ROOT ا ن ف
2 verses • 3 derived words
📖 Lane's Lexicon
Classical definitions for root انف
Morphology Tree
Lemmas and their derived stems found in the Quran.
Occurrences in Quran
Found 2 verses containing words derived from "A n f".
وَكَتَبْنَا عَلَيْهِمْ فِيهَآ أَنَّ ٱلنَّفْسَ بِٱلنَّفْسِ وَٱلْعَيْنَ بِٱلْعَيْنِ وَٱلْأَنفَ بِٱلْأَنفِ وَٱلْأُذُنَ بِٱلْأُذُنِ وَٱلسِّنَّ بِٱلسِّنِّ وَٱلْجُرُوحَ قِصَاصٌ ۚ فَمَن تَصَدَّقَ بِهِۦ فَهُوَ كَفَّارَةٌ لَّهُۥ ۚ وَمَن لَّمْ يَحْكُم بِمَآ أَنزَلَ ٱللَّهُ فَأُو۟لَٰٓئِكَ هُمُ ٱلظَّٰلِمُونَ
تورات میں لکھا ہے ’’اور جو کوئی کسی آدمی کو مار ڈالے وہ ضرور جان سے مارا جائے۔ اور اگر کوئی شخص اپنے ہمسایہ کو عیب دار بنادے تو جیسا اس نے کیا ویسا ہی اس سے کیا جائے یعنی عضو توڑنے کے بدلے عضو توڑنا ہو اور آنکھ کے بدلے آنکھ اور دانت کے بدلے دانت‘‘۔ (پرانا عہدنامہ احبار باب۲۴ آیت۱۹‘۲۰)
5:45, 48.
See Exod. 21:23-25 and Leviticus 24: 19-21. The words, and whoso waives the right thereto, constitute evidence of the fact that teaching about forgiveness of which Christians boast so much was no monopoly of the Gospels. It also formed part of the teaching of Moses though Moses’s teaching lays stress on retaliation, as does that of Jesus on forgiveness and non-resistance.
5:45, 48.
Commentary:
As the law mentioned in this verse is clearly stated to have belonged to the Torah, though it is not to be found in the Bible as we now have it, the words, And whoso waives the right thereto, constitute clear evidence of the fact that the teaching about forgiveness of which Christians boast so much was no monopoly of the Gospels. It was contained in the Torah also, though at the same time there can be no denying the fact that the teachings of Moses lay extra stress on retaliation, as do those of Jesus on forgiveness and non-resistance.
a
5:45, 48.
378
见 «出埃及记» 21:23-25和 «利未记» 24:19-21。“凡放弃这个权利的” 这些字, 指证了一个事实, 即基督徒常自我炫耀的宽恕之道, 并非 «新约书» 所独有。虽然穆撒的教导强调报复, 但是, 正好像伊撒关于宽恕和不抵抗的教导所做的那样, 宽恕也是穆撒教导的一部分。
2
تورات میں لکھا ہے ’’اور جو کوئی کسی آدمی کو مار ڈالے وہ ضرور جان سے مارا جائے۔ اور اگر کوئی شخص اپنے ہمسایہ کو عیب دار بنادے تو جیسا اس نے کیا ویسا ہی اس سے کیا جائے یعنی عضو توڑنے کے بدلے عضو توڑنا ہو اور آنکھ کے بدلے آنکھ اور دانت کے بدلے دانت‘‘۔ (پرانا عہدنامہ احبار باب۲۴ آیت۱۹‘۲۰)
a
5:45, 48.
677
Commentary:
As the law mentioned in this verse is clearly stated to have belonged to the Torah, though it is not to be found in the Bible as we now have it, the words, And whoso waives the right thereto, constitute clear evidence of the fact that the teaching about forgiveness of which Christians boast so much was no monopoly of the Gospels. It was contained in the Torah also, though at the same time there can be no denying the fact that the teachings of Moses lay extra stress on retaliation, as do those of Jesus on forgiveness and non-resistance.
c
5:45, 48.
751
See Exod. 21:23-25 and Leviticus 24: 19-21. The words, and whoso waives the right thereto, constitute evidence of the fact that teaching about forgiveness of which Christians boast so much was no monopoly of the Gospels. It also formed part of the teaching of Moses though Moses’s teaching lays stress on retaliation, as does that of Jesus on forgiveness and non-resistance.
وَمِنْهُم مَّن يَسْتَمِعُ إِلَيْكَ حَتَّىٰٓ إِذَا خَرَجُوا۟ مِنْ عِندِكَ قَالُوا۟ لِلَّذِينَ أُوتُوا۟ ٱلْعِلْمَ مَاذَا قَالَ ءَانِفًا ۚ أُو۟لَٰٓئِكَ ٱلَّذِينَ طَبَعَ ٱللَّهُ عَلَىٰ قُلُوبِهِمْ وَٱتَّبَعُوٓا۟ أَهْوَآءَهُمْ
16:109; 63:4.
قرآن مجید میں حَتّٰی کا لفظ ہے جو ابتدائیہ بھی ہوتا ہے اور اس کے معنے واؤ کے بھی ہوتے ہیں۔ اسی کے مطابق ہم نے ’’مگر‘‘ کا ترجمہ کیا ہے (اقرب)
16:109; 63:4.
A hypocrite being a double-faced person generally uses language susceptible of double meaning. This he does in order to extricate himself from an awkward position, so that, should one construction of his speech land him in trouble, he might be able to avoid its consequences by putting quite a different construction on it. The above expression is an appropriate instance of the equivocal language used by the Hypocrites of Medina. If one of them, after a meeting with the Holy Prophet, happened to meet a Muslim, he would say, 'What was it that the Prophet said just now,' meaning what beautiful and highly useful things the Prophet had said. But if he chanced to meet a Hypocrite like himself he would use the same expression but meaning 'what nonsense talk the Prophet had indulged in.'
9:93; 16:109; 63:4.
Commentary:
As the principal subject of the Surah is war, it naturally deals with three categories of men, viz. true believers, firm disbelievers and the hypocrites who vacillate between faith and disbelief. The verse under comment deals with the third category of men.
The expression ما ذا قال آنفا has a twofold meaning. A hypocrite being a double-faced person generally uses language susceptible of double meaning. This he does in order to extricate himself from an awkward position, wherein, should one construction of his speech land him in trouble, he might be able to avoid that consequence by putting quite a different construction on it. The above expression is an appropriate instance of the equivocal language used by the hypocrites of Medina. If one of them, after a meeting with the Prophet, happened to meet a Muslim, he would say "What was it that he said just now," meaning, what beautiful and highly useful things had the Prophet said. But if he chanced to meet a hypocrite like himself he would use the same expression but meaning "what non sense talk had the Prophet indulged in."
a
16:109; 63:4.
1
قرآن مجید میں حَتّٰی کا لفظ ہے جو ابتدائیہ بھی ہوتا ہے اور اس کے معنے واؤ کے بھی ہوتے ہیں۔ اسی کے مطابق ہم نے ’’مگر‘‘ کا ترجمہ کیا ہے (اقرب)
a
9:93; 16:109; 63:4.
3801
Commentary:
As the principal subject of the Surah is war, it naturally deals with three categories of men, viz. true believers, firm disbelievers and the hypocrites who vacillate between faith and disbelief. The verse under comment deals with the third category of men.
The expression ما ذا قال آنفا has a twofold meaning. A hypocrite being a double-faced person generally uses language susceptible of double meaning. This he does in order to extricate himself from an awkward position, wherein, should one construction of his speech land him in trouble, he might be able to avoid that consequence by putting quite a different construction on it. The above expression is an appropriate instance of the equivocal language used by the hypocrites of Medina. If one of them, after a meeting with the Prophet, happened to meet a Muslim, he would say "What was it that he said just now," meaning, what beautiful and highly useful things had the Prophet said. But if he chanced to meet a hypocrite like himself he would use the same expression but meaning "what non sense talk had the Prophet indulged in."
a
16:109; 63:4.
2749
A hypocrite being a double-faced person generally uses language susceptible of double meaning. This he does in order to extricate himself from an awkward position, so that, should one construction of his speech land him in trouble, he might be able to avoid its consequences by putting quite a different construction on it. The above expression is an appropriate instance of the equivocal language used by the Hypocrites of Medina. If one of them, after a meeting with the Holy Prophet, happened to meet a Muslim, he would say, 'What was it that the Prophet said just now,' meaning what beautiful and highly useful things the Prophet had said. But if he chanced to meet a Hypocrite like himself he would use the same expression but meaning 'what nonsense talk the Prophet had indulged in.'