حَوۡلَ
Appears 13 times in Quran
Derived Words (9)
Words derived from the stem "حَوۡلَ".
- around her
- around it
- around him
- around it
- the environs of
- around them
- around you
- for two
- around him
- around
- and all around it
- round about you
Occurrences in Quran
Found 13 verses containing "حَوۡلَ".
مَثَلُہُمۡ کَمَثَلِ الَّذِی اسۡتَوۡقَدَ نَارًا فَلَمَّاۤ اَضَآءَتۡ مَا حَوۡلَہٗ ذَہَبَ اللّٰہُ بِنُوۡرِہِمۡ وَتَرَکَہُمۡ فِیۡ ظُلُمٰتٍ لَّا یُبۡصِرُوۡنَ
6:40, 123; 24:41.
“火” 这个词有时用于战争。在这节经文中 “燃火的人” 可能意指:或者是那些虚伪者串通不信道者向伊斯兰教进行战争, 或者是穆圣在主的旨意下点起精神之光。传说穆圣曾经说过: “我的样子就像一个点起火光的人似的” («布哈里»)。
这句话的意思是, 那些虚伪者煽动战争来重新建立他们已丧失的势力, 但那些战争的实际结果却是暴露了他们的虚伪性以及随之发生的他们的混乱与困惑。«古兰经»中总是用 ظُلْمَة (Zulma) 这个词的复数,它的意思是道德与精神上的黑暗。罪与恶从来不单独存在。一个罪恶会引出另一个罪恶, 一件不幸的事情会引出另一件不幸的事情。这意思是, 虚伪者被多方面的危险与灾难所压垮。
مَثَلُھُمْ کَمَثَلِ الَّذِی اسْتَوْقَدَ نَارًا عربی زبان میں نَار کا لفظ جنگ کے لئے بھی بولا جاتا ہے۔ پس آیت کا مطلب یہ ہے کہ منافقوں نے مسلمانوں کوہرانے کے لئے کفار سے لڑوا دیا۔ مگر جب جنگ پھیل گئی تو نتیجہ اُلٹ نکلا۔ مسلمان جیت گئے اور اللہ تعالیٰ نے منافقوں کو ایسی حالت میں چھوڑ دیا کہ ان کو اس اُلجھن سے نکلنے کا کوئی راستہ نظر نہیں آتا تھا اور اندھوں کی طرح اِدھر اُدھر مارے پھرتے تھے۔
اندھیروں کا لفظ اس امر کے اظہار کے لئے استعمال کیا گیا ہے کہ صرف ظاہری تاریکی ہی نہیں بلکہ اور کئی قسم کے خطرات بھی لاحق ہو گئے ہیں۔ اردو میں چونکہ اندھیرے کا لفظ اس موقعہ پر جمع کے صیغہ میں استعمال نہیں ہوتا اور اگر کر بھی لیں تو وہ معنی نہیں دیتا جو عربی سے ظاہر ہوتے ہیں اس لئے ’’قسم قسم کے‘‘ کے الفاظ خطوط وحدانی میں بڑھا دیئے گئے ہیں تا اصل مفہوم پڑھنے والے پر واضح ہو جائے قرآن کریم میں یہ لفظ ہمیشہ جمع کے طور پر استعمال ہوا ہے کیونکہ جب بھی استعمال ہوا ہے کسی اخلاقی یا روحانی امر کی تمثیل بیان کرنے کے لئے ہوا ہے اور گناہ اور بداخلاقیاں اکیلی نہیں رہتیں بلکہ ای
6:40, 123; 24:41.
The word "fire" is sometimes used for war. "The kindler of fire" in the verse may signify either the hypocrites who conspired with disbelievers to wage war against Islam, or the Holy Prophet who under God’s command kindled a Divine light. He is reported to have said: 'My example is like that of a person who kindles a fire' (Bukhari).
The expression signifies that the hypocrites fomented wars in order to re-establish their lost influence but the actual result of these wars was the exposure of their hypocrisy and their consequent confusion and perplexity. The word Zulumat has always been used in the Qur’an in the plural, signifying moral and spiritual darkness. Sin and vice never exist in isolation. One vice attracts another and one misfortune draws another. The meaning is that the hypocrites are overtaken by manifold dangers and calamities.
6:40, 123; 24:41.
Important Words:
مثل (case) gives a number of meanings: (1) likeness or similitude; (2) state or condition; (3) reason or argument; (4) proverb, etc (Aqrab)..
اضاء (it lighted up) is derived from ضاء i.e. it or he became bright or lit up. اضاء is used both transitively and intransitively. Used transitively it means, it lit up or lighted up (the surroundings, etc.), and used intransitively it means, it became bright or lit up. الضیاء or الضوء means, light (Aqrab). In the verse under comment the word has been used transitively.
ظلمات (darkness or lit. darknesses), which is the plural of ظلمة i.e. darkness or absence of light, is derived from ظلم i.e. it became dark. The word ظلمة is also used figuratively to signify ضلالة i.e. error or ignorance, just as the word نور i.e. light is sometimes used to signify ھدایة i.e. guidance (Aqrab). ظلمة also means, affliction, hardship and danger. In the verse the word ظلمات has been used in the plural form in order to signify that the position or place spoken of is not only wanting in light, but is also ful1 of various dangers. In the Quran the word is always used in the plural and denotes different kinds of darkness, physical, moral or spiritual. In the moral and spiritual sense the plural form also signifies that sins and evil deeds do not stand alone, but grow and multiply, one stumbling leading to another.
Commentary:
The verse speaks of hypocrites who were unbelievers at heart but outwardly formed part of the Muslim community. The light of the Holy Prophet or the light of Islam touched their outside, but owing to the diseased condition of their hearts it could not penetrate their inside, which is essential for true religious conversion; so they remained virtually deprived of that light. "The kindler of fire" in the verse can mean either: (1) the class of hypocrites who kindled a fire for themselves, i.e. they accepted the light of Islam but when the light grew in intensity and lit up the surroundings, their hidden disease got the better of them and they lost the light and were left in utter darkness. In this case the Arabic text would read somewhat like this: مثلھم كمثل الذین استوقدوا نارا فلما اضاءت ماحولھم۔الخ i.e. their condition is like the condition of those who kindle a fire, etc. This reading would be quite correct according to Arabic idiom and the style of the Quran itself. Or, (2) it may mean the Holy Prophet of Islam who, under God’s command, kindled a fire or a light but then the class of hypocrites came into being, whom the light touched but did not penetrate. Though apparently in light, they were really deprived of it, and owing to the disease of their heart their deprivation grew as the light increased. In this case the Arabic text would read somewhat like this: مثلھم كمثل بعض اصحاب الذی استوقد نارا فلما اضاءت ماحوله۔الخ i.e. their condition is like the condition of some of those surrounding a person who kindles a fire, etc. This reading is also correct according to the Arabic idiom. In either case the people deprived of light are the hypocrites.
By 'a fire' is meant, the light of divine teaching and heavenly signs. This is corroborated by other passages in the Quran. In 28:30, 31, it is said that Moses saw a fire near Mount Sinai and, approaching it, he heard a voice, saying, O Moses, verily I, even I, am Allah, the Lord of the worlds. Elsewhere in the Quran divine revelation is compared to "fire" and it is stated that some human beings possessing extraordinary spiritual potency are near to being lit up even without divine revelation (24:36). Thus, according to the Quran, the word "fire" sometimes signifies the light of divine teaching and heavenly signs, and in the present verse the word has been used in this very sense.
According to Arab usage, the word "fire" is sometimes also used for war. In 5:65 the Jews are said to have lighted the fire of war. In this sense, the verse would mean that hypocrites conspired with disbelievers to wage war against Islam. But the war only served to increase the power of Islam, leaving the hypocrites utterly confounded.
The words, Allah took away their light, may mean that the wars tore away from the hypocrites the bright mantle of Islam with which they had disguised themselves. The wars not only failed to bring the expected victory to the disbelievers, but also helped to expose the hypocrites who betrayed themselves by failing to join up with the Muslims and share the perils of the wars with them. The gradual extension and elaboration of the teachings of Islam also helped the exposure. The more commands there were to obey, the more burdensome did obedience prove to the hypocrites.
The expression, left them in thick darkness; they see not, means that the hypocrites had fomented the wars in order to re-establish their influence but the actual result of these wars was the exposure of their hypocrisy and their consequent confusion and perplexity.
If the word "fire" means the light of Islam, the verse would signify that though the light of Islam touched the hypocrites on the outside, yet their hearts remained unaffected by it. God deprived them not only of the light of revelation with all its blessings but also of the light of conscience which He has implanted in the nature of man.
d
6:40, 123; 24:41.
29H
“火” 这个词有时用于战争。在这节经文中 “燃火的人” 可能意指:或者是那些虚伪者串通不信道者向伊斯兰教进行战争, 或者是穆圣在主的旨意下点起精神之光。传说穆圣曾经说过: “我的样子就像一个点起火光的人似的” («布哈里»)。
29I
这句话的意思是, 那些虚伪者煽动战争来重新建立他们已丧失的势力, 但那些战争的实际结果却是暴露了他们的虚伪性以及随之发生的他们的混乱与困惑。«古兰经»中总是用 ظُلْمَة (Zulma) 这个词的复数,它的意思是道德与精神上的黑暗。罪与恶从来不单独存在。一个罪恶会引出另一个罪恶, 一件不幸的事情会引出另一件不幸的事情。这意思是, 虚伪者被多方面的危险与灾难所压垮。
1
مَثَلُھُمْ کَمَثَلِ الَّذِی اسْتَوْقَدَ نَارًا عربی زبان میں نَار کا لفظ جنگ کے لئے بھی بولا جاتا ہے۔ پس آیت کا مطلب یہ ہے کہ منافقوں نے مسلمانوں کوہرانے کے لئے کفار سے لڑوا دیا۔ مگر جب جنگ پھیل گئی تو نتیجہ اُلٹ نکلا۔ مسلمان جیت گئے اور اللہ تعالیٰ نے منافقوں کو ایسی حالت میں چھوڑ دیا کہ ان کو اس اُلجھن سے نکلنے کا کوئی راستہ نظر نہیں آتا تھا اور اندھوں کی طرح اِدھر اُدھر مارے پھرتے تھے۔
2
اندھیروں کا لفظ اس امر کے اظہار کے لئے استعمال کیا گیا ہے کہ صرف ظاہری تاریکی ہی نہیں بلکہ اور کئی قسم کے خطرات بھی لاحق ہو گئے ہیں۔ اردو میں چونکہ اندھیرے کا لفظ اس موقعہ پر جمع کے صیغہ میں استعمال نہیں ہوتا اور اگر کر بھی لیں تو وہ معنی نہیں دیتا جو عربی سے ظاہر ہوتے ہیں اس لئے ’’قسم قسم کے‘‘ کے الفاظ خطوط وحدانی میں بڑھا دیئے گئے ہیں تا اصل مفہوم پڑھنے والے پر واضح ہو جائے قرآن کریم میں یہ لفظ ہمیشہ جمع کے طور پر استعمال ہوا ہے کیونکہ جب بھی استعمال ہوا ہے کسی اخلاقی یا روحانی امر کی تمثیل بیان کرنے کے لئے ہوا ہے اور گناہ اور بداخلاقیاں اکیلی نہیں رہتیں بلکہ ای
a
6:40, 123; 24:41.
24
Important Words:
مثل (case) gives a number of meanings: (1) likeness or similitude; (2) state or condition; (3) reason or argument; (4) proverb, etc (Aqrab)..
اضاء (it lighted up) is derived from ضاء i.e. it or he became bright or lit up. اضاء is used both transitively and intransitively. Used transitively it means, it lit up or lighted up (the surroundings, etc.), and used intransitively it means, it became bright or lit up. الضیاء or الضوء means, light (Aqrab). In the verse under comment the word has been used transitively.
ظلمات (darkness or lit. darknesses), which is the plural of ظلمة i.e. darkness or absence of light, is derived from ظلم i.e. it became dark. The word ظلمة is also used figuratively to signify ضلالة i.e. error or ignorance, just as the word نور i.e. light is sometimes used to signify ھدایة i.e. guidance (Aqrab). ظلمة also means, affliction, hardship and danger. In the verse the word ظلمات has been used in the plural form in order to signify that the position or place spoken of is not only wanting in light, but is also ful1 of various dangers. In the Quran the word is always used in the plural and denotes different kinds of darkness, physical, moral or spiritual. In the moral and spiritual sense the plural form also signifies that sins and evil deeds do not stand alone, but grow and multiply, one stumbling leading to another.
Commentary:
The verse speaks of hypocrites who were unbelievers at heart but outwardly formed part of the Muslim community. The light of the Holy Prophet or the light of Islam touched their outside, but owing to the diseased condition of their hearts it could not penetrate their inside, which is essential for true religious conversion; so they remained virtually deprived of that light. "The kindler of fire" in the verse can mean either: (1) the class of hypocrites who kindled a fire for themselves, i.e. they accepted the light of Islam but when the light grew in intensity and lit up the surroundings, their hidden disease got the better of them and they lost the light and were left in utter darkness. In this case the Arabic text would read somewhat like this: مثلھم كمثل الذین استوقدوا نارا فلما اضاءت ماحولھم۔الخ i.e. their condition is like the condition of those who kindle a fire, etc. This reading would be quite correct according to Arabic idiom and the style of the Quran itself. Or, (2) it may mean the Holy Prophet of Islam who, under God’s command, kindled a fire or a light but then the class of hypocrites came into being, whom the light touched but did not penetrate. Though apparently in light, they were really deprived of it, and owing to the disease of their heart their deprivation grew as the light increased. In this case the Arabic text would read somewhat like this: مثلھم كمثل بعض اصحاب الذی استوقد نارا فلما اضاءت ماحوله۔الخ i.e. their condition is like the condition of some of those surrounding a person who kindles a fire, etc. This reading is also correct according to the Arabic idiom. In either case the people deprived of light are the hypocrites.
By 'a fire' is meant, the light of divine teaching and heavenly signs. This is corroborated by other passages in the Quran. In 28:30, 31, it is said that Moses saw a fire near Mount Sinai and, approaching it, he heard a voice, saying, O Moses, verily I, even I, am Allah, the Lord of the worlds. Elsewhere in the Quran divine revelation is compared to "fire" and it is stated that some human beings possessing extraordinary spiritual potency are near to being lit up even without divine revelation (24:36). Thus, according to the Quran, the word "fire" sometimes signifies the light of divine teaching and heavenly signs, and in the present verse the word has been used in this very sense.
According to Arab usage, the word "fire" is sometimes also used for war. In 5:65 the Jews are said to have lighted the fire of war. In this sense, the verse would mean that hypocrites conspired with disbelievers to wage war against Islam. But the war only served to increase the power of Islam, leaving the hypocrites utterly confounded.
The words, Allah took away their light, may mean that the wars tore away from the hypocrites the bright mantle of Islam with which they had disguised themselves. The wars not only failed to bring the expected victory to the disbelievers, but also helped to expose the hypocrites who betrayed themselves by failing to join up with the Muslims and share the perils of the wars with them. The gradual extension and elaboration of the teachings of Islam also helped the exposure. The more commands there were to obey, the more burdensome did obedience prove to the hypocrites.
The expression, left them in thick darkness; they see not, means that the hypocrites had fomented the wars in order to re-establish their influence but the actual result of these wars was the exposure of their hypocrisy and their consequent confusion and perplexity.
If the word "fire" means the light of Islam, the verse would signify that though the light of Islam touched the hypocrites on the outside, yet their hearts remained unaffected by it. God deprived them not only of the light of revelation with all its blessings but also of the light of conscience which He has implanted in the nature of man.
b
6:40, 123; 24:41.
36
The word "fire" is sometimes used for war. "The kindler of fire" in the verse may signify either the hypocrites who conspired with disbelievers to wage war against Islam, or the Holy Prophet who under God’s command kindled a Divine light. He is reported to have said: 'My example is like that of a person who kindles a fire' (Bukhari).
37
The expression signifies that the hypocrites fomented wars in order to re-establish their lost influence but the actual result of these wars was the exposure of their hypocrisy and their consequent confusion and perplexity. The word Zulumat has always been used in the Qur’an in the plural, signifying moral and spiritual darkness. Sin and vice never exist in isolation. One vice attracts another and one misfortune draws another. The meaning is that the hypocrites are overtaken by manifold dangers and calamities.
۞ وَالۡوٰلِدٰتُ یُرۡضِعۡنَ اَوۡلٰدَہُنَّ حَوۡلَیۡنِ کَامِلَیۡنِ ۖ لِمَنۡ اَرَادَ اَنۡ یُّتِمَّ الرَّضَاعَۃَ ۚ وَعَلَی الۡمَوۡلُوۡدِ لَہٗ رِزۡقُہُنَّ وَکِسۡوَتُہُنَّ بِالۡمَعۡرُوۡفِ ۚ لَا تُکَلَّفُ نَفۡسٌ اِلَّا وُسۡعَہَا ۚ لَا تُضَآرَّ وٰلِدَۃٌۢ بِوَلَدِہَا وَلَا مَوۡلُوۡدٌ لَّہٗ بِوَلَدِہٖ ۚ وَعَلَی الۡوَارِثِ مِثۡلُ ذٰلِکَ ۗ فَاِنۡ اَرَادَا فِصَالًا عَنۡ تَرَاضٍ مِّنۡہُمَا وَتَشَاوُرٍ فَلَا جُنَاحَ عَلَیۡہِمَا ۗ وَاِنۡ اَرَدتُّمۡ اَنۡ تَسۡتَرۡضِعُوۡۤا اَوۡلٰدَکُمۡ فَلَا جُنَاحَ عَلَیۡکُمۡ اِذَا سَلَّمۡتُمۡ مَّاۤ اٰتَیۡتُمۡ بِالۡمَعۡرُوۡفِ ۗ وَاتَّقُوا اللّٰہَ وَاعۡلَمُوۡۤا اَنَّ اللّٰہَ بِمَا تَعۡمَلُوۡنَ بَصِیۡرٌ
31:15; 46:16.
65:7.
2:287; 6:153; 7:43; 23:63; 65:8.
لَا تُضَآرَّ (La Tudarra) 这一用语, 既是主动又是被动语态; 因此它的意思可以是: (1) 母亲不应使父亲由于他的孩子而受苦; (2) 不应使母亲由于她的孩子而受苦; 这里这两种意义都可同等适用。
这里用 مَوْلُوْدٌ لَهٗ (Mauludun la-hu, 孩子所归属的人) 这几个字, 而不用较简单的 وَالِد (Walid, 父亲) 这个字, 为的是指出, 具有所生的孩子, 是父亲的固有的权利而且有抚养他孩子的天职。
继承一个死者的财产的人, 对他留下的孩子一定要负起抚养成人的责任。
孩子吃奶期至多两年。在这时期结束以前, 如果父母同意, 准许提前断奶。这节经文指示, 如果没有母亲的同意, 孩子不能在两年时期结束前断奶。
یہاں بِالْمَعْرُوْفِ سے مراد باپ کی مَقدرت ہے کہ امیر اپنی طاقت کے مطابق دے اور غریب اپنی طاقت کے مطابق۔ اس جگہ عام دودھ پلانے والیوں کا ذکر نہیں بلکہ ماؤں کا ہے اور یہ ذکر طلاق کے ضمن میں کیا گیا ہے اور کہا گیا ہے کہ اگر دودھ پلانے والی عورت کو طلاق دی جائے تو بچہ کی خاطر عورت کے لئے یہ ضروری ہے کہ بچے کو دودھ مقررہ مدت تک پلائے اور اس کے بدلہ میں خاوند پر فرض ہے کہ عام مزدور عورت کی طرح نہیں بلکہ اپنی توفیق کے مطابق اسے خرچ دے۔ کیونکہ یہ عورت کے جذبات کو ٹھیس پہنچانے والا ہوگا کہ ایک طرف تو اسے مجبور کیا جائے کہ وہ طلاق کے بعد بھی بچہ کو دودھ پلاتی رہے اور دوسری ط
کھانے اور کپڑے سے مراد تمام اخراجات ہیں نہ کہ صرف روٹی اور لباس اور یہ محاورہ ہے تمام ضرورتوں کو پورا کرنے کے متعلق۔
یعنی مرد سے یہ مطالبہ کرنا کہ وہ اپنی طاقت سے زیادہ خرچ کرے یہ بھی نامناسب ہے اور عورت سے مطالبہ کرنا کہ وہ ایک نوکر کی طرح طلاق کے بعد ایک عرصہ گھر میں گزار دے یہ بھی نامناسب ہے۔
یعنی بچہ کو ایک دوسرے پر دباؤ ڈالنے کا ذریعہ نہ بناؤ۔ یہ حکم نہایت لطیف ہے۔ بہت سے نادان اس حرکت کے مرتکب ہوتے ہیں اور نتیجہ یہ ہوتا ہے کہ یا تو بچے ہلاک ہو جاتے ہیں یا ان کی تربیت خراب ہو جاتی ہے۔ اس قسم کا فعل درحقیقت قتل اولاد کے مشابہ ہے اور قرآن کریم نے اس سے روک کر آئندہ اولادوں پر احسان عظیم کیا ہے۔
اس آیت سے معلوم ہوتا ہے کہ بچے کے متعلق دودھ پلانے یا چھڑانے کا فیصلہ قرآن کریم نے نہ مرد کے اختیار میں رکھا ہے نہ عورت کے اختیار میں۔ بلکہ دونوں کو مشترکہ اختیار دیا ہے شاید تمام شرائع کی تاریخ میں یہ منفرد مثال ہے کہ اس طرح اہلی معاملات میں میاں بیوی کو ایک مقام پر کھڑا کرکے برابر کے اختیارات دئیے گئے ہیں۔ ہاں یہ شرط ضرور ہے کہ دودھ پلانے کی مدت جو قرآن کریم نے مقرر کی ہے اس سے زیادہ دیر تک دودھ پلانے پر نہ خاوند مجبور کر سکتا ہے نہ عورت زور دے سکتی ہے۔ جب طلاق کے بعد بھی عورت کے جذبات کا اس قدر خیال رکھنے پر خاوند کو مجبور کیا گیا ہے تو ظاہر ہے کہ جو عورت نکاح میں ہے
قرآنی الفاظ اٰتَیْتُمْ کے ہیں جن کے لفظی معنے ہیں دے دیا ہے‘ دے چکے ہو۔ لیکن اس طرح ترجمہ کیا جائے تو ترجمہ یہ ہوگا کہ جب تم دے دو۔ جو کچھ تم دے چکے ہو۔ اور ظاہر ہے کہ یہ مراد قرآن مجید کی نہیں ہو سکتی۔ پس ان الفاظ کا ترجمہ کرتے وقت ایک اور قاعدہ کو ملحوظ رکھنا ہوگا جو یہ ہے کہ کبھی ماضی کا صیغہ قطعی فیصلہ پر دلالت کرنے کے لئے استعمال کیا جاتا ہے۔ چنانچہ قرآن کریم میں دوسرے کئی مقامات پر بھی یہ محاورہ استعمال کیا گیا ہے۔ مثلاً آتا ہے اِذَا قُمْتُمْ اِلَی الصَّلٰوۃِ فَاغْسِلُوْا وُجُوْھَکُمْ(المآئدۃ: ۷) یعنی جب تم نماز کے لئے کھڑے ہو تو اپنے مونہوں کو اور ہات
31:15; 46:16.
65:7.
2:287; 6:153; 7:43; 23:63; 65:8.
The expression, la Tudarra, is both in the active and the passive voice; the clause may, therefore, mean that: (1) the mother shall not make the father suffer on account of her child; and (2) the mother shall not be made to suffer on account of her child; and both meanings are equally applicable here.
The words Mauludulla-hu (he to whom the child belongs) have been used here in preference to the simpler word Walid (father), in order to point to the inherent right of the father to possess the child and to his natural responsibility for its maintenance.
One who inherits the property of a deceased person is duty bound to bring up the children the latter may leave behind.
The suckling of the child should last for two years at the maximum. But it is allowable to discontinue it before the end of this period, if the father and the mother both agree on this course. The verse also implies that the child is not to be weaned before the end of two years without the consent of its mother.
31:15; 46:16.
65:7.
2:287; 6:153; 7:43; 23:63; 65:8.
Important Words:
یرضعن (give suck) is derived from رضع i.e. he (the babe) sucked. ارضعت means, she (the mother or the wet-nurse) gave suck to the child. استرضع means, he arranged for the suckling of the child; he engaged a wet-nurse for it. The infinitive-noun رضاعة signifies sucking. ھذا اخی من الرضاعة means, he is my foster-brother, both having sucked from the breast of the same woman (Aqrab & Lane).
حولین (two years) is the dual of حول (a year) which is the infinitive-noun from حال meaning, it passed and became complete, or it passed from one state to another, or it turned round. A year is called حول because it is a complete measure of time and turns round and round. حول also means strength and power to do a thing as in the well-known formula لاحول ولاقوة الابالله (Aqrab).
وسعھا (its capacity) is derived from وسع meaning, it was sufficiently capacious. وسعت رحمة الله کل شیء means, God’s mercy extends to, and covers, all things. وسع means capacity or power or strength. The infinitive-noun from it is سعة meaning, breadth; extent, capaciousness; capacity and power. ذوسعة means, a man of means or a man of ample means (Aqrab).
تکلف (is burdened) is derived from کلف. They say کلفه امرا i.e. he imposed on him the task of doing a thing, or he tasked him to do a thing. It also means, he ordered him to do a thing which was difficult or troublesome or inconvenient (Lane).
فصال (weaning the child) is derived from فصل which is both transitive and intransitive, meaning, he separated, he divided, he partitioned; or he got separated, he went forth from. فصلت المرأة رضیعھا means, the woman weaned her child, which is also a sort of separation between the woman and her suckling. ھذایوم الفصل means, this is the day when a decision or a distinction shall be made between the parties, i.e. the doers of good and the doers of evil. فصال means, the weaning of a child from its mother or from the woman who suckles it (Taj).
تشاور (consultation) is derived from شار. They say شارالعسل i.e. he extracted honey from the honey-comb. شارالدابة means, he rode the beast in order to try it and ascertain its worth. اشار besides giving the same meaning as شار, also means, he made a thing known, he pointed to a thing, he gave a word of good counsel to a person. شاوره means, he consulted him, he sought his advice and counsel. تشاور means, mutual consultation. مشورة and شوری give similar meanings, i.e. consultation (Aqrab).
Commentary:
If a woman is divorced while she is pregnant, the question of the suckling of the child and the expense of bringing it up naturally arises. The verse under comment supplies the answer. It points out that the suckling of the child should last for two years at the maximum. But it is allowable to discontinue it before the end of that period, if the father and the mother both agree on that course. The verse also implies that the child is not to be weaned before the end of two years without the consent of its mother.
The expression لاتضار is both in the active and the passive voice; the clause لاتضار والدة بولدھا may therefore mean that: (1) the mother shall not make the father suffer on account of her child; and (2) the mother shall not be made to suffer on account of her child; and both meanings are equally good and equitable. The words مولودله (he to whom the child belongs) have been used here in preference to the simpler word والد (father), in order to point to the inherent right of the father to possess the child and to his natural responsibility for its maintenance.
The clause, and the same is incumbent on the heir, lays down an important social principle. If a father dies leaving behind a child, it is the duty of his heirs to bring up the child and maintain it until it reaches puberty. This shall not be considered an act of favour on their part, but an act of duty. One who inherits the property of a deceased person is duty bound to bring up the children the latter may leave behind. He who receives a support from another must be prepared to give the same to him, when he may stand in need of it.
a
31:15; 46:16.
b
65:7.
c
2:287; 6:153; 7:43; 23:63; 65:8.
176
لَا تُضَآرَّ (La Tudarra) 这一用语, 既是主动又是被动语态; 因此它的意思可以是: (1) 母亲不应使父亲由于他的孩子而受苦; (2) 不应使母亲由于她的孩子而受苦; 这里这两种意义都可同等适用。
177
这里用 مَوْلُوْدٌ لَهٗ (Mauludun la-hu, 孩子所归属的人) 这几个字, 而不用较简单的 وَالِد (Walid, 父亲) 这个字, 为的是指出, 具有所生的孩子, 是父亲的固有的权利而且有抚养他孩子的天职。
178
继承一个死者的财产的人, 对他留下的孩子一定要负起抚养成人的责任。
179
孩子吃奶期至多两年。在这时期结束以前, 如果父母同意, 准许提前断奶。这节经文指示, 如果没有母亲的同意, 孩子不能在两年时期结束前断奶。
1
یہاں بِالْمَعْرُوْفِ سے مراد باپ کی مَقدرت ہے کہ امیر اپنی طاقت کے مطابق دے اور غریب اپنی طاقت کے مطابق۔ اس جگہ عام دودھ پلانے والیوں کا ذکر نہیں بلکہ ماؤں کا ہے اور یہ ذکر طلاق کے ضمن میں کیا گیا ہے اور کہا گیا ہے کہ اگر دودھ پلانے والی عورت کو طلاق دی جائے تو بچہ کی خاطر عورت کے لئے یہ ضروری ہے کہ بچے کو دودھ مقررہ مدت تک پلائے اور اس کے بدلہ میں خاوند پر فرض ہے کہ عام مزدور عورت کی طرح نہیں بلکہ اپنی توفیق کے مطابق اسے خرچ دے۔ کیونکہ یہ عورت کے جذبات کو ٹھیس پہنچانے والا ہوگا کہ ایک طرف تو اسے مجبور کیا جائے کہ وہ طلاق کے بعد بھی بچہ کو دودھ پلاتی رہے اور دوسری ط
2
کھانے اور کپڑے سے مراد تمام اخراجات ہیں نہ کہ صرف روٹی اور لباس اور یہ محاورہ ہے تمام ضرورتوں کو پورا کرنے کے متعلق۔
3
یعنی مرد سے یہ مطالبہ کرنا کہ وہ اپنی طاقت سے زیادہ خرچ کرے یہ بھی نامناسب ہے اور عورت سے مطالبہ کرنا کہ وہ ایک نوکر کی طرح طلاق کے بعد ایک عرصہ گھر میں گزار دے یہ بھی نامناسب ہے۔
4
یعنی بچہ کو ایک دوسرے پر دباؤ ڈالنے کا ذریعہ نہ بناؤ۔ یہ حکم نہایت لطیف ہے۔ بہت سے نادان اس حرکت کے مرتکب ہوتے ہیں اور نتیجہ یہ ہوتا ہے کہ یا تو بچے ہلاک ہو جاتے ہیں یا ان کی تربیت خراب ہو جاتی ہے۔ اس قسم کا فعل درحقیقت قتل اولاد کے مشابہ ہے اور قرآن کریم نے اس سے روک کر آئندہ اولادوں پر احسان عظیم کیا ہے۔
5
اس آیت سے معلوم ہوتا ہے کہ بچے کے متعلق دودھ پلانے یا چھڑانے کا فیصلہ قرآن کریم نے نہ مرد کے اختیار میں رکھا ہے نہ عورت کے اختیار میں۔ بلکہ دونوں کو مشترکہ اختیار دیا ہے شاید تمام شرائع کی تاریخ میں یہ منفرد مثال ہے کہ اس طرح اہلی معاملات میں میاں بیوی کو ایک مقام پر کھڑا کرکے برابر کے اختیارات دئیے گئے ہیں۔ ہاں یہ شرط ضرور ہے کہ دودھ پلانے کی مدت جو قرآن کریم نے مقرر کی ہے اس سے زیادہ دیر تک دودھ پلانے پر نہ خاوند مجبور کر سکتا ہے نہ عورت زور دے سکتی ہے۔ جب طلاق کے بعد بھی عورت کے جذبات کا اس قدر خیال رکھنے پر خاوند کو مجبور کیا گیا ہے تو ظاہر ہے کہ جو عورت نکاح میں ہے
6
قرآنی الفاظ اٰتَیْتُمْ کے ہیں جن کے لفظی معنے ہیں دے دیا ہے‘ دے چکے ہو۔ لیکن اس طرح ترجمہ کیا جائے تو ترجمہ یہ ہوگا کہ جب تم دے دو۔ جو کچھ تم دے چکے ہو۔ اور ظاہر ہے کہ یہ مراد قرآن مجید کی نہیں ہو سکتی۔ پس ان الفاظ کا ترجمہ کرتے وقت ایک اور قاعدہ کو ملحوظ رکھنا ہوگا جو یہ ہے کہ کبھی ماضی کا صیغہ قطعی فیصلہ پر دلالت کرنے کے لئے استعمال کیا جاتا ہے۔ چنانچہ قرآن کریم میں دوسرے کئی مقامات پر بھی یہ محاورہ استعمال کیا گیا ہے۔ مثلاً آتا ہے اِذَا قُمْتُمْ اِلَی الصَّلٰوۃِ فَاغْسِلُوْا وُجُوْھَکُمْ(المآئدۃ: ۷) یعنی جب تم نماز کے لئے کھڑے ہو تو اپنے مونہوں کو اور ہات
a
31:15; 46:16.
b
65:7.
c
2:287; 6:153; 7:43; 23:63; 65:8.
240
Important Words:
یرضعن (give suck) is derived from رضع i.e. he (the babe) sucked. ارضعت means, she (the mother or the wet-nurse) gave suck to the child. استرضع means, he arranged for the suckling of the child; he engaged a wet-nurse for it. The infinitive-noun رضاعة signifies sucking. ھذا اخی من الرضاعة means, he is my foster-brother, both having sucked from the breast of the same woman (Aqrab & Lane).
حولین (two years) is the dual of حول (a year) which is the infinitive-noun from حال meaning, it passed and became complete, or it passed from one state to another, or it turned round. A year is called حول because it is a complete measure of time and turns round and round. حول also means strength and power to do a thing as in the well-known formula لاحول ولاقوة الابالله (Aqrab).
وسعھا (its capacity) is derived from وسع meaning, it was sufficiently capacious. وسعت رحمة الله کل شیء means, God’s mercy extends to, and covers, all things. وسع means capacity or power or strength. The infinitive-noun from it is سعة meaning, breadth; extent, capaciousness; capacity and power. ذوسعة means, a man of means or a man of ample means (Aqrab).
تکلف (is burdened) is derived from کلف. They say کلفه امرا i.e. he imposed on him the task of doing a thing, or he tasked him to do a thing. It also means, he ordered him to do a thing which was difficult or troublesome or inconvenient (Lane).
فصال (weaning the child) is derived from فصل which is both transitive and intransitive, meaning, he separated, he divided, he partitioned; or he got separated, he went forth from. فصلت المرأة رضیعھا means, the woman weaned her child, which is also a sort of separation between the woman and her suckling. ھذایوم الفصل means, this is the day when a decision or a distinction shall be made between the parties, i.e. the doers of good and the doers of evil. فصال means, the weaning of a child from its mother or from the woman who suckles it (Taj).
تشاور (consultation) is derived from شار. They say شارالعسل i.e. he extracted honey from the honey-comb. شارالدابة means, he rode the beast in order to try it and ascertain its worth. اشار besides giving the same meaning as شار, also means, he made a thing known, he pointed to a thing, he gave a word of good counsel to a person. شاوره means, he consulted him, he sought his advice and counsel. تشاور means, mutual consultation. مشورة and شوری give similar meanings, i.e. consultation (Aqrab).
Commentary:
If a woman is divorced while she is pregnant, the question of the suckling of the child and the expense of bringing it up naturally arises. The verse under comment supplies the answer. It points out that the suckling of the child should last for two years at the maximum. But it is allowable to discontinue it before the end of that period, if the father and the mother both agree on that course. The verse also implies that the child is not to be weaned before the end of two years without the consent of its mother.
The expression لاتضار is both in the active and the passive voice; the clause لاتضار والدة بولدھا may therefore mean that: (1) the mother shall not make the father suffer on account of her child; and (2) the mother shall not be made to suffer on account of her child; and both meanings are equally good and equitable. The words مولودله (he to whom the child belongs) have been used here in preference to the simpler word والد (father), in order to point to the inherent right of the father to possess the child and to his natural responsibility for its maintenance.
The clause, and the same is incumbent on the heir, lays down an important social principle. If a father dies leaving behind a child, it is the duty of his heirs to bring up the child and maintain it until it reaches puberty. This shall not be considered an act of favour on their part, but an act of duty. One who inherits the property of a deceased person is duty bound to bring up the children the latter may leave behind. He who receives a support from another must be prepared to give the same to him, when he may stand in need of it.
a
31:15; 46:16.
b
65:7.
c
2:287; 6:153; 7:43; 23:63; 65:8.
286
The expression, la Tudarra, is both in the active and the passive voice; the clause may, therefore, mean that: (1) the mother shall not make the father suffer on account of her child; and (2) the mother shall not be made to suffer on account of her child; and both meanings are equally applicable here.
287
The words Mauludulla-hu (he to whom the child belongs) have been used here in preference to the simpler word Walid (father), in order to point to the inherent right of the father to possess the child and to his natural responsibility for its maintenance.
288
One who inherits the property of a deceased person is duty bound to bring up the children the latter may leave behind.
288A
The suckling of the child should last for two years at the maximum. But it is allowable to discontinue it before the end of this period, if the father and the mother both agree on this course. The verse also implies that the child is not to be weaned before the end of two years without the consent of its mother.
وَہٰذَا کِتٰبٌ اَنۡزَلۡنٰہُ مُبَارَکٌ مُّصَدِّقُ الَّذِیۡ بَیۡنَ یَدَیۡہِ وَلِتُنۡذِرَ اُمَّ الۡقُرٰی وَمَنۡ حَوۡلَہَا ۚ وَالَّذِیۡنَ یُؤۡمِنُوۡنَ بِالۡاٰخِرَۃِ یُؤۡمِنُوۡنَ بِہٖ ۖ وَہُمۡ عَلٰی صَلَاتِہِمۡ یُحَافِظُوۡنَ
6:156; 21:51; 38:30.
42:8.
23:10; 70:24.
安拉所派遣的一位先知出现的地方称为 “城市之母”, 因为这是人们喝精神乳汁的所在, 正如婴孩吮吸他母亲的乳汁。“在其周围的人” 可以指全世界, 因为穆圣的使命是给全人类准备的。
这些话表明, 一个相信后世的人也一定相信 «古兰经»。因此, 相信 «古兰经» 和相信后世是不可分离地连结在一起的; 二者缺一就没有意义。
6:156; 21:51; 38:30.
42:8.
23:10; 70:24.
The place where a Prophet of God appears is called "The Mother of towns," for it is there that men drink spiritual milk, even as a child sucks milk from the breast of its mother. The words, those around her, may signify the whole world as the Message of the Holy Prophet was meant for the whole of mankind.
These words show that a believer in the life to come must believe in the Qur’an also. Thus belief in the Qur’an and belief in the Hereafter are inseparably linked together; the one is meaningless without the other.
6:156; 21:51; 38:30.
42:8.
23:10; 70:24.
Important Words:
مبارك (full of blessings) is derived from برك . They say برك الجمل i.e. the camel kneeled and lay down on his chest with his legs folded. برك also means, he or it was or became firm, steady or steadfast. برك علی فلان (barraka) means, he prayed that such a one might be blessed. بارك علیه means, he kept or applied himself constantly to it. بارك الله علیك or بارك الله فیك means, may God bless thee and make thee prosperous, or may He continue to shower blessings on thee. تبارك الله means, blessed is God; or hallowed is He; or far removed is He from every imperfection; or highly exalted is He. برکة (barakat) means, a blessing; any good bestowed by God, particularly that which continues and goes on increasing. It also means, increase, abundance or plenty. برکة (birkah) means, a tank dug in the ground; a lake or pond; a place where water remains and collects. مبارك means, blessed; gifted with blessing; abounding in good (Lane).
ام (mother), apart from its primary meaning, also signifies: source, origin, foundation or basis; support or cause of subsistence; the main or chief part of a thing; anything to which other things are collected together or joined; place of collection or comprehension or combination of a thing. The word is also applied to inanimate things, as the Arabs say ام الشجرة i.e. the mother of the tree; or ام النجوم i.e. the Milky Way, viz. the place where the stars are collected together in a great multitude. ام القری signifies, the mother of the towns; the metropolis; Mecca, because, being the Qiblah it is the gathering-place of men, or because of all towns it possesses the greatest dignity. In fact, every city is the ام of the smaller towns around it (Lane). Mecca is called ام القری also because it is the source of spiritual food for mankind.
Commentary:
This verse further explains the rational argument contained in the words, you have been taught that which neither you nor your fathers knew (see note on the preceding verse), and makes it clear that it is the Quran that the words quoted above refer to. The present verse mentions four features of the Quran: (1) it has been sent by God; (2) it is full of blessings as the word مبارك indicates, i.e. it is a Book in which, like a برکة (a place where water collects), are collected all the blessings of God; (3) it fulfils that which preceded it, i.e. it fulfils the prophecies contained in the previous Scriptures; and (4) it has been revealed so that the Holy Prophet may warn thereby the Mother of towns and those around her. The place where a Prophet of God appears is called "the mother of towns," for it is out of it that men drink spiritual milk, even as a child sucks milk from the breast of its mother. The words, those around her, are intended to include the whole earth. The earth being round, all parts of it lie around the place where the Holy Prophet made his appearance, i.e. Mecca. Thus, this verse also proves the universal mission of the Holy Prophet.
The words, those who believe in the Hereafter believe therein, signify that a true believer in the life to come cannot but believe in the Quranic teaching. In fact, he who has real faith in the life to come will always be anxious to find out the truth in order to ensure his salvation, and he who earnestly seeks after truth will necessarily be led to believe in the Quran, for as the Quran says: those who strive in Our cause—We will surely guide them in Our ways (29:70). Thus, belief in the Quran is really a criterion of true faith in the Day of Resurrection. Again, when a man comes to have faith in the Quran, he will naturally try to mould his actions according to its teachings and will be constant in his Prayers.
c
6:156; 21:51; 38:30.
d
42:8.
e
23:10; 70:24.
437
安拉所派遣的一位先知出现的地方称为 “城市之母”, 因为这是人们喝精神乳汁的所在, 正如婴孩吮吸他母亲的乳汁。“在其周围的人” 可以指全世界, 因为穆圣的使命是给全人类准备的。
438
这些话表明, 一个相信后世的人也一定相信 «古兰经»。因此, 相信 «古兰经» 和相信后世是不可分离地连结在一起的; 二者缺一就没有意义。
a
6:156; 21:51; 38:30.
b
42:8.
c
23:10; 70:24.
835
Important Words:
مبارك (full of blessings) is derived from برك . They say برك الجمل i.e. the camel kneeled and lay down on his chest with his legs folded. برك also means, he or it was or became firm, steady or steadfast. برك علی فلان (barraka) means, he prayed that such a one might be blessed. بارك علیه means, he kept or applied himself constantly to it. بارك الله علیك or بارك الله فیك means, may God bless thee and make thee prosperous, or may He continue to shower blessings on thee. تبارك الله means, blessed is God; or hallowed is He; or far removed is He from every imperfection; or highly exalted is He. برکة (barakat) means, a blessing; any good bestowed by God, particularly that which continues and goes on increasing. It also means, increase, abundance or plenty. برکة (birkah) means, a tank dug in the ground; a lake or pond; a place where water remains and collects. مبارك means, blessed; gifted with blessing; abounding in good (Lane).
ام (mother), apart from its primary meaning, also signifies: source, origin, foundation or basis; support or cause of subsistence; the main or chief part of a thing; anything to which other things are collected together or joined; place of collection or comprehension or combination of a thing. The word is also applied to inanimate things, as the Arabs say ام الشجرة i.e. the mother of the tree; or ام النجوم i.e. the Milky Way, viz. the place where the stars are collected together in a great multitude. ام القری signifies, the mother of the towns; the metropolis; Mecca, because, being the Qiblah it is the gathering-place of men, or because of all towns it possesses the greatest dignity. In fact, every city is the ام of the smaller towns around it (Lane). Mecca is called ام القری also because it is the source of spiritual food for mankind.
Commentary:
This verse further explains the rational argument contained in the words, you have been taught that which neither you nor your fathers knew (see note on the preceding verse), and makes it clear that it is the Quran that the words quoted above refer to. The present verse mentions four features of the Quran: (1) it has been sent by God; (2) it is full of blessings as the word مبارك indicates, i.e. it is a Book in which, like a برکة (a place where water collects), are collected all the blessings of God; (3) it fulfils that which preceded it, i.e. it fulfils the prophecies contained in the previous Scriptures; and (4) it has been revealed so that the Holy Prophet may warn thereby the Mother of towns and those around her. The place where a Prophet of God appears is called "the mother of towns," for it is out of it that men drink spiritual milk, even as a child sucks milk from the breast of its mother. The words, those around her, are intended to include the whole earth. The earth being round, all parts of it lie around the place where the Holy Prophet made his appearance, i.e. Mecca. Thus, this verse also proves the universal mission of the Holy Prophet.
The words, those who believe in the Hereafter believe therein, signify that a true believer in the life to come cannot but believe in the Quranic teaching. In fact, he who has real faith in the life to come will always be anxious to find out the truth in order to ensure his salvation, and he who earnestly seeks after truth will necessarily be led to believe in the Quran, for as the Quran says: those who strive in Our cause—We will surely guide them in Our ways (29:70). Thus, belief in the Quran is really a criterion of true faith in the Day of Resurrection. Again, when a man comes to have faith in the Quran, he will naturally try to mould his actions according to its teachings and will be constant in his Prayers.
a
6:156; 21:51; 38:30.
b
42:8.
c
23:10; 70:24.
875
The place where a Prophet of God appears is called "The Mother of towns," for it is there that men drink spiritual milk, even as a child sucks milk from the breast of its mother. The words, those around her, may signify the whole world as the Message of the Holy Prophet was meant for the whole of mankind.
876
These words show that a believer in the life to come must believe in the Qur’an also. Thus belief in the Qur’an and belief in the Hereafter are inseparably linked together; the one is meaningless without the other.
وَمِمَّنۡ حَوۡلَکُمۡ مِّنَ الۡاَعۡرَابِ مُنٰفِقُوۡنَ ۖ وَمِنۡ اَہۡلِ الۡمَدِیۡنَۃِ ۖ مَرَدُوۡا عَلَی النِّفَاقِ لَا تَعۡلَمُہُمۡ ۖ نَحۡنُ نَعۡلَمُہُمۡ ۚ سَنُعَذِّبُہُمۡ مَّرَّتَیۡنِ ثُمَّ یُرَدُّوۡنَ اِلٰی عَذَابٍ عَظِیۡمٍ
پہلی دفعہ رسول اللہ صلی اللہ علیہ وسلم کی وفات کے بعد منافقوں کے ساتھی قبائلیوں کی تباہی اور پھر ان کی امید گاہ عیسائی عرب قبائل کی تباہی ہوئی۔
The reference particularly is to the five tribes of the desert living near Medina—Juhainah, Muzainah, Ashja‘, Aslam and Ghifar (Ma‘ani. iii. 361). After the death of the Holy Prophet the Hypocrites from among these tribes gathered together and made a raid on Medina (Khaldun, ii. 66).
"Twice" may not refer to the form of punishment but to the period thereof which is explained in 9:126. The word may signify that the Hypocrites would be punished in a period ranging from one to two years, i.e. if the punishment comes twice a year, they will have it in one year; if it comes once, they will have it in two years.
Important Words:
مردوا (persist) is from مرد (marada) which means, he exalted himself; he was insolent and audacious in pride and in acts of disobedience; he was excessively proud or disobedient or rebellious; he was refractory; or he outstripped others in pride or disobedience. They say مرد علی شیء i.e. he became accustomed or inured to a thing and persisted in it. The expression مردوا علی النفاق means, they have become accustomed or inured to hypocrisy and persist in it; or they have become insolent and audacious in hypocrisy. تمرد has about the same meaning. مرد(marida) with different vowel point at the central letter, means, it (a tree, etc.) was or became destitute of leaves (Lane & Aqrab).
Commentary:
The reference in the opening part of this verse is particularly to the five tribes of the desert living near Medina, viz. Juhainah, Muzainah, Ashja‘, Aslam and Ghifar (Ma‘ani, vol. iii. p. 361). After the death of the Holy Prophet, the hypocrites from among the neighbouring tribes gathered together and made a raid on Medina (Khaldun, ii. 66).
The word "twice" occurring in the sentence, We will punish them twice, does not refer to the form of punishment, but to the period thereof which is explained in 9:126 below, where the Quran says, do they not see that they are tried every year once or twice? Thus, the word "twice" occurring in the present verse signifies that the hypocrites would be punished in a period ranging from one to two years, i.e. if the punishment comes twice a year, they will have it in one year; if it comes once, they will have it in two years.
1
پہلی دفعہ رسول اللہ صلی اللہ علیہ وسلم کی وفات کے بعد منافقوں کے ساتھی قبائلیوں کی تباہی اور پھر ان کی امید گاہ عیسائی عرب قبائل کی تباہی ہوئی۔
1250
Important Words:
مردوا (persist) is from مرد (marada) which means, he exalted himself; he was insolent and audacious in pride and in acts of disobedience; he was excessively proud or disobedient or rebellious; he was refractory; or he outstripped others in pride or disobedience. They say مرد علی شیء i.e. he became accustomed or inured to a thing and persisted in it. The expression مردوا علی النفاق means, they have become accustomed or inured to hypocrisy and persist in it; or they have become insolent and audacious in hypocrisy. تمرد has about the same meaning. مرد(marida) with different vowel point at the central letter, means, it (a tree, etc.) was or became destitute of leaves (Lane & Aqrab).
Commentary:
The reference in the opening part of this verse is particularly to the five tribes of the desert living near Medina, viz. Juhainah, Muzainah, Ashja‘, Aslam and Ghifar (Ma‘ani, vol. iii. p. 361). After the death of the Holy Prophet, the hypocrites from among the neighbouring tribes gathered together and made a raid on Medina (Khaldun, ii. 66).
The word "twice" occurring in the sentence, We will punish them twice, does not refer to the form of punishment, but to the period thereof which is explained in 9:126 below, where the Quran says, do they not see that they are tried every year once or twice? Thus, the word "twice" occurring in the present verse signifies that the hypocrites would be punished in a period ranging from one to two years, i.e. if the punishment comes twice a year, they will have it in one year; if it comes once, they will have it in two years.
1213
The reference particularly is to the five tribes of the desert living near Medina—Juhainah, Muzainah, Ashja‘, Aslam and Ghifar (Ma‘ani. iii. 361). After the death of the Holy Prophet the Hypocrites from among these tribes gathered together and made a raid on Medina (Khaldun, ii. 66).
1214
"Twice" may not refer to the form of punishment but to the period thereof which is explained in 9:126. The word may signify that the Hypocrites would be punished in a period ranging from one to two years, i.e. if the punishment comes twice a year, they will have it in one year; if it comes once, they will have it in two years.
مَا کَانَ لِاَہۡلِ الۡمَدِیۡنَۃِ وَمَنۡ حَوۡلَہُمۡ مِّنَ الۡاَعۡرَابِ اَنۡ یَّتَخَلَّفُوۡا عَنۡ رَّسُوۡلِ اللّٰہِ وَلَا یَرۡغَبُوۡا بِاَنۡفُسِہِمۡ عَنۡ نَّفۡسِہٖ ۚ ذٰلِکَ بِاَنَّہُمۡ لَا یُصِیۡبُہُمۡ ظَمَاٌ وَّلَا نَصَبٌ وَّلَا مَخۡمَصَۃٌ فِیۡ سَبِیۡلِ اللّٰہِ وَلَا یَطَـُٔوۡنَ مَوۡطِئًا یَّغِیۡظُ الۡکُفَّارَ وَلَا یَنَالُوۡنَ مِنۡ عَدُوٍّ نَّیۡلًا اِلَّا کُتِبَ لَہُمۡ بِہٖ عَمَلٌ صٰلِحٌ ۚ اِنَّ اللّٰہَ لَا یُضِیۡعُ اَجۡرَ الۡمُحۡسِنِیۡنَ
Important Words:
موطأ (track) is derived from وطیء. They say وطئ الشیء he trod upon the thing with his feet or he trampled upon the thing. موطأtherefore, means, a place trod upon; a footstep or footprint (Lane).
Commentary:
The verse relates some of the great advantages which would have accrued to the laggards if they had accompanied the Holy Prophet to Tabuk.
1267
Important Words:
موطأ (track) is derived from وطیء. They say وطئ الشیء he trod upon the thing with his feet or he trampled upon the thing. موطأtherefore, means, a place trod upon; a footstep or footprint (Lane).
Commentary:
The verse relates some of the great advantages which would have accrued to the laggards if they had accompanied the Holy Prophet to Tabuk.
سُبۡحٰنَ الَّذِیۡۤ اَسۡرٰی بِعَبۡدِہٖ لَیۡلًا مِّنَ الۡمَسۡجِدِ الۡحَرَامِ اِلَی الۡمَسۡجِدِ الۡاَقۡصَا الَّذِیۡ بٰرَکۡنَا حَوۡلَہٗ لِنُرِیَہٗ مِنۡ اٰیٰتِنَاۤ ۚ اِنَّہٗ ہُوَ السَّمِیۡعُ الۡبَصِیۡرُ
5:22; 7:138.
这节经文谈的, 看来是穆圣的一种精神境界, «古兰经» 大多数注释家都以为这节经文指的是他的精神升天 (مِعْرَاج, Mi‘raj)。我们与大多数人的意见相反, 倾向於这节经文述及穆圣从麦加到耶路撒冷的精神夜行 (اِسْرَاء, Isra’) 的一种精神境界这一看法, 而他的精神升天在 «星宿» 章中谈得较详细。 «星宿» 章 (8-18) 提到的所有事实, 都是在宣称使者第五年伊历七月移居阿比西尼亚之后不久启示的。这些事实在述及穆圣精神升天的许多传说中都有详细的叙述。本章述及的穆圣从麦加到耶路撒冷的精神夜行, 根据 祖尔卡尼 (زُرْقَانِی, Zurqani) 的看法, 发生在宣称使者第11年, 而米尔 (Muir) 和其他基督教作者的意见是发生在第12年。然而, 按照梅尔达伟 (مَرْدَوَيْه, Merdawaih) 和伊本•萨德 (اِبْنِ سَعْد, Ibn-e-Sa‘d) 的看法, 精神夜行发生在三月的第17日 (رَبِيْعُ الْاَوَّل, Rabi‘ul-Awwal), 在伊历纪元前一年 (اَلْخَصَائِصُ الْكُبْرَى, Al-Khasa’isul-Kubra)。贝哈奎 (بَيْهَقِی, Baihaqi) 也说, 精神夜行发生在伊历纪元前一年或六个月, 这样所有有关的传说都表明, 精神夜行发生在宣称使者约第12年前一年或六个月, 那时在第10年卡迪贾 (خَدِيْجَة, Khadijah) 死后穆圣和他的堂姐妹, 乌姆·哈尼 (اُمّ هَانِی, Umm-e-Hani) 生活在一起。可是, 精神升天, 根据绝大多数学者的意见, 是在第5年发生的。因此, 这两件大事彼此时间相隔有六七年, 所以不可能是一回事; 认为两者各具特性而并无牵连。而且, 传说中谈到的穆圣在精神升天中所发生的种种事情与他在精神夜行中所发生的种种事情性质十分殊异。顺便也可说一下, 两件大事只是穆圣的精神境界, 并不是他亲身到天上去或旅行去耶路撒冷。
除了这一强有力的历史证明以外, 其他有关情况也证实这两件大事各具特性而并无牵连: (a) «古兰经» 在第53章中叙述了穆圣的精神升天, 但该章并不叙述他的夜行去耶路撒冷; 但本章谈及了他的精神夜行而不谈一切有关他的精神升天的事。(b) 乌姆·哈尼是穆圣的表姐妹, 精神夜行去耶路撒冷发生的那个夜晚和他住在一起, 她只说他去了耶路撒冷而没有说他到天上去过。她是听到穆圣夜行去耶路撒冷这件事的第一个人。至少有七个收集传说的人, 根据四位直接从她所谈的事情中得到情况的报道, 叙述了她讲的事情。所有这四位的报导都一致说, 穆圣去了耶路撒冷并在当夜又回到麦加。假如穆圣说了他也到天上去过, 乌姆•哈尼不会不在她的某一个报导中谈到这件事。可是, 她的任何一次报道中都没有说, 其结论明显地是, 在那个夜晚穆圣只精神夜行去了耶路撒冷而并没有精神升天。看来有些传说的报道人把精神夜行和精神升天这两件大事的叙述牵连在一起了。这种混淆不清的说法, 似乎是由夜行 (اِسْرَاء, Isra’,) 这个单词引起的, 因为它既可用于精神夜行, 又可用于精神升天; 而且在描写精神夜行和精神升天的某些细节中颇有相似之处, 更使人们加强和相信这种说法。(c) 首先叙述穆圣去耶路撒冷然后他又从耶路撒冷到天上去的传说, 也讲了在耶路撒冷他见到了包括阿丹、伊布拉欣、穆撒和伊撒在内的过去的许多先知, 而且在天上他又见到了相同的那些先知, 但没有认出他们。穆圣在耶路撒冷碰见的这些先知如何在他之前到了天上? 为什么他在同一旅程中没有多少时间以前刚看到过的那些先知他又不能认出他们了? 他在同一旅程中没多久以前刚碰见过的先知, 他竟不能认出, 这是不能理解的。这一重要论题的详细讨论, 可看英文 (《大版本的注释本》第1404-1409页)。
“远寺” 指耶路撒冷的先知素莱曼的寺。
本节经文所叙述的穆圣的精神境界, 意示一个伟大的预言。他远行到 “远寺” 意味着他移居麦地那并在那里他要建造一座清真寺, 这寺命定将要成为伊斯兰教的中心清真寺; 他在精神境界中见到自己领导着安拉所派遣的其他先知在祈祷, 意指新的宗教--------伊斯兰教--------将不局限于它所诞生的地方, 而是将遍及全世界, 所有宗教的信奉者都将参加到它的行列中来。他在精神境界中去耶路撒冷, 也可理解为意指他将受命统治耶路撒冷所在的那块领土。这一预言在圣职继位人欧麦尔时期实现了。这一精神境界也可理解为指穆圣在将来某一时期去远处的一次精神旅行而言。它意指在精神黑暗笼罩全世界时, 穆圣将从精神意义方面在他的追随者之一的身上再次出现在离他第一次降临的一个很远的地方。针对穆圣第二次降临的叙述, 可见62:3-4节经文。
5:22; 7:138.
The verse which seems to mention a vision of the Holy Prophet is supposed by most Commentators of the Qur’an to refer to his Mi‘raj (Spiritual Ascension). Contrary to popular opinion we are inclined to the view that the verse deals with the Isra’ (Spiritual Night Journey) of the Holy Prophet in a vision from Mecca to Jerusalem, while his Mi‘raj (Spiritual Ascension) has been dealt with at some length in Surah An-Najm. All the facts, mentioned in Surah An-Najm (vv. 8-18) which was revealed immediately after the Emigration to Abyssinia which took place in the month of Rajab in the 5th year of the Call, are to be found narrated in detail in the traditions which deal with the Mi‘raj of the Holy Prophet. The Isra’ or the Spiritual Night Journey of the Holy Prophet from Mecca to Jerusalem, with which the present verse deals, took place in the eleventh year of the Call, according to Zurqani, and in the 12th year according to Muir and some other Christia
"The Distant Mosque" refers to Prophet Solomon’s Temple at Jerusalem.
The Vision of the Prophet referred to in the present verse implied a great prophecy. His journey to "The Distant Mosque" meant his Emigration to Medina where he was to build a Mosque which was destined to become later on the Central Mosque of Islam, and his seeing himself in the Vision that he was leading other Prophets of God in Prayers signified that the New Faith— Islam—was not to remain confined to the place of its birth but was to spread all over the world and the followers of all religions were to join its fold. His going to Jerusalem in the Vision may also be understood to mean that he was to be given dominion over the territory in which Jerusalem was situated. This prophecy was fulfilled during the Caliphate of ‘Umar. The Vision may also be taken as referring to a spiritual journey of the Holy Prophet to a distant land in some future time. It meant that when spiritual darkness would envelop the entire world, the Holy Prophet would appear in a spiritual sense a second time in the person of one
5:22; 7:138.
Important Words:
اسری (carried) is derived from سری. They say سری باللیل او سری اللیل i.e. he journeyed or travelled by night or in the night. اسراهاو اسری به means, he made him journey or travel, or he transported him by night or in the night; he journeyed or travelled with him, by night or in the night, or simply, he carried him. The Quranic expression سبحان الذی اسری بعبدہ لیلا means, Glory be to Him Who transported His servant by night. According to some lexicologists اسری is used for journey in the first part of the night and سری for the last part of it. According to others, the verb اسری is from سراة which means, a wide tract of land. According to this meaning the expression اسری بعبدہ means, Who transported His servant over a wide tract of land (Lane, Aqrab & Mufradat).
المسجد الاقصی (the Distant Mosque). اقصی is derived from قصی. They say قصی المکان i.e. the place was or became distant. اقصیmeans, distant or very distant (Aqrab). المسجد الاقصی may signify the Prophet Solomon’s Temple at Jerusalem, the Holy Prophet’s Mosque at Medina or the Promised Messiah’s Mosque at Qadian.
Commentary:
The verse is supposed by almost all commentators of the Quran to refer to the معراج (Spiritual Ascension of the Holy Prophet). The subject of Mi‘raj has become much complicated and confused on account of the many divergent traditions that deal with it. Contrary to popular view we are, however, inclined towards the opinion that the present verse deals with the اسراء (Night Journey) of the Holy Prophet while his Mi‘raj (Spiritual Ascension) has been dealt with in Surah An-Najm. That Surah removes all the obscurities and ambiguities that have confused the popular mind in regard to this important subject. In Surah An-Najm we have:
It is nothing but a revelation that is revealed. The One of mighty powers has taught him (this knowledge): the One Possessor of strength. So He manifested His ascendance (over everything) and He revealed His Word when he was on the uppermost horizon. Then he drew nearer (to God); then he came down to (His creatures), so that he became, as it were, the one chord of two bows or closer still. And He revealed to His servant that which He revealed. The heart (of the Prophet) was not untrue to that which he saw. Will you then dispute with him concerning that which he saw? And certainly he saw Him a second time, near the Lote-tree beyond which none may pass, near which is the Garden of Abode. This was when a wonderful and glorious Divine manifestation covered the Lote-tree. The eye deviated not nor did it wander. Surely, he saw the greatest of the Signs of his Lord. (53:5-19).
These verses give a graphic description of the Mi‘raj, for the facts mentioned in them all relate to it, e.g. the Holy Prophet went up to the Lote-tree; (2) the Lote-tree was covered with "something"; (3) the Prophet saw the Paradise (the Garden of Abode) near the Lote-tree; (4) he became, as it were, the one chord of two bows; (5) he saw God (and the heart of the Prophet was not untrue to that which he saw); and (6) the word of God descended on the Lote-tree.
All these details have also been mentioned in the traditions which deal with the Mi‘raj. As for the Lote-tree, AbuHurairah (as reported by Ibn Jarir, Ibn Abu Hatim, Ibn Merdawaih, Abu Ya‘la and Baihaqi) says, "In the night of Mi‘raj, after having seen other Prophets of God in heaven, the Holy Prophet proceeded further till he reached the Lote-tree." The same fact has been mentioned in the tradition quoted on the authority of Abu Sa‘id al-Khudri by Ibn Jarir, Ibn Mundhir, Ibn Abi Hatim, Ibn Merdawaih, Baihaqi, and Ibn ‘Asakir, and in the tradition quoted on the authority of Malik Ibn Sa‘sa’ by Ahmad bin Hanbal, Bukhari, Muslim and Ibn Jarir and in the tradition quoted on the authority of Anas by Bukhari (Bukhari, chapter on Mi‘raj, & Al-Khasa’isul-Kubra, vol. 1, pp. 153, 167 & 174).
The second important detail mentioned in Surah An-Najm is that when the Prophet reached the Lote-tree, he saw it covered with some extraordinary thing (53:17). This has also been mentioned in the traditions that deal with Mi‘raj. In the tradition reported by Abu Hurairah to which reference has been made above we read فغشیھا نور الخلاق عزوجل i.e. when the Holy Prophet reached the Lote-tree, the light of the Powerful and Glorious Creator covered it (Al-Khasa’isul-Kubra, vol. 1, p. 174). Similarly, in the tradition reported by Anas we have: "Then the Lote-tree became covered with a special Divine grace so much so that in its newly changed condition its beauty defied all description" (Muslim, Kitabul-Iman)
The third incident referred to in chapter 53 (An-Najm) is that the Holy Prophet saw Paradise near the Lote-tree. This has also found mention in traditions which deal with Mi‘raj. In the tradition quoted on the authority of Abu Sa‘id al-Khudri by Ibn Jarir and mentioned in some other books of Hadith we read: ثم انی رفعت الی الجنة i.e. after I had seen the Prophets in the heavens I was taken up to Paradise. This is followed by the words ثم انی رفعت الی سدرة المنتھی i.e. after paradise I was led up to the Lote-tree (Ibn Jarir, vol. 15, p. 11).
The fourth important detail mentioned in chapter 53 is that when the Holy Prophet had a vision of those celestial scenes he was transported into a highly spiritual state which has been described in the words, So that he became, as it were, the one chord of two bows or closer still.
This fact has also been mentioned in the traditions about Mi‘raj. In the tradition reported by Abu Sa‘id al-Khudri and referred to above we find the words: فکان قاب قوسین او ادنی i.e. between God and the Prophet there was the one chord of two bows or closer still.
The fifth important and relevant incident mentioned in chapter 53 is that during the Mi‘raj the Prophet had a vision of God Himself (53:12). This fact has also been mentioned in the traditions quoted by Ibn Merdawaih on the authority of Asma’, daughter of Abu Bakr (Al-Khasa’isul-Kubra, vol. 1, p. 177), and by Muslim on the authority of Ibn ‘Abbas (Muslim, Kitabul-Iman). In the latter tradition we read راٰہ بفؤادہ مرتین i.e. twice the Prophet saw God with the eyes of his heart.
The sixth notable detail mentioned in chapter 53 is that God spoke to the Holy Prophet near the Lote-tree (53:11). This fact has also found a mention in the traditions. For instance, in the tradition reported by Abu Hurairah we have فکلمهاللّٰه تعالی عند ذالک i.e. so God spoke to him near it—the Lote-tree (Al-Khasa’isul-Kubra, vol. 1, p. 174). Similarly, Ibn Abu Hatim has reported on the authority of Anas bin Malik that when the Prophet arrived near the Lote-tree, God addressed him by name saying یا محمد i.e. O Muhammad, and then Anas continues to finish the hadith. These very striking similarities and resemblances between the subject matter of Surah An-Najm and the traditions about Mi‘raj leave no doubt that it is the Mi‘raj of the Holy Prophet which has been described in that Surah.
After having established the fact that Surah An-Najm contains a description of the Mi‘raj it is important to point out that this Surah has been admitted by the consensus of scholarly opinion to have been revealed in the fifth year of the Call or even earlier. The following very well-known historical event proves it. A party of early Muslims had sought refuge in Abyssinia. They left Mecca in the seventh month of the fifth year of the Call (Muir, The Life of Mahomet, 1923, p. 69). Now the traditions agree that three months had hardly elapsed since this little band of the Faithful had left for Abyssinia when they returned to Mecca (Muir, The Life of Mahomet, 1923, p. 80). The reason which, according to traditions, led to their early return was this. The Holy Prophet was one day reciting chapter 53. When he came to the words, Rather prostrate yourselves before Allah, and worship Him (53:63), the Prophet and the Muslims with him fell prostrate on the ground. The disbelievers present on the occasion, being overwhelmed with the grand theme of the Surah and the solemnity of the occasion, also joined the Prophet in prostration. This gave rise to the rumour that the Quraish had converted to Islam. When this rumour reached Abyssinia, Muslim refugees hastened back to Mecca. This shows that the recitation of the Surah which led to this incident having taken place, must have been revealed in the fifth year of the Call or sometime prior to it.
After a brief description of the Mi‘raj or the Spiritual Ascension of the Holy Prophet and of the time when it took place, it may be noted here that the اسراء Isra’ or the Night Journey of the Holy Prophet from Mecca to Jerusalem, with which the present verse deals took place in the eleventh year of the Call (Zurqani, vol. 1, p. 306). Christian writers, however, put it in the twelfth year of the Call (Muir, The Life of Mahomet, 1923, p. 121). Traditions relating to this incident also corroborate the date referred to above. According to the traditions quoted by Ibn Merdawaih and Ibn Sa‘d, the Isra’ took place on the seventeenth of Rabi‘ul-Awwal, a year before the Hijrah (Al-Khasa’isul-Kubra, vol. 1, p. 162). Similarly, a tradition quoted by Baihaqi on the authority of Ibn Shihab, relates that the Isra’ took place a year before the Hijrah. Another tradition also quoted by Baihaqi places the Night Journey to Jerusalem six months before the Hijrah (Al-Khasa’isul-Kubra, vol. 1, p. 162).
All these traditions go to prove that the Isra’ took place six months or a year prior to the Hijrah and it has been shown above that the Mi‘raj took place about the fifth year of the Call. Thus the two incidents are separated from each other by an interval of six or seven years and therefore cannot be identical; the Mi‘raj must be regarded as quite distinct and separate from the Isra’.
Irrefutable evidence which shows that the Mi‘raj and the Isra’ were two separate incidents is the fact that it was during the fifth year of the Call that the five daily prayers were enjoined upon Muslims. If the Mi‘raj be considered as identical with the Isra’, then it will also have to be admitted that the five daily Prayers were enjoined upon Muslims in the eleventh or twelfth year of the Call which is evidently wrong because all traditionalists agree that the five Prayers were prescribed in the very early years of the Call.
It may incidentally be stated here that the Mi‘raj itself seems to have occurred twice. As it appears from the Hadith, the first Mi‘raj occurred in the beginning of the Holy Prophet’s ministry when the foundation of the Shari‘ah may be said to have been laid and Prayers were made obligatory, which seem to have taken place in the first year of the Call (Bukhari, chapter on Tauhid; Jarir, vol. 15, p. 4). The second or the better known Mi‘raj took place about the fifth year of the Call when the five prescribed Prayers were made obligatory and chapter 53, containing a description of it, was revealed (or it may have taken place even earlier and may have been subsequently referred to in Ch. 53). The Isra’, however, is quite a separate event which undoubtedly occurred in the eleventh or twelfth year of the Call when the Prophet was living in the house of his cousin, Ummi Hani, after the death of his wife, Khadijah, which took place in the tenth year of the Call after the Prophet had come out of the Valley (شعب) of Abu Talib.
In addition to this strong historical evidence, other relevant circumstances also lend support to the view that the two incidents are quite distinct and separate from each other:
(1) The first evidence in this connection is furnished by the Quran itself. It gives an account of the Prophet’s Mi‘raj(Spiritual Ascension) in chapter 53 but makes no reference to his Isra’ (Night Journey to Jerusalem), while in the present Surah it speaks of his Isra’ but omits all allusion to his Mi‘raj. This shows that the two incidents took place separately and, therefore, could not be mentioned together. It is inconceivable that the Quran should have mentioned the concluding portion of this incident in one Surah and the first portion of the selfsame incident in another Surah five years later.
(2) The second evidence which supports this inference is the fact that there was only one person, namely Ummi Hani, who was present with the Prophet during the night when the Isra’ (Spiritual Night Journey to Jerusalem) took place and she speaks only of his visit to Jerusalem and makes no mention of his journey to the heavens. She was the first person whom the Prophet informed of his Night Journey to Jerusalem and at least seven collectors of traditions have given her account of the incident on the authority of four different reporters who have reported the incident from her. All these four reporters concur in saying that the Prophet went to Jerusalem and returned to Mecca the same night. If the Prophet had spoken of his Ascension to the heavens also, Ummi Hani could not have failed to refer to it in one or other of her reports. But she does not do so in any of her reports, which conclusively shows that during the night in question the Holy Prophet made the Isra’ or the Spiritual Night Journey to Jerusalem only and that the Mi‘raj did not take place on that occasion. So the Isra’ or the Prophet’s Spiritual Night Journey to Jerusalem should not be confused with the Mi‘raj or his Spiritual Ascension to heaven.
(3) All the different reporters of this incident may be placed in three categories: (a) those who speak of the Prophet’s Ascension direct to heaven and make no mention of his Journey to Jerusalem; (b) those who speak first of his Journey to Jerusalem and then of his Ascension to heaven; and (c) those who only speak of His Journey to Jerusalem and make no mention at all of his Ascension to heaven. Of the reporters of this last group, there is a goodly number who say expressly that the Prophet returned to Mecca after his Journey to Jerusalem.
It is evident that the reports of the first group point to the Mi‘raj as being distinct from the Isra’ inasmuch as, according to them, the Holy Prophet was taken from his house direct to heaven, so Jerusalem could not lie in his way. The reporters of this group are Anas, Malik bin Sa‘sa’ and Abu Dharr, who was one of the earliest converts to Islam.
Similarly, the reports of those who speak only of the Prophet’s Journey to Jerusalem and make no mention of his Ascension to heaven also show that when he made his Night Journey to Jerusalem, he did not ascend to heaven, for if he had ascended to heaven after his visit to Jerusalem, it is inconceivable that the reporters, after mentioning the less important part of the vision, should have omitted to mention its more important part which related to his Ascension to heaven, and to his having seen God and having had communion with Him. The reporters of this group of traditions are Anas and ‘Abdullah bin Mas‘ud, the latter being one of the earliest and best-loved of the Prophet’s Companions.
Reports of the third group clearly state that the Prophet returned to Mecca after his visit to Jerusalem and did not ascend to heaven. These also demonstrate the two events to be distinct and separate from each other. The reporters of this group are ‘Abdullah bin Mas‘ud, ‘Abdullah bin ‘Abbas, ‘A’ishah and Ummi Salma and Ummi Hani. All of them with the exception of ‘Abdullah bin Mas‘ud, who, as stated above, was among the earliest converts to Islam, were the Prophet’s very near relatives and enjoyed his intimate and constant company. It is impossible to impugn their evidence.
Another argument in favour of Isra’ being distinct from Mi‘raj are the traditions which speak of the Prophet’s transportation to the heavens after his visit to Jerusalem and then of his return from the heavens to Jerusalem and from Jerusalem back to Mecca (Al-Khasa’isul-Kubra, vol. I, p. 154). Now, going to Jerusalem before ascending to heaven may be considered as reasonable, for it served for the Prophet the purpose of offering Prayers at the place where a large party of heavenly Messengers had delivered their Divine Message, but it is difficult to understand why the same route should have been followed during the return journey, when on his return from heaven the Prophet is not reported to have performed any specific act at Jerusalem. The only reasonable assumption is that the account of the Isra’ became mixed up with that of the Mi‘raj. Anas seems to have related the account of both the Isra’ and the Mi‘raj to some reporters who mixed up the two accounts and mistakenly thought that they formed the two parts of the same event and thus these reporters were led to believe that while coming back from his Mi‘raj the Prophet went to Jerusalem from where he returned to Mecca. In fact, the confusion seems to have arisen from the same word اسراء (which means a night journey) having been used for both the Holy Prophet’s اسراء (Spiritual Night Journey to Jerusalem) and his معراج (Spiritual Ascension to heaven); and the resemblance that existed in some of the details in the description of the اسراء (Isra’) and the معراج (Mi‘raj) heightened and confirmed it.
Internal evidence of the traditions also points to the fact that the Isra’ and the Mi‘raj were two distinct and separate events. The traditions which first give an account of the Prophet’s visit to Jerusalem and then of his transportation from Jerusalem to heaven also state that at Jerusalem he met the former Prophets, including Adam, Abraham, Moses, and Jesus, and that in the heavens he met the same Prophets again but could not recognize them. Now how did these Prophets whom he had met at Jerusalem reach the heavens before him and why could he not recognize them while he had seen them only a short while ago in the course of the same journey? If the two meetings had taken place separately and at a distance of long intervals, it was possible that he could not have recognized some of them at the time of the second meeting in a changed atmosphere. But it is inconceivable that he should have failed to recognize them when he had met them only a short while ago in the course of the same journey.
It having been established that the Isra’ and the Mi‘raj were two separate and distinct events, it is necessary to give a somewhat detailed account of Isra’ as given in the traditions as it forms the subject matter of the verse under comment. The most reliable account of it is to be found in the tradition quoted by Ibn Jarir on the authority of Anas bin Malik. It is briefly as follows:
'When the Archangel Gabriel brought the Buraq to the Holy Prophet, he mounted it, and had gone only a short distance, when he saw an old woman. The Prophet asked Gabriel who she was, but Gabriel gave no answer to his question; on the contrary he told him not to ask questions, just as Moses in his معراج (Spiritual Ascension) was told not to put unnecessary questions (18:71). After the Prophet had gone a little further he saw a man calling him by name from across the road in order to invite his attention to himself. But Gabriel asked him again not to heed his call. When the Prophet had proceeded a little further, he met a party of men who greeted him with the greeting of peace. Gabriel told him to return their greeting. After this, the Prophet reached the Holy House in Jerusalem. There Gabriel presented him with three cups containing water, milk and wine. The Prophet took the cup containing milk and drank it and refused to accept the other two. Upon this Gabriel said to him, "Thou hast, indeed, chosen the right course which is in perfect harmony with a pure, unsullied nature. If thou hadst accepted water or wine, thou and thine followers would have been lost." Then Adam and the other Prophets were presented to him, and the Holy Prophet led them in Prayers. After this Gabriel explained to him that the old woman he saw on the way was an embodied representation of the life of this world and only as much was left of the life of the world as was left of the life of that old woman. As for the person who called him from across the road, he was Iblis, the enemy of God. The party of men who greeted him were the Prophets Abraham, Moses and Jesus' (Ibn Jarir).
This tradition serves as a key to resolve this whole allegory. It gives the most reliable and correct account of the Isra’. It shows that the Journey to Jerusalem was no physical act but only a vision. This is clear from the following facts:
(a) It is stated in this tradition that during the Night Journey to Jerusalem, the Prophet saw an old woman, a person standing on one side of the road, and three cups full of water, wine and milk (of which the Prophet chose the last), and Gabriel told him what all these things signified. The explanation and interpretation by Gabriel of the things the Prophet saw shows that the Journey was only a vision, for it is only things seen in visions that need interpretation and explanation.
(b) The Night Journey has been spoken of as a vision in the present Surah (v. 61). Accordingly, we find that several Companions of the Prophet and some of the later scholars of Islam have, on the basis of this verse, declared the Isra’ to be a vision. For instance, Ibn Ishaq and Ibn Jarir report that when Mu‘awiyah was asked concerning the Isra’, he said that it was a vision which came out to be true (Manthur, vol. 4, p. 197). ‘A’isha is also reported to have held the same view. (Hisham and Mas‘ud, vol. 1).
(c) We learn from the hadith that when the Holy Prophet spoke of his Night Journey to Jerusalem he was asked to give a description of the Temple at Jerusalem. The Prophet is reported to have said that at that time God presented before his eyes an embodied representation of the Temple and he was thus able to describe it as demanded of him (Ibn Kathir, vol. 6, p. 18).
The Vision of the Prophet referred to in the present verse implied a great prophecy. His journey to the Distant Mosque (المسجد الاقصی) meant his Migration to Medina where he was to build a Mosque which was destined to become later the Centre of all Faiths and Dispensations and the Holy Prophet’s seeing himself in the Vision leading other Prophets of God in Prayers signified that the new Faith Islam was not to remain confined to the place of its birth but was to spread all over the world and the followers of all religions were to join its fold. His going to Jerusalem in the Vision may also be understood to mean that he was to be given dominion over the territory in which Jerusalem was situated. This prophecy was fulfilled in the Caliphate of Umar.
The words of the verse also lend support to the view that the Vision constituted a prophecy about the great future of Islam. The Distant Mosque (المسجد الاقصی) that the Prophet saw in the Vision represented his own Mosque at Medina, Jerusalem stood for Medina and his going to Jerusalem signified his Migration to Medina. The Vision begins with the words سبحان الذی (Glory be to Him) which indicated that the Migration of the Prophet would redound to the Glory of God. The word سبحان itself shows that the Vision embodied a prophecy; for a physical journey to the Temple at Jerusalem could not be regarded as evidence of the Glory of God. But as establishment of the Islamic State at Medina was to fulfil a prophecy, that event did serve as evidence of Divine glory. Thus the words, Glory be to Him Who carried His servant by night from the Sacred Mosque to the Distant Mosque, signified that God would take the Holy Prophet to a Mosque resembling المسجد الاقصی (the Distant Mosque) at Jerusalem so that His word might be fulfilled.
The words, We might show him some of Our Signs, pointed to the great possibilities of the Prophet’s journey to Medina. The Prophet’s Migration to Medina served as a prelude to the glorious future of Islam which was then hidden from the eyes of the world and thus God’s great signs were manifested. The reason why the Holy Prophet’s Mosque was called المسجد الاقصی (the Distant Mosque), and why Medina was shown to him in the Vision in the form of Jerusalem was that the blessings which God had conferred on the Mosque at Jerusalem were also in store in a greater measure for the Prophet’s Mosque at Medina.
The Prophecy implied in the words, Who carried His servant by night, was fulfilled when the Prophet left Mecca at dead of night. He did not undertake this journey of his own accord but in pursuance of God’s express command. And as in his Night Journey to Jerusalem in the Vision he was accompanied by the Archangel Gabriel, so in his Flight to Medina he was accompanied by his most faithful companion, Abu Bakr. The word "Gabriel", which means "Man of God", fitly applies to Abu Bakr and portrays his spiritual eminence.
The Vision may also be taken as referring to a spiritual journey of the Holy Prophet to a distant land in some future time. It meant that when spiritual darkness enveloped the entire world, the Prophet would appear in spirit a second time in the person of one of his followers, in a land far away from the scene of his first advent—in the Punjab. A pointed reference to this second advent of the Holy Prophet is to be found in 62:3-5.
a
5:22; 7:138.
695
这节经文谈的, 看来是穆圣的一种精神境界, «古兰经» 大多数注释家都以为这节经文指的是他的精神升天 (مِعْرَاج, Mi‘raj)。我们与大多数人的意见相反, 倾向於这节经文述及穆圣从麦加到耶路撒冷的精神夜行 (اِسْرَاء, Isra’) 的一种精神境界这一看法, 而他的精神升天在 «星宿» 章中谈得较详细。 «星宿» 章 (8-18) 提到的所有事实, 都是在宣称使者第五年伊历七月移居阿比西尼亚之后不久启示的。这些事实在述及穆圣精神升天的许多传说中都有详细的叙述。本章述及的穆圣从麦加到耶路撒冷的精神夜行, 根据 祖尔卡尼 (زُرْقَانِی, Zurqani) 的看法, 发生在宣称使者第11年, 而米尔 (Muir) 和其他基督教作者的意见是发生在第12年。然而, 按照梅尔达伟 (مَرْدَوَيْه, Merdawaih) 和伊本•萨德 (اِبْنِ سَعْد, Ibn-e-Sa‘d) 的看法, 精神夜行发生在三月的第17日 (رَبِيْعُ الْاَوَّل, Rabi‘ul-Awwal), 在伊历纪元前一年 (اَلْخَصَائِصُ الْكُبْرَى, Al-Khasa’isul-Kubra)。贝哈奎 (بَيْهَقِی, Baihaqi) 也说, 精神夜行发生在伊历纪元前一年或六个月, 这样所有有关的传说都表明, 精神夜行发生在宣称使者约第12年前一年或六个月, 那时在第10年卡迪贾 (خَدِيْجَة, Khadijah) 死后穆圣和他的堂姐妹, 乌姆·哈尼 (اُمّ هَانِی, Umm-e-Hani) 生活在一起。可是, 精神升天, 根据绝大多数学者的意见, 是在第5年发生的。因此, 这两件大事彼此时间相隔有六七年, 所以不可能是一回事; 认为两者各具特性而并无牵连。而且, 传说中谈到的穆圣在精神升天中所发生的种种事情与他在精神夜行中所发生的种种事情性质十分殊异。顺便也可说一下, 两件大事只是穆圣的精神境界, 并不是他亲身到天上去或旅行去耶路撒冷。
除了这一强有力的历史证明以外, 其他有关情况也证实这两件大事各具特性而并无牵连: (a) «古兰经» 在第53章中叙述了穆圣的精神升天, 但该章并不叙述他的夜行去耶路撒冷; 但本章谈及了他的精神夜行而不谈一切有关他的精神升天的事。(b) 乌姆·哈尼是穆圣的表姐妹, 精神夜行去耶路撒冷发生的那个夜晚和他住在一起, 她只说他去了耶路撒冷而没有说他到天上去过。她是听到穆圣夜行去耶路撒冷这件事的第一个人。至少有七个收集传说的人, 根据四位直接从她所谈的事情中得到情况的报道, 叙述了她讲的事情。所有这四位的报导都一致说, 穆圣去了耶路撒冷并在当夜又回到麦加。假如穆圣说了他也到天上去过, 乌姆•哈尼不会不在她的某一个报导中谈到这件事。可是, 她的任何一次报道中都没有说, 其结论明显地是, 在那个夜晚穆圣只精神夜行去了耶路撒冷而并没有精神升天。看来有些传说的报道人把精神夜行和精神升天这两件大事的叙述牵连在一起了。这种混淆不清的说法, 似乎是由夜行 (اِسْرَاء, Isra’,) 这个单词引起的, 因为它既可用于精神夜行, 又可用于精神升天; 而且在描写精神夜行和精神升天的某些细节中颇有相似之处, 更使人们加强和相信这种说法。(c) 首先叙述穆圣去耶路撒冷然后他又从耶路撒冷到天上去的传说, 也讲了在耶路撒冷他见到了包括阿丹、伊布拉欣、穆撒和伊撒在内的过去的许多先知, 而且在天上他又见到了相同的那些先知, 但没有认出他们。穆圣在耶路撒冷碰见的这些先知如何在他之前到了天上? 为什么他在同一旅程中没有多少时间以前刚看到过的那些先知他又不能认出他们了? 他在同一旅程中没多久以前刚碰见过的先知, 他竟不能认出, 这是不能理解的。这一重要论题的详细讨论, 可看英文 (《大版本的注释本》第1404-1409页)。
696
“远寺” 指耶路撒冷的先知素莱曼的寺。
697
本节经文所叙述的穆圣的精神境界, 意示一个伟大的预言。他远行到 “远寺” 意味着他移居麦地那并在那里他要建造一座清真寺, 这寺命定将要成为伊斯兰教的中心清真寺; 他在精神境界中见到自己领导着安拉所派遣的其他先知在祈祷, 意指新的宗教--------伊斯兰教--------将不局限于它所诞生的地方, 而是将遍及全世界, 所有宗教的信奉者都将参加到它的行列中来。他在精神境界中去耶路撒冷, 也可理解为意指他将受命统治耶路撒冷所在的那块领土。这一预言在圣职继位人欧麦尔时期实现了。这一精神境界也可理解为指穆圣在将来某一时期去远处的一次精神旅行而言。它意指在精神黑暗笼罩全世界时, 穆圣将从精神意义方面在他的追随者之一的身上再次出现在离他第一次降临的一个很远的地方。针对穆圣第二次降临的叙述, 可见62:3-4节经文。
b
5:22; 7:138.
1931
Important Words:
اسری (carried) is derived from سری. They say سری باللیل او سری اللیل i.e. he journeyed or travelled by night or in the night. اسراهاو اسری به means, he made him journey or travel, or he transported him by night or in the night; he journeyed or travelled with him, by night or in the night, or simply, he carried him. The Quranic expression سبحان الذی اسری بعبدہ لیلا means, Glory be to Him Who transported His servant by night. According to some lexicologists اسری is used for journey in the first part of the night and سری for the last part of it. According to others, the verb اسری is from سراة which means, a wide tract of land. According to this meaning the expression اسری بعبدہ means, Who transported His servant over a wide tract of land (Lane, Aqrab & Mufradat).
المسجد الاقصی (the Distant Mosque). اقصی is derived from قصی. They say قصی المکان i.e. the place was or became distant. اقصیmeans, distant or very distant (Aqrab). المسجد الاقصی may signify the Prophet Solomon’s Temple at Jerusalem, the Holy Prophet’s Mosque at Medina or the Promised Messiah’s Mosque at Qadian.
Commentary:
The verse is supposed by almost all commentators of the Quran to refer to the معراج (Spiritual Ascension of the Holy Prophet). The subject of Mi‘raj has become much complicated and confused on account of the many divergent traditions that deal with it. Contrary to popular view we are, however, inclined towards the opinion that the present verse deals with the اسراء (Night Journey) of the Holy Prophet while his Mi‘raj (Spiritual Ascension) has been dealt with in Surah An-Najm. That Surah removes all the obscurities and ambiguities that have confused the popular mind in regard to this important subject. In Surah An-Najm we have:
It is nothing but a revelation that is revealed. The One of mighty powers has taught him (this knowledge): the One Possessor of strength. So He manifested His ascendance (over everything) and He revealed His Word when he was on the uppermost horizon. Then he drew nearer (to God); then he came down to (His creatures), so that he became, as it were, the one chord of two bows or closer still. And He revealed to His servant that which He revealed. The heart (of the Prophet) was not untrue to that which he saw. Will you then dispute with him concerning that which he saw? And certainly he saw Him a second time, near the Lote-tree beyond which none may pass, near which is the Garden of Abode. This was when a wonderful and glorious Divine manifestation covered the Lote-tree. The eye deviated not nor did it wander. Surely, he saw the greatest of the Signs of his Lord. (53:5-19).
These verses give a graphic description of the Mi‘raj, for the facts mentioned in them all relate to it, e.g. the Holy Prophet went up to the Lote-tree; (2) the Lote-tree was covered with "something"; (3) the Prophet saw the Paradise (the Garden of Abode) near the Lote-tree; (4) he became, as it were, the one chord of two bows; (5) he saw God (and the heart of the Prophet was not untrue to that which he saw); and (6) the word of God descended on the Lote-tree.
All these details have also been mentioned in the traditions which deal with the Mi‘raj. As for the Lote-tree, AbuHurairah (as reported by Ibn Jarir, Ibn Abu Hatim, Ibn Merdawaih, Abu Ya‘la and Baihaqi) says, "In the night of Mi‘raj, after having seen other Prophets of God in heaven, the Holy Prophet proceeded further till he reached the Lote-tree." The same fact has been mentioned in the tradition quoted on the authority of Abu Sa‘id al-Khudri by Ibn Jarir, Ibn Mundhir, Ibn Abi Hatim, Ibn Merdawaih, Baihaqi, and Ibn ‘Asakir, and in the tradition quoted on the authority of Malik Ibn Sa‘sa’ by Ahmad bin Hanbal, Bukhari, Muslim and Ibn Jarir and in the tradition quoted on the authority of Anas by Bukhari (Bukhari, chapter on Mi‘raj, & Al-Khasa’isul-Kubra, vol. 1, pp. 153, 167 & 174).
The second important detail mentioned in Surah An-Najm is that when the Prophet reached the Lote-tree, he saw it covered with some extraordinary thing (53:17). This has also been mentioned in the traditions that deal with Mi‘raj. In the tradition reported by Abu Hurairah to which reference has been made above we read فغشیھا نور الخلاق عزوجل i.e. when the Holy Prophet reached the Lote-tree, the light of the Powerful and Glorious Creator covered it (Al-Khasa’isul-Kubra, vol. 1, p. 174). Similarly, in the tradition reported by Anas we have: "Then the Lote-tree became covered with a special Divine grace so much so that in its newly changed condition its beauty defied all description" (Muslim, Kitabul-Iman)
The third incident referred to in chapter 53 (An-Najm) is that the Holy Prophet saw Paradise near the Lote-tree. This has also found mention in traditions which deal with Mi‘raj. In the tradition quoted on the authority of Abu Sa‘id al-Khudri by Ibn Jarir and mentioned in some other books of Hadith we read: ثم انی رفعت الی الجنة i.e. after I had seen the Prophets in the heavens I was taken up to Paradise. This is followed by the words ثم انی رفعت الی سدرة المنتھی i.e. after paradise I was led up to the Lote-tree (Ibn Jarir, vol. 15, p. 11).
The fourth important detail mentioned in chapter 53 is that when the Holy Prophet had a vision of those celestial scenes he was transported into a highly spiritual state which has been described in the words, So that he became, as it were, the one chord of two bows or closer still.
This fact has also been mentioned in the traditions about Mi‘raj. In the tradition reported by Abu Sa‘id al-Khudri and referred to above we find the words: فکان قاب قوسین او ادنی i.e. between God and the Prophet there was the one chord of two bows or closer still.
The fifth important and relevant incident mentioned in chapter 53 is that during the Mi‘raj the Prophet had a vision of God Himself (53:12). This fact has also been mentioned in the traditions quoted by Ibn Merdawaih on the authority of Asma’, daughter of Abu Bakr (Al-Khasa’isul-Kubra, vol. 1, p. 177), and by Muslim on the authority of Ibn ‘Abbas (Muslim, Kitabul-Iman). In the latter tradition we read راٰہ بفؤادہ مرتین i.e. twice the Prophet saw God with the eyes of his heart.
The sixth notable detail mentioned in chapter 53 is that God spoke to the Holy Prophet near the Lote-tree (53:11). This fact has also found a mention in the traditions. For instance, in the tradition reported by Abu Hurairah we have فکلمهاللّٰه تعالی عند ذالک i.e. so God spoke to him near it—the Lote-tree (Al-Khasa’isul-Kubra, vol. 1, p. 174). Similarly, Ibn Abu Hatim has reported on the authority of Anas bin Malik that when the Prophet arrived near the Lote-tree, God addressed him by name saying یا محمد i.e. O Muhammad, and then Anas continues to finish the hadith. These very striking similarities and resemblances between the subject matter of Surah An-Najm and the traditions about Mi‘raj leave no doubt that it is the Mi‘raj of the Holy Prophet which has been described in that Surah.
After having established the fact that Surah An-Najm contains a description of the Mi‘raj it is important to point out that this Surah has been admitted by the consensus of scholarly opinion to have been revealed in the fifth year of the Call or even earlier. The following very well-known historical event proves it. A party of early Muslims had sought refuge in Abyssinia. They left Mecca in the seventh month of the fifth year of the Call (Muir, The Life of Mahomet, 1923, p. 69). Now the traditions agree that three months had hardly elapsed since this little band of the Faithful had left for Abyssinia when they returned to Mecca (Muir, The Life of Mahomet, 1923, p. 80). The reason which, according to traditions, led to their early return was this. The Holy Prophet was one day reciting chapter 53. When he came to the words, Rather prostrate yourselves before Allah, and worship Him (53:63), the Prophet and the Muslims with him fell prostrate on the ground. The disbelievers present on the occasion, being overwhelmed with the grand theme of the Surah and the solemnity of the occasion, also joined the Prophet in prostration. This gave rise to the rumour that the Quraish had converted to Islam. When this rumour reached Abyssinia, Muslim refugees hastened back to Mecca. This shows that the recitation of the Surah which led to this incident having taken place, must have been revealed in the fifth year of the Call or sometime prior to it.
After a brief description of the Mi‘raj or the Spiritual Ascension of the Holy Prophet and of the time when it took place, it may be noted here that the اسراء Isra’ or the Night Journey of the Holy Prophet from Mecca to Jerusalem, with which the present verse deals took place in the eleventh year of the Call (Zurqani, vol. 1, p. 306). Christian writers, however, put it in the twelfth year of the Call (Muir, The Life of Mahomet, 1923, p. 121). Traditions relating to this incident also corroborate the date referred to above. According to the traditions quoted by Ibn Merdawaih and Ibn Sa‘d, the Isra’ took place on the seventeenth of Rabi‘ul-Awwal, a year before the Hijrah (Al-Khasa’isul-Kubra, vol. 1, p. 162). Similarly, a tradition quoted by Baihaqi on the authority of Ibn Shihab, relates that the Isra’ took place a year before the Hijrah. Another tradition also quoted by Baihaqi places the Night Journey to Jerusalem six months before the Hijrah (Al-Khasa’isul-Kubra, vol. 1, p. 162).
All these traditions go to prove that the Isra’ took place six months or a year prior to the Hijrah and it has been shown above that the Mi‘raj took place about the fifth year of the Call. Thus the two incidents are separated from each other by an interval of six or seven years and therefore cannot be identical; the Mi‘raj must be regarded as quite distinct and separate from the Isra’.
Irrefutable evidence which shows that the Mi‘raj and the Isra’ were two separate incidents is the fact that it was during the fifth year of the Call that the five daily prayers were enjoined upon Muslims. If the Mi‘raj be considered as identical with the Isra’, then it will also have to be admitted that the five daily Prayers were enjoined upon Muslims in the eleventh or twelfth year of the Call which is evidently wrong because all traditionalists agree that the five Prayers were prescribed in the very early years of the Call.
It may incidentally be stated here that the Mi‘raj itself seems to have occurred twice. As it appears from the Hadith, the first Mi‘raj occurred in the beginning of the Holy Prophet’s ministry when the foundation of the Shari‘ah may be said to have been laid and Prayers were made obligatory, which seem to have taken place in the first year of the Call (Bukhari, chapter on Tauhid; Jarir, vol. 15, p. 4). The second or the better known Mi‘raj took place about the fifth year of the Call when the five prescribed Prayers were made obligatory and chapter 53, containing a description of it, was revealed (or it may have taken place even earlier and may have been subsequently referred to in Ch. 53). The Isra’, however, is quite a separate event which undoubtedly occurred in the eleventh or twelfth year of the Call when the Prophet was living in the house of his cousin, Ummi Hani, after the death of his wife, Khadijah, which took place in the tenth year of the Call after the Prophet had come out of the Valley (شعب) of Abu Talib.
In addition to this strong historical evidence, other relevant circumstances also lend support to the view that the two incidents are quite distinct and separate from each other:
(1) The first evidence in this connection is furnished by the Quran itself. It gives an account of the Prophet’s Mi‘raj(Spiritual Ascension) in chapter 53 but makes no reference to his Isra’ (Night Journey to Jerusalem), while in the present Surah it speaks of his Isra’ but omits all allusion to his Mi‘raj. This shows that the two incidents took place separately and, therefore, could not be mentioned together. It is inconceivable that the Quran should have mentioned the concluding portion of this incident in one Surah and the first portion of the selfsame incident in another Surah five years later.
(2) The second evidence which supports this inference is the fact that there was only one person, namely Ummi Hani, who was present with the Prophet during the night when the Isra’ (Spiritual Night Journey to Jerusalem) took place and she speaks only of his visit to Jerusalem and makes no mention of his journey to the heavens. She was the first person whom the Prophet informed of his Night Journey to Jerusalem and at least seven collectors of traditions have given her account of the incident on the authority of four different reporters who have reported the incident from her. All these four reporters concur in saying that the Prophet went to Jerusalem and returned to Mecca the same night. If the Prophet had spoken of his Ascension to the heavens also, Ummi Hani could not have failed to refer to it in one or other of her reports. But she does not do so in any of her reports, which conclusively shows that during the night in question the Holy Prophet made the Isra’ or the Spiritual Night Journey to Jerusalem only and that the Mi‘raj did not take place on that occasion. So the Isra’ or the Prophet’s Spiritual Night Journey to Jerusalem should not be confused with the Mi‘raj or his Spiritual Ascension to heaven.
(3) All the different reporters of this incident may be placed in three categories: (a) those who speak of the Prophet’s Ascension direct to heaven and make no mention of his Journey to Jerusalem; (b) those who speak first of his Journey to Jerusalem and then of his Ascension to heaven; and (c) those who only speak of His Journey to Jerusalem and make no mention at all of his Ascension to heaven. Of the reporters of this last group, there is a goodly number who say expressly that the Prophet returned to Mecca after his Journey to Jerusalem.
It is evident that the reports of the first group point to the Mi‘raj as being distinct from the Isra’ inasmuch as, according to them, the Holy Prophet was taken from his house direct to heaven, so Jerusalem could not lie in his way. The reporters of this group are Anas, Malik bin Sa‘sa’ and Abu Dharr, who was one of the earliest converts to Islam.
Similarly, the reports of those who speak only of the Prophet’s Journey to Jerusalem and make no mention of his Ascension to heaven also show that when he made his Night Journey to Jerusalem, he did not ascend to heaven, for if he had ascended to heaven after his visit to Jerusalem, it is inconceivable that the reporters, after mentioning the less important part of the vision, should have omitted to mention its more important part which related to his Ascension to heaven, and to his having seen God and having had communion with Him. The reporters of this group of traditions are Anas and ‘Abdullah bin Mas‘ud, the latter being one of the earliest and best-loved of the Prophet’s Companions.
Reports of the third group clearly state that the Prophet returned to Mecca after his visit to Jerusalem and did not ascend to heaven. These also demonstrate the two events to be distinct and separate from each other. The reporters of this group are ‘Abdullah bin Mas‘ud, ‘Abdullah bin ‘Abbas, ‘A’ishah and Ummi Salma and Ummi Hani. All of them with the exception of ‘Abdullah bin Mas‘ud, who, as stated above, was among the earliest converts to Islam, were the Prophet’s very near relatives and enjoyed his intimate and constant company. It is impossible to impugn their evidence.
Another argument in favour of Isra’ being distinct from Mi‘raj are the traditions which speak of the Prophet’s transportation to the heavens after his visit to Jerusalem and then of his return from the heavens to Jerusalem and from Jerusalem back to Mecca (Al-Khasa’isul-Kubra, vol. I, p. 154). Now, going to Jerusalem before ascending to heaven may be considered as reasonable, for it served for the Prophet the purpose of offering Prayers at the place where a large party of heavenly Messengers had delivered their Divine Message, but it is difficult to understand why the same route should have been followed during the return journey, when on his return from heaven the Prophet is not reported to have performed any specific act at Jerusalem. The only reasonable assumption is that the account of the Isra’ became mixed up with that of the Mi‘raj. Anas seems to have related the account of both the Isra’ and the Mi‘raj to some reporters who mixed up the two accounts and mistakenly thought that they formed the two parts of the same event and thus these reporters were led to believe that while coming back from his Mi‘raj the Prophet went to Jerusalem from where he returned to Mecca. In fact, the confusion seems to have arisen from the same word اسراء (which means a night journey) having been used for both the Holy Prophet’s اسراء (Spiritual Night Journey to Jerusalem) and his معراج (Spiritual Ascension to heaven); and the resemblance that existed in some of the details in the description of the اسراء (Isra’) and the معراج (Mi‘raj) heightened and confirmed it.
Internal evidence of the traditions also points to the fact that the Isra’ and the Mi‘raj were two distinct and separate events. The traditions which first give an account of the Prophet’s visit to Jerusalem and then of his transportation from Jerusalem to heaven also state that at Jerusalem he met the former Prophets, including Adam, Abraham, Moses, and Jesus, and that in the heavens he met the same Prophets again but could not recognize them. Now how did these Prophets whom he had met at Jerusalem reach the heavens before him and why could he not recognize them while he had seen them only a short while ago in the course of the same journey? If the two meetings had taken place separately and at a distance of long intervals, it was possible that he could not have recognized some of them at the time of the second meeting in a changed atmosphere. But it is inconceivable that he should have failed to recognize them when he had met them only a short while ago in the course of the same journey.
It having been established that the Isra’ and the Mi‘raj were two separate and distinct events, it is necessary to give a somewhat detailed account of Isra’ as given in the traditions as it forms the subject matter of the verse under comment. The most reliable account of it is to be found in the tradition quoted by Ibn Jarir on the authority of Anas bin Malik. It is briefly as follows:
'When the Archangel Gabriel brought the Buraq to the Holy Prophet, he mounted it, and had gone only a short distance, when he saw an old woman. The Prophet asked Gabriel who she was, but Gabriel gave no answer to his question; on the contrary he told him not to ask questions, just as Moses in his معراج (Spiritual Ascension) was told not to put unnecessary questions (18:71). After the Prophet had gone a little further he saw a man calling him by name from across the road in order to invite his attention to himself. But Gabriel asked him again not to heed his call. When the Prophet had proceeded a little further, he met a party of men who greeted him with the greeting of peace. Gabriel told him to return their greeting. After this, the Prophet reached the Holy House in Jerusalem. There Gabriel presented him with three cups containing water, milk and wine. The Prophet took the cup containing milk and drank it and refused to accept the other two. Upon this Gabriel said to him, "Thou hast, indeed, chosen the right course which is in perfect harmony with a pure, unsullied nature. If thou hadst accepted water or wine, thou and thine followers would have been lost." Then Adam and the other Prophets were presented to him, and the Holy Prophet led them in Prayers. After this Gabriel explained to him that the old woman he saw on the way was an embodied representation of the life of this world and only as much was left of the life of the world as was left of the life of that old woman. As for the person who called him from across the road, he was Iblis, the enemy of God. The party of men who greeted him were the Prophets Abraham, Moses and Jesus' (Ibn Jarir).
This tradition serves as a key to resolve this whole allegory. It gives the most reliable and correct account of the Isra’. It shows that the Journey to Jerusalem was no physical act but only a vision. This is clear from the following facts:
(a) It is stated in this tradition that during the Night Journey to Jerusalem, the Prophet saw an old woman, a person standing on one side of the road, and three cups full of water, wine and milk (of which the Prophet chose the last), and Gabriel told him what all these things signified. The explanation and interpretation by Gabriel of the things the Prophet saw shows that the Journey was only a vision, for it is only things seen in visions that need interpretation and explanation.
(b) The Night Journey has been spoken of as a vision in the present Surah (v. 61). Accordingly, we find that several Companions of the Prophet and some of the later scholars of Islam have, on the basis of this verse, declared the Isra’ to be a vision. For instance, Ibn Ishaq and Ibn Jarir report that when Mu‘awiyah was asked concerning the Isra’, he said that it was a vision which came out to be true (Manthur, vol. 4, p. 197). ‘A’isha is also reported to have held the same view. (Hisham and Mas‘ud, vol. 1).
(c) We learn from the hadith that when the Holy Prophet spoke of his Night Journey to Jerusalem he was asked to give a description of the Temple at Jerusalem. The Prophet is reported to have said that at that time God presented before his eyes an embodied representation of the Temple and he was thus able to describe it as demanded of him (Ibn Kathir, vol. 6, p. 18).
The Vision of the Prophet referred to in the present verse implied a great prophecy. His journey to the Distant Mosque (المسجد الاقصی) meant his Migration to Medina where he was to build a Mosque which was destined to become later the Centre of all Faiths and Dispensations and the Holy Prophet’s seeing himself in the Vision leading other Prophets of God in Prayers signified that the new Faith Islam was not to remain confined to the place of its birth but was to spread all over the world and the followers of all religions were to join its fold. His going to Jerusalem in the Vision may also be understood to mean that he was to be given dominion over the territory in which Jerusalem was situated. This prophecy was fulfilled in the Caliphate of Umar.
The words of the verse also lend support to the view that the Vision constituted a prophecy about the great future of Islam. The Distant Mosque (المسجد الاقصی) that the Prophet saw in the Vision represented his own Mosque at Medina, Jerusalem stood for Medina and his going to Jerusalem signified his Migration to Medina. The Vision begins with the words سبحان الذی (Glory be to Him) which indicated that the Migration of the Prophet would redound to the Glory of God. The word سبحان itself shows that the Vision embodied a prophecy; for a physical journey to the Temple at Jerusalem could not be regarded as evidence of the Glory of God. But as establishment of the Islamic State at Medina was to fulfil a prophecy, that event did serve as evidence of Divine glory. Thus the words, Glory be to Him Who carried His servant by night from the Sacred Mosque to the Distant Mosque, signified that God would take the Holy Prophet to a Mosque resembling المسجد الاقصی (the Distant Mosque) at Jerusalem so that His word might be fulfilled.
The words, We might show him some of Our Signs, pointed to the great possibilities of the Prophet’s journey to Medina. The Prophet’s Migration to Medina served as a prelude to the glorious future of Islam which was then hidden from the eyes of the world and thus God’s great signs were manifested. The reason why the Holy Prophet’s Mosque was called المسجد الاقصی (the Distant Mosque), and why Medina was shown to him in the Vision in the form of Jerusalem was that the blessings which God had conferred on the Mosque at Jerusalem were also in store in a greater measure for the Prophet’s Mosque at Medina.
The Prophecy implied in the words, Who carried His servant by night, was fulfilled when the Prophet left Mecca at dead of night. He did not undertake this journey of his own accord but in pursuance of God’s express command. And as in his Night Journey to Jerusalem in the Vision he was accompanied by the Archangel Gabriel, so in his Flight to Medina he was accompanied by his most faithful companion, Abu Bakr. The word "Gabriel", which means "Man of God", fitly applies to Abu Bakr and portrays his spiritual eminence.
The Vision may also be taken as referring to a spiritual journey of the Holy Prophet to a distant land in some future time. It meant that when spiritual darkness enveloped the entire world, the Prophet would appear in spirit a second time in the person of one of his followers, in a land far away from the scene of his first advent—in the Punjab. A pointed reference to this second advent of the Holy Prophet is to be found in 62:3-5.
a
5:22; 7:138.
1590
The verse which seems to mention a vision of the Holy Prophet is supposed by most Commentators of the Qur’an to refer to his Mi‘raj (Spiritual Ascension). Contrary to popular opinion we are inclined to the view that the verse deals with the Isra’ (Spiritual Night Journey) of the Holy Prophet in a vision from Mecca to Jerusalem, while his Mi‘raj (Spiritual Ascension) has been dealt with at some length in Surah An-Najm. All the facts, mentioned in Surah An-Najm (vv. 8-18) which was revealed immediately after the Emigration to Abyssinia which took place in the month of Rajab in the 5th year of the Call, are to be found narrated in detail in the traditions which deal with the Mi‘raj of the Holy Prophet. The Isra’ or the Spiritual Night Journey of the Holy Prophet from Mecca to Jerusalem, with which the present verse deals, took place in the eleventh year of the Call, according to Zurqani, and in the 12th year according to Muir and some other Christia
1591
"The Distant Mosque" refers to Prophet Solomon’s Temple at Jerusalem.
1591A
The Vision of the Prophet referred to in the present verse implied a great prophecy. His journey to "The Distant Mosque" meant his Emigration to Medina where he was to build a Mosque which was destined to become later on the Central Mosque of Islam, and his seeing himself in the Vision that he was leading other Prophets of God in Prayers signified that the New Faith— Islam—was not to remain confined to the place of its birth but was to spread all over the world and the followers of all religions were to join its fold. His going to Jerusalem in the Vision may also be understood to mean that he was to be given dominion over the territory in which Jerusalem was situated. This prophecy was fulfilled during the Caliphate of ‘Umar. The Vision may also be taken as referring to a spiritual journey of the Holy Prophet to a distant land in some future time. It meant that when spiritual darkness would envelop the entire world, the Holy Prophet would appear in a spiritual sense a second time in the person of one
فَوَرَبِّکَ لَنَحۡشُرَنَّہُمۡ وَالشَّیٰطِیۡنَ ثُمَّ لَنُحۡضِرَنَّہُمۡ حَوۡلَ جَہَنَّمَ جِثِیًّا
10:29; 17:98; 34:41.
یعنی عاجزانہ دعائیں کر رہے ہوں گے۔
10:29; 17:98; 34:41.
In Hebrew, Jahannam is used as Gehenna which in Aramaic originally was 'Hinnom,' but later on came to be changed into "Ge-Hinnom" (Enc. Bib.) which means, 'The valley of death or destruction.' The word may also have been a combination of Jahana which means, he went near, and Jahuma which means, his face became contracted. So Jahannam may also mean a thing or place which a person at first likes but when he goes near it, he comes to dislike it and contracts his face to show his dislike for it. Thus the very construction of the word explains the nature and character of Hell.
10:29; 17:98; 34:41.
Important Words:
جھنم (Hell). Commentators of the Quran generally agree that in Arabic this word has no root and is used as a proper name for the place of punishment reserved for the evildoers in the next world. Non-Arabic lexicographers, however, are of the opinion that it is an Aramaic word and is used for the place of punishment after death. In Hebrew it is used as Gehenna which in Aramaic originally was 'Hinnom' but later on came to be changed into "Ge-Hinnom" (Enc. Bib.) which means, "the valley of death or destruction." The word "Ge-Hinnom" also seems to have been a distorted form of the Arabic words ذو and ھنم, the latter word meaning 'a leopard'; and so ذو ھنم means a place where leopards live. Thus "Ge-Hinnom" which in Aramaic means the valley of death and destruction was originally ذو ھنم. The non-Arabs generally change the letter ذinto ج; so ذو ھنم became converted into the Aramaic 'Ge-Hinnom' and the Arabs borrowed it from the non-Arabs and turned it into جھنم. The word may also have been a combination of جھن which means, he went near, and جھمwhich means, he became contracted in the face. So جھنم may mean a thing or place which a person at first likes but when he goes near it he comes to dislike it and contracts his face to show his dislike for it. Thus the very construction of the word جھنم explains its nature and character, i.e. at first a person commits hellish deeds, thinking them to be good but when as a result of those deeds he approaches near Hell, he dislikes it and contracts his face to show his dislike. See also 2:207.
The word الشیاطین (Satans) applies to those philosophers and exponents of a materialistic concept of life who engender in the minds of disbelievers doubts regarding life after death.
d
10:29; 17:98; 34:41.
1
یعنی عاجزانہ دعائیں کر رہے ہوں گے۔
b
10:29; 17:98; 34:41.
2209
Important Words:
جھنم (Hell). Commentators of the Quran generally agree that in Arabic this word has no root and is used as a proper name for the place of punishment reserved for the evildoers in the next world. Non-Arabic lexicographers, however, are of the opinion that it is an Aramaic word and is used for the place of punishment after death. In Hebrew it is used as Gehenna which in Aramaic originally was 'Hinnom' but later on came to be changed into "Ge-Hinnom" (Enc. Bib.) which means, "the valley of death or destruction." The word "Ge-Hinnom" also seems to have been a distorted form of the Arabic words ذو and ھنم, the latter word meaning 'a leopard'; and so ذو ھنم means a place where leopards live. Thus "Ge-Hinnom" which in Aramaic means the valley of death and destruction was originally ذو ھنم. The non-Arabs generally change the letter ذinto ج; so ذو ھنم became converted into the Aramaic 'Ge-Hinnom' and the Arabs borrowed it from the non-Arabs and turned it into جھنم. The word may also have been a combination of جھن which means, he went near, and جھمwhich means, he became contracted in the face. So جھنم may mean a thing or place which a person at first likes but when he goes near it he comes to dislike it and contracts his face to show his dislike for it. Thus the very construction of the word جھنم explains its nature and character, i.e. at first a person commits hellish deeds, thinking them to be good but when as a result of those deeds he approaches near Hell, he dislikes it and contracts his face to show his dislike. See also 2:207.
The word الشیاطین (Satans) applies to those philosophers and exponents of a materialistic concept of life who engender in the minds of disbelievers doubts regarding life after death.
c
10:29; 17:98; 34:41.
1790
In Hebrew, Jahannam is used as Gehenna which in Aramaic originally was 'Hinnom,' but later on came to be changed into "Ge-Hinnom" (Enc. Bib.) which means, 'The valley of death or destruction.' The word may also have been a combination of Jahana which means, he went near, and Jahuma which means, his face became contracted. So Jahannam may also mean a thing or place which a person at first likes but when he goes near it, he comes to dislike it and contracts his face to show his dislike for it. Thus the very construction of the word explains the nature and character of Hell.
قَالَ لِمَنۡ حَوۡلَہٗۤ اَلَا تَسۡتَمِعُوۡنَ
The verse depicts Pharaoh as trying to incite his people against Moses by hinting that he was insulting their gods by ascribing the Kingdom of the heavens and earth to Allah because it were their own gods who held sway over all the universe.
Commentary:
The verse depicts Pharaoh as trying to incite his people against Moses by hinting that he was insulting their gods by ascribing the kingdom of the heavens and earth to Allah as it were their own gods who held sway over all the universe.
2723
Commentary:
The verse depicts Pharaoh as trying to incite his people against Moses by hinting that he was insulting their gods by ascribing the kingdom of the heavens and earth to Allah as it were their own gods who held sway over all the universe.
2107
The verse depicts Pharaoh as trying to incite his people against Moses by hinting that he was insulting their gods by ascribing the Kingdom of the heavens and earth to Allah because it were their own gods who held sway over all the universe.
قَالَ لِلۡمَلَاِ حَوۡلَہٗۤ اِنَّ ہٰذَا لَسٰحِرٌ عَلِیۡمٌ
7:110
7:110
7:110.
a
7:110
b
7:110.
e
7:110
فَلَمَّا جَآءَہَا نُوۡدِیَ اَنۡۢ بُوۡرِکَ مَنۡ فِی النَّارِ وَمَنۡ حَوۡلَہَا وَسُبۡحٰنَ اللّٰہِ رَبِّ الۡعٰلَمِیۡنَ
اس آیت سے بھی ثابت ہے کہ یہ بات غلط ہے کہ اس آگ میں خداتعالیٰ کا وجود تھا۔ کیونکہ خداتعالیٰ خود برکت دیتا ہے‘ اس کو کوئی برکت نہیں دیتا۔ یعنی وہ تَـبَارَکَ کہلا سکتا ہے بُوْرِکَ نہیں کہلا سکتا۔ دوسرے یہ کہ مَنْ فِی النَّارِ کے ساتھ وَ منْ حَوْلَھَا بھی کہا گیا ہے یعنی جو اس آگ میں ہے اور جو اس کے گرد کھڑا ہے اس کو بھی برکت دی گئی ہے‘ یعنی موسیٰ بھی مہبط انوار ہے اور آگ کا جلوہ بھی مہبط انوار ہے یعنی دونوں کے ذریعہ سے ہستی باری کو ظاہر کیا جارہا ہے سُبْحَانَ اللّٰہِ کے فقرہ میں بھی اس بات کی تردید کی گئی ہے کہ خدا آگ میں تھا۔ کیونکہ ربّ العالمین کہہ کر
The expression may mean, (a) who is in search of the fire, and who is near it; (b) who is actually in the fire and who is about to enter it, 'fire' symbolising the fire of God’s love or the fire of trials and tribulations. The fire was not God, nor was God in the fire. It was only a Divine manifestation which cast its glow upon all that was near.
Commentary:
The expression من فی النار و من حولھا may have the following two interpretations: (a) who is in search of the fire, and who is near it; (b) who is actually in the fire and who is about to enter it, 'fire' symbolizing the fire of God’s love or the fire of trials and tribulations.
It is wrong to apply, as some commentators of the Quran have done, the expression بورک من فی النار to God. The word بورک(blessed) being in passive voice cannot be used about God, the right word to use about the Almighty is تبارک which means, He is blessed.
3
اس آیت سے بھی ثابت ہے کہ یہ بات غلط ہے کہ اس آگ میں خداتعالیٰ کا وجود تھا۔ کیونکہ خداتعالیٰ خود برکت دیتا ہے‘ اس کو کوئی برکت نہیں دیتا۔ یعنی وہ تَـبَارَکَ کہلا سکتا ہے بُوْرِکَ نہیں کہلا سکتا۔ دوسرے یہ کہ مَنْ فِی النَّارِ کے ساتھ وَ منْ حَوْلَھَا بھی کہا گیا ہے یعنی جو اس آگ میں ہے اور جو اس کے گرد کھڑا ہے اس کو بھی برکت دی گئی ہے‘ یعنی موسیٰ بھی مہبط انوار ہے اور آگ کا جلوہ بھی مہبط انوار ہے یعنی دونوں کے ذریعہ سے ہستی باری کو ظاہر کیا جارہا ہے سُبْحَانَ اللّٰہِ کے فقرہ میں بھی اس بات کی تردید کی گئی ہے کہ خدا آگ میں تھا۔ کیونکہ ربّ العالمین کہہ کر
2818
Commentary:
The expression من فی النار و من حولھا may have the following two interpretations: (a) who is in search of the fire, and who is near it; (b) who is actually in the fire and who is about to enter it, 'fire' symbolizing the fire of God’s love or the fire of trials and tribulations.
It is wrong to apply, as some commentators of the Quran have done, the expression بورک من فی النار to God. The word بورک(blessed) being in passive voice cannot be used about God, the right word to use about the Almighty is تبارک which means, He is blessed.
2148
The expression may mean, (a) who is in search of the fire, and who is near it; (b) who is actually in the fire and who is about to enter it, 'fire' symbolising the fire of God’s love or the fire of trials and tribulations. The fire was not God, nor was God in the fire. It was only a Divine manifestation which cast its glow upon all that was near.