ROOT ن ف س
268 verses • 73 derived words
📖 Lane's Lexicon
Classical definitions for root نفس
Morphology Tree
Lemmas and their derived stems found in the Quran.
Occurrences in Quran
Found 268 verses containing words derived from "n f s".
يُخَٰدِعُونَ ٱللَّهَ وَٱلَّذِينَ ءَامَنُوا۟ وَمَا يَخْدَعُونَ إِلَّآ أَنفُسَهُمْ وَمَا يَشْعُرُونَ
’’مگر‘‘ کا لفظ اس جگہ واؤ کا ترجمہ ہے۔ اس جگہ ’’اور‘‘ کا لفظ صحیح مفہوم ظاہرنہیں کرتا۔ نُور اللّغات جو اردو کی لغت کی کتاب ہے اُس میں لکھا ہے کہ ’’مگر‘‘ کے معنے ’’بایں ہمہ‘‘ کے ہوتے ہیں اور یہی معنے اس جگہ واؤ کے ہیں۔ پس ہم نے اس کا ترجمہ لغتِ اردو کے مطابق ’’مگر‘‘ کیا ہے۔
یہ لکیر ـــــ اس امر کی علامت ہے کہ اگلا حصہ گو آیت کے ساتھ شامل ہے مگر مفہوم میں وہ الگ جملہ کی حیثیت رکھتا ہے۔
4:143.
Khada‘a-hu means, he sought or desired to deceive him but did not succeed in his attempt. Khada‘a-hu means, he succeeded in his attempt to deceive him; he forsook him or it (Baqa’). The former word is used about a man when he has not attained his desire and the latter when he has attained it (Lane).
4:143.
Important Words:
یخادعون (would deceive) is derived from خادع and یخدعون (deceive) is derived from خدع. They say خدعه i.e. he deceived him; he made a show of what he was not; he tried to harm him in a way unknown to the latter. خادعه is sometimes loosely used to give the same meaning as خدع but in reality it is different. خادع is used when the deceiver is not successful in his attempt at deception and خدع is used when the party intended to be deceived actually falls a victim to the deception (Baqa & Aqrab). This distinction is corroborated by Lane who says, "One says of a man خادع when he has not attained his desire, and خدع when he has attained his desire." The word خادع also means: (1) he forsook or he abandoned; (2) it (the market) was variable. They say سوق خادعة i.e. a market varying in its state, at one time brisk, at another dull in respect of traffic (Lane). Following this signification یخادعون الله would mean (1) they forsake and abandon God; and (2) they are variable with respect to Allah, believing at one time and disbelieving at another.
یشعرون (they perceive) is derived from شعر. They say شعرہ meaning, he perceived it; he came to know of it; he understood it; he felt it (Aqrab). شعور is the faculty of insight not depending upon the senses for its exercise, something that rises from within. In the verse the word یشعرون has been used to signify that though the disease of the hypocrites lies in their hearts, yet their insight gives them no warning.
Commentary:
The verse makes it clear that effective faith is based upon truth and sincerity. Faith not so based amounts to deception and God cannot be deceived.
The verse has given rise to some objections: 1. How can it be possible for any man to deceive God? 2. The word یخادعون is derived from the verb خادع in the measure of مفاعلة which denotes two parties mutually engaged in the same operation. The words یخادعون الله would, therefore, mean that hypocrites and God are both engaged in deceiving each other.
In answer to the first objection it may be said that the word used here is خادع and not خدع, the former, as explained above, signifying only an attempt at deception and not actual deception. The objection is, therefore, without foundation.
The second objection also does not hold good. The measure مفاعلة does not always carry the sense of mutual participation. Sometimes it signifies only one of the parties so engaged. For example, in the sentence عاقبت اللص meaning, "I punished the thief" the word عاقبت belongs to the measure of مفاعلة, yet here it does not denote mutual participation in the act. It only means, I punished the thief.
A note on the hypocrites will not be out of place here. Before the coming of Islam into Medina, the city’s inhabitants included two pagan Arab tribes known as Aus and Khazraj, and three Jewish tribes named Banu Quraizah, Banu Nadirand Banu Qainuqa‘. The two pagan tribes outnumbered the Jews but were inferior to them in wealth and education. The Jews thus exercised great influence over the pagans of Medina. In order to further increase their influence, they encouraged internecine feuds among their idolatrous neighbours. A few years before the rise of Islam the pagan tribes of Medina, realizing how they had been duped, decided to organize themselves under a duly elected king. Their choice fell upon one ‘Abdullah bin Ubayy, chief of the tribe of Khazraj, and they were preparing for his coronation when news came to them of the rise of Islam in Mecca. Events suddenly began to take a different turn. The idolatrous tribes of Ausand Khazraj became attracted towards Islam and began to embrace the new faith in large numbers, believing that the solution of their difficulties lay not in electing a king but in accepting Islam. Soon after the Holy Prophet migrated to Medina, the tide of enthusiasm became irresistible; and ‘Abdullah bin Ubayy and his party felt it wise to follow their tribesmen into the new faith. They did not realize at the time that the establishment of Islam would mean the frustration of their own hopes. When, however, the power of Islam became established, they realized that they had put an end to their hopes. This realization destroyed any attachment they had for Islam. Instead, they developed actual hostility towards it. However, as a preponderant majority of their tribesmen had already become zealous followers of Islam, they could not openly leave its fold. Thus came into being the hypocrites—a party professing Islam outwardly but hostile to it at heart. Not strong enough to oppose Islam openly, they naturally thought of entering into a secret alliance with the Jews in order to injure the cause of Islam. In the beginning they had nothing to do with the Meccans for whom they bore a long-standing tribal antipathy. After the Battle of Uhud, however, at the instigation of the Jews and prompted by their own jealousy, they forgot their enmity and began to secretly conspire with the Quraish of Mecca, keeping up a show of attachment for Islam. Their leader ‘Abdullah continued to accompany the Holy Prophet in many of his expeditions.
In the Quran this party of hypocrites is mentioned in several places. Their last act of hostility towards Islam was their attempt, after the Fall of Mecca, to conspire with the Byzantine Christian power. The occasion was the Tabuk expedition led by the Holy Prophet in the ninth year of Hijrah. The attempt met with discomfiture. It was probably the shock of its failure that caused, only two months later, the death of ‘Abdullah bin Ubayy. The party then broke up. Some of its members entered Islam sincerely; others ended their days in obscurity.
d
4:143
29
خَادَعَهٗ (Khada‘a-hu) 意为:他试图或极想欺瞒他, 但他的企图没能成功。خَدَعَهٗ 意为:他想欺瞒他的企图成功了; 他摒绝了他或它 (بَقَا--------Baqa)。前者用于一个人没有达到他的愿望而后者用于他达到了他的愿望 (Lane)。
1
’’مگر‘‘ کا لفظ اس جگہ واؤ کا ترجمہ ہے۔ اس جگہ ’’اور‘‘ کا لفظ صحیح مفہوم ظاہرنہیں کرتا۔ نُور اللّغات جو اردو کی لغت کی کتاب ہے اُس میں لکھا ہے کہ ’’مگر‘‘ کے معنے ’’بایں ہمہ‘‘ کے ہوتے ہیں اور یہی معنے اس جگہ واؤ کے ہیں۔ پس ہم نے اس کا ترجمہ لغتِ اردو کے مطابق ’’مگر‘‘ کیا ہے۔
2
یہ لکیر ـــــ اس امر کی علامت ہے کہ اگلا حصہ گو آیت کے ساتھ شامل ہے مگر مفہوم میں وہ الگ جملہ کی حیثیت رکھتا ہے۔
a
4:143.
16
Important Words:
یخادعون (would deceive) is derived from خادع and یخدعون (deceive) is derived from خدع. They say خدعه i.e. he deceived him; he made a show of what he was not; he tried to harm him in a way unknown to the latter. خادعه is sometimes loosely used to give the same meaning as خدع but in reality it is different. خادع is used when the deceiver is not successful in his attempt at deception and خدع is used when the party intended to be deceived actually falls a victim to the deception (Baqa & Aqrab). This distinction is corroborated by Lane who says, "One says of a man خادع when he has not attained his desire, and خدع when he has attained his desire." The word خادع also means: (1) he forsook or he abandoned; (2) it (the market) was variable. They say سوق خادعة i.e. a market varying in its state, at one time brisk, at another dull in respect of traffic (Lane). Following this signification یخادعون الله would mean (1) they forsake and abandon God; and (2) they are variable with respect to Allah, believing at one time and disbelieving at another.
یشعرون (they perceive) is derived from شعر. They say شعرہ meaning, he perceived it; he came to know of it; he understood it; he felt it (Aqrab). شعور is the faculty of insight not depending upon the senses for its exercise, something that rises from within. In the verse the word یشعرون has been used to signify that though the disease of the hypocrites lies in their hearts, yet their insight gives them no warning.
Commentary:
The verse makes it clear that effective faith is based upon truth and sincerity. Faith not so based amounts to deception and God cannot be deceived.
The verse has given rise to some objections: 1. How can it be possible for any man to deceive God? 2. The word یخادعون is derived from the verb خادع in the measure of مفاعلة which denotes two parties mutually engaged in the same operation. The words یخادعون الله would, therefore, mean that hypocrites and God are both engaged in deceiving each other.
In answer to the first objection it may be said that the word used here is خادع and not خدع, the former, as explained above, signifying only an attempt at deception and not actual deception. The objection is, therefore, without foundation.
The second objection also does not hold good. The measure مفاعلة does not always carry the sense of mutual participation. Sometimes it signifies only one of the parties so engaged. For example, in the sentence عاقبت اللص meaning, "I punished the thief" the word عاقبت belongs to the measure of مفاعلة, yet here it does not denote mutual participation in the act. It only means, I punished the thief.
A note on the hypocrites will not be out of place here. Before the coming of Islam into Medina, the city’s inhabitants included two pagan Arab tribes known as Aus and Khazraj, and three Jewish tribes named Banu Quraizah, Banu Nadirand Banu Qainuqa‘. The two pagan tribes outnumbered the Jews but were inferior to them in wealth and education. The Jews thus exercised great influence over the pagans of Medina. In order to further increase their influence, they encouraged internecine feuds among their idolatrous neighbours. A few years before the rise of Islam the pagan tribes of Medina, realizing how they had been duped, decided to organize themselves under a duly elected king. Their choice fell upon one ‘Abdullah bin Ubayy, chief of the tribe of Khazraj, and they were preparing for his coronation when news came to them of the rise of Islam in Mecca. Events suddenly began to take a different turn. The idolatrous tribes of Ausand Khazraj became attracted towards Islam and began to embrace the new faith in large numbers, believing that the solution of their difficulties lay not in electing a king but in accepting Islam. Soon after the Holy Prophet migrated to Medina, the tide of enthusiasm became irresistible; and ‘Abdullah bin Ubayy and his party felt it wise to follow their tribesmen into the new faith. They did not realize at the time that the establishment of Islam would mean the frustration of their own hopes. When, however, the power of Islam became established, they realized that they had put an end to their hopes. This realization destroyed any attachment they had for Islam. Instead, they developed actual hostility towards it. However, as a preponderant majority of their tribesmen had already become zealous followers of Islam, they could not openly leave its fold. Thus came into being the hypocrites—a party professing Islam outwardly but hostile to it at heart. Not strong enough to oppose Islam openly, they naturally thought of entering into a secret alliance with the Jews in order to injure the cause of Islam. In the beginning they had nothing to do with the Meccans for whom they bore a long-standing tribal antipathy. After the Battle of Uhud, however, at the instigation of the Jews and prompted by their own jealousy, they forgot their enmity and began to secretly conspire with the Quraish of Mecca, keeping up a show of attachment for Islam. Their leader ‘Abdullah continued to accompany the Holy Prophet in many of his expeditions.
In the Quran this party of hypocrites is mentioned in several places. Their last act of hostility towards Islam was their attempt, after the Fall of Mecca, to conspire with the Byzantine Christian power. The occasion was the Tabuk expedition led by the Holy Prophet in the ninth year of Hijrah. The attempt met with discomfiture. It was probably the shock of its failure that caused, only two months later, the death of ‘Abdullah bin Ubayy. The party then broke up. Some of its members entered Islam sincerely; others ended their days in obscurity.
b
4:143.
29
Khada‘a-hu means, he sought or desired to deceive him but did not succeed in his attempt. Khada‘a-hu means, he succeeded in his attempt to deceive him; he forsook him or it (Baqa’). The former word is used about a man when he has not attained his desire and the latter when he has attained it (Lane).
۞ أَتَأْمُرُونَ ٱلنَّاسَ بِٱلْبِرِّ وَتَنسَوْنَ أَنفُسَكُمْ وَأَنتُمْ تَتْلُونَ ٱلْكِتَٰبَ ۚ أَفَلَا تَعْقِلُونَ
26:227; 61:3-4.
26:227; 61:3-4.
Birr (good) means, behaving benevolently towards relations and others; truthfulness; fidelity; righteousness; obedience to God (Aqrab). The word also means extensive goodness or beneficence (Mufradat).
'Book' here refers to the Bible, but the clause, while you read the Book, does not imply that all the contents of the Bible have been accepted as true.
26:227; 61:3, 4.
Important Words:
تنسون (forget) is derived from نسی meaning: (1) he forgot; (2) he ignored; (3) he left off a thing (Aqrab).
تعقلون (you understand) is derived from عقل meaning: (1) he understood; (2) he realized his mistake. عقل الغلام means, the boy reached the age of puberty. عقل البعیر means, he tied up the camel with a piece of rope. Thus عقل also embodies the sense of restraining (Aqrab).
بر (good) means, acting well towards relations and others; truthfulness; fidelity; righteousness; obedience; obedience to God (Aqrab). It also means, extensive goodness or beneficence (Mufradat).
Commentary:
The Quran questions the Jews, as if saying: Do you enjoin men to practise extensive beneficence, to deal kindly with one another, to be truthful, to act righteously and to serve and obey God, yet you neglect your own selves, while you claim to read the Book sent by God? Again, your Book contains prophecies concerning the Holy Prophet of Islam, yet you do not accept him. Thus you break a great commandment of the Lord but bid others to observe lesser commandments. Will you not then understand? The word 'Book' here refers to the Bible, but the clause, while you read the Book, does not imply that all the contents of the Bible have been admitted to be true and indisputable. The words have been used with the object of bringing home to the Jews the fact that while they think they are the People of the Book, they behave like ignorant men. Should the People of the Book behave as they behave?
The words, do you enjoin others to do what is good and forget your own selves, may be interpreted in another way also. As explained under Important Words, the word means, acting well towards relations. The Jews are thus invited to ponder over the fact whether they have acted well towards their brethren, the Ishmaelites? They went about enjoining others to act kindly towards relations but for more than two thousand years they themselves acted most shamefully towards their own kinsmen, and their rejection of the Holy Prophet was also due to the jealousy they bore towards the house of Ishmael.
a
26:227; 61:3-4.
a
26:227; 61:3, 4.
51
Important Words:
تنسون (forget) is derived from نسی meaning: (1) he forgot; (2) he ignored; (3) he left off a thing (Aqrab).
تعقلون (you understand) is derived from عقل meaning: (1) he understood; (2) he realized his mistake. عقل الغلام means, the boy reached the age of puberty. عقل البعیر means, he tied up the camel with a piece of rope. Thus عقل also embodies the sense of restraining (Aqrab).
بر (good) means, acting well towards relations and others; truthfulness; fidelity; righteousness; obedience; obedience to God (Aqrab). It also means, extensive goodness or beneficence (Mufradat).
Commentary:
The Quran questions the Jews, as if saying: Do you enjoin men to practise extensive beneficence, to deal kindly with one another, to be truthful, to act righteously and to serve and obey God, yet you neglect your own selves, while you claim to read the Book sent by God? Again, your Book contains prophecies concerning the Holy Prophet of Islam, yet you do not accept him. Thus you break a great commandment of the Lord but bid others to observe lesser commandments. Will you not then understand? The word 'Book' here refers to the Bible, but the clause, while you read the Book, does not imply that all the contents of the Bible have been admitted to be true and indisputable. The words have been used with the object of bringing home to the Jews the fact that while they think they are the People of the Book, they behave like ignorant men. Should the People of the Book behave as they behave?
The words, do you enjoin others to do what is good and forget your own selves, may be interpreted in another way also. As explained under Important Words, the word means, acting well towards relations. The Jews are thus invited to ponder over the fact whether they have acted well towards their brethren, the Ishmaelites? They went about enjoining others to act kindly towards relations but for more than two thousand years they themselves acted most shamefully towards their own kinsmen, and their rejection of the Holy Prophet was also due to the jealousy they bore towards the house of Ishmael.
e
26:227; 61:3-4.
80
Birr (good) means, behaving benevolently towards relations and others; truthfulness; fidelity; righteousness; obedience to God (Aqrab). The word also means extensive goodness or beneficence (Mufradat).
81
'Book' here refers to the Bible, but the clause, while you read the Book, does not imply that all the contents of the Bible have been accepted as true.
وَٱتَّقُوا۟ يَوْمًا لَّا تَجْزِى نَفْسٌ عَن نَّفْسٍ شَيْـًٔا وَلَا يُقْبَلُ مِنْهَا شَفَٰعَةٌ وَلَا يُؤْخَذُ مِنْهَا عَدْلٌ وَلَا هُمْ يُنصَرُونَ
2:124, 256; 19:88; 20:110; 21:29; 34:24; 39:45; 43:87; 53:27; 74:49.
2:124; 31:34; 82:20.
شَفَاعَة (Shafa‘ah, 说情), 源自 شَفَعَ (Shafa‘a) 其意思是, 他提供源出于一单独的东西与另一东西在一起, 或者把一个单独的东西与它的同类相联系 (مُفْرَدَات, Mufradat)。因此这词具有相象或类似的意义; 此词也意味着为某人说情或祈祷, 以便他得到恩惠, 他的罪恶可以根据他与说情人的关系而被饶恕, 这里还有这样的含意, 说情人的地位高于他为之说情的人的地位, 而且还与他说情的人有着深厚的关系 (مُفْرَدَات和لِسَانْ)。شَفَاعَة (说情) 要具有下列几种条件: (1) 说情者一定要与他希望向其说情而得到其恩惠的人有特别关系, 因为没有这样的关系, 他既不敢前去说情, 也不可能得到说情的效果。 (2) 要人说情的人一定与说情者具有真诚的关系, 因为后者要不是和前者有着这种真诚的关系, 谁也不愿为人去说情。 (3) 寻求说情而能得到同意的人, 一般必须是好人, 曾经作出忠诚的努力以赢得安拉的喜悦, (21:29) 只是由于他一时的软弱而陷入罪恶。 (4) 只有在得到安拉的特殊许可下才能进行说情。 (2:256; 10:4) شَفَاعَة (Shafa‘ah) 正如伊斯兰教所表明的, 实际上只是悔改的另一种形式, 因为 تَوْبَة (Taubah, 悔改) 是重修旧好的意思, 或加强松散关系的意思。因此, 虽然悔悟之门由于死亡而闭上了, 但 شَفَاعَة 即悔悟的另一种形式之门依然开着。شَفَاعَة 是安拉的仁慈显现的一种途径, 安拉不是法官而是主宰, 所以没有什么可以阻挡他对他所喜悦的人施行仁慈。
2:124, 256; 19:88; 20:110; 21:29; 34:24; 39:45; 43:87; 53:27; 74:49.
2:124; 31:34; 82:20.
Shafa‘ah is derived from Shafa‘a which means, he provided a thing which was alone with another; joined a thing to its like (Mufradat). Thus the word has the significance of likeness or similarity; also it means, interceding or praying for a person that he may be shown favour and his sins may be passed over on the ground that he is connected with the intercessor, it being also implied that the petitioner is a person of higher position than the one for whom he pleads and also has deep connection with the person with whom he intercedes (Mufradat & Lisan). Shafa‘ah (intercession) is governed by the following conditions: (1) He who intercedes must have a special connection with the person with whom he wishes to intercede and enjoys his special favour, for without such connection he dare not intercede nor can intercession be fruitful. (2) The person for whom intercession is to be made must have a true and real connection with the intercessor, for none would think of interceding for
‘Adl (ransom) means, equity or justice; equal compensation; fair and equitable ransom (Aqrab).
2:124, 256; 19:88; 20:110; 21:29; 34:24; 39:45; 43:87; 53:27; 74:49.
Important Words:
تجزی (shall serve as a substitute) is derived from جزی which means, he or it sufficed; he rendered satisfaction; he paid; he requited or recompensed. The expression جزی ھذا من ھذا or جزی ھذا عن ھذا means, this stood in the place of that, or this served as a substitute for that (Lane & Aqrab).
شفاعة (intercession) is derived from شفع which means, he provided a thing, which was alone, with another, or he joined up a single thing with another, so as to make it one of a pair or couple. The Arabs say کان وترا فشفعته i.e. it was a single thing and I joined to it another and made it one of a couple. According to Ar-Raghib الشفع signifies the adjoining a thing to its like; thus the word has the significance of likeness or similarity also. Then the verb شفع has come to mean, he interceded, because the person who intercedes for another attaches, or, as it were, joins or links up the latter to himself and thus uses his influence in his favour. Thus شفع لفلان اوفی فلان الی الامیر means, he interceded for such a person with the prince; he requested or prayed the prince to help or show favour to such a person on the ground that he was attached to him as a relation or friend or follower, etc. شفاعة therefore means, interceding or praying for a person to the effect that he may be shown favour or that his sins may be passed over, on the ground that he is connected with the intercessor or is like or similar to him, it being also implied that the petitioner is a person of higher position than the one for whom he pleads and is also connected with him with whom he intercedes, (Aqrab, Mufradat, Lane & Lisan).
عدل (ransom) means: (1) equity or justice (2) equal compensation; (3) fair and equitable ransom (Aqrab).
Commentary:
The verse is important. God addresses the Israelites, who claimed to be the progeny of the Prophets, saying that though it was a fact that they were descended from holy personages and He had shown special favour to them inasmuch as He had exalted them above other peoples of the age, yet as they repeatedly broke His covenant and had begun to lead wicked lives and had finally rejected the Promised Prophet, who had made his appearance in fulfilment of the prophecies contained in the Bible, they no longer deserved His blessings, but had, on the contrary, become the object of His wrath and must be prepared to render an account of their deeds. The verse under comment calls upon the Jews to prepare themselves for the Day of Retribution when they would stand alone before God and there would be none to intercede for them or help them in any other way. The fact that they were descendants of holy persons would be of no avail, nor would any substitute or ransom be accepted from them. It would indeed be a dreadful day for those who reject God’s Messengers; for on that day nothing but one’s own deeds would count.
As a criminal can count on four possible means of securing his release, God has mentioned all those means and has made it clear that none of them will avail him on the Day of Reckoning. The first idea that comes to the mind of a culprit is to prove that the offence alleged to have been committed by him was legally not committed by him at all. It was either committed by somebody else or, if it was in fact committed by him, it was committed at the instigation of another person, or another person undertook to shoulder his burden. Thus the culprit tries to secure his release by throwing the blame or the responsibility on somebody else. In view of this plea, the Quran says that (on the Day of Judgement) no soul shall serve as a substitute for another soul. If a person is really sinful, the blame will surely lie on his own head and will, by no means, be shifted to another person. Everyone will bear his own cross and there will be no atonement in the sense of one man serving as a substitute for another.
The second possible way of escape when a criminal fails to shift the responsibility to another person, is for him either to try to secure the intercession of an influential person in his favour or to enter a plea that he is related to some big personality and hence is entitled to special treatment. In reply to this, the Quran says, nor shall intercession be accepted for it. As explained above, the word شفاعة here has a twofold significance: (a) that no influential person shall be allowed to intercede for a culprit; and (b) that no culprit shall himself be allowed to put in the plea that he is related to an influential person.
The third possible means of release is for the culprit to try to secure his freedom by paying a ransom. With regard to this the Quran says, nor shall ransom be taken from it.
Finally, when a criminal sees that all other means of escape have failed, he thinks of using force and getting his release by violence. With regard to this, the Quran says: nor shall they be helped, i.e. they shall find no helpers against God.
The Quran mentions these things not by way of threat but to make the Jews realize that they should not entertain false hopes. The only way open to them was to accept the Holy Prophet whom God had raised for their own good.
Here arises a very important question. What is the teaching of Islam about شفاعة (intercession)? Does Islam hold it to be quite useless and unlawful, as would appear from the verse under comment, or does it hold certain forms of شفاعة to be useful and lawful and others to be useless and unlawful? From the teachings of the Quran and the Hadith it appears that the latter view is correct and we proceed to discuss it accordingly. It should be stated at once that the word "intercession" is a very imperfect rendering of the word شفاعة. It conveys only a part of the meaning of شفاعة and that too very imperfectly.
As explained under Important Words, the root meaning of the word شفاعة is to attach or connect or join a thing, or, for that matter, to connect or join oneself with another thing or person so as to form a pair or a couple on the basis of similarity. The Quran uses the different derivations of this word in no less than 29 different places and in all of them the root meaning of the word is retained in one form or another. The word is used in the sense of "intercession" because the person who intercedes for somebody must have a twofold connection:
Firstly, he must have a special connection with the being or person with whom he wishes to intercede, for without such connection none dare intercede nor can intercession be fruitful.
Secondly, he must also have a special connection with the person for whom he intercedes, because none can think of interceding for a person unless he is specially connected with the latter and is akin or similar to him.
In religious terminology شفاعة means intercession with God by a holy man for a sinful person. Here too the twofold connection referred to above is essential. The holy person who intercedes with God must have a special connection with Him, enjoying His special favour and being very near and dear to Him. On the other hand, he should also have real connection with the person on whose behalf he wishes to intercede; for without such connection he cannot be properly moved to intercede nor can his intercession carry much weight with God. In fact, the intercessor, on the essential basis of the aforementioned double connection, approaches God saying, as it were, "My God, I come to Thee with a special request, knowing that Thou art well pleased with me and that I enjoy Thy special favour. Here is an erring man who is sincerely connected with me but in moments of weakness he has stumbled and faltered. But as Thou art kind and good to me, O Lord, be Thou kind also to this sinful servant of Thine and pardon him his sins". This is what may be termed the essence of شفاعة as taught and, held lawful, by Islam.
From the above significance of the word it is apparent that true شفاعة is governed by the following conditions:
(1) He who intercedes must be very near and dear to God enjoying His special favour.
(2) The person for whom he wishes to intercede must have a true and real connection with him.
(3) The person in whose favour intercession is to be made must be a good person overall, only casually tempted to sin in moments of weakness; for it cannot be entertained for a moment that a habitually wicked one can enjoy a true connection with a holy person.
(4) Intercession must always be made with God’s permission; for it is God alone Who knows (a) whether a so-called holy person really stands near and dear to Him, and (b) whether the person for whom intercession is being made is truly and sincerely connected with the holy man making the intercession, for there is many a connection which looks sound and genuine from outside but is rotten from within.
(5) Each and every intercession is not necessarily lawful or fruitful. Only that intercession is lawful which fulfils all the requisite conditions.
The above view finds clear corroboration in the Islamic teachings. For instance, the Quran says: And fear the day when no soul shall serve as a substitute for another soul at all, nor shall any ransom be accepted from it, nor any شفاعة(intercession) avail it, nor shall they be helped (2:124). This verse is addressed to the Jews and signifies that, as they have rejected the Holy Prophet and thus failed to form the most important of spiritual connections, therefore no other connection or intercession will avail them on the Day of Judgement. This makes it clear that شفاعة can avail only those who accept the Messenger of the day. It cannot avail those who, by rejecting a Messenger of God, rebel against divine authority. As such people fail to form the connection that they are called upon to form, no question of شفاعة arises.
Again the Quran says: On the Day of Judgement شفاعة (intercession) shall not avail any person except him for whom God grants permission and with whose word (i.e. with whose expression of faith) He is pleased (20:110). This verse throws light on three very important points:
(a) That if, on the one hand, there are some whom شفاعة (intercession) will not avail, on the other hand, there are others whom it will certainly avail.
(b) But it will avail only those for whom God grants special permission.
(c) That such permission will be granted only in the case of those sinners whose faith at least is sound, i.e. their ایمان(faith) is true and well-founded; only in اعمال (practice) they sometimes show weakness.
At another place the Quran says: Who is he that will intercede with God except by His permission? He knows what is before them and what is behind them; and they encompass nothing of His knowledge except what He pleases (2:256). This verse supplies the reason for the principle adduced in the verse quoted above. God’s permission is necessary because His knowledge alone is perfect and it is only He Who knows whether the twofold connection essential for شفاعةreally exists, i.e. (1) whether the holy person wishing to intercede really enjoys the special relation with God required for such intercession and, (2) whether the person for whom he wishes to intercede is truly and sincerely connected with him.
To illustrate the above point, we may well quote an incident in Noah’s life. At the time of the great Deluge, he saw that his son had been caught by the surging waves and was going to be drowned. Thereupon he turned to God, saying that the drowning boy was one of his family whom God had promised to save. Upon this God sharply reprimanded him, saying, He is surely not of thy family; he is indeed a man of unrighteous conduct. So ask not of Me that of which thou hast no knowledge. I advise thee lest thou become one of the ignorant (11:47). This verse beautifully illustrates the philosophy of شفاعة. In a moment of great uneasiness of mind Noah interceded for his son with God but forgot to ask for His permission, whereupon God reminded him that though the boy was his son in the physical sense, he was not one in the true spiritual sense and was therefore not entitled to شفاعة which has its basis in spiritual kinship.
Having briefly explained the nature and conditions of شفاعة, we now come to the question: How many forms of شفاعة are there? A study of the relevant Quranic verses and of the attendant facts reveals that شفاعة is of three kinds:
(1) Firstly, there is the verbal شفاعة which has been interpreted as "intercession". In this form of شفاعة a holy person actually prays to God on the basis of his special connection with Him that a sinful person who is truly connected with him may be granted forgiveness or that, for that matter, a person suffering from some disease or misfortune may be restored to health or saved from the attending misfortune. In this case "intercession" is really a form of prayer but it makes a stronger appeal and is much more efficacious. For, whereas a prayer is simply a request made to God, شفاعة(intercession) is a prayer reinforced by the twofold connection referred to above. The شفیع (intercessor) appeals to God in a special way because (a) he enjoys God’s special favour, and (b) the person for whom he intercedes is truly and sincerely connected with him. This twofold connection gives intercession a strength that is lacking in an ordinary prayer. The intercessor, so to speak, says to God "My God, if Thou holdest me dear, then be Thou kind also to this sufferer who is dear to me." Such a prayer, if offered with God’s permission, most forcefully moves the mercy of God and is sure of acceptance.
(2) Secondly, there is the form of شفاعة which, though verbal, yet is offered not in the form of a prayer but merely as a simple statement expressive of the relation between the intercessor and the person for whom he intercedes. Sometimes, it happens that through fear of God or through modesty the intercessor does not make an intercession in the form of a direct request or prayer but simply expresses the relation existing between him and the person for whom he wishes to intercede, leaving the conclusion to be drawn by God Himself. A case in point is that of Noah’s intercession for his son referred to above. Noah did not actually pray for his son but simply drew God’s attention to their relationship: My Lord, verily my son is of my family and surely Thy promise is true (11:46). These are Noah’s words. It is a clear case of شفاعةalthough the actual form of prayer is wanting.
(3) Thirdly, there is the شفاعة which is neither made in the form of a prayer nor expressed in words. It simply consists in the practical existence of the twofold relation necessary for شفاعة. In fact, in this case the relationship itself is spoken of as شفاعة. For instance, the Quran speaks of the Jews saying لا تنفعھا شفاعة i.e. on the Day of Judgement no شفاعة shall avail them (2:124). Here شفاعة is used simply in the sense of connection. God means to say that as the Jews have refused to connect themselves with the Holy Prophet of Islam, therefore no other connection will avail them. Their being counted among the followers of Abraham or Moses or David, etc., will be of no avail to them. In this sense a Prophet of God is a شفیع or intercessor for all his true followers without distinction. Everybody who establishes a true connection with him is saved while others perish. In this sense God also is a شفیع for those who connect themselves with Him are saved, while others who remain disconnected are ruined.
Now the question arises, Why has God instituted شفاعة at all? The answer is as follows:
Firstly, شفاعة in the sense of good association is the very essence of spirituality. All spiritual progress depends on a good spiritual contact. A soul not in contact with God is lost and, for that matter, a soul not in contact with the Prophet of the day, who represents God on earth, is also lost. The Quran says, he who forms a good connection will reap the benefit thereof and he who forms an evil connection will suffer the loss attached thereto (4:86). Thus the need and the usefulness of شفاعة in the sense of a good connection is self-evident and one need not say much about it. But when we come to شفاعة in the sense of intercession, an explanation seems called for. When all depends on true belief and right actions, why should the necessity of intercession arise at all? Even a cursory thought leads to the conviction that this question, which has misled many, arises from the misleading conception of the word "intercession" as ordinarily understood. Unprincipled men go about interceding for criminals with unprincipled judges, thus thwarting the very ends of justice. Islamic شفاعة is far from this. It is not a mere intercession but is an adjunct of the principle of true belief and right actions. According to Islam only that person is entitled to شفاعة who is sincerely connected with the Prophet of the day, is true in faith and earnestly tries to live a righteous life according to the teachings of Islam. But, being weak, he sometimes stumbles. There is nothing inherently wrong with his connection with the Prophet, which is pure and true; only an occasional stumbling in practice makes him fall short of the prescribed standard. God entitles such a one to شفاعة and that also by His special permission; and when the Knower of all things considers one to be deserving of forgiveness, who is there to object that the case is not deserving? The Islamic شفاعة is, in fact, only another form of repentance. For what is توبة (repentance) but reforming a broken connection or tightening up a loose one? But whereas the door of repentance is closed with death, the door of شفاعة remains open. Moreover, شفاعة is a means of the manifestation of God’s mercy and God says رحمتی سبقت غضبی i.e. "My mercy is stronger than My anger" (Bukhari). Thus شفاعة (intercession) is based on the manifestation of God’s mercy; and as God is not judge but مالك (Master), there is nothing to stop Him from extending His mercy to whomsoever He pleases.
Yet another reason why شفاعة has been allowed by Islam is that by this means God honours His Prophets. It is indeed a great honour that He should allow a person to intercede with Him.
It has been objected by some Christian critics of Islam that the doctrine of شفاعة is likely to encourage people to commit sins. Nothing can be farther from the truth. The شفاعة as allowed by Islam should encourage people to strengthen their connection with the Prophet rather than weaken it. As sin is nothing but a product of weakness in the spiritual connection, شفاعة and sin really stand poles apart and it is sheer ignorance to suggest that the doctrine of شفاعة, whose very conception rests on the soundness of man’s connection with God and His Prophet, encourages one to sin. On the contrary, it is the Christian doctrine of Atonement which throws open the floodgates of sin; for, unlike Islamic شفاعة the doctrine of Atonement is based on the unnatural conception that one man can bear the sins of another. But of this, more will be explained later when we come to the relevant verses.
Now we come to the last question in this connection, i.e. who will be شفیع (intercessor) on the Day of Judgement? This question has given rise to much controversy and consequently much misunderstanding. Let it be said up front that Islam does not confine شفاعة (intercession) to one person only; for, according to the Islamic conception of شفاعة every holy person whose connection can materially influence the spiritual condition of a man is virtually a شفیع for him. All Prophets are therefore شفیع but they are شفیع only in their own respective spheres. Abraham is a شفیع for those who followed him and Moses is a شفیع for those who followed him and so on. But with the advent of the Holy Prophet of Islam, all other connections have come to an end; for the message of the Holy Prophet is for all time and all mankind. Even the present-day followers of Moses or Jesus cannot turn to these Prophets for شفاعة, because spiritually they are now under the regime of the Holy Prophet of Islam, the regimes of the previous Prophets having come to an end. As a matter of fact, as explained by the Quran itself, the real شفیع is God alone. Says the Quran: There is no helper nor شفیع (intercessor) for you except Allah; will you not then ponder? (32:5) Now as God alone is the real شفیع i.e. He is the One connection with Whom really matters, the Prophets of God become شفیع in a secondary way only. Whosoever among the Prophets represents God on earth at a particular time and in a particular place becomes a شفیعfor the people of that time and that place. From this it follows that the Prophets of God who passed before Islam were شفیع for their own followers and in their own time only; with the advent of Islam the period of their شفاعة came to an end. Now the Prophet of Islam is the only شفیع for all times and all peoples. Being a perfect image of God he is (1) the perfect شفیع and, having a universal mission he is (2) the universal شفیع; and having cancelled all previous connections he is now (3) the only شفیع (peace and blessings of God be on him). For proof of the fact that the Holy Prophet has himself put forward the above claim, the reader is referred to a hadith where the aforesaid distinction of the Prophet on the Day of Judgement is most vividly set forth (Muslim ch. on Iman).
a
2:124, 256; 19:88; 20:110; 21:29; 34:24; 39:45; 43:87; 53:27; 74:49.
g
2:124; 31:34; 82:20.
48
شَفَاعَة (Shafa‘ah, 说情), 源自 شَفَعَ (Shafa‘a) 其意思是, 他提供源出于一单独的东西与另一东西在一起, 或者把一个单独的东西与它的同类相联系 (مُفْرَدَات, Mufradat)。因此这词具有相象或类似的意义; 此词也意味着为某人说情或祈祷, 以便他得到恩惠, 他的罪恶可以根据他与说情人的关系而被饶恕, 这里还有这样的含意, 说情人的地位高于他为之说情的人的地位, 而且还与他说情的人有着深厚的关系 (مُفْرَدَات和لِسَانْ)。شَفَاعَة (说情) 要具有下列几种条件: (1) 说情者一定要与他希望向其说情而得到其恩惠的人有特别关系, 因为没有这样的关系, 他既不敢前去说情, 也不可能得到说情的效果。 (2) 要人说情的人一定与说情者具有真诚的关系, 因为后者要不是和前者有着这种真诚的关系, 谁也不愿为人去说情。 (3) 寻求说情而能得到同意的人, 一般必须是好人, 曾经作出忠诚的努力以赢得安拉的喜悦, (21:29) 只是由于他一时的软弱而陷入罪恶。 (4) 只有在得到安拉的特殊许可下才能进行说情。 (2:256; 10:4) شَفَاعَة (Shafa‘ah) 正如伊斯兰教所表明的, 实际上只是悔改的另一种形式, 因为 تَوْبَة (Taubah, 悔改) 是重修旧好的意思, 或加强松散关系的意思。因此, 虽然悔悟之门由于死亡而闭上了, 但 شَفَاعَة 即悔悟的另一种形式之门依然开着。شَفَاعَة 是安拉的仁慈显现的一种途径, 安拉不是法官而是主宰, 所以没有什么可以阻挡他对他所喜悦的人施行仁慈。
a
2:124, 256; 19:88; 20:110; 21:29; 34:24; 39:45; 43:87; 53:27; 74:49.
55
Important Words:
تجزی (shall serve as a substitute) is derived from جزی which means, he or it sufficed; he rendered satisfaction; he paid; he requited or recompensed. The expression جزی ھذا من ھذا or جزی ھذا عن ھذا means, this stood in the place of that, or this served as a substitute for that (Lane & Aqrab).
شفاعة (intercession) is derived from شفع which means, he provided a thing, which was alone, with another, or he joined up a single thing with another, so as to make it one of a pair or couple. The Arabs say کان وترا فشفعته i.e. it was a single thing and I joined to it another and made it one of a couple. According to Ar-Raghib الشفع signifies the adjoining a thing to its like; thus the word has the significance of likeness or similarity also. Then the verb شفع has come to mean, he interceded, because the person who intercedes for another attaches, or, as it were, joins or links up the latter to himself and thus uses his influence in his favour. Thus شفع لفلان اوفی فلان الی الامیر means, he interceded for such a person with the prince; he requested or prayed the prince to help or show favour to such a person on the ground that he was attached to him as a relation or friend or follower, etc. شفاعة therefore means, interceding or praying for a person to the effect that he may be shown favour or that his sins may be passed over, on the ground that he is connected with the intercessor or is like or similar to him, it being also implied that the petitioner is a person of higher position than the one for whom he pleads and is also connected with him with whom he intercedes, (Aqrab, Mufradat, Lane & Lisan).
عدل (ransom) means: (1) equity or justice (2) equal compensation; (3) fair and equitable ransom (Aqrab).
Commentary:
The verse is important. God addresses the Israelites, who claimed to be the progeny of the Prophets, saying that though it was a fact that they were descended from holy personages and He had shown special favour to them inasmuch as He had exalted them above other peoples of the age, yet as they repeatedly broke His covenant and had begun to lead wicked lives and had finally rejected the Promised Prophet, who had made his appearance in fulfilment of the prophecies contained in the Bible, they no longer deserved His blessings, but had, on the contrary, become the object of His wrath and must be prepared to render an account of their deeds. The verse under comment calls upon the Jews to prepare themselves for the Day of Retribution when they would stand alone before God and there would be none to intercede for them or help them in any other way. The fact that they were descendants of holy persons would be of no avail, nor would any substitute or ransom be accepted from them. It would indeed be a dreadful day for those who reject God’s Messengers; for on that day nothing but one’s own deeds would count.
As a criminal can count on four possible means of securing his release, God has mentioned all those means and has made it clear that none of them will avail him on the Day of Reckoning. The first idea that comes to the mind of a culprit is to prove that the offence alleged to have been committed by him was legally not committed by him at all. It was either committed by somebody else or, if it was in fact committed by him, it was committed at the instigation of another person, or another person undertook to shoulder his burden. Thus the culprit tries to secure his release by throwing the blame or the responsibility on somebody else. In view of this plea, the Quran says that (on the Day of Judgement) no soul shall serve as a substitute for another soul. If a person is really sinful, the blame will surely lie on his own head and will, by no means, be shifted to another person. Everyone will bear his own cross and there will be no atonement in the sense of one man serving as a substitute for another.
The second possible way of escape when a criminal fails to shift the responsibility to another person, is for him either to try to secure the intercession of an influential person in his favour or to enter a plea that he is related to some big personality and hence is entitled to special treatment. In reply to this, the Quran says, nor shall intercession be accepted for it. As explained above, the word شفاعة here has a twofold significance: (a) that no influential person shall be allowed to intercede for a culprit; and (b) that no culprit shall himself be allowed to put in the plea that he is related to an influential person.
The third possible means of release is for the culprit to try to secure his freedom by paying a ransom. With regard to this the Quran says, nor shall ransom be taken from it.
Finally, when a criminal sees that all other means of escape have failed, he thinks of using force and getting his release by violence. With regard to this, the Quran says: nor shall they be helped, i.e. they shall find no helpers against God.
The Quran mentions these things not by way of threat but to make the Jews realize that they should not entertain false hopes. The only way open to them was to accept the Holy Prophet whom God had raised for their own good.
Here arises a very important question. What is the teaching of Islam about شفاعة (intercession)? Does Islam hold it to be quite useless and unlawful, as would appear from the verse under comment, or does it hold certain forms of شفاعة to be useful and lawful and others to be useless and unlawful? From the teachings of the Quran and the Hadith it appears that the latter view is correct and we proceed to discuss it accordingly. It should be stated at once that the word "intercession" is a very imperfect rendering of the word شفاعة. It conveys only a part of the meaning of شفاعة and that too very imperfectly.
As explained under Important Words, the root meaning of the word شفاعة is to attach or connect or join a thing, or, for that matter, to connect or join oneself with another thing or person so as to form a pair or a couple on the basis of similarity. The Quran uses the different derivations of this word in no less than 29 different places and in all of them the root meaning of the word is retained in one form or another. The word is used in the sense of "intercession" because the person who intercedes for somebody must have a twofold connection:
Firstly, he must have a special connection with the being or person with whom he wishes to intercede, for without such connection none dare intercede nor can intercession be fruitful.
Secondly, he must also have a special connection with the person for whom he intercedes, because none can think of interceding for a person unless he is specially connected with the latter and is akin or similar to him.
In religious terminology شفاعة means intercession with God by a holy man for a sinful person. Here too the twofold connection referred to above is essential. The holy person who intercedes with God must have a special connection with Him, enjoying His special favour and being very near and dear to Him. On the other hand, he should also have real connection with the person on whose behalf he wishes to intercede; for without such connection he cannot be properly moved to intercede nor can his intercession carry much weight with God. In fact, the intercessor, on the essential basis of the aforementioned double connection, approaches God saying, as it were, "My God, I come to Thee with a special request, knowing that Thou art well pleased with me and that I enjoy Thy special favour. Here is an erring man who is sincerely connected with me but in moments of weakness he has stumbled and faltered. But as Thou art kind and good to me, O Lord, be Thou kind also to this sinful servant of Thine and pardon him his sins". This is what may be termed the essence of شفاعة as taught and, held lawful, by Islam.
From the above significance of the word it is apparent that true شفاعة is governed by the following conditions:
(1) He who intercedes must be very near and dear to God enjoying His special favour.
(2) The person for whom he wishes to intercede must have a true and real connection with him.
(3) The person in whose favour intercession is to be made must be a good person overall, only casually tempted to sin in moments of weakness; for it cannot be entertained for a moment that a habitually wicked one can enjoy a true connection with a holy person.
(4) Intercession must always be made with God’s permission; for it is God alone Who knows (a) whether a so-called holy person really stands near and dear to Him, and (b) whether the person for whom intercession is being made is truly and sincerely connected with the holy man making the intercession, for there is many a connection which looks sound and genuine from outside but is rotten from within.
(5) Each and every intercession is not necessarily lawful or fruitful. Only that intercession is lawful which fulfils all the requisite conditions.
The above view finds clear corroboration in the Islamic teachings. For instance, the Quran says: And fear the day when no soul shall serve as a substitute for another soul at all, nor shall any ransom be accepted from it, nor any شفاعة(intercession) avail it, nor shall they be helped (2:124). This verse is addressed to the Jews and signifies that, as they have rejected the Holy Prophet and thus failed to form the most important of spiritual connections, therefore no other connection or intercession will avail them on the Day of Judgement. This makes it clear that شفاعة can avail only those who accept the Messenger of the day. It cannot avail those who, by rejecting a Messenger of God, rebel against divine authority. As such people fail to form the connection that they are called upon to form, no question of شفاعة arises.
Again the Quran says: On the Day of Judgement شفاعة (intercession) shall not avail any person except him for whom God grants permission and with whose word (i.e. with whose expression of faith) He is pleased (20:110). This verse throws light on three very important points:
(a) That if, on the one hand, there are some whom شفاعة (intercession) will not avail, on the other hand, there are others whom it will certainly avail.
(b) But it will avail only those for whom God grants special permission.
(c) That such permission will be granted only in the case of those sinners whose faith at least is sound, i.e. their ایمان(faith) is true and well-founded; only in اعمال (practice) they sometimes show weakness.
At another place the Quran says: Who is he that will intercede with God except by His permission? He knows what is before them and what is behind them; and they encompass nothing of His knowledge except what He pleases (2:256). This verse supplies the reason for the principle adduced in the verse quoted above. God’s permission is necessary because His knowledge alone is perfect and it is only He Who knows whether the twofold connection essential for شفاعةreally exists, i.e. (1) whether the holy person wishing to intercede really enjoys the special relation with God required for such intercession and, (2) whether the person for whom he wishes to intercede is truly and sincerely connected with him.
To illustrate the above point, we may well quote an incident in Noah’s life. At the time of the great Deluge, he saw that his son had been caught by the surging waves and was going to be drowned. Thereupon he turned to God, saying that the drowning boy was one of his family whom God had promised to save. Upon this God sharply reprimanded him, saying, He is surely not of thy family; he is indeed a man of unrighteous conduct. So ask not of Me that of which thou hast no knowledge. I advise thee lest thou become one of the ignorant (11:47). This verse beautifully illustrates the philosophy of شفاعة. In a moment of great uneasiness of mind Noah interceded for his son with God but forgot to ask for His permission, whereupon God reminded him that though the boy was his son in the physical sense, he was not one in the true spiritual sense and was therefore not entitled to شفاعة which has its basis in spiritual kinship.
Having briefly explained the nature and conditions of شفاعة, we now come to the question: How many forms of شفاعة are there? A study of the relevant Quranic verses and of the attendant facts reveals that شفاعة is of three kinds:
(1) Firstly, there is the verbal شفاعة which has been interpreted as "intercession". In this form of شفاعة a holy person actually prays to God on the basis of his special connection with Him that a sinful person who is truly connected with him may be granted forgiveness or that, for that matter, a person suffering from some disease or misfortune may be restored to health or saved from the attending misfortune. In this case "intercession" is really a form of prayer but it makes a stronger appeal and is much more efficacious. For, whereas a prayer is simply a request made to God, شفاعة(intercession) is a prayer reinforced by the twofold connection referred to above. The شفیع (intercessor) appeals to God in a special way because (a) he enjoys God’s special favour, and (b) the person for whom he intercedes is truly and sincerely connected with him. This twofold connection gives intercession a strength that is lacking in an ordinary prayer. The intercessor, so to speak, says to God "My God, if Thou holdest me dear, then be Thou kind also to this sufferer who is dear to me." Such a prayer, if offered with God’s permission, most forcefully moves the mercy of God and is sure of acceptance.
(2) Secondly, there is the form of شفاعة which, though verbal, yet is offered not in the form of a prayer but merely as a simple statement expressive of the relation between the intercessor and the person for whom he intercedes. Sometimes, it happens that through fear of God or through modesty the intercessor does not make an intercession in the form of a direct request or prayer but simply expresses the relation existing between him and the person for whom he wishes to intercede, leaving the conclusion to be drawn by God Himself. A case in point is that of Noah’s intercession for his son referred to above. Noah did not actually pray for his son but simply drew God’s attention to their relationship: My Lord, verily my son is of my family and surely Thy promise is true (11:46). These are Noah’s words. It is a clear case of شفاعةalthough the actual form of prayer is wanting.
(3) Thirdly, there is the شفاعة which is neither made in the form of a prayer nor expressed in words. It simply consists in the practical existence of the twofold relation necessary for شفاعة. In fact, in this case the relationship itself is spoken of as شفاعة. For instance, the Quran speaks of the Jews saying لا تنفعھا شفاعة i.e. on the Day of Judgement no شفاعة shall avail them (2:124). Here شفاعة is used simply in the sense of connection. God means to say that as the Jews have refused to connect themselves with the Holy Prophet of Islam, therefore no other connection will avail them. Their being counted among the followers of Abraham or Moses or David, etc., will be of no avail to them. In this sense a Prophet of God is a شفیع or intercessor for all his true followers without distinction. Everybody who establishes a true connection with him is saved while others perish. In this sense God also is a شفیع for those who connect themselves with Him are saved, while others who remain disconnected are ruined.
Now the question arises, Why has God instituted شفاعة at all? The answer is as follows:
Firstly, شفاعة in the sense of good association is the very essence of spirituality. All spiritual progress depends on a good spiritual contact. A soul not in contact with God is lost and, for that matter, a soul not in contact with the Prophet of the day, who represents God on earth, is also lost. The Quran says, he who forms a good connection will reap the benefit thereof and he who forms an evil connection will suffer the loss attached thereto (4:86). Thus the need and the usefulness of شفاعة in the sense of a good connection is self-evident and one need not say much about it. But when we come to شفاعة in the sense of intercession, an explanation seems called for. When all depends on true belief and right actions, why should the necessity of intercession arise at all? Even a cursory thought leads to the conviction that this question, which has misled many, arises from the misleading conception of the word "intercession" as ordinarily understood. Unprincipled men go about interceding for criminals with unprincipled judges, thus thwarting the very ends of justice. Islamic شفاعة is far from this. It is not a mere intercession but is an adjunct of the principle of true belief and right actions. According to Islam only that person is entitled to شفاعة who is sincerely connected with the Prophet of the day, is true in faith and earnestly tries to live a righteous life according to the teachings of Islam. But, being weak, he sometimes stumbles. There is nothing inherently wrong with his connection with the Prophet, which is pure and true; only an occasional stumbling in practice makes him fall short of the prescribed standard. God entitles such a one to شفاعة and that also by His special permission; and when the Knower of all things considers one to be deserving of forgiveness, who is there to object that the case is not deserving? The Islamic شفاعة is, in fact, only another form of repentance. For what is توبة (repentance) but reforming a broken connection or tightening up a loose one? But whereas the door of repentance is closed with death, the door of شفاعة remains open. Moreover, شفاعة is a means of the manifestation of God’s mercy and God says رحمتی سبقت غضبی i.e. "My mercy is stronger than My anger" (Bukhari). Thus شفاعة (intercession) is based on the manifestation of God’s mercy; and as God is not judge but مالك (Master), there is nothing to stop Him from extending His mercy to whomsoever He pleases.
Yet another reason why شفاعة has been allowed by Islam is that by this means God honours His Prophets. It is indeed a great honour that He should allow a person to intercede with Him.
It has been objected by some Christian critics of Islam that the doctrine of شفاعة is likely to encourage people to commit sins. Nothing can be farther from the truth. The شفاعة as allowed by Islam should encourage people to strengthen their connection with the Prophet rather than weaken it. As sin is nothing but a product of weakness in the spiritual connection, شفاعة and sin really stand poles apart and it is sheer ignorance to suggest that the doctrine of شفاعة, whose very conception rests on the soundness of man’s connection with God and His Prophet, encourages one to sin. On the contrary, it is the Christian doctrine of Atonement which throws open the floodgates of sin; for, unlike Islamic شفاعة the doctrine of Atonement is based on the unnatural conception that one man can bear the sins of another. But of this, more will be explained later when we come to the relevant verses.
Now we come to the last question in this connection, i.e. who will be شفیع (intercessor) on the Day of Judgement? This question has given rise to much controversy and consequently much misunderstanding. Let it be said up front that Islam does not confine شفاعة (intercession) to one person only; for, according to the Islamic conception of شفاعة every holy person whose connection can materially influence the spiritual condition of a man is virtually a شفیع for him. All Prophets are therefore شفیع but they are شفیع only in their own respective spheres. Abraham is a شفیع for those who followed him and Moses is a شفیع for those who followed him and so on. But with the advent of the Holy Prophet of Islam, all other connections have come to an end; for the message of the Holy Prophet is for all time and all mankind. Even the present-day followers of Moses or Jesus cannot turn to these Prophets for شفاعة, because spiritually they are now under the regime of the Holy Prophet of Islam, the regimes of the previous Prophets having come to an end. As a matter of fact, as explained by the Quran itself, the real شفیع is God alone. Says the Quran: There is no helper nor شفیع (intercessor) for you except Allah; will you not then ponder? (32:5) Now as God alone is the real شفیع i.e. He is the One connection with Whom really matters, the Prophets of God become شفیع in a secondary way only. Whosoever among the Prophets represents God on earth at a particular time and in a particular place becomes a شفیعfor the people of that time and that place. From this it follows that the Prophets of God who passed before Islam were شفیع for their own followers and in their own time only; with the advent of Islam the period of their شفاعة came to an end. Now the Prophet of Islam is the only شفیع for all times and all peoples. Being a perfect image of God he is (1) the perfect شفیع and, having a universal mission he is (2) the universal شفیع; and having cancelled all previous connections he is now (3) the only شفیع (peace and blessings of God be on him). For proof of the fact that the Holy Prophet has himself put forward the above claim, the reader is referred to a hadith where the aforesaid distinction of the Prophet on the Day of Judgement is most vividly set forth (Muslim ch. on Iman).
a
2:124, 256; 19:88; 20:110; 21:29; 34:24; 39:45; 43:87; 53:27; 74:49.
d
2:124; 31:34; 82:20.
85
Shafa‘ah is derived from Shafa‘a which means, he provided a thing which was alone with another; joined a thing to its like (Mufradat). Thus the word has the significance of likeness or similarity; also it means, interceding or praying for a person that he may be shown favour and his sins may be passed over on the ground that he is connected with the intercessor, it being also implied that the petitioner is a person of higher position than the one for whom he pleads and also has deep connection with the person with whom he intercedes (Mufradat & Lisan). Shafa‘ah (intercession) is governed by the following conditions: (1) He who intercedes must have a special connection with the person with whom he wishes to intercede and enjoys his special favour, for without such connection he dare not intercede nor can intercession be fruitful. (2) The person for whom intercession is to be made must have a true and real connection with the intercessor, for none would think of interceding for
86
‘Adl (ransom) means, equity or justice; equal compensation; fair and equitable ransom (Aqrab).
وَإِذْ قَالَ مُوسَىٰ لِقَوْمِهِۦ يَٰقَوْمِ إِنَّكُمْ ظَلَمْتُمْ أَنفُسَكُم بِٱتِّخَاذِكُمُ ٱلْعِجْلَ فَتُوبُوٓا۟ إِلَىٰ بَارِئِكُمْ فَٱقْتُلُوٓا۟ أَنفُسَكُمْ ذَٰلِكُمْ خَيْرٌ لَّكُمْ عِندَ بَارِئِكُمْ فَتَابَ عَلَيْكُمْ ۚ إِنَّهُۥ هُوَ ٱلتَّوَّابُ ٱلرَّحِيمُ
اَنْفُسَكُمْ (Anfusa-kum, 你们的恶欲) 的意思是你们的亲属; 你们的歹念。نَفْس (Nafs) 是 اَنْفُسْ (Anfus) 的单数, 也意谓感情; 欲望。古以色列人被命令通过禁欲来清洗他们的心灵的恶欲。«圣经»上说他们被命令: “杀你们的兄弟、朋友和邻居。” («出埃及记»32:27), 但这说法并没得到 «古兰经» 的证实, 按 «古兰经» 所说, 他们得到了宽恕 (4:154)。甚至他们的首领萨米里也并没有被处死 (20:98)。
فَاقْتُلُوْا اَنْفُسَکُمْ بائیبل سے پتہ لگتا ہے کہ بنی اسرائیل کو یہ حکم دیا گیا تھا کہ ہر بھائی اپنے بھائی کو‘ ہر دوست اپنے دوست کو اور ہر پڑوسی اپنے پڑوسی کو قتل کرے۔ چنانچہ بائیبل کے بیان کے مطابق اس دن تین ہزار آدمی مارے گئے (خروج باب۳۲۔ آیت۲۷۔ ۲۸) لیکن چونکہ تورات کی یہی تعلیم ہے کہ کسی شخص کو بغیر اس کے کہ اس نے کوئی اور آدمی قتل کیا ہو قتل کرنا ناجائز ہے اس لئے یہ معنے درست نہیں ہو سکتے اس کے مقابلہ میں بعض مفسرین نے اس کے معنے لفظی لئے ہیں اور کہا ہے کہ ہر شخص خود کشی کرے۔ لیکن خود کشی بھی جائز نہیں اس لئے یہی صورت باقی رہ جاتی ہے کہ ہم اس سارے واقعہ کو ایک
Anfusa-kum (your evil desires) means, your kith and kin; your evil desires. Nafs which is the singular of Anfus also means, passion; desire. The Israelites were commanded to purge their souls of evil desires through mortification. The biblical statement that they were commanded 'to slay every man his brother, every man his companion and every man his neighbour' (Exod. 32: 27) is not supported by the Qur’an according to which they were pardoned (4:154). Even their leader Samiri was not killed (20:98).
Important Words:
باری (Maker) is derived from بری which means, he shaped or fashioned a reed into a pen, or he shaped an arrow. باریmeans, one who forms or fashions a thing by cutting; one who shapes out or pares a thing. باری is to be distinguished from خالق for whereas the latter word means, one who brings a thing into existence according to the proper plan or measure, or one who brings a thing into existence from a state of nonexistence, the former word, i.e. باری signifies one who fashions a thing into its proper shape. Generally, however, باری is used as somewhat synonymous with خالق, for it is the formation of a shape which is the result in each case (Mufradat & Lane).
Commentary:
It appears from this verse that, although after the incident of calf-worship a general pardon was granted to the Israelites, yet it was thought essential to punish the ringleaders who were ordered to be slain. The clause فاقتلوا انفسکم does not mean "slay yourselves", but "slay your men or slay your kith and kin". The latter meaning is borne out by 2:85, where God says, you shall not turn your people out of your homes. Similarly, in 24:62, we read: When you enter houses, greet your people with salam. In these verses the expression انفسکم has been used in the sense of 'your people or your brethren'. See also 2:86 & 4:67.
Speaking of this incident, the Bible says: "Put ye every man his sword upon his thigh, and go to and fro from gate to gate throughout the camp, and slay every man his brother, and every man his companion, and every man his neighbour. And the sons of Levi did according to the word of Moses: and there fell of the people that day about three thousand men" (Exod. 32:27, 28).
In the above passage, the number of persons slain has been put at three thousand, but this is apparently an error. Similarly, the number of the Israelites who came out of Egypt is represented in the Bible as six hundred thousand (Exod. 12:37) which also is clearly wrong. Such a large number could not live as servants and labourers of the Egyptians, who themselves speak of them as "a small community" (the Quran, 26:55). The error has apparently arisen from a confusion of the words إلف (ilf) and ألف (alf), the former meaning "a family", and the latter "a thousand" (Aqrab). Really, there were only 600 families of the Israelites who lived in Egypt and who left the country under the leadership of Moses, but they were misconstrued into 600 thousands. Similarly, the number of persons slain could scarcely be three thousand. There were most likely only three families the leaders of which took part in setting up the calf for worship, and these were put to death, by their own kinsmen at the bidding of Moses.
The words فاقتلوا أنفسکم (slay yourselves) have also been construed as "kill your desires"–an interpretation borne out by the usage of the Arabic language. Some commentators prefer this interpretation to the one given above on the ground that the Israelites, having been forgiven by God at the intercession of Moses, could not have been ordered to slay their brethren, for such an order would have been incompatible with the forgiveness granted to them. This argument, however, does not appear to be sound for forgiveness of a people as a whole is not incompatible with the punishment of a few ringleaders.
The clause, turn ye therefore to your Maker, implies an exhortation to the Israelites to turn to their باری or Maker or Fashioner, which means that they should work a change or reformation in themselves.
54
اَنْفُسَكُمْ (Anfusa-kum, 你们的恶欲) 的意思是你们的亲属; 你们的歹念。نَفْس (Nafs) 是 اَنْفُسْ (Anfus) 的单数, 也意谓感情; 欲望。古以色列人被命令通过禁欲来清洗他们的心灵的恶欲。«圣经»上说他们被命令: “杀你们的兄弟、朋友和邻居。” («出埃及记»32:27), 但这说法并没得到 «古兰经» 的证实, 按 «古兰经» 所说, 他们得到了宽恕 (4:154)。甚至他们的首领萨米里也并没有被处死 (20:98)。
1
فَاقْتُلُوْا اَنْفُسَکُمْ بائیبل سے پتہ لگتا ہے کہ بنی اسرائیل کو یہ حکم دیا گیا تھا کہ ہر بھائی اپنے بھائی کو‘ ہر دوست اپنے دوست کو اور ہر پڑوسی اپنے پڑوسی کو قتل کرے۔ چنانچہ بائیبل کے بیان کے مطابق اس دن تین ہزار آدمی مارے گئے (خروج باب۳۲۔ آیت۲۷۔ ۲۸) لیکن چونکہ تورات کی یہی تعلیم ہے کہ کسی شخص کو بغیر اس کے کہ اس نے کوئی اور آدمی قتل کیا ہو قتل کرنا ناجائز ہے اس لئے یہ معنے درست نہیں ہو سکتے اس کے مقابلہ میں بعض مفسرین نے اس کے معنے لفظی لئے ہیں اور کہا ہے کہ ہر شخص خود کشی کرے۔ لیکن خود کشی بھی جائز نہیں اس لئے یہی صورت باقی رہ جاتی ہے کہ ہم اس سارے واقعہ کو ایک
61
Important Words:
باری (Maker) is derived from بری which means, he shaped or fashioned a reed into a pen, or he shaped an arrow. باریmeans, one who forms or fashions a thing by cutting; one who shapes out or pares a thing. باری is to be distinguished from خالق for whereas the latter word means, one who brings a thing into existence according to the proper plan or measure, or one who brings a thing into existence from a state of nonexistence, the former word, i.e. باری signifies one who fashions a thing into its proper shape. Generally, however, باری is used as somewhat synonymous with خالق, for it is the formation of a shape which is the result in each case (Mufradat & Lane).
Commentary:
It appears from this verse that, although after the incident of calf-worship a general pardon was granted to the Israelites, yet it was thought essential to punish the ringleaders who were ordered to be slain. The clause فاقتلوا انفسکم does not mean "slay yourselves", but "slay your men or slay your kith and kin". The latter meaning is borne out by 2:85, where God says, you shall not turn your people out of your homes. Similarly, in 24:62, we read: When you enter houses, greet your people with salam. In these verses the expression انفسکم has been used in the sense of 'your people or your brethren'. See also 2:86 & 4:67.
Speaking of this incident, the Bible says: "Put ye every man his sword upon his thigh, and go to and fro from gate to gate throughout the camp, and slay every man his brother, and every man his companion, and every man his neighbour. And the sons of Levi did according to the word of Moses: and there fell of the people that day about three thousand men" (Exod. 32:27, 28).
In the above passage, the number of persons slain has been put at three thousand, but this is apparently an error. Similarly, the number of the Israelites who came out of Egypt is represented in the Bible as six hundred thousand (Exod. 12:37) which also is clearly wrong. Such a large number could not live as servants and labourers of the Egyptians, who themselves speak of them as "a small community" (the Quran, 26:55). The error has apparently arisen from a confusion of the words إلف (ilf) and ألف (alf), the former meaning "a family", and the latter "a thousand" (Aqrab). Really, there were only 600 families of the Israelites who lived in Egypt and who left the country under the leadership of Moses, but they were misconstrued into 600 thousands. Similarly, the number of persons slain could scarcely be three thousand. There were most likely only three families the leaders of which took part in setting up the calf for worship, and these were put to death, by their own kinsmen at the bidding of Moses.
The words فاقتلوا أنفسکم (slay yourselves) have also been construed as "kill your desires"–an interpretation borne out by the usage of the Arabic language. Some commentators prefer this interpretation to the one given above on the ground that the Israelites, having been forgiven by God at the intercession of Moses, could not have been ordered to slay their brethren, for such an order would have been incompatible with the forgiveness granted to them. This argument, however, does not appear to be sound for forgiveness of a people as a whole is not incompatible with the punishment of a few ringleaders.
The clause, turn ye therefore to your Maker, implies an exhortation to the Israelites to turn to their باری or Maker or Fashioner, which means that they should work a change or reformation in themselves.
95
Anfusa-kum (your evil desires) means, your kith and kin; your evil desires. Nafs which is the singular of Anfus also means, passion; desire. The Israelites were commanded to purge their souls of evil desires through mortification. The biblical statement that they were commanded 'to slay every man his brother, every man his companion and every man his neighbour' (Exod. 32: 27) is not supported by the Qur’an according to which they were pardoned (4:154). Even their leader Samiri was not killed (20:98).
وَظَلَّلْنَا عَلَيْكُمُ ٱلْغَمَامَ وَأَنزَلْنَا عَلَيْكُمُ ٱلْمَنَّ وَٱلسَّلْوَىٰ ۖ كُلُوا۟ مِن طَيِّبَٰتِ مَا رَزَقْنَٰكُمْ ۖ وَمَا ظَلَمُونَا وَلَٰكِن كَانُوٓا۟ أَنفُسَهُمْ يَظْلِمُونَ
7:161; 20:82.
7:161; 20:81.
مَنّ (Mann, 吗哪) 的意思是赏赐或礼物; 不经周折或困难所获得的任何东西; 蜂蜜或露水 (اَقْرَبْ)。吗哪在穆圣的一句话中也曾被提到: “松露也是一种吗哪” (布哈理)。也可参阅 (Lane) 的 “تَرَنْجَبِيْن” (Turanjabin) 条目。
سَلْوٰی (Salwa, 萨耳瓦) 是 (1) 像鹌鹑那样一种略带白色的鸟, 在阿拉伯半岛及其邻近国家的某些地区可以见到; (2) 凡是使人得到满足和快乐的东西; 蜜 (اَقْرَبْ, Aqrab)。吗哪和萨耳瓦的恩赐在 «古兰经» 中有三处提到 (本节及2:58与7:161), 而在这三处提及这一事实之后都有这样的命令: “吃我供应给你们的好东西吧。” 这表明提供给西奈半岛荒野中的古以色列人的食物是有益健康的、可口而美味的, 这种食物不只是一种而是包括好几种东西; 吗哪 (松露) 和鹌鹑构成其中的主要部分。见 («出埃及记»16:13-15)。
مَنّ کے معنے عربی زبان میں احسان کے ہوتے ہیں۔ پس جو چیز بفضلِ الٰہی مل جائے اس کو مَنّ کہتے ہیں۔ حدیث میں آتا ہے اَلْکَمْأَۃُ مِنَ الْمَنِّ یعنی کھمب بھی مَنّ میں سے ہے۔ اسی طرح ترنجبین کو بھی مَنَّ کہتے ہیں۔ اور سَلْوٰی کے معنے عربی زبان میں بٹیر کی قسم کے پرندوں کے ہیں۔ پس مطلب یہ ہے کہ ہم نے تمہارے لئے کثرت سے ترنجبین اور کھمبیں اس علاقہ میں پیدا کردیں اور بٹیرکی قسم کے جانور بھیج دئیے۔
7:161.
7:161; 20:81.
See Exodus, 40: 34-38.
Mann means a favour or gift; anything obtained without trouble or difficulty; honey or dew (Aqrab). The Manna has also been referred to in a saying of the Holy Prophet as: "The truffle is one of the things included in the Manna" (Bukhari). See also Lane under "Turanjabin."
Salwa is (1) a whitish bird resembling a quail and found in some parts of Arabia and the neighbouring countries; (2) whatever renders a person contented and happy; honey (Aqrab). The sending down of Manna and Salwa has been mentioned at three places in the Qur’an, in the present verse and in vv. 2:58 and 7:161, and at all these three places the fact has been followed by the injunction: 'Eat of the good things that We have provided for you.' This shows that whereas the food which was provided to the Israelites in the wilderness of Sinai was wholesome, palatable and of good taste, it consisted not of one but of several things; Manna (truffle) and Salwa (quails) forming the major part of them. See Exodus, 16: 13-15.
7:161.
7:161; 20:81.
Important Words:
من (Manna). The infinitive من signifies bestowing favour on or doing good to. They say من علیه i.e. he bestowed a favour on him without his labouring for it. من means: (1) a favour; (2) anything obtained without trouble or difficulty; (3) honey-dew (Aqrab).
سلوی (Salwa) is derived from سلا. They say سلا عن الشیء i.e. he was satisfied with it سلاه عن الشیء means, he satisfied him with it; he removed his grief and worry through it. سلوی is (1) a whitish bird resembling a quail and found in some parts of Arabia and the neighbouring countries. It also means, (2) whatever renders a person contented and happy; (3) honey (Aqrab).
Commentary:
As the Israelites were camping in hot and open country, God speaks of the clouds having been sent to give them shade. We learn from Exod. 40:34-38, that clouds spread and shaded the spot where the Israelites encamped, and that they dispersed on the day when it was time for them to resume their journey. But the verse under comment shows that the clouds meant not only shadow but also rainfall because, firstly, it is rain-clouds that are generally dark and dense; and, secondly, along with the "clouds," the Quran also mentions two eatables, Manna and Salwa, which served as complement to the favour mentioned in the shadowing clouds. In fact, there was scarcity of both water and food in that arid country, and God used to quench their thirst by sending clouds, and satisfy their hunger by providing Manna and Salwa. And, no wonder, for God shows special favours to His servants in order to remove their difficulties and promote their comfort.
The sending down of Manna and Salwa has been mentioned in Exod. 16:11-15, where we read: "And the Lord spoke unto Moses, saying, I have heard the murmurings of the children of Israel: speak unto them, saying, At even ye shall eat flesh, and in the morning ye shall be filled with bread; and ye shall know that I am the Lord your God. And it came to pass that at even the quails came up, and covered the camp: and in the morning the dew lay round about the host. And when the dew that lay was gone up, behold, upon the face of the wilderness there lay a small round thing, as small as the hoar frost on the ground. And when the children of Israel saw it, they said one to another, It is manna: for they wist not what it was. And Moses said unto them, This is the bread which the Lord hath given you to eat."
When the children of Israel got no food in the wilderness and death stared them in the face, they began to murmur against Moses and Aaron. They said to them: "Would to God we had died by the hand of the Lord in the land of Egypt, when we sat by the flesh pots and when we did eat bread to the full; for ye have brought us forth into this wilderness to kill this whole assembly with hunger" (Exod. 16:3). These murmurings of the Israelites were answered in the passage quoted above.
The Holy Prophet refers to the Manna bestowed on the Israelites in the following, hadith. Says he: "The mushroom is one of the things included in the Manna, and the sap of it heals the eye" (Bukhari). He is also reported to have said: "The mushroom is among the things which God bestowed upon Moses, as a free gift" (Muhit). This shows that God provided the Israelites with a number of things in the wilderness, sometimes with one thing and sometimes with another.
The verse does not mention how the Israelites "wronged themselves". But as God speaks here of the favours bestowed upon them, it is evident that they wronged themselves by showing ingratitude and by murmuring and complaining of their lot in spite of God’s special favours. By doing so, however, they did no harm to God or His Messenger, but only harmed their own souls.
a
7:161; 20:82.
c
7:161; 20:81.
55
مَنّ (Mann, 吗哪) 的意思是赏赐或礼物; 不经周折或困难所获得的任何东西; 蜂蜜或露水 (اَقْرَبْ)。吗哪在穆圣的一句话中也曾被提到: “松露也是一种吗哪” (布哈理)。也可参阅 (Lane) 的 “تَرَنْجَبِيْن” (Turanjabin) 条目。
56
سَلْوٰی (Salwa, 萨耳瓦) 是 (1) 像鹌鹑那样一种略带白色的鸟, 在阿拉伯半岛及其邻近国家的某些地区可以见到; (2) 凡是使人得到满足和快乐的东西; 蜜 (اَقْرَبْ, Aqrab)。吗哪和萨耳瓦的恩赐在 «古兰经» 中有三处提到 (本节及2:58与7:161), 而在这三处提及这一事实之后都有这样的命令: “吃我供应给你们的好东西吧。” 这表明提供给西奈半岛荒野中的古以色列人的食物是有益健康的、可口而美味的, 这种食物不只是一种而是包括好几种东西; 吗哪 (松露) 和鹌鹑构成其中的主要部分。见 («出埃及记»16:13-15)。
1
مَنّ کے معنے عربی زبان میں احسان کے ہوتے ہیں۔ پس جو چیز بفضلِ الٰہی مل جائے اس کو مَنّ کہتے ہیں۔ حدیث میں آتا ہے اَلْکَمْأَۃُ مِنَ الْمَنِّ یعنی کھمب بھی مَنّ میں سے ہے۔ اسی طرح ترنجبین کو بھی مَنَّ کہتے ہیں۔ اور سَلْوٰی کے معنے عربی زبان میں بٹیر کی قسم کے پرندوں کے ہیں۔ پس مطلب یہ ہے کہ ہم نے تمہارے لئے کثرت سے ترنجبین اور کھمبیں اس علاقہ میں پیدا کردیں اور بٹیرکی قسم کے جانور بھیج دئیے۔
a
7:161.
b
7:161; 20:81.
64
Important Words:
من (Manna). The infinitive من signifies bestowing favour on or doing good to. They say من علیه i.e. he bestowed a favour on him without his labouring for it. من means: (1) a favour; (2) anything obtained without trouble or difficulty; (3) honey-dew (Aqrab).
سلوی (Salwa) is derived from سلا. They say سلا عن الشیء i.e. he was satisfied with it سلاه عن الشیء means, he satisfied him with it; he removed his grief and worry through it. سلوی is (1) a whitish bird resembling a quail and found in some parts of Arabia and the neighbouring countries. It also means, (2) whatever renders a person contented and happy; (3) honey (Aqrab).
Commentary:
As the Israelites were camping in hot and open country, God speaks of the clouds having been sent to give them shade. We learn from Exod. 40:34-38, that clouds spread and shaded the spot where the Israelites encamped, and that they dispersed on the day when it was time for them to resume their journey. But the verse under comment shows that the clouds meant not only shadow but also rainfall because, firstly, it is rain-clouds that are generally dark and dense; and, secondly, along with the "clouds," the Quran also mentions two eatables, Manna and Salwa, which served as complement to the favour mentioned in the shadowing clouds. In fact, there was scarcity of both water and food in that arid country, and God used to quench their thirst by sending clouds, and satisfy their hunger by providing Manna and Salwa. And, no wonder, for God shows special favours to His servants in order to remove their difficulties and promote their comfort.
The sending down of Manna and Salwa has been mentioned in Exod. 16:11-15, where we read: "And the Lord spoke unto Moses, saying, I have heard the murmurings of the children of Israel: speak unto them, saying, At even ye shall eat flesh, and in the morning ye shall be filled with bread; and ye shall know that I am the Lord your God. And it came to pass that at even the quails came up, and covered the camp: and in the morning the dew lay round about the host. And when the dew that lay was gone up, behold, upon the face of the wilderness there lay a small round thing, as small as the hoar frost on the ground. And when the children of Israel saw it, they said one to another, It is manna: for they wist not what it was. And Moses said unto them, This is the bread which the Lord hath given you to eat."
When the children of Israel got no food in the wilderness and death stared them in the face, they began to murmur against Moses and Aaron. They said to them: "Would to God we had died by the hand of the Lord in the land of Egypt, when we sat by the flesh pots and when we did eat bread to the full; for ye have brought us forth into this wilderness to kill this whole assembly with hunger" (Exod. 16:3). These murmurings of the Israelites were answered in the passage quoted above.
The Holy Prophet refers to the Manna bestowed on the Israelites in the following, hadith. Says he: "The mushroom is one of the things included in the Manna, and the sap of it heals the eye" (Bukhari). He is also reported to have said: "The mushroom is among the things which God bestowed upon Moses, as a free gift" (Muhit). This shows that God provided the Israelites with a number of things in the wilderness, sometimes with one thing and sometimes with another.
The verse does not mention how the Israelites "wronged themselves". But as God speaks here of the favours bestowed upon them, it is evident that they wronged themselves by showing ingratitude and by murmuring and complaining of their lot in spite of God’s special favours. By doing so, however, they did no harm to God or His Messenger, but only harmed their own souls.
a
7:161.
b
7:161; 20:81.
97
See Exodus, 40: 34-38.
98
Mann means a favour or gift; anything obtained without trouble or difficulty; honey or dew (Aqrab). The Manna has also been referred to in a saying of the Holy Prophet as: "The truffle is one of the things included in the Manna" (Bukhari). See also Lane under "Turanjabin."
99
Salwa is (1) a whitish bird resembling a quail and found in some parts of Arabia and the neighbouring countries; (2) whatever renders a person contented and happy; honey (Aqrab). The sending down of Manna and Salwa has been mentioned at three places in the Qur’an, in the present verse and in vv. 2:58 and 7:161, and at all these three places the fact has been followed by the injunction: 'Eat of the good things that We have provided for you.' This shows that whereas the food which was provided to the Israelites in the wilderness of Sinai was wholesome, palatable and of good taste, it consisted not of one but of several things; Manna (truffle) and Salwa (quails) forming the major part of them. See Exodus, 16: 13-15.
وَإِذْ قَتَلْتُمْ نَفْسًا فَٱدَّٰرَْٰٔتُمْ فِيهَا ۖ وَٱللَّهُ مُخْرِجٌ مَّا كُنتُمْ تَكْتُمُونَ
قَتَلْتُمْ (Qataltum) 意思是指你尝试、企图、主张或决心去杀死 (40:29), 或你使他像死去的一样; 你几乎杀死了他。他们说 قَتَلَهٗ (Qatala-hu), 他使他变得像一个肉体上或道德上已被杀死的人 (Lane)。欧麦尔 (عُمَرْ, ‘Umar,) 的名言即 اُقْتُلُوْاسَعْدًا (Uqtulu Sa‘dan) 被认为其含意是, 使 سَعْد (Sa‘d) 塞德变得像一个对一切意图和目的都是幻灭了的人。
نَفْسًا (Nafsan) 用作普通名词, 即在不确定的形式中, 按照阿拉伯语语法可以指一个非常重要的人物 (مُطَوَّلْ, Mutawwal)。在前一节经文中提到了犹太人的某些恶劣行径和罪行。本节经文系指他们的滔天罪行, 即他们企图杀死在十字架上的伊撒并表明, 按照 «圣经» 所说, 他是一个假先知 («申命记» 21:23)。在这一恶毒的企图中他们彻底失败了。伊撒从十字架上被取下时并没死去, 但像死人一样。对伊撒并未死在十字架上而是活着像死人一样被取下的这一历史事实。可参阅889A。
这一字句表明, 伊撒之死真相大白的时刻终得到来, 而如此长久地蒙在这一事件上的伪装终将被摘掉。
وَ اِذْ قَتَلْتُمْ نَفْسًا سے حضرت مسیح ؑ کی صلیب کا واقعہ مراد ہے جس کے متعلق عیسائیوں نے تو یہ کہہ دیا کہ مسیح اپنی مرضی سے صلیب پر چڑھ گیا کیونکہ وہ دنیا کا کفار ہ بننا چاہتا تھا‘ اور یہودیوں نے کہا کہ اِنَّا قَتَلْنَا الْمَسِیْحَ۔ اللہ تعالیٰ فرماتا ہے کہ دونوں جھوٹے ہیں۔ درحقیقت مسیحؑ صلیب پر سے زندہ اتر آئے تھے اور اگر ایسے ہی حالات میں صلیب سے اترنے والوں کے حالات کو دیکھو تو تمہیں معلوم ہو جائے گا کہ تاریخ کے مطابق بھی اور طبّ کے مطابق بھی وہ لوگ زندہ ہی ہوتے ہیں۔ پس مسیحؑ بھی صلیب سے زندہ ہی اترے تھے۔ اور اگر قرآن مجیدنے ان کی نسبت کہا کہ تم نے ایک
Qataltum means, you sought, attempted, claimed, or made up your mind, to kill (40:29), or you made him appear as dead; you almost killed him. They say Qatala-hu, i.e. he rendered him like one killed physically or morally (Lane). The famous saying of ‘Umar, viz. Uqtulu Sa‘dan, has been taken to signify, render Sa‘d like one who is, to all intents and purposes, dead.
Nafsan used as Nakirah, i.e. in an undefined form, according to Arabic grammar may refer to a very important personage (Mutawwal).
In the foregoing verses some of the evil practices and crimes of the Jews were mentioned. This verse refers to their crowning guilt, i.e. they sought to kill Jesus on the Cross and thus to show that according to the Bible he was a false prophet (Deut. 21: 23). In this nefarious attempt they utterly failed. Jesus was taken down from the Cross alive but like one dead. For the historical fact that Jesus did not die on the Cross but was taken down alive like one dead. See {2000}.
The clause signifies that a time will come when the truth about Jesus’s death will come to light and the mask which had so long been hanging over the incident will be lifted.
Important Words:
قتلتم (you slew) is derived from قتل which means: (1) he killed; (2) he attempted to kill; (3) he rendered a person like unto one killed (see also 2:62).
نفساً (a person) has been used here as نکرة i.e. in an indefinite or undefined form. It may, according to the rules of the Arabic language, refer either to an unimportant person that need not be named, or to a very important personage; for sometimes a word used as نکرة denotes a sense of greatness (Mutawwal).
فادارءتم (differed among yourselves) is derived from درأ meaning, he repelled it or he thrust it back. ادارءتم is originally تدارءتمmeaning: (1) you repelled one another by casting blame or responsibility on one another; (2) you disagreed or differed among yourselves (Aqrab & Lane).
تکتمون (you concealed). See 2: 34.
Commentary:
See under next verse.
61
قَتَلْتُمْ (Qataltum) 意思是指你尝试、企图、主张或决心去杀死 (40:29), 或你使他像死去的一样; 你几乎杀死了他。他们说 قَتَلَهٗ (Qatala-hu), 他使他变得像一个肉体上或道德上已被杀死的人 (Lane)。欧麦尔 (عُمَرْ, ‘Umar,) 的名言即 اُقْتُلُوْاسَعْدًا (Uqtulu Sa‘dan) 被认为其含意是, 使 سَعْد (Sa‘d) 塞德变得像一个对一切意图和目的都是幻灭了的人。
62
نَفْسًا (Nafsan) 用作普通名词, 即在不确定的形式中, 按照阿拉伯语语法可以指一个非常重要的人物 (مُطَوَّلْ, Mutawwal)。在前一节经文中提到了犹太人的某些恶劣行径和罪行。本节经文系指他们的滔天罪行, 即他们企图杀死在十字架上的伊撒并表明, 按照 «圣经» 所说, 他是一个假先知 («申命记» 21:23)。在这一恶毒的企图中他们彻底失败了。伊撒从十字架上被取下时并没死去, 但像死人一样。对伊撒并未死在十字架上而是活着像死人一样被取下的这一历史事实。可参阅889A。
63
这一字句表明, 伊撒之死真相大白的时刻终得到来, 而如此长久地蒙在这一事件上的伪装终将被摘掉。
2
وَ اِذْ قَتَلْتُمْ نَفْسًا سے حضرت مسیح ؑ کی صلیب کا واقعہ مراد ہے جس کے متعلق عیسائیوں نے تو یہ کہہ دیا کہ مسیح اپنی مرضی سے صلیب پر چڑھ گیا کیونکہ وہ دنیا کا کفار ہ بننا چاہتا تھا‘ اور یہودیوں نے کہا کہ اِنَّا قَتَلْنَا الْمَسِیْحَ۔ اللہ تعالیٰ فرماتا ہے کہ دونوں جھوٹے ہیں۔ درحقیقت مسیحؑ صلیب پر سے زندہ اتر آئے تھے اور اگر ایسے ہی حالات میں صلیب سے اترنے والوں کے حالات کو دیکھو تو تمہیں معلوم ہو جائے گا کہ تاریخ کے مطابق بھی اور طبّ کے مطابق بھی وہ لوگ زندہ ہی ہوتے ہیں۔ پس مسیحؑ بھی صلیب سے زندہ ہی اترے تھے۔ اور اگر قرآن مجیدنے ان کی نسبت کہا کہ تم نے ایک
79
Important Words:
قتلتم (you slew) is derived from قتل which means: (1) he killed; (2) he attempted to kill; (3) he rendered a person like unto one killed (see also 2:62).
نفساً (a person) has been used here as نکرة i.e. in an indefinite or undefined form. It may, according to the rules of the Arabic language, refer either to an unimportant person that need not be named, or to a very important personage; for sometimes a word used as نکرة denotes a sense of greatness (Mutawwal).
فادارءتم (differed among yourselves) is derived from درأ meaning, he repelled it or he thrust it back. ادارءتم is originally تدارءتمmeaning: (1) you repelled one another by casting blame or responsibility on one another; (2) you disagreed or differed among yourselves (Aqrab & Lane).
تکتمون (you concealed). See 2: 34.
Commentary:
See under next verse.
109
Qataltum means, you sought, attempted, claimed, or made up your mind, to kill (40:29), or you made him appear as dead; you almost killed him. They say Qatala-hu, i.e. he rendered him like one killed physically or morally (Lane). The famous saying of ‘Umar, viz. Uqtulu Sa‘dan, has been taken to signify, render Sa‘d like one who is, to all intents and purposes, dead.
109A
Nafsan used as Nakirah, i.e. in an undefined form, according to Arabic grammar may refer to a very important personage (Mutawwal).
In the foregoing verses some of the evil practices and crimes of the Jews were mentioned. This verse refers to their crowning guilt, i.e. they sought to kill Jesus on the Cross and thus to show that according to the Bible he was a false prophet (Deut. 21: 23). In this nefarious attempt they utterly failed. Jesus was taken down from the Cross alive but like one dead. For the historical fact that Jesus did not die on the Cross but was taken down alive like one dead. See {2000}.
109B
The clause signifies that a time will come when the truth about Jesus’s death will come to light and the mask which had so long been hanging over the incident will be lifted.
وَإِذْ أَخَذْنَا مِيثَٰقَكُمْ لَا تَسْفِكُونَ دِمَآءَكُمْ وَلَا تُخْرِجُونَ أَنفُسَكُم مِّن دِيَٰرِكُمْ ثُمَّ أَقْرَرْتُمْ وَأَنتُمْ تَشْهَدُونَ
لَا تَسۡفِکُوۡنَ دِمَآءَکُمۡ یعنی بعض یہودی قبیلے دوسرے یہودی قبلیوں کو نقصان نہ پہنچائیں گے۔ عہد کی تفصیل کے لئے دیکھئے خروج باب ۲۰۔ ۲۱
خروج باب ۲۴ آیت ۳۔
The reference may be to the covenant between the Holy Prophet and the Jews of Medina by which both sides undertook to help each other against a common enemy and all disputes were to be referred to the Holy Prophet for decision (Muir’s 'Life of Mahomet' & 'Sirat' by Mirza Bashir Ahmad, M.A.).
See under 2:87.
2
لَا تَسۡفِکُوۡنَ دِمَآءَکُمۡ یعنی بعض یہودی قبیلے دوسرے یہودی قبلیوں کو نقصان نہ پہنچائیں گے۔ عہد کی تفصیل کے لئے دیکھئے خروج باب ۲۰۔ ۲۱
3
خروج باب ۲۴ آیت ۳۔
91
See under 2:87.
117
The reference may be to the covenant between the Holy Prophet and the Jews of Medina by which both sides undertook to help each other against a common enemy and all disputes were to be referred to the Holy Prophet for decision (Muir’s 'Life of Mahomet' & 'Sirat' by Mirza Bashir Ahmad, M.A.).
ثُمَّ أَنتُمْ هَٰٓؤُلَآءِ تَقْتُلُونَ أَنفُسَكُمْ وَتُخْرِجُونَ فَرِيقًا مِّنكُم مِّن دِيَٰرِهِمْ تَظَٰهَرُونَ عَلَيْهِم بِٱلْإِثْمِ وَٱلْعُدْوَٰنِ وَإِن يَأْتُوكُمْ أُسَٰرَىٰ تُفَٰدُوهُمْ وَهُوَ مُحَرَّمٌ عَلَيْكُمْ إِخْرَاجُهُمْ ۚ أَفَتُؤْمِنُونَ بِبَعْضِ ٱلْكِتَٰبِ وَتَكْفُرُونَ بِبَعْضٍ ۚ فَمَا جَزَآءُ مَن يَفْعَلُ ذَٰلِكَ مِنكُمْ إِلَّا خِزْىٌ فِى ٱلْحَيَوٰةِ ٱلدُّنْيَا ۖ وَيَوْمَ ٱلْقِيَٰمَةِ يُرَدُّونَ إِلَىٰٓ أَشَدِّ ٱلْعَذَابِ ۗ وَمَا ٱللَّهُ بِغَٰفِلٍ عَمَّا تَعْمَلُونَ
There lived in Medina in the time of the Holy Prophet three Jewish tribes, the Banu Qainuqa‘, the Banu Nadir and the Banu Quraizah; and two pagan tribes, the Aus and the Khazraj. Two of the Jewish tribes, Banu Qainuqa‘ and Banu Quraizah, sided with the Aus, and Banu Nadir with the Khazraj. Thus, whenever these pagan clans were at war with each other, the Jewish tribes were automatically involved. But, if during a war any Jews were taken prisoner by the pagans, the former would collect money by subscription and ransom them. They considered it improper for a Jew to remain in bondage with a Gentile. The Qur’an objects to this practice by saying that their Faith not only forbids the enslavement of Jews, but also prohibits mutual warfare and murder in which they openly indulged and there could be nothing worse than to accept a portion of a Scripture and reject the rest; for, when one accepts a portion of a Scripture, it is proof of the fact that one is convinced of the truth of the whole. Thus rejection o
See under 2:87.
92
See under 2:87.
118
There lived in Medina in the time of the Holy Prophet three Jewish tribes, the Banu Qainuqa‘, the Banu Nadir and the Banu Quraizah; and two pagan tribes, the Aus and the Khazraj. Two of the Jewish tribes, Banu Qainuqa‘ and Banu Quraizah, sided with the Aus, and Banu Nadir with the Khazraj. Thus, whenever these pagan clans were at war with each other, the Jewish tribes were automatically involved. But, if during a war any Jews were taken prisoner by the pagans, the former would collect money by subscription and ransom them. They considered it improper for a Jew to remain in bondage with a Gentile. The Qur’an objects to this practice by saying that their Faith not only forbids the enslavement of Jews, but also prohibits mutual warfare and murder in which they openly indulged and there could be nothing worse than to accept a portion of a Scripture and reject the rest; for, when one accepts a portion of a Scripture, it is proof of the fact that one is convinced of the truth of the whole. Thus rejection o
بِئْسَمَا ٱشْتَرَوْا۟ بِهِۦٓ أَنفُسَهُمْ أَن يَكْفُرُوا۟ بِمَآ أَنزَلَ ٱللَّهُ بَغْيًا أَن يُنَزِّلَ ٱللَّهُ مِن فَضْلِهِۦ عَلَىٰ مَن يَشَآءُ مِنْ عِبَادِهِۦ ۖ فَبَآءُو بِغَضَبٍ عَلَىٰ غَضَبٍ ۚ وَلِلْكَٰفِرِينَ عَذَابٌ مُّهِينٌ
3:113; 5:61.
3:113; 5:61.
3:113; 5:61.
Important Words:
بغیا (grudging) is derived from بغی. They say بغی الشیء i.e. he wished or desired or sought the thing. بغی الرجل means, the man transgressed or turned away from the truth, or he disobeyed or revolted against a lawful authority. بغی علیه means, he wronged him and continued long in the act (Aqrab). بغی علی اخیه means, he envied his brother; he wished that a blessing might become transferred from his brother to himself (Lane). In the text the word has been translated as "grudging" which is the same as "envying".
باؤا (they incurred) is derived from باء which means, he returned. باء به means, he returned with it. باء بغضب من الله means, he returned with anger from God, i.e. the anger of God came upon him; he incurred His anger (Aqrab & Lane).
Commentary:
In this verse, we are told that the Jews rejected the Holy Prophet solely because he was of different nationality. The verse means that the Jews upon whom the truth has dawned and who have come to recognize the Quran as the very Book mentioned in their Scriptures are, out of sheer pride and obstinacy, impiously rejecting it, little knowing that, by so doing, they are hastening the ruin of their own souls. The truth is that they cannot bear to see a Prophet raised from among any people other than their own. They fail to realize that all alike are the creatures of God and there is no earthly reason why Prophets should appear only from among the Israelites.
The words باؤا بغضب translated here as, they incurred wrath, literally mean "they returned with (God’s) wrath" which points to the fact that though God called them to His presence in order to bestow on them His favours, they, instead of receiving favours, returned from His presence loaded with His displeasure and anger.
The words, wrath upon wrath, are used to signify that even before the coming of the Holy Prophet the Jews had incurred the anger of God by their rejection of Jesus and other iniquities; so when they rejected the Holy Prophet, they incurred wrath upon wrath, i.e. they added to their previous load of God’s anger.
d
3:113; 5:61.
a
3:113; 5:61.
97
Important Words:
بغیا (grudging) is derived from بغی. They say بغی الشیء i.e. he wished or desired or sought the thing. بغی الرجل means, the man transgressed or turned away from the truth, or he disobeyed or revolted against a lawful authority. بغی علیه means, he wronged him and continued long in the act (Aqrab). بغی علی اخیه means, he envied his brother; he wished that a blessing might become transferred from his brother to himself (Lane). In the text the word has been translated as "grudging" which is the same as "envying".
باؤا (they incurred) is derived from باء which means, he returned. باء به means, he returned with it. باء بغضب من الله means, he returned with anger from God, i.e. the anger of God came upon him; he incurred His anger (Aqrab & Lane).
Commentary:
In this verse, we are told that the Jews rejected the Holy Prophet solely because he was of different nationality. The verse means that the Jews upon whom the truth has dawned and who have come to recognize the Quran as the very Book mentioned in their Scriptures are, out of sheer pride and obstinacy, impiously rejecting it, little knowing that, by so doing, they are hastening the ruin of their own souls. The truth is that they cannot bear to see a Prophet raised from among any people other than their own. They fail to realize that all alike are the creatures of God and there is no earthly reason why Prophets should appear only from among the Israelites.
The words باؤا بغضب translated here as, they incurred wrath, literally mean "they returned with (God’s) wrath" which points to the fact that though God called them to His presence in order to bestow on them His favours, they, instead of receiving favours, returned from His presence loaded with His displeasure and anger.
The words, wrath upon wrath, are used to signify that even before the coming of the Holy Prophet the Jews had incurred the anger of God by their rejection of Jesus and other iniquities; so when they rejected the Holy Prophet, they incurred wrath upon wrath, i.e. they added to their previous load of God’s anger.
b
3:113; 5:61.
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