covered with merited confusion the picture of his sensual paradise which had been drawn at Mecca?" (Muir, page 76).
It is amazing how these Christian critics with pretensions to culture and learning will draw on sheer speculation to attack the honour of a Teacher who is held in the deepest reverence and devotion by many millions of men and women all over the world. They seem emboldened to do so, because Christians today hold political sway over the Muslims. A few centuries of power have made them forget that Muslims ruled over Christendom for a full 1,000 years, and during this time they never said anything unbecoming about Jesus. They respected Christian susceptibilities when Christians were quite unprotected and were much weaker than Muslims are today. Would to God Christians did not feel so elated!
Sir William conveniently ignores the fact that there are other things besides women which are mentioned in the Meccan chapters and to which there is no reference in the Medinite chapters. We read in the Meccan chapters that there will be wine, honey and rivers of milk in Paradise. Was the Holy Prophet deprived even of these things at Mecca that he should have compensated himself by imagining them in Paradise? Nothing could be more absurd than this. Personally the Holy Prophet was much better off at Mecca than he was at Medina. His rich wife Khadijah was then alive and she had placed all her wealth at his disposal. By the time he reached Medina, most of this wealth had been spent in good works and the Holy Prophet was left a poor man with little to live on. If the picture of Paradise was an imaged compensation for his wants, it should have emerged at Medina instead of at Mecca.
Supposing Sir William is right, cannot critics of Christianity say justifiably that Jesus imagined himself the king of the Jews because he was persecuted everywhere? Could they not also say that as Jesus saw nothing of sex life in this world, he remained obsessed with the idea of a second advent and imagined himself a bridegroom taking no less than five virgins for wives? In the words of the New Testament, he is reported to have said: "Then shall the kingdom of heaven be likened unto ten virgins which took their lamps, and went forth to meet the bridegroom. And five of them were foolish, and five were wise. For the foolish, when they took their lamps, took no oil with them: but the wise took oil in their vessels with their lamps…And the foolish said unto the wise, Give us of your oil; for our lamps are going out. But the wise answered, saying, Peradventure there will not be enough for us and you: go ye rather to them that sell, and buy for yourselves. And while they went away to buy, the bridegroom came; and they that were ready went in with him to the marriage feast; and the door was shut" (Matt. 25:1-10). A bridegroom surrounded by a bevy of virgins—is not this the Heaven of Jesus’ imagination?
But to revert to the subject; the disbelievers at Mecca used to taunt the Muslims about their poverty, saying they had nothing of the good things which they had, so God took over their own phrases and said that the rewards which believers would have in Paradise would be even better. When Islam was established at Medina, the disbelievers gave up their taunts. So God also dropped the earlier descriptions of Paradise. The descriptions in their deep significance, however, hold for all time.
At Mecca, moreover, it was necessary to explain and emphasize the basic belief of Islam. Therefore, greater detail of doctrine is found in the Meccan chapters, and as Paradise, the abode of believers in the afterlife, is an important item of belief, it is dealt with in detail in them. At Medina, on the contrary, practical matters like personal ethics and social legislation became more important. Therefore, greater attention was given to them in the Medinite chapters. The Meccan Surahs also abound in descriptions of Hell. What are they a compensation for?
Sir William Muir also suggests that the Holy Prophet changed his views about Paradise under the influence of the Jews and the Christians of Medina. But he forgets that the stock criticism made by Christian writers is that some Christian slaves had taught the Holy Prophet the Christian scriptures, the substance of which was incorporated in the Quran. Sir William himself alleges that the Holy Prophetlearnt Christianity from Suhaib, a Roman slave at Mecca (The Life of Mahomet, p.67). If the Holy Prophet at Mecca already knew the Christian teachings, he need not have waited for their influence until his arrival at Medina. In point of fact, in the Jewish and the Christian scriptures, there are no descriptions of Paradise. The Jews and the Christians have remained so engrossed in the affairs of this life that their Books do not say much about the life to come. The promises made by their Prophets about the next life have always been taken by them to pertain only to this life. It cannot be imagined that anybody could be influenced by such a teaching.
a
3:16, 134, 196, 199; 4:14, 58, 123; 5:13, 86; 7:44; 9:72, 89, 100; 10:10; 13:36; 22:15, 24; 25:11; 2:18; 47:16; 58:23; 61:13; 64:10.
b
3:16; 4:58.
46A
The Qur’an teaches that every created thing stands in need of a mate for its full development. In Paradise righteous men and women will have pure mates for perfecting their spiritual development and completing their happiness. What kind of mates these will be, will be realized only in the Hereafter.
47
This verse gives a brief description of the rewards which the believers will have in the next world. Critics of Islam have raised all sorts of objections to this description. The criticism is based upon a complete misunderstanding of the Islamic teaching about heavenly blessings. The Qur’an emphatically declares that it is beyond human mind to comprehend their nature (32:18). The Holy Prophet is reported to have said: "No eye has seen them, nor has any ear heard of them, nor can the mind of man conceive of them" (Bukhari). The question naturally arises, why have the blessings of Heaven been given the names used for material things in this world? This is because the address of the Qur’an is not merely to those people who are intellectually advanced. Therefore, it has used simple words which can be understood by all. While describing the heavenly blessings, the Qur’an has used the names of things generally looked upon as good in this world, and believers are told that they would get all these thi
۞ إِنَّ ٱللَّهَ لَا يَسْتَحْىِۦٓ أَن يَضْرِبَ مَثَلًا مَّا بَعُوضَةً فَمَا فَوْقَهَا ۚ فَأَمَّا ٱلَّذِينَ ءَامَنُوا۟ فَيَعْلَمُونَ أَنَّهُ ٱلْحَقُّ مِن رَّبِّهِمْ ۖ وَأَمَّا ٱلَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا۟ فَيَقُولُونَ مَاذَآ أَرَادَ ٱللَّهُ بِهَٰذَا مَثَلًا ۘ يُضِلُّ بِهِۦ كَثِيرًا وَيَهْدِى بِهِۦ كَثِيرًا ۚ وَمَا يُضِلُّ بِهِۦٓ إِلَّا ٱلْفَٰسِقِينَ
عربی زبان میں فَوْقٌ دونوں معنے رکھتا ہے۔ اگر بڑائی کا مقابلہ ہو تو اس کے معنے زیادہ بڑی کے ہو سکتے ہیں اگر چھوٹے ہونے کا ذکر ہو تو زیادہ چھوٹے کے معنے دے سکتا ہے۔ پس اس آیت کے دونوں ہی معنے کیے جا سکتے ہیں۔ یہ بھی کہ مچھر سے بڑی بات، یا یہ کہ اس سے بھی چھوٹی بات (مفردات راغب)
یُضِلُّ بِہٖ کَثِیْرًا کے معنے کیے گئے ہیں ’’وہ گمراہ قرار دیتا ہے‘‘ یہ عربی لغت کے مطابق ہے۔ چنانچہ مفردات میں اَ لْاِضْلَالُ کے معنی کرتے ہوئے لکھا ہے اَنْ تَحْکُمَ بِضَـلَا لَۃٍ کہ تو اس کے گمراہ ہونے کا فیصلہ کر دے۔ پس یُضِلُّ بِہٖ کَثِیْرًا کے معنی ہوں گے یَحْکُمُ اللّٰہُ بِالضَّـلَالِ عَلَیْھِمْ یعنی اللہ ان کے گمراہ ہونے کا فیصلہ کرتا ہے۔
فَسَقَ کے معنے ہوتے ہیں تَرَکَ اَمْرَ اللّٰہِ یعنی اللہ تعالیٰ کے حکم کو ردّ کر دیا (اقرب) پس فاسق کے معنے ہوں گے نافرمان۔ اللہ کے حکم کو ردّ کرنے والا۔
33:54.
14:25; 16:76, 112; 47:4; 66:12.
6:118; 7:187; 13:28; 16:94; 40:35.
Darabal-Mathala means, he gave an illustration or a description; he made a statement; he propounded a parable (Lane, Taj & 14:46).
God has described Heaven and Hell in the Qur’an in metaphors and similes. Metaphors and similes express depths of meaning which cannot adequately be expressed otherwise, and in things of the spirit they provide perhaps the only method by which ideas can be properly conveyed. The words used for describing Heaven may be as inadequate and insignificant as a gnat; which is considered by the Arabs and, in fact is, a very, very weak creature. The Arabs say: Ad‘afu min Ba‘udatin, i.e. he is weaker than a gnat. Nevertheless they help to conjure up the picture. The believers know the words are only metaphorical and try to get to the depth of their meaning; but the disbelievers begin to find fault with them and increase in error and misguidance.
Fauq means, above and signifies both 'greater' and 'smaller' and is used in the sense which befits the context (Mufradat).
Adallallahu means, (1) God adjudged him to be in error; (2) God forsook or abandoned him so that he went astray (Kashshaf); (3) God found or left him in error or let him go astray (Lane).
33:54.
14:25; 16:76, 113; 47:4; 66:12.
6:118; 7:187; 13:28; 16:94; 40:35.
Important Words:
یستحیٖ (disdains) is derived from حیی which means: (1) he lived or had life; (2) he felt or had a sense of shame or shyness or bashfulness. The infinitive حیاء means, sense of shame or modesty or shyness or bashfulness; or keeping back from a thing through fear of blame. استحیا means, he felt a sense of shame or shyness; he kept back, or he forbore, or he shrank from. استحیی من کذا means, he disdained it, or he refused to do it by reason of pride, or he kept far from it (Lane).
یضل (He adjudges to be erring) is from اضل which is derived from ضل which means, he went astray; he lost his way; he erred; he was lost; he perished. اضل is the transitive form of ضل. They say اضله i.e. he led him astray; he caused him to err; he lost him or it; he caused him to perish. اضله also means, he found him to be erring or straying or lost, etc. (Lane). اضله اللهmay also mean, (1) God adjudged him to be erring or He adjudged him to have gone astray; (2) God forsook or abandoned him and he went astray (Kashshaf). See also 1:7.
الفاسقین (the disobedient) is the plural of فاسق which is derived from the verb فسق which means, he left the right course, or he declined from the right path. فسق عن امرربه means, he departed from the command of his Lord; he disobeyed his Lord. فاسقis thus one who departs from the right course or from the way of truth, or from the limits of the law, or from the bounds of obedience. The word is generally applied to one who first takes upon himself to obey an authority or to observe the ordinances of a law and then falls short of it (Lane & Aqrab).
Commentary:
If, as described in the previous verse, there is not much in common between the gifts of this world and those of the next, why has the Quran given a description of Heaven at all? This question is answered in the present verse. Even if the picture of Heaven and Hell given in the Quran is not exact, it cannot be denied that the imagery used enlightens and helps us to form an idea of the next life. God has, no doubt, described Heaven and Hell by using metaphors and similes, but no one can say that they are useless. Metaphors and similes are used in all languages, and they express depths of meaning which cannot be reached otherwise, and in things of the spirit they afford perhaps the only method by which ideas can be conveyed. The words used for describing Heaven may be as inadequate and insignificant as a gnat; nevertheless they help to conjure up the picture. The believers know the words are only metaphorical and try to get to the depth of their meaning; but the disbelievers begin to find fault with them and increase in error and misguidance.
The words یضل به کثیرا (lit. many does He misguide) have been translated in the text as, many does He adjudge by it to be erring. This, as shown under Important Words above, is a perfectly correct rendering, for though misguidance springs from one’s own self, as the verse itself makes clear in the concluding clause, yet it is God, the final Judge, Who declares or adjudges the misguided to be so.
a
33:54.
b
14:25; 16:76, 112; 47:4; 66:12.
c
6:118; 7:187; 13:28; 16:94; 40:35.
1
عربی زبان میں فَوْقٌ دونوں معنے رکھتا ہے۔ اگر بڑائی کا مقابلہ ہو تو اس کے معنے زیادہ بڑی کے ہو سکتے ہیں اگر چھوٹے ہونے کا ذکر ہو تو زیادہ چھوٹے کے معنے دے سکتا ہے۔ پس اس آیت کے دونوں ہی معنے کیے جا سکتے ہیں۔ یہ بھی کہ مچھر سے بڑی بات، یا یہ کہ اس سے بھی چھوٹی بات (مفردات راغب)
2
یُضِلُّ بِہٖ کَثِیْرًا کے معنے کیے گئے ہیں ’’وہ گمراہ قرار دیتا ہے‘‘ یہ عربی لغت کے مطابق ہے۔ چنانچہ مفردات میں اَ لْاِضْلَالُ کے معنی کرتے ہوئے لکھا ہے اَنْ تَحْکُمَ بِضَـلَا لَۃٍ کہ تو اس کے گمراہ ہونے کا فیصلہ کر دے۔ پس یُضِلُّ بِہٖ کَثِیْرًا کے معنی ہوں گے یَحْکُمُ اللّٰہُ بِالضَّـلَالِ عَلَیْھِمْ یعنی اللہ ان کے گمراہ ہونے کا فیصلہ کرتا ہے۔
3
فَسَقَ کے معنے ہوتے ہیں تَرَکَ اَمْرَ اللّٰہِ یعنی اللہ تعالیٰ کے حکم کو ردّ کر دیا (اقرب) پس فاسق کے معنے ہوں گے نافرمان۔ اللہ کے حکم کو ردّ کرنے والا۔
a
33:54.
b
14:25; 16:76, 113; 47:4; 66:12.
c
6:118; 7:187; 13:28; 16:94; 40:35.
33
Important Words:
یستحیٖ (disdains) is derived from حیی which means: (1) he lived or had life; (2) he felt or had a sense of shame or shyness or bashfulness. The infinitive حیاء means, sense of shame or modesty or shyness or bashfulness; or keeping back from a thing through fear of blame. استحیا means, he felt a sense of shame or shyness; he kept back, or he forbore, or he shrank from. استحیی من کذا means, he disdained it, or he refused to do it by reason of pride, or he kept far from it (Lane).
یضل (He adjudges to be erring) is from اضل which is derived from ضل which means, he went astray; he lost his way; he erred; he was lost; he perished. اضل is the transitive form of ضل. They say اضله i.e. he led him astray; he caused him to err; he lost him or it; he caused him to perish. اضله also means, he found him to be erring or straying or lost, etc. (Lane). اضله اللهmay also mean, (1) God adjudged him to be erring or He adjudged him to have gone astray; (2) God forsook or abandoned him and he went astray (Kashshaf). See also 1:7.
الفاسقین (the disobedient) is the plural of فاسق which is derived from the verb فسق which means, he left the right course, or he declined from the right path. فسق عن امرربه means, he departed from the command of his Lord; he disobeyed his Lord. فاسقis thus one who departs from the right course or from the way of truth, or from the limits of the law, or from the bounds of obedience. The word is generally applied to one who first takes upon himself to obey an authority or to observe the ordinances of a law and then falls short of it (Lane & Aqrab).
Commentary:
If, as described in the previous verse, there is not much in common between the gifts of this world and those of the next, why has the Quran given a description of Heaven at all? This question is answered in the present verse. Even if the picture of Heaven and Hell given in the Quran is not exact, it cannot be denied that the imagery used enlightens and helps us to form an idea of the next life. God has, no doubt, described Heaven and Hell by using metaphors and similes, but no one can say that they are useless. Metaphors and similes are used in all languages, and they express depths of meaning which cannot be reached otherwise, and in things of the spirit they afford perhaps the only method by which ideas can be conveyed. The words used for describing Heaven may be as inadequate and insignificant as a gnat; nevertheless they help to conjure up the picture. The believers know the words are only metaphorical and try to get to the depth of their meaning; but the disbelievers begin to find fault with them and increase in error and misguidance.
The words یضل به کثیرا (lit. many does He misguide) have been translated in the text as, many does He adjudge by it to be erring. This, as shown under Important Words above, is a perfectly correct rendering, for though misguidance springs from one’s own self, as the verse itself makes clear in the concluding clause, yet it is God, the final Judge, Who declares or adjudges the misguided to be so.
a
33:54.
b
14:25; 16:76, 112; 47:4; 66:12.
c
6:118; 7:187; 13:28; 16:94; 40:35.
48
Darabal-Mathala means, he gave an illustration or a description; he made a statement; he propounded a parable (Lane, Taj & 14:46).
48A
God has described Heaven and Hell in the Qur’an in metaphors and similes. Metaphors and similes express depths of meaning which cannot adequately be expressed otherwise, and in things of the spirit they provide perhaps the only method by which ideas can be properly conveyed. The words used for describing Heaven may be as inadequate and insignificant as a gnat; which is considered by the Arabs and, in fact is, a very, very weak creature. The Arabs say: Ad‘afu min Ba‘udatin, i.e. he is weaker than a gnat. Nevertheless they help to conjure up the picture. The believers know the words are only metaphorical and try to get to the depth of their meaning; but the disbelievers begin to find fault with them and increase in error and misguidance.
48B
Fauq means, above and signifies both 'greater' and 'smaller' and is used in the sense which befits the context (Mufradat).
49
Adallallahu means, (1) God adjudged him to be in error; (2) God forsook or abandoned him so that he went astray (Kashshaf); (3) God found or left him in error or let him go astray (Lane).
وَءَامِنُوا۟ بِمَآ أَنزَلْتُ مُصَدِّقًا لِّمَا مَعَكُمْ وَلَا تَكُونُوٓا۟ أَوَّلَ كَافِرٍۭ بِهِۦ ۖ وَلَا تَشْتَرُوا۟ بِـَٔايَٰتِى ثَمَنًا قَلِيلًا وَإِيَّٰىَ فَٱتَّقُونِ
وَ لَا تَشْتَرُوْا بِاٰیٰـتِیْ ثَمَنًا قَلِیْـلًا سے یہ مرادنہیں کہ تھوڑے پیسے نہ لو۔ بلکہ مراد یہ ہے کہ میرے باتیں جو دین ہیں‘ ان کے بدلے میں دنیا نہ لو‘ کیونکہ دنیا دین کے مقابلہ میں بالکل حقیر چیز ہے۔
2:90, 98, 102; 3:4, 82; 4:48; 5:49.
7:102; 10:75.
2:80, 175; 3:200; 5:45; 9:9; 16:96.
Musaddiq is derived from Saddaqa which means, he held or declared him or it to be true (Lane). When the word is used in the sense of "holding a thing to be true," it is either followed by no preposition or by the preposition ba’. But when it is used in the sense of "fulfilling" as in the present verse, it is followed by the preposition lam (2:92 & 35:32). So here it means "fulfilling" and not "confirming" or "declaring to be true." The Qur’an fulfils the prophecies that were contained in the previous Scriptures regarding the advent of a Law-giving Prophet and a universal Scripture. Wherever the Qur’an speaks of itself as being Musaddiq of the previous Scriptures, it does not confirm their teachings but claims to have come in fulfilment of their prophecies. Nevertheless, it accepts the Divine origin of all the revealed Books before it. But it does not look upon all their present teachings to be true in their totality; for parts of them have been tampered with and
2:90, 98, 102; 3:4, 82; 4:48; 5:49.
7:102; 10:75.
2:80, 175; 3:200; 5:45; 9:9; 16:96.
Important Words:
مصدقا (fulfilling) is derived from صدق meaning, he told the truth or he was true. صدقه (saddaqahu) means, he held or declared him or it to be true. صدق زید خالدا means, Zaid said or held that what Khalid had said was true (Aqrab & Lane). The word تصدیق when used about previous Prophets or previous Scriptures can possibly signify three things: (1) that the claim of the previous Prophets and the previous Books about their divine mission or Divine origin is true; (2) that the teachings which they gave were true; and (3) that the prophecies which they made about the coming of some future Prophet or future revelation, etc., were true. Now the Quran and the Holy Prophet were مصدق of the previous Books and the previous Prophets in all these three senses: (1) Islam declares that all previous Prophets and all previous Books that claimed divine mission or Divine origin and were believed in as such by a large number of people, were indeed from God (2:5; 2:286); (2) it admits that the teachings of the previous Prophets and the previous Books were true, not necessarily in the form in which they existed at the time of its advent but in the form in which they were originally given (98:4); (3) it claims that the prophecies made by previous Books and the previous Prophets about the coming of a Prophet and the coming of a Book of divine law were true and have been fulfilled in the Quran and the Holy Prophet of Islam. In the verse under comment the word مصدق is used in the last-mentioned sense, i.e. fulfilling the prophecies of the previous Scriptures.
Moreover, the word مصدق is here followed by the preposition لام and not با and there is a difference between simple مصدقand مصدق به and مصدق له. When the word is used in the sense of holding a thing to be true, it is either followed by no preposition or is followed by the preposition با. When, however, the Quran uses the word in the sense of fulfilling, it is followed by the preposition لام. Even in common parlance we say جئت تصدیقا لقول فلان i.e. I have come in accordance with, or to fulfil, the word of such a person.
The use of the word مصدق له in the Quran practically bears out this distinction. For instance, in 2:92 the Quran says: And when it is said to them, 'Believe in what Allah has sent down,' they say, 'We believe in what has been sent down to us'; and they disbelieve in what has been sent down after that, yet it is the truth, fulfilling that which is with them. This verse makes it absolutely clear what the word مصدق means when followed by the preposition لام. It undoubtedly means "fulfilling" and not "confirming" or "declaring to be true". The expression in the verse quoted above has been used as a proof of the truth of the Quran and this clearly proves that this expression (i.e. مصدق له) conveys the sense of "fulfilling", not that of "confirming"; for if a book declares the Bible to be true, that is no proof of the book being itself a revealed word of God; even an impostor can declare the previous Scriptures to be true. It is only the fulfilling of the prophecies contained in the Bible that can serve as an evidence of the truth of the Quran. Thus it is clear that when the Quran speaks of its being مصدق (used with the preposition لام) of the Christian and the Jewish scriptures, it uses the word in the sense of "fulfilling" and not in the sense of "declaring to be true".
Again in 35:32 we find the same expression definitely used in the sense of 'fulfilling'. The verse runs thus: And the Book which We have revealed to thee is the truth itself, fulfilling (مصدقا) that which is before it, i.e. fulfilling the Scriptures that have gone before it. Now in this verse مصدق cannot mean 'declaring to be true'; for in that case we shall have to admit that the Quran declares all the teachings contained in previous Scriptures to be true, whereas many of these Scriptures are contradictory of one another and all of them contain at least some teachings that are opposed to the teachings of the Quran. So if the expression مصدقا له means "declaring to be true", it would signify that the Quran declares not only all the mutually contradictory Scriptures to be true, but also such teachings as are opposed to its own teaching. From this it is clear that the expression مصد قاله can only signify that the Quran fulfils the prophecies that were contained in the previous Scriptures regarding the advent of a Law-giving Prophet and a universal Dispensation.
لا تشتروا (barter not). For the meaning of the word اشتری see note under 2:17.
Commentary:
The verse under comment is a fitting complement of what has been said in the previous verse. God, the Almighty, calls upon the Israelites to accept the Holy Prophet of Islam in whom the prophecies contained in their Scriptures have been fulfilled. In fact, all the previous Scriptures had prophesied about the advent of a great Prophet. The Quran itself refers to this fact where it says: And remember the time when Allah took a covenant from the people through the Prophets, saying, 'Whatever I give you of the Book and Wisdom, and then there comes to you a Messenger fulfilling what is with you, you shall believe in him, and help him'. And He said, 'Do you agree and do you accept the responsibility which I lay upon you in this matter?' They said, 'We agree;' He said, 'Then bear witness, and I am with you among the witnesses' (3:82). In this verse we have been told that every previous Prophet informed his people of the advent of a great Prophet and enjoined them to accept him when he made his appearance. As, before Islam, different Prophets were sent to different peoples, and it was only with the advent of Islam that there was to come a Prophet for all mankind, it was necessary that a covenant should have been taken from all the different peoples binding them to accept the World-Prophet when he appeared.
The advent of such a Prophet who was to gather together all nations was announced in Isaiah 42:1-4 in the following words:
"Behold my servant, whom I uphold; my chosen, in whom my soul delighteth: I have put my spirit upon him; he shall bring forth judgement to the nations. He shall not cry nor lift up, nor cause his voice to be heard in the street. A bruised reed shall he not break, and the smoking flax shall he not quench: he shall bring forth judgement in truth. He shall not fail nor be discouraged, till he have set judgement in the earth; and the isles shall wait for his law. Thus saith God the Lord, He that created the heavens, and stretched them forth" (Revised Version). Again, in Isaiah 55:4 we read: "Behold, I have given him for witness to the peoples, a leader and commander to the peoples" (Revised Version). Compare this with the Quran where God addresses the Holy Prophet, saying: And how will it fare with them when We shall bring a witness from every people, and shall bring thee as a witness against these (4:42). The above quoted prophecy mentioned in Isaiah cannot be supposed to refer to Jesus, for he did not claim to have been sent to all peoples. Says Jesus, "I am not sent but to the lost sheep of the house of Israel" (Matt. 15: 24).
In Isaiah 60:5-7, we read:
"Then thou shalt see and be lightened, and thine heart shall tremble and be enlarged, because the abundance of the sea shall be turned unto thee, the wealth of the nations shall come unto thee. The multitude of camels shall cover thee, the dromedaries of Midian and Ephah; they all shalt come from Sheba: They shall bring gold and frankincense, and shall proclaim the praises of the Lord. All the flocks of Kedar shall be gathered together unto thee, the rams of Nebaioth shall minister unto thee: they shall come up with acceptance on My altar, and I will glorify the house of My glory" (Revised Version). On this point the Quran says regarding Pilgrimage to Mecca: And proclaim unto mankind the Pilgrimage; they shall come to thee on foot, and on every lean camel emaciated on account of coming through every deep and distant track(22:28).
Now is there any House, except the one at Mecca, to which people repair riding on camels and where they offer sacrifices?
Add to the above prophecies those already given under the previous verse e.g. the prophecy relating to the coming of a Prophet from among the "brethren" of the Israelites, etc., and the reader will at once realize that the Bible did contain prophecies about the advent of a great Prophet who was to gather together all nations, and that these prophecies have been fulfilled in the person of the Holy Prophet of Islam.
The words, and be not the first to disbelieve therein, occurring in the verse under comment call upon the Israelites to ponder over the claim of the Holy Prophet and not to be hasty in rejecting it. They have been cautioned against being hasty in rejecting the truth, for once a man rejects the truth without giving it calm and dispassionate consideration, it becomes very difficult for him to accept it afterwards. He becomes prejudiced against it. It is to this fact that the Quran refers when it says: And We shall confound their hearts and their eyes, as they believed not therein at the first time and We shall leave them in their transgression to wander in distraction (6:111).
These words also hint at the fact that the People of the Book, being in possession of divine prophecies bearing on the advent of a great Prophet from among the descendants of Ishmael, are better fitted than others to judge of the truth of the Holy Prophet of Islam and should therefore be the first to accept him; at least they should not go to the other extreme and be the first to reject him.
The words, and barter not My Signs for a paltry price, are explained in the Quran in 4:78: Say, The benefit of this world is little. Interpreted in this light the verse would mean "Do not forsake the truth for worldly gains," for worldly gains, however big, are but a small and passing thing when compared with the gains of the Hereafter. These words may also be interpreted to signify that people who reject the truth may secure only temporary gains, but eventually, even in this life, the tide very often turns, bringing the righteous ones in ascendance.
The concluding words, and take protection in Me alone, are similar in construction to those placed at the end of the preceding verse, the only difference being that here the word ترھبون has been replaced by the word تتقون which gives a much wider significance than the former. For an explanation of the word تقوی see under 2:3 above.
Before we pass on to the next verse, it is necessary to remove one possible misunderstanding. The Quran declares itself to be مصدق له of the Jewish scriptures and we have explained this expression as meaning that the Quran came in fulfilment of what was prophesied in the previous Scriptures—not that the Quran holds the previous Scriptures to be true. This should not give rise to the misunderstanding that the Quran does not accept the Divine origin of the previous Scriptures. As a matter of fact, the Quran itself says that God’s Messengers have appeared among all the different peoples of the world (35:25). It also calls upon its followers to believe in all the previous revelations but this belief should be through the Holy Prophet and not independently of him (2:5). At the same time, the Quran criticizes and denies several teachings ascribed to the previous Scriptures and claims that these teachings have been tampered with (19:89-92; 9:30; 4:47). Thus the position may be summed up as follows:
(1) Wherever the Quran speaks of itself as being مصدق له of the previous Scriptures, it does not mean that it confirms their teachings but that it claims to have come in fulfilment of their prophecies.
(2) Nevertheless the Quran accepts the Divine origin of all the revealed Books that were sent by God before Islam.
(3) But it does not look upon all their present teachings to be true; for much has been tampered with and much that was meant for a specific period has now become obsolete.
f
2:90, 98, 102; 3:4, 82; 4:48; 5:49.
g
7:102; 10:75.
h
2:80, 175; 3:200; 5:45; 9:9; 16:96.
2
وَ لَا تَشْتَرُوْا بِاٰیٰـتِیْ ثَمَنًا قَلِیْـلًا سے یہ مرادنہیں کہ تھوڑے پیسے نہ لو۔ بلکہ مراد یہ ہے کہ میرے باتیں جو دین ہیں‘ ان کے بدلے میں دنیا نہ لو‘ کیونکہ دنیا دین کے مقابلہ میں بالکل حقیر چیز ہے۔
a
2:90, 98, 102; 3:4, 82; 4:48; 5:49.
b
7:102; 10:75.
c
2:80, 175; 3:200; 5:45; 9:9; 16:96.
48
Important Words:
مصدقا (fulfilling) is derived from صدق meaning, he told the truth or he was true. صدقه (saddaqahu) means, he held or declared him or it to be true. صدق زید خالدا means, Zaid said or held that what Khalid had said was true (Aqrab & Lane). The word تصدیق when used about previous Prophets or previous Scriptures can possibly signify three things: (1) that the claim of the previous Prophets and the previous Books about their divine mission or Divine origin is true; (2) that the teachings which they gave were true; and (3) that the prophecies which they made about the coming of some future Prophet or future revelation, etc., were true. Now the Quran and the Holy Prophet were مصدق of the previous Books and the previous Prophets in all these three senses: (1) Islam declares that all previous Prophets and all previous Books that claimed divine mission or Divine origin and were believed in as such by a large number of people, were indeed from God (2:5; 2:286); (2) it admits that the teachings of the previous Prophets and the previous Books were true, not necessarily in the form in which they existed at the time of its advent but in the form in which they were originally given (98:4); (3) it claims that the prophecies made by previous Books and the previous Prophets about the coming of a Prophet and the coming of a Book of divine law were true and have been fulfilled in the Quran and the Holy Prophet of Islam. In the verse under comment the word مصدق is used in the last-mentioned sense, i.e. fulfilling the prophecies of the previous Scriptures.
Moreover, the word مصدق is here followed by the preposition لام and not با and there is a difference between simple مصدقand مصدق به and مصدق له. When the word is used in the sense of holding a thing to be true, it is either followed by no preposition or is followed by the preposition با. When, however, the Quran uses the word in the sense of fulfilling, it is followed by the preposition لام. Even in common parlance we say جئت تصدیقا لقول فلان i.e. I have come in accordance with, or to fulfil, the word of such a person.
The use of the word مصدق له in the Quran practically bears out this distinction. For instance, in 2:92 the Quran says: And when it is said to them, 'Believe in what Allah has sent down,' they say, 'We believe in what has been sent down to us'; and they disbelieve in what has been sent down after that, yet it is the truth, fulfilling that which is with them. This verse makes it absolutely clear what the word مصدق means when followed by the preposition لام. It undoubtedly means "fulfilling" and not "confirming" or "declaring to be true". The expression in the verse quoted above has been used as a proof of the truth of the Quran and this clearly proves that this expression (i.e. مصدق له) conveys the sense of "fulfilling", not that of "confirming"; for if a book declares the Bible to be true, that is no proof of the book being itself a revealed word of God; even an impostor can declare the previous Scriptures to be true. It is only the fulfilling of the prophecies contained in the Bible that can serve as an evidence of the truth of the Quran. Thus it is clear that when the Quran speaks of its being مصدق (used with the preposition لام) of the Christian and the Jewish scriptures, it uses the word in the sense of "fulfilling" and not in the sense of "declaring to be true".
Again in 35:32 we find the same expression definitely used in the sense of 'fulfilling'. The verse runs thus: And the Book which We have revealed to thee is the truth itself, fulfilling (مصدقا) that which is before it, i.e. fulfilling the Scriptures that have gone before it. Now in this verse مصدق cannot mean 'declaring to be true'; for in that case we shall have to admit that the Quran declares all the teachings contained in previous Scriptures to be true, whereas many of these Scriptures are contradictory of one another and all of them contain at least some teachings that are opposed to the teachings of the Quran. So if the expression مصدقا له means "declaring to be true", it would signify that the Quran declares not only all the mutually contradictory Scriptures to be true, but also such teachings as are opposed to its own teaching. From this it is clear that the expression مصد قاله can only signify that the Quran fulfils the prophecies that were contained in the previous Scriptures regarding the advent of a Law-giving Prophet and a universal Dispensation.
لا تشتروا (barter not). For the meaning of the word اشتری see note under 2:17.
Commentary:
The verse under comment is a fitting complement of what has been said in the previous verse. God, the Almighty, calls upon the Israelites to accept the Holy Prophet of Islam in whom the prophecies contained in their Scriptures have been fulfilled. In fact, all the previous Scriptures had prophesied about the advent of a great Prophet. The Quran itself refers to this fact where it says: And remember the time when Allah took a covenant from the people through the Prophets, saying, 'Whatever I give you of the Book and Wisdom, and then there comes to you a Messenger fulfilling what is with you, you shall believe in him, and help him'. And He said, 'Do you agree and do you accept the responsibility which I lay upon you in this matter?' They said, 'We agree;' He said, 'Then bear witness, and I am with you among the witnesses' (3:82). In this verse we have been told that every previous Prophet informed his people of the advent of a great Prophet and enjoined them to accept him when he made his appearance. As, before Islam, different Prophets were sent to different peoples, and it was only with the advent of Islam that there was to come a Prophet for all mankind, it was necessary that a covenant should have been taken from all the different peoples binding them to accept the World-Prophet when he appeared.
The advent of such a Prophet who was to gather together all nations was announced in Isaiah 42:1-4 in the following words:
"Behold my servant, whom I uphold; my chosen, in whom my soul delighteth: I have put my spirit upon him; he shall bring forth judgement to the nations. He shall not cry nor lift up, nor cause his voice to be heard in the street. A bruised reed shall he not break, and the smoking flax shall he not quench: he shall bring forth judgement in truth. He shall not fail nor be discouraged, till he have set judgement in the earth; and the isles shall wait for his law. Thus saith God the Lord, He that created the heavens, and stretched them forth" (Revised Version). Again, in Isaiah 55:4 we read: "Behold, I have given him for witness to the peoples, a leader and commander to the peoples" (Revised Version). Compare this with the Quran where God addresses the Holy Prophet, saying: And how will it fare with them when We shall bring a witness from every people, and shall bring thee as a witness against these (4:42). The above quoted prophecy mentioned in Isaiah cannot be supposed to refer to Jesus, for he did not claim to have been sent to all peoples. Says Jesus, "I am not sent but to the lost sheep of the house of Israel" (Matt. 15: 24).
In Isaiah 60:5-7, we read:
"Then thou shalt see and be lightened, and thine heart shall tremble and be enlarged, because the abundance of the sea shall be turned unto thee, the wealth of the nations shall come unto thee. The multitude of camels shall cover thee, the dromedaries of Midian and Ephah; they all shalt come from Sheba: They shall bring gold and frankincense, and shall proclaim the praises of the Lord. All the flocks of Kedar shall be gathered together unto thee, the rams of Nebaioth shall minister unto thee: they shall come up with acceptance on My altar, and I will glorify the house of My glory" (Revised Version). On this point the Quran says regarding Pilgrimage to Mecca: And proclaim unto mankind the Pilgrimage; they shall come to thee on foot, and on every lean camel emaciated on account of coming through every deep and distant track(22:28).
Now is there any House, except the one at Mecca, to which people repair riding on camels and where they offer sacrifices?
Add to the above prophecies those already given under the previous verse e.g. the prophecy relating to the coming of a Prophet from among the "brethren" of the Israelites, etc., and the reader will at once realize that the Bible did contain prophecies about the advent of a great Prophet who was to gather together all nations, and that these prophecies have been fulfilled in the person of the Holy Prophet of Islam.
The words, and be not the first to disbelieve therein, occurring in the verse under comment call upon the Israelites to ponder over the claim of the Holy Prophet and not to be hasty in rejecting it. They have been cautioned against being hasty in rejecting the truth, for once a man rejects the truth without giving it calm and dispassionate consideration, it becomes very difficult for him to accept it afterwards. He becomes prejudiced against it. It is to this fact that the Quran refers when it says: And We shall confound their hearts and their eyes, as they believed not therein at the first time and We shall leave them in their transgression to wander in distraction (6:111).
These words also hint at the fact that the People of the Book, being in possession of divine prophecies bearing on the advent of a great Prophet from among the descendants of Ishmael, are better fitted than others to judge of the truth of the Holy Prophet of Islam and should therefore be the first to accept him; at least they should not go to the other extreme and be the first to reject him.
The words, and barter not My Signs for a paltry price, are explained in the Quran in 4:78: Say, The benefit of this world is little. Interpreted in this light the verse would mean "Do not forsake the truth for worldly gains," for worldly gains, however big, are but a small and passing thing when compared with the gains of the Hereafter. These words may also be interpreted to signify that people who reject the truth may secure only temporary gains, but eventually, even in this life, the tide very often turns, bringing the righteous ones in ascendance.
The concluding words, and take protection in Me alone, are similar in construction to those placed at the end of the preceding verse, the only difference being that here the word ترھبون has been replaced by the word تتقون which gives a much wider significance than the former. For an explanation of the word تقوی see under 2:3 above.
Before we pass on to the next verse, it is necessary to remove one possible misunderstanding. The Quran declares itself to be مصدق له of the Jewish scriptures and we have explained this expression as meaning that the Quran came in fulfilment of what was prophesied in the previous Scriptures—not that the Quran holds the previous Scriptures to be true. This should not give rise to the misunderstanding that the Quran does not accept the Divine origin of the previous Scriptures. As a matter of fact, the Quran itself says that God’s Messengers have appeared among all the different peoples of the world (35:25). It also calls upon its followers to believe in all the previous revelations but this belief should be through the Holy Prophet and not independently of him (2:5). At the same time, the Quran criticizes and denies several teachings ascribed to the previous Scriptures and claims that these teachings have been tampered with (19:89-92; 9:30; 4:47). Thus the position may be summed up as follows:
(1) Wherever the Quran speaks of itself as being مصدق له of the previous Scriptures, it does not mean that it confirms their teachings but that it claims to have come in fulfilment of their prophecies.
(2) Nevertheless the Quran accepts the Divine origin of all the revealed Books that were sent by God before Islam.
(3) But it does not look upon all their present teachings to be true; for much has been tampered with and much that was meant for a specific period has now become obsolete.
a
2:90, 98, 102; 3:4, 82; 4:48; 5:49.
b
7:102; 10:75.
c
2:80, 175; 3:200; 5:45; 9:9; 16:96.
77
Musaddiq is derived from Saddaqa which means, he held or declared him or it to be true (Lane). When the word is used in the sense of "holding a thing to be true," it is either followed by no preposition or by the preposition ba’. But when it is used in the sense of "fulfilling" as in the present verse, it is followed by the preposition lam (2:92 & 35:32). So here it means "fulfilling" and not "confirming" or "declaring to be true." The Qur’an fulfils the prophecies that were contained in the previous Scriptures regarding the advent of a Law-giving Prophet and a universal Scripture. Wherever the Qur’an speaks of itself as being Musaddiq of the previous Scriptures, it does not confirm their teachings but claims to have come in fulfilment of their prophecies. Nevertheless, it accepts the Divine origin of all the revealed Books before it. But it does not look upon all their present teachings to be true in their totality; for parts of them have been tampered with and
وَإِذَا لَقُوا۟ ٱلَّذِينَ ءَامَنُوا۟ قَالُوٓا۟ ءَامَنَّا وَإِذَا خَلَا بَعْضُهُمْ إِلَىٰ بَعْضٍ قَالُوٓا۟ أَتُحَدِّثُونَهُم بِمَا فَتَحَ ٱللَّهُ عَلَيْكُمْ لِيُحَآجُّوكُم بِهِۦ عِندَ رَبِّكُمْ ۚ أَفَلَا تَعْقِلُونَ
2:15; 3:120; 5:62.
لِیُحَآجُّوْکُمْ بِہٖ میں لام ‘ لامِ عاقبت ہے اور اس کا مطلب یہ ہے کہ پہلی بات کا یہ نتیجہ ہوگا کہ وہ تم پر حجت قائم کریں گے۔
2:15; 3:120; 5:62.
The verse mentions another class of Jews who always acted hypocritically. When they mixed with Muslims, they chimed in with them from worldly motives, confirming the prophecies contained in their Scriptures about the Holy Prophet. But when they mixed with their own people, other members of the community would reproach them for their enlightening the Muslims on what God had revealed to them, i.e. for letting the Muslims know the prophecies about the Holy Prophet which were contained in their own Scriptures.
2:15; 3:120; 5:62.
Important Words:
فتح (has unfolded) means: (1) he opened; (2) he unfolded or disclosed; (3) he taught; (4) he gained victory over a place or a people (Aqrab).
عند (before) gives a number of meanings, e.g., with, by, at, near, in the presence of, in the opinion of or in the estimation of, etc. (Lane). See also 2:275.
Commentary:
The verse mentions another class of Jews who acted hypocritically. When they mixed with Muslims, they chimed in with them from worldly motives, confirming the prophecies contained in their Books about the Holy Prophet. But when they were away from Muslims and mixed with their own people, they behaved in quite a different way. On such occasions other members of the community would reproach them for their enlightening the Muslims on what God had revealed to them, i.e., for letting the Muslims know the prophecies about the Holy Prophet contained in the Jewish scriptures. In that case, they would say, the Muslims would argue with them before God, blaming them before Him on the Day of Judgement for their rejection of the Holy Prophet. And yet they well knew the prophecies which spoke of his advent and bore witness to his truth. That there will be such contentions on the Day of Judgement has also been mentioned elsewhere in the Quran which says: Then surely on the Day of Resurrection you will contend with one another in the presence of your Lord (39:32). It is a weakness of human nature that a culprit, even when knowing that the judge knows the truth, tries to put up pleas in his favour. Moreover, there is a sect among the Jews who, against the teachings of their own scriptures, hold that God does not know the details of all things, and quite possibly those who reproached their brethren for disclosing such prophecies to the Muslims held a similar view and feared lest the latter should place these facts before God on the Day of Resurrection and blame them in the presence of their Lord.
b
2:15; 3:120; 5:62.
1
لِیُحَآجُّوْکُمْ بِہٖ میں لام ‘ لامِ عاقبت ہے اور اس کا مطلب یہ ہے کہ پہلی بات کا یہ نتیجہ ہوگا کہ وہ تم پر حجت قائم کریں گے۔
a
2:15; 3:120; 5:62.
83
Important Words:
فتح (has unfolded) means: (1) he opened; (2) he unfolded or disclosed; (3) he taught; (4) he gained victory over a place or a people (Aqrab).
عند (before) gives a number of meanings, e.g., with, by, at, near, in the presence of, in the opinion of or in the estimation of, etc. (Lane). See also 2:275.
Commentary:
The verse mentions another class of Jews who acted hypocritically. When they mixed with Muslims, they chimed in with them from worldly motives, confirming the prophecies contained in their Books about the Holy Prophet. But when they were away from Muslims and mixed with their own people, they behaved in quite a different way. On such occasions other members of the community would reproach them for their enlightening the Muslims on what God had revealed to them, i.e., for letting the Muslims know the prophecies about the Holy Prophet contained in the Jewish scriptures. In that case, they would say, the Muslims would argue with them before God, blaming them before Him on the Day of Judgement for their rejection of the Holy Prophet. And yet they well knew the prophecies which spoke of his advent and bore witness to his truth. That there will be such contentions on the Day of Judgement has also been mentioned elsewhere in the Quran which says: Then surely on the Day of Resurrection you will contend with one another in the presence of your Lord (39:32). It is a weakness of human nature that a culprit, even when knowing that the judge knows the truth, tries to put up pleas in his favour. Moreover, there is a sect among the Jews who, against the teachings of their own scriptures, hold that God does not know the details of all things, and quite possibly those who reproached their brethren for disclosing such prophecies to the Muslims held a similar view and feared lest the latter should place these facts before God on the Day of Resurrection and blame them in the presence of their Lord.
b
2:15; 3:120; 5:62.
113
The verse mentions another class of Jews who always acted hypocritically. When they mixed with Muslims, they chimed in with them from worldly motives, confirming the prophecies contained in their Scriptures about the Holy Prophet. But when they mixed with their own people, other members of the community would reproach them for their enlightening the Muslims on what God had revealed to them, i.e. for letting the Muslims know the prophecies about the Holy Prophet which were contained in their own Scriptures.
فَوَيْلٌ لِّلَّذِينَ يَكْتُبُونَ ٱلْكِتَٰبَ بِأَيْدِيهِمْ ثُمَّ يَقُولُونَ هَٰذَا مِنْ عِندِ ٱللَّهِ لِيَشْتَرُوا۟ بِهِۦ ثَمَنًا قَلِيلًا ۖ فَوَيْلٌ لَّهُم مِّمَّا كَتَبَتْ أَيْدِيهِمْ وَوَيْلٌ لَّهُم مِّمَّا يَكْسِبُونَ
2:175; 3:200.
2:175; 3:200.
There were Jews who composed books or parts thereof and then gave them out as the Word of God. This malpractice was common among the Jews. In addition, therefore, to the canonical Books of the Bible, there are a number of books which are supposed by the Jews to have been revealed, so that it has now become impossible to distinguish the revealed Books from those not revealed.
2:175; 3:200; 13:27.
Important Words:
ویل (woe) means: (1) the coming or befalling of some calamity, misfortune or sorrow; (2) punishment; (3) perdition. The expression ویل له or ویله or ویل لك or ویلك etc. is used as a warning for some coming sorrow or misfortune (Aqrab & Lane).
Commentary:
There were Jews who composed books or parts thereof and then gave them out as the word of God. This malpractice was common among the Jews and other peoples. Therefore, in addition to the canonical Books of the Bible, there are a number of books which are supposed to be revealed, so that it has now become impossible to distinguish the revealed Books from those not revealed. Another mal-practice of the Jews was that they distorted the meaning of the Divine Word. They themselves wrote a whole book or part thereof and declared it to be based on Biblical evidence; while, as a matter of fact, it was opposed to this evidence. Those responsible for this were responsible not only for their own misdeeds, namely, fabricating and distorting the Word of God, but also for the misdeeds of their followers who were led by their example to commit one or all of the following acts (1) tampering with the Word of God (2:76); (2) preferring worldliness to religion (2:77); and (3) following their own vain desires and false notions (2:79). Hence, while speaking of them, the Quran uses the word ویل (woe) in order to warn them and remind them of the seriousness of their offence.
Some Christian writers have argued that the verse under comment proves that the Jewish and Christian scriptures were intact at the time of the Holy Prophet. This inference is absolutely unjustified. For tampering with the text does not necessarily mean tampering with a genuine text. One who tampers with a version of a false book which he believes to be true is as liable to blame as the one who tampers with a genuine scripture. Hence, the warning to the People of the Book against tampering with the Bible cannot be cited as proof of the existence of the true Bible at the time of the Holy Prophet.
The words, paltry price, do not mean that the taking of a good price would be lawful. The words have been used to point out that whatever price they may take would be paltry in view of the great loss they would be suffering thereby. Elsewhere, the Quran says: the benefit of this world is little (4:78).
In the last clause the Quran repeats the words, Woe to them, twice, saying: Woe, then, to them for what their hands have written and woe to them for what they earn. This is to point out that by so doing the Israelites are committing two offences: (1) writing down a thing falsely and (2) doing it with the intention of earning some worldly benefit. As the offence is double, the punishment also will be double.
d
2:175; 3:200.
a
2:175; 3:200; 13:27.
86
Important Words:
ویل (woe) means: (1) the coming or befalling of some calamity, misfortune or sorrow; (2) punishment; (3) perdition. The expression ویل له or ویله or ویل لك or ویلك etc. is used as a warning for some coming sorrow or misfortune (Aqrab & Lane).
Commentary:
There were Jews who composed books or parts thereof and then gave them out as the word of God. This malpractice was common among the Jews and other peoples. Therefore, in addition to the canonical Books of the Bible, there are a number of books which are supposed to be revealed, so that it has now become impossible to distinguish the revealed Books from those not revealed. Another mal-practice of the Jews was that they distorted the meaning of the Divine Word. They themselves wrote a whole book or part thereof and declared it to be based on Biblical evidence; while, as a matter of fact, it was opposed to this evidence. Those responsible for this were responsible not only for their own misdeeds, namely, fabricating and distorting the Word of God, but also for the misdeeds of their followers who were led by their example to commit one or all of the following acts (1) tampering with the Word of God (2:76); (2) preferring worldliness to religion (2:77); and (3) following their own vain desires and false notions (2:79). Hence, while speaking of them, the Quran uses the word ویل (woe) in order to warn them and remind them of the seriousness of their offence.
Some Christian writers have argued that the verse under comment proves that the Jewish and Christian scriptures were intact at the time of the Holy Prophet. This inference is absolutely unjustified. For tampering with the text does not necessarily mean tampering with a genuine text. One who tampers with a version of a false book which he believes to be true is as liable to blame as the one who tampers with a genuine scripture. Hence, the warning to the People of the Book against tampering with the Bible cannot be cited as proof of the existence of the true Bible at the time of the Holy Prophet.
The words, paltry price, do not mean that the taking of a good price would be lawful. The words have been used to point out that whatever price they may take would be paltry in view of the great loss they would be suffering thereby. Elsewhere, the Quran says: the benefit of this world is little (4:78).
In the last clause the Quran repeats the words, Woe to them, twice, saying: Woe, then, to them for what their hands have written and woe to them for what they earn. This is to point out that by so doing the Israelites are committing two offences: (1) writing down a thing falsely and (2) doing it with the intention of earning some worldly benefit. As the offence is double, the punishment also will be double.
a
2:175; 3:200.
114
There were Jews who composed books or parts thereof and then gave them out as the Word of God. This malpractice was common among the Jews. In addition, therefore, to the canonical Books of the Bible, there are a number of books which are supposed by the Jews to have been revealed, so that it has now become impossible to distinguish the revealed Books from those not revealed.
بَلَىٰ مَن كَسَبَ سَيِّئَةً وَأَحَٰطَتْ بِهِۦ خَطِيٓـَٔتُهُۥ فَأُو۟لَٰٓئِكَ أَصْحَٰبُ ٱلنَّارِ ۖ هُمْ فِيهَا خَٰلِدُونَ
Important Words:
سیئة (evil) is derived from ساء meaning, it or he was or became evil or bad. So سیئة means, anything that is evil or bad. The Arabs say قول سیء i.e. an evil word or an evil opinion (Aqrab).
خطیئة (sins) is derived from خطأ meaning, he committed a mistake or an offence or a sin. The word خطیئة, though translated here as plural, is really singular, meaning, a sinful act or an offence, whether intentional or otherwise (Aqrab, Mufradat & Lane).
Commentary:
This and the following verse prescribe the law of punishment and reward, or, in other words, of Hell and Heaven. The Quran here begins with the law pertaining to punishment, because in the preceding verse the Jews claimed immunity from punishment. The Jews based their claim on the fact that they were a chosen people of God, being descended from Prophets. The Quran strongly repudiates this idea, saying, that Hell and Heaven have not been earmarked for any race. The entry of man into Hell or Heaven depends on what beliefs he holds and what actions he performs in this world. If a man holds wrong beliefs and performs sinful deeds, he will go to Hell, irrespective of the fact whether he is a Jew or a Christian or anybody else.
In the verse under comment, the word سیئة (evil) read with the context signifies rejection of the Holy Prophet by the Jews, thus referring to the condition as to wrong belief, and the word خطیئة (sin) signifies their general misdeeds, thus referring to the condition as to sinful actions. It must, however, be noted that, as occasional stumbling is generally pardonable with the Merciful God, provided the belief is good and provided further that there is an honest effort on one’s part to live righteously, the words, he is encompassed by his sins, have been used to point to the fact that only such misdeeds can drive one to Hell as are so large in number as to virtually encompass a man, just as an invading army encompasses a besieged force, leaving it no way out.
Coming as it does after a narration of the wrong beliefs and sinful deeds of the Israelites, the verse warns the Jews that with such a black record they should be ashamed to claim immunity from the punishment of Hellfire.
88
Important Words:
سیئة (evil) is derived from ساء meaning, it or he was or became evil or bad. So سیئة means, anything that is evil or bad. The Arabs say قول سیء i.e. an evil word or an evil opinion (Aqrab).
خطیئة (sins) is derived from خطأ meaning, he committed a mistake or an offence or a sin. The word خطیئة, though translated here as plural, is really singular, meaning, a sinful act or an offence, whether intentional or otherwise (Aqrab, Mufradat & Lane).
Commentary:
This and the following verse prescribe the law of punishment and reward, or, in other words, of Hell and Heaven. The Quran here begins with the law pertaining to punishment, because in the preceding verse the Jews claimed immunity from punishment. The Jews based their claim on the fact that they were a chosen people of God, being descended from Prophets. The Quran strongly repudiates this idea, saying, that Hell and Heaven have not been earmarked for any race. The entry of man into Hell or Heaven depends on what beliefs he holds and what actions he performs in this world. If a man holds wrong beliefs and performs sinful deeds, he will go to Hell, irrespective of the fact whether he is a Jew or a Christian or anybody else.
In the verse under comment, the word سیئة (evil) read with the context signifies rejection of the Holy Prophet by the Jews, thus referring to the condition as to wrong belief, and the word خطیئة (sin) signifies their general misdeeds, thus referring to the condition as to sinful actions. It must, however, be noted that, as occasional stumbling is generally pardonable with the Merciful God, provided the belief is good and provided further that there is an honest effort on one’s part to live righteously, the words, he is encompassed by his sins, have been used to point to the fact that only such misdeeds can drive one to Hell as are so large in number as to virtually encompass a man, just as an invading army encompasses a besieged force, leaving it no way out.
Coming as it does after a narration of the wrong beliefs and sinful deeds of the Israelites, the verse warns the Jews that with such a black record they should be ashamed to claim immunity from the punishment of Hellfire.
وَلَمَّا جَآءَهُمْ كِتَٰبٌ مِّنْ عِندِ ٱللَّهِ مُصَدِّقٌ لِّمَا مَعَهُمْ وَكَانُوا۟ مِن قَبْلُ يَسْتَفْتِحُونَ عَلَى ٱلَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا۟ فَلَمَّا جَآءَهُم مَّا عَرَفُوا۟ كَفَرُوا۟ بِهِۦ ۚ فَلَعْنَةُ ٱللَّهِ عَلَى ٱلْكَٰفِرِينَ
یہاں فَاء کا ترجمہ چھوڑا گیا ہے کیونکہ اردو میں ایسے موقع پر کوئی لفظ استعمال نہیں ہوتا۔
2:147.
2:42, 92, 98, 102; 3:82; 4:48; 35:32; 46:13.
The verse signifies that Jews used to disclose to the pagan Arabs the fact that there were prophecies in their Scriptures about the advent of a Prophet who would spread the truth all over the world (Deut. 18: 18 & 28: 1-2). But when that Prophet actually appeared, even those of them who had seen the Signs of God being fulfilled in his person turned away from him. Or the meaning may be that before the advent of the Holy Prophet the Jews used to pray fervently to God to raise a Prophet who should cause the true Faith to triumph over false Faiths (Hisham, i. 150). But when the Prophet for whom they had prayed actually came and the ascendancy of truth over falsehood became manifest, they refused to accept him; consequently bringing on their heads the curse of God.
2:42, 92, 98, 102; 3:82; 4:48; 35:32; 46:13.
2:147.
Important Words:
یستفتحون (they prayed for victory) is derived from فتح meaning (1) he opened a thing, or he disclosed a thing; (2) he conquered or gained victory over. The word یستفتحون would, therefore, have two meanings: (1) they disclose; and (2) they ask or pray for victory (Aqrab).
Commentary:
According to the first meaning of یستفتحون the verse would signify that Jews used to disclose to the pagan Arabs the fact that there was foretold in their Scriptures the appearance of a Prophet who would spread the truth all over the world. But when that Prophet actually appeared, even those of them who had seen the signs of God fulfilled in his person turned away from him.
Taking the second meaning of the word, the verse would signify that before the advent of the Holy Prophet, the Jews used to pray fervently to God to raise a Prophet who would cause the true faith to triumph over the false ones (Hisham, i. 150). But when the Prophet for whom they prayed actually came and the ascendancy of truth over falsehood became manifest, they refused to accept him. This naturally brought on their heads the curse of God.
It may be repeated here that the word "curse" is not used in the Quran as abuse but as indicative of the actual state or condition of a person or a people. As explained under the preceding verse, the literal meaning of the word لعنة is "to be driven away from God" and hence all who stand in opposition to God and His Prophets incur لعنة and are spoken of as being under the curse of God; i.e. driven away from God’s presence and deprived of His mercy.
b
2:42, 92, 98, 102; 3:82; 4:48; 35:32; 46:13.
c
2:147.
2
یہاں فَاء کا ترجمہ چھوڑا گیا ہے کیونکہ اردو میں ایسے موقع پر کوئی لفظ استعمال نہیں ہوتا۔
a
2:42, 92, 98, 102; 3:82; 4:48; 35:32; 46:13.
b
2:147.
96
Important Words:
یستفتحون (they prayed for victory) is derived from فتح meaning (1) he opened a thing, or he disclosed a thing; (2) he conquered or gained victory over. The word یستفتحون would, therefore, have two meanings: (1) they disclose; and (2) they ask or pray for victory (Aqrab).
Commentary:
According to the first meaning of یستفتحون the verse would signify that Jews used to disclose to the pagan Arabs the fact that there was foretold in their Scriptures the appearance of a Prophet who would spread the truth all over the world. But when that Prophet actually appeared, even those of them who had seen the signs of God fulfilled in his person turned away from him.
Taking the second meaning of the word, the verse would signify that before the advent of the Holy Prophet, the Jews used to pray fervently to God to raise a Prophet who would cause the true faith to triumph over the false ones (Hisham, i. 150). But when the Prophet for whom they prayed actually came and the ascendancy of truth over falsehood became manifest, they refused to accept him. This naturally brought on their heads the curse of God.
It may be repeated here that the word "curse" is not used in the Quran as abuse but as indicative of the actual state or condition of a person or a people. As explained under the preceding verse, the literal meaning of the word لعنة is "to be driven away from God" and hence all who stand in opposition to God and His Prophets incur لعنة and are spoken of as being under the curse of God; i.e. driven away from God’s presence and deprived of His mercy.
a
2:147.
f
2:42, 92, 98, 102; 3:82; 4:48; 35:32; 46:13.
120
The verse signifies that Jews used to disclose to the pagan Arabs the fact that there were prophecies in their Scriptures about the advent of a Prophet who would spread the truth all over the world (Deut. 18: 18 & 28: 1-2). But when that Prophet actually appeared, even those of them who had seen the Signs of God being fulfilled in his person turned away from him. Or the meaning may be that before the advent of the Holy Prophet the Jews used to pray fervently to God to raise a Prophet who should cause the true Faith to triumph over false Faiths (Hisham, i. 150). But when the Prophet for whom they had prayed actually came and the ascendancy of truth over falsehood became manifest, they refused to accept him; consequently bringing on their heads the curse of God.
هُوَ ٱلَّذِىٓ أَنزَلَ عَلَيْكَ ٱلْكِتَٰبَ مِنْهُ ءَايَٰتٌ مُّحْكَمَٰتٌ هُنَّ أُمُّ ٱلْكِتَٰبِ وَأُخَرُ مُتَشَٰبِهَٰتٌ ۖ فَأَمَّا ٱلَّذِينَ فِى قُلُوبِهِمْ زَيْغٌ فَيَتَّبِعُونَ مَا تَشَٰبَهَ مِنْهُ ٱبْتِغَآءَ ٱلْفِتْنَةِ وَٱبْتِغَآءَ تَأْوِيلِهِۦ ۗ وَمَا يَعْلَمُ تَأْوِيلَهُۥٓ إِلَّا ٱللَّهُ ۗ وَٱلرَّٰسِخُونَ فِى ٱلْعِلْمِ يَقُولُونَ ءَامَنَّا بِهِۦ كُلٌّ مِّنْ عِندِ رَبِّنَا ۗ وَمَا يَذَّكَّرُ إِلَّآ أُو۟لُوا۟ ٱلْأَلْبَٰبِ
11:2.
39:24.
7:54; 18:79.
4:163.
مُحْكَمْ (Muhkam) 的意思是: (1) 意义不会受到窜改或删减者; (2) 意义不含糊或不存在怀疑可能性者; (3) 意义清楚而解释明确者; (4) 包含«古兰经»特有教义的节文(مُفْرَدَات, Mufradat和Lane)。
اُمّ (Umm) 意指: (1) 母亲; (2) 事物的起源或基础; (3) 任何作为扶助、支持改革或修正另一事物手段的东西; (4) 与周围其它事物相联系的任何东西 (اَقْرَبْ, Aqrab和مُفْرَدَات, Mufradat)。
مُتَشَابِه (Mutashabih) 用於 (1)虽是一致, 但可以有不同解释的词语、句子或经节; (2) 彼此相似或一致的部分; (3) 经文的真正意义和没有表示出来的意义相类似的部分; (4) 经文的正确意思只有参照称为 مُحْكَمْ (Muhkam) 的经文才可知道; (5) 不经过反复考虑就不能正确理解的经文; (6) 经文含有的教义和先前启示的经文含有的教义相符或相似的部分 (مُفْرَدَات, Mufradat)。
تَأ وِيْل (Ta’wil) 意思是: (1) 解释或说明; (2) 讲话或文章的意义的推测; (3) 转变讲话或文章的正确解释; (4) 对梦的解释; (5) 事物的结束、结果或后果 (Lane)。在此节经文中该词出现两次。第一次的意思是 (2) 和 (3), 而第二次的意思是 (1) 或 (5)。
此节经文说明这样一个重要规则, 即为了证实一个有争论的观点, 应该考虑那明确而清楚的经文措辞。如果发现这些经文与某一意义不明确的章节的句子结构有抵触, 就应该把该章节解释得与措辞明确、清楚的经文相一致。根据此节经文来看, «古兰经» 有两种经文。一种是 مُحْكَمْ (Muhkam) 意义肯定而明确的, 另一种是 مُتَشَابِه (Mutashabih) 意义可作不同的解释的。正确解释 Mutashabih 经文的方法是, 只有把其经文解释得与 (Muhkam) 经文相一致。在39:24中, 整个 «古兰经» 被称作Mutashabih而在11:2中所有 «古兰经» 节文被说成是 Muhkam。这不应该被看作与在注释的这节经文相矛盾。根据在注解的这节经文, 有些 «古兰经» 节文是 Muhkam, 有些节文是 Mutashabih。就 «古兰经» 节文的真正意义而论, 整个 «古兰经» 是 Muhkam, 因为所有的节文包含明确而永恒的真理。然而, 从另一意义来说, 全本 «古兰经» 节文是Mutashabih, 因为 «古兰经» 每一节都同时表示几个同样正确和适当的意思, 就另一意义说, «古兰经» 也是Mutashabih 相互类似, 其中没有前后矛盾或相互不一致的地方, 不同的节文可以相互印证。(如同此节经文所指出的那样) 有些经文当然属於 (Muhkam), 有些属于Mutashabih, 这要看不同读者的知识、思想品质和天赋能力而定, 如本节所指示者。至于预言, 用明白、直接、只容许有一种意义的语言所表述的可以看作是 (Muhkam); 而用隐喻、能有不止一种解释的语言叙述的, 则可被看作 Mutashabih。因此, 应该按照确已实现了无疑的预言和伊斯兰教的基本原则来解释用隐喻的言语所叙述的预言。有关(Muhkam) 预言, 读者可参阅58:22; 而28:86则包含Mutashabih预言。(Muhkam) 这个词也适用那种包括充分而全面经律的经文; 而 Mutashabih经文只包容某一经律的一部分, 并且须与其它经文联系起来阅读, 才能形成一条完整的经律。مُحْكَمَات (Muhkamat) (明确的经文)通常论述伊斯兰教信仰的律令和教义; 而且 مُتَشَابِهَات (Mutashabihat) 论述次要的论题或叙述众先知的生平轶事或各民族史, 在论述中有时就用一些可能会产生不同意思的成语和短语。这样的经文的解释不应与措辞清楚的伊斯兰教信仰的教义相矛盾。这里可以注意到: 为了用最少的词来表达众多的意思, 为了使经文风格优雅, 为了使人们受到磨炼--------如果没有这种磨炼, 人们的心灵就不可能深化和完美--------就需要使用隐喻, 而隐喻是经典中Mutashabih经文的主要基础。
مُحْکَمٰتٌ محکمات سے مراد وہ آیات ہیں جن میں قرآن کریم کی خاص تعلیم بیان ہوئی ہے۔
مُتَشٰبِھٰتٌ سے مراد وہ آیات ہیں جن میں ایسی تعلیم ہے جو پہلی کتابوں میں بھی مذکور ہے۔
یعنی جو آیات پہلی کتب کی تعلیم سے ملتی ہیں وہ ان کو بگاڑ کر پہلی قوموں کی روایات کے تابع کر دیتے ہیں اور اس طرح قرآن کریم کی خوبی کو چھپا دیتے ہیں۔
7:54; 18:79.
4:163.
11:2.
39:24.
Muhkam means, (1) that which has been made secure from change or alteration; (2) that in which there is no ambiguity or possibility of doubt; (3) that which is clear in meaning and decisive in exposition and (4) a verse which embodies a teaching special to the Qur’an (Mufradat & Lane).
Umm means, (1) mother; (2) source or origin or basis of a thing; (3) anything which is a means of sustenance and support or of reformation and correction for another; (4) anything to which other things around it are linked (Aqrab & Mufradat).
Mutashabih is used about (1) that phrase, sentence or verse which is susceptible of different, though concordant, interpretations; (2) that whose parts resemble or are concordant with one another; (3) that whose true significance bears a similarity to a sense which is not meant; (4) that of which the true meaning is known only by referring it to what is termed Muhkam; (5) that which cannot be rightly understood without repeated consideration; (6) a verse which contains teaching corresponding to or resembling those contained in the previous revealed Scriptures (Mufradat).
Ta’wil means, (1) interpretation or explanation; (2) conjecture about the meaning of a speech or writing; (3) turning away a speech or writing from its right interpretation; (4) interpretation of a dream; (5) end, result or sequel of a thing (Lane). In this verse the word occurs twice; in the former place it gives the second or the third meaning, while in the latter it gives the first or the fifth meaning.
The verse lays down the golden rule that, in order to prove a controversial point, the decisive and clearly worded parts of a Scripture should be taken into consideration, and if these are found to contradict the construction put upon a certain ambiguous passage that passage should be so interpreted as to make it harmonize with the decisive and clearly worded parts of the text. According to the verse, the Qur’an has two sets of verses. Some are Muhkam (firm and decisive in meaning) and others Mutashabih (capable of different interpretations). The right way to interpret a Mutashabih verse is that only such interpretation of it should be accepted as agrees with the verses that are Muhkam. In 39:24 the whole of the Qur’an is called Mutashabih and in 11:2 all the Quranic verses have been described as Muhkam. This should not be taken as contradicting the verse under comment, according to which some verses of the Qur’an are Muhkam and others Mutashabih
11:2.
39:24.
7:54; 18:79.
4:163.
Important Words:
محکمات (decisive in meaning) is derived from احکم which again is derived from حکم which means, he decided or he judged; he prevented or restrained or withheld. احکمه means, he rendered it firm, stable and secure; he restrained it. Hence محکم means: (1) that which has been made secure from change or alteration; (2) that in which there is no ambiguity or possibility of doubt; (3) that which is clear in meaning and decisive in exposition (Aqrab, Mufradat & Lane).
ام (basis) is the noun-infinitive from ام (amma), i.e. he aimed at or sought or took himself to. ام possesses a variety of meanings some of which are: (1) mother; (2) source or origin or basis of a thing; (3) anything which is a means of sustenance and support or of reformation and correction for another; (4) anything to which other things surrounding it are linked (Aqrab & Mufradat).
متشابھات (susceptible of different interpretations) is the plural of متشابھة which is derived from شبه. They say شبھه به i.e. he made it to be like that; he likened it to that. شبه علیه الامر means, he rendered the affair confused or obscure or ambiguous to him. تشابه الرجلان means, the two men were so like each other that it was difficult to distinguish one from the other. متشابهmeans, mutually resembling. Thus the expressions متشابھه is used about (1) that phrase, sentence or verse which is susceptible of different, though concordant, interpretations; or (2) that whose parts resemble or are concordant with one another; or (3) that whose true significance bears a similarity to a sense which is not meant; or (4) that of which the true meaning is known only by referring it to what is termed محکم (decisive); or (5) that which cannot be rightly understood without repeated consideration (Aqrab, Lane & Mufradat).
زیغ (perversity) is the noun-infinitive from زاغ which means, he declined or deviated, or turned aside from the right course. So زیغ means, deviation from the truth or the right course; crookedness; doubt. ازاغه means, he made him deviate from the right course (Aqrab & Mufradat).
تاویله (its interpretation). تاویل is the noun-infinitive from اول which is derived from آل i.e. he or it turned or returned. اولهmeans, he caused it or him to turn or return. اول الکلام means, he interpreted or explained the speech or writing. اول الرؤیاmeans, he interpreted the dream. تاویل means, (1) interpretation or explanation; (2) conjecture about the meaning of a speech or writing; (3) turning away a speech or writing from its right interpretation; (4) interpretation of a dream; (5) end, result or sequel of a thing (Lane & Aqrab). In the present verse the word تاویل occurs twice, the first-mentioned تاویلgiving the second or the third meaning, while the second-mentioned gives the first or the fifth meaning.
الراسخون (firmly grounded) is the plural of الراسخ which is derived from رسخ i.e. he or it was or became firm, stable or established. رسخ الشیءmeans, the thing became firmly established. رسخ العلم فی قلبه means, knowledge became firmly established, or sank deep, in his heart. الراسخ فی العلم is one whose knowledge is extensive and deep-rooted, being firmly established and based on sure ground (Aqrab & Mufradat).
Commentary:
The verse, which was revealed when a party of Christians from Najran visited the Holy Prophet in Medina (Jarir), serves a fourfold purpose: (1) it gives the genesis of the later Christian doctrines and explains how the true original doctrines became perverted; (2) it tells how the critics of Islam, particularly the Christians, distort true Islamic teachings in order to find an excuse for attacking Islam; (3) it warns Muslims to take a lesson from the history of Christians; and (4) it supplies a sure and trustworthy principle of interpreting revealed Books, or, for that matter, any writing or speech, in a right manner.
What proved the perversion of the Christian faith was that expressions like "Son of God" etc. used metaphorically were taken literally and the simple and straightforward faith of Jesus was transformed out of all recognition, the متشابهbeing given the place of محکم.
Again, it is on record that when the party of Christians, referred to above, visited the Holy Prophet and had a discussion with him on the godhead of Jesus, they, like clever casuists, who when it suits their purpose tear a passage from its context and then base their arguments on it, asked the Holy Prophet if the words کلمة الله (word of God) and روح(spirit) were used about Jesus in the Quran, and, receiving an answer in the affirmative, joyfully exclaimed that the divinity of Jesus was thereby proved. They did not care to ponder over the explanation of these words in their context, which did not at all bear out the sense which they thought they possessed. It is to such objectionable practices that allusion is made in this verse, which lays down the golden rule that, in order to prove a controversial point, the decisive and clearly worded parts of a Scripture should be taken into consideration, and that if they are found to contradict the construction put upon a certain ambiguous passage quoted in support of an argument, that interpretation should be rejected and the passage should be so interpreted as to make it harmonize with the decisive and clearly worded parts of the text.
This golden rule should always be observed whenever it is required to interpret or explain a passage which is susceptible of several interpretations and is not easily comprehensible. Its observance is all the more necessary when a seemingly difficult and knotty verse of the Quran is sought to be explained. Any interpretation which clashes with other verses of the Quran and runs counter to the clearly worded parts thereof should be rejected and only that interpretation which is in harmony with its basic principles should be accepted.
According to the verse, the Quran has two sets of verses. Some are محکم (decisive in meaning) and others متشابه(capable of different interpretations). The right way to interpret a متشابه verse is that only such interpretation of it should be accepted as agrees with the verses that are محکم and all other interpretations should be dismissed as incorrect. It is on record that one day the Holy Prophet, on hearing people disputing about the interpretation of certain verses of the Quran, angrily said: "Thus were ruined those who have gone before you. They interpreted certain parts of their scriptures in such a manner as to make them contradict other parts. But the Quran has been so revealed that different parts of it should corroborate one another. So do not reject any truth by making one part contradict the other. Act on what you understand thereof and refer that which you do not understand to those who know and understand it" (Musnad).
The above hadith also refutes the theory of abrogation, for it speaks of the Quran as a Book of which all parts corroborate one another and condemns those who think that some of its verses contradict others. To Ahmad, the Holy Founder of the Ahmadiyya Movement, goes the credit of exploding the so-called abrogation theory. He and his disciples have given convincing explanations of those verses which were previously regarded as abrogated.
It may be noted here that in 39:24 the whole Quran is called متشابه and in 11:2 all the Quranic verses have been described as محکم. This should not be taken as contradicting the verse under comment, according to which some verses of the Quran are محکم and others متشابه. The apparent in-consistency is easily explained. So far as the real significance of the Quranic verses is concerned the whole of the Quran is محکم (decisive), inasmuch as all its verses contain decisive and eternal truths. In another sense, however, the whole of the Quran is متشابه inasmuch as the Quranic verses have been so worded as to give, at one and the same time, several meanings equally true and good. The Quran is also متشابه (i.e.mutually resembling) in the sense that there is no contradiction or inconsistency in it, its different verses affording support to one another. But parts of it are certainly محکم or متشابه for different readers according to their mental and spiritual capacities, as the present verse points out.
As regards prophecies, those that are couched in plain and direct language, susceptible of only one meaning, would be regarded as محکم and those that are described in figurative or metaphorical language, capable of more than one interpretation, would be regarded as متشابه. The prophecies described in metaphorical language should, therefore, be interpreted in the light of the prophecies that have been clearly and literally fulfilled and also in the light of the basic and fundamental principles of Islam. For an example of محکم prophecies, the reader is referred to 58:22; whereas 28:86 contains a متشابه prophecy.
The term محکم may also be applied to such verses as embody full and complete commandments while متشابه verses are those which give only part of a certain commandment, and require to be read in conjunction with other verses to make a complete injunction.
Moreover, محکمات (decisive verses) generally deal with the Law and the doctrines of Faith, while متشابھات generally deal with topics of secondary importance or describe incidents in the lives of Prophets or the history of peoples and, while so doing, sometimes make use of idioms and phrases capable of different meanings. Such verses should not be so interpreted as to contradict the clear-worded tenets of the Faith.
The Arabic clause which has been translated as and none knows its right interpretation except Allah and those who are firmly grounded in knowledge; they say, ‘We believe in it; the whole is from our Lord', may be rendered in two ways, according as the pause is made after the word الله (Allah) or after the word العلم (knowledge). If the pause is made after العلم (knowledge), the clause would be translated as above and the term would in this case apply to verses pertaining to events of the past or verses containing general exhortation. If, however, the pause is made after الله (Allah), the term متشابھات would refer to prophecies of which the real interpretation is known to God only. In this case the clause would be translated as, "and none knows its interpretation except Allah; and those who are firmly grounded in knowledge say, "We believe in it, the whole is from our Lord". Grammatically, both constructions are correct.
Finally, it may be noted that the use of metaphors, the main basis of متشابھات verses, in religious scriptures is necessary; (1) to assure vastness of meaning in the fewest of words; (2) to add beauty and grace to the style; and (3) to provide for the people a trial (ابتلاء) without which spiritual development and perfection is not possible.
c
11:2.
d
39:24.
e
7:54; 18:79.
f
4:163.
224
مُحْكَمْ (Muhkam) 的意思是: (1) 意义不会受到窜改或删减者; (2) 意义不含糊或不存在怀疑可能性者; (3) 意义清楚而解释明确者; (4) 包含«古兰经»特有教义的节文(مُفْرَدَات, Mufradat和Lane)。
225
اُمّ (Umm) 意指: (1) 母亲; (2) 事物的起源或基础; (3) 任何作为扶助、支持改革或修正另一事物手段的东西; (4) 与周围其它事物相联系的任何东西 (اَقْرَبْ, Aqrab和مُفْرَدَات, Mufradat)。
226
مُتَشَابِه (Mutashabih) 用於 (1)虽是一致, 但可以有不同解释的词语、句子或经节; (2) 彼此相似或一致的部分; (3) 经文的真正意义和没有表示出来的意义相类似的部分; (4) 经文的正确意思只有参照称为 مُحْكَمْ (Muhkam) 的经文才可知道; (5) 不经过反复考虑就不能正确理解的经文; (6) 经文含有的教义和先前启示的经文含有的教义相符或相似的部分 (مُفْرَدَات, Mufradat)。
227
تَأ وِيْل (Ta’wil) 意思是: (1) 解释或说明; (2) 讲话或文章的意义的推测; (3) 转变讲话或文章的正确解释; (4) 对梦的解释; (5) 事物的结束、结果或后果 (Lane)。在此节经文中该词出现两次。第一次的意思是 (2) 和 (3), 而第二次的意思是 (1) 或 (5)。
228
此节经文说明这样一个重要规则, 即为了证实一个有争论的观点, 应该考虑那明确而清楚的经文措辞。如果发现这些经文与某一意义不明确的章节的句子结构有抵触, 就应该把该章节解释得与措辞明确、清楚的经文相一致。根据此节经文来看, «古兰经» 有两种经文。一种是 مُحْكَمْ (Muhkam) 意义肯定而明确的, 另一种是 مُتَشَابِه (Mutashabih) 意义可作不同的解释的。正确解释 Mutashabih 经文的方法是, 只有把其经文解释得与 (Muhkam) 经文相一致。在39:24中, 整个 «古兰经» 被称作Mutashabih而在11:2中所有 «古兰经» 节文被说成是 Muhkam。这不应该被看作与在注释的这节经文相矛盾。根据在注解的这节经文, 有些 «古兰经» 节文是 Muhkam, 有些节文是 Mutashabih。就 «古兰经» 节文的真正意义而论, 整个 «古兰经» 是 Muhkam, 因为所有的节文包含明确而永恒的真理。然而, 从另一意义来说, 全本 «古兰经» 节文是Mutashabih, 因为 «古兰经» 每一节都同时表示几个同样正确和适当的意思, 就另一意义说, «古兰经» 也是Mutashabih 相互类似, 其中没有前后矛盾或相互不一致的地方, 不同的节文可以相互印证。(如同此节经文所指出的那样) 有些经文当然属於 (Muhkam), 有些属于Mutashabih, 这要看不同读者的知识、思想品质和天赋能力而定, 如本节所指示者。至于预言, 用明白、直接、只容许有一种意义的语言所表述的可以看作是 (Muhkam); 而用隐喻、能有不止一种解释的语言叙述的, 则可被看作 Mutashabih。因此, 应该按照确已实现了无疑的预言和伊斯兰教的基本原则来解释用隐喻的言语所叙述的预言。有关(Muhkam) 预言, 读者可参阅58:22; 而28:86则包含Mutashabih预言。(Muhkam) 这个词也适用那种包括充分而全面经律的经文; 而 Mutashabih经文只包容某一经律的一部分, 并且须与其它经文联系起来阅读, 才能形成一条完整的经律。مُحْكَمَات (Muhkamat) (明确的经文)通常论述伊斯兰教信仰的律令和教义; 而且 مُتَشَابِهَات (Mutashabihat) 论述次要的论题或叙述众先知的生平轶事或各民族史, 在论述中有时就用一些可能会产生不同意思的成语和短语。这样的经文的解释不应与措辞清楚的伊斯兰教信仰的教义相矛盾。这里可以注意到: 为了用最少的词来表达众多的意思, 为了使经文风格优雅, 为了使人们受到磨炼--------如果没有这种磨炼, 人们的心灵就不可能深化和完美--------就需要使用隐喻, 而隐喻是经典中Mutashabih经文的主要基础。
1
مُحْکَمٰتٌ محکمات سے مراد وہ آیات ہیں جن میں قرآن کریم کی خاص تعلیم بیان ہوئی ہے۔
2
مُتَشٰبِھٰتٌ سے مراد وہ آیات ہیں جن میں ایسی تعلیم ہے جو پہلی کتابوں میں بھی مذکور ہے۔
3
یعنی جو آیات پہلی کتب کی تعلیم سے ملتی ہیں وہ ان کو بگاڑ کر پہلی قوموں کی روایات کے تابع کر دیتے ہیں اور اس طرح قرآن کریم کی خوبی کو چھپا دیتے ہیں۔
a
11:2.
b
39:24.
c
7:54; 18:79.
d
4:163.
299
Important Words:
محکمات (decisive in meaning) is derived from احکم which again is derived from حکم which means, he decided or he judged; he prevented or restrained or withheld. احکمه means, he rendered it firm, stable and secure; he restrained it. Hence محکم means: (1) that which has been made secure from change or alteration; (2) that in which there is no ambiguity or possibility of doubt; (3) that which is clear in meaning and decisive in exposition (Aqrab, Mufradat & Lane).
ام (basis) is the noun-infinitive from ام (amma), i.e. he aimed at or sought or took himself to. ام possesses a variety of meanings some of which are: (1) mother; (2) source or origin or basis of a thing; (3) anything which is a means of sustenance and support or of reformation and correction for another; (4) anything to which other things surrounding it are linked (Aqrab & Mufradat).
متشابھات (susceptible of different interpretations) is the plural of متشابھة which is derived from شبه. They say شبھه به i.e. he made it to be like that; he likened it to that. شبه علیه الامر means, he rendered the affair confused or obscure or ambiguous to him. تشابه الرجلان means, the two men were so like each other that it was difficult to distinguish one from the other. متشابهmeans, mutually resembling. Thus the expressions متشابھه is used about (1) that phrase, sentence or verse which is susceptible of different, though concordant, interpretations; or (2) that whose parts resemble or are concordant with one another; or (3) that whose true significance bears a similarity to a sense which is not meant; or (4) that of which the true meaning is known only by referring it to what is termed محکم (decisive); or (5) that which cannot be rightly understood without repeated consideration (Aqrab, Lane & Mufradat).
زیغ (perversity) is the noun-infinitive from زاغ which means, he declined or deviated, or turned aside from the right course. So زیغ means, deviation from the truth or the right course; crookedness; doubt. ازاغه means, he made him deviate from the right course (Aqrab & Mufradat).
تاویله (its interpretation). تاویل is the noun-infinitive from اول which is derived from آل i.e. he or it turned or returned. اولهmeans, he caused it or him to turn or return. اول الکلام means, he interpreted or explained the speech or writing. اول الرؤیاmeans, he interpreted the dream. تاویل means, (1) interpretation or explanation; (2) conjecture about the meaning of a speech or writing; (3) turning away a speech or writing from its right interpretation; (4) interpretation of a dream; (5) end, result or sequel of a thing (Lane & Aqrab). In the present verse the word تاویل occurs twice, the first-mentioned تاویلgiving the second or the third meaning, while the second-mentioned gives the first or the fifth meaning.
الراسخون (firmly grounded) is the plural of الراسخ which is derived from رسخ i.e. he or it was or became firm, stable or established. رسخ الشیءmeans, the thing became firmly established. رسخ العلم فی قلبه means, knowledge became firmly established, or sank deep, in his heart. الراسخ فی العلم is one whose knowledge is extensive and deep-rooted, being firmly established and based on sure ground (Aqrab & Mufradat).
Commentary:
The verse, which was revealed when a party of Christians from Najran visited the Holy Prophet in Medina (Jarir), serves a fourfold purpose: (1) it gives the genesis of the later Christian doctrines and explains how the true original doctrines became perverted; (2) it tells how the critics of Islam, particularly the Christians, distort true Islamic teachings in order to find an excuse for attacking Islam; (3) it warns Muslims to take a lesson from the history of Christians; and (4) it supplies a sure and trustworthy principle of interpreting revealed Books, or, for that matter, any writing or speech, in a right manner.
What proved the perversion of the Christian faith was that expressions like "Son of God" etc. used metaphorically were taken literally and the simple and straightforward faith of Jesus was transformed out of all recognition, the متشابهbeing given the place of محکم.
Again, it is on record that when the party of Christians, referred to above, visited the Holy Prophet and had a discussion with him on the godhead of Jesus, they, like clever casuists, who when it suits their purpose tear a passage from its context and then base their arguments on it, asked the Holy Prophet if the words کلمة الله (word of God) and روح(spirit) were used about Jesus in the Quran, and, receiving an answer in the affirmative, joyfully exclaimed that the divinity of Jesus was thereby proved. They did not care to ponder over the explanation of these words in their context, which did not at all bear out the sense which they thought they possessed. It is to such objectionable practices that allusion is made in this verse, which lays down the golden rule that, in order to prove a controversial point, the decisive and clearly worded parts of a Scripture should be taken into consideration, and that if they are found to contradict the construction put upon a certain ambiguous passage quoted in support of an argument, that interpretation should be rejected and the passage should be so interpreted as to make it harmonize with the decisive and clearly worded parts of the text.
This golden rule should always be observed whenever it is required to interpret or explain a passage which is susceptible of several interpretations and is not easily comprehensible. Its observance is all the more necessary when a seemingly difficult and knotty verse of the Quran is sought to be explained. Any interpretation which clashes with other verses of the Quran and runs counter to the clearly worded parts thereof should be rejected and only that interpretation which is in harmony with its basic principles should be accepted.
According to the verse, the Quran has two sets of verses. Some are محکم (decisive in meaning) and others متشابه(capable of different interpretations). The right way to interpret a متشابه verse is that only such interpretation of it should be accepted as agrees with the verses that are محکم and all other interpretations should be dismissed as incorrect. It is on record that one day the Holy Prophet, on hearing people disputing about the interpretation of certain verses of the Quran, angrily said: "Thus were ruined those who have gone before you. They interpreted certain parts of their scriptures in such a manner as to make them contradict other parts. But the Quran has been so revealed that different parts of it should corroborate one another. So do not reject any truth by making one part contradict the other. Act on what you understand thereof and refer that which you do not understand to those who know and understand it" (Musnad).
The above hadith also refutes the theory of abrogation, for it speaks of the Quran as a Book of which all parts corroborate one another and condemns those who think that some of its verses contradict others. To Ahmad, the Holy Founder of the Ahmadiyya Movement, goes the credit of exploding the so-called abrogation theory. He and his disciples have given convincing explanations of those verses which were previously regarded as abrogated.
It may be noted here that in 39:24 the whole Quran is called متشابه and in 11:2 all the Quranic verses have been described as محکم. This should not be taken as contradicting the verse under comment, according to which some verses of the Quran are محکم and others متشابه. The apparent in-consistency is easily explained. So far as the real significance of the Quranic verses is concerned the whole of the Quran is محکم (decisive), inasmuch as all its verses contain decisive and eternal truths. In another sense, however, the whole of the Quran is متشابه inasmuch as the Quranic verses have been so worded as to give, at one and the same time, several meanings equally true and good. The Quran is also متشابه (i.e.mutually resembling) in the sense that there is no contradiction or inconsistency in it, its different verses affording support to one another. But parts of it are certainly محکم or متشابه for different readers according to their mental and spiritual capacities, as the present verse points out.
As regards prophecies, those that are couched in plain and direct language, susceptible of only one meaning, would be regarded as محکم and those that are described in figurative or metaphorical language, capable of more than one interpretation, would be regarded as متشابه. The prophecies described in metaphorical language should, therefore, be interpreted in the light of the prophecies that have been clearly and literally fulfilled and also in the light of the basic and fundamental principles of Islam. For an example of محکم prophecies, the reader is referred to 58:22; whereas 28:86 contains a متشابه prophecy.
The term محکم may also be applied to such verses as embody full and complete commandments while متشابه verses are those which give only part of a certain commandment, and require to be read in conjunction with other verses to make a complete injunction.
Moreover, محکمات (decisive verses) generally deal with the Law and the doctrines of Faith, while متشابھات generally deal with topics of secondary importance or describe incidents in the lives of Prophets or the history of peoples and, while so doing, sometimes make use of idioms and phrases capable of different meanings. Such verses should not be so interpreted as to contradict the clear-worded tenets of the Faith.
The Arabic clause which has been translated as and none knows its right interpretation except Allah and those who are firmly grounded in knowledge; they say, ‘We believe in it; the whole is from our Lord', may be rendered in two ways, according as the pause is made after the word الله (Allah) or after the word العلم (knowledge). If the pause is made after العلم (knowledge), the clause would be translated as above and the term would in this case apply to verses pertaining to events of the past or verses containing general exhortation. If, however, the pause is made after الله (Allah), the term متشابھات would refer to prophecies of which the real interpretation is known to God only. In this case the clause would be translated as, "and none knows its interpretation except Allah; and those who are firmly grounded in knowledge say, "We believe in it, the whole is from our Lord". Grammatically, both constructions are correct.
Finally, it may be noted that the use of metaphors, the main basis of متشابھات verses, in religious scriptures is necessary; (1) to assure vastness of meaning in the fewest of words; (2) to add beauty and grace to the style; and (3) to provide for the people a trial (ابتلاء) without which spiritual development and perfection is not possible.
a
7:54; 18:79.
b
4:163.
d
11:2.
e
39:24.
369
Muhkam means, (1) that which has been made secure from change or alteration; (2) that in which there is no ambiguity or possibility of doubt; (3) that which is clear in meaning and decisive in exposition and (4) a verse which embodies a teaching special to the Qur’an (Mufradat & Lane).
370
Umm means, (1) mother; (2) source or origin or basis of a thing; (3) anything which is a means of sustenance and support or of reformation and correction for another; (4) anything to which other things around it are linked (Aqrab & Mufradat).
371
Mutashabih is used about (1) that phrase, sentence or verse which is susceptible of different, though concordant, interpretations; (2) that whose parts resemble or are concordant with one another; (3) that whose true significance bears a similarity to a sense which is not meant; (4) that of which the true meaning is known only by referring it to what is termed Muhkam; (5) that which cannot be rightly understood without repeated consideration; (6) a verse which contains teaching corresponding to or resembling those contained in the previous revealed Scriptures (Mufradat).
372
Ta’wil means, (1) interpretation or explanation; (2) conjecture about the meaning of a speech or writing; (3) turning away a speech or writing from its right interpretation; (4) interpretation of a dream; (5) end, result or sequel of a thing (Lane). In this verse the word occurs twice; in the former place it gives the second or the third meaning, while in the latter it gives the first or the fifth meaning.
373
The verse lays down the golden rule that, in order to prove a controversial point, the decisive and clearly worded parts of a Scripture should be taken into consideration, and if these are found to contradict the construction put upon a certain ambiguous passage that passage should be so interpreted as to make it harmonize with the decisive and clearly worded parts of the text. According to the verse, the Qur’an has two sets of verses. Some are Muhkam (firm and decisive in meaning) and others Mutashabih (capable of different interpretations). The right way to interpret a Mutashabih verse is that only such interpretation of it should be accepted as agrees with the verses that are Muhkam. In 39:24 the whole of the Qur’an is called Mutashabih and in 11:2 all the Quranic verses have been described as Muhkam. This should not be taken as contradicting the verse under comment, according to which some verses of the Qur’an are Muhkam and others Mutashabih
وَٱتَّبَعُوا۟ مَا تَتْلُوا۟ ٱلشَّيَٰطِينُ عَلَىٰ مُلْكِ سُلَيْمَٰنَ ۖ وَمَا كَفَرَ سُلَيْمَٰنُ وَلَٰكِنَّ ٱلشَّيَٰطِينَ كَفَرُوا۟ يُعَلِّمُونَ ٱلنَّاسَ ٱلسِّحْرَ وَمَآ أُنزِلَ عَلَى ٱلْمَلَكَيْنِ بِبَابِلَ هَٰرُوتَ وَمَٰرُوتَ ۚ وَمَا يُعَلِّمَانِ مِنْ أَحَدٍ حَتَّىٰ يَقُولَآ إِنَّمَا نَحْنُ فِتْنَةٌ فَلَا تَكْفُرْ ۖ فَيَتَعَلَّمُونَ مِنْهُمَا مَا يُفَرِّقُونَ بِهِۦ بَيْنَ ٱلْمَرْءِ وَزَوْجِهِۦ ۚ وَمَا هُم بِضَآرِّينَ بِهِۦ مِنْ أَحَدٍ إِلَّا بِإِذْنِ ٱللَّهِ ۚ وَيَتَعَلَّمُونَ مَا يَضُرُّهُمْ وَلَا يَنفَعُهُمْ ۚ وَلَقَدْ عَلِمُوا۟ لَمَنِ ٱشْتَرَىٰهُ مَا لَهُۥ فِى ٱلْءَاخِرَةِ مِنْ خَلَٰقٍ ۚ وَلَبِئْسَ مَا شَرَوْا۟ بِهِۦٓ أَنفُسَهُمْ ۚ لَوْ كَانُوا۟ يَعْلَمُونَ
هَارُوْت (Harut, 哈鲁特) 和 مَارُوْت (Marut, 马鲁特) 都是形容性名称, 前者来自هَرَتَ (Harata) 即他摧毁 (اَقْرَبْ), 意指摧毁者; 而后者来自 مَرَتَ (Marata) 即他破坏, 意指破坏者。这两个名称意味着这两位圣洁的人出现的目的是 “粉碎” 和 “破坏” 古以色列人敌国的光荣和权利。这两位圣洁的人一开始就告诉新成员们, 这是来自安拉的一种考验, 作分辩善恶之用。它们只限于社会成员中的男性。本节经文表明, 在穆圣时期的犹太人一味干着素莱曼 (所罗们) 时代他们的祖先所沉溺的、同样的阴谋诡计。经文又说素莱曼时代的那些作乱者, 就是称他 (素菜曼) 为不信宗教者。本节经文消除了对素莱曼不信的责备。经文又说, 素莱曼时代这些害人精为了欺骗人们和隐瞒他们的真实企图, 授给他们的伙伴一些隐语, 这些隐语传达给他们与一般所了解的完全不同的含义。本节经文间接提到了素莱曼的敌人对他进行的密谋策划, 企图藉此来分裂他的帝国。这暗指, 麦地那的犹太人正在采取卑鄙的手法来反对穆圣, 但是他们的邪恶谋划永不会得逞。
“两位天使” 这词在这里指两位圣洁的人 (12:32), 因为这里是说, 这两位天使在教导人们某些事情而天使并不生活在人间, 也不与人有自由交往。(17:95; 21:8)
犹太人看到伊斯兰教的势力在稳步扩展, 而在阿拉伯半岛反对它的势力已彻底崩溃以致他们不能阻止或妨碍它的发展, 这时他们便开始煽动局外人来反对它。在基督教统治者们的压迫和残害下, 他们原在波斯避难, 早把它们宗教中心地从犹太转移到巴比伦王国 (Hutchinson编History of Nations 550页)。他们逐渐对波斯君主王朝的宫廷施加巨大的影响, 并开始策划反对伊斯兰教的阴谋。当乔所罗斯 (Chosroes) 二世收到穆圣邀他接受伊斯兰教的信时, 他们成功地怂恿他给也门--------当时是波斯的一个省--------省长巴德汉 (بَاذَان, Badhan) 发布命令, 逮捕穆圣, 并把囚禁的穆圣送上波斯法庭。本节经文间接提到的正是穆圣时期犹太人的这些阴谋诡计。这件事引起了他们的注意力: 即他们的祖先当初也曾策划反对素莱曼的阴谋。那时他们集团中的某些成员建立起反对他的结社, 在社的内部教以秘密的符号和代号 («列王纪上» 11:29-32; «列王纪上»11:14, 23, 26; «历代志下» 10:2-4) 他们第二次求助于秘密结社是在尼布加尼撒 (Nebuchadnezzar) 国王时代, 他们在巴比伦被监禁期间。本节经文中所提到的圣洁的人是先知哈基 (Haggai) 和伊多 (Iddo) 的儿子扎格里亚 (Zachariah) («以斯拉记» 5:1)。这两位圣洁的人把他们协会的会员限制在男性之内, 并在一开始就告诉新会员:他们是来自安拉的一种考验, 因此古以色列人不应不信从他们所说的话。当米堤亚 (Media) 和波斯 (Persia) 的国王塞鲁士 (Cyrus) 登基时, 古以色列人同他达成一项秘密协议, 这大大促进了他征服巴比伦。作为这一贡献的报答, 塞鲁士不仅允许他们返回耶路撒冷, 而且帮助他们重建素菜曼圣殿 («史学家的世界史», II. 126)。本节经文暗示, 犹太人前两次的努力得到不同的结果。第一次针对素菜曼的阴谋以完全失去他们的威望并最后被放逐到巴比伦而告终。第二次, 他们在两位受安拉启示的人物的领导下采取类似方针而获得成功。因此, 为了指出犹太人反对穆圣的企图是否会像他们在素莱曼时代那样遭到失败, 或是像在巴比伦时代那样而获得成功, «古兰
经» 说: “(穆圣的反对者) 正在学习对他们有害而无益的东西。” 暗示他们不会像他们的祖先那样在巴比伦获得成功。
شَیْطَان کے معنے ہیں کُلُّ عَاتٍ مُّتَمَرِّدٍ: ہر سرکش اور حد سے بڑھنے والا (اقرب) مفردات راغب میں بھی وَاتَّبَعُوْا مَا تَتْلُوا الشَّیٰـطِیْنُ میں شیاطین سے سرکش انسان مراد لئے گئے ہیں۔ اس لئے ہم نے ترجمہ میں ’’باغی‘‘ کا لفظ استعمال کیا ہے۔
دو فرشتوں یعنی دو فرشتہ خصلت آدمیوں پر (تفصیل کے لئے دیکھیں تفسیر کبیر سورۃ البقرۃ جلد دوم صفحہ ۶۵)۔
یُفَرِّقُوۡنَ بِہٖ بَیۡنَ الۡمَرۡءِ وَ زَوۡجِہٖ یعنی وہ خاص دینی تعلیم ان کو دیتے تھے جس کی وجہ سے جو عورت ایمان لے آتی تھی‘ وہ ایمان نہ لانے والے مرد کی پروا نہیں کرتی تھی اور جو مرد ایمان لے آتا تھا وہ ایمان نہ لانے والی عورت کی پروا نہیں کرتا تھا‘ بلکہ اگر میاں بیوی میں سے بیوی ایمان لے آتی تو وہ اس تعلیم کو جو اسے سکھائی جاتی تھی مقدم رکھ کر اپنے خاوند سے اپنی جماعت کی باتیں چھپانے لگ جاتی اور اگر مرد ایمان لے آتا تو وہ اپنی بیوی سے باتیں چھپانے لگ جاتا اور دونوں ایک دوسرے کو اپنا راز دار نہیں بناتے تھے۔ صرف خدا تعالیٰ کے رسول یا اس کے نائبوں کو راز دار بنات
Talautu-hu means, I followed him (Lane).
‘Ala gives the sense of fi, i.e. "in" or "during" and "against" (Mughni). The particle is also used in the Qur’an in the sense of "in conformity with" (2:113); assigning a cause (2:186); in the sense of fi (28:16) and min (83:3). Tala ‘Alaihi also means, he lied against him (Taj, Muhit & Razi).
Sihr means, a crafty device; mischief; enchantment; producing what is false in the form of truth; any event of which the cause is hidden and which is imagined to be different from what it really is (Lane). Thus every falsehood, deceit or crafty device which is meant to hide the real object from public view is included in Sihr.
The word "two angels" here signifies two holy men (12:32), because the two angels are here mentioned as teaching something to the people and angels do not live among men and do not have free intercourse with them (17:95; 21:8).
Harut and Marut are both descriptive names, the former being derived from Harata, (i.e. he tore up—Aqrab) means, one who tears up; and the latter derived from Marata, (i.e. he broke) means, one who breaks. These names signify that the object of the appearance of these holy men was to 'tear asunder' and 'break' the glory and power of the empire of the enemies of the Israelites. These holy men told the new members, at the time of initiation, that they were a sort of trial from God, serving to differentiate between the good and the bad. They confined the membership of their society to the males only. The verse signifies that the Jews in the time of the Holy Prophet indulged in the same mischievous devices and practices which characterized their forefathers in the days of Solomon. It further says that the mischief-mongers in Solomon’s time were those rebellious men who called him a disbeliever. The verse clears Solomon of the accusation of disbelief. It adds that the mischief-mongers in Solom
When the Jews saw that the power of Islam was steadily expanding and opposition to it in Arabia had completely broken down and they could not arrest or retard its progress, they began to excite outsiders against it. Oppressed and persecuted by Christian rulers they had taken refuge in Persia and had shifted their religious centre from Judah to Babylonia (Hutchinson’s History of the Nations, p. 550). Gradually, they came to exercise great influence at the court of the Persian Monarchs and began to hatch plots against Islam. When Chosroes II received a letter from the Holy Prophet inviting him to accept Islam, they succeeded in instigating him to issue orders to Badhan, the Governor of Yemen, which was then a province of Persia, to arrest and send the Holy Prophet in chains to the Persian court. It is to these plots and machinations of the Jews in the Prophet’s time that the verse alludes. Their attention is invited to the fact that their forefathers had also hatched plots first against Solomon when some
Important Words:
تتلوا (followed). See 2:114
شیاطین (rebellious men). See 2:15.
علی (during) gives the sense of فی i.e. "in" or "during" (Aqrab & Mughni). It is also used to denote a hostile sense meaning "against", as one says خرج علیه i.e. he rebelled against him, or he went out against him with an army intending to fight (Wright). In this sense the phrase علی ملك سلیمان would mean, against the government of Solomon, or conspiring against his government.
سحر (falsehood and deception). In verbal senses سحرہ means, he deceived him; he coaxed him and involved him in trouble and deprived him of his understanding; he enchanted him. سحرالفضة means, he coated a piece of silver so as to make it look like gold. The noun سحر means, anything the source of which is not quite visible; showing off falsehood in the form of truth; a crafty device; craftiness; mischief; enchantment (Aqrab). It also means, producing what is false in the form of truth; any event of which the cause is hidden and which is imagined to be different from what it really is; embellishment by falsification and deceit (Lane). Thus every falsehood, deceit or crafty device which is meant to hide the real object from public view is included in the meaning of سحر.
ملكین (two angels) is the dual number from ملك (angel) for which see 2:31. Figuratively ملك is sometimes used to denote a handsome or holy person, as the Quran says, He (Joseph) is but a gracious angel, i.e. a handsome and pious youth (12:32). As in the verse under comment, the two angels are described as teaching something to the people, therefore the word cannot be taken in its literal significance, because angels do not live among men and do not generally have free intercourse with them (17:95, 96; 21:8). Thus in the present verse ملکین would not mean "two angels" in the literal sense of the word but "two holy men".
ھاروت (Harut) and ماروت (Marut) are both descriptive names. ھاروت is derived from ھرت which means, he tore up (Aqrab); hence ھاروت means, one who tears; the tearer. ماروت is derived from مرت which means, he broke (Aqrab & Lane). Thus ماروت means, one who breaks; the breaker. These names signify that the object of the appearance of these holy men was to 'tear' asunder and 'break' the glory and power of certain people.
فتنة (trial) means, the trial or means whereby the condition of a man may be demonstrated in respect of good or evil (Lane). They say فتن الصائغ الذھب i.e. the goldsmith melted the gold in the crucible so that its purity or impurity might be ascertained (Aqrab).
Commentary:
Many a legend unwarranted by the Quran and the Hadith—and even running contrary to them—clusters round this verse. It would be quite unreasonable to interpret it on the basis of those myths. For their true interpretation no external evidence is needed, the words being self-explanatory. It is clear from the verse itself that Jews in the time of the Holy Prophet were bent upon the same mischief which characterized them in the days of Solomon and during the days of their captivity in Babylon. The verse further indicates that the mischief-mongers of Solomon’s time were those "rebellious men" who called him an unbeliever. God says that those wicked men themselves, and not Solomon, lacked belief. Again, the verse tells us that these men taught their associates such signs as conveyed to them meanings quite different from those generally accepted, for the purpose of deceiving other people and concealing their own activities. All this leads to the conclusion that this verse alludes to those secret plots which the enemies of Solomon made against him, and by which they wished to break his empire. It is pointed out that now, in the time of the Holy Prophet, these people are resorting to the selfsame tactics, but that they will fail.
As the verse refers to a number of historical events, it is advisable to relate them here at some length.
When Jews saw that the power of Islam was steadily expanding and that no opposition from the Arabs had been able to arrest the progress of Muslims, they began to excite outsiders against them. At that time there were two large empires in the neighbourhood of Arabia: (1) The Byzantine or Eastern Roman Empire; and (2) The Persian Empire. As Jews were already at enmity with the Roman Government, because they were in constant trouble under it, so it was only the Persian Government to which they could look for support. Harassed by the oppression of Christian rulers, they had taken refuge in Persia, where they enjoyed a good deal of religious freedom, and their religious centre shifted from Judah and Jerusalem to Babylonia (Hutchinson’s History of the Nations, p.550). In the seventh century of the Christian era, i.e., during the lifetime of the Holy Prophet, Jews suffered exceptionally cruel persecution at the hands of the Christian Emperors of the Eastern Roman Empire. "Both Phocas and Heraclius", says the Historians’ History of the World (vol. 7, p. 175), "attempted to exterminate the Jewish religion, and if possible to put an end to their national existence. Heraclius not only practised every species of cruelty himself to effect this object within the bounds of his own dominions, but he even made the forced conversion or banishment of the Jews a prominent feature in his diplomacy." So, in the time of the Holy Prophet the only government to which the Jews could look for help was that of Persia, where their co-religionists enjoyed much influence, especially in the reign of Chosroes II (Jew. Enc., ix. 648).
Consequently, when the Jews saw that their efforts to check the progress of Islam had totally failed, they took to exciting the Persian Court against the Holy Prophet by various means; and as a result, Chosroes II issued orders to the Governor of Yemen to send to him the Arabian claimant as a captive. But when the envoys of the Governor came to the Holy Prophet, he asked them to see him the next day, when he told them that God had informed him that He had their king murdered. Thereupon they returned and related this incident to the Governor. A few days later, the Governor received a letter from Siroes, the son of Chosroes II, to the effect that he had killed his father on account of the latter’s tyranny and that the Governor should, on his behalf, renew the oath of allegiance from all the Chiefs of Yemen; and that the order of his father regarding an Arab should be considered as cancelled (Tabari, iii. 1573-1574).
Some historians, including Tabari himself, hold that it was the letter of the Holy Prophet to the king of Persia inviting him to Islam that was the occasion of his orders for the apprehension of the Holy Prophet. But on comparison of the dates of the above-mentioned events, this turns out to be a mistaken view. For, as we read in Zurqani (ii. 211-212), the letter in question was despatched from Medina on the first of Muharram, 7 A.H.–a date corresponding to 12th April, 628 A.D. (Lane under ھجرة); whereas Chosroes II, who sent orders for the arrest of the Holy Prophet, had been assassinated on the 29th of February, 628 A.D. (Historians’ History of the World, viii. 95). Thus the view that the letter of the Holy Prophet was the cause of Chosroes’ orders is quite untenable; and the only possible cause of Chosroes’ ignominious orders was that his ears had been poisoned by malicious reports, a fact admitted by Sir William Muir (The Life of Mahomet, p. 370). It is to these efforts of the Jews that the Quran alludes in the verse under comment.
The verse also points out that it was foolish on the part of the Jews to suppose that they would succeed in that way. Their attention is invited to the fact that they had already been responsible for two secret plots. The first was against Solomon, when some members of their community turned rebels, hatched plots and stirred up bitter feeling against him by calling him an infidel; whereas the infidels were those who opposed him, hurled imputations at him, and set up against him secret societies in which secret signs and symbols were taught. The Jews, however, themselves reaped the ill-reward of their sinister schemes: their power, as a consequence, fell into decay, and at last they became so powerless that they were driven into exile towards Babylon. This account of Jewish secret societies and conspiracies and treacherous signs and symbols, as alluded to in this verse, finds corroboration in the Bible (1 Kings 11:1-6), where we read that the charge of idol-worship was spread against Solomon. An account of his enemies is found in I Kings 11:14, 23, 26, and a reference to secret plots is met with in II Chron. 10: 2-4 where we learn that the Jews had sent for Jeroboam, a bitter enemy of Solomon, immediately after his death and had attempted to make Solomon’s son agree to some demands of theirs, involving certain imputations against Solomon, before his accession to the throne. We learn about the secret signs from I Kings 11:29-32, in which the ten tribes of the Israelites are likened to ten pieces of a garment, and Jeroboam is told that these ten tribes were on his side against Solomon; and so it proved to be, for on the death of Solomon, these ten tribes made Jeroboam their king (I Kings 12:20). Again, the reference of the Quran to the infidelity of Solomon’s enemies finds corroboration in II Chron. 11:15, from which we learn that his enemies, who falsely charged him with unbelief, themselves fell into idol-worship when they rose to power.
Besides the testimony of the Bible, there is other evidence to show that in the days of Solomon a secret society was at work against him. An old tradition, current among medieval Freemasons, indicates that Solomon was envious of the superior intelligence of Hiram, the chief architect who built the Temple at Jerusalem. He is said to have attempted to kill the great Mason by having him thrown into a tank of molten brass, but he was saved by the spirit of his ancestor, Cain, who prophesied that at last his people would get the better of their enemy. Solomon, however, as the tradition goes, had him afterwards put to death. It is said of him that he had fixed certain secret signs which were a sort of mystery known only to him and his associates (Secret Societies of the World, Volume II, pp. 1-8; as the original book could not be obtained, the reference is to an Urdu translation). We further learn from this book that before the period of the Accepted Masons, the same signs used in all the Lodges were current among the Masons of Solomon’s time (p. 11) and that at the time of initiation, the Hiram incident was related to the new member (pp. 29, 30). However incredible the story as a whole may be, it points at least to the conclusion that in one way or other, secret societies were associated with Solomon’s reign and were much in vogue in his time.
The second occasion when, according to the Quran, the Israelites had resort to secret societies was during their captivity in Babylon. But this time they were not acting against any Prophet but were, on the other hand, working under the leadership of two inspired personages, who were, in obedience to divine command, trying to bring about the deliverance of the Israelites. Their mission was to "tear asunder" and "break down" the empire of the enemies of the Israelites. These holy men told new members, at the time of initiation, that they were a sort of trial from God, serving to differentiate between the good and the bad, and that the Israelites should not therefore refuse to believe what they said, because this would lead them to infidelity. In their teachings they drew a distinction between males and females, confining membership to males only (this is an old practice found among most secret societies). It is also stated that the disciples of these holy men directed their activities against only those for whose chastisement they were commissioned by God.
In this narration, the Quran refers to the days when King Nebuchadnezzar brought the Jews as captives into Babylon and kept them there for a long time. The holy men referred to in the verse under comment were Haggai, the Prophet, and Zechariah, the son of Iddo (Ezra 5:1). When Cyrus, King of Media and Persia, rose to power, the Israelites entered into a secret agreement with him and greatly facilitated his conquest of Babylon. In return for this service, he not only allowed them to return to their own country but also helped in the rebuilding of the Temple (Historians’ History of the World, ii. 126).
After stating that the Jews of the Holy Prophet’s time were following the same course which was adopted by the rebels of Solomon’s days and which was later adopted by the Jews under two holy men in Babylon, it was necessary here to state the ultimate upshot of their efforts against the Holy Prophet, because on the two previous occasion’s their efforts had met with different results. On the first occasion the conspiracy of the Israelites, being directed against a Prophet of God, had ended in the total loss of their prestige and finally in their banishment to Babylon. On the second occasion, they took a similar course under two inspired personages and were successful. Hence, in order to indicate whether the efforts of the Jews against the Holy Prophet would meet with failure, as they did in the days of Solomon, or with success as in Babylon, the Quran says: these people are learning that which would harm them and do them no good; hinting that they will not be successful as in Babylon. Accordingly, the consequence of their hostile efforts against the Holy Prophet was that Chosroes, their only supporter, met his death at the hands of his son, and they themselves were exiled from Arabia in the time of ‘Umar. In the concluding portion of the verse, God adds: And they have certainly known that he who trafficks therein has no share of good in the Hereafter, meaning that a mischievous plotter never succeeds ultimately. The last clause, had they but known, throws a flood of light on how intensely God desires that His creatures should always take the right course and not be misled by mischievous people.
71
هَارُوْت (Harut, 哈鲁特) 和 مَارُوْت (Marut, 马鲁特) 都是形容性名称, 前者来自هَرَتَ (Harata) 即他摧毁 (اَقْرَبْ), 意指摧毁者; 而后者来自 مَرَتَ (Marata) 即他破坏, 意指破坏者。这两个名称意味着这两位圣洁的人出现的目的是 “粉碎” 和 “破坏” 古以色列人敌国的光荣和权利。这两位圣洁的人一开始就告诉新成员们, 这是来自安拉的一种考验, 作分辩善恶之用。它们只限于社会成员中的男性。本节经文表明, 在穆圣时期的犹太人一味干着素莱曼 (所罗们) 时代他们的祖先所沉溺的、同样的阴谋诡计。经文又说素莱曼时代的那些作乱者, 就是称他 (素菜曼) 为不信宗教者。本节经文消除了对素莱曼不信的责备。经文又说, 素莱曼时代这些害人精为了欺骗人们和隐瞒他们的真实企图, 授给他们的伙伴一些隐语, 这些隐语传达给他们与一般所了解的完全不同的含义。本节经文间接提到了素莱曼的敌人对他进行的密谋策划, 企图藉此来分裂他的帝国。这暗指, 麦地那的犹太人正在采取卑鄙的手法来反对穆圣, 但是他们的邪恶谋划永不会得逞。
72
“两位天使” 这词在这里指两位圣洁的人 (12:32), 因为这里是说, 这两位天使在教导人们某些事情而天使并不生活在人间, 也不与人有自由交往。(17:95; 21:8)
73
犹太人看到伊斯兰教的势力在稳步扩展, 而在阿拉伯半岛反对它的势力已彻底崩溃以致他们不能阻止或妨碍它的发展, 这时他们便开始煽动局外人来反对它。在基督教统治者们的压迫和残害下, 他们原在波斯避难, 早把它们宗教中心地从犹太转移到巴比伦王国 (Hutchinson编History of Nations 550页)。他们逐渐对波斯君主王朝的宫廷施加巨大的影响, 并开始策划反对伊斯兰教的阴谋。当乔所罗斯 (Chosroes) 二世收到穆圣邀他接受伊斯兰教的信时, 他们成功地怂恿他给也门--------当时是波斯的一个省--------省长巴德汉 (بَاذَان, Badhan) 发布命令, 逮捕穆圣, 并把囚禁的穆圣送上波斯法庭。本节经文间接提到的正是穆圣时期犹太人的这些阴谋诡计。这件事引起了他们的注意力: 即他们的祖先当初也曾策划反对素莱曼的阴谋。那时他们集团中的某些成员建立起反对他的结社, 在社的内部教以秘密的符号和代号 («列王纪上» 11:29-32; «列王纪上»11:14, 23, 26; «历代志下» 10:2-4) 他们第二次求助于秘密结社是在尼布加尼撒 (Nebuchadnezzar) 国王时代, 他们在巴比伦被监禁期间。本节经文中所提到的圣洁的人是先知哈基 (Haggai) 和伊多 (Iddo) 的儿子扎格里亚 (Zachariah) («以斯拉记» 5:1)。这两位圣洁的人把他们协会的会员限制在男性之内, 并在一开始就告诉新会员:他们是来自安拉的一种考验, 因此古以色列人不应不信从他们所说的话。当米堤亚 (Media) 和波斯 (Persia) 的国王塞鲁士 (Cyrus) 登基时, 古以色列人同他达成一项秘密协议, 这大大促进了他征服巴比伦。作为这一贡献的报答, 塞鲁士不仅允许他们返回耶路撒冷, 而且帮助他们重建素菜曼圣殿 («史学家的世界史», II. 126)。本节经文暗示, 犹太人前两次的努力得到不同的结果。第一次针对素菜曼的阴谋以完全失去他们的威望并最后被放逐到巴比伦而告终。第二次, 他们在两位受安拉启示的人物的领导下采取类似方针而获得成功。因此, 为了指出犹太人反对穆圣的企图是否会像他们在素莱曼时代那样遭到失败, 或是像在巴比伦时代那样而获得成功, «古兰
经» 说: “(穆圣的反对者) 正在学习对他们有害而无益的东西。” 暗示他们不会像他们的祖先那样在巴比伦获得成功。
1
شَیْطَان کے معنے ہیں کُلُّ عَاتٍ مُّتَمَرِّدٍ: ہر سرکش اور حد سے بڑھنے والا (اقرب) مفردات راغب میں بھی وَاتَّبَعُوْا مَا تَتْلُوا الشَّیٰـطِیْنُ میں شیاطین سے سرکش انسان مراد لئے گئے ہیں۔ اس لئے ہم نے ترجمہ میں ’’باغی‘‘ کا لفظ استعمال کیا ہے۔
2
دو فرشتوں یعنی دو فرشتہ خصلت آدمیوں پر (تفصیل کے لئے دیکھیں تفسیر کبیر سورۃ البقرۃ جلد دوم صفحہ ۶۵)۔
3
یُفَرِّقُوۡنَ بِہٖ بَیۡنَ الۡمَرۡءِ وَ زَوۡجِہٖ یعنی وہ خاص دینی تعلیم ان کو دیتے تھے جس کی وجہ سے جو عورت ایمان لے آتی تھی‘ وہ ایمان نہ لانے والے مرد کی پروا نہیں کرتی تھی اور جو مرد ایمان لے آتا تھا وہ ایمان نہ لانے والی عورت کی پروا نہیں کرتا تھا‘ بلکہ اگر میاں بیوی میں سے بیوی ایمان لے آتی تو وہ اس تعلیم کو جو اسے سکھائی جاتی تھی مقدم رکھ کر اپنے خاوند سے اپنی جماعت کی باتیں چھپانے لگ جاتی اور اگر مرد ایمان لے آتا تو وہ اپنی بیوی سے باتیں چھپانے لگ جاتا اور دونوں ایک دوسرے کو اپنا راز دار نہیں بناتے تھے۔ صرف خدا تعالیٰ کے رسول یا اس کے نائبوں کو راز دار بنات
109
Important Words:
تتلوا (followed). See 2:114
شیاطین (rebellious men). See 2:15.
علی (during) gives the sense of فی i.e. "in" or "during" (Aqrab & Mughni). It is also used to denote a hostile sense meaning "against", as one says خرج علیه i.e. he rebelled against him, or he went out against him with an army intending to fight (Wright). In this sense the phrase علی ملك سلیمان would mean, against the government of Solomon, or conspiring against his government.
سحر (falsehood and deception). In verbal senses سحرہ means, he deceived him; he coaxed him and involved him in trouble and deprived him of his understanding; he enchanted him. سحرالفضة means, he coated a piece of silver so as to make it look like gold. The noun سحر means, anything the source of which is not quite visible; showing off falsehood in the form of truth; a crafty device; craftiness; mischief; enchantment (Aqrab). It also means, producing what is false in the form of truth; any event of which the cause is hidden and which is imagined to be different from what it really is; embellishment by falsification and deceit (Lane). Thus every falsehood, deceit or crafty device which is meant to hide the real object from public view is included in the meaning of سحر.
ملكین (two angels) is the dual number from ملك (angel) for which see 2:31. Figuratively ملك is sometimes used to denote a handsome or holy person, as the Quran says, He (Joseph) is but a gracious angel, i.e. a handsome and pious youth (12:32). As in the verse under comment, the two angels are described as teaching something to the people, therefore the word cannot be taken in its literal significance, because angels do not live among men and do not generally have free intercourse with them (17:95, 96; 21:8). Thus in the present verse ملکین would not mean "two angels" in the literal sense of the word but "two holy men".
ھاروت (Harut) and ماروت (Marut) are both descriptive names. ھاروت is derived from ھرت which means, he tore up (Aqrab); hence ھاروت means, one who tears; the tearer. ماروت is derived from مرت which means, he broke (Aqrab & Lane). Thus ماروت means, one who breaks; the breaker. These names signify that the object of the appearance of these holy men was to 'tear' asunder and 'break' the glory and power of certain people.
فتنة (trial) means, the trial or means whereby the condition of a man may be demonstrated in respect of good or evil (Lane). They say فتن الصائغ الذھب i.e. the goldsmith melted the gold in the crucible so that its purity or impurity might be ascertained (Aqrab).
Commentary:
Many a legend unwarranted by the Quran and the Hadith—and even running contrary to them—clusters round this verse. It would be quite unreasonable to interpret it on the basis of those myths. For their true interpretation no external evidence is needed, the words being self-explanatory. It is clear from the verse itself that Jews in the time of the Holy Prophet were bent upon the same mischief which characterized them in the days of Solomon and during the days of their captivity in Babylon. The verse further indicates that the mischief-mongers of Solomon’s time were those "rebellious men" who called him an unbeliever. God says that those wicked men themselves, and not Solomon, lacked belief. Again, the verse tells us that these men taught their associates such signs as conveyed to them meanings quite different from those generally accepted, for the purpose of deceiving other people and concealing their own activities. All this leads to the conclusion that this verse alludes to those secret plots which the enemies of Solomon made against him, and by which they wished to break his empire. It is pointed out that now, in the time of the Holy Prophet, these people are resorting to the selfsame tactics, but that they will fail.
As the verse refers to a number of historical events, it is advisable to relate them here at some length.
When Jews saw that the power of Islam was steadily expanding and that no opposition from the Arabs had been able to arrest the progress of Muslims, they began to excite outsiders against them. At that time there were two large empires in the neighbourhood of Arabia: (1) The Byzantine or Eastern Roman Empire; and (2) The Persian Empire. As Jews were already at enmity with the Roman Government, because they were in constant trouble under it, so it was only the Persian Government to which they could look for support. Harassed by the oppression of Christian rulers, they had taken refuge in Persia, where they enjoyed a good deal of religious freedom, and their religious centre shifted from Judah and Jerusalem to Babylonia (Hutchinson’s History of the Nations, p.550). In the seventh century of the Christian era, i.e., during the lifetime of the Holy Prophet, Jews suffered exceptionally cruel persecution at the hands of the Christian Emperors of the Eastern Roman Empire. "Both Phocas and Heraclius", says the Historians’ History of the World (vol. 7, p. 175), "attempted to exterminate the Jewish religion, and if possible to put an end to their national existence. Heraclius not only practised every species of cruelty himself to effect this object within the bounds of his own dominions, but he even made the forced conversion or banishment of the Jews a prominent feature in his diplomacy." So, in the time of the Holy Prophet the only government to which the Jews could look for help was that of Persia, where their co-religionists enjoyed much influence, especially in the reign of Chosroes II (Jew. Enc., ix. 648).
Consequently, when the Jews saw that their efforts to check the progress of Islam had totally failed, they took to exciting the Persian Court against the Holy Prophet by various means; and as a result, Chosroes II issued orders to the Governor of Yemen to send to him the Arabian claimant as a captive. But when the envoys of the Governor came to the Holy Prophet, he asked them to see him the next day, when he told them that God had informed him that He had their king murdered. Thereupon they returned and related this incident to the Governor. A few days later, the Governor received a letter from Siroes, the son of Chosroes II, to the effect that he had killed his father on account of the latter’s tyranny and that the Governor should, on his behalf, renew the oath of allegiance from all the Chiefs of Yemen; and that the order of his father regarding an Arab should be considered as cancelled (Tabari, iii. 1573-1574).
Some historians, including Tabari himself, hold that it was the letter of the Holy Prophet to the king of Persia inviting him to Islam that was the occasion of his orders for the apprehension of the Holy Prophet. But on comparison of the dates of the above-mentioned events, this turns out to be a mistaken view. For, as we read in Zurqani (ii. 211-212), the letter in question was despatched from Medina on the first of Muharram, 7 A.H.–a date corresponding to 12th April, 628 A.D. (Lane under ھجرة); whereas Chosroes II, who sent orders for the arrest of the Holy Prophet, had been assassinated on the 29th of February, 628 A.D. (Historians’ History of the World, viii. 95). Thus the view that the letter of the Holy Prophet was the cause of Chosroes’ orders is quite untenable; and the only possible cause of Chosroes’ ignominious orders was that his ears had been poisoned by malicious reports, a fact admitted by Sir William Muir (The Life of Mahomet, p. 370). It is to these efforts of the Jews that the Quran alludes in the verse under comment.
The verse also points out that it was foolish on the part of the Jews to suppose that they would succeed in that way. Their attention is invited to the fact that they had already been responsible for two secret plots. The first was against Solomon, when some members of their community turned rebels, hatched plots and stirred up bitter feeling against him by calling him an infidel; whereas the infidels were those who opposed him, hurled imputations at him, and set up against him secret societies in which secret signs and symbols were taught. The Jews, however, themselves reaped the ill-reward of their sinister schemes: their power, as a consequence, fell into decay, and at last they became so powerless that they were driven into exile towards Babylon. This account of Jewish secret societies and conspiracies and treacherous signs and symbols, as alluded to in this verse, finds corroboration in the Bible (1 Kings 11:1-6), where we read that the charge of idol-worship was spread against Solomon. An account of his enemies is found in I Kings 11:14, 23, 26, and a reference to secret plots is met with in II Chron. 10: 2-4 where we learn that the Jews had sent for Jeroboam, a bitter enemy of Solomon, immediately after his death and had attempted to make Solomon’s son agree to some demands of theirs, involving certain imputations against Solomon, before his accession to the throne. We learn about the secret signs from I Kings 11:29-32, in which the ten tribes of the Israelites are likened to ten pieces of a garment, and Jeroboam is told that these ten tribes were on his side against Solomon; and so it proved to be, for on the death of Solomon, these ten tribes made Jeroboam their king (I Kings 12:20). Again, the reference of the Quran to the infidelity of Solomon’s enemies finds corroboration in II Chron. 11:15, from which we learn that his enemies, who falsely charged him with unbelief, themselves fell into idol-worship when they rose to power.
Besides the testimony of the Bible, there is other evidence to show that in the days of Solomon a secret society was at work against him. An old tradition, current among medieval Freemasons, indicates that Solomon was envious of the superior intelligence of Hiram, the chief architect who built the Temple at Jerusalem. He is said to have attempted to kill the great Mason by having him thrown into a tank of molten brass, but he was saved by the spirit of his ancestor, Cain, who prophesied that at last his people would get the better of their enemy. Solomon, however, as the tradition goes, had him afterwards put to death. It is said of him that he had fixed certain secret signs which were a sort of mystery known only to him and his associates (Secret Societies of the World, Volume II, pp. 1-8; as the original book could not be obtained, the reference is to an Urdu translation). We further learn from this book that before the period of the Accepted Masons, the same signs used in all the Lodges were current among the Masons of Solomon’s time (p. 11) and that at the time of initiation, the Hiram incident was related to the new member (pp. 29, 30). However incredible the story as a whole may be, it points at least to the conclusion that in one way or other, secret societies were associated with Solomon’s reign and were much in vogue in his time.
The second occasion when, according to the Quran, the Israelites had resort to secret societies was during their captivity in Babylon. But this time they were not acting against any Prophet but were, on the other hand, working under the leadership of two inspired personages, who were, in obedience to divine command, trying to bring about the deliverance of the Israelites. Their mission was to "tear asunder" and "break down" the empire of the enemies of the Israelites. These holy men told new members, at the time of initiation, that they were a sort of trial from God, serving to differentiate between the good and the bad, and that the Israelites should not therefore refuse to believe what they said, because this would lead them to infidelity. In their teachings they drew a distinction between males and females, confining membership to males only (this is an old practice found among most secret societies). It is also stated that the disciples of these holy men directed their activities against only those for whose chastisement they were commissioned by God.
In this narration, the Quran refers to the days when King Nebuchadnezzar brought the Jews as captives into Babylon and kept them there for a long time. The holy men referred to in the verse under comment were Haggai, the Prophet, and Zechariah, the son of Iddo (Ezra 5:1). When Cyrus, King of Media and Persia, rose to power, the Israelites entered into a secret agreement with him and greatly facilitated his conquest of Babylon. In return for this service, he not only allowed them to return to their own country but also helped in the rebuilding of the Temple (Historians’ History of the World, ii. 126).
After stating that the Jews of the Holy Prophet’s time were following the same course which was adopted by the rebels of Solomon’s days and which was later adopted by the Jews under two holy men in Babylon, it was necessary here to state the ultimate upshot of their efforts against the Holy Prophet, because on the two previous occasion’s their efforts had met with different results. On the first occasion the conspiracy of the Israelites, being directed against a Prophet of God, had ended in the total loss of their prestige and finally in their banishment to Babylon. On the second occasion, they took a similar course under two inspired personages and were successful. Hence, in order to indicate whether the efforts of the Jews against the Holy Prophet would meet with failure, as they did in the days of Solomon, or with success as in Babylon, the Quran says: these people are learning that which would harm them and do them no good; hinting that they will not be successful as in Babylon. Accordingly, the consequence of their hostile efforts against the Holy Prophet was that Chosroes, their only supporter, met his death at the hands of his son, and they themselves were exiled from Arabia in the time of ‘Umar. In the concluding portion of the verse, God adds: And they have certainly known that he who trafficks therein has no share of good in the Hereafter, meaning that a mischievous plotter never succeeds ultimately. The last clause, had they but known, throws a flood of light on how intensely God desires that His creatures should always take the right course and not be misled by mischievous people.
126
Talautu-hu means, I followed him (Lane).
127
‘Ala gives the sense of fi, i.e. "in" or "during" and "against" (Mughni). The particle is also used in the Qur’an in the sense of "in conformity with" (2:113); assigning a cause (2:186); in the sense of fi (28:16) and min (83:3). Tala ‘Alaihi also means, he lied against him (Taj, Muhit & Razi).
128
Sihr means, a crafty device; mischief; enchantment; producing what is false in the form of truth; any event of which the cause is hidden and which is imagined to be different from what it really is (Lane). Thus every falsehood, deceit or crafty device which is meant to hide the real object from public view is included in Sihr.
129
The word "two angels" here signifies two holy men (12:32), because the two angels are here mentioned as teaching something to the people and angels do not live among men and do not have free intercourse with them (17:95; 21:8).
130
Harut and Marut are both descriptive names, the former being derived from Harata, (i.e. he tore up—Aqrab) means, one who tears up; and the latter derived from Marata, (i.e. he broke) means, one who breaks. These names signify that the object of the appearance of these holy men was to 'tear asunder' and 'break' the glory and power of the empire of the enemies of the Israelites. These holy men told the new members, at the time of initiation, that they were a sort of trial from God, serving to differentiate between the good and the bad. They confined the membership of their society to the males only. The verse signifies that the Jews in the time of the Holy Prophet indulged in the same mischievous devices and practices which characterized their forefathers in the days of Solomon. It further says that the mischief-mongers in Solomon’s time were those rebellious men who called him a disbeliever. The verse clears Solomon of the accusation of disbelief. It adds that the mischief-mongers in Solom
130A
When the Jews saw that the power of Islam was steadily expanding and opposition to it in Arabia had completely broken down and they could not arrest or retard its progress, they began to excite outsiders against it. Oppressed and persecuted by Christian rulers they had taken refuge in Persia and had shifted their religious centre from Judah to Babylonia (Hutchinson’s History of the Nations, p. 550). Gradually, they came to exercise great influence at the court of the Persian Monarchs and began to hatch plots against Islam. When Chosroes II received a letter from the Holy Prophet inviting him to accept Islam, they succeeded in instigating him to issue orders to Badhan, the Governor of Yemen, which was then a province of Persia, to arrest and send the Holy Prophet in chains to the Persian court. It is to these plots and machinations of the Jews in the Prophet’s time that the verse alludes. Their attention is invited to the fact that their forefathers had also hatched plots first against Solomon when some
ٱلَّذِينَ ءَاتَيْنَٰهُمُ ٱلْكِتَٰبَ يَتْلُونَهُۥ حَقَّ تِلَاوَتِهِۦٓ أُو۟لَٰٓئِكَ يُؤْمِنُونَ بِهِۦ ۗ وَمَن يَكْفُرْ بِهِۦ فَأُو۟لَٰٓئِكَ هُمُ ٱلْخَٰسِرُونَ
3:114.
اَلَّذِیْنَ اٰتَیْنَاھُمُ الْکِتٰبَ میں اَلْکِتَابَ سے مراد قرآن کریم ہے اور اس آیت میں اللہ تعالیٰ نے یہود کو ملزم قرار دیا ہے کہ تم نے تو تورات کو پسِ پشت پھینک رکھا تھا۔ مگر اب یہ لوگ جن کو ہم نے قرآن کریم دیا ہے اس پر پوری طرح عمل کرتے ہیں اور اس پر ان کا رسمی ایمان نہیں۔ بلکہ پختہ ایمان ہے۔ (تفصیل کے لئے دیکھیں تفسیر کبیر جلد دوم صفحہ ۱۴۹)۔
3:114.
The words refer to Muslims and not to Jews and Christians, because it is the Muslims who are the true and sincere followers of the Qur’an and not the Jews or the Christians who refused to believe in it and rejected it as a piece of fabrication (Qatadah). This meaning of Yatluna is supported by Ibn-e- ‘Abbas, ‘Abdullah bin Mas‘ud, ‘Ata, and ‘Ikrimah.
3:114.
Commentary:
The words, they to whom We have given the Book, clearly refer here to Muslims and not to Jews and Christians, because it is the Muslims that were the true and sincere followers of the Quran and not Jews and Christians who refused to believe in the Quran and rejected it as a piece of fabrication. Jews and Christians have been referred to in the concluding portion of the verse where, owing to their rejection of the Quran, they are spoken of as the losers. The verse provides very high and well-merited praise for the Companions of the Holy Prophet who have been described as true followers of God’s guidance.
f
3:114.
1
اَلَّذِیْنَ اٰتَیْنَاھُمُ الْکِتٰبَ میں اَلْکِتَابَ سے مراد قرآن کریم ہے اور اس آیت میں اللہ تعالیٰ نے یہود کو ملزم قرار دیا ہے کہ تم نے تو تورات کو پسِ پشت پھینک رکھا تھا۔ مگر اب یہ لوگ جن کو ہم نے قرآن کریم دیا ہے اس پر پوری طرح عمل کرتے ہیں اور اس پر ان کا رسمی ایمان نہیں۔ بلکہ پختہ ایمان ہے۔ (تفصیل کے لئے دیکھیں تفسیر کبیر جلد دوم صفحہ ۱۴۹)۔
a
3:114.
128
Commentary:
The words, they to whom We have given the Book, clearly refer here to Muslims and not to Jews and Christians, because it is the Muslims that were the true and sincere followers of the Quran and not Jews and Christians who refused to believe in the Quran and rejected it as a piece of fabrication. Jews and Christians have been referred to in the concluding portion of the verse where, owing to their rejection of the Quran, they are spoken of as the losers. The verse provides very high and well-merited praise for the Companions of the Holy Prophet who have been described as true followers of God’s guidance.
b
3:114.
142
The words refer to Muslims and not to Jews and Christians, because it is the Muslims who are the true and sincere followers of the Qur’an and not the Jews or the Christians who refused to believe in it and rejected it as a piece of fabrication (Qatadah). This meaning of Yatluna is supported by Ibn-e- ‘Abbas, ‘Abdullah bin Mas‘ud, ‘Ata, and ‘Ikrimah.
فَإِنْ ءَامَنُوا۟ بِمِثْلِ مَآ ءَامَنتُم بِهِۦ فَقَدِ ٱهْتَدَوا۟ ۖ وَّإِن تَوَلَّوْا۟ فَإِنَّمَا هُمْ فِى شِقَاقٍ ۖ فَسَيَكْفِيكَهُمُ ٱللَّهُ ۚ وَهُوَ ٱلسَّمِيعُ ٱلْعَلِيمُ
这里告诉穆斯林, 如果犹太教徒和基督教徒一致认为宗教不是一个世袭问题, 而是在于接受一切启示的指导, 那么, 同他们之间便不存在根本性的歧见, 否则, 他们就站不到一起, 而有一条宽阔的鸿沟使他们隔离, 在此情况下, 对产生教会宗派及造成敌视的责任在于犹太教徒和基督教徒, 而不在于穆斯林。
3:21.
Muslims are here told that if Jews and Christians agree with them in holding that Religion is not an hereditary matter, but consists in accepting all revealed guidance, then there is no basic difference between them, otherwise their ways stand apart and a wide gulf separates them, responsibility for the schism and the resulting hostility in this case lying with Jews and Christians and not with Muslims.
3:21.
Important Words:
شقاق (schism) is from شاق which is from شق meaning, he split up a thing, or he tore it up. شق عصا القوم means, he created a split or schism in the community which before stood united. شق النبت means, the vegetation sprouted forth from the earth. الشقmeans, one side as opposed to another. شاقه means, he opposed him and became hostile to him so that each sided with a different party. شقاق means, opposition.; hostility; schism; being mutually remote (Aqrab). The word شقاق however, is not used about the party which sides with the truth (Muhit).
Commentary:
Muslims are here told that if Jews and Christians come to agree with them in holding that religion is not an hereditary matter, but consists in accepting all revealed guidance, then they are one with them; otherwise, their ways stand apart and a wide gulf separates them, responsibility for the schism and the resulting hostility in this case lying with Jews and Christians and not with the Muslims.
In this case, however, Muslims should not be afraid of Jews or Christians; for God is on their side and the God of Islam is All-Hearing and All-Knowing. If they pray to Him for protection, He will answer their prayers and even if there comes a time when they cannot pray, He will protect them; for He is not only All-Hearing but is also All-Knowing. The verse also refers to the special and personal divine protection promised to the Holy Prophet (5:68) in view of the repeated attempts made by the Jews upon his life.
84
这里告诉穆斯林, 如果犹太教徒和基督教徒一致认为宗教不是一个世袭问题, 而是在于接受一切启示的指导, 那么, 同他们之间便不存在根本性的歧见, 否则, 他们就站不到一起, 而有一条宽阔的鸿沟使他们隔离, 在此情况下, 对产生教会宗派及造成敌视的责任在于犹太教徒和基督教徒, 而不在于穆斯林。
a
3:21.
144
Important Words:
شقاق (schism) is from شاق which is from شق meaning, he split up a thing, or he tore it up. شق عصا القوم means, he created a split or schism in the community which before stood united. شق النبت means, the vegetation sprouted forth from the earth. الشقmeans, one side as opposed to another. شاقه means, he opposed him and became hostile to him so that each sided with a different party. شقاق means, opposition.; hostility; schism; being mutually remote (Aqrab). The word شقاق however, is not used about the party which sides with the truth (Muhit).
Commentary:
Muslims are here told that if Jews and Christians come to agree with them in holding that religion is not an hereditary matter, but consists in accepting all revealed guidance, then they are one with them; otherwise, their ways stand apart and a wide gulf separates them, responsibility for the schism and the resulting hostility in this case lying with Jews and Christians and not with the Muslims.
In this case, however, Muslims should not be afraid of Jews or Christians; for God is on their side and the God of Islam is All-Hearing and All-Knowing. If they pray to Him for protection, He will answer their prayers and even if there comes a time when they cannot pray, He will protect them; for He is not only All-Hearing but is also All-Knowing. The verse also refers to the special and personal divine protection promised to the Holy Prophet (5:68) in view of the repeated attempts made by the Jews upon his life.
b
3:21.
155
Muslims are here told that if Jews and Christians agree with them in holding that Religion is not an hereditary matter, but consists in accepting all revealed guidance, then there is no basic difference between them, otherwise their ways stand apart and a wide gulf separates them, responsibility for the schism and the resulting hostility in this case lying with Jews and Christians and not with Muslims.
إِنَّمَا حَرَّمَ عَلَيْكُمُ ٱلْمَيْتَةَ وَٱلدَّمَ وَلَحْمَ ٱلْخِنزِيرِ وَمَآ أُهِلَّ بِهِۦ لِغَيْرِ ٱللَّهِ ۖ فَمَنِ ٱضْطُرَّ غَيْرَ بَاغٍ وَلَا عَادٍ فَلَآ إِثْمَ عَلَيْهِ ۚ إِنَّ ٱللَّهَ غَفُورٌ رَّحِيمٌ
5:4; 6:146; 16:116.
这个肮脏动物的这个名称含有禁止吃它肉的暗示。此词为 خِنْز (Khinz) 和 اَرٰی (Ara) 的结合; 第一部分含意为很脏, 第二部分为 “我看到”, 意即, “我看到它很脏” ……。在印度语中, 这动物的名称叫做 سُؤر (Su’ar) 这与阿拉伯语خِنْزِيْر (Khinzir) 具有完全相同的意义, 即 “我看到它很脏” ……在印度语中这动物也叫做 بَدْ Bad意思是 “坏” 或 “脏” 这也许是原来阿拉伯字的翻译。
اِثْم (Ithm) 的意思是任何不合法的事情, 即一种罪恶; 使人应受惩罚的事情 (اَقْرَبْ, Aqrab); 凡是使良心受谴责的事, 如恶行 (مُفْرَدَات, Mufradat)。在本节经文中所提到的这四种东西并不是伊斯兰教所仅仅禁止的。伊斯兰教也禁止使用许多其它东西, 分成不同种类, 其中有些属 “非法的”, 有些属 مَمْنُوْع (Mamnu‘, 禁止的)。加注的这节经文只提到 “非法的东西” 。禁止的东西已由穆圣阐明, 并在圣训中提到。使用 حَرَام (Haram--------一种非法的东西--------对人类的道德发展有着直接关系, 但对于较次要的禁止的东西, 则不是这样, 虽然两者都是被禁止的。在本节经文中被宣称为非法的这些东西中, 作为食物的血和死动物的肉显然是有害的, 而大多数的医学权威也是这样认为的。已被证实猪肉除了对人类的身体健康有害, 也对他们的道德和精神健康有害。猪吃污物并以生活在肮脏的地方为乐。它有下流习惯并有性反常的邪恶癖性。人们知道绦虫、淋巴结核、癌症以及囊色旋毛虫在食猪肉的人们中间较普遍。吃猪肉还会引起旋毛虫病。
اُھِلَّ کے معنے بلند آواز سے کچھ کہنے کے ہوتے ہیں۔ محاورہ میں کسی جانور یا کسی اور نعمت کے متعلق خداتعالیٰ یا کسی دیوتا کے نام کے پکارنے کے لئے بھی بولا جاتا ہے۔ مثلاً کسی چیز کے متعلق کہہ دیا کہ یہ فلاں دیوتا کی ہے یا خداتعالیٰ کی ہے یا ذبح کرتے وقت خداتعالیٰ کا یا اور کسی دیوتا کا نام لے دیا۔ فرمایا ایسی اشیا کا استعمال حرام ہے خواہ خدا کے سوا کسی اور کی نیاز ہو‘ یا ذبح کے وقت کسی اور کا نام لیا گیا ہو دونوں میں کوئی فرق نہیں کیا گیا۔
فَاء کا ترجمہ یہاں ’’مگر‘‘ کیا گیا ہے کیونکہ وہ بھی نتیجہ پر دلالت کرتا ہے جو فَاء کا مفہوم ہے۔
5:4; 6:146; 16:116.
The very name of this foul animal contains an allusion to the prohibition of its flesh. The word is a combination of Khinz and Ara; the first part meaning, 'very foul' and the second, 'I see', meaning, 'I see it very foul'……In Hindi, this animal is known by the name Su’ar which exactly means the same as the Arabic Khinzir, i.e. 'I see it very foul'......In Hindi this animal is also known as bad meaning 'bad' or 'foul' which is probably a translation of the original Arabic word.
Ithm means, anything unlawful, i.e. a sin; anything which renders a person deserving of punishment (Aqrab); anything that pricks the mind as something evil (Mufradat). The four things mentioned in this verse are not the only things prohibited in Islam. Islam prohibits the use of many other things also which are divided into grades or categories, some of them being "unlawful" and others Mamnu‘ (forbidden). The verse under comment mentions only the "unlawful things." The forbidden things have been stated by the Holy Prophet and are mentioned in the Hadith. The use of Haram or an unlawful thing has direct bearing on the moral development of man but it is not so with a forbidden thing which stands on a lower level of importance, though both are prohibited. Among the things declared unlawful in this verse, the blood and the flesh of a dead animal as food are evidently injurious and have been recognized as such by most authorities on medicine. The flesh of swine has been proved to be injur
5:4; 6:146; 16:116.
Important Words:
المیتة (that which dies of itself) is derived from مات i.e. he died. میتة means: (1) an animal that has died a natural death (Aqrab); (2) an animal that has not been slaughtered in a manner prescribed by Law (Lane & Mufradat).
الخنزیر (swine). Authorities differ as to the derivation of this word, some deriving it from خنزر and others from خزر. The word الخنزرة means, hard and rugged land; or a clumsy, badly-finished axe. خزر الرجل means, the man looked with the hinder parts or outer angles of his eyes (Lisan). خزرت العین means, the eye was or became narrow and small. خزر الرجل means, the man looked from the outer angle of the eye; or he had a distortion of one of his eyes. The Arabs say: کل خنزیراخزر i.e. all swine look from the outer angles of their eyes. خزر المرء means the man affected or pretended to be cunning. الخنزیر means, the swine, the hog, the pig; a certain well-known foul animal the eating of whose flesh is said to be forbidden by every Prophet (Lane). The Holy Founder of the Ahmadiyya Movement says of the word خنزیر: "The very name of this foul animal contains an allusion to the prohibition of its flesh. It is a combination of خنز and ار, the first part meaning, 'very foul' and the second, 'I see'. The word thus literally means, 'I see it very foul'…What is yet more remarkable is that in Hindi this animal is known by the name سؤر which is similarly composed of two words, i.e. سوء and ار, the latter part being identical with the latter part of the Arabic word and the former being the exact equivalent of the first part of the Arabic form. The Hindi word, therefore, exactly means the same as the Arabic, viz. 'I see it very foul'…In Hindi this animal is also known as بد meaning bad or foul which is probably a translation of the original Arabic word" (Teachings of Islam).
أھل (invoked) is derived from ھل meaning, it (the moon) made its appearance; he (the man) cried aloud. اھل also means, it made its appearance; he called or cried aloud. اھل بالتسمیة علی الذبیحة means, he invoked or pronounced the name of God while slaughtering an animal. اھل السیف بفلان means, the sword cut into him ( Aqrab). اھلال which is the infinitive-noun from اھل means, to raise one’s voice aloud by way of exclamation, on seeing the ھلال or the moon of the first night (Mufradat). Thus اھل به لغیر الله would mean, on which the name of anything besides God has been invoked at the time of slaughter; or which has been cut or slaughtered for a being other than God.
اضطر (driven by necessity) is derived from ضر which means, it did harm. ضرہ الی کذا means, it forced him to resort to that. اضطره means, he compelled him against his will. اضطره الی کذا means, he compelled him against his will to have recourse to that (Aqrab).
باغ (disobedient) is derived from بغی meaning, he rebelled; he disobeyed; he committed a wrong. باغ is really باغی being the active participle from بغی meaning, one who disobeys; one who is rebellious (Aqrab).
عاد (exceeding the limit) is the active participle from عدا i.e. he exceeded the proper or the prescribed limit. عدی علیهmeans, he transgressed against him. عاد is really عادی meaning, one who exceeds the limit (Aqrab).
اثم (sin). The verb اثم means, he did a thing which was unlawful for him; he did a thing which made him deserving of punishment. Thus the noun اثم means: (1) anything unlawful, i.e. a sin; (2) anything which makes a person deserving of punishment (Aqrab); (3) anything that pricks the mind as something evil (Mufradat).
Commentary:
This verse speaks only of food that is حرام or unlawful. It makes no mention of طیبات or pure and wholesome things to which reference has already been made in the preceding verse. It should not be supposed that the four things mentioned in this verse are the only things prohibited in Islam. As a matter of fact, Islam prohibits the use of many things; but they are divided into grades or classes, some of them being حرام or unlawful and others being ممنوع or simply forbidden. The verse under comment mentions only the former class. The forbidden things have been stated by the Holy Prophet and are mentioned in Hadith. They must not be used by the Faithful but they cannot be called حرام or unlawful. In fact, there is a great difference between unlawful (حرام) and forbidden (ممنوع) things. Islam recognizes due difference in the importance of different things, and so all prohibitions cannot be classed together and treated as of equal importance. The use of حرام or an unlawful thing has a great and direct bearing on the moral and spiritual development of man but it is not so with a ممنوع or forbidden thing which stands on a lower level of importance, though both are prohibited.
Among the things declared حرام or unlawful in this verse, the injuriousness of consuming blood and the flesh of a dead animal as food has been recognized by most authorities on medicine. The use of the flesh of swine has also proved to be injurious not only to the physical health of man, but also to his moral and spiritual health. The swine eats filth and takes delight in living in dirty places. It has indecent habits and possesses the evil trait of sex-perversion. Tape-worms, scrofula, cancer and encysted trichina are known to be more prevalent among pork-eating peoples. The use of pork also causes trichinosis.
The clause, and that on which the name of any other than Allah has been invoked, refers to that animal at the time of whose slaughter the name of any deity other than Allah is invoked or that animal which is slaughtered with a view to winning the pleasure of an idol or a saint etc., even though the name of Allah may have been mentioned while slaughtering it. Hence, all such animals as are sacrificed in order to propitiate a false deity or a saint, or any food that is cooked as an offering to a deceased person have been condemned as unlawful. Such foods are spiritually harmful. The incentive to these offerings is شرك (i.e. idolatry) and شرك is tantamount to rebellion against God.
In spite of the fact that the above mentioned things have been declared to be unlawful, the verse goes on to say that if for want of food the very life of a person should be in danger, considerations of the preservation of human life must temporarily prevail over other considerations. This is a case of choosing the lesser of two evils. Hence the verse very wisely makes an exception in case of a real and urgent necessity when no other food is available and one is in real danger of losing one’s life if one does not use the unlawful food. In fact, of the four unlawful things, the first three have been declared unlawful mostly on the basis of the fact that they are injurious to physical and moral health, and it is certainly wise to permit their use in case of urgent necessity when there is real danger to life. As for the fourth thing, i.e. a food consecrated to any other being beside Allah, it is evident that it is not injurious intrinsically. It is injurious only from the point of view of faith. Therefore when such a thing is used merely to save one’s life, which may be so usefully employed in the service of religion, there can be no real objection in eating it, because this extremely rare act cannot be considered as involving شرك or idolatry, particularly when it is performed with the sanction of God.
Permission for the exceptional use of such things is, however, qualified by two important conditions: (1) that one who resorts to this use must not be باغی (i.e. disobedient). There should be no lurking spirit of revolt or disobedience behind the act. The circumstances must be real and the condition genuine, and nothing should be done out of design and wilfulness; (2) that the user of unlawful food under exceptional circumstances should not become عاد i.e. he should not exceed the limit. He should confine himself to such quantity only as is absolutely essential to save life. Thus the exceptional use is permissible only at a time when one is under bona fide constraint and is in real danger, and then only to the extent which is absolutely necessary for saving life.
Though it has been declared in this verse that there is no sin in partaking of a prohibited food when no revolt or transgression is intended, yet as one might err in judging what is revolt or transgression and what is not, and thus be unconsciously guilty of breaking a divine commandment, the Quran adds the words: surely, Allah is Most Forgiving, Merciful, meaning that an unintentional deviation will be forgiven by the Merciful God. The clause also reminds a Muslim that though it has been made permissible for him to take unlawful food in exceptional circumstances, yet such circumstances may be due to certain hidden shortcomings of his own for which he should seek God’s forgiveness, and that if he does so he will find God Forgiving and Merciful. In this connection see also 5:4; 6:146 & 16:116.
h
5:4; 6:146; 16:116.
110
这个肮脏动物的这个名称含有禁止吃它肉的暗示。此词为 خِنْز (Khinz) 和 اَرٰی (Ara) 的结合; 第一部分含意为很脏, 第二部分为 “我看到”, 意即, “我看到它很脏” ……。在印度语中, 这动物的名称叫做 سُؤر (Su’ar) 这与阿拉伯语خِنْزِيْر (Khinzir) 具有完全相同的意义, 即 “我看到它很脏” ……在印度语中这动物也叫做 بَدْ Bad意思是 “坏” 或 “脏” 这也许是原来阿拉伯字的翻译。
111
اِثْم (Ithm) 的意思是任何不合法的事情, 即一种罪恶; 使人应受惩罚的事情 (اَقْرَبْ, Aqrab); 凡是使良心受谴责的事, 如恶行 (مُفْرَدَات, Mufradat)。在本节经文中所提到的这四种东西并不是伊斯兰教所仅仅禁止的。伊斯兰教也禁止使用许多其它东西, 分成不同种类, 其中有些属 “非法的”, 有些属 مَمْنُوْع (Mamnu‘, 禁止的)。加注的这节经文只提到 “非法的东西” 。禁止的东西已由穆圣阐明, 并在圣训中提到。使用 حَرَام (Haram--------一种非法的东西--------对人类的道德发展有着直接关系, 但对于较次要的禁止的东西, 则不是这样, 虽然两者都是被禁止的。在本节经文中被宣称为非法的这些东西中, 作为食物的血和死动物的肉显然是有害的, 而大多数的医学权威也是这样认为的。已被证实猪肉除了对人类的身体健康有害, 也对他们的道德和精神健康有害。猪吃污物并以生活在肮脏的地方为乐。它有下流习惯并有性反常的邪恶癖性。人们知道绦虫、淋巴结核、癌症以及囊色旋毛虫在食猪肉的人们中间较普遍。吃猪肉还会引起旋毛虫病。
1
اُھِلَّ کے معنے بلند آواز سے کچھ کہنے کے ہوتے ہیں۔ محاورہ میں کسی جانور یا کسی اور نعمت کے متعلق خداتعالیٰ یا کسی دیوتا کے نام کے پکارنے کے لئے بھی بولا جاتا ہے۔ مثلاً کسی چیز کے متعلق کہہ دیا کہ یہ فلاں دیوتا کی ہے یا خداتعالیٰ کی ہے یا ذبح کرتے وقت خداتعالیٰ کا یا اور کسی دیوتا کا نام لے دیا۔ فرمایا ایسی اشیا کا استعمال حرام ہے خواہ خدا کے سوا کسی اور کی نیاز ہو‘ یا ذبح کے وقت کسی اور کا نام لیا گیا ہو دونوں میں کوئی فرق نہیں کیا گیا۔
2
فَاء کا ترجمہ یہاں ’’مگر‘‘ کیا گیا ہے کیونکہ وہ بھی نتیجہ پر دلالت کرتا ہے جو فَاء کا مفہوم ہے۔
b
5:4; 6:146; 16:116.
180
Important Words:
المیتة (that which dies of itself) is derived from مات i.e. he died. میتة means: (1) an animal that has died a natural death (Aqrab); (2) an animal that has not been slaughtered in a manner prescribed by Law (Lane & Mufradat).
الخنزیر (swine). Authorities differ as to the derivation of this word, some deriving it from خنزر and others from خزر. The word الخنزرة means, hard and rugged land; or a clumsy, badly-finished axe. خزر الرجل means, the man looked with the hinder parts or outer angles of his eyes (Lisan). خزرت العین means, the eye was or became narrow and small. خزر الرجل means, the man looked from the outer angle of the eye; or he had a distortion of one of his eyes. The Arabs say: کل خنزیراخزر i.e. all swine look from the outer angles of their eyes. خزر المرء means the man affected or pretended to be cunning. الخنزیر means, the swine, the hog, the pig; a certain well-known foul animal the eating of whose flesh is said to be forbidden by every Prophet (Lane). The Holy Founder of the Ahmadiyya Movement says of the word خنزیر: "The very name of this foul animal contains an allusion to the prohibition of its flesh. It is a combination of خنز and ار, the first part meaning, 'very foul' and the second, 'I see'. The word thus literally means, 'I see it very foul'…What is yet more remarkable is that in Hindi this animal is known by the name سؤر which is similarly composed of two words, i.e. سوء and ار, the latter part being identical with the latter part of the Arabic word and the former being the exact equivalent of the first part of the Arabic form. The Hindi word, therefore, exactly means the same as the Arabic, viz. 'I see it very foul'…In Hindi this animal is also known as بد meaning bad or foul which is probably a translation of the original Arabic word" (Teachings of Islam).
أھل (invoked) is derived from ھل meaning, it (the moon) made its appearance; he (the man) cried aloud. اھل also means, it made its appearance; he called or cried aloud. اھل بالتسمیة علی الذبیحة means, he invoked or pronounced the name of God while slaughtering an animal. اھل السیف بفلان means, the sword cut into him ( Aqrab). اھلال which is the infinitive-noun from اھل means, to raise one’s voice aloud by way of exclamation, on seeing the ھلال or the moon of the first night (Mufradat). Thus اھل به لغیر الله would mean, on which the name of anything besides God has been invoked at the time of slaughter; or which has been cut or slaughtered for a being other than God.
اضطر (driven by necessity) is derived from ضر which means, it did harm. ضرہ الی کذا means, it forced him to resort to that. اضطره means, he compelled him against his will. اضطره الی کذا means, he compelled him against his will to have recourse to that (Aqrab).
باغ (disobedient) is derived from بغی meaning, he rebelled; he disobeyed; he committed a wrong. باغ is really باغی being the active participle from بغی meaning, one who disobeys; one who is rebellious (Aqrab).
عاد (exceeding the limit) is the active participle from عدا i.e. he exceeded the proper or the prescribed limit. عدی علیهmeans, he transgressed against him. عاد is really عادی meaning, one who exceeds the limit (Aqrab).
اثم (sin). The verb اثم means, he did a thing which was unlawful for him; he did a thing which made him deserving of punishment. Thus the noun اثم means: (1) anything unlawful, i.e. a sin; (2) anything which makes a person deserving of punishment (Aqrab); (3) anything that pricks the mind as something evil (Mufradat).
Commentary:
This verse speaks only of food that is حرام or unlawful. It makes no mention of طیبات or pure and wholesome things to which reference has already been made in the preceding verse. It should not be supposed that the four things mentioned in this verse are the only things prohibited in Islam. As a matter of fact, Islam prohibits the use of many things; but they are divided into grades or classes, some of them being حرام or unlawful and others being ممنوع or simply forbidden. The verse under comment mentions only the former class. The forbidden things have been stated by the Holy Prophet and are mentioned in Hadith. They must not be used by the Faithful but they cannot be called حرام or unlawful. In fact, there is a great difference between unlawful (حرام) and forbidden (ممنوع) things. Islam recognizes due difference in the importance of different things, and so all prohibitions cannot be classed together and treated as of equal importance. The use of حرام or an unlawful thing has a great and direct bearing on the moral and spiritual development of man but it is not so with a ممنوع or forbidden thing which stands on a lower level of importance, though both are prohibited.
Among the things declared حرام or unlawful in this verse, the injuriousness of consuming blood and the flesh of a dead animal as food has been recognized by most authorities on medicine. The use of the flesh of swine has also proved to be injurious not only to the physical health of man, but also to his moral and spiritual health. The swine eats filth and takes delight in living in dirty places. It has indecent habits and possesses the evil trait of sex-perversion. Tape-worms, scrofula, cancer and encysted trichina are known to be more prevalent among pork-eating peoples. The use of pork also causes trichinosis.
The clause, and that on which the name of any other than Allah has been invoked, refers to that animal at the time of whose slaughter the name of any deity other than Allah is invoked or that animal which is slaughtered with a view to winning the pleasure of an idol or a saint etc., even though the name of Allah may have been mentioned while slaughtering it. Hence, all such animals as are sacrificed in order to propitiate a false deity or a saint, or any food that is cooked as an offering to a deceased person have been condemned as unlawful. Such foods are spiritually harmful. The incentive to these offerings is شرك (i.e. idolatry) and شرك is tantamount to rebellion against God.
In spite of the fact that the above mentioned things have been declared to be unlawful, the verse goes on to say that if for want of food the very life of a person should be in danger, considerations of the preservation of human life must temporarily prevail over other considerations. This is a case of choosing the lesser of two evils. Hence the verse very wisely makes an exception in case of a real and urgent necessity when no other food is available and one is in real danger of losing one’s life if one does not use the unlawful food. In fact, of the four unlawful things, the first three have been declared unlawful mostly on the basis of the fact that they are injurious to physical and moral health, and it is certainly wise to permit their use in case of urgent necessity when there is real danger to life. As for the fourth thing, i.e. a food consecrated to any other being beside Allah, it is evident that it is not injurious intrinsically. It is injurious only from the point of view of faith. Therefore when such a thing is used merely to save one’s life, which may be so usefully employed in the service of religion, there can be no real objection in eating it, because this extremely rare act cannot be considered as involving شرك or idolatry, particularly when it is performed with the sanction of God.
Permission for the exceptional use of such things is, however, qualified by two important conditions: (1) that one who resorts to this use must not be باغی (i.e. disobedient). There should be no lurking spirit of revolt or disobedience behind the act. The circumstances must be real and the condition genuine, and nothing should be done out of design and wilfulness; (2) that the user of unlawful food under exceptional circumstances should not become عاد i.e. he should not exceed the limit. He should confine himself to such quantity only as is absolutely essential to save life. Thus the exceptional use is permissible only at a time when one is under bona fide constraint and is in real danger, and then only to the extent which is absolutely necessary for saving life.
Though it has been declared in this verse that there is no sin in partaking of a prohibited food when no revolt or transgression is intended, yet as one might err in judging what is revolt or transgression and what is not, and thus be unconsciously guilty of breaking a divine commandment, the Quran adds the words: surely, Allah is Most Forgiving, Merciful, meaning that an unintentional deviation will be forgiven by the Merciful God. The clause also reminds a Muslim that though it has been made permissible for him to take unlawful food in exceptional circumstances, yet such circumstances may be due to certain hidden shortcomings of his own for which he should seek God’s forgiveness, and that if he does so he will find God Forgiving and Merciful. In this connection see also 5:4; 6:146 & 16:116.
b
5:4; 6:146; 16:116.
198
The very name of this foul animal contains an allusion to the prohibition of its flesh. The word is a combination of Khinz and Ara; the first part meaning, 'very foul' and the second, 'I see', meaning, 'I see it very foul'……In Hindi, this animal is known by the name Su’ar which exactly means the same as the Arabic Khinzir, i.e. 'I see it very foul'......In Hindi this animal is also known as bad meaning 'bad' or 'foul' which is probably a translation of the original Arabic word.
199
Ithm means, anything unlawful, i.e. a sin; anything which renders a person deserving of punishment (Aqrab); anything that pricks the mind as something evil (Mufradat). The four things mentioned in this verse are not the only things prohibited in Islam. Islam prohibits the use of many other things also which are divided into grades or categories, some of them being "unlawful" and others Mamnu‘ (forbidden). The verse under comment mentions only the "unlawful things." The forbidden things have been stated by the Holy Prophet and are mentioned in the Hadith. The use of Haram or an unlawful thing has direct bearing on the moral development of man but it is not so with a forbidden thing which stands on a lower level of importance, though both are prohibited. Among the things declared unlawful in this verse, the blood and the flesh of a dead animal as food are evidently injurious and have been recognized as such by most authorities on medicine. The flesh of swine has been proved to be injur
إِنَّ ٱلَّذِينَ يَكْتُمُونَ مَآ أَنزَلَ ٱللَّهُ مِنَ ٱلْكِتَٰبِ وَيَشْتَرُونَ بِهِۦ ثَمَنًا قَلِيلًا ۙ أُو۟لَٰٓئِكَ مَا يَأْكُلُونَ فِى بُطُونِهِمْ إِلَّا ٱلنَّارَ وَلَا يُكَلِّمُهُمُ ٱللَّهُ يَوْمَ ٱلْقِيَٰمَةِ وَلَا يُزَكِّيهِمْ وَلَهُمْ عَذَابٌ أَلِيمٌ
تھوڑی سی قیمت کا یہ مطلب نہیں کہ زیادہ قیمت لینا جائز ہے بلکہ مطلب یہ ہے کہ دنیوی قیمت کتنی بھی زیادہ ہو وہ اس جرم و نقصان کے بدلہ میں تھوڑی اور حقیر ہے۔
See 2:147.
2:42.
2:160.
The words signify that as fire cannot satisfy thirst, but rather increases it, so the things of this world cannot bring peace of mind and contentment but rather the reverse of them.
See 2:147.
See 2:42.
2:160
Important Words:
یزکیھم (purify them) is from زکی meaning, he purified him; he elevated him (Aqrab). See also 2:130.
Commentary:
Sin generally originates from an undue love of the world but the world is indeed a small thing as compared with the Hereafter (9:38). Those who forsake truth or conceal it for the things of this world eat naught but fire which will eventually consume their own bodies. The verse beautifully hints that the things of this world, as opposed to spiritual blessings, are like the hellfire of the next. As food goes to make up the tissues of the body, so will the body of an enemy of truth eating fire become one whole mass of fire, serving as fuel for the fire of Hell. The words also signify that as fire cannot satisfy hunger and thirst, but rather increases them, so the things of this world cannot bring about peace of mind and contentment but rather the reverse of them. The verse also constitutes a stern warning to those preachers who, in order to gain worldly ends, accommodate their sermons to the views of the listeners and refrain from speaking the truth.
The words Allah will not speak to them do not mean that God will not speak to them at all; for God, being the Lord and Master, will speak even to the guilty on the Day of Judgement, but such speech will be like that of a judge condemning a criminal to punishment. What is meant is that God will not speak to them with love and affection.
The words, nor will He purify them, mean that He will not adjudge them as purified but will declare them unclean and unholy, These words may also mean that on the Day of Judgement, God will not elevate them or exalt them to Himself but will leave them abased and neglected. Again, as these people opposed the truth in the world in order that they might enjoy the good things thereof, they will correspondingly have a painful punishment in the Hereafter and will be deprived of all sweetness of life in the world to come (see important Words under 2:8).
a
2:147.
b
2:42.
c
2:160.
112
此话表明, 火不能解渴, 却相反增加口渴, 因此这个世界的这类事物不能带来心神的安宁和满足而适得相反。
3
تھوڑی سی قیمت کا یہ مطلب نہیں کہ زیادہ قیمت لینا جائز ہے بلکہ مطلب یہ ہے کہ دنیوی قیمت کتنی بھی زیادہ ہو وہ اس جرم و نقصان کے بدلہ میں تھوڑی اور حقیر ہے۔
a
See 2:147.
b
See 2:42.
c
2:160
181
Important Words:
یزکیھم (purify them) is from زکی meaning, he purified him; he elevated him (Aqrab). See also 2:130.
Commentary:
Sin generally originates from an undue love of the world but the world is indeed a small thing as compared with the Hereafter (9:38). Those who forsake truth or conceal it for the things of this world eat naught but fire which will eventually consume their own bodies. The verse beautifully hints that the things of this world, as opposed to spiritual blessings, are like the hellfire of the next. As food goes to make up the tissues of the body, so will the body of an enemy of truth eating fire become one whole mass of fire, serving as fuel for the fire of Hell. The words also signify that as fire cannot satisfy hunger and thirst, but rather increases them, so the things of this world cannot bring about peace of mind and contentment but rather the reverse of them. The verse also constitutes a stern warning to those preachers who, in order to gain worldly ends, accommodate their sermons to the views of the listeners and refrain from speaking the truth.
The words Allah will not speak to them do not mean that God will not speak to them at all; for God, being the Lord and Master, will speak even to the guilty on the Day of Judgement, but such speech will be like that of a judge condemning a criminal to punishment. What is meant is that God will not speak to them with love and affection.
The words, nor will He purify them, mean that He will not adjudge them as purified but will declare them unclean and unholy, These words may also mean that on the Day of Judgement, God will not elevate them or exalt them to Himself but will leave them abased and neglected. Again, as these people opposed the truth in the world in order that they might enjoy the good things thereof, they will correspondingly have a painful punishment in the Hereafter and will be deprived of all sweetness of life in the world to come (see important Words under 2:8).
a
See 2:147.
b
2:42.
c
2:160.
200
The words signify that as fire cannot satisfy thirst, but rather increases it, so the things of this world cannot bring peace of mind and contentment but rather the reverse of them.
يَسْـَٔلُونَكَ مَاذَا يُنفِقُونَ ۖ قُلْ مَآ أَنفَقْتُم مِّنْ خَيْرٍ فَلِلْوَٰلِدَيْنِ وَٱلْأَقْرَبِينَ وَٱلْيَتَٰمَىٰ وَٱلْمَسَٰكِينِ وَٱبْنِ ٱلسَّبِيلِ ۗ وَمَا تَفْعَلُوا۟ مِنْ خَيْرٍ فَإِنَّ ٱللَّهَ بِهِۦ عَلِيمٌ
معترض اعتراض کرتے ہیں کہ سوال کچھ ہے اور جواب کچھ ہے۔ پوچھا تو یہ گیا ہے کہ کیا خرچ کریں اور جواب یہ دیا جاتا ہے کہ جو کچھ بھی مال میں سے خرچ کرو وہ فلاں فلاں کو دو۔ اس کا جواب یہ ہے کہ یہ اعتراض قلتِ تدبر کی وجہ سے ہے۔ سوال کا جواب آیت میں موجود ہے۔ جب فرماتا ہے کہ جو کچھ بھی اچھے مال سے خرچ کرو تو اس میں سائل کا جواب مکمل آگیا ہے۔ اول یہ کہ کوئی حد بندی نہیں‘ جتنے کی توفیق ہو اتنا خرچ کرو۔ دوم یہ کہ اس امر کا لحاظ رکھو کہ جو خرچ کرو وہ طیّب مال ہو۔ جو لوگ حرام کماتے ہیں اور اس میں سے خدا کی راہ میں خرچ کرکے سمجھتے ہیں کہ ہم نے گویا اپنے گناہ کا کفار کر دیا وہ غلطی پر ہیں۔ خ
2:178; 4:37.
The verse signifies that whatever is spent should have been honestly acquired. What is spent must be good also in the sense that it should be acceptable to the receiver and should satisfy his need and that the object on which it is spent is also worthy and laudable.
2:178; 4:37.
Important Words:
خیر (good and abundant wealth). See 2:181.
اقربین (near relatives) is the plural of اقرب (derived from قریب) meaning, one nearer; a near relative (Aqrab).
Commentary:
When the Companions of the Holy Prophet were told that they could not win the pleasure of God and enter Heaven unless they were made to pass through sufferings and afflictions like those that had gone before, they at once signified their readiness to part with their wealth and property in the cause of God and asked the Holy Prophet to let them know what they should spend in order to win the pleasure of God and attain spiritual progress. They did not wait for the threatened trials to actually overtake them, but were prepared to make every kind of sacrifice in advance. They simply wanted to be told what form their sacrifice should take.
In reply to their eager question, God’s reply also indicates a sort of eagerness, as if He meant to impart to the Faithful the relevant commandment in its entirety, without waiting for any further question on their part; for whereas their question related only "what" they should spend, God’s answer goes a step further, describing also "on whom" the money is to be spent. As to the question, what is to be spent should be (1) well-acquired and (2) abundant. In moments of great national need, there can be no hope of success unless people spend freely and generously. But as free and generous expenditure carries with it the danger of weak people resorting to acquiring wealth by unfair means, therefore the condition about the money being "good" has been added.
As to the other part of the anticipated question, i.e. on whom should the money be spent, the Quran says that money should be spent on parents and near relatives (lit. near ones) and orphans and the needy and the wayfarer. The five classes include all such persons as generally stand in need of help. The two first-mentioned classes include relatives, neighbours and friends who go to form the group that immediately surrounds a man and must claim his first attention, owning to personal relationship or personal contact. Then follow two classes that deserve help owing to their particular circumstance, orphans being without anyone to support them and the needy without any means of support. Lastly comes the wayfarer, whose claim consists in his being a stranger with no friend, no relative and no supporter. By pointing out these five classes as deserving of help, the Quran desires to hint that unless the entire community, including those who come to stay with them temporarily, is prepared to fight in the cause of Allah and unless the well-to-do classes help the weaker ones in their preparation for the national struggle, Muslims cannot present a united front nor can their efforts bring about the desired result. Each and every person must gird up his loins to contribute his fullest possible share, and those who cannot do so for want of means must receive help from others who can afford such help.
d
2:178; 4:37.
157
本节经文的意思是, 凡花费掉的, 应被真正得到。所花费掉的, 也必定是有益的。这所谓有益那就是对接受者来说是可接受的、并应满足他的需要, 而所花费的宗旨也要有价值且值得称赞。
3
معترض اعتراض کرتے ہیں کہ سوال کچھ ہے اور جواب کچھ ہے۔ پوچھا تو یہ گیا ہے کہ کیا خرچ کریں اور جواب یہ دیا جاتا ہے کہ جو کچھ بھی مال میں سے خرچ کرو وہ فلاں فلاں کو دو۔ اس کا جواب یہ ہے کہ یہ اعتراض قلتِ تدبر کی وجہ سے ہے۔ سوال کا جواب آیت میں موجود ہے۔ جب فرماتا ہے کہ جو کچھ بھی اچھے مال سے خرچ کرو تو اس میں سائل کا جواب مکمل آگیا ہے۔ اول یہ کہ کوئی حد بندی نہیں‘ جتنے کی توفیق ہو اتنا خرچ کرو۔ دوم یہ کہ اس امر کا لحاظ رکھو کہ جو خرچ کرو وہ طیّب مال ہو۔ جو لوگ حرام کماتے ہیں اور اس میں سے خدا کی راہ میں خرچ کرکے سمجھتے ہیں کہ ہم نے گویا اپنے گناہ کا کفار کر دیا وہ غلطی پر ہیں۔ خ
a
2:178; 4:37.
222
Important Words:
خیر (good and abundant wealth). See 2:181.
اقربین (near relatives) is the plural of اقرب (derived from قریب) meaning, one nearer; a near relative (Aqrab).
Commentary:
When the Companions of the Holy Prophet were told that they could not win the pleasure of God and enter Heaven unless they were made to pass through sufferings and afflictions like those that had gone before, they at once signified their readiness to part with their wealth and property in the cause of God and asked the Holy Prophet to let them know what they should spend in order to win the pleasure of God and attain spiritual progress. They did not wait for the threatened trials to actually overtake them, but were prepared to make every kind of sacrifice in advance. They simply wanted to be told what form their sacrifice should take.
In reply to their eager question, God’s reply also indicates a sort of eagerness, as if He meant to impart to the Faithful the relevant commandment in its entirety, without waiting for any further question on their part; for whereas their question related only "what" they should spend, God’s answer goes a step further, describing also "on whom" the money is to be spent. As to the question, what is to be spent should be (1) well-acquired and (2) abundant. In moments of great national need, there can be no hope of success unless people spend freely and generously. But as free and generous expenditure carries with it the danger of weak people resorting to acquiring wealth by unfair means, therefore the condition about the money being "good" has been added.
As to the other part of the anticipated question, i.e. on whom should the money be spent, the Quran says that money should be spent on parents and near relatives (lit. near ones) and orphans and the needy and the wayfarer. The five classes include all such persons as generally stand in need of help. The two first-mentioned classes include relatives, neighbours and friends who go to form the group that immediately surrounds a man and must claim his first attention, owning to personal relationship or personal contact. Then follow two classes that deserve help owing to their particular circumstance, orphans being without anyone to support them and the needy without any means of support. Lastly comes the wayfarer, whose claim consists in his being a stranger with no friend, no relative and no supporter. By pointing out these five classes as deserving of help, the Quran desires to hint that unless the entire community, including those who come to stay with them temporarily, is prepared to fight in the cause of Allah and unless the well-to-do classes help the weaker ones in their preparation for the national struggle, Muslims cannot present a united front nor can their efforts bring about the desired result. Each and every person must gird up his loins to contribute his fullest possible share, and those who cannot do so for want of means must receive help from others who can afford such help.
d
2:178; 4:37.
258
The verse signifies that whatever is spent should have been honestly acquired. What is spent must be good also in the sense that it should be acceptable to the receiver and should satisfy his need and that the object on which it is spent is also worthy and laudable.
يَسْـَٔلُونَكَ عَنِ ٱلشَّهْرِ ٱلْحَرَامِ قِتَالٍ فِيهِ ۖ قُلْ قِتَالٌ فِيهِ كَبِيرٌ ۖ وَصَدٌّ عَن سَبِيلِ ٱللَّهِ وَكُفْرٌۢ بِهِۦ وَٱلْمَسْجِدِ ٱلْحَرَامِ وَإِخْرَاجُ أَهْلِهِۦ مِنْهُ أَكْبَرُ عِندَ ٱللَّهِ ۚ وَٱلْفِتْنَةُ أَكْبَرُ مِنَ ٱلْقَتْلِ ۗ وَلَا يَزَالُونَ يُقَٰتِلُونَكُمْ حَتَّىٰ يَرُدُّوكُمْ عَن دِينِكُمْ إِنِ ٱسْتَطَٰعُوا۟ ۚ وَمَن يَرْتَدِدْ مِنكُمْ عَن دِينِهِۦ فَيَمُتْ وَهُوَ كَافِرٌ فَأُو۟لَٰٓئِكَ حَبِطَتْ أَعْمَٰلُهُمْ فِى ٱلدُّنْيَا وَٱلْءَاخِرَةِ ۖ وَأُو۟لَٰٓئِكَ أَصْحَٰبُ ٱلنَّارِ ۖ هُمْ فِيهَا خَٰلِدُونَ
2:192.
3:87, 91; 4:138; 5:55; 47:26.
3:23; 7:148; 18:106.
信者们被告知, 假如不信仰者亵渎了圣月的圣洁, 他们应毫不犹豫地在圣月中惩罚他们, 只有这样, 神圣事物的圣洁性才能得到保障 (2:195)。注释者通常阐述, 而事实上也有这样的传说, 大意是说, 有一次穆圣派遣阿布杜拉•彬•贾希 (عَبْدُالله بِنْ جَحْش, ‘Abdullah bin Jahsh) 去传递有关一伙古来西人出发去麦加的消息。当阿布杜拉 (عَبْدُالله, ‘Abdullah) 和他的同伴到达一个名叫纳赫拉 (نَخْلَة, Nakhla) 的地方时, 他们遇上了一小伙人。阿布杜拉袭击了这伙人, 杀死了其中的一个并俘获了两个。发生这件事的日期是有疑问的, 有的认为它是在圣月中, 而另一些不以为然。消息传到麦加, 古来西人利用关于日期的怀疑而提出抗议, 说是穆斯林亵渎了圣月。加注的本节经文就在当时被启示了。
یعنی ان دونوں کی حرمت کو ضائع کرنے کی کوشش کرنا ہے۔
2:192.
3:87, 91; 4:138; 5:55; 47:26.
3:23; 7:148; 18:106.
The believers were told that if disbelievers violated the sanctity of the Sacred Months, they should not hesitate to punish them in the Sacred Months, for thus alone could the sanctity of a sacred thing be safeguarded (2:195). Commentators generally state, and in fact there are also traditions to this effect, that on one occasion the Holy Prophet sent ‘Abdullah bin Jahsh to bring news about a party of the Quraish proceeding to Mecca. When ‘Abdullah and his companions reached a place called Nakhlah, they met a small party. ‘Abdullah attacked the party, killing one of them and capturing two. The date on which this happened was doubtful, some considering it to be one within the Sacred Month and others not. The news reached Mecca, the Quraish took advantage of the doubt and protested that the Muslims had violated the Sacred Month. The verse under comment was revealed on that occasion.
2:192.
3:84, 91; 4:138; 5:55; 47:26.
3:23; 7:148; 18:106.
Important Words:
کبیر (great transgression) really stands for ذنب کبیر i.e. a great sin or great transgression or great offence. اکبر is in the comparative degree and means, a greater sin, etc.
صد (to hinder) is the infinitive from صد. They say صدہ i.e. he prevented him; he turned him back. صد عنه اومنه means, he kept back from it. Thus the word is both transitive and intransitive. صد, therefore, means: (1) to hinder or to prevent; (2) a hindrance or a barrier; (3) a mountain or a wall, etc., because it serves as a barrier (Aqrab).
یردوکم (turn you back) and یرتدد (turns back) are both derived from رد. They say ردہ i.e. he turned him back; and ارتد i.e.he himself turned back. ارتد عن الاسلام means, he turned back from Islam and reverted to a state of disbelief. مرتد means, one who turns back from his religion, particularly from Islam; one who apostatizes (Taj).
حبطت (shall be in vain). حبط البعیر means, the stomach of the camel became inflated and his belly became bound by eating unwholesome food. حبط عمله means: (1) his work or deed became null and void and went for nothing; (2) his work or deed became evil and corrupt. حبط دمه means, his blood went unavenged. حبط ماء البئر means, the water of the well receded and went down never to return to its original level (Aqrab & Lane).
Commentary:
The words translated as "to be ungrateful to Him and the Sacred Mosque" may also be rendered as "to be ungrateful to Him and to hinder men from the Sacred Mosque".
The Quran has already explained that if disbelievers violate the sanctity of a sacred month, Muslims may also retaliate in a sacred month; for thus only can the sanctity of a sacred thing be safeguarded (2:195).
The present verse provides a further reason for defending Islam, if need be, in a sacred month. Disbelievers, particularly those of Mecca, had violated the sanctity of things far more sacred than a "sacred month"––they were trying forcibly to turn men form the way of God; they were preventing people from approaching the Sacred Mosque and they had forced the Muslim dwellers of Mecca to flee from it. This was a form of persecution which was certainly much more heinous than fighting in a Sacred Month.
Commentators generally state, and in fact there are also traditions to the effect, that once the Holy Prophet sent one of his Companions, named ‘Abdullah bin Jahsh, to bring news about a party of the Quraish proceeding to Mecca. When ‘Abdullah and his comrades reached a place called Nakhlah, they met a small party proceeding to Mecca. Guided by his own judgement and without any instruction to that effect from the Prophet, ‘Abdullah attacked the party, killing one of them and capturing two. The date was doubtful, some considering it to be as one of the Sacred Month and others as not. When the news reached Mecca, the Quraish took advantage of the doubt as regards date and clamoured that the Muslims had violated the Sacred Month. The verse under comment was revealed on that occasion (Tabari, Hisham & Zurqani).
The verse acknowledges the sanctity of the Sacred Months and considers it an act of sin and transgression knowingly to fight in a sacred month, but forcefully points out that the sanctities which disbelievers were violating were far more worthy of safeguarding. Disbelievers were forcibly preventing people from accepting Islam. They did not allow Muslims to approach the Sacred Mosque and they had mercilessly turned the Prophet and his followers out of their homes.
The verse should not be understood to imply that Muslims did start a fight in a sacred month, it only purports to bring home to disbelievers the fact that in view of their persistent violation of highly sacred thing, it does not lie in their mouth to accuse Muslim of violating the sanctity of a sacred month.
The clause it is they whose works shall be vain in this world and the next does not mean that everything that a renegade from Islam, or, for that matter, everything that a disbeliever, does will go for nothing and produce no result. The clause only means that such actions of the renegades as they might do to weaken the cause of Islam in this world as well as those of their actions which they might perform in opposition to the teaching of Islam in order to win the pleasure of God in the world to come, will all be in vain. Thus the clause does not refer to such good actions as a person may perform in the state o unbelief; for, as the Quran expressly states, these must have their reward (99:8) which may either take the form of the acceptance of Islam or that of the lightening of punishment. The Holy Prophet is reported to have said about his uncle Abu Talib that on account of the good treatment the latter extended to him, he is likely to be only lightly punished for his non-acceptance of Islam (Bukhari). On another occasion when Hakim bin Hizam, a nephew of his wife Khadijah, asked the Prophet whether he would get any reward for the good deeds he did before he accepted Islam, the Holy Prophet said, "your very acceptance of Islam is a reward thereof" (Bukhari).
The clause, their works shall be vain in this world and the next, also signifies that if such men as apostatize from Islam had not done so, their deeds would have brought them the great reward promised to Muslims both in this world and the next, but by apostatizing from Islam they had totally deprived themselves of this twofold reward.
Finally, the clause, and they will not cease fighting you until they turn you back from your faith, if they can, throws a flood of light on the attitude of disbelievers towards Muslim. They were not only the first to begin hostilities, but had also vowed not to cease fighting until Islam had been totally wiped out from Arabia and not a soul remained to call himself a Muslim. This clear testimony of the Quran should be an eye-opener for those who accuse Muslims of being aggressors in their early struggle against disbelievers. The words, if they can, are highly eulogistic of the Companions of the Holy Prophet. Do what they could, disbelievers would never be able to turn back Muslims from their faith. Their love for Islam was too deep to be extirpated by persecution however severe and bitter it might be.
b
2:192.
c
3:87, 91; 4:138; 5:55; 47:26.
d
3:23; 7:148; 18:106.
159
信者们被告知, 假如不信仰者亵渎了圣月的圣洁, 他们应毫不犹豫地在圣月中惩罚他们, 只有这样, 神圣事物的圣洁性才能得到保障 (2:195)。注释者通常阐述, 而事实上也有这样的传说, 大意是说, 有一次穆圣派遣阿布杜拉•彬•贾希 (عَبْدُالله بِنْ جَحْش, ‘Abdullah bin Jahsh) 去传递有关一伙古来西人出发去麦加的消息。当阿布杜拉 (عَبْدُالله, ‘Abdullah) 和他的同伴到达一个名叫纳赫拉 (نَخْلَة, Nakhla) 的地方时, 他们遇上了一小伙人。阿布杜拉袭击了这伙人, 杀死了其中的一个并俘获了两个。发生这件事的日期是有疑问的, 有的认为它是在圣月中, 而另一些不以为然。消息传到麦加, 古来西人利用关于日期的怀疑而提出抗议, 说是穆斯林亵渎了圣月。加注的本节经文就在当时被启示了。
2
یعنی ان دونوں کی حرمت کو ضائع کرنے کی کوشش کرنا ہے۔
a
2:192.
b
3:84, 91; 4:138; 5:55; 47:26.
c
3:23; 7:148; 18:106.
224
Important Words:
کبیر (great transgression) really stands for ذنب کبیر i.e. a great sin or great transgression or great offence. اکبر is in the comparative degree and means, a greater sin, etc.
صد (to hinder) is the infinitive from صد. They say صدہ i.e. he prevented him; he turned him back. صد عنه اومنه means, he kept back from it. Thus the word is both transitive and intransitive. صد, therefore, means: (1) to hinder or to prevent; (2) a hindrance or a barrier; (3) a mountain or a wall, etc., because it serves as a barrier (Aqrab).
یردوکم (turn you back) and یرتدد (turns back) are both derived from رد. They say ردہ i.e. he turned him back; and ارتد i.e.he himself turned back. ارتد عن الاسلام means, he turned back from Islam and reverted to a state of disbelief. مرتد means, one who turns back from his religion, particularly from Islam; one who apostatizes (Taj).
حبطت (shall be in vain). حبط البعیر means, the stomach of the camel became inflated and his belly became bound by eating unwholesome food. حبط عمله means: (1) his work or deed became null and void and went for nothing; (2) his work or deed became evil and corrupt. حبط دمه means, his blood went unavenged. حبط ماء البئر means, the water of the well receded and went down never to return to its original level (Aqrab & Lane).
Commentary:
The words translated as "to be ungrateful to Him and the Sacred Mosque" may also be rendered as "to be ungrateful to Him and to hinder men from the Sacred Mosque".
The Quran has already explained that if disbelievers violate the sanctity of a sacred month, Muslims may also retaliate in a sacred month; for thus only can the sanctity of a sacred thing be safeguarded (2:195).
The present verse provides a further reason for defending Islam, if need be, in a sacred month. Disbelievers, particularly those of Mecca, had violated the sanctity of things far more sacred than a "sacred month"––they were trying forcibly to turn men form the way of God; they were preventing people from approaching the Sacred Mosque and they had forced the Muslim dwellers of Mecca to flee from it. This was a form of persecution which was certainly much more heinous than fighting in a Sacred Month.
Commentators generally state, and in fact there are also traditions to the effect, that once the Holy Prophet sent one of his Companions, named ‘Abdullah bin Jahsh, to bring news about a party of the Quraish proceeding to Mecca. When ‘Abdullah and his comrades reached a place called Nakhlah, they met a small party proceeding to Mecca. Guided by his own judgement and without any instruction to that effect from the Prophet, ‘Abdullah attacked the party, killing one of them and capturing two. The date was doubtful, some considering it to be as one of the Sacred Month and others as not. When the news reached Mecca, the Quraish took advantage of the doubt as regards date and clamoured that the Muslims had violated the Sacred Month. The verse under comment was revealed on that occasion (Tabari, Hisham & Zurqani).
The verse acknowledges the sanctity of the Sacred Months and considers it an act of sin and transgression knowingly to fight in a sacred month, but forcefully points out that the sanctities which disbelievers were violating were far more worthy of safeguarding. Disbelievers were forcibly preventing people from accepting Islam. They did not allow Muslims to approach the Sacred Mosque and they had mercilessly turned the Prophet and his followers out of their homes.
The verse should not be understood to imply that Muslims did start a fight in a sacred month, it only purports to bring home to disbelievers the fact that in view of their persistent violation of highly sacred thing, it does not lie in their mouth to accuse Muslim of violating the sanctity of a sacred month.
The clause it is they whose works shall be vain in this world and the next does not mean that everything that a renegade from Islam, or, for that matter, everything that a disbeliever, does will go for nothing and produce no result. The clause only means that such actions of the renegades as they might do to weaken the cause of Islam in this world as well as those of their actions which they might perform in opposition to the teaching of Islam in order to win the pleasure of God in the world to come, will all be in vain. Thus the clause does not refer to such good actions as a person may perform in the state o unbelief; for, as the Quran expressly states, these must have their reward (99:8) which may either take the form of the acceptance of Islam or that of the lightening of punishment. The Holy Prophet is reported to have said about his uncle Abu Talib that on account of the good treatment the latter extended to him, he is likely to be only lightly punished for his non-acceptance of Islam (Bukhari). On another occasion when Hakim bin Hizam, a nephew of his wife Khadijah, asked the Prophet whether he would get any reward for the good deeds he did before he accepted Islam, the Holy Prophet said, "your very acceptance of Islam is a reward thereof" (Bukhari).
The clause, their works shall be vain in this world and the next, also signifies that if such men as apostatize from Islam had not done so, their deeds would have brought them the great reward promised to Muslims both in this world and the next, but by apostatizing from Islam they had totally deprived themselves of this twofold reward.
Finally, the clause, and they will not cease fighting you until they turn you back from your faith, if they can, throws a flood of light on the attitude of disbelievers towards Muslim. They were not only the first to begin hostilities, but had also vowed not to cease fighting until Islam had been totally wiped out from Arabia and not a soul remained to call himself a Muslim. This clear testimony of the Quran should be an eye-opener for those who accuse Muslims of being aggressors in their early struggle against disbelievers. The words, if they can, are highly eulogistic of the Companions of the Holy Prophet. Do what they could, disbelievers would never be able to turn back Muslims from their faith. Their love for Islam was too deep to be extirpated by persecution however severe and bitter it might be.
a
2:192.
b
3:87, 91; 4:138; 5:55; 47:26.
c
3:23; 7:148; 18:106.
260
The believers were told that if disbelievers violated the sanctity of the Sacred Months, they should not hesitate to punish them in the Sacred Months, for thus alone could the sanctity of a sacred thing be safeguarded (2:195). Commentators generally state, and in fact there are also traditions to this effect, that on one occasion the Holy Prophet sent ‘Abdullah bin Jahsh to bring news about a party of the Quraish proceeding to Mecca. When ‘Abdullah and his companions reached a place called Nakhlah, they met a small party. ‘Abdullah attacked the party, killing one of them and capturing two. The date on which this happened was doubtful, some considering it to be one within the Sacred Month and others not. The news reached Mecca, the Quraish took advantage of the doubt and protested that the Muslims had violated the Sacred Month. The verse under comment was revealed on that occasion.
ٱلطَّلَٰقُ مَرَّتَانِ ۖ فَإِمْسَاكٌۢ بِمَعْرُوفٍ أَوْ تَسْرِيحٌۢ بِإِحْسَٰنٍ ۗ وَلَا يَحِلُّ لَكُمْ أَن تَأْخُذُوا۟ مِمَّآ ءَاتَيْتُمُوهُنَّ شَيْـًٔا إِلَّآ أَن يَخَافَآ أَلَّا يُقِيمَا حُدُودَ ٱللَّهِ ۖ فَإِنْ خِفْتُمْ أَلَّا يُقِيمَا حُدُودَ ٱللَّهِ فَلَا جُنَاحَ عَلَيْهِمَا فِيمَا ٱفْتَدَتْ بِهِۦ ۗ تِلْكَ حُدُودُ ٱللَّهِ فَلَا تَعْتَدُوهَا ۚ وَمَن يَتَعَدَّ حُدُودَ ٱللَّهِ فَأُو۟لَٰٓئِكَ هُمُ ٱلظَّٰلِمُونَ
2:228.
2:232; 4:130; 65:3.
这节经文含有对离婚第五种约制。如果丈夫想和妻子离异, 他必须在三个不同时期声明离婚, 每次在她个别的洁净时期中并没有和她同过房, 在同一时期声明两次或三次离婚, 是不准许的。这在 مَرَّتَان (Marratan, 两次) 这一字中可以看出。这字的意思是, 发生在两个不同时期的一件事情, 而不是发生在同一时间的两件事情。穆圣把这种同一时间的集中声明, 不管几次, 都只作一次离婚声明看待 (تِرْمِذِی与داؤد)。根据纳萨伊 (نَسَائِی) 说, 有一天穆圣听到有人在同一时间内作了三次离婚声明, 非常生气地说, “在我还在你们中间时, 就把安拉的经典当儿戏吗?” 在第一和第二次声明离婚后, 丈夫在 عِدَّة (‘Iddat), 既等候时期内, 不论经过或不经过妻子的同意, 都可以召回离了婚的妻子; 但是等候时期过了以后, 他要经过她的同意而且要重新娶她才能收回。在第三次离婚后, 丈夫就丧失了这种权利, 这对夫妻就最终离异了。穆圣的一个伙伴有一次问他说, “«古兰经» 在这里只谈了两次离婚, 第三次离婚在什么地方?” 穆圣向他提到 “以厚道的做法辞离她们” 这句话, 意思是说, 第一和第二次离婚之后, 丈夫可以保留并且可以再娶她, 如果她也同意结婚的话; 但是如果他要最后离异的话, 他应与她离婚, 即第三次离婚 {جَرِيْر (Jarir) 与 مُسْنَد (Musnad)}。这一点在下一节经文中还要进一步说明。这样, 这里的 تَسْرِيْح (Tasrih) 这个字意为 طَلَاق (Talaq), 即离婚。
一个人和他的妻子离婚后, 他就丧失了他已给她的嫁妆 (办嫁妆的钱); 如果在离婚时他还没有给过她嫁妆, 在正式离婚之前, 他必须给她那笔钱。而且, 他不准许取回作为馈赠或礼物而给她的任何东西。
不过, 如果提出离婚的是女方, 法律上称为 خُلْع (khul‘), 她必须通过 قَاضِیْ (Qadi) 即法官, 正如 “你们 (双方) 害怕” 这几个字所暗示的那样。在这种情况下, 她必须归还男方全部或部分嫁妆以及男方过去送给她的礼品, 这要双方议定或由法官决定。盖斯•彬•撒比特 (قَيْس بِنْ ثَابِتْ, Qais bin Thabit) 的妻子杰米拉 (جَمِيْلَة, Jamilah) 那个案例提供了妇女行使 خُلْع 权的一个很好的实际说明。她要求和丈夫盖斯离婚, 理由是她不喜欢他, 也就是说, 他们性格不合, 不能相处在一起。穆圣给了他 خُلْع 的许可, 但是她必须把他给她的果园还给他 (布哈理)。
عام طور پر اس زمانہ کے علماء یہ سمجھتے ہیں کہ جس نے تین دفعہ طلاق کہہ دیا اس کی طلاق بائن ہو جاتی ہے یعنی اس کی بیوی اس سے دوبارہ اس وقت تک شادی نہیں کر سکتی جب تک کسی اور سے نکاح نہ کر لے مگر یہ غلط ہے کیونکہ قرآن کریم میں صاف فرمایا گیا ہے اَلطَّـلَا قُ مَرَّتٰنِ یعنی وہ طلاق جو بائن نہیں وہ دو دفعہ ہو سکتی ہے اس طور پر کہ پہلے مرد طلاق دے پھر یا تو طلاق واپس لے لے اور رجوع کرے یا عدت گزرنے دے اور نکاح کرے۔ پھر اَن بَن کی صورت میں دوبارہ طلاق دے۔ پس ایسی طلاق کا دو دفعہ ہونا تو قطعی طور پر ثابت ہے۔ پس ایک ہی دفعہ تین یا تین سے زیادہ بار طلاق کہہ دینے کو بائن قرار دین
تمہیں یعنی ملتِ اسلامیہ یا اسلام پر ایمان رکھنے والی حکومت کو۔
اِنْ خِفْتُمْ میں بتایا گیا ہے کہ اگر محکمہ قضا اس بات کا فیصلہ کرے کہ عورت خاوند کے پاس رہنے کے لئے راضی نہیں اور اس کی نارضا مندی کی وجہ سے مرد بھی عدل نہ رکھ سکے گا‘ تو عورت اگر کچھ دینا چاہے تو مرد کو اجازت ہے کہ کچھ مال لیکر اسے طلاق دے دے۔ لیکن وہ صرف اتنا ہی مال لے سکتا ہے جتنا اس نے خود دیا ہو اور کچھ نہیں۔
2:232; 4:130; 65:3.
This verse contains the fifth check on divorce. A man who seeks separation from his wife must pronounce divorce on three separate occasions, each in a separate period of purity when he has not gone in unto her during that period. The pronouncement of divorce twice or thrice at one and the same time is not permissible as is hinted in the word Marratan (twice) which signifies a thing happening on two separate occasions and not two things happening at one and the same time. The Holy Prophet treated such collective pronouncements, whatever their number, as only one divorce (Tirmidhi & Dawud). According to Nasa’i, the Holy Prophet was extremely angry when one day he was told that a person had made all the three pronouncements of divorce at one and the same time and said, "Is the Book of God going to be made a plaything while I am yet among you?" After the pronouncement of the first two divorces, the husband can take back the divorced wife within ‘Iddat, i.e. the period of waiting, with or
When a person divorces his wife, he forfeits the dower-money he has given her; and if at the time of divorce he has not yet given her the dower- money, he must make the payment before the divorce becomes effective. Again, he is not allowed to take back anything he might have given her in the form of gifts and presents.
If, however, it is the wife who demands separation, technically known as Khula‘, she must get it through a Qadi or judge as the words "you fear," in the plural number, hint. In this case she has to part with, in full or in part, her dowry as well as the gifts she might have received from her husband, as agreed upon by the parties or decided by the judge. The case of Jamilah, wife of Qais bin Thabit, provides a good illustration of the exercise of the right of Khula‘ by women. She demanded separation from her husband. Qais, on the ground that she did not like him, i.e. their temperaments being different she could not get on with him. She was granted Khula‘ by the Holy Prophet, but she had to return to her husband the orchard he had given her (Bukhari).
See 2:228.
2:232; 4:130; 65:3.
Important Words:
امساك (retain) is derived from امسك which is again derived from مسك. They say امسك به i.e. he stuck to it. امسك is both transitive and intransitive. امسكه means, he got hold of it and stopped and retained it. امسك عن الکلام means, he abstained from talking. امساك means, (1) to hold or stop or prevent or retain; (2) to refrain or abstain (Aqrab).
تسریح (send away) is the noun-infinitive from سرح (sarraha) which is derived from سرح. They say سرح المواشی i.e. the cattle went forth for grazing. سرح السیل means, the flood moved on leisurely. سرحه means, he sent him away. سرح فلان زوجته means, he sent away or divorced his wife (Aqrab).
حدود (limits) is the plural of حد i.e. a limit. حده means, he put a limit to it. حد الشیء عن الشیء means, he distinguished one thing from the other. الحد means, (1) the limit or the line where two things meet; (2) last limit or extremity of a thing; (3) that by which a thing may be defined; (4) prescribed punishment for an offence. حدود الله means God’s religious commandments (Aqrab).
Commentary:
This verse contains the fifth check on divorce. A man who seeks permanent and irrevocable separation from his wife must pronounce divorce on three separate occasions, each in a separate طھر i.e. period of purity, when the woman is clean and the man has not gone in unto her during that period of purity. The pronouncement of divorce twice or thrice at one and the same time is not permissible as the verse hints in the word مرتان (twice) which signifies a thing happening on two separate occasions and not two things happening at one and the same time. The Holy Prophet treated such collective pronouncements, whatever their number, as only one divorce (Tirmidhi & Dawud). According to Nasa’i, the Holy Prophet was extremely angry when one day he was told that a person had made all the three pronouncements of divorce at one and the same time, and said: "Is the Book of God going to be made a plaything while I am yet among you?"
After the pronouncement of the first two divorces, the husband can take back the divorced wife within ‘iddah, i.e. the period of waiting, with or without her consent; but after the period of waiting is over, he can take her back only with her consent and that after remarrying her. After the pronouncement of the third divorce, however, the husband forfeits this right and the couple are finally separated. A Companion of the Holy Prophet once asked him saying, "The Quran has here spoken of two divorces only, whence comes in the third!" The Prophet referred him to the Quranic words اوتسریح باحسان i.e. or send them away with kindness meaning thereby that after the pronouncement of the first two divorces the husband was free to retain his wife if he so desired but if he wanted irrevocable separation, he should "send her away", i.e. divorce her a third time (Jarir & Musnad). The point is further made clear in the succeeding verse. Thus the word تسریح here signifies طلاق i.e. divorce.
The present verse also makes it clear that when a person divorces his wife, he forfeits مھر i.e. the dower-money he has given her; and if at the time of divorce he has not yet given her the dower-money agreed on by the parties, he must make the payment before the divorce becomes effective. Again, he is not allowed to take back anything he might have given her in the form of gifts and presents as the clause it is not lawful for you that you take anything of what you have given them indicates.
If, however, it is the wife who demands separation, technically known as خلع (Khul‘a lit. the putting off of clothes etc., or the shedding of old leaves), she must get it through a Qadi or judge as the word خفتم (you fear), which has been put in the plural number, hints. In this case she has to part with, in full or in part, her dowry as well as the gifts she might have received from her husband, as agreed on by the parties or decided by the judge. The case of Jamilah, wife of Qais bin Thabit, provides a good illustration of the exercise of the right of Khul‘a by women. She demanded separation from her husband, Qais, on the ground that she did not like him, i.e. their temperaments being different, she could not get on with him. She was granted Kkul‘a by the Holy Prophet, but she had to return to her husband the orchard he had given her (Bukhari). This right, however, is not to be exercised in a light-hearted manner. The Holy Prophet has condemned the action of a woman who demands separation from her husband without valid reason even as he has condemned the action of a man who divorces his wife without genuine cause. He is reported to have said, "A woman who seeks separation from her husband without a legitimate cause shall be deprived of the fragrance of heaven" (Dawud & Tirmidhi). This is what is hinted in the concluding words, these are the limits prescribed by Allah, so transgress them not, etc. The husband and the wife are both warned to fear God and refrain from transgressing the limits imposed by God for their own good.
b
2:228.
c
2:232; 4:130; 65:3.
170
这节经文含有对离婚第五种约制。如果丈夫想和妻子离异, 他必须在三个不同时期声明离婚, 每次在她个别的洁净时期中并没有和她同过房, 在同一时期声明两次或三次离婚, 是不准许的。这在 مَرَّتَان (Marratan, 两次) 这一字中可以看出。这字的意思是, 发生在两个不同时期的一件事情, 而不是发生在同一时间的两件事情。穆圣把这种同一时间的集中声明, 不管几次, 都只作一次离婚声明看待 (تِرْمِذِی与داؤد)。根据纳萨伊 (نَسَائِی) 说, 有一天穆圣听到有人在同一时间内作了三次离婚声明, 非常生气地说, “在我还在你们中间时, 就把安拉的经典当儿戏吗?” 在第一和第二次声明离婚后, 丈夫在 عِدَّة (‘Iddat), 既等候时期内, 不论经过或不经过妻子的同意, 都可以召回离了婚的妻子; 但是等候时期过了以后, 他要经过她的同意而且要重新娶她才能收回。在第三次离婚后, 丈夫就丧失了这种权利, 这对夫妻就最终离异了。穆圣的一个伙伴有一次问他说, “«古兰经» 在这里只谈了两次离婚, 第三次离婚在什么地方?” 穆圣向他提到 “以厚道的做法辞离她们” 这句话, 意思是说, 第一和第二次离婚之后, 丈夫可以保留并且可以再娶她, 如果她也同意结婚的话; 但是如果他要最后离异的话, 他应与她离婚, 即第三次离婚 {جَرِيْر (Jarir) 与 مُسْنَد (Musnad)}。这一点在下一节经文中还要进一步说明。这样, 这里的 تَسْرِيْح (Tasrih) 这个字意为 طَلَاق (Talaq), 即离婚。
171
一个人和他的妻子离婚后, 他就丧失了他已给她的嫁妆 (办嫁妆的钱); 如果在离婚时他还没有给过她嫁妆, 在正式离婚之前, 他必须给她那笔钱。而且, 他不准许取回作为馈赠或礼物而给她的任何东西。
172
不过, 如果提出离婚的是女方, 法律上称为 خُلْع (khul‘), 她必须通过 قَاضِیْ (Qadi) 即法官, 正如 “你们 (双方) 害怕” 这几个字所暗示的那样。在这种情况下, 她必须归还男方全部或部分嫁妆以及男方过去送给她的礼品, 这要双方议定或由法官决定。盖斯•彬•撒比特 (قَيْس بِنْ ثَابِتْ, Qais bin Thabit) 的妻子杰米拉 (جَمِيْلَة, Jamilah) 那个案例提供了妇女行使 خُلْع 权的一个很好的实际说明。她要求和丈夫盖斯离婚, 理由是她不喜欢他, 也就是说, 他们性格不合, 不能相处在一起。穆圣给了他 خُلْع 的许可, 但是她必须把他给她的果园还给他 (布哈理)。
1
عام طور پر اس زمانہ کے علماء یہ سمجھتے ہیں کہ جس نے تین دفعہ طلاق کہہ دیا اس کی طلاق بائن ہو جاتی ہے یعنی اس کی بیوی اس سے دوبارہ اس وقت تک شادی نہیں کر سکتی جب تک کسی اور سے نکاح نہ کر لے مگر یہ غلط ہے کیونکہ قرآن کریم میں صاف فرمایا گیا ہے اَلطَّـلَا قُ مَرَّتٰنِ یعنی وہ طلاق جو بائن نہیں وہ دو دفعہ ہو سکتی ہے اس طور پر کہ پہلے مرد طلاق دے پھر یا تو طلاق واپس لے لے اور رجوع کرے یا عدت گزرنے دے اور نکاح کرے۔ پھر اَن بَن کی صورت میں دوبارہ طلاق دے۔ پس ایسی طلاق کا دو دفعہ ہونا تو قطعی طور پر ثابت ہے۔ پس ایک ہی دفعہ تین یا تین سے زیادہ بار طلاق کہہ دینے کو بائن قرار دین
2
تمہیں یعنی ملتِ اسلامیہ یا اسلام پر ایمان رکھنے والی حکومت کو۔
3
اِنْ خِفْتُمْ میں بتایا گیا ہے کہ اگر محکمہ قضا اس بات کا فیصلہ کرے کہ عورت خاوند کے پاس رہنے کے لئے راضی نہیں اور اس کی نارضا مندی کی وجہ سے مرد بھی عدل نہ رکھ سکے گا‘ تو عورت اگر کچھ دینا چاہے تو مرد کو اجازت ہے کہ کچھ مال لیکر اسے طلاق دے دے۔ لیکن وہ صرف اتنا ہی مال لے سکتا ہے جتنا اس نے خود دیا ہو اور کچھ نہیں۔
a
See 2:228.
b
2:232; 4:130; 65:3.
236
Important Words:
امساك (retain) is derived from امسك which is again derived from مسك. They say امسك به i.e. he stuck to it. امسك is both transitive and intransitive. امسكه means, he got hold of it and stopped and retained it. امسك عن الکلام means, he abstained from talking. امساك means, (1) to hold or stop or prevent or retain; (2) to refrain or abstain (Aqrab).
تسریح (send away) is the noun-infinitive from سرح (sarraha) which is derived from سرح. They say سرح المواشی i.e. the cattle went forth for grazing. سرح السیل means, the flood moved on leisurely. سرحه means, he sent him away. سرح فلان زوجته means, he sent away or divorced his wife (Aqrab).
حدود (limits) is the plural of حد i.e. a limit. حده means, he put a limit to it. حد الشیء عن الشیء means, he distinguished one thing from the other. الحد means, (1) the limit or the line where two things meet; (2) last limit or extremity of a thing; (3) that by which a thing may be defined; (4) prescribed punishment for an offence. حدود الله means God’s religious commandments (Aqrab).
Commentary:
This verse contains the fifth check on divorce. A man who seeks permanent and irrevocable separation from his wife must pronounce divorce on three separate occasions, each in a separate طھر i.e. period of purity, when the woman is clean and the man has not gone in unto her during that period of purity. The pronouncement of divorce twice or thrice at one and the same time is not permissible as the verse hints in the word مرتان (twice) which signifies a thing happening on two separate occasions and not two things happening at one and the same time. The Holy Prophet treated such collective pronouncements, whatever their number, as only one divorce (Tirmidhi & Dawud). According to Nasa’i, the Holy Prophet was extremely angry when one day he was told that a person had made all the three pronouncements of divorce at one and the same time, and said: "Is the Book of God going to be made a plaything while I am yet among you?"
After the pronouncement of the first two divorces, the husband can take back the divorced wife within ‘iddah, i.e. the period of waiting, with or without her consent; but after the period of waiting is over, he can take her back only with her consent and that after remarrying her. After the pronouncement of the third divorce, however, the husband forfeits this right and the couple are finally separated. A Companion of the Holy Prophet once asked him saying, "The Quran has here spoken of two divorces only, whence comes in the third!" The Prophet referred him to the Quranic words اوتسریح باحسان i.e. or send them away with kindness meaning thereby that after the pronouncement of the first two divorces the husband was free to retain his wife if he so desired but if he wanted irrevocable separation, he should "send her away", i.e. divorce her a third time (Jarir & Musnad). The point is further made clear in the succeeding verse. Thus the word تسریح here signifies طلاق i.e. divorce.
The present verse also makes it clear that when a person divorces his wife, he forfeits مھر i.e. the dower-money he has given her; and if at the time of divorce he has not yet given her the dower-money agreed on by the parties, he must make the payment before the divorce becomes effective. Again, he is not allowed to take back anything he might have given her in the form of gifts and presents as the clause it is not lawful for you that you take anything of what you have given them indicates.
If, however, it is the wife who demands separation, technically known as خلع (Khul‘a lit. the putting off of clothes etc., or the shedding of old leaves), she must get it through a Qadi or judge as the word خفتم (you fear), which has been put in the plural number, hints. In this case she has to part with, in full or in part, her dowry as well as the gifts she might have received from her husband, as agreed on by the parties or decided by the judge. The case of Jamilah, wife of Qais bin Thabit, provides a good illustration of the exercise of the right of Khul‘a by women. She demanded separation from her husband, Qais, on the ground that she did not like him, i.e. their temperaments being different, she could not get on with him. She was granted Kkul‘a by the Holy Prophet, but she had to return to her husband the orchard he had given her (Bukhari). This right, however, is not to be exercised in a light-hearted manner. The Holy Prophet has condemned the action of a woman who demands separation from her husband without valid reason even as he has condemned the action of a man who divorces his wife without genuine cause. He is reported to have said, "A woman who seeks separation from her husband without a legitimate cause shall be deprived of the fragrance of heaven" (Dawud & Tirmidhi). This is what is hinted in the concluding words, these are the limits prescribed by Allah, so transgress them not, etc. The husband and the wife are both warned to fear God and refrain from transgressing the limits imposed by God for their own good.
b
2:228.c
2:232; 4:130; 65:3.
280
This verse contains the fifth check on divorce. A man who seeks separation from his wife must pronounce divorce on three separate occasions, each in a separate period of purity when he has not gone in unto her during that period. The pronouncement of divorce twice or thrice at one and the same time is not permissible as is hinted in the word Marratan (twice) which signifies a thing happening on two separate occasions and not two things happening at one and the same time. The Holy Prophet treated such collective pronouncements, whatever their number, as only one divorce (Tirmidhi & Dawud). According to Nasa’i, the Holy Prophet was extremely angry when one day he was told that a person had made all the three pronouncements of divorce at one and the same time and said, "Is the Book of God going to be made a plaything while I am yet among you?" After the pronouncement of the first two divorces, the husband can take back the divorced wife within ‘Iddat, i.e. the period of waiting, with or
281
When a person divorces his wife, he forfeits the dower-money he has given her; and if at the time of divorce he has not yet given her the dower- money, he must make the payment before the divorce becomes effective. Again, he is not allowed to take back anything he might have given her in the form of gifts and presents.
282
If, however, it is the wife who demands separation, technically known as Khula‘, she must get it through a Qadi or judge as the words "you fear," in the plural number, hint. In this case she has to part with, in full or in part, her dowry as well as the gifts she might have received from her husband, as agreed upon by the parties or decided by the judge. The case of Jamilah, wife of Qais bin Thabit, provides a good illustration of the exercise of the right of Khula‘ by women. She demanded separation from her husband. Qais, on the ground that she did not like him, i.e. their temperaments being different she could not get on with him. She was granted Khula‘ by the Holy Prophet, but she had to return to her husband the orchard he had given her (Bukhari).
وَإِذَا طَلَّقْتُمُ ٱلنِّسَآءَ فَبَلَغْنَ أَجَلَهُنَّ فَأَمْسِكُوهُنَّ بِمَعْرُوفٍ أَوْ سَرِّحُوهُنَّ بِمَعْرُوفٍ ۚ وَلَا تُمْسِكُوهُنَّ ضِرَارًا لِّتَعْتَدُوا۟ ۚ وَمَن يَفْعَلْ ذَٰلِكَ فَقَدْ ظَلَمَ نَفْسَهُۥ ۚ وَلَا تَتَّخِذُوٓا۟ ءَايَٰتِ ٱللَّهِ هُزُوًا ۚ وَٱذْكُرُوا۟ نِعْمَتَ ٱللَّهِ عَلَيْكُمْ وَمَآ أَنزَلَ عَلَيْكُم مِّنَ ٱلْكِتَٰبِ وَٱلْحِكْمَةِ يَعِظُكُم بِهِۦ ۚ وَٱتَّقُوا۟ ٱللَّهَ وَٱعْلَمُوٓا۟ أَنَّ ٱللَّهَ بِكُلِّ شَىْءٍ عَلِيمٌ
2:229; 65:5.
2:230.
3:104.
从上下文中很清楚地可以看出, 这里谈的是可以撤回的离婚。在这种离婚声明后, 丈夫前面只有两条路可走。要么他挽留妻子并善意地对待她, 要么以厚道的做法与她离婚。他不准虐待她, 使她处于一种悬挂状态。
بَلَغَ الْاَجَلَ کے دو معنے ہیں۔ یہ بھی کہ مدت کے خاتمہ کے قریب پہنچ گیا اور یہ بھی کہ مدت پوری کرلی۔ اس جگہ پہلے معنے مراد ہیں۔ علامہ قرطبی ہسپانوی مفسر لکھتے ہیں کہ اس آیت میں اول الذکر معنوں پر تمام علمائے امت کا اتفاق ہے۔ کسی نے اس کے خلاف نہیں کہا۔ عربی کا محاورہ ہے کہ جب مسافر شہر کے قریب پہنچتا ہے تو کہتا ہے کہ بَلَغْنَا الْبَلَدَ ہم شہر پہنچ گئے۔ اردو میں بھی یہ استعمال کثرت سے پایا جاتا ہے فَامْسِکُوْھُنَّ بِمَعْرُوْفٍ اَوْ سَرِّحُوْھُنَّ بِمَعْرُوْفٍ میں اس بات پر زور دیا کہ عورتوں سے دو ہی قسم کا سلوک کرنے کا حکم ہے۔ یا تو انہیں مناسب رنگ م
’’ان کو روک لو‘‘ سے مراد یہ ہے کہ رجوع کرلو اور طلاق واپس لے لو۔ مگر فرماتا ہے یہ رجوع معروف طریق پر ہونا چاہییٔ۔ ایسا نہ ہو کہ عورت کی بدنامی ہو اور یا پھر ان کو طلاق تو دے دو مگر طلاق دیتے وقت بھی یہ خیال رکھو کہ ان کے ساتھ حسن سلوک ہو۔ ان کو ذلیل اور بدنام نہ کرو۔
2:229; 65:5.
See 2:230.
3:104.
The expression Balaghal-Ajala means, he approached the end of the period; or he reached the end of, or completed, the period. According to consensus of scholarly opinion, the first meaning applies here (Qurtubi).
As is apparent from the context, the divorce spoken of here refers to the revocable divorce. After such divorce has been pronounced there are only two courses open to the husband. He may either retain his wife and treat her with kindness or may part with her in a good and becoming manner. He is not allowed to maltreat her and keep her in a state of suspense.
2:229; 65:5.
See 2:230.
3:104.
Important Words:
بلغن (they approach) is from بلغ which means, he reached or came to or attained; or he was near to reaching or attaining (Lane).
اجل (period) is the noun-infinitive from the verb اجل meaning, he or it delayed or fell short. اجل الشیء means, he appointed a time or period for the thing. اجل therefore means, the term or period appointed or specified for a thing; also the end of such period. Death is called اجل because for every life there is an appointed time when it must come to an end (Aqrab Lane).
یعظکم (exhorts you). یعظ is derived from وعظ meaning, he gave him good advice; he exhorted him; he admonished him; he warned him of the consequences of his actions and called him to a life of righteousness (Aqrab).
Commentary:
The verse contains a general injunction about the treatment of divorced women.
As is apparent from the context, the divorce spoken of here refers to the revocable divorce. After such divorce has been pronounced, there are only two courses open to the husband. He may either retain his wife and treat her with kindness or he may part with her in a good and becoming manner. He is not allowed to maltreat her and keep her in a state of suspense. The concluding part of the verse warns the husband against making light of the commandments of Allah relating to the rights of women, adding that, God being All-Knowing, even the hidden intentions and secret machinations of man are known to Him.
a
2:229; 65:5.
b
2:230.
c
3:104.
174
从上下文中很清楚地可以看出, 这里谈的是可以撤回的离婚。在这种离婚声明后, 丈夫前面只有两条路可走。要么他挽留妻子并善意地对待她, 要么以厚道的做法与她离婚。他不准虐待她, 使她处于一种悬挂状态。
3
بَلَغَ الْاَجَلَ کے دو معنے ہیں۔ یہ بھی کہ مدت کے خاتمہ کے قریب پہنچ گیا اور یہ بھی کہ مدت پوری کرلی۔ اس جگہ پہلے معنے مراد ہیں۔ علامہ قرطبی ہسپانوی مفسر لکھتے ہیں کہ اس آیت میں اول الذکر معنوں پر تمام علمائے امت کا اتفاق ہے۔ کسی نے اس کے خلاف نہیں کہا۔ عربی کا محاورہ ہے کہ جب مسافر شہر کے قریب پہنچتا ہے تو کہتا ہے کہ بَلَغْنَا الْبَلَدَ ہم شہر پہنچ گئے۔ اردو میں بھی یہ استعمال کثرت سے پایا جاتا ہے فَامْسِکُوْھُنَّ بِمَعْرُوْفٍ اَوْ سَرِّحُوْھُنَّ بِمَعْرُوْفٍ میں اس بات پر زور دیا کہ عورتوں سے دو ہی قسم کا سلوک کرنے کا حکم ہے۔ یا تو انہیں مناسب رنگ م
4
’’ان کو روک لو‘‘ سے مراد یہ ہے کہ رجوع کرلو اور طلاق واپس لے لو۔ مگر فرماتا ہے یہ رجوع معروف طریق پر ہونا چاہییٔ۔ ایسا نہ ہو کہ عورت کی بدنامی ہو اور یا پھر ان کو طلاق تو دے دو مگر طلاق دیتے وقت بھی یہ خیال رکھو کہ ان کے ساتھ حسن سلوک ہو۔ ان کو ذلیل اور بدنام نہ کرو۔
a
2:229; 65:5.
b
See 2:230.
c
3:104.
238
Important Words:
بلغن (they approach) is from بلغ which means, he reached or came to or attained; or he was near to reaching or attaining (Lane).
اجل (period) is the noun-infinitive from the verb اجل meaning, he or it delayed or fell short. اجل الشیء means, he appointed a time or period for the thing. اجل therefore means, the term or period appointed or specified for a thing; also the end of such period. Death is called اجل because for every life there is an appointed time when it must come to an end (Aqrab Lane).
یعظکم (exhorts you). یعظ is derived from وعظ meaning, he gave him good advice; he exhorted him; he admonished him; he warned him of the consequences of his actions and called him to a life of righteousness (Aqrab).
Commentary:
The verse contains a general injunction about the treatment of divorced women.
As is apparent from the context, the divorce spoken of here refers to the revocable divorce. After such divorce has been pronounced, there are only two courses open to the husband. He may either retain his wife and treat her with kindness or he may part with her in a good and becoming manner. He is not allowed to maltreat her and keep her in a state of suspense. The concluding part of the verse warns the husband against making light of the commandments of Allah relating to the rights of women, adding that, God being All-Knowing, even the hidden intentions and secret machinations of man are known to Him.
a
2:229; 65:5.
b
See 2:230.
c
3:104.
283A
The expression Balaghal-Ajala means, he approached the end of the period; or he reached the end of, or completed, the period. According to consensus of scholarly opinion, the first meaning applies here (Qurtubi).
284
As is apparent from the context, the divorce spoken of here refers to the revocable divorce. After such divorce has been pronounced there are only two courses open to the husband. He may either retain his wife and treat her with kindness or may part with her in a good and becoming manner. He is not allowed to maltreat her and keep her in a state of suspense.
وَإِذَا طَلَّقْتُمُ ٱلنِّسَآءَ فَبَلَغْنَ أَجَلَهُنَّ فَلَا تَعْضُلُوهُنَّ أَن يَنكِحْنَ أَزْوَٰجَهُنَّ إِذَا تَرَٰضَوْا۟ بَيْنَهُم بِٱلْمَعْرُوفِ ۗ ذَٰلِكَ يُوعَظُ بِهِۦ مَن كَانَ مِنكُمْ يُؤْمِنُ بِٱللَّهِ وَٱلْيَوْمِ ٱلْءَاخِرِ ۗ ذَٰلِكُمْ أَزْكَىٰ لَكُمْ وَأَطْهَرُ ۗ وَٱللَّهُ يَعْلَمُ وَأَنتُمْ لَا تَعْلَمُونَ
这节经文中谈到的 “丈夫” 这两个字, 可以指以前或者将来的丈夫。在前一种情况下, “当你们与妻子离了婚” 这一句, 可以理解为第一次或第二次离婚而言。如果 “丈夫” 这两个字代表未来的丈夫, 那么, 上一句指的是第三次或最终一次离婚。离婚妇女的监护人不能阻止她和前夫重新结婚。她的前夫也不能阻止她同新的丈夫结婚。
اس جگہ بَلَغْنَ کے معنے عدت کو پورا کر لینے کے ہیں نہ کہ مدت کے خاتمہ کے قریب پہنچ جانے کے۔ (دیکھئے نوٹ آیت ۲۳۲)
اس جگہ پر صیغہ حاضر کا استعمال ہوا ہے مگر مراد یہ ہے کہ مرد و عورت کے رشتہ دار نہ روکیں۔ صرف زور دینے کے لئے غائب کو حاضر کی طرف منتقل کر دیا گیا ہے اور تم کا لفظ استعمال کیا ہے۔
اَزْکٰی: زَکَا سے نکلا ہے اور زَکَا کے معنے بڑھنے اور برکت والا ہونے کے ہوتے ہیں (مفردات) پس اَزْکٰی کے معنے ہوئے زیادہ بڑھنے والی اور زیادہ برکت والی۔
The word "husbands" mentioned in this verse may refer either to former husbands or to prospective ones. In the former case, the clause, and when you divorce women, would be taken as referring to the first or second divorce. In case the word "husbands" stands for prospective husbands, the above phrase would refer to the third or final divorce. The guardian of a divorced woman cannot prevent her from remarrying her former husband nor the former husband can prevent her from marrying a new husband.
Important Words:
لاتعضلوھن (prevent them not) is derived from عضل. They say عضلھا i.e. he prevented or debarred her from marrying. The primary signification of عضل is the act of straitening or preventing, or withholding or debarring. عضل means, he straitened him in his affairs and intervened as an obstacle between him and that which he desired (Taj).
تراضوا (agree between themselves) is derived from رضی i.e. he was pleased, or he was satisfied, or he agreed. تراضی القومmeans, the people agreed between themselves, or they came to a mutual agreement (Aqrab).
ازکی (more blessed) is derived from زکا which means, it increased or augmented; it received blessing from God; it was or became pure. ازکی means, more blessed, containing greater benefits, conducive to more good (Aqrab).
Commentary:
The word "husbands" mentioned in this verse may refer either to former husbands or to prospective ones. In the former case, the clause, and when you divorce women, would be taken as referring to the first or second pronouncement of divorce. Sometimes, when a husband desires to take back his wife before pronouncing the third or irrevocable divorce, her offended relatives do not like her to go back to him again and therefore try to prevent her from remarrying him. The verse condemns that practice. In case the word "husbands" stands for prospective husbands, the above phrase would refer to the third or final divorce. Some men, even after the complete dissolution of their marriage, do not like the idea that their divorced wives should marry other persons and try to prevent them from contracting new marriages. This practice is also condemned in the clause, prevent them not from marrying their (prospective) husbands. Should the guardian of a divorced woman prevent her from remarrying her former husband or should the former husband prevent her from marrying a new husband, she can do so with the permission of the Qadi or the judge. The verse under comment also implies a repudiation of the evil practice of pronouncing three divorces at one and the same time, because had it been permissible, the question of divorced women remarrying their former husbands would have been meaningless.
175
这节经文中谈到的 “丈夫” 这两个字, 可以指以前或者将来的丈夫。在前一种情况下, “当你们与妻子离了婚” 这一句, 可以理解为第一次或第二次离婚而言。如果 “丈夫” 这两个字代表未来的丈夫, 那么, 上一句指的是第三次或最终一次离婚。离婚妇女的监护人不能阻止她和前夫重新结婚。她的前夫也不能阻止她同新的丈夫结婚。
1
اس جگہ بَلَغْنَ کے معنے عدت کو پورا کر لینے کے ہیں نہ کہ مدت کے خاتمہ کے قریب پہنچ جانے کے۔ (دیکھئے نوٹ آیت ۲۳۲)
2
اس جگہ پر صیغہ حاضر کا استعمال ہوا ہے مگر مراد یہ ہے کہ مرد و عورت کے رشتہ دار نہ روکیں۔ صرف زور دینے کے لئے غائب کو حاضر کی طرف منتقل کر دیا گیا ہے اور تم کا لفظ استعمال کیا ہے۔
3
اَزْکٰی: زَکَا سے نکلا ہے اور زَکَا کے معنے بڑھنے اور برکت والا ہونے کے ہوتے ہیں (مفردات) پس اَزْکٰی کے معنے ہوئے زیادہ بڑھنے والی اور زیادہ برکت والی۔
239
Important Words:
لاتعضلوھن (prevent them not) is derived from عضل. They say عضلھا i.e. he prevented or debarred her from marrying. The primary signification of عضل is the act of straitening or preventing, or withholding or debarring. عضل means, he straitened him in his affairs and intervened as an obstacle between him and that which he desired (Taj).
تراضوا (agree between themselves) is derived from رضی i.e. he was pleased, or he was satisfied, or he agreed. تراضی القومmeans, the people agreed between themselves, or they came to a mutual agreement (Aqrab).
ازکی (more blessed) is derived from زکا which means, it increased or augmented; it received blessing from God; it was or became pure. ازکی means, more blessed, containing greater benefits, conducive to more good (Aqrab).
Commentary:
The word "husbands" mentioned in this verse may refer either to former husbands or to prospective ones. In the former case, the clause, and when you divorce women, would be taken as referring to the first or second pronouncement of divorce. Sometimes, when a husband desires to take back his wife before pronouncing the third or irrevocable divorce, her offended relatives do not like her to go back to him again and therefore try to prevent her from remarrying him. The verse condemns that practice. In case the word "husbands" stands for prospective husbands, the above phrase would refer to the third or final divorce. Some men, even after the complete dissolution of their marriage, do not like the idea that their divorced wives should marry other persons and try to prevent them from contracting new marriages. This practice is also condemned in the clause, prevent them not from marrying their (prospective) husbands. Should the guardian of a divorced woman prevent her from remarrying her former husband or should the former husband prevent her from marrying a new husband, she can do so with the permission of the Qadi or the judge. The verse under comment also implies a repudiation of the evil practice of pronouncing three divorces at one and the same time, because had it been permissible, the question of divorced women remarrying their former husbands would have been meaningless.
285
The word "husbands" mentioned in this verse may refer either to former husbands or to prospective ones. In the former case, the clause, and when you divorce women, would be taken as referring to the first or second divorce. In case the word "husbands" stands for prospective husbands, the above phrase would refer to the third or final divorce. The guardian of a divorced woman cannot prevent her from remarrying her former husband nor the former husband can prevent her from marrying a new husband.
وَلَا جُنَاحَ عَلَيْكُمْ فِيمَا عَرَّضْتُم بِهِۦ مِنْ خِطْبَةِ ٱلنِّسَآءِ أَوْ أَكْنَنتُمْ فِىٓ أَنفُسِكُمْ ۚ عَلِمَ ٱللَّهُ أَنَّكُمْ سَتَذْكُرُونَهُنَّ وَلَٰكِن لَّا تُوَاعِدُوهُنَّ سِرًّا إِلَّآ أَن تَقُولُوا۟ قَوْلًا مَّعْرُوفًا ۚ وَلَا تَعْزِمُوا۟ عُقْدَةَ ٱلنِّكَاحِ حَتَّىٰ يَبْلُغَ ٱلْكِتَٰبُ أَجَلَهُۥ ۚ وَٱعْلَمُوٓا۟ أَنَّ ٱللَّهَ يَعْلَمُ مَا فِىٓ أَنفُسِكُمْ فَٱحْذَرُوهُ ۚ وَٱعْلَمُوٓا۟ أَنَّ ٱللَّهَ غَفُورٌ حَلِيمٌ
在守寡的规定时期内, 禁止男人向寡妇公开提婚。他可以间接地暗示他的意向。但他绝不能公开建议或正式提出甚或私订婚约。寡妇也禁止在规定时期内同意这种建议。由於尊重她对亡夫的思念以及使可能怀孕的情况变得明显起来, 她必须耐心等待四个月零十天。因为孕妇在孩子出生前是不准结婚的。
یعنی بیوہ عورتوں کے متعلق اگر تمہارے دل میں نکاح کی خواہش ہو تو اُسے عدت گزر جانے تک ظاہر نہ کرو۔ ہاں کسی غیر واضح اشارہ سے اِدھر توجہ دلائی جائے تو حرج نہیں۔
It is forbidden to a man to make an open proposal of marriage to a widow within her prescribed period of waiting. He may drop a hint indirectly suggestive of his intention. But he must on no account make an open suggestion or a formal proposal or even a secret proposal concerning marriage. A widow, too, is prohibited from giving her consent to such a proposal within the prescribed period. She must patiently wait for four months and ten days, out of deference to the memory of her departed spouse and in order also that her possible pregnancy may become apparent, because a pregnant woman is not allowed to marry until she is delivered of the child.
Important Words:
عرضتم (you throw out a hint) is derived from عرض meaning, he offered and presented a thing. عرض (‘arrada) means, he used an expression susceptible of different meanings; or he mentioned a thing not clearly but in a veiled manner; or he used words to convey a sense which the words used did not definitely convey (Lane).
خطبة (proposal of marriage) is derived from خطب meaning, he addressed a meeting; he delivered a sermon. خطب المرأة means, he proposed marriage to her. خطبة (khutbah) means, a sermon. خطبة (khitbah) means, a proposal of marriage (Aqrab).
اکننتم (you keep hidden) is derived fromکن . They say کن الشیء or اکن الشیء meaning, he concealed the thing; he covered it. کنان means, a veil or covering, and مکنون means, covered or hidden (Aqrab).
عقدة (tie) is the infinitive-noun from عقد meaning, he tied; he made a thing firm and fast. عقد الحبل means, he tied the rope; he tied it in knots. عقدة means, a tie; a contract that ties up or binds two parties; a marriage contract (Aqrab).
Commentary:
According to this verse, it is forbidden to a man to make an open proposal of marriage to a widow within her عدة or the prescribed period of waiting. He who intends to marry a widow must keep his intention concealed from her. He may drop a hint indirectly suggestive of his intention. But he must on no account make an open suggestion or a formal proposal or even a secret proposal concerning marriage. A widow, too, is prohibited from giving her consent to such a proposal within the prescribed period. She must patiently wait for four months and ten days out of deference to the memory of her departed spouse and in order that her possible pregnancy may become apparent, because a pregnant woman is not allowed to marry until she is delivered of the child.
The words, beware of it, are meant to caution men to be on their guard against disobeying these commandments which are meant for their own good. If God had not laid them down, all social order would have gone to pieces.
The divine attributes, "Forgiving" and "Forbearing", have been mentioned at the end of this verse not to hint that breach of these injunctions would find God Forgiving and Forbearing but that the exigencies of the circumstances required stricter laws in this matter, but as God knows human weaknesses, He has been lenient in this respect. So whatever commandment has now been given, must be faithfully followed and all lapse be honestly guarded against.
182
在守寡的规定时期内, 禁止男人向寡妇公开提婚。他可以间接地暗示他的意向。但他绝不能公开建议或正式提出甚或私订婚约。寡妇也禁止在规定时期内同意这种建议。由於尊重她对亡夫的思念以及使可能怀孕的情况变得明显起来, 她必须耐心等待四个月零十天。因为孕妇在孩子出生前是不准结婚的。
1
یعنی بیوہ عورتوں کے متعلق اگر تمہارے دل میں نکاح کی خواہش ہو تو اُسے عدت گزر جانے تک ظاہر نہ کرو۔ ہاں کسی غیر واضح اشارہ سے اِدھر توجہ دلائی جائے تو حرج نہیں۔
242
Important Words:
عرضتم (you throw out a hint) is derived from عرض meaning, he offered and presented a thing. عرض (‘arrada) means, he used an expression susceptible of different meanings; or he mentioned a thing not clearly but in a veiled manner; or he used words to convey a sense which the words used did not definitely convey (Lane).
خطبة (proposal of marriage) is derived from خطب meaning, he addressed a meeting; he delivered a sermon. خطب المرأة means, he proposed marriage to her. خطبة (khutbah) means, a sermon. خطبة (khitbah) means, a proposal of marriage (Aqrab).
اکننتم (you keep hidden) is derived fromکن . They say کن الشیء or اکن الشیء meaning, he concealed the thing; he covered it. کنان means, a veil or covering, and مکنون means, covered or hidden (Aqrab).
عقدة (tie) is the infinitive-noun from عقد meaning, he tied; he made a thing firm and fast. عقد الحبل means, he tied the rope; he tied it in knots. عقدة means, a tie; a contract that ties up or binds two parties; a marriage contract (Aqrab).
Commentary:
According to this verse, it is forbidden to a man to make an open proposal of marriage to a widow within her عدة or the prescribed period of waiting. He who intends to marry a widow must keep his intention concealed from her. He may drop a hint indirectly suggestive of his intention. But he must on no account make an open suggestion or a formal proposal or even a secret proposal concerning marriage. A widow, too, is prohibited from giving her consent to such a proposal within the prescribed period. She must patiently wait for four months and ten days out of deference to the memory of her departed spouse and in order that her possible pregnancy may become apparent, because a pregnant woman is not allowed to marry until she is delivered of the child.
The words, beware of it, are meant to caution men to be on their guard against disobeying these commandments which are meant for their own good. If God had not laid them down, all social order would have gone to pieces.
The divine attributes, "Forgiving" and "Forbearing", have been mentioned at the end of this verse not to hint that breach of these injunctions would find God Forgiving and Forbearing but that the exigencies of the circumstances required stricter laws in this matter, but as God knows human weaknesses, He has been lenient in this respect. So whatever commandment has now been given, must be faithfully followed and all lapse be honestly guarded against.
291
It is forbidden to a man to make an open proposal of marriage to a widow within her prescribed period of waiting. He may drop a hint indirectly suggestive of his intention. But he must on no account make an open suggestion or a formal proposal or even a secret proposal concerning marriage. A widow, too, is prohibited from giving her consent to such a proposal within the prescribed period. She must patiently wait for four months and ten days, out of deference to the memory of her departed spouse and in order also that her possible pregnancy may become apparent, because a pregnant woman is not allowed to marry until she is delivered of the child.
لِلْفُقَرَآءِ ٱلَّذِينَ أُحْصِرُوا۟ فِى سَبِيلِ ٱللَّهِ لَا يَسْتَطِيعُونَ ضَرْبًا فِى ٱلْأَرْضِ يَحْسَبُهُمُ ٱلْجَاهِلُ أَغْنِيَآءَ مِنَ ٱلتَّعَفُّفِ تَعْرِفُهُم بِسِيمَٰهُمْ لَا يَسْـَٔلُونَ ٱلنَّاسَ إِلْحَافًا ۗ وَمَا تُنفِقُوا۟ مِنْ خَيْرٍ فَإِنَّ ٱللَّهَ بِهِۦ عَلِيمٌ
48:30.
اَحْصَرَہٗ: حَبَسَہٗ عَنْہُ (اقرب) یعنی کسی کام سے اسے روک دیا۔ پس معنے یہ ہوئے کہ جولوگ دوسرے مشاغل سے روکے گئے ہیں اور صرف اللہ تعالیٰ کے دین کی خدمت میں لگے ہوئے ہیں یا یہ مطلب ہے کہ فی سبیل اللہ یعنی دینِ الٰہی کے کاموں پر انہیں سب کاموں سے فارغ کرکے لگا دیا گیا ہے۔
48:30.
Circumstances sometimes compel people to remain confined to a place where they are unable to earn their living. Such persons particularly deserve help from the better off members of the community. Two kinds of people particularly fall under this category; (a) Those who voluntarily remain attached to a Man of God, never quitting his company in order to benefit spiritually from it. (b) Those, who being confined to hostile environments, are deprived of necessities of life.
Sima means, a distinguishing sign or mark, or general appearance serving as such (Aqrab).
The verse incidentally praises those self-respecting persons who abstain from begging and implies the impropriety of begging, as the words, Ta‘affuf (abstaining from an improper or unlawful thing) and Ilhaf (with importunity) indicate. The Holy Prophet has condemned begging.
Khair means, wealth; abundant wealth; wealth honestly earned (Mufradat).
There are two categories of charity—obligatory Zakat and supererogatory (Sadaqah). Zakat is collected by the State from every Muslim possessing a certain amount of money or property and is spent by the State on the poor, the needy, and on orphans, widows and wayfarers, etc.; the recipients not knowing the real source of charity are beholden to no individual. Zakat is a State cheque and not charity. Sadaqah is voluntary and is given to individuals out of a desire to help them. It engenders feelings of sympathy among the well-to-do towards their poor brethren and feelings of gratefulness among the poor for their benefactors. It also serves to distinguish sincere believers from the insincere.
48:30.
Important Words:
ضرباً (move) is from ضرب. They say ضرب الشیء i.e. the thing moved. ضربه means, he struck or beat him with a sword or a stick, etc. ضرب فی الارض means, he set out on a journey through the country or he journeyed through it (Aqrab).
تعفف (abstaining) is derived from عف i.e. he abstained from doing what is unlawful or improper. تعفف in verb form also gives the same meaning with greater effort. عفة means, abstaining from the gratification of low desires. So تعفف means, abstaining from what is improper or unlawful (Aqrab).
سیما (appearance) is derived from سوم which is again derived from سام. They say سوم الفرس i.e. he branded the horse with some distinguishing mark or sign. سیما or سیمة or سومة means, a distinguishing sign or mark, or general appearance serving as such (Aqrab).
إلحافاً (with importunity) is derived from لحف. They say لحفه i.e. he covered him with a sheet or a blanket, etc. الحفه also gives the same meaning. الحف السائل means, the beggar begged with importunity, as if sticking to one like a covering (Aqrab & Mufradat).
Commentary:
Circumstances sometimes compel people to remain confined in a place where they are unable to earn their living. Such men deserve help from the better-off members of the community. Two kinds of people come particularly under this verse: (1) Those who voluntarily stick to a place owing to the love of a holy man and never quit his company so that they may listen to whatever he says and observe whatever he does and then impart the knowledge thus acquired to others. A remarkable example of persons of this class was Abu Hurairah, who embraced Islam only three years before the death of the Holy Prophet, but thereafter clove to the Mosque at Medina so that he might remain in constant contact with his beloved Master. The result was that he reported to the world a much larger number of the sayings and acts of the Holy Prophet than those reported by even such Companions as had embraced Islam long before him. (2) Sometimes a Muslim becomes confined to a place owing to the hostility of disbelievers and, being surrounded by persecutors, he has often to suffer extreme hardships and remain without the necessities of life. Such men are also among the fittest objects of help.
People generally help those who beg for help, ignoring those who need help but, through modesty or shyness, do not ask for it. The Quran exhorts Muslims not to confine their charity to those who beg, but also to look for those who are really needy and whom a sense of honour or modesty prevents from begging.
The words, thou shalt know them by their appearance, contain a tribute to the Holy Prophet, who is here spoken of as being able to know such persons as are in want but refrain from disclosing their needs to others; and believers are exhorted to follow the example of the Holy Prophet in this respect. Abu Hurairah relates a personal incident which beautifully brings out this characteristic of the Prophet. He says that one day he was suffering from extreme hunger but, as Islam did not approve of begging, he could not ask anybody for food, and at the same time he would not leave the Prophet’s mosque for fear of losing his company. At that time Abu Bakr happened to pass by and, in order to draw his attention to his own famished condition, Abu Hurairah asked him to explain a verse of the Quran which dealt with charity. Abu Bakr, failing to understand his real object, explained to him the verse and passed on. Then came ‘Umar, and the hunger-stricken Abu Hurairah approached him also with the request to explain the verse. ‘Umar too failed to catch his purpose and, explaining to him the verse, went on his way. The Holy Prophet, who at that time happened to be within hearing inside his house, opened his window and with a bowl of milk in his hand, called Abu Hurairah and smilingly asked him whether he was hungry. And, receiving a reply in the affirmative, he further asked him to invite all the seven men who happened to be present in the mosque at that time. Before handing the cup of milk to Abu Hurairah, the Holy Prophet offered it to those seven men who were also hungry like Abu Hurairah. All the seven drank milk out of the bowl but, says Abu Hurairah, it remained as full as ever. Then the Prophet gave it to Abu Hurairah who drank his fill. When Abu Hurairah could drink no more, the Holy Prophet took the bowl and drank the remaining milk (Tirmidhi ch. on Zuhd).
The verse incidentally praises those who abstain from begging and hints at the impropriety of begging as the words تعفف (abstaining from an improper or unlawful thing) and الحافا (with importunity) clearly indicate. The Holy Prophet greatly disapproved of begging and there are diverse sayings of his to that effect.
d
48:30.
3
اَحْصَرَہٗ: حَبَسَہٗ عَنْہُ (اقرب) یعنی کسی کام سے اسے روک دیا۔ پس معنے یہ ہوئے کہ جولوگ دوسرے مشاغل سے روکے گئے ہیں اور صرف اللہ تعالیٰ کے دین کی خدمت میں لگے ہوئے ہیں یا یہ مطلب ہے کہ فی سبیل اللہ یعنی دینِ الٰہی کے کاموں پر انہیں سب کاموں سے فارغ کرکے لگا دیا گیا ہے۔
a
48:30.
280
Important Words:
ضرباً (move) is from ضرب. They say ضرب الشیء i.e. the thing moved. ضربه means, he struck or beat him with a sword or a stick, etc. ضرب فی الارض means, he set out on a journey through the country or he journeyed through it (Aqrab).
تعفف (abstaining) is derived from عف i.e. he abstained from doing what is unlawful or improper. تعفف in verb form also gives the same meaning with greater effort. عفة means, abstaining from the gratification of low desires. So تعفف means, abstaining from what is improper or unlawful (Aqrab).
سیما (appearance) is derived from سوم which is again derived from سام. They say سوم الفرس i.e. he branded the horse with some distinguishing mark or sign. سیما or سیمة or سومة means, a distinguishing sign or mark, or general appearance serving as such (Aqrab).
إلحافاً (with importunity) is derived from لحف. They say لحفه i.e. he covered him with a sheet or a blanket, etc. الحفه also gives the same meaning. الحف السائل means, the beggar begged with importunity, as if sticking to one like a covering (Aqrab & Mufradat).
Commentary:
Circumstances sometimes compel people to remain confined in a place where they are unable to earn their living. Such men deserve help from the better-off members of the community. Two kinds of people come particularly under this verse: (1) Those who voluntarily stick to a place owing to the love of a holy man and never quit his company so that they may listen to whatever he says and observe whatever he does and then impart the knowledge thus acquired to others. A remarkable example of persons of this class was Abu Hurairah, who embraced Islam only three years before the death of the Holy Prophet, but thereafter clove to the Mosque at Medina so that he might remain in constant contact with his beloved Master. The result was that he reported to the world a much larger number of the sayings and acts of the Holy Prophet than those reported by even such Companions as had embraced Islam long before him. (2) Sometimes a Muslim becomes confined to a place owing to the hostility of disbelievers and, being surrounded by persecutors, he has often to suffer extreme hardships and remain without the necessities of life. Such men are also among the fittest objects of help.
People generally help those who beg for help, ignoring those who need help but, through modesty or shyness, do not ask for it. The Quran exhorts Muslims not to confine their charity to those who beg, but also to look for those who are really needy and whom a sense of honour or modesty prevents from begging.
The words, thou shalt know them by their appearance, contain a tribute to the Holy Prophet, who is here spoken of as being able to know such persons as are in want but refrain from disclosing their needs to others; and believers are exhorted to follow the example of the Holy Prophet in this respect. Abu Hurairah relates a personal incident which beautifully brings out this characteristic of the Prophet. He says that one day he was suffering from extreme hunger but, as Islam did not approve of begging, he could not ask anybody for food, and at the same time he would not leave the Prophet’s mosque for fear of losing his company. At that time Abu Bakr happened to pass by and, in order to draw his attention to his own famished condition, Abu Hurairah asked him to explain a verse of the Quran which dealt with charity. Abu Bakr, failing to understand his real object, explained to him the verse and passed on. Then came ‘Umar, and the hunger-stricken Abu Hurairah approached him also with the request to explain the verse. ‘Umar too failed to catch his purpose and, explaining to him the verse, went on his way. The Holy Prophet, who at that time happened to be within hearing inside his house, opened his window and with a bowl of milk in his hand, called Abu Hurairah and smilingly asked him whether he was hungry. And, receiving a reply in the affirmative, he further asked him to invite all the seven men who happened to be present in the mosque at that time. Before handing the cup of milk to Abu Hurairah, the Holy Prophet offered it to those seven men who were also hungry like Abu Hurairah. All the seven drank milk out of the bowl but, says Abu Hurairah, it remained as full as ever. Then the Prophet gave it to Abu Hurairah who drank his fill. When Abu Hurairah could drink no more, the Holy Prophet took the bowl and drank the remaining milk (Tirmidhi ch. on Zuhd).
The verse incidentally praises those who abstain from begging and hints at the impropriety of begging as the words تعفف (abstaining from an improper or unlawful thing) and الحافا (with importunity) clearly indicate. The Holy Prophet greatly disapproved of begging and there are diverse sayings of his to that effect.
a
48:30.
346
Circumstances sometimes compel people to remain confined to a place where they are unable to earn their living. Such persons particularly deserve help from the better off members of the community. Two kinds of people particularly fall under this category; (a) Those who voluntarily remain attached to a Man of God, never quitting his company in order to benefit spiritually from it. (b) Those, who being confined to hostile environments, are deprived of necessities of life.
347
Sima means, a distinguishing sign or mark, or general appearance serving as such (Aqrab).
348
The verse incidentally praises those self-respecting persons who abstain from begging and implies the impropriety of begging, as the words, Ta‘affuf (abstaining from an improper or unlawful thing) and Ilhaf (with importunity) indicate. The Holy Prophet has condemned begging.
348A
Khair means, wealth; abundant wealth; wealth honestly earned (Mufradat).
349
There are two categories of charity—obligatory Zakat and supererogatory (Sadaqah). Zakat is collected by the State from every Muslim possessing a certain amount of money or property and is spent by the State on the poor, the needy, and on orphans, widows and wayfarers, etc.; the recipients not knowing the real source of charity are beholden to no individual. Zakat is a State cheque and not charity. Sadaqah is voluntary and is given to individuals out of a desire to help them. It engenders feelings of sympathy among the well-to-do towards their poor brethren and feelings of gratefulness among the poor for their benefactors. It also serves to distinguish sincere believers from the insincere.
لَا يُكَلِّفُ ٱللَّهُ نَفْسًا إِلَّا وُسْعَهَا ۚ لَهَا مَا كَسَبَتْ وَعَلَيْهَا مَا ٱكْتَسَبَتْ ۗ رَبَّنَا لَا تُؤَاخِذْنَآ إِن نَّسِينَآ أَوْ أَخْطَأْنَا ۚ رَبَّنَا وَلَا تَحْمِلْ عَلَيْنَآ إِصْرًا كَمَا حَمَلْتَهُۥ عَلَى ٱلَّذِينَ مِن قَبْلِنَا ۚ رَبَّنَا وَلَا تُحَمِّلْنَا مَا لَا طَاقَةَ لَنَا بِهِۦ ۖ وَٱعْفُ عَنَّا وَٱغْفِرْ لَنَا وَٱرْحَمْنَآ ۚ أَنتَ مَوْلَىٰنَا فَٱنصُرْنَا عَلَى ٱلْقَوْمِ ٱلْكَٰفِرِينَ
2:234.
3:148.
这一句有力驳斥了基督替世人赎罪而受难至死的教义。它体现了两个重要原则: (1) 安拉授予律令时, 对人类的能力和自然限制总是给以应有的关心的, (2) 道德上的纯洁并不一定要求完全没有一切种类的失误和缺点。期望人类所做的一切, 只是他们要诚意尽力争取做好事而避免罪恶的事。其他的可由永久仁慈的安拉来宽赦他们。因此, 不需要基督来替世人赎罪。
كَسَبَ (Kasaba) 这个字一般指做好事。اِكْتَسَبَ (Iktasaba) 一般指做恶事。两个字都出自相同词根, 而后者较着重地指行为一方。做好事的人, 即使他们是偶然或不是自觉地出力去做的, 将得到报答; 而做恶事的人, 只有在他们深思熟虑而有意识努力去犯这些罪行的, 才受到惩罚。
在一般情况下, نِسْيَان (Nisyan) 和 خَطِيْئَة (Khati’ah) 是不受惩罚的, 因为它们是无意的, 或缺少动机的; 而有意的或有动机的必须受到惩罚。但是, 这里这两个字的意思是 “忘记” 和 “错误”。如果加以应有的小心的话, 它们是可以避免的。
اِصْر (Isr) 的意思是: (1) 限制人们行动的一种负担; (2) 一种很重大的责任, 如果不能完成的话, 会使人受到应得的惩罚; (3) 一种罪恶或冒犯;以及 (4) 对罪恶行为的严厉惩罚。“ 求你使我们不致像前人一样担负重担!” 这句话, 并不意味着放在我们身上的负担要比前人身上的轻些。这句话的意思是, 求你保护我们不违背对你的许约, 这样可以使我们免于承担像前人所承担那样的背逆罪过。这是为保存和保护伊斯兰教以及保护穆斯林不会招致安拉不悦的一种集体的祈祷。
اَخَذَ : جب گناہ یا غلطی کے متعلق آئے تو اس کے معنے ہوتے ہیں عَاقَبَہٗ : اسے اس کے گناہ کی سزا دی (اقرب الموارد) یہاں پکڑنے کی بجائے سزا دینا ترجمہ کیا گیا ہے۔
اِصْرٌ کے معنے عہد‘ اقرار‘ ثقل‘ بوجھ اور اَلذَّنْبُ یعنی گناہ کے ہیں (اقرب) نیز وہ کام جو انسان کو نیکی سے روک دیں اور محروم کر دیں۔ جیسے قرآن کریم میں ہے وَ یَضَعُ عَنْھُمْ اِصْرَھُمْ (اعراف: ۱۵۸) نیز اِصْرٌ اس تاکیدی عہد کو بھی کہتے ہیں جو عہد شکن کو ثواب اور نیکیوں سے محروم کر دے (مفردات) اس آیت کا یہ مطلب نہیں کہ پہلے لوگوں پر زیادہ بوجھ تھا ہم پر کم ڈالیو۔ بلکہ مراد یہ ہے کہ جس طرح ان پر احکام الٰہی کے توڑنے پر ذمہ داری ڈالی گئی تھی اور وہ ثواب کے کاموں سے محروم ہو گئے تھے اسی طرح ہم پر ذمہ داری نہ ڈالی جائے۔ یعنی ہم عہد شکن ہو کر ثواب کے کاموں سے م
حَمَّلَہٗ: جَعَلَہٗ یَحْمِلُہٗ۔ اس سے بوجھ اٹھوایا (اقرب) اس سے مراد بھی عذاب ہے‘ یعنی ایسا عذاب ہم پر نہ آئے کہ ہم کچلے جائیں اور پھر اٹھنے کی طاقت نہ رہے۔ چنانچہ اس سے آگے ’’درگذر کر‘‘ کے الفاظ اس مفہوم کو واضح کر دیتے ہیں۔
قَوْمٌ کے معنے لوگوں کی ایک جماعت کے ہوتے ہیں۔ رشتہ داروں اور قریبیوں کے لئے بھی یہ لفظ بولا جاتا ہے (اقرب) پس قوم کے معنے لازما ً قوم کے نہیں ہوتے بلکہ ہر اس گروہ پر یہ لفظ بولا جاتا ہے جو ایک مقصد پر جمع ہوں۔ چونکہ کفار مسلمانوں کے خلاف جمع تھے اس لئے وہ ایک قوم کہلانے کے مستحق تھے۔ قَوْم کے معنے دشمنوں کے بھی ہوتے ہیں (اقرب) ان معنوں کی رو سے آیت کے یہ معنے ہوں گے کہ کافر دشمنوں کے خلاف ہماری مدد کر۔ یہ معنے زیادہ لطیف ہیں لیکن چونکہ عام طور پر لوگ ان معنوں سے واقف نہیں۔ میں نے ترجمہ مشہور معنوں کی رو سے کر دیا ہے تا طبائع پر گراں نہ گذرے۔
3:148.
See 2:234.
The clause constitutes a powerful refutation of the doctrine of Atonement. It embodies two important principles: (1) That the commandments of God are always given with due regard for man’s capacities and his natural limitations. (2) That moral purification in this world does not necessarily signify complete freedom from all kinds of failings and shortcomings. All that man is expected to do is sincerely to strive for good and avoid sin to the best of his power, and the rest will be forgiven him by the Merciful God. So no Atonement is needed.
The word Kasaba generally denotes the doing of good deeds and Iktasaba the doing of evil deeds. Both words are from the same root but the latter denotes greater exertion on the part of the doer. A man will be rewarded for good deeds even if they are done casually and without conscious effort, while he will be punished for his evil deeds only if they are committed deliberately and with conscious effort.
In ordinary circumstances, Nisyan and Khati’ah are not punishable for they lack intention or motive which are necessary for awarding punishment. But here the words denote forgetfulness and error which can be avoided if due care is taken.
Isr means, (1) a burden which restrains one from motion; (2) a heavy responsibility the breaking of which renders one deserving of punishment; (3) a sin or an offence; and (4) grievous punishment of a sin. The expression 'lay not on us a responsibility as Thou didst lay upon those before us,' does not mean that the burden to be laid upon us should be lighter than that which was laid upon those before us. The meaning is that we may be safeguarded against breaking Thy covenant and thus may be saved from incurring a heavy responsibility for disobedience as was incurred by those before us. This is a collective prayer for the preservation and protection of Islam and the safeguarding of Muslims against incurring the displeasure of God.
See 2:234.
3:148.
Important Words:
اصرا (responsibility). They say اصرالشیء i.e. he broke the thing. اصرہ means, be confined or detained or debarred him; he held him in custody or he restrained him. اصرالخیمة means, he provided the tent with a peg or a rope for tying. اصر (isr.) or اصر (asr) or اصر (usr) means: (1) a burden which restrains one from motion; (2) a burdensome covenant or a heavy responsibility the breaking of which makes one deserving of punishment; (3) a sin, or an offence; and (4) grievous punishment of a sin (Aqrab & Lane).
Commentary:
The clause, Allah burdens not any soul beyond its capacity, is a powerful refutation of the doctrine of Atonement. It embodies two important principles: (1) That the commandments of God are always given with due regard for human capacities and weaknesses. (2) That purification in this world does not necessarily signify complete freedom from all kinds of failings and shortcomings. All that man is expected to do is sincerely to strive after good and avoid sin to the best of his power, and the rest will be forgiven him by the Merciful God. So no atonement is needed.
The word کسب (earns) has been used here with regard to the doing of good deeds and اکتسب (incurs) for the doing of evil deeds. They are from the same root but the latter denotes greater exertion. Thus the words hint that a man will be rewarded for good deeds even if they are done casually and without concentrated effort, while he will be punished for his evil deeds only if they are committed deliberately and with concentrated effort.
In ordinary circumstances, نسیان (forgetfulness) and خطاء (error) are not punishable, for they lack intention or motive which are necessary for punishment. But here the words denote a forgetfulness and an error which might have been avoided, if due care had been exercised.
As explained under Important Words above, the word اصر (responsibility) has several connot-ations, all of which are applicable here. Hence, the verse may also be translated as (a) Impose not on us a sin, i.e. enable us to avoid sin and prevent us from the doing of deeds which might make us stumble; (b) Do not punish us if we commit some sin or break some covenant; (c) Taking the expression لاتحمل علینا to mean, as it literally does, do not make it ride us or do not mount it on us, the clause may also be rendered as, do not make a responsibility or a covenant mount on us as Thou didst mount it on those before us. The simile is beautiful. divine covenants are meant to help the people in their onward march; but sometimes, through abuse or breach, they become a burden, instead of a help, thus turning into a rider in place of a riding beast. Muslims are taught to pray against such an eventuality.
The words, lay not on us a responsibility as Thou didst lay upon those before us, do not mean that Muslims have been taught to wish for lighter burdens. The facts of history belie that inference. The words only mean that God may help Muslims to fulfil their responsibilities and to avoid sins as well as the consequences thereof. The previous peoples were entrusted with some responsibilities and given certain commandments which were all for their own good, but many of them failed to fulfil them and also rejected Islam to which they had been invited and thus turned a blissful guidance into a veritable means of incurring God’s displeasure. Thus, they were virtually laid under an isr or a burdensome responsibility. Muslims, being the bearers of the final and universal Shari‘ah, have been exhorted to set a better example and pray to God for success in their great task and in the fulfilment of their heavy responsibilities. The laying of burden or burdensome responsibility has been attributed to God just as in the Quranic idiom ضلالة (misguidance) is sometimes attributed to Him for which see 2:7.
The clause, lay not on us a responsibility as Thou didst lay on those before us, may also refer to Christians particularly who, by declaring the Law to be a curse, converted a divine mercy into an isr, i.e. a burden and a punishment. Muslims are thus taught to pray that for them the Shari‘ah may always remain a mercy. In this case the verse comes as a fitting preamble to the succeeding Surah of which Christianity forms the special theme.
The clause, and efface our sins and grant us Forgiveness and have Mercy on us, comprises three important invocations placed in perfect order. They not only correspond to the preceding three prayers but also constitute a perfect manifestation of a perfect treatment on the part of a perfect Master. فاعف عنا means that God may efface our sins and leave out no trace of them to be seen by men. اغفرلنا means that He may not only efface our sins but also grant us forgiveness so that He Himself may treat them as non-existent. And ارحمنا means that God may not only efface our sins and forgive us but also show positive mercy to us.
The concluding clause, help us Thou against the disbelieving people, provides a fitting ending to the Surah. The Muslims are out for a great struggle. The entire world of کفر (disbelief) is arrayed against them and the field of work, as hinted in Abraham’s prayer (2:130), is wide and far-stretched, extending over (1) heavenly signs, (2) laws and covenants, (3) wisdom and philosophy, (4) morals and spirituality, and (5) general progress. This was a stupendous task and unless God came to their help, there was little hope for that tiny Muslim community that was just emerging into existence. But God did come to their help.
a
2:234.
b
3:148.
217
这一句有力驳斥了基督替世人赎罪而受难至死的教义。它体现了两个重要原则: (1) 安拉授予律令时, 对人类的能力和自然限制总是给以应有的关心的, (2) 道德上的纯洁并不一定要求完全没有一切种类的失误和缺点。期望人类所做的一切, 只是他们要诚意尽力争取做好事而避免罪恶的事。其他的可由永久仁慈的安拉来宽赦他们。因此, 不需要基督来替世人赎罪。
218
كَسَبَ (Kasaba) 这个字一般指做好事。اِكْتَسَبَ (Iktasaba) 一般指做恶事。两个字都出自相同词根, 而后者较着重地指行为一方。做好事的人, 即使他们是偶然或不是自觉地出力去做的, 将得到报答; 而做恶事的人, 只有在他们深思熟虑而有意识努力去犯这些罪行的, 才受到惩罚。
219
在一般情况下, نِسْيَان (Nisyan) 和 خَطِيْئَة (Khati’ah) 是不受惩罚的, 因为它们是无意的, 或缺少动机的; 而有意的或有动机的必须受到惩罚。但是, 这里这两个字的意思是 “忘记” 和 “错误”。如果加以应有的小心的话, 它们是可以避免的。
220
اِصْر (Isr) 的意思是: (1) 限制人们行动的一种负担; (2) 一种很重大的责任, 如果不能完成的话, 会使人受到应得的惩罚; (3) 一种罪恶或冒犯;以及 (4) 对罪恶行为的严厉惩罚。“ 求你使我们不致像前人一样担负重担!” 这句话, 并不意味着放在我们身上的负担要比前人身上的轻些。这句话的意思是, 求你保护我们不违背对你的许约, 这样可以使我们免于承担像前人所承担那样的背逆罪过。这是为保存和保护伊斯兰教以及保护穆斯林不会招致安拉不悦的一种集体的祈祷。
1
اَخَذَ : جب گناہ یا غلطی کے متعلق آئے تو اس کے معنے ہوتے ہیں عَاقَبَہٗ : اسے اس کے گناہ کی سزا دی (اقرب الموارد) یہاں پکڑنے کی بجائے سزا دینا ترجمہ کیا گیا ہے۔
2
اِصْرٌ کے معنے عہد‘ اقرار‘ ثقل‘ بوجھ اور اَلذَّنْبُ یعنی گناہ کے ہیں (اقرب) نیز وہ کام جو انسان کو نیکی سے روک دیں اور محروم کر دیں۔ جیسے قرآن کریم میں ہے وَ یَضَعُ عَنْھُمْ اِصْرَھُمْ (اعراف: ۱۵۸) نیز اِصْرٌ اس تاکیدی عہد کو بھی کہتے ہیں جو عہد شکن کو ثواب اور نیکیوں سے محروم کر دے (مفردات) اس آیت کا یہ مطلب نہیں کہ پہلے لوگوں پر زیادہ بوجھ تھا ہم پر کم ڈالیو۔ بلکہ مراد یہ ہے کہ جس طرح ان پر احکام الٰہی کے توڑنے پر ذمہ داری ڈالی گئی تھی اور وہ ثواب کے کاموں سے محروم ہو گئے تھے اسی طرح ہم پر ذمہ داری نہ ڈالی جائے۔ یعنی ہم عہد شکن ہو کر ثواب کے کاموں سے م
3
حَمَّلَہٗ: جَعَلَہٗ یَحْمِلُہٗ۔ اس سے بوجھ اٹھوایا (اقرب) اس سے مراد بھی عذاب ہے‘ یعنی ایسا عذاب ہم پر نہ آئے کہ ہم کچلے جائیں اور پھر اٹھنے کی طاقت نہ رہے۔ چنانچہ اس سے آگے ’’درگذر کر‘‘ کے الفاظ اس مفہوم کو واضح کر دیتے ہیں۔
4
قَوْمٌ کے معنے لوگوں کی ایک جماعت کے ہوتے ہیں۔ رشتہ داروں اور قریبیوں کے لئے بھی یہ لفظ بولا جاتا ہے (اقرب) پس قوم کے معنے لازما ً قوم کے نہیں ہوتے بلکہ ہر اس گروہ پر یہ لفظ بولا جاتا ہے جو ایک مقصد پر جمع ہوں۔ چونکہ کفار مسلمانوں کے خلاف جمع تھے اس لئے وہ ایک قوم کہلانے کے مستحق تھے۔ قَوْم کے معنے دشمنوں کے بھی ہوتے ہیں (اقرب) ان معنوں کی رو سے آیت کے یہ معنے ہوں گے کہ کافر دشمنوں کے خلاف ہماری مدد کر۔ یہ معنے زیادہ لطیف ہیں لیکن چونکہ عام طور پر لوگ ان معنوں سے واقف نہیں۔ میں نے ترجمہ مشہور معنوں کی رو سے کر دیا ہے تا طبائع پر گراں نہ گذرے۔
a
See 2:234.
b
3:148.
292A
Important Words:
اصرا (responsibility). They say اصرالشیء i.e. he broke the thing. اصرہ means, be confined or detained or debarred him; he held him in custody or he restrained him. اصرالخیمة means, he provided the tent with a peg or a rope for tying. اصر (isr.) or اصر (asr) or اصر (usr) means: (1) a burden which restrains one from motion; (2) a burdensome covenant or a heavy responsibility the breaking of which makes one deserving of punishment; (3) a sin, or an offence; and (4) grievous punishment of a sin (Aqrab & Lane).
Commentary:
The clause, Allah burdens not any soul beyond its capacity, is a powerful refutation of the doctrine of Atonement. It embodies two important principles: (1) That the commandments of God are always given with due regard for human capacities and weaknesses. (2) That purification in this world does not necessarily signify complete freedom from all kinds of failings and shortcomings. All that man is expected to do is sincerely to strive after good and avoid sin to the best of his power, and the rest will be forgiven him by the Merciful God. So no atonement is needed.
The word کسب (earns) has been used here with regard to the doing of good deeds and اکتسب (incurs) for the doing of evil deeds. They are from the same root but the latter denotes greater exertion. Thus the words hint that a man will be rewarded for good deeds even if they are done casually and without concentrated effort, while he will be punished for his evil deeds only if they are committed deliberately and with concentrated effort.
In ordinary circumstances, نسیان (forgetfulness) and خطاء (error) are not punishable, for they lack intention or motive which are necessary for punishment. But here the words denote a forgetfulness and an error which might have been avoided, if due care had been exercised.
As explained under Important Words above, the word اصر (responsibility) has several connot-ations, all of which are applicable here. Hence, the verse may also be translated as (a) Impose not on us a sin, i.e. enable us to avoid sin and prevent us from the doing of deeds which might make us stumble; (b) Do not punish us if we commit some sin or break some covenant; (c) Taking the expression لاتحمل علینا to mean, as it literally does, do not make it ride us or do not mount it on us, the clause may also be rendered as, do not make a responsibility or a covenant mount on us as Thou didst mount it on those before us. The simile is beautiful. divine covenants are meant to help the people in their onward march; but sometimes, through abuse or breach, they become a burden, instead of a help, thus turning into a rider in place of a riding beast. Muslims are taught to pray against such an eventuality.
The words, lay not on us a responsibility as Thou didst lay upon those before us, do not mean that Muslims have been taught to wish for lighter burdens. The facts of history belie that inference. The words only mean that God may help Muslims to fulfil their responsibilities and to avoid sins as well as the consequences thereof. The previous peoples were entrusted with some responsibilities and given certain commandments which were all for their own good, but many of them failed to fulfil them and also rejected Islam to which they had been invited and thus turned a blissful guidance into a veritable means of incurring God’s displeasure. Thus, they were virtually laid under an isr or a burdensome responsibility. Muslims, being the bearers of the final and universal Shari‘ah, have been exhorted to set a better example and pray to God for success in their great task and in the fulfilment of their heavy responsibilities. The laying of burden or burdensome responsibility has been attributed to God just as in the Quranic idiom ضلالة (misguidance) is sometimes attributed to Him for which see 2:7.
The clause, lay not on us a responsibility as Thou didst lay on those before us, may also refer to Christians particularly who, by declaring the Law to be a curse, converted a divine mercy into an isr, i.e. a burden and a punishment. Muslims are thus taught to pray that for them the Shari‘ah may always remain a mercy. In this case the verse comes as a fitting preamble to the succeeding Surah of which Christianity forms the special theme.
The clause, and efface our sins and grant us Forgiveness and have Mercy on us, comprises three important invocations placed in perfect order. They not only correspond to the preceding three prayers but also constitute a perfect manifestation of a perfect treatment on the part of a perfect Master. فاعف عنا means that God may efface our sins and leave out no trace of them to be seen by men. اغفرلنا means that He may not only efface our sins but also grant us forgiveness so that He Himself may treat them as non-existent. And ارحمنا means that God may not only efface our sins and forgive us but also show positive mercy to us.
The concluding clause, help us Thou against the disbelieving people, provides a fitting ending to the Surah. The Muslims are out for a great struggle. The entire world of کفر (disbelief) is arrayed against them and the field of work, as hinted in Abraham’s prayer (2:130), is wide and far-stretched, extending over (1) heavenly signs, (2) laws and covenants, (3) wisdom and philosophy, (4) morals and spirituality, and (5) general progress. This was a stupendous task and unless God came to their help, there was little hope for that tiny Muslim community that was just emerging into existence. But God did come to their help.
a
3:148.
c
See 2:234.
359
The clause constitutes a powerful refutation of the doctrine of Atonement. It embodies two important principles: (1) That the commandments of God are always given with due regard for man’s capacities and his natural limitations. (2) That moral purification in this world does not necessarily signify complete freedom from all kinds of failings and shortcomings. All that man is expected to do is sincerely to strive for good and avoid sin to the best of his power, and the rest will be forgiven him by the Merciful God. So no Atonement is needed.
360
The word Kasaba generally denotes the doing of good deeds and Iktasaba the doing of evil deeds. Both words are from the same root but the latter denotes greater exertion on the part of the doer. A man will be rewarded for good deeds even if they are done casually and without conscious effort, while he will be punished for his evil deeds only if they are committed deliberately and with conscious effort.
361
In ordinary circumstances, Nisyan and Khati’ah are not punishable for they lack intention or motive which are necessary for awarding punishment. But here the words denote forgetfulness and error which can be avoided if due care is taken.
362
Isr means, (1) a burden which restrains one from motion; (2) a heavy responsibility the breaking of which renders one deserving of punishment; (3) a sin or an offence; and (4) grievous punishment of a sin. The expression 'lay not on us a responsibility as Thou didst lay upon those before us,' does not mean that the burden to be laid upon us should be lighter than that which was laid upon those before us. The meaning is that we may be safeguarded against breaking Thy covenant and thus may be saved from incurring a heavy responsibility for disobedience as was incurred by those before us. This is a collective prayer for the preservation and protection of Islam and the safeguarding of Muslims against incurring the displeasure of God.
قُلْ يَٰٓأَهْلَ ٱلْكِتَٰبِ تَعَالَوْا۟ إِلَىٰ كَلِمَةٍ سَوَآءٍۭ بَيْنَنَا وَبَيْنَكُمْ أَلَّا نَعْبُدَ إِلَّا ٱللَّهَ وَلَا نُشْرِكَ بِهِۦ شَيْـًٔا وَلَا يَتَّخِذَ بَعْضُنَا بَعْضًا أَرْبَابًا مِّن دُونِ ٱللَّهِ ۚ فَإِن تَوَلَّوْا۟ فَقُولُوا۟ ٱشْهَدُوا۟ بِأَنَّا مُسْلِمُونَ
9:31.
’’کم سے کم‘‘ کسی لفظ کا ترجمہ نہیں بلکہ عبارت کا مفہوم ہے۔
9:31.
This verse is wrongly considered by some to provide a basis for a compromise between Islam on the one hand and Christianity and Judaism on the other. It is argued that if these religions also teach and inculcate the doctrine of Divine Unity, then other Islamic teachings supposed to be of comparatively little importance could safely be left alone. It is unthinkable that the idea of compromise in matters of faith could ever have been encouraged, with a people who, in the immediately preceding verses, have been severely condemned for their false beliefs and who are so forcefully challenged to a prayer-contest to invoke the curse of God upon the holders of false beliefs. The Holy Prophet, while writing his missionary epistle to Heraclius, used this very verse, yet he forcefully invited the latter to accept Islam and threatened him with Divine punishment if he refused to do so (Bukhari). This shows beyond doubt that the mere fact of his believing in Divine Unity could not, according to the Holy Prophet, save He
9:31.
Important Words:
اربابا (Lords) is the plural of رب (Lord) for which see 1:2. رب means, lord, master or owner; a chief or ruler to whom obedience is rendered; one who fosters, brings up, or nourishes (Lane & Aqrab).
Commentary:
This verse is wrongly considered by some to provide a basis for a compromise between Islam on the one hand and Christianity and Judaism on the other. It is argued that if these faiths become united in the doctrine of the Oneness of God, the verse permits the sacrifice of other Islamic teachings as being of comparatively little importance. Nothing can be farther from the truth. The Quran, the Hadith and the facts of history are all united in belying this ridiculous assumption. It is simply unthinkable that compromise in matters of faith could be allowed by any religion worth the name, particularly with a people who, in the immediately preceding verses, have been severely condemned for their beliefs and who are so forcefully challenged to a prayer contest to invoke the curse of God upon those who lie in their beliefs. The Holy Prophet, while writing his missionary epistle to Heraclius, used this very verse, yet he forcefully invited the latter to accept Islam and threatened him with Divine punishment if he refused to do so (Bukhari). This shows beyond doubt that the mere fact of his believing in the Oneness of God could not, according to the Holy Prophet, save Heraclius from God’s punishment. Elsewhere the Quran emphatically declares that, Surely the (true) religion with Allah is Islam, (i.e. complete submission); and whoso seeks a religion other than Islam, it shall not be accepted from him, and in the life to come he shall be among the losers (3:20 & 86). Can anything be clearer?
The truth is that this verse is intended to suggest an easy and simple method by which Jews and Christians can arrive at a right decision regarding the truth of Islam. Christians, in spite of claiming belief in the Unity of Godhead, felt satisfied in believing in the divinity of Jesus; and Jews, notwithstanding their claim to be monotheists, gave blind allegiance to their priests and divines, practically placing them in the position of God Himself. The verse exhorts both these communities to come back to their original belief in the Oneness of God and give up the worship of false deities who stand in the way of their accepting Islam. Thus, instead of seeking a compromise with these faiths, the verse virtually invites Christians and Jews to the faith of Islam, by drawing their attention to the doctrine of the Oneness of God which being, at least in its outer form, the common fundamental doctrine of all, could serve as a meeting ground for further approach.
It was exactly on these lines that Ahmad, the Promised Messiah, in his "Message of Peace", made an offer to the Hindus of India to enter into an agreement with the Muslims of his way of thinking to the effect that they (Hindus) would respect and honour the Holy Prophet of Islam and would look upon him as a true Messenger of God, even as he and his followers believed in Rama and Krishna as God’s Elect.
Special emphasis has been laid in the verse under comment on the Oneness of God—a doctrine on which in theory all revealed religions seem to agree, but regarding the details, of which no two Faiths are found to concur. Most religions claim to be monotheistic; but under the outer veneer of monotheism, polytheism very often lies hidden in most hideous forms. It is the simple faith of Islam alone which is really and truly monotheistic in all its aspects and which strongly condemns the association with God of anything or any being in His person, attributes, worship or works. It is most unfortunate, however, that in spite of Islam being such a strictly monotheistic faith, a section of present-day Muslims has drifted away into the quagmire of what cannot but be termed idol-worship in the wider sense of the word.
Incidentally, it may be noted that the letter mentioned by Bukhari and other Muslim traditionists as having been addressed by the Holy Prophet to Heraclius in the words of this verse inviting him to accept Islam has recently been discovered and found to contain the exact words quoted by Bukhari (R. Rel. vol. V. No. 8). This furnishes a strong proof of the essential authenticity of Bukhari and, for that matter, of other accepted works of Hadith.
a
9:31.
2
’’کم سے کم‘‘ کسی لفظ کا ترجمہ نہیں بلکہ عبارت کا مفہوم ہے۔
a
9:31.
353
Important Words:
اربابا (Lords) is the plural of رب (Lord) for which see 1:2. رب means, lord, master or owner; a chief or ruler to whom obedience is rendered; one who fosters, brings up, or nourishes (Lane & Aqrab).
Commentary:
This verse is wrongly considered by some to provide a basis for a compromise between Islam on the one hand and Christianity and Judaism on the other. It is argued that if these faiths become united in the doctrine of the Oneness of God, the verse permits the sacrifice of other Islamic teachings as being of comparatively little importance. Nothing can be farther from the truth. The Quran, the Hadith and the facts of history are all united in belying this ridiculous assumption. It is simply unthinkable that compromise in matters of faith could be allowed by any religion worth the name, particularly with a people who, in the immediately preceding verses, have been severely condemned for their beliefs and who are so forcefully challenged to a prayer contest to invoke the curse of God upon those who lie in their beliefs. The Holy Prophet, while writing his missionary epistle to Heraclius, used this very verse, yet he forcefully invited the latter to accept Islam and threatened him with Divine punishment if he refused to do so (Bukhari). This shows beyond doubt that the mere fact of his believing in the Oneness of God could not, according to the Holy Prophet, save Heraclius from God’s punishment. Elsewhere the Quran emphatically declares that, Surely the (true) religion with Allah is Islam, (i.e. complete submission); and whoso seeks a religion other than Islam, it shall not be accepted from him, and in the life to come he shall be among the losers (3:20 & 86). Can anything be clearer?
The truth is that this verse is intended to suggest an easy and simple method by which Jews and Christians can arrive at a right decision regarding the truth of Islam. Christians, in spite of claiming belief in the Unity of Godhead, felt satisfied in believing in the divinity of Jesus; and Jews, notwithstanding their claim to be monotheists, gave blind allegiance to their priests and divines, practically placing them in the position of God Himself. The verse exhorts both these communities to come back to their original belief in the Oneness of God and give up the worship of false deities who stand in the way of their accepting Islam. Thus, instead of seeking a compromise with these faiths, the verse virtually invites Christians and Jews to the faith of Islam, by drawing their attention to the doctrine of the Oneness of God which being, at least in its outer form, the common fundamental doctrine of all, could serve as a meeting ground for further approach.
It was exactly on these lines that Ahmad, the Promised Messiah, in his "Message of Peace", made an offer to the Hindus of India to enter into an agreement with the Muslims of his way of thinking to the effect that they (Hindus) would respect and honour the Holy Prophet of Islam and would look upon him as a true Messenger of God, even as he and his followers believed in Rama and Krishna as God’s Elect.
Special emphasis has been laid in the verse under comment on the Oneness of God—a doctrine on which in theory all revealed religions seem to agree, but regarding the details, of which no two Faiths are found to concur. Most religions claim to be monotheistic; but under the outer veneer of monotheism, polytheism very often lies hidden in most hideous forms. It is the simple faith of Islam alone which is really and truly monotheistic in all its aspects and which strongly condemns the association with God of anything or any being in His person, attributes, worship or works. It is most unfortunate, however, that in spite of Islam being such a strictly monotheistic faith, a section of present-day Muslims has drifted away into the quagmire of what cannot but be termed idol-worship in the wider sense of the word.
Incidentally, it may be noted that the letter mentioned by Bukhari and other Muslim traditionists as having been addressed by the Holy Prophet to Heraclius in the words of this verse inviting him to accept Islam has recently been discovered and found to contain the exact words quoted by Bukhari (R. Rel. vol. V. No. 8). This furnishes a strong proof of the essential authenticity of Bukhari and, for that matter, of other accepted works of Hadith.
a
9:31.
426A
This verse is wrongly considered by some to provide a basis for a compromise between Islam on the one hand and Christianity and Judaism on the other. It is argued that if these religions also teach and inculcate the doctrine of Divine Unity, then other Islamic teachings supposed to be of comparatively little importance could safely be left alone. It is unthinkable that the idea of compromise in matters of faith could ever have been encouraged, with a people who, in the immediately preceding verses, have been severely condemned for their false beliefs and who are so forcefully challenged to a prayer-contest to invoke the curse of God upon the holders of false beliefs. The Holy Prophet, while writing his missionary epistle to Heraclius, used this very verse, yet he forcefully invited the latter to accept Islam and threatened him with Divine punishment if he refused to do so (Bukhari). This shows beyond doubt that the mere fact of his believing in Divine Unity could not, according to the Holy Prophet, save He
هَٰٓأَنتُمْ هَٰٓؤُلَآءِ حَٰجَجْتُمْ فِيمَا لَكُم بِهِۦ عِلْمٌ فَلِمَ تُحَآجُّونَ فِيمَا لَيْسَ لَكُم بِهِۦ عِلْمٌ ۚ وَٱللَّهُ يَعْلَمُ وَأَنتُمْ لَا تَعْلَمُونَ
The reference is either to the Quranic teaching or to the claim of the Jews and Christians about Abraham referred to in the preceding verse.
Commentary:
The verse administers a rebuke to the Jews with whom disputation about religious questions had become a habit and a pastime. The rebuke purports to say: Is not your appetite for bickering and quarrelling about Biblical principles and tenets, with which you are at least conversant to some extent, satisfied that you have begun to meddle with matters about which you know nothing? The reference is either to the Quranic teaching or to their claim about Abraham referred to in the preceding verse.
355
Commentary:
The verse administers a rebuke to the Jews with whom disputation about religious questions had become a habit and a pastime. The rebuke purports to say: Is not your appetite for bickering and quarrelling about Biblical principles and tenets, with which you are at least conversant to some extent, satisfied that you have begun to meddle with matters about which you know nothing? The reference is either to the Quranic teaching or to their claim about Abraham referred to in the preceding verse.
427
The reference is either to the Quranic teaching or to the claim of the Jews and Christians about Abraham referred to in the preceding verse.
وَإِذْ أَخَذَ ٱللَّهُ مِيثَٰقَ ٱلنَّبِيِّۦنَ لَمَآ ءَاتَيْتُكُم مِّن كِتَٰبٍ وَحِكْمَةٍ ثُمَّ جَآءَكُمْ رَسُولٌ مُّصَدِّقٌ لِّمَا مَعَكُمْ لَتُؤْمِنُنَّ بِهِۦ وَلَتَنصُرُنَّهُۥ ۚ قَالَ ءَأَقْرَرْتُمْ وَأَخَذْتُمْ عَلَىٰ ذَٰلِكُمْ إِصْرِى ۖ قَالُوٓا۟ أَقْرَرْنَا ۚ قَالَ فَٱشْهَدُوا۟ وَأَنَا۠ مَعَكُم مِّنَ ٱلشَّٰهِدِينَ
5:13.
مِيْثَاقُ النَّبِيّٖن (Mithaqun-Nabiyyin) 这措词既可表示众先知与安拉的圣约, 也可表示安拉通过众先知从人们取得的圣约, 此处最后一个意义, 因为正如被乌巴耶•彬•卡布 (أُبَیّ بِنْ كَعْب)和阿布杜拉•彬•麦斯武德 (عَبْدُ الله بِنْ مَسْعُوْد) 所证实的那样, 这个词语的另一解释是 مِيْثَاقَ الَّذِيْنَ أُوتُو الْكِتَاب (Mithaqalladhina ’utul-Kitab), 意思是有经的人的誓约 (مُحِيْط, Muhit)。这个翻译也为以下的话所证实, 即 “那时你们会遇到一位证实你们所遵循的经典的使者,”因为安拉的使者是来到有经的人中间, 而不是来到他们的众先知中间。
此处 مُصَدِّقْ (Musaddiq) 用来指区别真伪宣称者的评判标准。此词在此处正确地被译作 “证实”, 因为只有亲自应验前面启示的经文中所含的预言, 宣称者才能证明自己的真理。
سب نبیوں والا سے مراد یہ ہے کہ جو عہد سب نبی اپنی امتوں سے لیتے چلے آئے ہیں۔
پہلے بتایا گیا ہے کہ دو تاکیدوں کے موقعہ پر جیسا کہ یہاں ہیں ایک تاکید کے معنے ’’ضرور‘‘ کے لفظ سے کیے گئے ہیں اور دوسری تاکید کے لئے ’’ہی‘‘ کے لفظ سے اس سے ترجمہ بالکل لفظی ہو جاتا ہے اور کوئی لفظ ترجمہ سے باہر نہیں رہ جاتا۔
5:13.
The expression Mithaqun-Nabiyyin may either signify the covenant of the Prophets with God or the covenant which God took from the people through their Prophets. The expression has been used here in the latter sense because another reading of the expression as supported by Ubayy bin Ka‘b and ‘Abdullah bin Mas‘ud is Mithaqalladhina ’utul-Kitab meaning, the covenant of those who were given the Book (Muhit). This rendering is also supported by the words that follow, i.e. and then there comes to you a Messenger fulfilling that which is with you, because it was to the people and not to their Prophets that the Messengers of God came.
The word Musaddiq has been used here to denote the criterion by which a true claimant is distinguished from a false one. The word has been rightly translated here as "fulfilling," for it is only by "fulfilling" in his person the prophecies contained in the previous revealed Scriptures that a claimant can prove his truth.
This verse is also considered to apply to other Prophets in general and to the Holy Prophet in particular. Both applications are correct. The verse lays down a general rule. The advent of every Prophet takes place in fulfilment of certain prophecies made by a previous Prophet in which he enjoins his followers to accept the next Prophet when he makes his appearance. If the Prophet comes in fulfilment of the prophecies contained in the Scriptures of one people only, as was the case with Jesus and other Israelite Prophets, then only that people are bound to accept and help him: but if the Scriptures of all religions predict the coming of a Prophet, as in the case of the Holy Prophet, then all nations are bound to accept him. The Holy Prophet appeared in fulfilment of the prophecies not only of the Israelite Prophets (Isa. 21: 13-15. Deut. 18: 18; 33: 2. John 14: 25, 26; 16: 7-13) but also of the Aryan seers and Buddhist and Zoroastrian sages (Safrang Dasatir, p. 188, Siraji Press, Delhi Jamaspi, published by
5:13.
Important Words:
میثاق النبیین (covenant from the people through the Prophets) literally means, Covenant of the Prophets. According to Arabic usage, the expression اخذ الله میثاق النبیین (lit. Allah took the covenant of the Prophets) may refer either to a covenant which the Prophets of God entered into with Him, or to a covenant which God took from the people through their Prophets. In this verse, the words are used in the latter sense, which is supported by another reading of میثاق النبیین as reported by Ubayy bin Ka‘b and ‘Abdullah bin Mas‘ud, i.e. میثاق الذین اوتوا الکتاب meaning, the covenant of those who were given the Book (Muhit). This rendering is supported by the words that follow, i.e. and then there comes to you a Messenger fulfilling what is with you, because it was to the people and not to their Prophets that the Messenger of God came. The meaning given above gains further support from the fact that as other Prophets were dead at the time of the Holy Prophet, they could naturally render him no help and there was thus no sense in taking any covenant from them to this effect.
Commentary:
This verse is considered to apply to other Prophets in general and to the Holy Prophet in particular. Both applications are correct. The verse lays down a general rule. The advent of every Prophet takes place in fulfilment of certain prophecies made by a previous Prophet in which he enjoins his followers to accept the next Prophet when he makes his appearance. If the Prophet comes in fulfilment of the prophecies con-tained in the scriptures of one people only, as was the case with Jesus and other Israelite Prophets, then only that people are bound to accept and help him; but if the scriptures of all religions predict the coming of a Prophet, as in the case of the Holy Prophet, then all nations are bound to accept him.
The Holy Prophet appeared in fulfilment of the prophecies not only of the Israelite Prophets (Isa. 21:13-15. Deut. 18:18; 33:2. John 14:25, 26; 16:7-13) but also of the Aryan seers and Buddhist and Zoroastrian sages. We have the following prophecy in Dasatir, the sacred Scripture of the Parsis: "When the people of Iran will begin to do such, (i.e.evil) deeds, there shall appear from among the Arabs a man whose followers shall abolish the crown, the throne, the kingdom, and the religion of Iran. The headstrong shall become humble and a house without idols shall take the place of idol-houses and fire-temples, and to it shall they turn their faces in worship" (Safrang Dasatir, p. 188, Siraji Press, Delhi). The words are too clear to need comment. A similar prophecy is found in Jamaspi, a work of Jamaspi, the first successor of Zoroaster (Jamaspi, published by Nizamul-Masha’ikh, Delhi, 1330 A.H.).
The word مصدقا (fulfilling; for the meaning of which see 3:42) has been used here to denote the criterion by which a true claimant to prophethood is distinguished from a false one. But if the word is taken in the sense of "verifying or confirming or declaring to be true" as is sometimes done, this verification or confirmation can be no test of knowing a true Prophet from an impostor, for even an impostor can declare the previous scriptures to be true. The word has, therefore, been rightly translated here as "fulfilling" for it is only by "fulfilling" in his person the prophecies contained in the previous scriptures that a claimant can prove his truth, it being beyond the power of an impostor to fulfil the previous prophecies in his person.
a
5:13.
256
مِيْثَاقُ النَّبِيّٖن (Mithaqun-Nabiyyin) 这措词既可表示众先知与安拉的圣约, 也可表示安拉通过众先知从人们取得的圣约, 此处最后一个意义, 因为正如被乌巴耶•彬•卡布 (أُبَیّ بِنْ كَعْب)和阿布杜拉•彬•麦斯武德 (عَبْدُ الله بِنْ مَسْعُوْد) 所证实的那样, 这个词语的另一解释是 مِيْثَاقَ الَّذِيْنَ أُوتُو الْكِتَاب (Mithaqalladhina ’utul-Kitab), 意思是有经的人的誓约 (مُحِيْط, Muhit)。这个翻译也为以下的话所证实, 即 “那时你们会遇到一位证实你们所遵循的经典的使者,”因为安拉的使者是来到有经的人中间, 而不是来到他们的众先知中间。
257
此处 مُصَدِّقْ (Musaddiq) 用来指区别真伪宣称者的评判标准。此词在此处正确地被译作 “证实”, 因为只有亲自应验前面启示的经文中所含的预言, 宣称者才能证明自己的真理。
2
سب نبیوں والا سے مراد یہ ہے کہ جو عہد سب نبی اپنی امتوں سے لیتے چلے آئے ہیں۔
3
پہلے بتایا گیا ہے کہ دو تاکیدوں کے موقعہ پر جیسا کہ یہاں ہیں ایک تاکید کے معنے ’’ضرور‘‘ کے لفظ سے کیے گئے ہیں اور دوسری تاکید کے لئے ’’ہی‘‘ کے لفظ سے اس سے ترجمہ بالکل لفظی ہو جاتا ہے اور کوئی لفظ ترجمہ سے باہر نہیں رہ جاتا۔
a
5:13.
370
Important Words:
میثاق النبیین (covenant from the people through the Prophets) literally means, Covenant of the Prophets. According to Arabic usage, the expression اخذ الله میثاق النبیین (lit. Allah took the covenant of the Prophets) may refer either to a covenant which the Prophets of God entered into with Him, or to a covenant which God took from the people through their Prophets. In this verse, the words are used in the latter sense, which is supported by another reading of میثاق النبیین as reported by Ubayy bin Ka‘b and ‘Abdullah bin Mas‘ud, i.e. میثاق الذین اوتوا الکتاب meaning, the covenant of those who were given the Book (Muhit). This rendering is supported by the words that follow, i.e. and then there comes to you a Messenger fulfilling what is with you, because it was to the people and not to their Prophets that the Messenger of God came. The meaning given above gains further support from the fact that as other Prophets were dead at the time of the Holy Prophet, they could naturally render him no help and there was thus no sense in taking any covenant from them to this effect.
Commentary:
This verse is considered to apply to other Prophets in general and to the Holy Prophet in particular. Both applications are correct. The verse lays down a general rule. The advent of every Prophet takes place in fulfilment of certain prophecies made by a previous Prophet in which he enjoins his followers to accept the next Prophet when he makes his appearance. If the Prophet comes in fulfilment of the prophecies con-tained in the scriptures of one people only, as was the case with Jesus and other Israelite Prophets, then only that people are bound to accept and help him; but if the scriptures of all religions predict the coming of a Prophet, as in the case of the Holy Prophet, then all nations are bound to accept him.
The Holy Prophet appeared in fulfilment of the prophecies not only of the Israelite Prophets (Isa. 21:13-15. Deut. 18:18; 33:2. John 14:25, 26; 16:7-13) but also of the Aryan seers and Buddhist and Zoroastrian sages. We have the following prophecy in Dasatir, the sacred Scripture of the Parsis: "When the people of Iran will begin to do such, (i.e.evil) deeds, there shall appear from among the Arabs a man whose followers shall abolish the crown, the throne, the kingdom, and the religion of Iran. The headstrong shall become humble and a house without idols shall take the place of idol-houses and fire-temples, and to it shall they turn their faces in worship" (Safrang Dasatir, p. 188, Siraji Press, Delhi). The words are too clear to need comment. A similar prophecy is found in Jamaspi, a work of Jamaspi, the first successor of Zoroaster (Jamaspi, published by Nizamul-Masha’ikh, Delhi, 1330 A.H.).
The word مصدقا (fulfilling; for the meaning of which see 3:42) has been used here to denote the criterion by which a true claimant to prophethood is distinguished from a false one. But if the word is taken in the sense of "verifying or confirming or declaring to be true" as is sometimes done, this verification or confirmation can be no test of knowing a true Prophet from an impostor, for even an impostor can declare the previous scriptures to be true. The word has, therefore, been rightly translated here as "fulfilling" for it is only by "fulfilling" in his person the prophecies contained in the previous scriptures that a claimant can prove his truth, it being beyond the power of an impostor to fulfil the previous prophecies in his person.
a
5:13.
433
The expression Mithaqun-Nabiyyin may either signify the covenant of the Prophets with God or the covenant which God took from the people through their Prophets. The expression has been used here in the latter sense because another reading of the expression as supported by Ubayy bin Ka‘b and ‘Abdullah bin Mas‘ud is Mithaqalladhina ’utul-Kitab meaning, the covenant of those who were given the Book (Muhit). This rendering is also supported by the words that follow, i.e. and then there comes to you a Messenger fulfilling that which is with you, because it was to the people and not to their Prophets that the Messengers of God came.
433A
The word Musaddiq has been used here to denote the criterion by which a true claimant is distinguished from a false one. The word has been rightly translated here as "fulfilling," for it is only by "fulfilling" in his person the prophecies contained in the previous revealed Scriptures that a claimant can prove his truth.
433B
This verse is also considered to apply to other Prophets in general and to the Holy Prophet in particular. Both applications are correct. The verse lays down a general rule. The advent of every Prophet takes place in fulfilment of certain prophecies made by a previous Prophet in which he enjoins his followers to accept the next Prophet when he makes his appearance. If the Prophet comes in fulfilment of the prophecies contained in the Scriptures of one people only, as was the case with Jesus and other Israelite Prophets, then only that people are bound to accept and help him: but if the Scriptures of all religions predict the coming of a Prophet, as in the case of the Holy Prophet, then all nations are bound to accept him. The Holy Prophet appeared in fulfilment of the prophecies not only of the Israelite Prophets (Isa. 21: 13-15. Deut. 18: 18; 33: 2. John 14: 25, 26; 16: 7-13) but also of the Aryan seers and Buddhist and Zoroastrian sages (Safrang Dasatir, p. 188, Siraji Press, Delhi Jamaspi, published by
لَن تَنَالُوا۟ ٱلْبِرَّ حَتَّىٰ تُنفِقُوا۟ مِمَّا تُحِبُّونَ ۚ وَمَا تُنفِقُوا۟ مِن شَىْءٍ فَإِنَّ ٱللَّهَ بِهِۦ عَلِيمٌ
9:34, 111; 63:11.
In order to attain true faith, which is the essence of all righteousness and is the highest form of good, one must be prepared to sacrifice everything that one holds dear. The highest stage of righteousness can be attained only by spending in the way of God that which one loves best. High morals (Birr) cannot be attained without imbibing a true spirit of sacrifice.
9:34, 111; 63:11.
Important Words:
البر (righteousness) means, goodness of a high order (Mufradat). The Holy Prophet has explained the word بر as حسن الخلق i.e.the excellence of moral qualities (Muslim & Musnad). See also 2:45, 178. As true belief is the basis of all goodness, so the word البر may also be taken to mean true belief.
Commentary:
Since the word البر means, goodness or righteousness of a high order or excellence of morals, the verse purports to say that though God is cognizant of, and suitably rewards, each and every thing that one spends in the cause of Allah, yet the goodness of a high order, most acceptable in His sight, can be achieved only by spending out of things, be they material or otherwise, which one loves most for the obvious reason that such spending involves the greatest sacrifice.
In the preceding verse it is said, there shall not be accepted from anyone of them even an earthful of gold, though he offer it in ransom. From this some people might conclude that spending in the cause of God was of no use. To remove this possible misunderstanding, it is pointed out here that spending in the cause of God is a highly meritorious act and spending what is best naturally brings the highest good. The preceding verse refers only to such disbelievers as die in their disbelief.
The verse may be interpreted in three ways: (1) If البر is taken to mean true faith, the verse would mean that as disbelievers think more of their worldly interests than of God, they are unable to recognize the truth of Islam. Thus the verse signifies that in order to attain true faith, which is the essence of all righteousness and the highest form of good, one must be prepared to sacrifice everything that one holds dear. (2) If البر is taken in the sense of goodness of a high order, the verse would mean that though whatever is spent in the cause of God is an act of righteousness, yet the highest stage of righteousness can be attained only by spending in the way of God that which one loves best. (3) If, however, the word البرis taken to mean high morals, the verse would signify that high morals cannot be attained without inculcating a true spirit of sacrifice.
It is on record in the Hadith that when this verse was revealed, Abu Talhah, a Companion of the Holy Prophet, stood up and addressing him said, "O Messenger of God, my garden known as Bi’r Rauha’ (this garden was situated opposite to the Mosque at Medina) is to me the dearest of my property and I hereby give it in charity" (Bukhari, ch. on Tafsir). This illustrates how the early converts to Islam strove to practise the highest good as the Quran enjoined upon them.
d
9:34, 111; 63:11.
261
为了达到真正的信仰,--------一切至善中的精华和完好的最高形式,--------一个人必须准备牺牲他所心爱的一切。只有为安拉而献出自己最爱的东西, 才能达到善的最高阶段。不吸收真正的牺牲精神, 就不能获得高尚的道德 بِرّ (Birr)。
a
9:34, 111; 63:11.
379
Important Words:
البر (righteousness) means, goodness of a high order (Mufradat). The Holy Prophet has explained the word بر as حسن الخلق i.e.the excellence of moral qualities (Muslim & Musnad). See also 2:45, 178. As true belief is the basis of all goodness, so the word البر may also be taken to mean true belief.
Commentary:
Since the word البر means, goodness or righteousness of a high order or excellence of morals, the verse purports to say that though God is cognizant of, and suitably rewards, each and every thing that one spends in the cause of Allah, yet the goodness of a high order, most acceptable in His sight, can be achieved only by spending out of things, be they material or otherwise, which one loves most for the obvious reason that such spending involves the greatest sacrifice.
In the preceding verse it is said, there shall not be accepted from anyone of them even an earthful of gold, though he offer it in ransom. From this some people might conclude that spending in the cause of God was of no use. To remove this possible misunderstanding, it is pointed out here that spending in the cause of God is a highly meritorious act and spending what is best naturally brings the highest good. The preceding verse refers only to such disbelievers as die in their disbelief.
The verse may be interpreted in three ways: (1) If البر is taken to mean true faith, the verse would mean that as disbelievers think more of their worldly interests than of God, they are unable to recognize the truth of Islam. Thus the verse signifies that in order to attain true faith, which is the essence of all righteousness and the highest form of good, one must be prepared to sacrifice everything that one holds dear. (2) If البر is taken in the sense of goodness of a high order, the verse would mean that though whatever is spent in the cause of God is an act of righteousness, yet the highest stage of righteousness can be attained only by spending in the way of God that which one loves best. (3) If, however, the word البرis taken to mean high morals, the verse would signify that high morals cannot be attained without inculcating a true spirit of sacrifice.
It is on record in the Hadith that when this verse was revealed, Abu Talhah, a Companion of the Holy Prophet, stood up and addressing him said, "O Messenger of God, my garden known as Bi’r Rauha’ (this garden was situated opposite to the Mosque at Medina) is to me the dearest of my property and I hereby give it in charity" (Bukhari, ch. on Tafsir). This illustrates how the early converts to Islam strove to practise the highest good as the Quran enjoined upon them.
b
9:34, 111; 63:11.
438
In order to attain true faith, which is the essence of all righteousness and is the highest form of good, one must be prepared to sacrifice everything that one holds dear. The highest stage of righteousness can be attained only by spending in the way of God that which one loves best. High morals (Birr) cannot be attained without imbibing a true spirit of sacrifice.
وَمَن يَكْسِبْ خَطِيٓـَٔةً أَوْ إِثْمًا ثُمَّ يَرْمِ بِهِۦ بَرِيٓـًٔا فَقَدِ ٱحْتَمَلَ بُهْتَٰنًا وَإِثْمًا مُّبِينًا
24:2, 24; 33:59.
خَطِيْئَة (Khati’ah) (过错) 和 اِثْم (Ithm) (罪恶) 在这节经文中同时谈及。它们的区别是, 前者可能是有意和无意的, 而且常常只限于行为者本身; 而后者是有
意的, 而它的范围可能涉及其他人。而且, 前者可以意指对安拉玩忽职责, 而后者常常是既触犯安拉又触犯他人, 因此, 更为严重而应受比前者更大的惩罚。请看 2:82 和 2:174。如果犯了过错或罪恶的人试图归咎无辜, 其犯错误或罪恶的严重性倍增。这就是为什么这样的企图不仅叫做 بُهْتَانْ (Buhtan) (诽谤), 也叫做 اِثْمُ مُبِيْن (Ithmu Mubin) (明显罪恶)。
24:2, 24; 33:59.
The difference between Khati’ah (fault) and Ithm (sin) mentioned side by side in this verse is that the former can be both intentional and unintentional and is often confined to the doer, while the latter is intentional and its scope may extend to other people as well. Moreover, the former may signify a dereliction of duty due to God, but the latter is often an offence against both God and man and is, therefore, more serious and is deserving of greater punishment than the former. See also 2:82 and 2:174. The commission of a fault or a sin makes it doubly grave, if the offender tries to shift the blame to an innocent person. This is why such an attempt has been termed not only as Buhtan (calumny) but also as Ithmun Mubin (manifest sin).
24:12, 24; 33:59.
Important Words:
The difference between خطیئة (fault) and اثم (sin) mentioned side by side in this verse is that the former can be both intentional and unintentional and is often confined to the doer; while the latter is intentional and its scope may extend to other people as well. Moreover, the former may be a dereliction of duty due to God; while the latter is often an offence against both God and man and is, therefore, more serious and deserving of greater punishment than the former. See also 2:82 and 2:174.
Commentary:
The commission of a fault or sin makes it doubly grave, if he who commits it tries to fix it on an innocent person. This is why such an attempt has not only been termed بھتان (calumny) but also اثم مبین (manifest sin). As the word مبین (manifest) also means "that which cuts asunder" (2:169), the expression اثما مبینا may also signify that a double sin, (i.e. committing a sin and then imputing it to an innocent person) is that which is likely to cut asunder the connection of the sinner with his Maker.
d
24:2, 24; 33:59.
344
خَطِيْئَة (Khati’ah) (过错) 和 اِثْم (Ithm) (罪恶) 在这节经文中同时谈及。它们的区别是, 前者可能是有意和无意的, 而且常常只限于行为者本身; 而后者是有
意的, 而它的范围可能涉及其他人。而且, 前者可以意指对安拉玩忽职责, 而后者常常是既触犯安拉又触犯他人, 因此, 更为严重而应受比前者更大的惩罚。请看 2:82 和 2:174。如果犯了过错或罪恶的人试图归咎无辜, 其犯错误或罪恶的严重性倍增。这就是为什么这样的企图不仅叫做 بُهْتَانْ (Buhtan) (诽谤), 也叫做 اِثْمُ مُبِيْن (Ithmu Mubin) (明显罪恶)。
c
24:12, 24; 33:59.
579
Important Words:
The difference between خطیئة (fault) and اثم (sin) mentioned side by side in this verse is that the former can be both intentional and unintentional and is often confined to the doer; while the latter is intentional and its scope may extend to other people as well. Moreover, the former may be a dereliction of duty due to God; while the latter is often an offence against both God and man and is, therefore, more serious and deserving of greater punishment than the former. See also 2:82 and 2:174.
Commentary:
The commission of a fault or sin makes it doubly grave, if he who commits it tries to fix it on an innocent person. This is why such an attempt has not only been termed بھتان (calumny) but also اثم مبین (manifest sin). As the word مبین (manifest) also means "that which cuts asunder" (2:169), the expression اثما مبینا may also signify that a double sin, (i.e. committing a sin and then imputing it to an innocent person) is that which is likely to cut asunder the connection of the sinner with his Maker.
c
24:2, 24; 33:59.
667
The difference between Khati’ah (fault) and Ithm (sin) mentioned side by side in this verse is that the former can be both intentional and unintentional and is often confined to the doer, while the latter is intentional and its scope may extend to other people as well. Moreover, the former may signify a dereliction of duty due to God, but the latter is often an offence against both God and man and is, therefore, more serious and is deserving of greater punishment than the former. See also 2:82 and 2:174. The commission of a fault or a sin makes it doubly grave, if the offender tries to shift the blame to an innocent person. This is why such an attempt has been termed not only as Buhtan (calumny) but also as Ithmun Mubin (manifest sin).
إِنَّ ٱللَّهَ لَا يَغْفِرُ أَن يُشْرَكَ بِهِۦ وَيَغْفِرُ مَا دُونَ ذَٰلِكَ لِمَن يَشَآءُ ۚ وَمَن يُشْرِكْ بِٱللَّهِ فَقَدْ ضَلَّ ضَلَٰلًۢا بَعِيدًا
a
4:49.
b
4:137.
b
4:49.
c
4:137.
583
Commentary:
See note on 4:49.
b
4:49.
c
4:137.
وَمَا جَعَلَهُ ٱللَّهُ إِلَّا بُشْرَىٰ لَكُمْ وَلِتَطْمَئِنَّ قُلُوبُكُم بِهِۦ ۗ وَمَا ٱلنَّصْرُ إِلَّا مِنْ عِندِ ٱللَّهِ ٱلْعَزِيزِ ٱلْحَكِيمِ
اس میں بتایا ہے کہ فرشتوں کا ذکر صرف اس لئے ہے کہ خواب یا کشف میں خوش خبری ملنے سے انسان کی ہمت بڑھتی ہے ورنہ اصل مراد یہی تھی کہ خداتعالیٰ مدد کرے گا۔
یہ آیت نمبر۱۲۸ کے آخری حصہ کا ترجمہ ہے جو مضمون کی وضاحت کے لئے پہلے کر دیا گیا ہے۔
8:11.
The angels helped Muslims on the one hand, by strengthening their hearts, and, on the other, by filling the hearts of their enemies with awe and fear. If God had so willed, a single angel would have been enough to help the Muslims at Uhud, but He promised to send as many as five thousand of them. This constituted a veiled hint that a large number of the hidden forces of nature would work in their favour. It may incidentally be noted that some believers, and even some disbelievers, are reported to have actually seen angels in the Battle of Badr (Jarir, iv. 47). See also 8:10.
8:11.
Commentary:
The verse is intended to warn Muslims against treating angels as gods or even as an independent source of help. Help comes from Allah alone; angels are entirely subservient to Him and do nothing by their own will. They come only by the command of God and do only what God commands them. The way in which angels help men is that they strengthen their hearts and fill their enemies with awe and fear. If God had so willed, a single angel would have been enough to help the Muslims, but He promised to send as many as five thousand angels in order to cheer and strengthen their hearts and to hint that a very large number of the hidden forces of nature were working in their favour. For the work and duties of angels, see 2:31.
It may incidentally be noted here that some believers, and even some disbelievers, are reported to have actually seen the angels at the Battle of Badr (Jarir, iv. 47). See also 8:11.
a
8:11.
277
众天使一方面通过激励穆斯林的信心来帮助他们, 另一方面使穆斯林的敌人心怀畏怯、恐惧。如果安拉决心这样做, 派遣一个天使就足以帮助吴候德的穆斯林了, 但他答应派遣多达五千名天使。这等于是一个隐约的暗示, 即许多隐藏的自然力量对他们会起着有利的作用。我们可以顺便指出, 据说有些信者, 甚至有些不信者在白德尔战役中真的看见过天使 (Jarir, iv.47)。另见 (8:10)。
1
اس میں بتایا ہے کہ فرشتوں کا ذکر صرف اس لئے ہے کہ خواب یا کشف میں خوش خبری ملنے سے انسان کی ہمت بڑھتی ہے ورنہ اصل مراد یہی تھی کہ خداتعالیٰ مدد کرے گا۔
2
یہ آیت نمبر۱۲۸ کے آخری حصہ کا ترجمہ ہے جو مضمون کی وضاحت کے لئے پہلے کر دیا گیا ہے۔
a
8:11.
411
Commentary:
The verse is intended to warn Muslims against treating angels as gods or even as an independent source of help. Help comes from Allah alone; angels are entirely subservient to Him and do nothing by their own will. They come only by the command of God and do only what God commands them. The way in which angels help men is that they strengthen their hearts and fill their enemies with awe and fear. If God had so willed, a single angel would have been enough to help the Muslims, but He promised to send as many as five thousand angels in order to cheer and strengthen their hearts and to hint that a very large number of the hidden forces of nature were working in their favour. For the work and duties of angels, see 2:31.
It may incidentally be noted here that some believers, and even some disbelievers, are reported to have actually seen the angels at the Battle of Badr (Jarir, iv. 47). See also 8:11.
a
8:11.
474
The angels helped Muslims on the one hand, by strengthening their hearts, and, on the other, by filling the hearts of their enemies with awe and fear. If God had so willed, a single angel would have been enough to help the Muslims at Uhud, but He promised to send as many as five thousand of them. This constituted a veiled hint that a large number of the hidden forces of nature would work in their favour. It may incidentally be noted that some believers, and even some disbelievers, are reported to have actually seen angels in the Battle of Badr (Jarir, iv. 47). See also 8:10.
سَنُلْقِى فِى قُلُوبِ ٱلَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا۟ ٱلرُّعْبَ بِمَآ أَشْرَكُوا۟ بِٱللَّهِ مَا لَمْ يُنَزِّلْ بِهِۦ سُلْطَٰنًا ۖ وَمَأْوَىٰهُمُ ٱلنَّارُ ۚ وَبِئْسَ مَثْوَى ٱلظَّٰلِمِينَ
8:13; 59:3.
8:13; 59:3.
Idolatry springs from superstition and fear; and one possessed of superstition and fear can never be truly brave.
8:13; 59:3.
Commentary:
The words, because they associate partners with Allah, signify that he who associates gods with Allah can never be truly brave, for he lacks complete devotion to anyone. It is only complete devotion that can inspire a person to make sacrifices. As a believer is completely devoted to the One God, therefore, he is ever ready to make every kind of sacrifice in His cause.
Moreover, it is through lack of perseverance that idolaters go from one god to another, and perseverance is an essential concomitant of bravery. Where there is no perseverance, there is no bravery. Again, idolaters are rebels in setting up gods with Allah and a rebel’s heart is never at rest; and a heart that is not at ease cannot be brave. Yet again, polytheism springs from superstitious fear and one possessed of that sort of fear can never be truly brave.
It should, however, be remembered that it is only relative bravery that is meant here; otherwise, even among idolaters and polytheists, there are men who possess bravery and courage, but their courage and bravery is inferior to that of true believers who put faith in One God and believe in His great powers and in the life after death.
b
8:13; 59:3.
c
8:13; 59:3.
434
Commentary:
The words, because they associate partners with Allah, signify that he who associates gods with Allah can never be truly brave, for he lacks complete devotion to anyone. It is only complete devotion that can inspire a person to make sacrifices. As a believer is completely devoted to the One God, therefore, he is ever ready to make every kind of sacrifice in His cause.
Moreover, it is through lack of perseverance that idolaters go from one god to another, and perseverance is an essential concomitant of bravery. Where there is no perseverance, there is no bravery. Again, idolaters are rebels in setting up gods with Allah and a rebel’s heart is never at rest; and a heart that is not at ease cannot be brave. Yet again, polytheism springs from superstitious fear and one possessed of that sort of fear can never be truly brave.
It should, however, be remembered that it is only relative bravery that is meant here; otherwise, even among idolaters and polytheists, there are men who possess bravery and courage, but their courage and bravery is inferior to that of true believers who put faith in One God and believe in His great powers and in the life after death.
d
8:13; 59:3.
498
Idolatry springs from superstition and fear; and one possessed of superstition and fear can never be truly brave.
وَلَا يَحْسَبَنَّ ٱلَّذِينَ يَبْخَلُونَ بِمَآ ءَاتَىٰهُمُ ٱللَّهُ مِن فَضْلِهِۦ هُوَ خَيْرًا لَّهُم ۖ بَلْ هُوَ شَرٌّ لَّهُمْ ۖ سَيُطَوَّقُونَ مَا بَخِلُوا۟ بِهِۦ يَوْمَ ٱلْقِيَٰمَةِ ۗ وَلِلَّهِ مِيرَٰثُ ٱلسَّمَٰوَٰتِ وَٱلْأَرْضِ ۗ وَٱللَّهُ بِمَا تَعْمَلُونَ خَبِيرٌ
4:38; 17:30; 25:68.
Mirath rendered as "heritage" here signifies "ownership." The word also means, portion allotted to one. See 23:12 where it is stated "those who shall inherit Paradise." Paradise is not inherited by anyone; it is only received as an allotted portion from God.
4:38; 17:30; 25:68.
Important Words:
میراث (heritage) is derived from ورث i.e. he inherited. ورث اباہ or ورث مال ابیه means, he inherited the property of his father. They say ورثت مجدہ i.e. I inherited his glory. ورث من ابیه or ورث عن ابیه means, he inherited from his father, or he inherited part of the property of his father. اورثه الشیء means, he made him inherit the thing. اورثه المرض ضعفا means, the disease occasioned him, as its result, weakness. ورث and ارث and تراث and میراث all mean, what is inherited; an inheritance; a heritage whether property, rank, quality, nobility, etc. وارث means, an heir. الوارث as an epithet applied to God means, He Who remains after all creatures have perished (Lane). Primarily, الوراثة signifies the transfer of property, etc. from one to another without sale or gift. The Arabs say ورثت علما من فلان i.e., I gained or acquired knowledge from such a one (Mufradat).
Commentary:
The chief obstacle in the way of the hypocrites to accept Islam was that constant calls were made on Muslims to spend money in the cause of God and make sacrifices for it. They are told in this verse that their unwillingness to spend would eventually do them no good nor would it save their possessions from destruction.
The sentence, And to Allah belongs the heritage of the heavens and the earth, obviously does not mean that Allah will receive heavens and earth in inheritance from someone else. The word میراث rendered as "heritage" here signifies ownership. The word also means portion allotted to one, as in the verse الذین یرثون الفردوس i.e. those who shall inherit Paradise (23:12). Now, Paradise is not inherited by anyone; it is only received as an allotted portion from God.
b
4:38; 17:30; 25:68.
295
مِيْرَاثْ (Mirath) 译作 “遗产”, 在此处表示 “所有权”。这个词也可指分配给某人的一份。参见23:12。在23:12里安拉说: “那些将要继承天园的人。”天园是不能被任何人继承的。只能从安拉那儿接受分配给他的一部分。
a
4:38; 17:30; 25:68.
463
Important Words:
میراث (heritage) is derived from ورث i.e. he inherited. ورث اباہ or ورث مال ابیه means, he inherited the property of his father. They say ورثت مجدہ i.e. I inherited his glory. ورث من ابیه or ورث عن ابیه means, he inherited from his father, or he inherited part of the property of his father. اورثه الشیء means, he made him inherit the thing. اورثه المرض ضعفا means, the disease occasioned him, as its result, weakness. ورث and ارث and تراث and میراث all mean, what is inherited; an inheritance; a heritage whether property, rank, quality, nobility, etc. وارث means, an heir. الوارث as an epithet applied to God means, He Who remains after all creatures have perished (Lane). Primarily, الوراثة signifies the transfer of property, etc. from one to another without sale or gift. The Arabs say ورثت علما من فلان i.e., I gained or acquired knowledge from such a one (Mufradat).
Commentary:
The chief obstacle in the way of the hypocrites to accept Islam was that constant calls were made on Muslims to spend money in the cause of God and make sacrifices for it. They are told in this verse that their unwillingness to spend would eventually do them no good nor would it save their possessions from destruction.
The sentence, And to Allah belongs the heritage of the heavens and the earth, obviously does not mean that Allah will receive heavens and earth in inheritance from someone else. The word میراث rendered as "heritage" here signifies ownership. The word also means portion allotted to one, as in the verse الذین یرثون الفردوس i.e. those who shall inherit Paradise (23:12). Now, Paradise is not inherited by anyone; it is only received as an allotted portion from God.
d
4:38; 17:30; 25:68.
537
Mirath rendered as "heritage" here signifies "ownership." The word also means, portion allotted to one. See 23:12 where it is stated "those who shall inherit Paradise." Paradise is not inherited by anyone; it is only received as an allotted portion from God.
وَإِذْ أَخَذَ ٱللَّهُ مِيثَٰقَ ٱلَّذِينَ أُوتُوا۟ ٱلْكِتَٰبَ لَتُبَيِّنُنَّهُۥ لِلنَّاسِ وَلَا تَكْتُمُونَهُۥ فَنَبَذُوهُ وَرَآءَ ظُهُورِهِمْ وَٱشْتَرَوْا۟ بِهِۦ ثَمَنًا قَلِيلًا ۖ فَبِئْسَ مَا يَشْتَرُونَ
اس آیت کی تشریح کے لئے دیکھئے سورۃ بقرہ آیت ۱۷۵۔
2:102.
The reference here is to no particular covenant but to a general covenant taken from the followers of every Prophet that they would preach and promulgate the Divine Message and would try to live up to it.
2:102.
Commentary:
The reference here is to no particular covenant, but to a general covenant taken from the followers of every Prophet that they would preach and promulgate the Message they had accepted and would live up to it. The pronoun "it" in the clause, and not conceal it, may refer either to the Book or the covenant.
a
2:102.
300
此处不是指某一个信约, 而是指从每位圣先知的信徒所缔结的一般信约, 即他们要布讲和宣扬安拉的启示, 并且尽力实践其教义。
1
اس آیت کی تشریح کے لئے دیکھئے سورۃ بقرہ آیت ۱۷۵۔
a
2:102.
470
Commentary:
The reference here is to no particular covenant, but to a general covenant taken from the followers of every Prophet that they would preach and promulgate the Message they had accepted and would live up to it. The pronoun "it" in the clause, and not conceal it, may refer either to the Book or the covenant.
c
2:102.
544
The reference here is to no particular covenant but to a general covenant taken from the followers of every Prophet that they would preach and promulgate the Divine Message and would try to live up to it.
يَٰٓأَيُّهَا ٱلنَّاسُ ٱتَّقُوا۟ رَبَّكُمُ ٱلَّذِى خَلَقَكُم مِّن نَّفْسٍ وَٰحِدَةٍ وَخَلَقَ مِنْهَا زَوْجَهَا وَبَثَّ مِنْهُمَا رِجَالًا كَثِيرًا وَنِسَآءً ۚ وَٱتَّقُوا۟ ٱللَّهَ ٱلَّذِى تَسَآءَلُونَ بِهِۦ وَٱلْأَرْحَامَ ۚ إِنَّ ٱللَّهَ كَانَ عَلَيْكُمْ رَقِيبًا
33:71; 59:19.
7:190; 16:73; 30:22; 39:7.
“一个人” 可以指: (1) 阿丹; (2) 视为一体的男女, 因两件事物联合了起着一个作用时, 可以称之为一个整体; (3) 视为分开的男女, 因为可以说人类是从 “一个人” 中创造出来的, 那是因为, 每个人都是从男人即 “单人” 的精子中被创造出来的, 也是由女人即也是 “单人” 生出来的。
这字句意思并非说妇女是从男子的身体里创造出来的, 而是说妇女和男子同属一类, 具有和男子同样的才智和脾性。哈娲 (夏娃) 是由阿丹 (亚当) 的肋骨创造出来的这一想法似乎是穆圣的一句话引起的, 即 “妇女是由肋骨创造出来的, 肋骨的最弯曲部分也必定是最高的部分。你使劲将它拉直, 它最易断裂” (بُخَارِی كِتَابُ النِّكَاحْ, Bukhari Kitabun-Nikah)。这句话只是反对而不是赞成上述观点。因为这话并未提到哈娲, 而只是谈到所有的妇女。因此很清楚, 每个妇女都不是由肋骨创造出来的。上面穆圣的这句话中所用的肋骨这个词意味着某种不直接显露的行为举止。该词本身含义是弯曲{بِحَارْ (Bihar) 和 مُحِيْط (Muhit)}。事实上, 该词指妇女的某种特点--------佯装生气和做作撒娇。在这句话中把 “不直接显露” 说成是妇女性格中最主要而合适的特征。有些人把妇女佯装生气当作真的生气, 因而态度生硬地对待她们。实际上,他们毁掉了妇女个性中最吸引人、最得人欢心的方面。
یعنی تم اس اللہ کے نام کا واسطہ دے کر اپنی ضروریات پورا کرنے کی خواہش کا اظہار کرتے ہو۔
33:71; 59:19.
7:190; 16:73; 30:22; 39:7.
"Single soul" may signify: (1) Adam; (2) man and woman taken together, because when two things jointly perform one function, they may be spoken of as one; (3) man and woman taken separately, because mankind may be said to have been created from one "single soul" in the sense that each and every individual is created from the seed of man who is "one soul" and is also born of woman who is likewise "one soul".
The words do not mean that woman was created out of the body of man but that she belonged to the same species as man, possessing identical aptitudes and propensities. The idea that Eve had been created out of the rib of Adam seems to have arisen from a saying of the Holy Prophet, viz. "Women have been created from a rib, and surely, the most crooked part of a rib is the highest part thereof. If you set yourself to straighten it, you will break it" (Bukhari, ch. on Nikah). This saying, if anything, constitutes an argument against the above view rather than being in its favour, for it makes no mention of Eve, but only speaks of all women, and it is clear that every woman has not been created from a rib. The word Dil‘ used in the above saying of the Prophet signifies a certain crookedness of manners, the word itself meaning crookedness (Bihar & Muhit). In fact, it refers to a certain peculiarity of woman, viz. her affectation of displeasure and coquetry. This "crookedness" has been spoken
The verse places "the fear of God", side by side with "respect for the ties of kinship", thus emphasizing the importance of good treatment of relatives, on which the Qur’an has laid so much stress. The Holy Prophet used to recite this verse when delivering a marriage sermon in order to remind both the parties of their duties to each other.
33:71; 59:19.
7:190; 16:73; 30:22; 39:7.
Important Words:
رقیبا (Watcher) is derived from رقب. They say رقبه i.e. he watched him; or guarded him; or waited for him; or he kept or preserved it. رقیبis one of God’s attributes meaning, Watcher, Guardian, Keeper; One from Whom nothing is hidden.رقیب also means, an observer; a spy (Lane & Aqrab).
Commentary:
The words نفس واحدة (single soul) may signify: (1) Adam; or (2) man and woman taken together, because when two things jointly perform one function, they may be spoken of as one. For instance, 2:62 speaks of one food, while it consisted of manna and quails; or (3) man and woman taken individually, because mankind may be said to have been created from one "single soul" in the sense that each and every individual is created from the seed of man who is "one soul" and is also born of woman who is likewise "one soul".
The expression, and created therefrom its mate, does not mean that woman was created out of the body of man but that she belonged to the same kind and species as man, having the same nature and the same propensities. The meaning of this expression becomes clear when elsewhere we read in the Quran: And Allah has made for you mates from among yourselves (16:73); and He has made for you pairs of your own selves, and of the cattle also pairs (42:12). This means that, like other human beings, a wife was provided for Adam from his own species. And just as other men’s wives are not created from their ribs, so was the wife of Adam not created out of his ribs; and just as our wives have been made from ourselves in the sense that they are of the same kind as ourselves, so was the wife of Adam created from his rib in the sense that she belonged to the same race as Adam did. The preposition من (from) which has given rise to this misconception has been used in the Quran not only about Adam but about other men as well (e.g. 4:60; 9:128; 10:3; 62:3, 4), and in both cases it should mean the same thing, i.e. belonging to the same kind or species. The Quran lends no support whatever to the view that Eve was actually created from the rib of Adam, as is clear from the following verses: We have created you in pairs (78:9); And of everything have We created pairs (51:50), which means that, just as God created a mate for every living thing, so did He make one for Adam. He did not need to depart from this law in respect of Adam and to create a female for him out of his own body.
The idea of Eve having been created out of the rib of Adam seems to have arisen from a saying of the Holy Prophet to the effect "Women have been created from a rib, and surely, the most crooked part of a rib is the highest part thereof. If you set yourself to straighten it, you will break it" (Bukhari, ch. on Nikah). This hadith is, however, an argument against the above view rather than in favour of it, for it makes no mention of Eve, and speaks of all women, and it is clear that every woman has not been created from a rib.
The expression "created from a rib" is evidently figurative and must not be taken literally. What it means is only that, like unto a rib, there is a sort of crookedness in the nature of woman and that this very crookedness lends charm to her. An analogous Quranic expression, viz.: خلق الانسان من عجل i.e. "man is made of (lit. from) haste" (21:38) helps to illustrate the point. These words clearly do not mean that man has been created out of a substance called عجل or haste. They mean only that man is hasty by nature. The above view has been supported by Majma‘ul Bihar, Bahrul-Muhit and Sirajul-Wahhaj, which all agree that in the above hadith the Arabic word ضلع means a certain crookedness of manners, the word itself meaning crookedness.
In fact, this hadith refers to a certain peculiarity of woman, viz. her affectation of displeasure and coquetry. This "crookedness" has been spoken of in the hadith as the highest or the best trait in her character, and those, who take affectation of anger on her part as an expression of her real anger and begin to deal harshly with her for that reason, in fact destroy woman’s most attractive and winning feature.
The verse places "the fear of God", side by side with "respect for the ties of relationship", thus emphasizing the importance of good treatment of relatives, on which the Quran lays so much stress. The Holy Prophet used to recite this verse when delivering a marriage sermon in order to remind the parties of their duties to one another.
a
33:71; 59:19.
b
7:190; 16:73; 30:22; 39:7.
308
“一个人” 可以指: (1) 阿丹; (2) 视为一体的男女, 因两件事物联合了起着一个作用时, 可以称之为一个整体; (3) 视为分开的男女, 因为可以说人类是从 “一个人” 中创造出来的, 那是因为, 每个人都是从男人即 “单人” 的精子中被创造出来的, 也是由女人即也是 “单人” 生出来的。
309
这字句意思并非说妇女是从男子的身体里创造出来的, 而是说妇女和男子同属一类, 具有和男子同样的才智和脾性。哈娲 (夏娃) 是由阿丹 (亚当) 的肋骨创造出来的这一想法似乎是穆圣的一句话引起的, 即 “妇女是由肋骨创造出来的, 肋骨的最弯曲部分也必定是最高的部分。你使劲将它拉直, 它最易断裂” (بُخَارِی كِتَابُ النِّكَاحْ, Bukhari Kitabun-Nikah)。这句话只是反对而不是赞成上述观点。因为这话并未提到哈娲, 而只是谈到所有的妇女。因此很清楚, 每个妇女都不是由肋骨创造出来的。上面穆圣的这句话中所用的肋骨这个词意味着某种不直接显露的行为举止。该词本身含义是弯曲{بِحَارْ (Bihar) 和 مُحِيْط (Muhit)}。事实上, 该词指妇女的某种特点--------佯装生气和做作撒娇。在这句话中把 “不直接显露” 说成是妇女性格中最主要而合适的特征。有些人把妇女佯装生气当作真的生气, 因而态度生硬地对待她们。实际上,他们毁掉了妇女个性中最吸引人、最得人欢心的方面。
1
یعنی تم اس اللہ کے نام کا واسطہ دے کر اپنی ضروریات پورا کرنے کی خواہش کا اظہار کرتے ہو۔
b
33:71; 59:19.
c
7:190; 16:73; 30:22; 39:7.
484
Important Words:
رقیبا (Watcher) is derived from رقب. They say رقبه i.e. he watched him; or guarded him; or waited for him; or he kept or preserved it. رقیبis one of God’s attributes meaning, Watcher, Guardian, Keeper; One from Whom nothing is hidden.رقیب also means, an observer; a spy (Lane & Aqrab).
Commentary:
The words نفس واحدة (single soul) may signify: (1) Adam; or (2) man and woman taken together, because when two things jointly perform one function, they may be spoken of as one. For instance, 2:62 speaks of one food, while it consisted of manna and quails; or (3) man and woman taken individually, because mankind may be said to have been created from one "single soul" in the sense that each and every individual is created from the seed of man who is "one soul" and is also born of woman who is likewise "one soul".
The expression, and created therefrom its mate, does not mean that woman was created out of the body of man but that she belonged to the same kind and species as man, having the same nature and the same propensities. The meaning of this expression becomes clear when elsewhere we read in the Quran: And Allah has made for you mates from among yourselves (16:73); and He has made for you pairs of your own selves, and of the cattle also pairs (42:12). This means that, like other human beings, a wife was provided for Adam from his own species. And just as other men’s wives are not created from their ribs, so was the wife of Adam not created out of his ribs; and just as our wives have been made from ourselves in the sense that they are of the same kind as ourselves, so was the wife of Adam created from his rib in the sense that she belonged to the same race as Adam did. The preposition من (from) which has given rise to this misconception has been used in the Quran not only about Adam but about other men as well (e.g. 4:60; 9:128; 10:3; 62:3, 4), and in both cases it should mean the same thing, i.e. belonging to the same kind or species. The Quran lends no support whatever to the view that Eve was actually created from the rib of Adam, as is clear from the following verses: We have created you in pairs (78:9); And of everything have We created pairs (51:50), which means that, just as God created a mate for every living thing, so did He make one for Adam. He did not need to depart from this law in respect of Adam and to create a female for him out of his own body.
The idea of Eve having been created out of the rib of Adam seems to have arisen from a saying of the Holy Prophet to the effect "Women have been created from a rib, and surely, the most crooked part of a rib is the highest part thereof. If you set yourself to straighten it, you will break it" (Bukhari, ch. on Nikah). This hadith is, however, an argument against the above view rather than in favour of it, for it makes no mention of Eve, and speaks of all women, and it is clear that every woman has not been created from a rib.
The expression "created from a rib" is evidently figurative and must not be taken literally. What it means is only that, like unto a rib, there is a sort of crookedness in the nature of woman and that this very crookedness lends charm to her. An analogous Quranic expression, viz.: خلق الانسان من عجل i.e. "man is made of (lit. from) haste" (21:38) helps to illustrate the point. These words clearly do not mean that man has been created out of a substance called عجل or haste. They mean only that man is hasty by nature. The above view has been supported by Majma‘ul Bihar, Bahrul-Muhit and Sirajul-Wahhaj, which all agree that in the above hadith the Arabic word ضلع means a certain crookedness of manners, the word itself meaning crookedness.
In fact, this hadith refers to a certain peculiarity of woman, viz. her affectation of displeasure and coquetry. This "crookedness" has been spoken of in the hadith as the highest or the best trait in her character, and those, who take affectation of anger on her part as an expression of her real anger and begin to deal harshly with her for that reason, in fact destroy woman’s most attractive and winning feature.
The verse places "the fear of God", side by side with "respect for the ties of relationship", thus emphasizing the importance of good treatment of relatives, on which the Quran lays so much stress. The Holy Prophet used to recite this verse when delivering a marriage sermon in order to remind the parties of their duties to one another.
b
33:71; 59:19.
c
7:190; 16:73; 30:22; 39:7.
556
"Single soul" may signify: (1) Adam; (2) man and woman taken together, because when two things jointly perform one function, they may be spoken of as one; (3) man and woman taken separately, because mankind may be said to have been created from one "single soul" in the sense that each and every individual is created from the seed of man who is "one soul" and is also born of woman who is likewise "one soul".
557
The words do not mean that woman was created out of the body of man but that she belonged to the same species as man, possessing identical aptitudes and propensities. The idea that Eve had been created out of the rib of Adam seems to have arisen from a saying of the Holy Prophet, viz. "Women have been created from a rib, and surely, the most crooked part of a rib is the highest part thereof. If you set yourself to straighten it, you will break it" (Bukhari, ch. on Nikah). This saying, if anything, constitutes an argument against the above view rather than being in its favour, for it makes no mention of Eve, but only speaks of all women, and it is clear that every woman has not been created from a rib. The word Dil‘ used in the above saying of the Prophet signifies a certain crookedness of manners, the word itself meaning crookedness (Bihar & Muhit). In fact, it refers to a certain peculiarity of woman, viz. her affectation of displeasure and coquetry. This "crookedness" has been spoken
558
The verse places "the fear of God", side by side with "respect for the ties of kinship", thus emphasizing the importance of good treatment of relatives, on which the Qur’an has laid so much stress. The Holy Prophet used to recite this verse when delivering a marriage sermon in order to remind both the parties of their duties to each other.
إِنَّ ٱلَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا۟ لَوْ أَنَّ لَهُم مَّا فِى ٱلْأَرْضِ جَمِيعًا وَمِثْلَهُۥ مَعَهُۥ لِيَفْتَدُوا۟ بِهِۦ مِنْ عَذَابِ يَوْمِ ٱلْقِيَٰمَةِ مَا تُقُبِّلَ مِنْهُمْ ۖ وَلَهُمْ عَذَابٌ أَلِيمٌ
13:19; 39:48.
13:19; 39:48.
13:19; 39:48.
a
13:19; 39:48.
a
13:19; 39:48.
d
13:19; 39:48.
۞ وَٱلْمُحْصَنَٰتُ مِنَ ٱلنِّسَآءِ إِلَّا مَا مَلَكَتْ أَيْمَٰنُكُمْ ۖ كِتَٰبَ ٱللَّهِ عَلَيْكُمْ ۚ وَأُحِلَّ لَكُم مَّا وَرَآءَ ذَٰلِكُمْ أَن تَبْتَغُوا۟ بِأَمْوَٰلِكُم مُّحْصِنِينَ غَيْرَ مُسَٰفِحِينَ ۚ فَمَا ٱسْتَمْتَعْتُم بِهِۦ مِنْهُنَّ فَـَٔاتُوهُنَّ أُجُورَهُنَّ فَرِيضَةً ۚ وَلَا جُنَاحَ عَلَيْكُمْ فِيمَا تَرَٰضَيْتُم بِهِۦ مِنۢ بَعْدِ ٱلْفَرِيضَةِ ۚ إِنَّ ٱللَّهَ كَانَ عَلِيمًا حَكِيمًا
4:26; 5:6.
4:5; 60:11.
تَمَتَّعَ بِالْمَرْأَةِ (Tamatta‘a bil Mar’ati) 意指他从妇女那里得到暂时的好处。اِسْتَمْتَعَ بِكَذَا (Istamta‘a bi Kadha) 意指他从中长期得益。阿拉伯习俗不允许把 اِسْتِمْتَاعْ (Istimt‘a)作 “暂时的关系” 这意思来用于妇女 (لِسَانْ, Lisan)。还可以注意到的是, 正如上面例句中那样, 每当名词 تَمَتُّعْ (Tamattu‘) 用来表明妇女的暂时性关系时, 后接置于代表妇女这词之前的介词 ب (ba’)。一位阿拉伯诗人说, تَمَتَّعْ بِهَا مَا سَاعَفَتْكَ وَ لَا تَكُنْ عَلَيْكَ شَجًا فِی الْحَلْقِ حِيْنَ تَبِيْنُ (Tamatt‘a biha ma Sa‘afatka wa la Takun ‘alaika Shajan fil Halqi hina Tabinu) (حَمَاسَة, Hamasah), 即只要她合你的意, 可从她得益, 但当她与你分离时, 不要让她像骨梗在喉般地成为你经久烦恼的祸根。可是在本节经文中, هُنَّ (Hunna) 这个指妇女们的代词之前置有介词 مِنْ (min)。对 مُتْعَة (Mut‘ah) 的误解, 看来是对 تَمَتُّعْ(Tamattu‘) 与 اِسْتِمْتَاعْ (Istimta‘)两词之间的差别未能理解而引起。 (لِسَانْ, Lisan) 的作者引述 زَجَّاجْ (Zajjaj) 说: “由于他们对阿拉伯语的无知, 有些人根据这节经文推断出 مُتْعَة (Mut‘ah) 的合法性, 而伊斯兰宗教学家之间意见一致, 声称不合法, فَمَا اسْتَمْتَعْتُمْ بِهِ مِنْهُنَّ (Fa-mastamta‘tum bihi Minhunna) 这个词语的简单的意思是依照上述条文所履行的婚姻。” 如果在这里早对 مُتْعَة (Mut‘ah) 加以注意的话, 所用的介词应该是 ب (ba’), 而不是 مِنْ (min)。而且, 所用的词是 اِسْتَمْتَعَ (Istamta‘a), 而不是与此具有不同意义的 تَمَتَّعَ (Tamatta‘a)。也不能从 اُجُوْرَهُنَّ (Ujurahunna) 这词得出有利于 مُتْعَة (Mut‘ah) 的推断; اُجُوْرَهُنَّ (Ujurahunna) 的意思是 “她们的嫁妆”, 这在 «古兰经» 33:51中也表示过。因此 «古兰经» 断然禁止 مُتْعَة (Mut‘ah) 并把超出正式婚姻之外的两性关系看作通奸。
مراد یہ ہے کہ وہ عورتیں جن سے نکاح جائز ہے وہ تو نکاح کے بعد جائز ہوں گی اور پہلی لسٹ والی عورتیں نکاح کے ساتھ بھی جائز نہیں ہو سکتیں‘ ہاں جنگی قیدی عورتیں نکاح کے ساتھ جائز ہو سکتی ہیں۔ اور جب ان کو کوئی نہ چھڑوائے تو ان کی اجازت کی ضرورت نہیں۔ قومی اخلاق کو درست رکھنے کے لئے حکومت ان کا ولی مقرر کرکے ان کا نکاح کر سکتی ہے۔
یہ مطلب نہیں کہ مومن زنا کرے گا‘ بلکہ مطلب یہ ہے کہ ہم مومن سے یہی امید کرتے ہیں کہ وہ شادی کے وقت سب تقویٰ کی راہوں کو مدنظر رکھے گا۔ اور زنا کی صورت کے قریب نہ جائے گا۔
4:26; 5:6.
4:5; 60:11.
Muhsanat is the plural of Muhsanah which means, a married woman; a free woman; a chaste woman (Lane).
This means that whereas a woman who is already married to a man cannot be taken in marriage by another person, an exception is made here in case of women who are taken prisoner in a war waged by a non-Muslim State against an Islamic State. This is the significance of the words Ma Malakat Aimanukum. Such married women, if they become converted to Islam and therefore could not be sent back to their non-Muslim husbands, may be married to Muslim husbands. For a detailed note on "What your right hands possess" see {561}.
Tamatta‘a bil Mar’ati means, he benefited by the woman temporarily. Istamta‘a bi Kadha means, he benefited by it for a long time. The Arabic idiom does not countenance the use of Istimta‘ with regard to a woman in the sense of temporary connection (Lisan). It may also be noted that whenever the noun Tamattu‘ is used to denote temporary connection with a woman, it is followed by the preposition ba’ put before the word standing for the woman, as in the above example. An Arab poet says, Tamatta‘ biha ma Sa‘afatka wa la Takun ‘alaika Shajan fil Halqi hina Tabinu (Hamasah), i.e. be benefited by her as long as she is agreeable to you, but when she gets separated from you, do not let her be a source of constant trouble for you like a piece of bone which remains stuck in the throat. But in this verse the pronoun Hunna referring to women is preceded by the preposition min. Misunderstanding about Mut‘ah seems to have arisen from the f
4:26; 5:6.
4:5; 60:11.
Important Words:
المحصنات (married) is the plural of محصنة and is derived from حصن meaning, he or it was or became inaccessible, fortified or protected against attack. حصن المرأة means, the woman was chaste, i.e. protected against moral or sexual sinfulness. احصنت المرأة means, the woman got married. محصنة therefore, means a married woman; a chaste woman who abstains from what is unlawful; a free or noble woman as opposed to a bondwoman. Similarly محصن means, a married man; chaste man who abstains from what is unlawful: a free or noble man. حصن means, a fort or a fortress. The word محصنات would, therefore, mean, women who have protected themselves by entering, as it were, the fortress of marriage. The word has been used in the Quran in all the different senses, i.e. (1) married women, (2) chaste women and (3) free women; but in the present verse it has been used in the sense of married women (Lane & Aqrab).
مسافحین (committing fornication) is the active participle from سافح which is derived from سفح. They say سفح الدم i.e. he shed blood or made it flow. سفح الدمع means, tears began to flow. Thus the word is both transitive and intransitive. سافحة means, he vied with the other party in shedding blood; he committed fornication. مسافحة means, a fornicator and مسافحة means, a fornicatress (Lane & Aqrab).
اجور (dowries) is the plural of اجر which means, reward or wages. اجر المرأة means, dowry of a woman (Taj). Also, in 33:51 the word has been used in the sense of dowry.
استمتعتم (the benefit you receive) is formed from متع. They say متعھا بکذا i.e. he gave her (his wife) such a thing. تمتع بالمرأةmeans, he benefited by the woman temporarily. استمتع بکذا means, he benefited by it for a long time. The Arabic idiom does not countenance the use of استمتاع with regard to a woman in the sense of temporary connection (Lisan). It must also be noted that whenever the noun تمتع (tamattu‘) is used to denote temporary connection with a woman, it is followed by the preposition با (ba) put before the word standing for the woman, as in the above example. But in the expression فما استمتعم به منھن to pronoun ھن referring to women is preceded by the preposition من.
ماملکت ایمانکم (what your right hands possess). The Arabs say ھذا ملک یمینی i.e. he or it is in the possession of my right hand, meaning, he or it is in my possession and I can deal with him or it as I like (Lisan & Aqrab). The expression ما ملکت ایمانکمgenerally signifies, men or women taken prisoner in war and being in the custody and control of their Muslim captors. In this verse, the expression means women prisoners only. The term has been used by the Quran in preference to عباد or اماء (slaves and bondwomen) to point to just and rightful possession, the word ایمان (right hands) also pointing to the same fact.
Commentary:
The expression, such as your right hands possess, has been used in the Quran with regard to those men or women who took part in aggressive wars against Islam and fell prisoners into the hands of Muslims. The context, however, shows that the expression used in the present verse means female prisoners of war. Islam does not allow women taken prisoner in ordinary wars to be taken as wives. This exceptional injunction becomes operative only when a hostile nation wages a religious war against Islam with a view to extirpating it and compelling Muslims to abandon their religion at the point of the sword, and treats their prisoners as slaves, as was done in the days of the Holy Prophet when the enemy took away Muslim women as prisoners and treated them as slaves. The Islamic injunction was thus only a retaliatory measure and also served the additional purpose of protecting the morals of captive women who were generally in large numbers and whom war separated from their kith and kin. A people who seek to compel others to forsake their religion at the point of the sword and reduce them to slavery are mere brutes and not respectable human beings. They must be paid back in their own coin in order to bring them to their senses. For a fuller exposition of this subject see General Introduction.
It may be noted that it is not permitted to take into marriage such female relations of a bondwoman who is treated as wife, as correspond to the relations of a free woman within the prohibited degree. For instance, the mothers, sisters, daughters etc. of such bondwomen cannot be taken in marriage.
The advocates of mut‘a (temporary marriage) have endeavoured in vain to infer its legality from this verse. The Quran and the Arabic language both contradict this manifestly unfounded inference. The misunderstanding about mut‘aseems to have arisen from the failure to understand the difference between the meanings of تمتع and استمتاع given under Important Words. The author of Lisanul-‘Arab quotes Zajjaj as saying: "This is a verse in the interpretation of which some men have committed a great blunder, owing to their ignorance of the Arabic language. They have inferred from it the legality of mut‘a which, by the consensus of opinion among Muslim theologians, has been declared to be unlawful, whereas the words simply mean marriage performed in accordance with the conditions mentioned above."
According to Arabic usage, the legality of mut‘a, as asserted by some people, cannot, therefore, be inferred from this verse. If there had been any reference to mut‘a, the preposition used ought to have been با (ba) and not من (min). Moreover, the expression used here is not تمتع but استمتع which possesses a sense different from that of the former word.
Nor can any inference in favour of mut‘a be drawn from the expression اجورھن which, as explained under Important Words, means "their dowries", in which sense it has been used in the Quran elsewhere also (33:51).
On principle, the dowry must be paid immediately at marriage; but with the wife’s consent the payment can be suitably deferred. The husband can increase the amount of the dowry later, if he so desires; but he cannot decrease it except with the permission of the wife or the qadi.
a
4:26; 5:6.
b
4:5; 60:11.
323
تَمَتَّعَ بِالْمَرْأَةِ (Tamatta‘a bil Mar’ati) 意指他从妇女那里得到暂时的好处。اِسْتَمْتَعَ بِكَذَا (Istamta‘a bi Kadha) 意指他从中长期得益。阿拉伯习俗不允许把 اِسْتِمْتَاعْ (Istimt‘a)作 “暂时的关系” 这意思来用于妇女 (لِسَانْ, Lisan)。还可以注意到的是, 正如上面例句中那样, 每当名词 تَمَتُّعْ (Tamattu‘) 用来表明妇女的暂时性关系时, 后接置于代表妇女这词之前的介词 ب (ba’)。一位阿拉伯诗人说, تَمَتَّعْ بِهَا مَا سَاعَفَتْكَ وَ لَا تَكُنْ عَلَيْكَ شَجًا فِی الْحَلْقِ حِيْنَ تَبِيْنُ (Tamatt‘a biha ma Sa‘afatka wa la Takun ‘alaika Shajan fil Halqi hina Tabinu) (حَمَاسَة, Hamasah), 即只要她合你的意, 可从她得益, 但当她与你分离时, 不要让她像骨梗在喉般地成为你经久烦恼的祸根。可是在本节经文中, هُنَّ (Hunna) 这个指妇女们的代词之前置有介词 مِنْ (min)。对 مُتْعَة (Mut‘ah) 的误解, 看来是对 تَمَتُّعْ(Tamattu‘) 与 اِسْتِمْتَاعْ (Istimta‘)两词之间的差别未能理解而引起。 (لِسَانْ, Lisan) 的作者引述 زَجَّاجْ (Zajjaj) 说: “由于他们对阿拉伯语的无知, 有些人根据这节经文推断出 مُتْعَة (Mut‘ah) 的合法性, 而伊斯兰宗教学家之间意见一致, 声称不合法, فَمَا اسْتَمْتَعْتُمْ بِهِ مِنْهُنَّ (Fa-mastamta‘tum bihi Minhunna) 这个词语的简单的意思是依照上述条文所履行的婚姻。” 如果在这里早对 مُتْعَة (Mut‘ah) 加以注意的话, 所用的介词应该是 ب (ba’), 而不是 مِنْ (min)。而且, 所用的词是 اِسْتَمْتَعَ (Istamta‘a), 而不是与此具有不同意义的 تَمَتَّعَ (Tamatta‘a)。也不能从 اُجُوْرَهُنَّ (Ujurahunna) 这词得出有利于 مُتْعَة (Mut‘ah) 的推断; اُجُوْرَهُنَّ (Ujurahunna) 的意思是 “她们的嫁妆”, 这在 «古兰经» 33:51中也表示过。因此 «古兰经» 断然禁止 مُتْعَة (Mut‘ah) 并把超出正式婚姻之外的两性关系看作通奸。
1
مراد یہ ہے کہ وہ عورتیں جن سے نکاح جائز ہے وہ تو نکاح کے بعد جائز ہوں گی اور پہلی لسٹ والی عورتیں نکاح کے ساتھ بھی جائز نہیں ہو سکتیں‘ ہاں جنگی قیدی عورتیں نکاح کے ساتھ جائز ہو سکتی ہیں۔ اور جب ان کو کوئی نہ چھڑوائے تو ان کی اجازت کی ضرورت نہیں۔ قومی اخلاق کو درست رکھنے کے لئے حکومت ان کا ولی مقرر کرکے ان کا نکاح کر سکتی ہے۔
2
یہ مطلب نہیں کہ مومن زنا کرے گا‘ بلکہ مطلب یہ ہے کہ ہم مومن سے یہی امید کرتے ہیں کہ وہ شادی کے وقت سب تقویٰ کی راہوں کو مدنظر رکھے گا۔ اور زنا کی صورت کے قریب نہ جائے گا۔
a
4:26; 5:6.
b
4:5; 60:11.
504
Important Words:
المحصنات (married) is the plural of محصنة and is derived from حصن meaning, he or it was or became inaccessible, fortified or protected against attack. حصن المرأة means, the woman was chaste, i.e. protected against moral or sexual sinfulness. احصنت المرأة means, the woman got married. محصنة therefore, means a married woman; a chaste woman who abstains from what is unlawful; a free or noble woman as opposed to a bondwoman. Similarly محصن means, a married man; chaste man who abstains from what is unlawful: a free or noble man. حصن means, a fort or a fortress. The word محصنات would, therefore, mean, women who have protected themselves by entering, as it were, the fortress of marriage. The word has been used in the Quran in all the different senses, i.e. (1) married women, (2) chaste women and (3) free women; but in the present verse it has been used in the sense of married women (Lane & Aqrab).
مسافحین (committing fornication) is the active participle from سافح which is derived from سفح. They say سفح الدم i.e. he shed blood or made it flow. سفح الدمع means, tears began to flow. Thus the word is both transitive and intransitive. سافحة means, he vied with the other party in shedding blood; he committed fornication. مسافحة means, a fornicator and مسافحة means, a fornicatress (Lane & Aqrab).
اجور (dowries) is the plural of اجر which means, reward or wages. اجر المرأة means, dowry of a woman (Taj). Also, in 33:51 the word has been used in the sense of dowry.
استمتعتم (the benefit you receive) is formed from متع. They say متعھا بکذا i.e. he gave her (his wife) such a thing. تمتع بالمرأةmeans, he benefited by the woman temporarily. استمتع بکذا means, he benefited by it for a long time. The Arabic idiom does not countenance the use of استمتاع with regard to a woman in the sense of temporary connection (Lisan). It must also be noted that whenever the noun تمتع (tamattu‘) is used to denote temporary connection with a woman, it is followed by the preposition با (ba) put before the word standing for the woman, as in the above example. But in the expression فما استمتعم به منھن to pronoun ھن referring to women is preceded by the preposition من.
ماملکت ایمانکم (what your right hands possess). The Arabs say ھذا ملک یمینی i.e. he or it is in the possession of my right hand, meaning, he or it is in my possession and I can deal with him or it as I like (Lisan & Aqrab). The expression ما ملکت ایمانکمgenerally signifies, men or women taken prisoner in war and being in the custody and control of their Muslim captors. In this verse, the expression means women prisoners only. The term has been used by the Quran in preference to عباد or اماء (slaves and bondwomen) to point to just and rightful possession, the word ایمان (right hands) also pointing to the same fact.
Commentary:
The expression, such as your right hands possess, has been used in the Quran with regard to those men or women who took part in aggressive wars against Islam and fell prisoners into the hands of Muslims. The context, however, shows that the expression used in the present verse means female prisoners of war. Islam does not allow women taken prisoner in ordinary wars to be taken as wives. This exceptional injunction becomes operative only when a hostile nation wages a religious war against Islam with a view to extirpating it and compelling Muslims to abandon their religion at the point of the sword, and treats their prisoners as slaves, as was done in the days of the Holy Prophet when the enemy took away Muslim women as prisoners and treated them as slaves. The Islamic injunction was thus only a retaliatory measure and also served the additional purpose of protecting the morals of captive women who were generally in large numbers and whom war separated from their kith and kin. A people who seek to compel others to forsake their religion at the point of the sword and reduce them to slavery are mere brutes and not respectable human beings. They must be paid back in their own coin in order to bring them to their senses. For a fuller exposition of this subject see General Introduction.
It may be noted that it is not permitted to take into marriage such female relations of a bondwoman who is treated as wife, as correspond to the relations of a free woman within the prohibited degree. For instance, the mothers, sisters, daughters etc. of such bondwomen cannot be taken in marriage.
The advocates of mut‘a (temporary marriage) have endeavoured in vain to infer its legality from this verse. The Quran and the Arabic language both contradict this manifestly unfounded inference. The misunderstanding about mut‘aseems to have arisen from the failure to understand the difference between the meanings of تمتع and استمتاع given under Important Words. The author of Lisanul-‘Arab quotes Zajjaj as saying: "This is a verse in the interpretation of which some men have committed a great blunder, owing to their ignorance of the Arabic language. They have inferred from it the legality of mut‘a which, by the consensus of opinion among Muslim theologians, has been declared to be unlawful, whereas the words simply mean marriage performed in accordance with the conditions mentioned above."
According to Arabic usage, the legality of mut‘a, as asserted by some people, cannot, therefore, be inferred from this verse. If there had been any reference to mut‘a, the preposition used ought to have been با (ba) and not من (min). Moreover, the expression used here is not تمتع but استمتع which possesses a sense different from that of the former word.
Nor can any inference in favour of mut‘a be drawn from the expression اجورھن which, as explained under Important Words, means "their dowries", in which sense it has been used in the Quran elsewhere also (33:51).
On principle, the dowry must be paid immediately at marriage; but with the wife’s consent the payment can be suitably deferred. The husband can increase the amount of the dowry later, if he so desires; but he cannot decrease it except with the permission of the wife or the qadi.
a
4:26; 5:6.
b
4:5; 60:11.
588
Muhsanat is the plural of Muhsanah which means, a married woman; a free woman; a chaste woman (Lane).
589
This means that whereas a woman who is already married to a man cannot be taken in marriage by another person, an exception is made here in case of women who are taken prisoner in a war waged by a non-Muslim State against an Islamic State. This is the significance of the words Ma Malakat Aimanukum. Such married women, if they become converted to Islam and therefore could not be sent back to their non-Muslim husbands, may be married to Muslim husbands. For a detailed note on "What your right hands possess" see {561}.
590
Tamatta‘a bil Mar’ati means, he benefited by the woman temporarily. Istamta‘a bi Kadha means, he benefited by it for a long time. The Arabic idiom does not countenance the use of Istimta‘ with regard to a woman in the sense of temporary connection (Lisan). It may also be noted that whenever the noun Tamattu‘ is used to denote temporary connection with a woman, it is followed by the preposition ba’ put before the word standing for the woman, as in the above example. An Arab poet says, Tamatta‘ biha ma Sa‘afatka wa la Takun ‘alaika Shajan fil Halqi hina Tabinu (Hamasah), i.e. be benefited by her as long as she is agreeable to you, but when she gets separated from you, do not let her be a source of constant trouble for you like a piece of bone which remains stuck in the throat. But in this verse the pronoun Hunna referring to women is preceded by the preposition min. Misunderstanding about Mut‘ah seems to have arisen from the f
وَلَا تَتَمَنَّوْا۟ مَا فَضَّلَ ٱللَّهُ بِهِۦ بَعْضَكُمْ عَلَىٰ بَعْضٍ ۚ لِّلرِّجَالِ نَصِيبٌ مِّمَّا ٱكْتَسَبُوا۟ ۖ وَلِلنِّسَآءِ نَصِيبٌ مِّمَّا ٱكْتَسَبْنَ ۚ وَسْـَٔلُوا۟ ٱللَّهَ مِن فَضْلِهِۦٓ ۗ إِنَّ ٱللَّهَ كَانَ بِكُلِّ شَىْءٍ عَلِيمًا
4:35.
4:35.
The verse establishes the equality of men and women so far as their works and rewards are concerned.
4:35.
Commentary:
The first part of the verse means that: (1) One should not pray that God may give one the very thing which another man possesses; (2) One may, however, pray that God may bestow on one "the like of that" which has been given to another man; (3) That while praying, one should not keep in view any particular favoured person, wishing that God may make one like that particular person, for it may be the will of God to bestow His favours upon one in even a greater measure. One should only pray to God generally for His bounty and grace, for Allah’s bounty and grace are unbounded.
The words, Men shall have a share of that which they have earned, etc., contain the key to national progress and advance. Both men and women get what they earn and deserve. So we should not wish evil for others but should work and pray. This is the way to succeed in life and to win the pleasure of God. The words also reveal the equality of men and women so far as their work and reward are concerned.
d
4:35.
b
4:35.
510
Commentary:
The first part of the verse means that: (1) One should not pray that God may give one the very thing which another man possesses; (2) One may, however, pray that God may bestow on one "the like of that" which has been given to another man; (3) That while praying, one should not keep in view any particular favoured person, wishing that God may make one like that particular person, for it may be the will of God to bestow His favours upon one in even a greater measure. One should only pray to God generally for His bounty and grace, for Allah’s bounty and grace are unbounded.
The words, Men shall have a share of that which they have earned, etc., contain the key to national progress and advance. Both men and women get what they earn and deserve. So we should not wish evil for others but should work and pray. This is the way to succeed in life and to win the pleasure of God. The words also reveal the equality of men and women so far as their work and reward are concerned.
b
4:35.
595
The verse establishes the equality of men and women so far as their works and rewards are concerned.
۞ وَٱعْبُدُوا۟ ٱللَّهَ وَلَا تُشْرِكُوا۟ بِهِۦ شَيْـًٔا ۖ وَبِٱلْوَٰلِدَيْنِ إِحْسَٰنًا وَبِذِى ٱلْقُرْبَىٰ وَٱلْيَتَٰمَىٰ وَٱلْمَسَٰكِينِ وَٱلْجَارِ ذِى ٱلْقُرْبَىٰ وَٱلْجَارِ ٱلْجُنُبِ وَٱلصَّاحِبِ بِٱلْجَنۢبِ وَٱبْنِ ٱلسَّبِيلِ وَمَا مَلَكَتْ أَيْمَٰنُكُمْ ۗ إِنَّ ٱللَّهَ لَا يُحِبُّ مَن كَانَ مُخْتَالًا فَخُورًا
6:152; 7:34; 17:24, 25; 23:60.
6:152; 7:34; 17:24, 25; 23:60.
After having enjoined in the preceding verses that one should be kind to one’s wife, in the present verse the Qur’an directs a Muslim to make his kindness so comprehensive as to include in its scope the whole of mankind, from parents, who are the nearest, to strangers who are the farthest removed.
Slaves, bondwomen, servants, subordinates.
6:152; 7:34; 17:24; 23:60.
Important Words:
جار الجنب (neighbour that is a stranger) is a compound word made up of جار (neighbour) and جنب (stranger or one distant). The compound word thus means, a neighbour who is not from one’s own tribe or community; a distant neighbour (Aqrab & Mufradat).
صاحب بالجنب (companion by your side) is also a compound word made up of صاحب (companion) and جنب (one’s side). The compound word thus means, the immediate neighbour or the near neighbour; or simply companion or co-worker or colleague (Aqrab, Lisan & Mufradat).
Commentary:
After laying down in the preceding verses that one should be kind to one’s wife, in the present verse the Quran enjoins a Muslim to make his kindness so comprehensive as to include in its scope the whole of mankind, from parents who are the nearest, to strangers who are the farthest removed.
The Arabic expression rendered as, neighbour that is a kinsman, may also mean: (1) the neighbour that lives near; (2) the neighbour that is kindly.
Similarly, the words, neighbour that is a stranger, may also include: (1) the neighbour that lives at a distance; (2) the neighbour that is not kindly.
The expression, companion by your side, may mean:(1) wife or husband; (2) comrade on a journey; (3) fellow-partner in a trade or a co-worker; (4) associate; (5) immediate neighbour.
The words, those whom your right hands possess, may refer to slaves, bondwomen, servants and even subordinates.
A person who does not carry out the Divine commandments contained in this verse is condemned as "proud and boastful" because, instead of doing good to others and being kind to them, he looks down upon them and behaves arrogantly. The very act of abstaining from being kind to one’s fellow beings, whether relations or neighbours or strangers, is an act of pride condemned by Islam.
b
6:152; 7:34; 17:24, 25; 23:60.
b
6:152; 7:34; 17:24; 23:60.
514
Important Words:
جار الجنب (neighbour that is a stranger) is a compound word made up of جار (neighbour) and جنب (stranger or one distant). The compound word thus means, a neighbour who is not from one’s own tribe or community; a distant neighbour (Aqrab & Mufradat).
صاحب بالجنب (companion by your side) is also a compound word made up of صاحب (companion) and جنب (one’s side). The compound word thus means, the immediate neighbour or the near neighbour; or simply companion or co-worker or colleague (Aqrab, Lisan & Mufradat).
Commentary:
After laying down in the preceding verses that one should be kind to one’s wife, in the present verse the Quran enjoins a Muslim to make his kindness so comprehensive as to include in its scope the whole of mankind, from parents who are the nearest, to strangers who are the farthest removed.
The Arabic expression rendered as, neighbour that is a kinsman, may also mean: (1) the neighbour that lives near; (2) the neighbour that is kindly.
Similarly, the words, neighbour that is a stranger, may also include: (1) the neighbour that lives at a distance; (2) the neighbour that is not kindly.
The expression, companion by your side, may mean:(1) wife or husband; (2) comrade on a journey; (3) fellow-partner in a trade or a co-worker; (4) associate; (5) immediate neighbour.
The words, those whom your right hands possess, may refer to slaves, bondwomen, servants and even subordinates.
A person who does not carry out the Divine commandments contained in this verse is condemned as "proud and boastful" because, instead of doing good to others and being kind to them, he looks down upon them and behaves arrogantly. The very act of abstaining from being kind to one’s fellow beings, whether relations or neighbours or strangers, is an act of pride condemned by Islam.
b
6:152; 7:34; 17:24, 25; 23:60.
604
After having enjoined in the preceding verses that one should be kind to one’s wife, in the present verse the Qur’an directs a Muslim to make his kindness so comprehensive as to include in its scope the whole of mankind, from parents, who are the nearest, to strangers who are the farthest removed.
605
Slaves, bondwomen, servants, subordinates.
إِنَّ ٱللَّهَ لَا يَغْفِرُ أَن يُشْرَكَ بِهِۦ وَيَغْفِرُ مَا دُونَ ذَٰلِكَ لِمَن يَشَآءُ ۚ وَمَن يُشْرِكْ بِٱللَّهِ فَقَدِ ٱفْتَرَىٰٓ إِثْمًا عَظِيمًا
4:117.
4:117.
Shirk which is tantamount to treason in spiritual terminology extends to loving or trusting a thing or a being as one should love or trust God. The verse only relates to the time after death, i.e. one who dies in a state of Shirk will not be forgiven.
4:117.
Important Words:
یشرك (associates partners) is derived from شرك . They say شرك فیه i.e. he shared or participated with him in it; he was or became his co-partner in it. أشرك بالله means, he attributed to God or associated with Him a partner or co-partner, whether in His person or attributes or dominion, etc. شرك means: (1) participation or co-partnership; (2) the attribution of a co-partner to, or associating a partner with, God, i.e. belief in the plurality of Gods (Lane & Aqrab). شرك in its wider sense is not confined to worshipping idols or looking upon certain beings or things as partners with God or possessing His attributes or sharing in His dominion, etc. It extends to loving a thing or a being as one should love God, or trusting in a thing or a being as one should trust in God, and so on. This latter kind of شرك is known as شرك خفی i.e. the hidden شرك being not easily discernible.
Commentary:
The reference in the verse is not only to idol-worship, but also to such idolatrous practices as are in vogue among common people, even among present-day Muslims, such as the adoration of saints and offering prayers and oblations to them. All such abominable practices are shirk in the sight of God. Butشرك خفی (hidden shirk), i.e. loving or trusting in a thing or being as one should love and trust in God, may be forgiven, if done in ignorance and through lack of proper care, provided one is a sincere believer in God and His Prophet and strives to do good works.
The expression, Allah will not forgive, does not mean that an idolatrous person can never repent or that his repentance cannot be accepted even in the present life. The expression relates to the time after death, i.e. one who dies in a state of shirk will not be forgiven.
a
4:117.
a
4:117.
523
Important Words:
یشرك (associates partners) is derived from شرك . They say شرك فیه i.e. he shared or participated with him in it; he was or became his co-partner in it. أشرك بالله means, he attributed to God or associated with Him a partner or co-partner, whether in His person or attributes or dominion, etc. شرك means: (1) participation or co-partnership; (2) the attribution of a co-partner to, or associating a partner with, God, i.e. belief in the plurality of Gods (Lane & Aqrab). شرك in its wider sense is not confined to worshipping idols or looking upon certain beings or things as partners with God or possessing His attributes or sharing in His dominion, etc. It extends to loving a thing or a being as one should love God, or trusting in a thing or a being as one should trust in God, and so on. This latter kind of شرك is known as شرك خفی i.e. the hidden شرك being not easily discernible.
Commentary:
The reference in the verse is not only to idol-worship, but also to such idolatrous practices as are in vogue among common people, even among present-day Muslims, such as the adoration of saints and offering prayers and oblations to them. All such abominable practices are shirk in the sight of God. Butشرك خفی (hidden shirk), i.e. loving or trusting in a thing or being as one should love and trust in God, may be forgiven, if done in ignorance and through lack of proper care, provided one is a sincere believer in God and His Prophet and strives to do good works.
The expression, Allah will not forgive, does not mean that an idolatrous person can never repent or that his repentance cannot be accepted even in the present life. The expression relates to the time after death, i.e. one who dies in a state of shirk will not be forgiven.
a
4:117.
615
Shirk which is tantamount to treason in spiritual terminology extends to loving or trusting a thing or a being as one should love or trust God. The verse only relates to the time after death, i.e. one who dies in a state of Shirk will not be forgiven.
فَمِنْهُم مَّنْ ءَامَنَ بِهِۦ وَمِنْهُم مَّن صَدَّ عَنْهُ ۚ وَكَفَىٰ بِجَهَنَّمَ سَعِيرًا
2:254; 10:41; 61:15.
سَعِیْر سَعْرٌ سے ہے جس کے اصل معنے تمازت کے ہیں (مفردات)
قرآن مجید میں لفظ کَفٰی کا ہے۔ مگر اردو میں کافی کا لفظ اس موقعہ پر استعمال نہیں ہوتا۔ اردو میں کافی کہیں تو اس کے معنے یہ ہوتے ہیں کہ میری ضرورت پورا کرتی ہے۔ اور جہنم ضرورت پورا نہیں کرتی۔ اس لئے ہم نے آیات کا ترجمہ یہ کیا ہے کہ جہنم تمازت میں بہت زیادہ ہے۔
2:254; 10:41; 61:15.
2:254; 10:41; 61:15.
a
2:254; 10:41; 61:15.
2
سَعِیْر سَعْرٌ سے ہے جس کے اصل معنے تمازت کے ہیں (مفردات)
3
قرآن مجید میں لفظ کَفٰی کا ہے۔ مگر اردو میں کافی کا لفظ اس موقعہ پر استعمال نہیں ہوتا۔ اردو میں کافی کہیں تو اس کے معنے یہ ہوتے ہیں کہ میری ضرورت پورا کرتی ہے۔ اور جہنم ضرورت پورا نہیں کرتی۔ اس لئے ہم نے آیات کا ترجمہ یہ کیا ہے کہ جہنم تمازت میں بہت زیادہ ہے۔
a
2:254; 10:41; 61:15.
b
2:254; 10:41; 61:15.
أَلَمْ تَرَ إِلَى ٱلَّذِينَ يَزْعُمُونَ أَنَّهُمْ ءَامَنُوا۟ بِمَآ أُنزِلَ إِلَيْكَ وَمَآ أُنزِلَ مِن قَبْلِكَ يُرِيدُونَ أَن يَتَحَاكَمُوٓا۟ إِلَى ٱلطَّٰغُوتِ وَقَدْ أُمِرُوٓا۟ أَن يَكْفُرُوا۟ بِهِۦ وَيُرِيدُ ٱلشَّيْطَٰنُ أَن يُضِلَّهُمْ ضَلَٰلًۢا بَعِيدًا
یہ آیت منافقوں کے متعلق ہے جو رسولِ کریم صلی اللہ علیہ وسلم سے فیصلہ کروانے کی بجائے دوسرے لوگوں کے فیصلہ کو پسند کرتے تھے۔
Commentary:
The words, They desire to seek judgement from the rebellious, need not be taken as referring to any particular incident; they speak of a general tendency among hypocrites.
2
یہ آیت منافقوں کے متعلق ہے جو رسولِ کریم صلی اللہ علیہ وسلم سے فیصلہ کروانے کی بجائے دوسرے لوگوں کے فیصلہ کو پسند کرتے تھے۔
534
Commentary:
The words, They desire to seek judgement from the rebellious, need not be taken as referring to any particular incident; they speak of a general tendency among hypocrites.
وَلَوْ أَنَّا كَتَبْنَا عَلَيْهِمْ أَنِ ٱقْتُلُوٓا۟ أَنفُسَكُمْ أَوِ ٱخْرُجُوا۟ مِن دِيَٰرِكُم مَّا فَعَلُوهُ إِلَّا قَلِيلٌ مِّنْهُمْ ۖ وَلَوْ أَنَّهُمْ فَعَلُوا۟ مَا يُوعَظُونَ بِهِۦ لَكَانَ خَيْرًا لَّهُمْ وَأَشَدَّ تَثْبِيتًا
یعنی بڑے بڑے مجاہدات کرو۔
اس سے مراد جہاد کے لئے نکلنا ہے نہ کہ بے فائدہ نکلنا۔
6:78.
The words, Uqtulu Anfusakum, do not mean "slay yourselves" but "slay your people" (2:55), or "lay down your lives in the cause of God".
4:78.
Commentary:
This verse refers to the hypocrites of Medina. The words اقتلوا انفسکم (kill your people) do not mean "kill yourselves" because suicide has been declared in Islam to be unlawful.
The expression انفسکم simply means "your people" (see note on 2:55). The Refugees had to leave their hearths and homes and had to kill their own disbelieving kith and kin in the war that had been forced upon them by the latter.
c
6:78.
334
اُقْتُلُوْا اَنْفُسَكُمْ (Uqtulu Anfusakum) 的意思不是 “杀你们自己” 而是 “杀你们的民众” (2:55), 或者 “为安拉献出你们的生命。”
2
یعنی بڑے بڑے مجاہدات کرو۔
3
اس سے مراد جہاد کے لئے نکلنا ہے نہ کہ بے فائدہ نکلنا۔
a
4:78.
539
Commentary:
This verse refers to the hypocrites of Medina. The words اقتلوا انفسکم (kill your people) do not mean "kill yourselves" because suicide has been declared in Islam to be unlawful.
The expression انفسکم simply means "your people" (see note on 2:55). The Refugees had to leave their hearths and homes and had to kill their own disbelieving kith and kin in the war that had been forced upon them by the latter.
c
6:78.
627
The words, Uqtulu Anfusakum, do not mean "slay yourselves" but "slay your people" (2:55), or "lay down your lives in the cause of God".
وَإِذَا جَآءَهُمْ أَمْرٌ مِّنَ ٱلْأَمْنِ أَوِ ٱلْخَوْفِ أَذَاعُوا۟ بِهِۦ ۖ وَلَوْ رَدُّوهُ إِلَى ٱلرَّسُولِ وَإِلَىٰٓ أُو۟لِى ٱلْأَمْرِ مِنْهُمْ لَعَلِمَهُ ٱلَّذِينَ يَسْتَنۢبِطُونَهُۥ مِنْهُمْ ۗ وَلَوْلَا فَضْلُ ٱللَّهِ عَلَيْكُمْ وَرَحْمَتُهُۥ لَٱتَّبَعْتُمُ ٱلشَّيْطَٰنَ إِلَّا قَلِيلًا
4:60.
4:60.
The reason why tidings relating to peace have been mentioned before those relating to fear is that the Qur’an is here speaking of war, and during war it is sometimes more dangerous to give publicity to matters likely to lead to happy results than to matters of fear. Under normal conditions, too, the injunction mentioned is very important, exercising direct influence on the discipline and well-being of society. The words, those in authority, refer to the Holy Prophet or his Successors or to the Chiefs appointed by them.
4:60.
Commentary:
The reason why tidings or matters relating to peace have been mentioned before those relating to fear is that the Quranis here speaking of war, and during war it is sometimes more dangerous to give publicity to matters likely to lead to happy results than to matters of fear. For instance, if any information comes that the forces of the enemy are about to attack, the publication of this news among the people may not prove so dangerous as disclosure of, for example, the news that the Muslim army was going to attack the enemy at a certain weak point of the latter. The latter class of news would disclose the intentions of the Muslim army to the enemy and he would take immediate steps to strengthen his position at the threatened point. Under normal conditions too the injunction is very important, exercising direct influence on the discipline and well-being of society.
The words, those in authority, refer to the Holy Prophet or his Successors or the chiefs appointed by both.
c
4:60.
a
4:60.
552
Commentary:
The reason why tidings or matters relating to peace have been mentioned before those relating to fear is that the Quranis here speaking of war, and during war it is sometimes more dangerous to give publicity to matters likely to lead to happy results than to matters of fear. For instance, if any information comes that the forces of the enemy are about to attack, the publication of this news among the people may not prove so dangerous as disclosure of, for example, the news that the Muslim army was going to attack the enemy at a certain weak point of the latter. The latter class of news would disclose the intentions of the Muslim army to the enemy and he would take immediate steps to strengthen his position at the threatened point. Under normal conditions too the injunction is very important, exercising direct influence on the discipline and well-being of society.
The words, those in authority, refer to the Holy Prophet or his Successors or the chiefs appointed by both.
c
4:60.
640
The reason why tidings relating to peace have been mentioned before those relating to fear is that the Qur’an is here speaking of war, and during war it is sometimes more dangerous to give publicity to matters likely to lead to happy results than to matters of fear. Under normal conditions, too, the injunction mentioned is very important, exercising direct influence on the discipline and well-being of society. The words, those in authority, refer to the Holy Prophet or his Successors or to the Chiefs appointed by them.
وَلَقَدِ ٱسْتُهْزِئَ بِرُسُلٍ مِّن قَبْلِكَ فَحَاقَ بِٱلَّذِينَ سَخِرُوا۟ مِنْهُم مَّا كَانُوا۟ بِهِۦ يَسْتَهْزِءُونَ
21:42.
یعنی جن موعود عذابوں سے وہ ہنسی مذاق کرتے تھے وہ آگئے اور کفار تباہ ہو گئے۔
21:42.
21:42.
Commentary:
The words, And surely have the Messengers been mocked at before thee, imply a hint that the demand of disbelievers regarding the coming of an angel is really nothing but a mockery. The verse also contains a prophecy about the destruction of the enemies of the Holy Prophet. The enemies of the former Prophets laughed them to scorn and were consequently punished by God, the very object of their mockery becoming the means of their destruction. The enemies of the Holy Prophet were also scoffing at him and so they too would meet with the same fate which befell their predecessors.
a
21:42.
2
یعنی جن موعود عذابوں سے وہ ہنسی مذاق کرتے تھے وہ آگئے اور کفار تباہ ہو گئے۔
a
21:42.
758
Commentary:
The words, And surely have the Messengers been mocked at before thee, imply a hint that the demand of disbelievers regarding the coming of an angel is really nothing but a mockery. The verse also contains a prophecy about the destruction of the enemies of the Holy Prophet. The enemies of the former Prophets laughed them to scorn and were consequently punished by God, the very object of their mockery becoming the means of their destruction. The enemies of the Holy Prophet were also scoffing at him and so they too would meet with the same fate which befell their predecessors.
b
21:42.
لَّيْسَ بِأَمَانِيِّكُمْ وَلَآ أَمَانِىِّ أَهْلِ ٱلْكِتَٰبِ ۗ مَن يَعْمَلْ سُوٓءًا يُجْزَ بِهِۦ وَلَا يَجِدْ لَهُۥ مِن دُونِ ٱللَّهِ وَلِيًّا وَلَا نَصِيرًا
4:46; 33:18, 66.
4:46; 33:18, 66.
4:46; 33:18, 66.
Commentary:
The expression, It shall not be according to your desires, does not mean that the desires of the Faithful will not materialize. The verse purports to lay down a general principle that it is only the Will of God which prevails. As the desires of true believers must coincide with the will of God, they are bound to materialize.
b
4:46; 33:18, 66.
b
4:46; 33:18, 66.
589
Commentary:
The expression, It shall not be according to your desires, does not mean that the desires of the Faithful will not materialize. The verse purports to lay down a general principle that it is only the Will of God which prevails. As the desires of true believers must coincide with the will of God, they are bound to materialize.
d
4:46; 33:18, 66.
وَيَسْتَفْتُونَكَ فِى ٱلنِّسَآءِ ۖ قُلِ ٱللَّهُ يُفْتِيكُمْ فِيهِنَّ وَمَا يُتْلَىٰ عَلَيْكُمْ فِى ٱلْكِتَٰبِ فِى يَتَٰمَى ٱلنِّسَآءِ ٱلَّٰتِى لَا تُؤْتُونَهُنَّ مَا كُتِبَ لَهُنَّ وَتَرْغَبُونَ أَن تَنكِحُوهُنَّ وَٱلْمُسْتَضْعَفِينَ مِنَ ٱلْوِلْدَٰنِ وَأَن تَقُومُوا۟ لِلْيَتَٰمَىٰ بِٱلْقِسْطِ ۚ وَمَا تَفْعَلُوا۟ مِنْ خَيْرٍ فَإِنَّ ٱللَّهَ كَانَ بِهِۦ عَلِيمًا
4:4.
یعنی سورۂ نساء آیت ۴ میں۔
مقرر کردہ حق سے یہ مراد ہے کہ ان کے مہر نہیں دیتے۔
کمزور بچیوں سے مراد یتیم لڑکیاں ہیں۔ کیونکہ وہ خود اپنے حق نہیں لے سکتیں۔
یہاں وِلْدَان کا لفظ ہے جو وَلَدٌ کی جمع ہے اور لڑکے اور لڑکی دونوں پر بولا جاتا ہے۔ لیکن عبارت کے مضمون سے ظاہر ہے کہ یہاں لڑکیاں مراد ہیں۔ کیونکہ انہی سے نکاح کا امکان ہے۔
4:4.
The "decision" is referred to in the following three verses.
The allusion in the words, that which is recited to you in the Book, is to the 4th verse of the present Surah. It was prohibited to Muslims to marry those orphan girls whose rights they could not adequately safeguard. ‘Umar, the Second Caliph would not allow the guardians of wealthy and handsome orphan girls to marry them and would insist on other and better husbands being found for them. The verse signifies that some instructions about women have already been given in the Qur’an and that other instructions follow.
Walad which is singular of Wildan is used both for a boy and a girl, but here Wildan signifies girls, marriage with whom is mentioned here.
4:4.
Important Words:
یستفتونك (they seek of thee the decision of the Law) and یفتیکم (gives you His decision) are both derived from فتو or فتی i.e.he was or became youthful, or he was in the prime of life. فتا الرجل means, he surpassed the man in فتوة i.e. in generosity. افتاه فی الامر means, he made known or explained to him the decision of the Shari‘ah respecting the matter; or he gave him an answer stating the decision of the Law respecting a question. استفتیت الفقیه فی الامر means, I asked or sought of the jurist or the lawyer or the learned man the decision of the Shari‘ah respecting the matter. فتوی therefore means, an explanation or notification or pronouncement of the decision of the Law in some dubious or difficult matter given by a jurist or a lawyer or a man learned in religious Law. استفتاء means, asking or seeking of a jurist or a lawyer or a learned man the decision of the Law (Shari‘ah) in a certain dubious or difficult matter (Lane & Aqrab). The expression إفتا rendered in the verse as gives you the decision, is also sometimes used in the sense of permitting or giving permission, as in the well-known hadith الاثم ماحك فی صدرك وان افتاك الناس i.e. a sin is that which pricks in thy mind even if people should say that it is permissible (Lisan). In this case the Quranic clause الله یفتیکم rendered as, Allah gives you His decision, may also be translated as "Allah gives you permission".
Commentary:
The verse which has been differently translated is considered to be a rather difficult one. The decision spoken of in the clause, Allah gives you His decision, refers to what follows in the succeeding verses, i.e. 4:129-131.
The allusion in the words, that which is recited to you in the Book, is to verse 4:4 in the beginning of the present Surah. It was prohibited to Muslims to marry those orphan girls whose rights they could not adequately discharge. ‘Umar, the Holy Prophet’s Second Successor, would not allow the guardians of wealthy and handsome orphan girls to marry them but would insist on better husbands being found for them. On the other hand, if they were not so wealthy or handsome, he recommended them to their guardians for marriage so that, being acquainted with their defects and weaknesses, they might overlook their shortcomings and deal kindly with them. For further instructions about good treatment of orphans; see 4: 6, 7.
Generally speaking the clause, Allah gives you His decision regarding them (women) and so does that which is recited to you in the Book concerning the orphan girls, means that some instructions about women have already been given in the Quran and other instructions follow.
g
4:4.
3
یعنی سورۂ نساء آیت ۴ میں۔
4
مقرر کردہ حق سے یہ مراد ہے کہ ان کے مہر نہیں دیتے۔
5
کمزور بچیوں سے مراد یتیم لڑکیاں ہیں۔ کیونکہ وہ خود اپنے حق نہیں لے سکتیں۔
6
یہاں وِلْدَان کا لفظ ہے جو وَلَدٌ کی جمع ہے اور لڑکے اور لڑکی دونوں پر بولا جاتا ہے۔ لیکن عبارت کے مضمون سے ظاہر ہے کہ یہاں لڑکیاں مراد ہیں۔ کیونکہ انہی سے نکاح کا امکان ہے۔
a
4:4.
593
Important Words:
یستفتونك (they seek of thee the decision of the Law) and یفتیکم (gives you His decision) are both derived from فتو or فتی i.e.he was or became youthful, or he was in the prime of life. فتا الرجل means, he surpassed the man in فتوة i.e. in generosity. افتاه فی الامر means, he made known or explained to him the decision of the Shari‘ah respecting the matter; or he gave him an answer stating the decision of the Law respecting a question. استفتیت الفقیه فی الامر means, I asked or sought of the jurist or the lawyer or the learned man the decision of the Shari‘ah respecting the matter. فتوی therefore means, an explanation or notification or pronouncement of the decision of the Law in some dubious or difficult matter given by a jurist or a lawyer or a man learned in religious Law. استفتاء means, asking or seeking of a jurist or a lawyer or a learned man the decision of the Law (Shari‘ah) in a certain dubious or difficult matter (Lane & Aqrab). The expression إفتا rendered in the verse as gives you the decision, is also sometimes used in the sense of permitting or giving permission, as in the well-known hadith الاثم ماحك فی صدرك وان افتاك الناس i.e. a sin is that which pricks in thy mind even if people should say that it is permissible (Lisan). In this case the Quranic clause الله یفتیکم rendered as, Allah gives you His decision, may also be translated as "Allah gives you permission".
Commentary:
The verse which has been differently translated is considered to be a rather difficult one. The decision spoken of in the clause, Allah gives you His decision, refers to what follows in the succeeding verses, i.e. 4:129-131.
The allusion in the words, that which is recited to you in the Book, is to verse 4:4 in the beginning of the present Surah. It was prohibited to Muslims to marry those orphan girls whose rights they could not adequately discharge. ‘Umar, the Holy Prophet’s Second Successor, would not allow the guardians of wealthy and handsome orphan girls to marry them but would insist on better husbands being found for them. On the other hand, if they were not so wealthy or handsome, he recommended them to their guardians for marriage so that, being acquainted with their defects and weaknesses, they might overlook their shortcomings and deal kindly with them. For further instructions about good treatment of orphans; see 4: 6, 7.
Generally speaking the clause, Allah gives you His decision regarding them (women) and so does that which is recited to you in the Book concerning the orphan girls, means that some instructions about women have already been given in the Quran and other instructions follow.
a
4:4.
676
The "decision" is referred to in the following three verses.
677
The allusion in the words, that which is recited to you in the Book, is to the 4th verse of the present Surah. It was prohibited to Muslims to marry those orphan girls whose rights they could not adequately safeguard. ‘Umar, the Second Caliph would not allow the guardians of wealthy and handsome orphan girls to marry them and would insist on other and better husbands being found for them. The verse signifies that some instructions about women have already been given in the Qur’an and that other instructions follow.
677A
Walad which is singular of Wildan is used both for a boy and a girl, but here Wildan signifies girls, marriage with whom is mentioned here.
وَقَوْلِهِمْ إِنَّا قَتَلْنَا ٱلْمَسِيحَ عِيسَى ٱبْنَ مَرْيَمَ رَسُولَ ٱللَّهِ وَمَا قَتَلُوهُ وَمَا صَلَبُوهُ وَلَٰكِن شُبِّهَ لَهُمْ ۚ وَإِنَّ ٱلَّذِينَ ٱخْتَلَفُوا۟ فِيهِ لَفِى شَكٍّ مِّنْهُ ۚ مَا لَهُم بِهِۦ مِنْ عِلْمٍ إِلَّا ٱتِّبَاعَ ٱلظَّنِّ ۚ وَمَا قَتَلُوهُ يَقِينًۢا
10:37; 53:29.
مَاصَلَبُوْهُ (Ma Salabu-hu) 的意思是, 他们并没有把他钉死在十字架上。صَلَبْ (Salab) 是一种大家都知道的处死法。他们说 صَلَبَ اللِّصَّ (Salabal-Lissa), 那就是说, 他把那窃贼钉死在十字架上。这节经文并未否认伊撒被钉在十字架上这一件事, 但否认他死在十字架上。
شُبِّهَ لَهُمْ (Shubbiha La-hum) 的意思是, 伊撒被得使犹太人看来像钉死在十字架上的那样;或者说伊撒的死对他们来说是一件含糊不清的事。شُبِّهَ عَلَيْهِ الْاَمْرُ (Shubbiha ‘Alaihil-Amru) 意为, 这件事弄得他疑惑不解, 踌躇不决。(Lane)
مَا قَتَلُوْهُ يَقِيْنًا (Ma Qatalu-hu Yaqinan) 意指: (1) 他们没有肯定地杀死了他; (2) 他们没有肯定它 (他们的猜想), 也就是说, 他们并未确实知道伊撒死在十字架上, 因此, 在他们思想上不能确信他们已真正杀死了他。此处 قَتَلُوْهُ (Qatalu-hu) 中的代词 هُ (hu) 指的是名词 ظَنّ (Zann, 猜想)。阿拉伯人说 قَتَلَ الشَّئَ خُبْرًا (Qatalash-Shai’a Khubran), 就是说, 他完全而肯定地知道了这件事, 以致排除了对这件事的一切怀疑的可能性。(Lane, Lisan 与 Mufradat) 从 «古兰经» 中可以清楚地看到, 伊撒并没有死在十字架上, 而是善终的。«福音» 书中所叙述的以下一些事实也给 «古兰经» 的看法提供了有力的证明:
1. 作为安拉的先知, 伊撒不可能死在十字架上, 因为按照 «圣经» 说, “绞死的人是上帝所憎恶的人。” (申命记: 21:23) 2. 他以极痛苦的心情向安拉祷告 “求你把这苦杯 (死在十字架上的) 移去;……” (马可, 14:36; 马太: 26:39; 路加, 22:42); 安拉听到了他的祈祷 (希伯来书 5:7)。3. 他曾经预言过, 像约拿 (犹努司) 那样活着出入鲸腹 (马太: 12:40), 他会留在墓穴中三天后能活着被挖掘出来。4. 他也曾经预言过, 他会去找到那十个失踪的以色列部落 (约拿, 10:16) 即使在伊撒的时候, 犹太人都相信这十个失踪的部落已散失在各地。(约拿7:34, 35) 5. 伊撒在十字架上只吊了大约三个小时 (约拿, 19:14) 一个正常体格的人在这样短的时间内不会死去的。6. 把他从十字架上取下后立刻刺穿了他的一肋, 血水流了出来, 这种迹象说明他肯定是活着的。(约拿, 19:34) 7. 犹太人自己也不能肯定伊撒是否已经死亡, 因为他们要比拉多 (Pilate) 派一个卫兵在他墓穴旁站岗以防止他的门徒夜间来把他偷走, 并且对他们的民众说, “他已从那些死人中间复活。” (马太, 27:64) 8. 所有«福音»书中找不到一份记录能确实证明伊撒从十字架上取下来或放入坟墓时目睹他已经死亡。而且, 在钉死在十字架的现场上没有一个门徒在场。当伊撒被带到刑场上时, 所有的门徒都逃走了。实际情况看来是这样: 比拉多的妻子大概做了个梦, 说 “你千万不要干涉那义人的事”, 比拉多相信伊撒是无辜的。因此他和苦修教会 (Essene Order) 的一个受人尊敬的会员亚利马太 (Arimaethia) 的约瑟夫商量想救伊撒的性命, 因为伊撒在受命作先知之前也是该会的会员。审判伊撒的日子是星期五。比拉多知道翌日是安息日, 被判死刑的人在日落后是不能留放在十字架上的, 因此他故意拖延审判的时间。最后他觉得不得不判伊撒死罪时, 在日落前只有三小时的时候才判决。这样他可以肯定一个健康正常的人留在十字架上这样短的时间内是不会死的。他又特别照顾, 给伊撒喝了混有 “没药” (请看下面注①)的酒或醋使他减轻对痛楚的感觉。吊了三小时后把他从十字架上放下时, 失去了知觉 (可能是给他吃了药醋的影响), 比拉多很快答应了亚利马太的约瑟夫的请求, 把伊撒的身躯交给了他。不像和他一起吊的那两个罪犯那样, 伊撒的骨头没有断碎。约瑟夫把他安置在一块岩石侧面开劈出来的一个宽敞的地方。医生没有作尸体解剖, 没有听诊器的检验, 也没有审问最后和伊撒在一起的那些人所提供的证明。斯潘塞•刘易斯 (H.Spencer Lewis) 著 «耶稣的神秘生活» 9.大家知道有一种油膏叫伊撒油膏 (مَرْهَم عِيْسَى, Marham-e-‘Isa), 是调制来涂在伊撒伤口上的。他由亚利马太的约瑟夫和尼可德默斯 (Nicodemus) 护理和照顾。后者也是苦修教会中一位非常有学识和受人高度尊敬的会员。10. 创伤充分医好之后, 他离开了那个墓穴, 同他的几个门徒见了面, 一起吃了东西, 并从耶路撒冷一直走到加利利。(«路加», 24:39-43) 11. «十字架受刑目睹记» 一书最初是1873年在美国出版的。该书是从用拉丁文写的一封古老的信的抄件译成英文的。那封信是耶路撒冷的苦修兄弟会在伊撒受刑后七年写给亚历山大里亚的该会分会的一个会员的。这本书有力地证明伊撒从十字架上取下时是活的这一看法。该书详细叙述了如何导致受十字架刑、十字架刑场的各种情景以及其后所发生的等等事情的所有情况。请看这一注解书的大版本。
犹太人中盛行着关于传说伊撒被钉在十字架上的两种不同看法。有些人认为他被杀死后他的尸体才被挂在十字架上的, 而另一些人的看法是, 他是被钉死在十字架上的。前一种看法可以在 «使徒行传» 5:30中看出, 在那节经文中, 我们可以看到 “你们把他杀死并挂在树上”。«古兰经» 驳斥这两种看法说, “他们没有杀害他, 也没有使他死在十字架上。” «古兰经» 首先否定以任何方式杀死伊撒, 然后否定把他杀死在十字架上的这种特殊的方式。它并不否认伊撒被挂在十字架上; 它只是否认他死在十字架上。
注
①：中药名。见 («辞海» 没药树): 橄榄科。小乔木, 枝上有棘刺。复叶, 小叶三片, 广披针形或卵圆形。夏季开花, 花白色, 总状花序。核果球形, 主产于非洲东南部, 阿拉伯半岛, 等地亦有分布。有树皮渗出的树脂、油胶于空气中变成红棕色而坚硬的圆块, 称为 “没药”, 中医学上入药, 性平、味苦, 功能活血散瘀、消肿止痛, 主治痈疽肿痛、跌打损伤等症。
مطلب یہ کہ مسیح کو صلیب پر لٹکانے کے بعد اس کے بے ہوش ہو جانے کی وجہ سے بعض لوگوں نے خیال کیا کہ وہ صلیب پر مر گئے ہیں۔ عربی میں صَلَبَ کا لفظ صلیب پر چڑھانے اور ہڈیاں توڑنے کے لئے استعمال ہوتا ہے چونکہ مسیحؑ کی ہڈیاں نہیں توڑی گئیں اس لئے مَاصَلَبُوْہُ کہا گیا ہے۔
یعنی تمام حالات صلیب پر مرنے کے خلاف تھے مگر چونکہ یہود کا دل چاہتا تھا کہ مسیحؑ صلیب پر مریں۔ اس لئے اپنے ہی وہم کا شکار ہو کر وہ مسیحؑ کی صلیبی موت پر یقین لاتے رہے۔
قَتَلَ الشَّیْئَ خُبْرًا کے معنے یہ بھی ہیں اَحَاطَ بِہٖ عِلْمًا (اقرب)کہ کسی چیز کو علم کے لحاظ سے پوری طرح سمجھ لیا۔ پس مَاقَتَلُوْہُ یَقِیْنًا کے معنے ہونگے انہوں نے اس واقعہ کی اصلیت کو پوری طرح نہیں سمجھا۔ اور نہ اپنے ظن کو یقین کے ساتھ بدلا۔ اسی طرح اس آیت کے ایک معنے یہ ہیں کہ یہ یقینی بات ہے کہ یہودیوں نے حضرت عیسیٰ علیہ السلام کو قتل نہیں کیا۔
10:37; 53:29.
Ma Salabu-hu means, they did not cause his death on the cross. Salab being a well-known manner of killing. They say Salabul-Lissa, i.e. he put the thief to death by putting him on the cross. The verse does not deny the fact of Jesus’s being nailed to the cross but denies his having died on it.
The words Shubbiha La-hum mean, Jesus was made to appear to the Jews like one crucified; or the matter of the death of Jesus became obscure or dubious to them. Shubbiha ‘Alaihil-Amru means, the matter was rendered confused, obscure or dubious to him (Lane).
The expression, Ma Qatalu-hu Yaqinan, means, (1) they did not kill him for certain; (2) they did not convert it (their conjecture) into certainty, i.e. their knowledge about the death of Jesus on the cross was not so certain as to have left no doubt in their minds that they had really killed him. In this case the pronoun hu in Qatalu-hu would refer to the noun Zann (conjecture). The Arabs say Qatalash-Shai’a Khubran, i.e. he acquired full and certain knowledge of the thing so as to dispel all possibility of doubt about it (Lane, Lisan & Mufradat). That Jesus did not die on the cross but died a natural death is clear from the Qur’an. The following facts, as narrated in the Gospels themselves lend powerful support to the Quranic version:
1. Being a Divine Prophet Jesus could not have died on the cross because according to the Bible "he that is hanged is accursed of God" (Deut. 21:23).
2. He had prayed to God in great agony to "take away this cup (of deat
10:37; 53:29.
Important Words:
ماقتلوہ (they slew him not). قتله means, he slew him by striking him with a sword or with a stone or by poison or by any other means. See also 2:62 & 4:158.
ماقتلوہ یقینا (they did not convert this conjecture into certainty) is a peculiar Arabic idiom. The Arabs say قتل الشیء خبرا (lit. he killed the thing with certainty of knowledge and proper examination), i.e. he acquired full and thorough knowledge of the thing so as to dispel all possibility of doubt. So the words ما قتلوہ یقینا would mean, their knowledge regarding it was not comprehensive, or they did not know it for certain that he had been killed, or they did not convert this (conjecture of theirs) into certainty, meaning that they were not sure and they did not make sure whether Jesus died on the cross or not. In this case, the pronoun in قتلوہ would refer to the noun ظن (a conjecture) immediately preceding it (Lane, Aqrab, Mufradat & Lisan).
In plain English, the words would mean that their knowledge about the death of Jesus on the cross was not so full and comprehensive as to have attained the stage of certainty. The expression may also mean that they certainly did not slay him or that they did not kill him as a certainty, i.e. they did not execute him in such a way as definitely assure themselves that life had indeed become extinct in him.
ما صلبوه (nor crucified him). The word صلبوا is from the root صلب. They say صلب الشیء i.e. he burned the thing. صلب العظامmeans, he extracted the marrow out of the bones. صلب اللص means, he crucified the thief, i.e. he put him to death in a certain well-known manner (Lane & Aqrab). In crucifixion one was nailed to a framework made in the form of a cross and, being kept without food and drink, slowly died of pain, hunger, fatigue and exposure.
شبه لھم (he was made to appear to them like one crucified). شبھه إیاہ means, he made it or him to be like it or him, or he made it or him to resemble it or him. شبه علیه الامر means, the matter was rendered confused, obscure or dubious to him. شبه علیه الامرmeans, he rendered the matter confused to him (by making it to appear like some other thing); he rendered it confused, obscure or dubious to him (Lane & Aqrab).
Commentary:
This and the preceding verse mention two main objections of the Jews against Jesus: (1) his alleged illegitimate birth, and (2) his supposed death on the cross which, according to Jewish Law, was an accursed death (Deut. 21:23). The words, We did kill the Messiah, Jesus, Son of Mary—the Messenger of Allah, are spoken ironically and tauntingly, meaning, "we have killed Jesus who posed as the Messiah and a Messenger of God."
The argument of the Jews was that because Jesus died on the cross, he could not be a true Prophet according to Jewish Law. The inference was based on their sacred Scriptures; for, according to the Bible, he who is hanged is accursed of God, and a false Prophet shall meet with destruction. Says the Bible: "His body shall not remain all night upon the tree, but thou shalt in any wise bury him that day; (for he that is hanged is accursed of God) that thy land be not defiled, which the Lord thy God giveth thee for an inheritance' (Deut. 21:23). Again: "My hand shall be upon false prophets that see vanity, and that divine lies" (Ezek. 13:9). Again: "Therefore thus saith the Lord concerning the prophets that prophesy in My name, and I sent them not, yet they say, Sword and famine shall not be in this land, by sword and famine shall those prophets be consumed" (Jer. 14:15).
On the strength of such verses of the Bible, the Jews claimed that, as Jesus had been crucified and met with destruction, he could not be a true Prophet of God, but was a false claimant and an accursed one.
Regarding the charge about the alleged death of Jesus by crucifixion, the Quran says that the act of crucifixion having not been completed, and Jesus having been taken down alive from the cross, the charge carries no weight. It should, however, be noted that the Quran does not deny the mere hanging of Jesus on the cross; it only denies his death on it.
Two different views prevail among the Jews regarding Jesus’ alleged death by crucifixion. Some of them hold that Jesus was first killed and then his dead body was hung on the cross, while others are of the view that he was put to death by being fixed to the cross. The former view is reflected in Acts, 5:30 where we read "which ye slew and hanged on a tree." The Quran refutes both these views by saying, they slew him not, nor crucified him. The words may also signify that the Quran first rejects the slaying of Jesus in any form, and then proceeds to deny the particular way of killing by hanging on the cross.
The verb شبه (in the passive voice) means, he was made to appear like, or was made to resemble. Now the question arises, who is the person who was made to appear "like one crucified." Clearly, it was Jesus whom the Jews tried to crucify or slay. Nobody else can be meant here, for there is absolutely no reference to any other person in the context. Hence, the theory invented by certain commentators that Judas or somebody else was made to appear like Jesus and was then crucified in his place is simply absurd. The context cannot be so twisted as to make room for somebody else of whom no mention at all is made in the verse.
To what then was Jesus made like? The context provides a clear answer to that question. The Jews did not kill him by crucifixion, but he was made to appear to them like "one crucified", and thus it was that they wrongly took him for dead. It was thus Jesus who was made to resemble "one crucified." This interpretation is not only in perfect harmony with the context, but is also clearly borne out by all relevant facts of history.
The second meaning of the expression شبه لھم is, as explained under Important Words, that "the matter became confused to them." This interpretation is also clearly borne out by history; for, although the Jews asserted that they had put Jesus to death by suspending him on the cross, they were not sure of it and the circumstances being obscure, the matter had certainly become confused to them. The fact that the Jews themselves were not sure whether Jesus had actually died on the cross is supported by the Bible and by all authentic historical facts.
The statements made in this verse are clearly substantiated by the following facts narrated in the Gospels:
(1) Jesus had himself predicted his escape from death on the cross, saying, "As Jonah was three days and three nights in the whale’s belly, so shall the son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth" (Matt. 12:40). Now it is an accepted fact that Jonah had entered the whale’s belly alive and had come out alive; so, according to his own prophecy, Jesus was to enter the heart of the earth, (i.e. his tomb) alive and was to come out of it alive.
(2) The trying magistrate (Pilate) believed Jesus to be innocent and, being sympathetic, was anxious to save his life (Matt. 27:17, 18; Mark 15:9, 10, 14; Luke 23:4, 14, 15, 20,22; John 18:38, 39); and he must have secretly tried to save him or at least connived at the attempt of others to do so.
(3) Pilate’s wife had seen a vision concerning the innocence of Jesus: "When he (Pilate) was set down on the judgement seat, his wife sent unto him, saying, 'Have thou nothing to do with that just man, for I have suffered many things this day in a dream because of him'" (Matt. 27:19). This message must certainly have influenced Pilate, and his wife must have also done her best to save Jesus.
(4) Pilate held the killing of Jesus in such horror that he actually washed his hands with water, saying that he was innocent of the blood of that just man (Matt. 27:24).
(5) Pilate did all he could to help Jesus; and the soldiers in charge also treated Jesus with kindness, apparently under Pilate’s directions. The following are some of the special favours shown to Jesus: (a) Every malefactor carried his own cross but another man was made to carry that of Jesus (Matt. 27:32; Mark 15:21); (b) Jesus was given wine or vinegar mingled with myrrh. This was intended to render him less sensible to pain. The two thieves who were crucified with him were not given this drink. When after sometime the effects of the drink were wearing off and Jesus cried with pain, the drink was administered again to render him unconscious of pain (Matt. 27:34, 48; Mark 15:23, 36; John 19:29, 30).
(6) The unconsciousness which followed the administration of vinegar was mistaken for death (John 19:30).
(7) Jesus remained on the cross for only about three hours (John 19:14. cf. Matt. 27:46) and according to Mark only for six hours (Mark 15:25, 33), and either of these periods was by no means sufficient to kill a young man like Jesus on the cross.
(8) When Joseph of Arimathaea came and craved the body of Jesus, Pilate "marvelled if he were already dead", and calling to him the centurion asked him whether he had been any while dead (Mark, 15:44).
(9) The soldiers did not break the legs of Jesus, but the legs of the two malefactors who had been crucified with him were broken (John 19:32, 33).
(10) Jesus was not buried in the earth with the two malefactors but was laid separately in a spacious sepulchre hewn out of a rock and situated in a garden which was private property (Mark 15:46; John 19:41, 42).
(11) The Jews themselves were not sure that Jesus was dead; for they came to Pilate and besought him that his legs be broken (John 19:31).
(12) The doubt that Jesus was alive and might, with the aid of his sympathizers, escape from the sepulchre rankled in the minds of the Jews. They remembered also the prophecy of Jesus that he would show them the miracle of Jonah and would come out of the heart of the earth alive. So, influenced by such misgivings, the chief priests and Pharisees went together to Pilate, saying, "Sir, we remember that the deceiver said, while he was yet alive—'After three days I will rise again.'—Command therefore that the sepulchre be made sure until the third day. Pilate told them to make their own arrangements; "so they went, and made the sepulchre sure, sealing the stone and setting a watch" (Matt. 27:62-66).
(13) In spite of the watch and despite the sealing of the stone, Jesus had left the sepulchre before the third day had dawned, when Mary Magdalene and Mary, mother of James, came to see the sepulchre and found the stone rolled away and the sepulchre empty (Matt. 28:1-6 Mark 16:1-6), which shows that the men set to watch were also in league with, and won over by, the friends of Jesus.
(14) After leaving the sepulchre, Jesus moved about secretly, lest the Jews should have him arrested again (Mark 16:12 John 20:19, 26; 21:4).
(15) Mary Magdalene and other disciples actually saw Jesus in this body of clay (Mark 16:9, 12).
(16) Jesus showed them his wounds to assure them that he was not a spirit but a man of flesh and blood and that the body they saw before them was the same physical body that had been nailed to the cross (Luke 24:39, 40; John 20:27).
(17) After leaving the sepulchre, Jesus felt hungry and partook of food with his disciples (John 21:5, 13; Luke 24:41, 42, 43).
The above references among others make it abundantly clear that Jesus did not die on the cross, that he was alive when he was taken down from the cross, and also when he was laid in the sepulchre, and that he came out of it alive on the third day at early morn, as he had himself prophesied, and that later he appeared to his disciples in secret and assured them that he was not dead.
(18) Jesus had said, "And other sheep I have which are not of this fold, them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice and there shall be one fold and one shepherd" (John 10:16). In these words he was obviously referring to the lost ten tribes of Israel who had scattered in Afghanistan, Kashmir, etc. In search of these Jesus came to the East after his miraculous escape from an accursed death on the cross, and among these he now lies buried in Khan Yar Street in Srinagar Kashmir. Conclusive historical evidence has established the fact that the holy occupant of the tomb in the Khan Yar Street in Srinagar is no other than Jesus, son of Mary. For further discussion of this important subject, see Masih Hindustan Meiń (Jesus in India) by the Promised Messiah, and R. Rel. Vol. II Nos. 1, 2, 5, 6, 10 published from Qadian, and the "Tomb of Jesus" by Dr M. M. Sadiq of Qadian.
e
10:37; 53:29.
357
مَاصَلَبُوْهُ (Ma Salabu-hu) 的意思是, 他们并没有把他钉死在十字架上。صَلَبْ (Salab) 是一种大家都知道的处死法。他们说 صَلَبَ اللِّصَّ (Salabal-Lissa), 那就是说, 他把那窃贼钉死在十字架上。这节经文并未否认伊撒被钉在十字架上这一件事, 但否认他死在十字架上。
358
شُبِّهَ لَهُمْ (Shubbiha La-hum) 的意思是, 伊撒被得使犹太人看来像钉死在十字架上的那样;或者说伊撒的死对他们来说是一件含糊不清的事。شُبِّهَ عَلَيْهِ الْاَمْرُ (Shubbiha ‘Alaihil-Amru) 意为, 这件事弄得他疑惑不解, 踌躇不决。(Lane)
359
مَا قَتَلُوْهُ يَقِيْنًا (Ma Qatalu-hu Yaqinan) 意指: (1) 他们没有肯定地杀死了他; (2) 他们没有肯定它 (他们的猜想), 也就是说, 他们并未确实知道伊撒死在十字架上, 因此, 在他们思想上不能确信他们已真正杀死了他。此处 قَتَلُوْهُ (Qatalu-hu) 中的代词 هُ (hu) 指的是名词 ظَنّ (Zann, 猜想)。阿拉伯人说 قَتَلَ الشَّئَ خُبْرًا (Qatalash-Shai’a Khubran), 就是说, 他完全而肯定地知道了这件事, 以致排除了对这件事的一切怀疑的可能性。(Lane, Lisan 与 Mufradat) 从 «古兰经» 中可以清楚地看到, 伊撒并没有死在十字架上, 而是善终的。«福音» 书中所叙述的以下一些事实也给 «古兰经» 的看法提供了有力的证明:
1. 作为安拉的先知, 伊撒不可能死在十字架上, 因为按照 «圣经» 说, “绞死的人是上帝所憎恶的人。” (申命记: 21:23) 2. 他以极痛苦的心情向安拉祷告 “求你把这苦杯 (死在十字架上的) 移去;……” (马可, 14:36; 马太: 26:39; 路加, 22:42); 安拉听到了他的祈祷 (希伯来书 5:7)。3. 他曾经预言过, 像约拿 (犹努司) 那样活着出入鲸腹 (马太: 12:40), 他会留在墓穴中三天后能活着被挖掘出来。4. 他也曾经预言过, 他会去找到那十个失踪的以色列部落 (约拿, 10:16) 即使在伊撒的时候, 犹太人都相信这十个失踪的部落已散失在各地。(约拿7:34, 35) 5. 伊撒在十字架上只吊了大约三个小时 (约拿, 19:14) 一个正常体格的人在这样短的时间内不会死去的。6. 把他从十字架上取下后立刻刺穿了他的一肋, 血水流了出来, 这种迹象说明他肯定是活着的。(约拿, 19:34) 7. 犹太人自己也不能肯定伊撒是否已经死亡, 因为他们要比拉多 (Pilate) 派一个卫兵在他墓穴旁站岗以防止他的门徒夜间来把他偷走, 并且对他们的民众说, “他已从那些死人中间复活。” (马太, 27:64) 8. 所有«福音»书中找不到一份记录能确实证明伊撒从十字架上取下来或放入坟墓时目睹他已经死亡。而且, 在钉死在十字架的现场上没有一个门徒在场。当伊撒被带到刑场上时, 所有的门徒都逃走了。实际情况看来是这样: 比拉多的妻子大概做了个梦, 说 “你千万不要干涉那义人的事”, 比拉多相信伊撒是无辜的。因此他和苦修教会 (Essene Order) 的一个受人尊敬的会员亚利马太 (Arimaethia) 的约瑟夫商量想救伊撒的性命, 因为伊撒在受命作先知之前也是该会的会员。审判伊撒的日子是星期五。比拉多知道翌日是安息日, 被判死刑的人在日落后是不能留放在十字架上的, 因此他故意拖延审判的时间。最后他觉得不得不判伊撒死罪时, 在日落前只有三小时的时候才判决。这样他可以肯定一个健康正常的人留在十字架上这样短的时间内是不会死的。他又特别照顾, 给伊撒喝了混有 “没药” (请看下面注①)的酒或醋使他减轻对痛楚的感觉。吊了三小时后把他从十字架上放下时, 失去了知觉 (可能是给他吃了药醋的影响), 比拉多很快答应了亚利马太的约瑟夫的请求, 把伊撒的身躯交给了他。不像和他一起吊的那两个罪犯那样, 伊撒的骨头没有断碎。约瑟夫把他安置在一块岩石侧面开劈出来的一个宽敞的地方。医生没有作尸体解剖, 没有听诊器的检验, 也没有审问最后和伊撒在一起的那些人所提供的证明。斯潘塞•刘易斯 (H.Spencer Lewis) 著 «耶稣的神秘生活» 9.大家知道有一种油膏叫伊撒油膏 (مَرْهَم عِيْسَى, Marham-e-‘Isa), 是调制来涂在伊撒伤口上的。他由亚利马太的约瑟夫和尼可德默斯 (Nicodemus) 护理和照顾。后者也是苦修教会中一位非常有学识和受人高度尊敬的会员。10. 创伤充分医好之后, 他离开了那个墓穴, 同他的几个门徒见了面, 一起吃了东西, 并从耶路撒冷一直走到加利利。(«路加», 24:39-43) 11. «十字架受刑目睹记» 一书最初是1873年在美国出版的。该书是从用拉丁文写的一封古老的信的抄件译成英文的。那封信是耶路撒冷的苦修兄弟会在伊撒受刑后七年写给亚历山大里亚的该会分会的一个会员的。这本书有力地证明伊撒从十字架上取下时是活的这一看法。该书详细叙述了如何导致受十字架刑、十字架刑场的各种情景以及其后所发生的等等事情的所有情况。请看这一注解书的大版本。
犹太人中盛行着关于传说伊撒被钉在十字架上的两种不同看法。有些人认为他被杀死后他的尸体才被挂在十字架上的, 而另一些人的看法是, 他是被钉死在十字架上的。前一种看法可以在 «使徒行传» 5:30中看出, 在那节经文中, 我们可以看到 “你们把他杀死并挂在树上”。«古兰经» 驳斥这两种看法说, “他们没有杀害他, 也没有使他死在十字架上。” «古兰经» 首先否定以任何方式杀死伊撒, 然后否定把他杀死在十字架上的这种特殊的方式。它并不否认伊撒被挂在十字架上; 它只是否认他死在十字架上。
注
①：中药名。见 («辞海» 没药树): 橄榄科。小乔木, 枝上有棘刺。复叶, 小叶三片, 广披针形或卵圆形。夏季开花, 花白色, 总状花序。核果球形, 主产于非洲东南部, 阿拉伯半岛, 等地亦有分布。有树皮渗出的树脂、油胶于空气中变成红棕色而坚硬的圆块, 称为 “没药”, 中医学上入药, 性平、味苦, 功能活血散瘀、消肿止痛, 主治痈疽肿痛、跌打损伤等症。
1
مطلب یہ کہ مسیح کو صلیب پر لٹکانے کے بعد اس کے بے ہوش ہو جانے کی وجہ سے بعض لوگوں نے خیال کیا کہ وہ صلیب پر مر گئے ہیں۔ عربی میں صَلَبَ کا لفظ صلیب پر چڑھانے اور ہڈیاں توڑنے کے لئے استعمال ہوتا ہے چونکہ مسیحؑ کی ہڈیاں نہیں توڑی گئیں اس لئے مَاصَلَبُوْہُ کہا گیا ہے۔
2
یعنی تمام حالات صلیب پر مرنے کے خلاف تھے مگر چونکہ یہود کا دل چاہتا تھا کہ مسیحؑ صلیب پر مریں۔ اس لئے اپنے ہی وہم کا شکار ہو کر وہ مسیحؑ کی صلیبی موت پر یقین لاتے رہے۔
3
قَتَلَ الشَّیْئَ خُبْرًا کے معنے یہ بھی ہیں اَحَاطَ بِہٖ عِلْمًا (اقرب)کہ کسی چیز کو علم کے لحاظ سے پوری طرح سمجھ لیا۔ پس مَاقَتَلُوْہُ یَقِیْنًا کے معنے ہونگے انہوں نے اس واقعہ کی اصلیت کو پوری طرح نہیں سمجھا۔ اور نہ اپنے ظن کو یقین کے ساتھ بدلا۔ اسی طرح اس آیت کے ایک معنے یہ ہیں کہ یہ یقینی بات ہے کہ یہودیوں نے حضرت عیسیٰ علیہ السلام کو قتل نہیں کیا۔
a
10:37; 53:29.
621
Important Words:
ماقتلوہ (they slew him not). قتله means, he slew him by striking him with a sword or with a stone or by poison or by any other means. See also 2:62 & 4:158.
ماقتلوہ یقینا (they did not convert this conjecture into certainty) is a peculiar Arabic idiom. The Arabs say قتل الشیء خبرا (lit. he killed the thing with certainty of knowledge and proper examination), i.e. he acquired full and thorough knowledge of the thing so as to dispel all possibility of doubt. So the words ما قتلوہ یقینا would mean, their knowledge regarding it was not comprehensive, or they did not know it for certain that he had been killed, or they did not convert this (conjecture of theirs) into certainty, meaning that they were not sure and they did not make sure whether Jesus died on the cross or not. In this case, the pronoun in قتلوہ would refer to the noun ظن (a conjecture) immediately preceding it (Lane, Aqrab, Mufradat & Lisan).
In plain English, the words would mean that their knowledge about the death of Jesus on the cross was not so full and comprehensive as to have attained the stage of certainty. The expression may also mean that they certainly did not slay him or that they did not kill him as a certainty, i.e. they did not execute him in such a way as definitely assure themselves that life had indeed become extinct in him.
ما صلبوه (nor crucified him). The word صلبوا is from the root صلب. They say صلب الشیء i.e. he burned the thing. صلب العظامmeans, he extracted the marrow out of the bones. صلب اللص means, he crucified the thief, i.e. he put him to death in a certain well-known manner (Lane & Aqrab). In crucifixion one was nailed to a framework made in the form of a cross and, being kept without food and drink, slowly died of pain, hunger, fatigue and exposure.
شبه لھم (he was made to appear to them like one crucified). شبھه إیاہ means, he made it or him to be like it or him, or he made it or him to resemble it or him. شبه علیه الامر means, the matter was rendered confused, obscure or dubious to him. شبه علیه الامرmeans, he rendered the matter confused to him (by making it to appear like some other thing); he rendered it confused, obscure or dubious to him (Lane & Aqrab).
Commentary:
This and the preceding verse mention two main objections of the Jews against Jesus: (1) his alleged illegitimate birth, and (2) his supposed death on the cross which, according to Jewish Law, was an accursed death (Deut. 21:23). The words, We did kill the Messiah, Jesus, Son of Mary—the Messenger of Allah, are spoken ironically and tauntingly, meaning, "we have killed Jesus who posed as the Messiah and a Messenger of God."
The argument of the Jews was that because Jesus died on the cross, he could not be a true Prophet according to Jewish Law. The inference was based on their sacred Scriptures; for, according to the Bible, he who is hanged is accursed of God, and a false Prophet shall meet with destruction. Says the Bible: "His body shall not remain all night upon the tree, but thou shalt in any wise bury him that day; (for he that is hanged is accursed of God) that thy land be not defiled, which the Lord thy God giveth thee for an inheritance' (Deut. 21:23). Again: "My hand shall be upon false prophets that see vanity, and that divine lies" (Ezek. 13:9). Again: "Therefore thus saith the Lord concerning the prophets that prophesy in My name, and I sent them not, yet they say, Sword and famine shall not be in this land, by sword and famine shall those prophets be consumed" (Jer. 14:15).
On the strength of such verses of the Bible, the Jews claimed that, as Jesus had been crucified and met with destruction, he could not be a true Prophet of God, but was a false claimant and an accursed one.
Regarding the charge about the alleged death of Jesus by crucifixion, the Quran says that the act of crucifixion having not been completed, and Jesus having been taken down alive from the cross, the charge carries no weight. It should, however, be noted that the Quran does not deny the mere hanging of Jesus on the cross; it only denies his death on it.
Two different views prevail among the Jews regarding Jesus’ alleged death by crucifixion. Some of them hold that Jesus was first killed and then his dead body was hung on the cross, while others are of the view that he was put to death by being fixed to the cross. The former view is reflected in Acts, 5:30 where we read "which ye slew and hanged on a tree." The Quran refutes both these views by saying, they slew him not, nor crucified him. The words may also signify that the Quran first rejects the slaying of Jesus in any form, and then proceeds to deny the particular way of killing by hanging on the cross.
The verb شبه (in the passive voice) means, he was made to appear like, or was made to resemble. Now the question arises, who is the person who was made to appear "like one crucified." Clearly, it was Jesus whom the Jews tried to crucify or slay. Nobody else can be meant here, for there is absolutely no reference to any other person in the context. Hence, the theory invented by certain commentators that Judas or somebody else was made to appear like Jesus and was then crucified in his place is simply absurd. The context cannot be so twisted as to make room for somebody else of whom no mention at all is made in the verse.
To what then was Jesus made like? The context provides a clear answer to that question. The Jews did not kill him by crucifixion, but he was made to appear to them like "one crucified", and thus it was that they wrongly took him for dead. It was thus Jesus who was made to resemble "one crucified." This interpretation is not only in perfect harmony with the context, but is also clearly borne out by all relevant facts of history.
The second meaning of the expression شبه لھم is, as explained under Important Words, that "the matter became confused to them." This interpretation is also clearly borne out by history; for, although the Jews asserted that they had put Jesus to death by suspending him on the cross, they were not sure of it and the circumstances being obscure, the matter had certainly become confused to them. The fact that the Jews themselves were not sure whether Jesus had actually died on the cross is supported by the Bible and by all authentic historical facts.
The statements made in this verse are clearly substantiated by the following facts narrated in the Gospels:
(1) Jesus had himself predicted his escape from death on the cross, saying, "As Jonah was three days and three nights in the whale’s belly, so shall the son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth" (Matt. 12:40). Now it is an accepted fact that Jonah had entered the whale’s belly alive and had come out alive; so, according to his own prophecy, Jesus was to enter the heart of the earth, (i.e. his tomb) alive and was to come out of it alive.
(2) The trying magistrate (Pilate) believed Jesus to be innocent and, being sympathetic, was anxious to save his life (Matt. 27:17, 18; Mark 15:9, 10, 14; Luke 23:4, 14, 15, 20,22; John 18:38, 39); and he must have secretly tried to save him or at least connived at the attempt of others to do so.
(3) Pilate’s wife had seen a vision concerning the innocence of Jesus: "When he (Pilate) was set down on the judgement seat, his wife sent unto him, saying, 'Have thou nothing to do with that just man, for I have suffered many things this day in a dream because of him'" (Matt. 27:19). This message must certainly have influenced Pilate, and his wife must have also done her best to save Jesus.
(4) Pilate held the killing of Jesus in such horror that he actually washed his hands with water, saying that he was innocent of the blood of that just man (Matt. 27:24).
(5) Pilate did all he could to help Jesus; and the soldiers in charge also treated Jesus with kindness, apparently under Pilate’s directions. The following are some of the special favours shown to Jesus: (a) Every malefactor carried his own cross but another man was made to carry that of Jesus (Matt. 27:32; Mark 15:21); (b) Jesus was given wine or vinegar mingled with myrrh. This was intended to render him less sensible to pain. The two thieves who were crucified with him were not given this drink. When after sometime the effects of the drink were wearing off and Jesus cried with pain, the drink was administered again to render him unconscious of pain (Matt. 27:34, 48; Mark 15:23, 36; John 19:29, 30).
(6) The unconsciousness which followed the administration of vinegar was mistaken for death (John 19:30).
(7) Jesus remained on the cross for only about three hours (John 19:14. cf. Matt. 27:46) and according to Mark only for six hours (Mark 15:25, 33), and either of these periods was by no means sufficient to kill a young man like Jesus on the cross.
(8) When Joseph of Arimathaea came and craved the body of Jesus, Pilate "marvelled if he were already dead", and calling to him the centurion asked him whether he had been any while dead (Mark, 15:44).
(9) The soldiers did not break the legs of Jesus, but the legs of the two malefactors who had been crucified with him were broken (John 19:32, 33).
(10) Jesus was not buried in the earth with the two malefactors but was laid separately in a spacious sepulchre hewn out of a rock and situated in a garden which was private property (Mark 15:46; John 19:41, 42).
(11) The Jews themselves were not sure that Jesus was dead; for they came to Pilate and besought him that his legs be broken (John 19:31).
(12) The doubt that Jesus was alive and might, with the aid of his sympathizers, escape from the sepulchre rankled in the minds of the Jews. They remembered also the prophecy of Jesus that he would show them the miracle of Jonah and would come out of the heart of the earth alive. So, influenced by such misgivings, the chief priests and Pharisees went together to Pilate, saying, "Sir, we remember that the deceiver said, while he was yet alive—'After three days I will rise again.'—Command therefore that the sepulchre be made sure until the third day. Pilate told them to make their own arrangements; "so they went, and made the sepulchre sure, sealing the stone and setting a watch" (Matt. 27:62-66).
(13) In spite of the watch and despite the sealing of the stone, Jesus had left the sepulchre before the third day had dawned, when Mary Magdalene and Mary, mother of James, came to see the sepulchre and found the stone rolled away and the sepulchre empty (Matt. 28:1-6 Mark 16:1-6), which shows that the men set to watch were also in league with, and won over by, the friends of Jesus.
(14) After leaving the sepulchre, Jesus moved about secretly, lest the Jews should have him arrested again (Mark 16:12 John 20:19, 26; 21:4).
(15) Mary Magdalene and other disciples actually saw Jesus in this body of clay (Mark 16:9, 12).
(16) Jesus showed them his wounds to assure them that he was not a spirit but a man of flesh and blood and that the body they saw before them was the same physical body that had been nailed to the cross (Luke 24:39, 40; John 20:27).
(17) After leaving the sepulchre, Jesus felt hungry and partook of food with his disciples (John 21:5, 13; Luke 24:41, 42, 43).
The above references among others make it abundantly clear that Jesus did not die on the cross, that he was alive when he was taken down from the cross, and also when he was laid in the sepulchre, and that he came out of it alive on the third day at early morn, as he had himself prophesied, and that later he appeared to his disciples in secret and assured them that he was not dead.
(18) Jesus had said, "And other sheep I have which are not of this fold, them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice and there shall be one fold and one shepherd" (John 10:16). In these words he was obviously referring to the lost ten tribes of Israel who had scattered in Afghanistan, Kashmir, etc. In search of these Jesus came to the East after his miraculous escape from an accursed death on the cross, and among these he now lies buried in Khan Yar Street in Srinagar Kashmir. Conclusive historical evidence has established the fact that the holy occupant of the tomb in the Khan Yar Street in Srinagar is no other than Jesus, son of Mary. For further discussion of this important subject, see Masih Hindustan Meiń (Jesus in India) by the Promised Messiah, and R. Rel. Vol. II Nos. 1, 2, 5, 6, 10 published from Qadian, and the "Tomb of Jesus" by Dr M. M. Sadiq of Qadian.
a
10:37; 53:29.
697
Ma Salabu-hu means, they did not cause his death on the cross. Salab being a well-known manner of killing. They say Salabul-Lissa, i.e. he put the thief to death by putting him on the cross. The verse does not deny the fact of Jesus’s being nailed to the cross but denies his having died on it.
698
The words Shubbiha La-hum mean, Jesus was made to appear to the Jews like one crucified; or the matter of the death of Jesus became obscure or dubious to them. Shubbiha ‘Alaihil-Amru means, the matter was rendered confused, obscure or dubious to him (Lane).
699
The expression, Ma Qatalu-hu Yaqinan, means, (1) they did not kill him for certain; (2) they did not convert it (their conjecture) into certainty, i.e. their knowledge about the death of Jesus on the cross was not so certain as to have left no doubt in their minds that they had really killed him. In this case the pronoun hu in Qatalu-hu would refer to the noun Zann (conjecture). The Arabs say Qatalash-Shai’a Khubran, i.e. he acquired full and certain knowledge of the thing so as to dispel all possibility of doubt about it (Lane, Lisan & Mufradat). That Jesus did not die on the cross but died a natural death is clear from the Qur’an. The following facts, as narrated in the Gospels themselves lend powerful support to the Quranic version:
1. Being a Divine Prophet Jesus could not have died on the cross because according to the Bible "he that is hanged is accursed of God" (Deut. 21:23).
2. He had prayed to God in great agony to "take away this cup (of deat
وَإِن مِّنْ أَهْلِ ٱلْكِتَٰبِ إِلَّا لَيُؤْمِنَنَّ بِهِۦ قَبْلَ مَوْتِهِۦ ۖ وَيَوْمَ ٱلْقِيَٰمَةِ يَكُونُ عَلَيْهِمْ شَهِيدًا
مفسرین اس آیت کے یہ معنے کرتے ہیں کہ تمام اہل کتاب مسیحؑ کی موت سے پہلے اس پر ایمان لے آئیں گے۔ لیکن یہ معنے درست نہیں کیونکہ یہاں اِنْ مِّنْ اَھْلِ الْکِتَابِ کے الفاظ ہیں جو بتاتے ہیں کہ اہل کتاب میں سے ہر فرد کا ایمان لانا ضروری ہے۔ حالانکہ لاکھوں یہودی ایسے ہیں جو مسیحؑ کے زمانہ سے اب تک فوت ہو چکے ہیں لیکن ان کو مسیحؑ پر ایمان لانا نصیب نہیں ہوا۔ پس ہم نے اس آیت کا ترجمہ یہ کیا ہے کہ اہل کتاب میں سے ہر ایک (یعنی یہودی اور مسیحی) اپنی موت سے پہلے پہلے یہ مانتا رہے گا کہ مسیح صلیب پر مر گئے ہیں۔ یہودی اس لئے کہ وہ مسیحؑ کو لعنتی ثابت کرنا چاہتے ہیں اور عیسائی اس
5:118.
The pronoun "his" in the expression "before his death" stands for the noun "none", meaning every one among the People of the Book before his own death……This meaning is supported by the second reading of Mautihi which is Mautihim (their death) as reported by Ubayy (Jarir, vi. 13). The Jews believe that they killed Jesus on the cross because they seek to prove that he was not a true Prophet. The Christians believe that he had died on the cross, and this is because they have adopted the doctrine of Atonement.
5:118.
Important Words:
The pronoun "it" in the clause, believe in it, stands for the false belief (referred to in the preceding verses) that Jesus met his death on the cross. So the verse signifies that both Jews and Christians will continue to believe in the supposed crucifixion of Jesus till the time of their death, when the veil will be lifted and everything will become clear. They are indeed bound to believe in the alleged death of Jesus on the cross. If the Jews do not do so, his truth becomes established and their whole position becomes indefensible. Similarly, if the Christians do not believe in it, the doctrine of Atonement becomes untenable and the entire fabric of Christianity crashes to pieces. So both these peoples go on sticking to this absurd and unfounded belief in the face of all reason and all established facts of history.
The attempts to make the words لیؤمنن به قبل موته (will believe in it before his death) mean "will believe in him (Jesus) before his (Jesus’) death" is simply ridiculous. The context spurns the idea, as does the second reading of the expression موته (his death) viz. موتھم (their death) reported by Ubayy (Jarir, vi. 13).
a
5:118.
361
“他死以前” 这一用语中的代词 “他的” 代表名词 “没有一个人”, 意指每一个有经的人在他自己死以前……。按乌巴耶 (اُبَیّ, Ubayy) 的说法 (Jarir. vi. 13) 这个意思可由 مَوْتِه (Mautihi) 的第二个版本 مَوْتِهِمْ (Mautihim) (他们的死) 得到证实。犹太人相信他们已在十字架上杀死了伊撒, 因为他们力图证明他不是真正的先知。基督教徒相信他已死在十字架上, 因为他们接受了伊撒(耶稣)替世人赎罪而受难及死的这一教义。
5
مفسرین اس آیت کے یہ معنے کرتے ہیں کہ تمام اہل کتاب مسیحؑ کی موت سے پہلے اس پر ایمان لے آئیں گے۔ لیکن یہ معنے درست نہیں کیونکہ یہاں اِنْ مِّنْ اَھْلِ الْکِتَابِ کے الفاظ ہیں جو بتاتے ہیں کہ اہل کتاب میں سے ہر فرد کا ایمان لانا ضروری ہے۔ حالانکہ لاکھوں یہودی ایسے ہیں جو مسیحؑ کے زمانہ سے اب تک فوت ہو چکے ہیں لیکن ان کو مسیحؑ پر ایمان لانا نصیب نہیں ہوا۔ پس ہم نے اس آیت کا ترجمہ یہ کیا ہے کہ اہل کتاب میں سے ہر ایک (یعنی یہودی اور مسیحی) اپنی موت سے پہلے پہلے یہ مانتا رہے گا کہ مسیح صلیب پر مر گئے ہیں۔ یہودی اس لئے کہ وہ مسیحؑ کو لعنتی ثابت کرنا چاہتے ہیں اور عیسائی اس
b
5:118.
623
Important Words:
The pronoun "it" in the clause, believe in it, stands for the false belief (referred to in the preceding verses) that Jesus met his death on the cross. So the verse signifies that both Jews and Christians will continue to believe in the supposed crucifixion of Jesus till the time of their death, when the veil will be lifted and everything will become clear. They are indeed bound to believe in the alleged death of Jesus on the cross. If the Jews do not do so, his truth becomes established and their whole position becomes indefensible. Similarly, if the Christians do not believe in it, the doctrine of Atonement becomes untenable and the entire fabric of Christianity crashes to pieces. So both these peoples go on sticking to this absurd and unfounded belief in the face of all reason and all established facts of history.
The attempts to make the words لیؤمنن به قبل موته (will believe in it before his death) mean "will believe in him (Jesus) before his (Jesus’) death" is simply ridiculous. The context spurns the idea, as does the second reading of the expression موته (his death) viz. موتھم (their death) reported by Ubayy (Jarir, vi. 13).
b
5:118.
701
The pronoun "his" in the expression "before his death" stands for the noun "none", meaning every one among the People of the Book before his own death……This meaning is supported by the second reading of Mautihi which is Mautihim (their death) as reported by Ubayy (Jarir, vi. 13). The Jews believe that they killed Jesus on the cross because they seek to prove that he was not a true Prophet. The Christians believe that he had died on the cross, and this is because they have adopted the doctrine of Atonement.
فَأَمَّا ٱلَّذِينَ ءَامَنُوا۟ بِٱللَّهِ وَٱعْتَصَمُوا۟ بِهِۦ فَسَيُدْخِلُهُمْ فِى رَحْمَةٍ مِّنْهُ وَفَضْلٍ وَيَهْدِيهِمْ إِلَيْهِ صِرَٰطًا مُّسْتَقِيمًا
3:102; 4:147.
3:102; 4:147.
3:102; 4:147.
Commentary:
The words, hold fast to Him, imply a forceful exhortation to Christians not to take Jesus as a deity but to look upon, and hold fast to, God alone as the means of their salvation and advancement.
d
3:102; 4:147.
c
3:102; 4:147.
638
Commentary:
The words, hold fast to Him, imply a forceful exhortation to Christians not to take Jesus as a deity but to look upon, and hold fast to, God alone as the means of their salvation and advancement.
b
3:102; 4:147.
حُرِّمَتْ عَلَيْكُمُ ٱلْمَيْتَةُ وَٱلدَّمُ وَلَحْمُ ٱلْخِنزِيرِ وَمَآ أُهِلَّ لِغَيْرِ ٱللَّهِ بِهِۦ وَٱلْمُنْخَنِقَةُ وَٱلْمَوْقُوذَةُ وَٱلْمُتَرَدِّيَةُ وَٱلنَّطِيحَةُ وَمَآ أَكَلَ ٱلسَّبُعُ إِلَّا مَا ذَكَّيْتُمْ وَمَا ذُبِحَ عَلَى ٱلنُّصُبِ وَأَن تَسْتَقْسِمُوا۟ بِٱلْأَزْلَٰمِ ۚ ذَٰلِكُمْ فِسْقٌ ۗ ٱلْيَوْمَ يَئِسَ ٱلَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا۟ مِن دِينِكُمْ فَلَا تَخْشَوْهُمْ وَٱخْشَوْنِ ۚ ٱلْيَوْمَ أَكْمَلْتُ لَكُمْ دِينَكُمْ وَأَتْمَمْتُ عَلَيْكُمْ نِعْمَتِى وَرَضِيتُ لَكُمُ ٱلْإِسْلَٰمَ دِينًا ۚ فَمَنِ ٱضْطُرَّ فِى مَخْمَصَةٍ غَيْرَ مُتَجَانِفٍ لِّإِثْمٍ ۙ فَإِنَّ ٱللَّهَ غَفُورٌ رَّحِيمٌ
2:174; 6:146.
5:91.
3:20, 86.
2:174; 6:146; 16:116.
اِكْمَالْ (Ikmal) (使…完美) 和 اِتْمَامْ (Itmam--------使…完整) 是动名词。第一个与质量有关而第二个与数量有关。第一个单词表明, «古兰经» 中体现的教义和律令以最完美的方式来影响人类身体、道德和精神的发展, 而第二个单词意指凡人类所需要的它无所不包。而且, 前一个单词与人类的身体方面即自我的外形有关, 而后一个关系到他们的精神即内在的自我。与安拉完美无缺的宗教和恩惠同时述及的是有关食物的法律。为的是指出食用合法的食物是形成良好品德的一种非常重要的基础。顺便说一下, 这是最后启示的一节经文。这节经文启示后仅82天, 穆圣就逝世了。
3:20, 86.
2:174; 6:146.
2:174; 6:146; 16:116.
Ikmal (perfecting) and Itmam (completing) are noun-infinitives, the first relating to quality and the second to quantity. The first word shows that doctrines and commandments affecting the physical, moral and spiritual development of man have been embodied in the Qur’an in their most perfect form; while the second signifies that nothing which was needed by man has been left out. Again, the former word pertains to commandments relating to the physical side of man or his external self, while the latter relates to his spiritual side or his inner self. The perfection and completion of God’s religion and favour have been mentioned side by side with the law relating to eatables in order to point out that the use of lawful and good food forms one of the very important bases of good morals which in turn provide a pedestal for spiritual progress. Incidentally, the verse was the last to be revealed, the Holy Prophet having died only 82 days after its revelation.
2:174; 6:146.
5:91.
3:20, 86.
2:174; 6:146; 16:116.
Important Words:
المیتة (an animal which dies of itself). Though generally speaking everything that is dead is میتة in its specific sense, the word signifies an animal that has died of itself without being properly slaughtered (Lane). See also 2:174.
المنخنقة (that which has been strangled) is derived from خنق. They say خنقه i.e. he squeezed his or its throat that he or it might die; he squeezed his or its throat so that he or it died; he strangled or throttled or choked him or it. اختنق or انخنقmeans, he or it became throttled or strangled or choked. شاة منخنقة means, a goat or sheep strangled or throttled (Lane).
الموقوذة (that which has been beaten to death) is derived from وقذه. They say وقذه i.e. he beat or struck him or it violently till he or it became relaxed and was at the point of death; he broke his or its skull, wounding the brain; he beat him or it till he or it died. شاة موقوذة means, a goat or sheep beaten to death either with a stick or staff or stones, etc. (Lane).
المتردیة (that which has been killed by a fall) is derived from ردی. They say ردی الرجل i.e. the man perished. رداه بحجر means, he threw stones at him and hit him. تردی means, he or it fell or tumbled down into a well or a pit. It also means, he or it fell down from a mountain, or a height and died. المتردیة means, that (a goat, etc.) which falls from a mountain or a height, or falls down a well, or a pit and dies (Lane).
النطیحة (that which has been gored to death) is derived from نطح. They say نطحه i.e. he (a ram, etc.) smote him or it with his horn. النطیحة means, a sheep or goat smitten with the horn and so killed (Lane).
ماذکیتم (that which you have properly slaughtered). ذکی (dhakka) is derived from ذکی (dhaka). They say ذکت النار i.e. the fire blazed or burned brightly. ذکت الارض means, the land was or became clean and pure. ذکی النار (dhakka) means, he made the fire blaze or burn brightly. ذکی العقل means, it (medicine, etc.) sharpened the intellect. ذکی الشاة means, he slaughtered the goat in the manner prescribed by the Law of Islam (Lane).
النصب (idols) is derived from نصب which means, he set up or he fixed. النصب according to some is singular, the plural of which is انصاب; and according to others, it is plural, of which the singular is نصاب. The word means, signs or marks set up to show the way; stones set up and worshipped to the exclusion of, or in preference to, God; anything that is so worshipped; stones which the pagan Arabs set to sacrifice or slay animals before them, the name of some deity being pronounced in the killing of such animals; idol or idols; but whereas idols were generally carved and had some form or shape, النصب were simple uncarved stones (Lane & Aqrab).
ازلام (divining arrows) is the plural of زلم and is derived from the verb زلم (zalama), meaning, he cut off the protruding part of a thing, such as the nose; he made his gift small in quantity as though he had cut off something from it. زلم السھم means, he cut or pared the arrow to make it proportionate and good-looking. زلم means, an arrow without a head and without feathers. ازلام (the plural of زلم) were those divining arrows by means of which pre-Islamic Arabs sought to know what was allotted to them. On some of these arrows the word "command" and on others "prohibition" were written, while others were left blank, and all these were kept together in a suitable vessel. When anyone wanted to do a certain thing or go on a journey, he would take out one of the arrows without looking at them and then act according to the instruction of "command" or "prohibition" as the case might be. If the blank arrow came out, the experiment was repeated, till an arrow bearing the word "command" or "prohibition" was taken out (Lane).
الیوم (this day) here really signifies "now". See 1:4.
مخمصة (hunger) is derived from مخمص. They say خمص البطن i.e. the belly was or became empty, i.e. hungry. خمصت القدم means, the foot rose from the ground or was hollow in the middle of the sole, so that it did not touch it. خمصه الجوع means, hunger rendered him lank in the belly. مخمصة therefore, means, emptiness of the belly; hunger (Lane & Aqrab).
Commentary:
This verse shows that the Quran does not consider the prosperity and predominance of Islam to be dependent on territorial conquest and the extension of material power, but on its being a perfect and complete religion. it draws the attention of Muslims to the fact that now that all the teachings needed for the moral and spiritual regeneration of man have been embodied in the Quran, it is up to them to win the premier place in the comity of nations by acting upon them and holding fast to them.
The words ikmal (perfecting) and itmam (completing) which are noun-infinitives from اکملت and اتممت (have I perfected and completed) occurring in the clause, This day have I perfected your religion for you and completed My favour upon you, are full of meaning and convey two different and distinct senses. The former, (i.e. perfection) relates to quality, and the latter, (i.e. completion) to quantity. The use of the word اکملت (I have perfected) with regard to the teaching of the Quran thus shows that doctrines and commandments affecting the physical, moral and spiritual development of man have been embodied in the Quran in their most perfect form; while the word اتممت (I have completed) shows that nothing which was needed by man has been left out. Again, the former, i.e. perfection, pertains to command-ments relating to the physical side of man or his external self, while the latter, i.e. completion, relates to his spiritual side or his inner self, viz. the completion of the spiritual blessings which follow the observance of the outward Law.
Thus, the verse hints that as the Divine Law has been perfected and completed in the Quran it shall not be superseded by any other Law. The Laws that preceded the Quran were meant for particular peoples and limited periods, being suited to their special requirements only. Similarly, the Prophets that preceded the Holy. Prophet of Islam were only sent to particular nations. This was quite in the fitness of things. The means of communication between different countries were then in a very undeveloped state and people living in one country knew little or nothing of the countries that lay far off from them. Moreover, nations of the earth were then in different stages of development, some being very backward and others only partially developed and the mind of man had not attained its full growth and development. Hence, the circumstances then obtaining required that separate Messengers be sent to separate nations who should give them such teachings as suited their particular needs and requirements. This state of things, however, was not to last forever, the Oneness of God presupposed oneness of mankind and it was quite natural that, when the God-given faculties of man became fully developed and the means of communication also improved so that intercourse between different nations became easier and more common, God should raise a Prophet for the whole of mankind and give him a perfect Law which should fulfil all the needs and meet all the problems of humanity
But the mere existence of a perfect Law cannot prevent the moral degeneration of humanity. So in spite of the presence of the Quran, it was necessary that heavenly Reformers should continue to appear in the world in times of degeneration, and, being inspired of God, should give new life to corrupt and degenerate humanity. In fact, the promise about the appearance of such Reformers is implied even in the words, This day have I completed My favour upon you, for if religion has been completed, it does not stand to reason that when mankind should consign God to oblivion and forget the object of their creation, God should make no provision for their regeneration. In that case, His favour upon them cannot be said to have been "completed". Thus, the very comple-tion of God’s favour upon Muslims requires that He should raise among them such Reformers as should breathe a new life into them, whenever their spiritual and moral degeneration demands it. Says the Holy Prophet, "God will raise among the Muslims at the head of each century a Reformer who would regenerate their religion for them" (Dawud, ch. on Malahim).
It may also be noted here that the perfection and completion of God’s religion and favour has been mentioned side by side with the law relating to eatables in order to point out that the use of lawful food forms one of the most important bases of good morals which in time provide a pedestal for spiritual progress.
a
2:174; 6:146.
b
5:91.
c
3:20, 86.
d
2:174; 6:146; 16:116.
370
اِكْمَالْ (Ikmal) (使…完美) 和 اِتْمَامْ (Itmam--------使…完整) 是动名词。第一个与质量有关而第二个与数量有关。第一个单词表明, «古兰经» 中体现的教义和律令以最完美的方式来影响人类身体、道德和精神的发展, 而第二个单词意指凡人类所需要的它无所不包。而且, 前一个单词与人类的身体方面即自我的外形有关, 而后一个关系到他们的精神即内在的自我。与安拉完美无缺的宗教和恩惠同时述及的是有关食物的法律。为的是指出食用合法的食物是形成良好品德的一种非常重要的基础。顺便说一下, 这是最后启示的一节经文。这节经文启示后仅82天, 穆圣就逝世了。
a
2:174; 6:146.
b
5:91.
c
3:20, 86.
d
2:174; 6:146; 16:116.
643
Important Words:
المیتة (an animal which dies of itself). Though generally speaking everything that is dead is میتة in its specific sense, the word signifies an animal that has died of itself without being properly slaughtered (Lane). See also 2:174.
المنخنقة (that which has been strangled) is derived from خنق. They say خنقه i.e. he squeezed his or its throat that he or it might die; he squeezed his or its throat so that he or it died; he strangled or throttled or choked him or it. اختنق or انخنقmeans, he or it became throttled or strangled or choked. شاة منخنقة means, a goat or sheep strangled or throttled (Lane).
الموقوذة (that which has been beaten to death) is derived from وقذه. They say وقذه i.e. he beat or struck him or it violently till he or it became relaxed and was at the point of death; he broke his or its skull, wounding the brain; he beat him or it till he or it died. شاة موقوذة means, a goat or sheep beaten to death either with a stick or staff or stones, etc. (Lane).
المتردیة (that which has been killed by a fall) is derived from ردی. They say ردی الرجل i.e. the man perished. رداه بحجر means, he threw stones at him and hit him. تردی means, he or it fell or tumbled down into a well or a pit. It also means, he or it fell down from a mountain, or a height and died. المتردیة means, that (a goat, etc.) which falls from a mountain or a height, or falls down a well, or a pit and dies (Lane).
النطیحة (that which has been gored to death) is derived from نطح. They say نطحه i.e. he (a ram, etc.) smote him or it with his horn. النطیحة means, a sheep or goat smitten with the horn and so killed (Lane).
ماذکیتم (that which you have properly slaughtered). ذکی (dhakka) is derived from ذکی (dhaka). They say ذکت النار i.e. the fire blazed or burned brightly. ذکت الارض means, the land was or became clean and pure. ذکی النار (dhakka) means, he made the fire blaze or burn brightly. ذکی العقل means, it (medicine, etc.) sharpened the intellect. ذکی الشاة means, he slaughtered the goat in the manner prescribed by the Law of Islam (Lane).
النصب (idols) is derived from نصب which means, he set up or he fixed. النصب according to some is singular, the plural of which is انصاب; and according to others, it is plural, of which the singular is نصاب. The word means, signs or marks set up to show the way; stones set up and worshipped to the exclusion of, or in preference to, God; anything that is so worshipped; stones which the pagan Arabs set to sacrifice or slay animals before them, the name of some deity being pronounced in the killing of such animals; idol or idols; but whereas idols were generally carved and had some form or shape, النصب were simple uncarved stones (Lane & Aqrab).
ازلام (divining arrows) is the plural of زلم and is derived from the verb زلم (zalama), meaning, he cut off the protruding part of a thing, such as the nose; he made his gift small in quantity as though he had cut off something from it. زلم السھم means, he cut or pared the arrow to make it proportionate and good-looking. زلم means, an arrow without a head and without feathers. ازلام (the plural of زلم) were those divining arrows by means of which pre-Islamic Arabs sought to know what was allotted to them. On some of these arrows the word "command" and on others "prohibition" were written, while others were left blank, and all these were kept together in a suitable vessel. When anyone wanted to do a certain thing or go on a journey, he would take out one of the arrows without looking at them and then act according to the instruction of "command" or "prohibition" as the case might be. If the blank arrow came out, the experiment was repeated, till an arrow bearing the word "command" or "prohibition" was taken out (Lane).
الیوم (this day) here really signifies "now". See 1:4.
مخمصة (hunger) is derived from مخمص. They say خمص البطن i.e. the belly was or became empty, i.e. hungry. خمصت القدم means, the foot rose from the ground or was hollow in the middle of the sole, so that it did not touch it. خمصه الجوع means, hunger rendered him lank in the belly. مخمصة therefore, means, emptiness of the belly; hunger (Lane & Aqrab).
Commentary:
This verse shows that the Quran does not consider the prosperity and predominance of Islam to be dependent on territorial conquest and the extension of material power, but on its being a perfect and complete religion. it draws the attention of Muslims to the fact that now that all the teachings needed for the moral and spiritual regeneration of man have been embodied in the Quran, it is up to them to win the premier place in the comity of nations by acting upon them and holding fast to them.
The words ikmal (perfecting) and itmam (completing) which are noun-infinitives from اکملت and اتممت (have I perfected and completed) occurring in the clause, This day have I perfected your religion for you and completed My favour upon you, are full of meaning and convey two different and distinct senses. The former, (i.e. perfection) relates to quality, and the latter, (i.e. completion) to quantity. The use of the word اکملت (I have perfected) with regard to the teaching of the Quran thus shows that doctrines and commandments affecting the physical, moral and spiritual development of man have been embodied in the Quran in their most perfect form; while the word اتممت (I have completed) shows that nothing which was needed by man has been left out. Again, the former, i.e. perfection, pertains to command-ments relating to the physical side of man or his external self, while the latter, i.e. completion, relates to his spiritual side or his inner self, viz. the completion of the spiritual blessings which follow the observance of the outward Law.
Thus, the verse hints that as the Divine Law has been perfected and completed in the Quran it shall not be superseded by any other Law. The Laws that preceded the Quran were meant for particular peoples and limited periods, being suited to their special requirements only. Similarly, the Prophets that preceded the Holy. Prophet of Islam were only sent to particular nations. This was quite in the fitness of things. The means of communication between different countries were then in a very undeveloped state and people living in one country knew little or nothing of the countries that lay far off from them. Moreover, nations of the earth were then in different stages of development, some being very backward and others only partially developed and the mind of man had not attained its full growth and development. Hence, the circumstances then obtaining required that separate Messengers be sent to separate nations who should give them such teachings as suited their particular needs and requirements. This state of things, however, was not to last forever, the Oneness of God presupposed oneness of mankind and it was quite natural that, when the God-given faculties of man became fully developed and the means of communication also improved so that intercourse between different nations became easier and more common, God should raise a Prophet for the whole of mankind and give him a perfect Law which should fulfil all the needs and meet all the problems of humanity
But the mere existence of a perfect Law cannot prevent the moral degeneration of humanity. So in spite of the presence of the Quran, it was necessary that heavenly Reformers should continue to appear in the world in times of degeneration, and, being inspired of God, should give new life to corrupt and degenerate humanity. In fact, the promise about the appearance of such Reformers is implied even in the words, This day have I completed My favour upon you, for if religion has been completed, it does not stand to reason that when mankind should consign God to oblivion and forget the object of their creation, God should make no provision for their regeneration. In that case, His favour upon them cannot be said to have been "completed". Thus, the very comple-tion of God’s favour upon Muslims requires that He should raise among them such Reformers as should breathe a new life into them, whenever their spiritual and moral degeneration demands it. Says the Holy Prophet, "God will raise among the Muslims at the head of each century a Reformer who would regenerate their religion for them" (Dawud, ch. on Malahim).
It may also be noted here that the perfection and completion of God’s religion and favour has been mentioned side by side with the law relating to eatables in order to point out that the use of lawful food forms one of the most important bases of good morals which in time provide a pedestal for spiritual progress.
a
5:91.b
3:20, 86.
c
2:174; 6:146.
d
2:174; 6:146; 16:116.
721
Ikmal (perfecting) and Itmam (completing) are noun-infinitives, the first relating to quality and the second to quantity. The first word shows that doctrines and commandments affecting the physical, moral and spiritual development of man have been embodied in the Qur’an in their most perfect form; while the second signifies that nothing which was needed by man has been left out. Again, the former word pertains to commandments relating to the physical side of man or his external self, while the latter relates to his spiritual side or his inner self. The perfection and completion of God’s religion and favour have been mentioned side by side with the law relating to eatables in order to point out that the use of lawful and good food forms one of the very important bases of good morals which in turn provide a pedestal for spiritual progress. Incidentally, the verse was the last to be revealed, the Holy Prophet having died only 82 days after its revelation.
فَبِمَا نَقْضِهِم مِّيثَٰقَهُمْ لَعَنَّٰهُمْ وَجَعَلْنَا قُلُوبَهُمْ قَٰسِيَةً ۖ يُحَرِّفُونَ ٱلْكَلِمَ عَن مَّوَاضِعِهِۦ ۙ وَنَسُوا۟ حَظًّا مِّمَّا ذُكِّرُوا۟ بِهِۦ ۚ وَلَا تَزَالُ تَطَّلِعُ عَلَىٰ خَآئِنَةٍ مِّنْهُمْ إِلَّا قَلِيلًا مِّنْهُمْ ۖ فَٱعْفُ عَنْهُمْ وَٱصْفَحْ ۚ إِنَّ ٱللَّهَ يُحِبُّ ٱلْمُحْسِنِينَ
فاء کا ترجمہ اور بھی ہوتا ہے۔
The verse contains a very apt description of the Jewish people.
4:156.
2:76; 3:79; 4:47; 5:42
Important Words:
قاسیة (hardened) is derived from قسی which means: (1) it was or became hardened; (2) it became darkened (Aqrab). Thus, the words جعلنا قلوبھم قاسیة rendered as, We have hardened their hearts, may also mean, We have made their hearts devoid of light.
نسوا (have forgotten) is derived from نسی meaning, he forgot, or he abandoned or ceased acting on (Aqrab).
خائنة (treachery) is both the noun-infinitive and the active participle from خان i.e. he acted unfaithfully or treacherously. They say خانه i.e. he was unfaithful to the confidence or trust that he (the other party) reposed in him; he was treacherous or perfidious to him. خائنة means: (1) treachery, perfidiousness or unfaithfulness; (2) one who is very treacherous, unfaithful or perfidious. In the latter sense the word خائنة is the intensive form of خائن. The expression خائنة الاعین used elsewhere in the Quran (40:20) means, a surreptitious or intentional look at a thing at which it is not allowable to look; or the looking with a look that induces suspicion or evil opinion; or the making of a sign with the eye to indicate a thing that one conceals in the mind; or as some say, the contracting of the eye by way of making an obscure indication (Lane). The word خائنة may also be taken to have been used as an adjective qualifying the noun امة (people or party) which may be taken to be understood before it.
Commentary:
The words, They pervert the words from their proper places, may mean: (1) they tamper with the text of the Book, or (2) they distort the true meaning of the text.
The words نسواحظا rendered as they have forgotten a good part, may also be translated as, "they have abandoned and ceased to act on a goodly part".
1
فاء کا ترجمہ اور بھی ہوتا ہے۔
b
4:156.
c
2:76; 3:79; 4:47; 5:42
651
Important Words:
قاسیة (hardened) is derived from قسی which means: (1) it was or became hardened; (2) it became darkened (Aqrab). Thus, the words جعلنا قلوبھم قاسیة rendered as, We have hardened their hearts, may also mean, We have made their hearts devoid of light.
نسوا (have forgotten) is derived from نسی meaning, he forgot, or he abandoned or ceased acting on (Aqrab).
خائنة (treachery) is both the noun-infinitive and the active participle from خان i.e. he acted unfaithfully or treacherously. They say خانه i.e. he was unfaithful to the confidence or trust that he (the other party) reposed in him; he was treacherous or perfidious to him. خائنة means: (1) treachery, perfidiousness or unfaithfulness; (2) one who is very treacherous, unfaithful or perfidious. In the latter sense the word خائنة is the intensive form of خائن. The expression خائنة الاعین used elsewhere in the Quran (40:20) means, a surreptitious or intentional look at a thing at which it is not allowable to look; or the looking with a look that induces suspicion or evil opinion; or the making of a sign with the eye to indicate a thing that one conceals in the mind; or as some say, the contracting of the eye by way of making an obscure indication (Lane). The word خائنة may also be taken to have been used as an adjective qualifying the noun امة (people or party) which may be taken to be understood before it.
Commentary:
The words, They pervert the words from their proper places, may mean: (1) they tamper with the text of the Book, or (2) they distort the true meaning of the text.
The words نسواحظا rendered as they have forgotten a good part, may also be translated as, "they have abandoned and ceased to act on a goodly part".
727B
The verse contains a very apt description of the Jewish people.