مُلۡکَ
Appears 5 times in Quran
Derived Words (2)
Words derived from the stem "مُلۡکَ".
Occurrences in Quran
Found 5 verses containing "مُلۡکَ".
وَقَالَ لَہُمۡ نَبِیُّہُمۡ اِنَّ اللّٰہَ قَدۡ بَعَثَ لَکُمۡ طَالُوۡتَ مَلِکًا ۚ قَالُوۡۤا اَنّٰی یَکُوۡنُ لَہُ الۡمُلۡکُ عَلَیۡنَا وَنَحۡنُ اَحَقُّ بِالۡمُلۡکِ مِنۡہُ وَلَمۡ یُؤۡتَ سَعَۃً مِّنَ الۡمَالِ ۚ قَالَ اِنَّ اللّٰہَ اصۡطَفٰٮہُ عَلَیۡکُمۡ وَزَادَہٗ بَسۡطَۃً فِی الۡعِلۡمِ وَالۡجِسۡمِ ۖ وَاللّٰہُ یُؤۡتِیۡ مُلۡکَہٗ مَنۡ یَّشَآءُ ۚ وَاللّٰہُ وٰسِعٌ عَلِیۡمٌ
3:27.
طالوت سے مراد جدعون ہے اور یہ صفاتی نام ہے جو طَالَ سے نکلا ہے جس کے معنے ہیں لمبا اور مضبوط ہو گیا اور جدعون کے معنے عبرانی زبان میں اپنے مادہ کے اعتبار سے گرانے یا کاٹنے کے ہیں اور جدعون ایسے شخص کو کہتے ہیں جو اپنے مخالف کو کاٹ ڈالتا اور زمین پر گرا دیتا ہے۔ بائبل میں بھی جدعون کو بہادر پہلوان کے نام سے پکارا گیا ہے (دیکھو قاضیوں باب۶ آیت۱۲) پس طالوت اور جدعون دونوں ہم معنی الفاظ ہیں۔
علاوہ اور معنوں کے مُلْـک کے معنے حکومت اور غلبہ کے بھی ہیں (اقرب) اَ نّٰی کے مندرجہ ذیل معنے ہیں۔ (۱) کَیْفَ کس طرح (۲) مِنْ اَیْنَ کہاں سے (۳) اَ یْنَ جہاں اور کہاں۔ اس صورت میں یہ دو فعلوں کو جزم دیتا ہے۔ (۴) حَتّٰی کب (اقرب) پس اس آیت کے معنے یہ ہوئے کہ اسے ہم پر حکومت کس طرح مل سکتی ہے یا یہ کہ اسے ہم پر حکومت کرنے کا حق کب حاصل ہوا؟ یا اُسے ہم پر حکومت کہاں سے حاصل ہوئی۔
مِنَ الْمَالِ‘ سَعَۃً کی صفت ہے۔ اس لئے ’’سَعَۃً مِّنَ الْمَالِ‘‘ کا صحیح ترجمہ مالی فراخی ہے۔
بَسْطَۃً کے معنے وسعت۔ فراخی اور کمال کے ہیں (اقرب)
اپنا ملک کہہ کر اِس طرف اشارہ فرمایا کہ جب حکومت خداتعالیٰ کی ہے تو حق دار وہ ہے جسے خداتعالیٰ مقرر کرے۔
3:27.
Talut is the attributive name of an Israelite king who lived about two hundred years before David and about the same number of years after Moses. Some Commentators of the Qur’an have wrongly identified Talut with Saul. The description of the Qur’an fits in more with Gideon (Judg. chs. 6-8) than with Saul. Gideon lived in about 1250 B.C. and the Bible calls him a "mighty man of valour" (Judg. 6: 12) which is the same as Talut. According to some Christian writers incidents related in this passage refer to two different periods which are separated from each other by the long interval of 200 years, and refer to this passage as an instance, as they say, of historical anachronisms to be found in the Qur’an. The passage does indeed refer to two different periods, but there is no anachronism in it. The Qur’an has here referred to both these periods. Its object in doing so is to show how the unification of the different tribes of Israel began in the time of Gideon, (i.e. Talut), two hundred years before Dav
3:27.
Important Words:
طالوت (Talut) is the attributive name of an Israelite king who lived about two hundred years before David and about the same number of years after Moses. Most commentators regard Talut to be a name of Hebrew origin and consider him to be synonymous with Saul (1. Sam. ch. 9). As Hebrew is only an offshoot of Arabic, the word Talut appears to be derived from the Arabic root طال i.e. he became tall or high___a description coinciding with the one given in the verse under comment viz. one increased abundantly in knowledge and body. It is, however, not right to identify Talut with Saul. The description of the Quran fits more with Gideon (Judg. chs. 6-8) than with Saul. Gideon lived in about 1250 B.C. and the Bible calls him a "mighty man of valour" (Judg. 6:12) which is the same as Talut.
Commentary:
There has been a difference of opinion as to the identity of the person to whom the name Talut has been applied. According to a number of Muslim commentators, Talut stands for Saul, and the passage refers to the reign of Saul. Christian writers have, however, taken exception to this view. According to them the incidents related in this passage refer to two different periods which are separated from each other by the long interval of 200 years; and these critics refer to this passage as an instance of historical anachronism, found in the Quran. The passage does indeed refer to two different periods, but if Christian critics had carefully thought over their own history, they would have seen that there is no confusion of dates in the passage in question and that the Quran has here referred to both these periods. Its object in doing so is to show how the unification of the different tribes of Israel began in the time of Gideon (i.e. Talut) two hundred years before David, and was finally consummated in the time of David.
In order to determine the identity of Talut, let us glance over the main incidents related in verse 247 to 252. These are as follows: 1. The people of the period to which Talut belongs had been driven forth from their homes and their children (2:247). 2. One who was not originally a king was appointed as such (2:248). 3. God helped the followers of this king, giving them the Talut as a token of His sovereignty (2:249). 4. The people were tried by means of water (2:250). 5. There existed a great disparity in numbers between these people and the enemy, and the trial reduced their number still further (ibid). 6. In spite of the small number of his followers, this king overcame the enemy (2:252).
Now some of these details do indeed apply to Saul, but there are others which do not. The key words which afford a clue to the identity of Talut are, Hast thou not heard of the chiefs of the children of Israel after Moses. The words "after Moses" indicate that the incident belongs to an early period when the Jews as a nation had just begun to take a definite shape in history. For two hundred years after Moses, the Israelites were divided into different tribes and had no king and no fighting force. In 1256 B.C., owing to their iniquity, God delivered them into the hands of the Midianites who plundered and ravaged them for seven long years, and they were compelled to take refuge in caves (Judg. 6:1, 2). This is why they are represented in the Quran as saying, we have been driven forth from our homes. The Midianites attacked them and carried away their sheep and oxen and asses, and destroyed their crops and pillaged them as far as Gaza (Judg. 6:4-6). The Israelites then cried to their Lord, and God raised among them a Prophet; and an angel of the Lord appeared to Gideon, appointed him king and promised him divine help. Then Gideon said to God, "Oh my Lord, wherewith shall I save Israel? Behold, my family is poor in Manasseh, and I am the least in my father’s house" (Judg. 6:15). This tallies with the description given in the Quran which represents the chiefs among the Israelites as saying with regard to the new king, How can he have sovereignty over us while we are better entitled to sovereignty than he and he is not given abundance of wealth (2:248). What makes the identification of Talut with Gideon still more certain is the fact that it was in the time of Gideon and not Saul that the Israelites were tried by means of water and the description of the trial as given in the Bible (Judg. 7:4-7) is the same as that of the Quran.
From Judg. 7:6, 7 we learn that after the aforesaid trial, there remained with Gideon only 300 men. It is interesting to note that a Companion of the Holy Prophet is reported to have said, "We were 313 men in the Battle of Badr, and this number corresponds to the number of men who followed Talut" (Tirmidhi, ch. on Siyar). Thus this tradition also lends support to the conclusion that Talut was no other than Gideon.
What further confirms the identity of Talut with Gideon is that the Hebrew word Gideon is identical in meaning with the Arabic word Talut. The former is derived from a root which in Hebrew means "to fell" (Enc. Bib.) or "to hew" (Jew. Enc.). Thus, Gideon means "one who cuts down his adversary and fells him to the ground" and the Bible itself speaks of Gideon as a "mighty man of valour" (Judg. 6:12), and we have already noted that in Arabic Tala means one who is tall and towers above others (see Important Words above).
The clause, how can he have sovereignty over us while we are better entitled to sovereignty than he, and he is not given abundance of wealth, indicates that the people raised two objections against Talut or Gideon: (1) that he did not belong to a highly placed family and was therefore not entitled to kingship, and (2) that he did not possess the requisite wealth for exercising influence. Both of these are plausible objections that are usually made by ordinary people of the world; but a chosen people guided by the will of the Just and Wise God must think otherwise. With them the real title to sovereignty is neither family status nor wealth but the personal qualities of a man; hence the clause, surely Allah has chosen him above you and has increased him abundantly in knowledge and body. The superiority of a man in physical and mental faculties coupled with knowledge and prowess must remain the basis for all title to rulership. And in the case of Talut the title had the additional strength of coinciding with the choice of God Who is the best and, in fact, the only true Judge of all titles.
c
3:27.
3
طالوت سے مراد جدعون ہے اور یہ صفاتی نام ہے جو طَالَ سے نکلا ہے جس کے معنے ہیں لمبا اور مضبوط ہو گیا اور جدعون کے معنے عبرانی زبان میں اپنے مادہ کے اعتبار سے گرانے یا کاٹنے کے ہیں اور جدعون ایسے شخص کو کہتے ہیں جو اپنے مخالف کو کاٹ ڈالتا اور زمین پر گرا دیتا ہے۔ بائبل میں بھی جدعون کو بہادر پہلوان کے نام سے پکارا گیا ہے (دیکھو قاضیوں باب۶ آیت۱۲) پس طالوت اور جدعون دونوں ہم معنی الفاظ ہیں۔
4
علاوہ اور معنوں کے مُلْـک کے معنے حکومت اور غلبہ کے بھی ہیں (اقرب) اَ نّٰی کے مندرجہ ذیل معنے ہیں۔ (۱) کَیْفَ کس طرح (۲) مِنْ اَیْنَ کہاں سے (۳) اَ یْنَ جہاں اور کہاں۔ اس صورت میں یہ دو فعلوں کو جزم دیتا ہے۔ (۴) حَتّٰی کب (اقرب) پس اس آیت کے معنے یہ ہوئے کہ اسے ہم پر حکومت کس طرح مل سکتی ہے یا یہ کہ اسے ہم پر حکومت کرنے کا حق کب حاصل ہوا؟ یا اُسے ہم پر حکومت کہاں سے حاصل ہوئی۔
5
مِنَ الْمَالِ‘ سَعَۃً کی صفت ہے۔ اس لئے ’’سَعَۃً مِّنَ الْمَالِ‘‘ کا صحیح ترجمہ مالی فراخی ہے۔
6
بَسْطَۃً کے معنے وسعت۔ فراخی اور کمال کے ہیں (اقرب)
7
اپنا ملک کہہ کر اِس طرف اشارہ فرمایا کہ جب حکومت خداتعالیٰ کی ہے تو حق دار وہ ہے جسے خداتعالیٰ مقرر کرے۔
a
3:27.
254
Important Words:
طالوت (Talut) is the attributive name of an Israelite king who lived about two hundred years before David and about the same number of years after Moses. Most commentators regard Talut to be a name of Hebrew origin and consider him to be synonymous with Saul (1. Sam. ch. 9). As Hebrew is only an offshoot of Arabic, the word Talut appears to be derived from the Arabic root طال i.e. he became tall or high___a description coinciding with the one given in the verse under comment viz. one increased abundantly in knowledge and body. It is, however, not right to identify Talut with Saul. The description of the Quran fits more with Gideon (Judg. chs. 6-8) than with Saul. Gideon lived in about 1250 B.C. and the Bible calls him a "mighty man of valour" (Judg. 6:12) which is the same as Talut.
Commentary:
There has been a difference of opinion as to the identity of the person to whom the name Talut has been applied. According to a number of Muslim commentators, Talut stands for Saul, and the passage refers to the reign of Saul. Christian writers have, however, taken exception to this view. According to them the incidents related in this passage refer to two different periods which are separated from each other by the long interval of 200 years; and these critics refer to this passage as an instance of historical anachronism, found in the Quran. The passage does indeed refer to two different periods, but if Christian critics had carefully thought over their own history, they would have seen that there is no confusion of dates in the passage in question and that the Quran has here referred to both these periods. Its object in doing so is to show how the unification of the different tribes of Israel began in the time of Gideon (i.e. Talut) two hundred years before David, and was finally consummated in the time of David.
In order to determine the identity of Talut, let us glance over the main incidents related in verse 247 to 252. These are as follows: 1. The people of the period to which Talut belongs had been driven forth from their homes and their children (2:247). 2. One who was not originally a king was appointed as such (2:248). 3. God helped the followers of this king, giving them the Talut as a token of His sovereignty (2:249). 4. The people were tried by means of water (2:250). 5. There existed a great disparity in numbers between these people and the enemy, and the trial reduced their number still further (ibid). 6. In spite of the small number of his followers, this king overcame the enemy (2:252).
Now some of these details do indeed apply to Saul, but there are others which do not. The key words which afford a clue to the identity of Talut are, Hast thou not heard of the chiefs of the children of Israel after Moses. The words "after Moses" indicate that the incident belongs to an early period when the Jews as a nation had just begun to take a definite shape in history. For two hundred years after Moses, the Israelites were divided into different tribes and had no king and no fighting force. In 1256 B.C., owing to their iniquity, God delivered them into the hands of the Midianites who plundered and ravaged them for seven long years, and they were compelled to take refuge in caves (Judg. 6:1, 2). This is why they are represented in the Quran as saying, we have been driven forth from our homes. The Midianites attacked them and carried away their sheep and oxen and asses, and destroyed their crops and pillaged them as far as Gaza (Judg. 6:4-6). The Israelites then cried to their Lord, and God raised among them a Prophet; and an angel of the Lord appeared to Gideon, appointed him king and promised him divine help. Then Gideon said to God, "Oh my Lord, wherewith shall I save Israel? Behold, my family is poor in Manasseh, and I am the least in my father’s house" (Judg. 6:15). This tallies with the description given in the Quran which represents the chiefs among the Israelites as saying with regard to the new king, How can he have sovereignty over us while we are better entitled to sovereignty than he and he is not given abundance of wealth (2:248). What makes the identification of Talut with Gideon still more certain is the fact that it was in the time of Gideon and not Saul that the Israelites were tried by means of water and the description of the trial as given in the Bible (Judg. 7:4-7) is the same as that of the Quran.
From Judg. 7:6, 7 we learn that after the aforesaid trial, there remained with Gideon only 300 men. It is interesting to note that a Companion of the Holy Prophet is reported to have said, "We were 313 men in the Battle of Badr, and this number corresponds to the number of men who followed Talut" (Tirmidhi, ch. on Siyar). Thus this tradition also lends support to the conclusion that Talut was no other than Gideon.
What further confirms the identity of Talut with Gideon is that the Hebrew word Gideon is identical in meaning with the Arabic word Talut. The former is derived from a root which in Hebrew means "to fell" (Enc. Bib.) or "to hew" (Jew. Enc.). Thus, Gideon means "one who cuts down his adversary and fells him to the ground" and the Bible itself speaks of Gideon as a "mighty man of valour" (Judg. 6:12), and we have already noted that in Arabic Tala means one who is tall and towers above others (see Important Words above).
The clause, how can he have sovereignty over us while we are better entitled to sovereignty than he, and he is not given abundance of wealth, indicates that the people raised two objections against Talut or Gideon: (1) that he did not belong to a highly placed family and was therefore not entitled to kingship, and (2) that he did not possess the requisite wealth for exercising influence. Both of these are plausible objections that are usually made by ordinary people of the world; but a chosen people guided by the will of the Just and Wise God must think otherwise. With them the real title to sovereignty is neither family status nor wealth but the personal qualities of a man; hence the clause, surely Allah has chosen him above you and has increased him abundantly in knowledge and body. The superiority of a man in physical and mental faculties coupled with knowledge and prowess must remain the basis for all title to rulership. And in the case of Talut the title had the additional strength of coinciding with the choice of God Who is the best and, in fact, the only true Judge of all titles.
a
3:27.
307
Talut is the attributive name of an Israelite king who lived about two hundred years before David and about the same number of years after Moses. Some Commentators of the Qur’an have wrongly identified Talut with Saul. The description of the Qur’an fits in more with Gideon (Judg. chs. 6-8) than with Saul. Gideon lived in about 1250 B.C. and the Bible calls him a "mighty man of valour" (Judg. 6: 12) which is the same as Talut. According to some Christian writers incidents related in this passage refer to two different periods which are separated from each other by the long interval of 200 years, and refer to this passage as an instance, as they say, of historical anachronisms to be found in the Qur’an. The passage does indeed refer to two different periods, but there is no anachronism in it. The Qur’an has here referred to both these periods. Its object in doing so is to show how the unification of the different tribes of Israel began in the time of Gideon, (i.e. Talut), two hundred years before Dav
فَہَزَمُوۡہُمۡ بِاِذۡنِ اللّٰہِ وَقَتَلَ دَاوٗدُ جَالُوۡتَ وَاٰتٰٮہُ اللّٰہُ الۡمُلۡکَ وَالۡحِکۡمَۃَ وَعَلَّمَہٗ مِمَّا یَشَآءُ ۗ وَلَوۡلَا دَفۡعُ اللّٰہِ النَّاسَ بَعۡضَہُمۡ بِبَعۡضٍ لَّفَسَدَتِ الۡاَرۡضُ وَلٰکِنَّ اللّٰہَ ذُوۡ فَضۡلٍ عَلَی الۡعٰلَمِیۡنَ
جیسا کہ ہم اوپر بیان کر چکے ہیں پہلی آیات میں جدعون کا واقعہ بیان کیا گیا ہے۔ اب ان آیات میں حضرت داؤد علیہ السلام کا ذکر کیا گیا ہے اس کی وجہ یہ ہے کہ حضرت داؤد علیہ السلام کا واقعہ جدعون کے واقعہ سے بہت کچھ ملتا ہے۔ جدعون کے وقت میں فلسطینیوں نے اسرائیل کو فلسطین سے نکالنے کی کوشش کی تھی۔ لیکن وہ ابتدائی کوشش تھی جو حضرت داؤدؑ کے زمانہ میں آکر ختم ہوئی۔ پس اس واقعہ کو مشابہت مضمون کی وجہ سے اس کے ساتھ بیان کیا گیا ہے۔ ورنہ پہلا جدعون کا واقعہ ہے اور یہ داؤدؑ کا واقعہ ہے اور دونوں میں دو سو سال کا فاصلہ ہے۔
اب ایک سوال حل طلب رہ جاتا ہے اور وہ یہ کہ بائبل کے رو سے د
22:41.
Talut or Gideon was able to defeat Jalut or the Midianites but their overwhelming defeat to which the verse refers as the killing of Jalut came in the time of David about two hundred years afterwards. The Bible speaks of the man defeated by David as Goliath (1 Sam. 17: 4), which is similar to Jalut. Probably, the attributive name given by the Qur’an to the people was also borne by their leader in the time of David.
These words give in a nutshell the whole philosophy of all wars of truth and justice. War should be resorted to only as a means of checking disorder and restoring peace and not for creating disorder and breaking peace and depriving weak nations of freedom.
22:41.
Commentary:
Talut or Gideon was able to defeat Jalut or the Midianites and curb their rising spirits, but their crushing defeat to which the verse refers as the killing of Jalut came in the time of David about two hundred years afterwards. This is why, whereas the defeat of Jalut by Talut has been spoken of by the Quran as ھزم i.e. routing, the complete crushing of their power has been referred to by the world قتل i.e. killing. The Bible speaks of the man defeated by David as Goliath (1 Sam. 17:4), which is similar to Jalut. Probably the attributive name given by the Quran to the people was also borne by their leader in the time of David.
The last clause of the verse, i.e. and had it not been for Allah’s repelling men, some of them by the others, the earth would have become filled with disorder, gives, in a nutshell, the whole philosophy of all wars of truth and justice. War should be resorted to only as a means of checking disorder and restoring peace, and not for creating disorder and breaking peace. The clause also serves as a criterion between Muslims and their adversaries and beautifully points to the party destined for final victory in the struggle.
a
22:41.
194
这些字概括地说出了一切真理和正义战争的全部哲理。战争只能作为制止混乱而恢复和平的一种手段, 而不能作为制造混乱而破坏和平以及剥夺弱小国家自由的手段。
1
جیسا کہ ہم اوپر بیان کر چکے ہیں پہلی آیات میں جدعون کا واقعہ بیان کیا گیا ہے۔ اب ان آیات میں حضرت داؤد علیہ السلام کا ذکر کیا گیا ہے اس کی وجہ یہ ہے کہ حضرت داؤد علیہ السلام کا واقعہ جدعون کے واقعہ سے بہت کچھ ملتا ہے۔ جدعون کے وقت میں فلسطینیوں نے اسرائیل کو فلسطین سے نکالنے کی کوشش کی تھی۔ لیکن وہ ابتدائی کوشش تھی جو حضرت داؤدؑ کے زمانہ میں آکر ختم ہوئی۔ پس اس واقعہ کو مشابہت مضمون کی وجہ سے اس کے ساتھ بیان کیا گیا ہے۔ ورنہ پہلا جدعون کا واقعہ ہے اور یہ داؤدؑ کا واقعہ ہے اور دونوں میں دو سو سال کا فاصلہ ہے۔
اب ایک سوال حل طلب رہ جاتا ہے اور وہ یہ کہ بائبل کے رو سے د
b
22:41.
258
Commentary:
Talut or Gideon was able to defeat Jalut or the Midianites and curb their rising spirits, but their crushing defeat to which the verse refers as the killing of Jalut came in the time of David about two hundred years afterwards. This is why, whereas the defeat of Jalut by Talut has been spoken of by the Quran as ھزم i.e. routing, the complete crushing of their power has been referred to by the world قتل i.e. killing. The Bible speaks of the man defeated by David as Goliath (1 Sam. 17:4), which is similar to Jalut. Probably the attributive name given by the Quran to the people was also borne by their leader in the time of David.
The last clause of the verse, i.e. and had it not been for Allah’s repelling men, some of them by the others, the earth would have become filled with disorder, gives, in a nutshell, the whole philosophy of all wars of truth and justice. War should be resorted to only as a means of checking disorder and restoring peace, and not for creating disorder and breaking peace. The clause also serves as a criterion between Muslims and their adversaries and beautifully points to the party destined for final victory in the struggle.
c
22:41.
312
Talut or Gideon was able to defeat Jalut or the Midianites but their overwhelming defeat to which the verse refers as the killing of Jalut came in the time of David about two hundred years afterwards. The Bible speaks of the man defeated by David as Goliath (1 Sam. 17: 4), which is similar to Jalut. Probably, the attributive name given by the Qur’an to the people was also borne by their leader in the time of David.
313
These words give in a nutshell the whole philosophy of all wars of truth and justice. War should be resorted to only as a means of checking disorder and restoring peace and not for creating disorder and breaking peace and depriving weak nations of freedom.
اَلَمۡ تَرَ اِلَی الَّذِیۡ حَآجَّ اِبۡرٰہٖمَ فِیۡ رَبِّہٖۤ اَنۡ اٰتٰٮہُ اللّٰہُ الۡمُلۡکَ اِذۡ قَالَ اِبۡرٰہٖمُ رَبِّیَ الَّذِیۡ یُحۡیٖ وَیُمِیۡتُ قَالَ اَنَا۠ اُحۡیٖ وَاُمِیۡتُ ۖ قَالَ اِبۡرٰہٖمُ فَاِنَّ اللّٰہَ یَاۡتِیۡ بِالشَّمۡسِ مِنَ الۡمَشۡرِقِ فَاۡتِ بِہَا مِنَ الۡمَغۡرِبِ فَبُہِتَ الَّذِیۡ کَفَرَ ۗ وَاللّٰہُ لَا یَہۡدِی الۡقَوۡمَ الظّٰلِمِیۡنَ
3:157; 9:116; 40:69; 57:3.
اَنْ اٰ تَاہُ اللّٰہُ الْمُلْکَ میں ہ کی ضمیر کو ترجمہ میں بحث کرنے والے کی طرف پھیرا گیا ہے۔ لیکن جائز ہے کہ یہ ضمیر ابراہیمؑ کی طرف پھرتی ہو۔ اس صورت میں یہ معنے ہوں گے کہ وہ ابراہیم ؑ سے اس حسد کی وجہ سے بحث کرنے لگ گیا کہ ابراہیم ؑ کو کیوں اللہ نے روحانی بادشاہت عطا فرمائی ہے۔
حَآجَّہٗ: خَاصَمَہٗ (اقرب) اس سے بحث کرنے لگ گیا۔ اصل معنے حُجَّۃٌ کے اس دلیل کے ہیں جس سے انسان دوسرے پر غالب آجائے۔ لیکن باب مفاعلہ میں آکر اس کے معنے خالص بحث کرنے کے بھی ہو جاتے ہیں۔
مفسرین کہتے ہیں کہ حضرت ابراہیم علیہ السلام نے اپنی کمزوری دیکھ کر بحث کا پہلو بدلا۔ لیکن یہ بات درست نہیں۔ اصل بات یہ ہے کہ حضرت ابراہیم علیہ السلام کی قوم ستارہ پرست تھی اور وہ سمجھتے تھے کہ تمام مخلوق کی زندگی اور موت سورج کے ساتھ تعلق رکھتی ہے۔ جب مباحثین نے ضد اختیار کی تو حضرت ابراہیم علیہ السلام نے کہا کہ تیرے اختیار والی موت اور زندگی میری دلیل میں مرادنہ تھی‘ میری مراد یہ تھی کہ دنیا میں حیات و ممات کا جو سلسلہ جاری ہے یہ خدا کے اختیار میں ہے جس کے متعلق تیرا یہ عقیدہ ہے کہ وہ سورج کے اختیار میں ہے۔ پس اگر واقعہ میں تو وہی خدا ہے جس کے ہاتھ میں موت و حیات کا
3:157; 9:116; 40:69; 57:3.
Abraham was a great iconoclast. His people worshipped the sun and the stars, their chief god being Merodach (Madruk), originally the god of the morning and the spring sun (Enc. Bib. & Enc. Rel. Eth.ii.p.296). They believed that all life depended on the sun. Abraham very wisely asked the infidel that if he, as he claimed, controlled life and death, then let him reverse the course of the sun on which all life depended. He was in a fix. He could not say that he could not accept Abraham’s challenge to bring the sun from the West to the East, for that would have demolished his claim of being the controller of life and death, and if he had said that he could do so, it meant that he claimed to exercise control over the sun which would have been a great blasphemy in the eyes of his people who worshipped the sun. Thus he was completely confounded and did not know what to say.
3:157; 9:116; 40:69; 57:3.
Commentary:
The preceding verses spoke of the great rise and success in store for Muslims—their being brought out of darkness into light. Now the Quran proceeds to illustrate the promised rise and advancement. It takes us back to the days of Abraham.
An incident in the life of the great Patriarch has been cited to illustrate the truth of the statement made in the previous verse, viz. that God is the friend of believers; He helps them against their enemies and shows them the way of success, leading them out of darkness into light.
Abraham was a native of Ur of the Chaldees. His people worshipped the stars and their chief god was the Sun. Their greatest god was Merodach (or Madruk), who was originally the god of the morning and the spring sun. He was also called Bel, i.e. Lord (Enc. Bib. and Enc. Rel. Eth. ii. 296).
Abraham was hostile to the worship of idols and false deities and vehemently preached against them. He once set fire to a house which contained wooden images. On another occasion, be broke certain idols to pieces and burned them, whereupon he was produced before the king, whose name is recorded as Nimrod (Gen. 10:8, 9 and Jew. Enc. under Abraham) and who was also worshipped by the people as a representative of their deities. The king, it appears, threatened Abraham with ruin and death, to which Abraham firmly and boldly replied that he could do him no harm, for it was His Lord God Who granted life and caused death. As the king laid claim to godhead, he wrathfully rejoined that it was he who exercised these powers. Now Abraham knew that Nimrod and his people believed that all life depended on the sun, so if it was true that it was the king who controlled life and death, it meant that even the sun was under the control of the king and that the final power of life and death attributed by Nimrod and his men to the sun was a mere farce. So he pertinently asked the king to send back the sun from the west to the east (i.e. put it aside), for in such case the sun could not be recognized as the final controlling power. The king was in a fix. He could not say that he did not possess the power to send back the sun, for that would have exposed him. At the same time he could not say that it was he who caused the sun to rise from the east and set in the west, for his people looked upon the sun as the supreme deity, superior to the king himself, and if he had claimed any power over the sun, he would have surely roused the ire of his people against him. So he was dumbfounded and knew not what reply to make.
e
3:157; 9:116; 40:69; 57:3.
1
اَنْ اٰ تَاہُ اللّٰہُ الْمُلْکَ میں ہ کی ضمیر کو ترجمہ میں بحث کرنے والے کی طرف پھیرا گیا ہے۔ لیکن جائز ہے کہ یہ ضمیر ابراہیمؑ کی طرف پھرتی ہو۔ اس صورت میں یہ معنے ہوں گے کہ وہ ابراہیم ؑ سے اس حسد کی وجہ سے بحث کرنے لگ گیا کہ ابراہیم ؑ کو کیوں اللہ نے روحانی بادشاہت عطا فرمائی ہے۔
2
حَآجَّہٗ: خَاصَمَہٗ (اقرب) اس سے بحث کرنے لگ گیا۔ اصل معنے حُجَّۃٌ کے اس دلیل کے ہیں جس سے انسان دوسرے پر غالب آجائے۔ لیکن باب مفاعلہ میں آکر اس کے معنے خالص بحث کرنے کے بھی ہو جاتے ہیں۔
3
مفسرین کہتے ہیں کہ حضرت ابراہیم علیہ السلام نے اپنی کمزوری دیکھ کر بحث کا پہلو بدلا۔ لیکن یہ بات درست نہیں۔ اصل بات یہ ہے کہ حضرت ابراہیم علیہ السلام کی قوم ستارہ پرست تھی اور وہ سمجھتے تھے کہ تمام مخلوق کی زندگی اور موت سورج کے ساتھ تعلق رکھتی ہے۔ جب مباحثین نے ضد اختیار کی تو حضرت ابراہیم علیہ السلام نے کہا کہ تیرے اختیار والی موت اور زندگی میری دلیل میں مرادنہ تھی‘ میری مراد یہ تھی کہ دنیا میں حیات و ممات کا جو سلسلہ جاری ہے یہ خدا کے اختیار میں ہے جس کے متعلق تیرا یہ عقیدہ ہے کہ وہ سورج کے اختیار میں ہے۔ پس اگر واقعہ میں تو وہی خدا ہے جس کے ہاتھ میں موت و حیات کا
d
3:157; 9:116; 40:69; 57:3.
265
Commentary:
The preceding verses spoke of the great rise and success in store for Muslims—their being brought out of darkness into light. Now the Quran proceeds to illustrate the promised rise and advancement. It takes us back to the days of Abraham.
An incident in the life of the great Patriarch has been cited to illustrate the truth of the statement made in the previous verse, viz. that God is the friend of believers; He helps them against their enemies and shows them the way of success, leading them out of darkness into light.
Abraham was a native of Ur of the Chaldees. His people worshipped the stars and their chief god was the Sun. Their greatest god was Merodach (or Madruk), who was originally the god of the morning and the spring sun. He was also called Bel, i.e. Lord (Enc. Bib. and Enc. Rel. Eth. ii. 296).
Abraham was hostile to the worship of idols and false deities and vehemently preached against them. He once set fire to a house which contained wooden images. On another occasion, be broke certain idols to pieces and burned them, whereupon he was produced before the king, whose name is recorded as Nimrod (Gen. 10:8, 9 and Jew. Enc. under Abraham) and who was also worshipped by the people as a representative of their deities. The king, it appears, threatened Abraham with ruin and death, to which Abraham firmly and boldly replied that he could do him no harm, for it was His Lord God Who granted life and caused death. As the king laid claim to godhead, he wrathfully rejoined that it was he who exercised these powers. Now Abraham knew that Nimrod and his people believed that all life depended on the sun, so if it was true that it was the king who controlled life and death, it meant that even the sun was under the control of the king and that the final power of life and death attributed by Nimrod and his men to the sun was a mere farce. So he pertinently asked the king to send back the sun from the west to the east (i.e. put it aside), for in such case the sun could not be recognized as the final controlling power. The king was in a fix. He could not say that he did not possess the power to send back the sun, for that would have exposed him. At the same time he could not say that it was he who caused the sun to rise from the east and set in the west, for his people looked upon the sun as the supreme deity, superior to the king himself, and if he had claimed any power over the sun, he would have surely roused the ire of his people against him. So he was dumbfounded and knew not what reply to make.
a
3:157; 9:116; 40:69; 57:3.
321
Abraham was a great iconoclast. His people worshipped the sun and the stars, their chief god being Merodach (Madruk), originally the god of the morning and the spring sun (Enc. Bib. & Enc. Rel. Eth.ii.p.296). They believed that all life depended on the sun. Abraham very wisely asked the infidel that if he, as he claimed, controlled life and death, then let him reverse the course of the sun on which all life depended. He was in a fix. He could not say that he could not accept Abraham’s challenge to bring the sun from the West to the East, for that would have demolished his claim of being the controller of life and death, and if he had said that he could do so, it meant that he claimed to exercise control over the sun which would have been a great blasphemy in the eyes of his people who worshipped the sun. Thus he was completely confounded and did not know what to say.
قُلِ اللّٰہُمَّ مٰلِکَ الۡمُلۡکِ تُؤۡتِی الۡمُلۡکَ مَنۡ تَشَآءُ وَتَنۡزِعُ الۡمُلۡکَ مِمَّنۡ تَشَآءُ وَتُعِزُّ مَنۡ تَشَآءُ وَتُذِلُّ مَنۡ تَشَآءُ ۖ بِیَدِکَ الۡخَیۡرُ ۖ اِنَّکَ عَلٰی کُلِّ شَیۡءٍ قَدِیۡرٌ
2:285; 5:19, 41; 35:14; 40:17; 48:15.
2:285; 5:19, 41; 35:14; 40:17; 48:15.
See next verse for explanation of this verse.
2:285; 5:19, 41; 35:14; 40:17; 48:15.
See under next verse.
b
2:285; 5:19, 41; 35:14; 40:17; 48:15.
a
2:285; 5:19, 41; 35:14; 40:17; 48:15.
317A
See under next verse.
b
2:285; 5:19, 41; 35:14; 40:17; 48:15.
392
See next verse for explanation of this verse.
وَشَدَدۡنَا مُلۡکَہٗ وَاٰتَیۡنٰہُ الۡحِکۡمَۃَ وَفَصۡلَ الۡخِطَابِ
2:252.
2:252.
2:252.
Important Words:
فصل الخطاب (decisive judgement) is infinitive noun from فصل (fasala) which means, he separated or divided a thing or distinguished it, he made it clear or he explained it, he separated it. فصل الحکم means, he decided the judgement. فصل الخطاب means, distinct or plain speech such as decides or distinguishes between what is true and what is false, or that which the person to whom it is addressed clearly understands; or judicial sentence. یوم الفصل means, the Day of Judgement or Decision (Lane & Aqrab).
Commentary:
The expression ذا الاید meaning, possessor of dignity and power, the verse shows that David was one of the greatest and most powerful Prophet-Kings of the House of Israel and was a very wise judge. In his reign Israelite glory had reached its high watermark. But in the time of his son, Solomon, though the Israelites tried to maintain their grandeur and the integrity and stability of their dominions, seeds of disruption and disintegration had been sown and signs of decadence had begun to appear. See also 34:11, 12.
e
2:252.
b
2:252.
3391
Important Words:
فصل الخطاب (decisive judgement) is infinitive noun from فصل (fasala) which means, he separated or divided a thing or distinguished it, he made it clear or he explained it, he separated it. فصل الحکم means, he decided the judgement. فصل الخطاب means, distinct or plain speech such as decides or distinguishes between what is true and what is false, or that which the person to whom it is addressed clearly understands; or judicial sentence. یوم الفصل means, the Day of Judgement or Decision (Lane & Aqrab).
Commentary:
The expression ذا الاید meaning, possessor of dignity and power, the verse shows that David was one of the greatest and most powerful Prophet-Kings of the House of Israel and was a very wise judge. In his reign Israelite glory had reached its high watermark. But in the time of his son, Solomon, though the Israelites tried to maintain their grandeur and the integrity and stability of their dominions, seeds of disruption and disintegration had been sown and signs of decadence had begun to appear. See also 34:11, 12.
b
2:252.