ءَاتَ
Appears 118 times in Quran
Derived Words (4)
Words derived from the stem "ءَاتَ".
- they give
- they gave him
- they would have at once done so
- and pay
Occurrences in Quran
Found 118 verses containing "ءَاتَ".
وَإِذْ ءَاتَيْنَا مُوسَى ٱلْكِتَٰبَ وَٱلْفُرْقَانَ لَعَلَّكُمْ تَهْتَدُونَ
2:88; 23:50; 32:24; 37:118; 40:54.
21:49.
The "Tablets" on which the Ten Commandments given to Moses were written. See 7:146, 151, 155.
Furqan means, arguments; morning or dawn; support (Lane).
The verse means that God gave Moses not only the Book or the Commandments written on the Tablets, but also such clear Signs and arguments, and brought about such events, as led to clear discrimination between truth and falsehood.
2:88; 23:50; 32:24; 37:118; 40:54.
21:49.
Important Words:
موسیٰ (Moses), the Founder of Judaism, was the deliverer of the Israelites from the hands of Pharaoh. He was an Israelite Prophet who, according to Biblical data, lived about 500 years after Abraham and about 1400 years before Jesus. Moses was a Law-giving Prophet, the other Israelite Prophets that came after him being only followers of his system. As a Law-giving Prophet and the founder of a great religious system, Moses bears striking resemblance to the Holy Prophet of Islam to whom he has been likened in the Quran itself (73:16).
As for the name Moses, it may be briefly noted that موسی (Moses) is really a Hebrew word in which language it is written and pronounced as موشے (moshe) and means, "a thing drawn out of water" or simply "a thing drawn out" (Enc. Bib.). The Bible itself supports that significance where Pharaoh’s daughter, speaking of the name Moses, says, "because I drew him out of the water" (Exod. 2:10). This derivation also finds support in Arabic, from which language Hebrew is derived. The Arabs say اوشی الشیء i.e. he extricated or drew out the thing (Aqrab). Thus the word موشی which is the passive participle from اوشی would mean "a thing extricated" or "a thing drawn out". Another possible derivation is from اوسی(derived from وسی) They say اوسی الشیء i.e. he cut the thing asunder (Aqrab). As Moses was cut off from his family, he was given that name.
Recently, however, the view has been expressed by certain Western scholars, e.g., by Breasted in his Dawn of Conscience and by Freud in his Moses and Monotheism that Moses is not a Hebrew name but an Egyptian. It is also claimed that Moses was not an Israelite by birth and did not belong to Hebrew stock. There can be no objection if we accept the first-mentioned view regarding the etymology of the name Moses, because as Moses was, in his childhood, cut off from his own people and was reared in Pharaoh’s house, it was not unnatural for Pharaoh’s daughter, herself an Egyptian, to give him a name of her own liking. But, as pointed out above, the fact is that Moses is a Hebrew name and Pharaoh’s daughter, if indeed it were she who gave him that name, must have certainly been influenced to give the child a Hebrew name, thinking that he belonged to the Israelite people. It is probable, however, that the name was suggested by the sister of Moses herself who was personally known to the household of Pharaoh, being present at the time when Pharaoh’s daughter picked up the lad from the river (Exod. 2:7; Quran, 28:9-13).
But there is absolutely no ground for accepting the view that Moses was not an Israelite or that the children of Israel never settled in Egypt. The idea is repugnant to all established facts and runs counter to the accepted history of the Jewish people and to the Bible and the Quran, both giving the lie to it. Among the arguments Western critics have advanced in support of their view, two appear to be the more noteworthy. One is that موسیٰ (Moses) is an Egyptian name occurring in many combinations of that language e.g., Amenmesse, Ahmosi, Thotmes, Ramose, etc. the last-mentioned being the same as Rameses, the name of the Pharaoh in whose time Moses lived. Though a deeper study of these words would indicate that these Egyptian names are really different from the Hebrew or Arabic word discussed above, yet even if we admit the name Moses to be of Egyptian origin, there is no justification for assuming that the man Moses was not Israelite but Egyptian by birth. As Israelites were a subject people in Egypt, living under the rule of the Pharaohs, it is no wonder if they adopted some of the Egyptian names of the ruling class, just as in India many Indians are fond of, and actually adopt, English names. But, as shown above, the fact remains that موسی is a Hebrew name, having definite derivation in both Hebrew and Arabic.
The second argument advanced by these critics is that the idea of God’s Oneness is originally Egyptian, having been first conceived and adopted by an ancient Egyptian king named Amenhotep IV who came to the throne in 1375 B.C. and passed away about 1358 B.C. when probably not 30 years of age. Later he gave himself the title of Ikhnaton (or Akhenaton) which means "the servant of the one God". This, these critics allege, shows that Moses was an Egyptian who borrowed the idea of God’s Oneness from Ikhnaton and then preached it among the Israelites. The inference is simply absurd. In the first place, it is against all reason to suppose that a certain conception is the monopoly of one people only. More than one people may independently form similar ideas without having borrowed them from one another. Secondly, even supposing that the idea of God’s unity is of Egyptian origin, there is no justification for the inference that Moses was not an Israelite. If an Indian can borrow an idea from an Englishman, why cannot an Israelite borrow an idea from an Egyptian? The truth is that the idea of God’s Oneness is neither the produce of Egypt nor of Palestine nor of any other place. It has its origin in divine revelation which has been independently vouchsafed to different peoples in different lands and at different times. It is never claimed that Moses was the first to conceive or preach that idea. He got it through divine revelation just as Jacob and Isaac and Abraham and Noah and Adam got it before him.
In short, there is no justification for supposing that the name Moses is of Egyptian origin or that the man Moses was not an Israelite. The linguistic evidence of Hebrew and Arabic, combined with reason and the evidence of Jewish history and tradition, not to speak of the story of the Bible and the Quran, all go to support the already established fact that Moses was an Israelite and not an Egyptian by birth, and that his name is also of Hebrew origin. (For a full discussion of the point see Tafsir-e-Kabir by Hadrat Mirza Bashir-ud-Din Mahmud Ahmad, Head of the Ahmadiyya Community, under 2:54).
الکتاب (the Book) is derived from کتب which means: (1) he wrote; (2) he made a thing obligatory, or he prescribed a law. The word کتاب bears the following meanings: (1) a thing in which or on which one writes; (2) a book; (3) a revealed book; (4) an epistle or letter; (5) an injunction or a commandment prescribed for a person or a people (Aqrab).
الفرقان (the Discrimination) is an Arabic word derived from فرق i.e. he divided or differentiated. It is wrong to think that it is not an Arabic but a Syriac word. The Arabic language abounds in words derived from the same root, which are also commonly met with in pre-Islamic literature of Arabia. The root meaning of the word فرقان is to differentiate. Hence فرقانis applied to that which differentiates between the true and the false, between sound reasoning and fallacy. Furqan also means 'an argument', because an argument serves to discriminate between the true and the false. 'Morning' or 'Dawn' are also termed furqan because they separate night from day. فرقان also means 'aid' or 'support', because the man helped and supported becomes distinguished from those against whom he receives assistance (Taj). From the above it is clear that all revealed Books are فرقان as well as all "signs" granted by God.
Commentary:
Here the word الکتاب (translated in the text as the Book) is used for the "tablets" on which the Ten Commandments given to Moses were written. The Quran itself makes it clear in 7:146, 151, 155 that it was only the tablets and not the Pentateuch that were given to Moses on Mount Sinai, and, as explained under Important Words, the word الکتاب does not necessarily mean a book, but anything on which something is written. Thus the word kitab here refers, not to the Pentateuch, but to the Ten Commandments that were written on the tablets. The verse would therefore mean that God gave Moses not only the Book or the Commandments written on the tablets but also such clear Signs and arguments, and brought about such events as led to clear discrimination between truth and falsehood. According to the Quran, فرقانis not the name of any particular thing; but every Sign and every instance of divine assistance discriminating truth from falsehood and every argument which serves the same object is termed فرقان.
The Quran uses the word فرقان about itself (25:2) and also calls the Battle of Badr, which so eminently helped to break the power of the Quraish, یوم الفرقان i.e. the Day of Discrimination (8:42).
Dr. Wherry’s criticism that the Quran is wrong in stating in this verse that the Torah was revealed to Moses on Mount Sinai betrays his ignorance of the Arabic language. He was apparently unaware that in Arabic the word کتاب is used in a much wider sense than "book". His inadequate knowledge of the Arabic language has also led Wherry to observe that the Prophet of Islam must have borrowed the word فرقان from the Syrians.
e
2:88; 23:50; 32:24; 37:118; 40:54.
f
21:49.
53
فُرْقَانْ (Furqan) 的意思是论据; 早晨或黎明; 支撑 (Lane)
a
2:88; 23:50; 32:24; 37:118; 40:54.
b
21:49.
60
Important Words:
موسیٰ (Moses), the Founder of Judaism, was the deliverer of the Israelites from the hands of Pharaoh. He was an Israelite Prophet who, according to Biblical data, lived about 500 years after Abraham and about 1400 years before Jesus. Moses was a Law-giving Prophet, the other Israelite Prophets that came after him being only followers of his system. As a Law-giving Prophet and the founder of a great religious system, Moses bears striking resemblance to the Holy Prophet of Islam to whom he has been likened in the Quran itself (73:16).
As for the name Moses, it may be briefly noted that موسی (Moses) is really a Hebrew word in which language it is written and pronounced as موشے (moshe) and means, "a thing drawn out of water" or simply "a thing drawn out" (Enc. Bib.). The Bible itself supports that significance where Pharaoh’s daughter, speaking of the name Moses, says, "because I drew him out of the water" (Exod. 2:10). This derivation also finds support in Arabic, from which language Hebrew is derived. The Arabs say اوشی الشیء i.e. he extricated or drew out the thing (Aqrab). Thus the word موشی which is the passive participle from اوشی would mean "a thing extricated" or "a thing drawn out". Another possible derivation is from اوسی(derived from وسی) They say اوسی الشیء i.e. he cut the thing asunder (Aqrab). As Moses was cut off from his family, he was given that name.
Recently, however, the view has been expressed by certain Western scholars, e.g., by Breasted in his Dawn of Conscience and by Freud in his Moses and Monotheism that Moses is not a Hebrew name but an Egyptian. It is also claimed that Moses was not an Israelite by birth and did not belong to Hebrew stock. There can be no objection if we accept the first-mentioned view regarding the etymology of the name Moses, because as Moses was, in his childhood, cut off from his own people and was reared in Pharaoh’s house, it was not unnatural for Pharaoh’s daughter, herself an Egyptian, to give him a name of her own liking. But, as pointed out above, the fact is that Moses is a Hebrew name and Pharaoh’s daughter, if indeed it were she who gave him that name, must have certainly been influenced to give the child a Hebrew name, thinking that he belonged to the Israelite people. It is probable, however, that the name was suggested by the sister of Moses herself who was personally known to the household of Pharaoh, being present at the time when Pharaoh’s daughter picked up the lad from the river (Exod. 2:7; Quran, 28:9-13).
But there is absolutely no ground for accepting the view that Moses was not an Israelite or that the children of Israel never settled in Egypt. The idea is repugnant to all established facts and runs counter to the accepted history of the Jewish people and to the Bible and the Quran, both giving the lie to it. Among the arguments Western critics have advanced in support of their view, two appear to be the more noteworthy. One is that موسیٰ (Moses) is an Egyptian name occurring in many combinations of that language e.g., Amenmesse, Ahmosi, Thotmes, Ramose, etc. the last-mentioned being the same as Rameses, the name of the Pharaoh in whose time Moses lived. Though a deeper study of these words would indicate that these Egyptian names are really different from the Hebrew or Arabic word discussed above, yet even if we admit the name Moses to be of Egyptian origin, there is no justification for assuming that the man Moses was not Israelite but Egyptian by birth. As Israelites were a subject people in Egypt, living under the rule of the Pharaohs, it is no wonder if they adopted some of the Egyptian names of the ruling class, just as in India many Indians are fond of, and actually adopt, English names. But, as shown above, the fact remains that موسی is a Hebrew name, having definite derivation in both Hebrew and Arabic.
The second argument advanced by these critics is that the idea of God’s Oneness is originally Egyptian, having been first conceived and adopted by an ancient Egyptian king named Amenhotep IV who came to the throne in 1375 B.C. and passed away about 1358 B.C. when probably not 30 years of age. Later he gave himself the title of Ikhnaton (or Akhenaton) which means "the servant of the one God". This, these critics allege, shows that Moses was an Egyptian who borrowed the idea of God’s Oneness from Ikhnaton and then preached it among the Israelites. The inference is simply absurd. In the first place, it is against all reason to suppose that a certain conception is the monopoly of one people only. More than one people may independently form similar ideas without having borrowed them from one another. Secondly, even supposing that the idea of God’s unity is of Egyptian origin, there is no justification for the inference that Moses was not an Israelite. If an Indian can borrow an idea from an Englishman, why cannot an Israelite borrow an idea from an Egyptian? The truth is that the idea of God’s Oneness is neither the produce of Egypt nor of Palestine nor of any other place. It has its origin in divine revelation which has been independently vouchsafed to different peoples in different lands and at different times. It is never claimed that Moses was the first to conceive or preach that idea. He got it through divine revelation just as Jacob and Isaac and Abraham and Noah and Adam got it before him.
In short, there is no justification for supposing that the name Moses is of Egyptian origin or that the man Moses was not an Israelite. The linguistic evidence of Hebrew and Arabic, combined with reason and the evidence of Jewish history and tradition, not to speak of the story of the Bible and the Quran, all go to support the already established fact that Moses was an Israelite and not an Egyptian by birth, and that his name is also of Hebrew origin. (For a full discussion of the point see Tafsir-e-Kabir by Hadrat Mirza Bashir-ud-Din Mahmud Ahmad, Head of the Ahmadiyya Community, under 2:54).
الکتاب (the Book) is derived from کتب which means: (1) he wrote; (2) he made a thing obligatory, or he prescribed a law. The word کتاب bears the following meanings: (1) a thing in which or on which one writes; (2) a book; (3) a revealed book; (4) an epistle or letter; (5) an injunction or a commandment prescribed for a person or a people (Aqrab).
الفرقان (the Discrimination) is an Arabic word derived from فرق i.e. he divided or differentiated. It is wrong to think that it is not an Arabic but a Syriac word. The Arabic language abounds in words derived from the same root, which are also commonly met with in pre-Islamic literature of Arabia. The root meaning of the word فرقان is to differentiate. Hence فرقانis applied to that which differentiates between the true and the false, between sound reasoning and fallacy. Furqan also means 'an argument', because an argument serves to discriminate between the true and the false. 'Morning' or 'Dawn' are also termed furqan because they separate night from day. فرقان also means 'aid' or 'support', because the man helped and supported becomes distinguished from those against whom he receives assistance (Taj). From the above it is clear that all revealed Books are فرقان as well as all "signs" granted by God.
Commentary:
Here the word الکتاب (translated in the text as the Book) is used for the "tablets" on which the Ten Commandments given to Moses were written. The Quran itself makes it clear in 7:146, 151, 155 that it was only the tablets and not the Pentateuch that were given to Moses on Mount Sinai, and, as explained under Important Words, the word الکتاب does not necessarily mean a book, but anything on which something is written. Thus the word kitab here refers, not to the Pentateuch, but to the Ten Commandments that were written on the tablets. The verse would therefore mean that God gave Moses not only the Book or the Commandments written on the tablets but also such clear Signs and arguments, and brought about such events as led to clear discrimination between truth and falsehood. According to the Quran, فرقانis not the name of any particular thing; but every Sign and every instance of divine assistance discriminating truth from falsehood and every argument which serves the same object is termed فرقان.
The Quran uses the word فرقان about itself (25:2) and also calls the Battle of Badr, which so eminently helped to break the power of the Quraish, یوم الفرقان i.e. the Day of Discrimination (8:42).
Dr. Wherry’s criticism that the Quran is wrong in stating in this verse that the Torah was revealed to Moses on Mount Sinai betrays his ignorance of the Arabic language. He was apparently unaware that in Arabic the word کتاب is used in a much wider sense than "book". His inadequate knowledge of the Arabic language has also led Wherry to observe that the Prophet of Islam must have borrowed the word فرقان from the Syrians.
e
2:88; 23:50; 32:24; 37:118; 40:54.
f
21:49.
93
The "Tablets" on which the Ten Commandments given to Moses were written. See 7:146, 151, 155.
94
Furqan means, arguments; morning or dawn; support (Lane).
The verse means that God gave Moses not only the Book or the Commandments written on the Tablets, but also such clear Signs and arguments, and brought about such events, as led to clear discrimination between truth and falsehood.
وَإِذْ أَخَذْنَا مِيثَٰقَكُمْ وَرَفَعْنَا فَوْقَكُمُ ٱلطُّورَ خُذُوا۟ مَآ ءَاتَيْنَٰكُم بِقُوَّةٍ وَٱذْكُرُوا۟ مَا فِيهِ لَعَلَّكُمْ تَتَّقُونَ
وَرَفَعْنَا فَوْقَکُمُ الطُّوْرَ یعنی تم کو پہاڑ کے دامن میں کھڑا کیا تھا۔ (خروج باب۱۹ آیت۱۷)۔
ذَکَرَہٗ کے معنی ہیں حَفِظَہٗ فِیْ ذِھْنِہٖ (اقرب) یعنی کسی بات کو اپنے ذہن میں محفوظ کر لیا۔ پس وَاذْکُرُوْا کے معنے ہوں گے اسے محفوظ کر لو اور یاد رکھو۔
2:84, 94; 4:155.
7:172.
The words do not mean that Mount Sinai was physically lifted up to hang over the heads of the Israelites. They only mean that the covenant was taken at a time when the Israelites were standing at the foot of the Mount. They may also refer to the scene when the Mount Sinai was terribly shaken with an earthquake, while the Israelites were camping at its foot (Exod. 19:2). On such an occasion the shaking of a high mountain peak appears as it were hanging over the heads of those standing near it.
2:84, 94; 4:155.
7:172.
Important Words:
میثاق (covenant) is derived from وثق i.e. it was or became firm and established. اوثقه means, he made it firm and fast; he bound or tied it firmly and strongly. میثاق means, a firmly made promise; a covenant (Aqrab & Lane). It should be noted that every commandment of God has the force of a covenant for those who believe, because once an individual or a people believe in God and accept His guidance, they, as it were, enter into a covenant with Him that they will obey all His Commandments, a formal agreement not being necessary. See also 2:28.
رفعنا (We raised high) is derived from رفع which means, he raised or lifted a thing or person; he raised a person in rank, honour, position or dignity; he took a report or complaint to a person in authority (Mufradat & Aqrab). It also means, to make a thing tower above another standing beside it. We read in a hadith رفع لنا صخرة طویلة لھا ظل i.e. a big stone giving good shade was raised above us, i.e. we found ourselves beside a high shady stone (Bukhari, ch. on Hijrah).
فوق (above) is derived from فاق meaning, he surpassed it or him; he stood higher than it or him. Thus فوق is the opposite of "beneath" meaning "above", both literally and figuratively (Aqrab). It is also used to denote a place higher than that which one is occupying. The Quran says: اذجاءوکم من فوقکم i.e. when the enemy made a descent on you from a higher position (33:11).
الطور (the Mount) means: (1) a hill or mountain; (2) the mount Tur or Sinai (Mufradat & Aqrab). Thus, it is both a common and a proper name.
Commentary:
In this verse the Quran again reverts to the previous subject, i.e. the iniquities of the Israelites, but in a different field. The verse refers to the time when Moses went up the Mount Sinai to receive the Ten Commandments and left his followers standing at the foot of the Mount (Exod. 19:17). So the covenant spoken of in the verse refers to the Ten Commandments which were given to Moses on this occasion.
The clause We raised high above you the Mount, does not mean that Mount Sinai was physically lifted up to hang over the heads of the Israelites. It only means that the covenant was taken at a time when the Israelites were standing at the foot of the mountain—a meaning quite consistent with the Arabic idiom as explained under Important Words. The raising of the Mount above the Israelites has been ascribed to God, because it was He Who had commanded them to come and stand at the foot of the Mount.
The verse may also refer to the scene when the Mount Sinai was terribly shaken with an earthquake, while the Israelites were camping near it (Exod. 19:18). On such an occasion the shaking of a high mountain peak appears as if it were hanging over the heads of those standing near it.
a
2:84, 94; 4:155.
b
4:155; 7:172.
60
这些话并不意味着西奈山真是被举起来悬在古以色列人的头顶上空。它们只是意指订约的时候古以色列人正站在这山 (西奈山) 脚下。它们也可以指当古以色列人正在它的山脚下宿营时, 西奈山遭到地震的可怕震撼的情景 («出埃及记»19:2)。在此时刻, 一座高高的山峰的震动, 看来就像它悬在站在它近旁的那些人的头顶上空。
1
وَرَفَعْنَا فَوْقَکُمُ الطُّوْرَ یعنی تم کو پہاڑ کے دامن میں کھڑا کیا تھا۔ (خروج باب۱۹ آیت۱۷)۔
2
ذَکَرَہٗ کے معنی ہیں حَفِظَہٗ فِیْ ذِھْنِہٖ (اقرب) یعنی کسی بات کو اپنے ذہن میں محفوظ کر لیا۔ پس وَاذْکُرُوْا کے معنے ہوں گے اسے محفوظ کر لو اور یاد رکھو۔
a
2:84, 94; 4:155.
b
7:172.
70
Important Words:
میثاق (covenant) is derived from وثق i.e. it was or became firm and established. اوثقه means, he made it firm and fast; he bound or tied it firmly and strongly. میثاق means, a firmly made promise; a covenant (Aqrab & Lane). It should be noted that every commandment of God has the force of a covenant for those who believe, because once an individual or a people believe in God and accept His guidance, they, as it were, enter into a covenant with Him that they will obey all His Commandments, a formal agreement not being necessary. See also 2:28.
رفعنا (We raised high) is derived from رفع which means, he raised or lifted a thing or person; he raised a person in rank, honour, position or dignity; he took a report or complaint to a person in authority (Mufradat & Aqrab). It also means, to make a thing tower above another standing beside it. We read in a hadith رفع لنا صخرة طویلة لھا ظل i.e. a big stone giving good shade was raised above us, i.e. we found ourselves beside a high shady stone (Bukhari, ch. on Hijrah).
فوق (above) is derived from فاق meaning, he surpassed it or him; he stood higher than it or him. Thus فوق is the opposite of "beneath" meaning "above", both literally and figuratively (Aqrab). It is also used to denote a place higher than that which one is occupying. The Quran says: اذجاءوکم من فوقکم i.e. when the enemy made a descent on you from a higher position (33:11).
الطور (the Mount) means: (1) a hill or mountain; (2) the mount Tur or Sinai (Mufradat & Aqrab). Thus, it is both a common and a proper name.
Commentary:
In this verse the Quran again reverts to the previous subject, i.e. the iniquities of the Israelites, but in a different field. The verse refers to the time when Moses went up the Mount Sinai to receive the Ten Commandments and left his followers standing at the foot of the Mount (Exod. 19:17). So the covenant spoken of in the verse refers to the Ten Commandments which were given to Moses on this occasion.
The clause We raised high above you the Mount, does not mean that Mount Sinai was physically lifted up to hang over the heads of the Israelites. It only means that the covenant was taken at a time when the Israelites were standing at the foot of the mountain—a meaning quite consistent with the Arabic idiom as explained under Important Words. The raising of the Mount above the Israelites has been ascribed to God, because it was He Who had commanded them to come and stand at the foot of the Mount.
The verse may also refer to the scene when the Mount Sinai was terribly shaken with an earthquake, while the Israelites were camping near it (Exod. 19:18). On such an occasion the shaking of a high mountain peak appears as if it were hanging over the heads of those standing near it.
c
2:84, 94; 4:155.
d
7:172.
105
The words do not mean that Mount Sinai was physically lifted up to hang over the heads of the Israelites. They only mean that the covenant was taken at a time when the Israelites were standing at the foot of the Mount. They may also refer to the scene when the Mount Sinai was terribly shaken with an earthquake, while the Israelites were camping at its foot (Exod. 19:2). On such an occasion the shaking of a high mountain peak appears as it were hanging over the heads of those standing near it.
وَلَقَدْ ءَاتَيْنَا مُوسَى ٱلْكِتَٰبَ وَقَفَّيْنَا مِنۢ بَعْدِهِۦ بِٱلرُّسُلِ ۖ وَءَاتَيْنَا عِيسَى ٱبْنَ مَرْيَمَ ٱلْبَيِّنَٰتِ وَأَيَّدْنَٰهُ بِرُوحِ ٱلْقُدُسِ ۗ أَفَكُلَّمَا جَآءَكُمْ رَسُولٌۢ بِمَا لَا تَهْوَىٰٓ أَنفُسُكُمُ ٱسْتَكْبَرْتُمْ فَفَرِيقًا كَذَّبْتُمْ وَفَرِيقًا تَقْتُلُونَ
2:54.
5:47; 57:28.
2:254; 3:185; 5:111; 43:64.
16:103.
普遍认为, رُوْحُ الْقُدُسْ (Ruhul-qudus, 圣灵) 是 جِبْرِيْل (Jibril, 吉布里尔) 天使的另一个称呼 (جَرِيْر, jarir和كَثِيْر, Kathir)。 رُوْحُ الْقُدُسْ 的另一个意思是安拉圣洁或有福的言语。
اس جگہ اَلرُّسُل کا لفظ ہے اور اَلْ سے اس چیز کی طرف اشارہ ہے جو مخاطبین کے ذہن میں تھی۔ پس اس آیت کے یہ معنے ہونگے کہ وہ رسول جوتمہارے ذہن میں ہیں اور جن کو تم جانتے ہو۔ اس مفہوم کو واضح کرنے کے لئے خطوط وحدانی میں ’’ان‘‘ کا لفظ بڑھا دیا گیا ہے۔
’’پیچھے بھیجا‘‘ سے صرف بعد میں آنا مرادنہیں کیونکہ وہ تومِنۡۢ بَعۡدِہٖ کے الفاظ میں بیان ہو چکا ہے۔ پس اس سے مرادنقشِ قدم پر چلنا اور اس کے دین کی خدمت کرنا ہے۔
تَقْتُلُوْنَ حال ماضیہ ہے یعنی حال کا صیغہ فعل ماضی کی شناخت کے اظہار کے لئے لایا گیا ہے مراد یہ ہے کہ یہ ایسا بُرا فعل تھا کہ اب بھی خیال کرتے ہوئے آنکھوں کے سامنے آجاتا ہے۔
See 2:54.
5:47; 57:28.
2:254; 3:185; 5:111; 43:64.
16:103.
It is commonly believed that the Spirit of holiness is another name of the angel Gabriel (Jarir & Kathir). Ruhul-Qudus also means, the holy or blessed Word of God.
See 2:54.
5:47; 57:28.
2:254; 3:185; 5:111; 43:64.
16:103.
Important Words:
قفینا (We caused to follow) is derived from قفا which means, the back of the neck. Hence قفا أثره means, he followed him. قفی(qaffa) means, he made a person or thing follow or come after another (Aqrab).
بینات (manifest Signs) is derived from بین meaning, he explained a thing so as to make it clear or manifest. So بینات means, such signs and arguments as make a thing manifest and clearly establish the truth of a claimant (Mufradat & Aqrab).
روح القدس (Spirit of Holiness) is a compound word made up of روح and القدس. The first-mentioned word, i.e. روح means, a spirit, an angel, a word of God; and قدس means, sanctity, holiness. روح القدس would thus mean, the holy or blessed word of God; the spirit or angel of holiness (Aqrab & Lane). It is generally taken to signify the angel Gabriel.
Commentary:
In this verse, the Israelites are told that they had opposed all the Prophets of God, beginning from Moses and ending with Jesus, for no other reason than that some of the teachings of these Prophets were at variance with their cherished desires.
The verse, while speaking generally of the Prophets who came after Moses, makes a special mention of Jesus. The reason for this lies in the fact that somehow or other, the Jews accepted all those Prophets who appeared prior to Jesus, but they stubbornly refused to accept him. It was, therefore, in the fitness of things that particular mention should have been made of Jesus, and it should have been declared that he was as good and as holy a Prophet as so many others who had gone before him and in whom the Jews had believed, inasmuch as he possessed, in common with them, that characteristic Spirit of Holiness which distinguished God’s Prophets from other men of the world. The most powerful proof of the truth of the claims of Jesus as a Prophet was his being favoured with Signs and the assistance of the Holy Spirit, and this is the very proof on the basis of which the Jews had believed in the previous Prophets. The بینات(manifest Signs) and روح القدس (the Spirit of Holiness) have been mentioned here not because they were the unique characteristics of Jesus, but because both these evidences, which must accompany every true Prophet, were denied him by the Jews. From Matt. 12:38-40, it is apparent that the Jews denied that Jesus showed any Sign, while from Luke 11:15 and Matt. 10:25 we learn that, according to the Jews, Jesus, far from being favoured with the Holy Spirit, was influenced by the Evil Spirit and was (God forbid!) himself a devil.
That بینات (manifest Signs) and روح القدس (the Spirit of Holiness) are the common characteristics of all the Prophets of God and not an exclusive distinction of Jesus is apparent from other verses of the Quran as well. Says the Quran: That was because their Messengers came to them with بینات (manifest Signs) but they disbelieved; so Allah seized them. Surely, He is strong and severe in chastising (40:23). Also see 2:100. And elsewhere the Quran says about the Holy Prophet, Say, theروح القدس (Spirit of Holiness) has brought it (the Quran) down from thy Lord with truth that He may strengthen those who believe and as a guidance and glad tidings for Muslims (16:103). The Quran goes still further and declares that the Spirit of Holiness descends not only on Prophets but also on true believers (58:23).
In this connection we have also the testimony of the Holy Prophet who is reported to have said to the poet Hassan, "Reply, O Hassan (to the disbelievers), on behalf of the Prophet of God, and O God, help Thou Hassan with روح القدس i.e. the Spirit of Holiness" (Bukhari & Muslim).
Hassan also declares in a couplet of his that روح القدس i.e. the Holy Spirit was always with the Muslims. Says he:
و جبریل رسول الله فینا
و روح القدس لیس له كفاء
"And Gabriel, the Messenger of God, is among us and the Spirit of Holiness has no match" (Muslim).
From the above it is clear that البینات (manifest Signs) and روح القدس (the Spirit of Holiness) are not the exclusive privileges of Jesus but were vouchsafed to all the Prophets of God. Even holy men other than Prophets have received the Spirit of Holiness from God. The specific mention of "manifest Signs" and "the Spirit of Holiness" in this verse is thus meant only to bring home to the Jews that the rejection of Jesus was entirely unjustified.
It is commonly believed that روح القدس is another name of the angel Gabriel (Jarir & Kathir). As explained under 2:31, out of His infinite wisdom, God has appointed different angels to execute His will and manifest His attributes in the universe; and the angel to whom the work of bringing about purification in the world and of reflecting God’s attribute of holiness has been assigned is called, روح القدس. The expression "Holy Spirit" is also met with in the Old Testament (Ps. 51:11). Some commentators have also interpreted روح القدس as a special manifestation of God’s اسم اعظم i.e. His chief attribute of Holiness (Kathir).
a
2:54.
b
5:47; 57:28.
c
2:254; 3:185; 5:111; 43:64.
d
16:103.
67
普遍认为, رُوْحُ الْقُدُسْ (Ruhul-qudus, 圣灵) 是 جِبْرِيْل (Jibril, 吉布里尔) 天使的另一个称呼 (جَرِيْر, jarir和كَثِيْر, Kathir)。 رُوْحُ الْقُدُسْ 的另一个意思是安拉圣洁或有福的言语。
1
اس جگہ اَلرُّسُل کا لفظ ہے اور اَلْ سے اس چیز کی طرف اشارہ ہے جو مخاطبین کے ذہن میں تھی۔ پس اس آیت کے یہ معنے ہونگے کہ وہ رسول جوتمہارے ذہن میں ہیں اور جن کو تم جانتے ہو۔ اس مفہوم کو واضح کرنے کے لئے خطوط وحدانی میں ’’ان‘‘ کا لفظ بڑھا دیا گیا ہے۔
2
’’پیچھے بھیجا‘‘ سے صرف بعد میں آنا مرادنہیں کیونکہ وہ تومِنۡۢ بَعۡدِہٖ کے الفاظ میں بیان ہو چکا ہے۔ پس اس سے مرادنقشِ قدم پر چلنا اور اس کے دین کی خدمت کرنا ہے۔
3
تَقْتُلُوْنَ حال ماضیہ ہے یعنی حال کا صیغہ فعل ماضی کی شناخت کے اظہار کے لئے لایا گیا ہے مراد یہ ہے کہ یہ ایسا بُرا فعل تھا کہ اب بھی خیال کرتے ہوئے آنکھوں کے سامنے آجاتا ہے۔
a
See 2:54.
b
5:47; 57:28.
c
2:254; 3:185; 5:111; 43:64.
d
16:103.
94
Important Words:
قفینا (We caused to follow) is derived from قفا which means, the back of the neck. Hence قفا أثره means, he followed him. قفی(qaffa) means, he made a person or thing follow or come after another (Aqrab).
بینات (manifest Signs) is derived from بین meaning, he explained a thing so as to make it clear or manifest. So بینات means, such signs and arguments as make a thing manifest and clearly establish the truth of a claimant (Mufradat & Aqrab).
روح القدس (Spirit of Holiness) is a compound word made up of روح and القدس. The first-mentioned word, i.e. روح means, a spirit, an angel, a word of God; and قدس means, sanctity, holiness. روح القدس would thus mean, the holy or blessed word of God; the spirit or angel of holiness (Aqrab & Lane). It is generally taken to signify the angel Gabriel.
Commentary:
In this verse, the Israelites are told that they had opposed all the Prophets of God, beginning from Moses and ending with Jesus, for no other reason than that some of the teachings of these Prophets were at variance with their cherished desires.
The verse, while speaking generally of the Prophets who came after Moses, makes a special mention of Jesus. The reason for this lies in the fact that somehow or other, the Jews accepted all those Prophets who appeared prior to Jesus, but they stubbornly refused to accept him. It was, therefore, in the fitness of things that particular mention should have been made of Jesus, and it should have been declared that he was as good and as holy a Prophet as so many others who had gone before him and in whom the Jews had believed, inasmuch as he possessed, in common with them, that characteristic Spirit of Holiness which distinguished God’s Prophets from other men of the world. The most powerful proof of the truth of the claims of Jesus as a Prophet was his being favoured with Signs and the assistance of the Holy Spirit, and this is the very proof on the basis of which the Jews had believed in the previous Prophets. The بینات(manifest Signs) and روح القدس (the Spirit of Holiness) have been mentioned here not because they were the unique characteristics of Jesus, but because both these evidences, which must accompany every true Prophet, were denied him by the Jews. From Matt. 12:38-40, it is apparent that the Jews denied that Jesus showed any Sign, while from Luke 11:15 and Matt. 10:25 we learn that, according to the Jews, Jesus, far from being favoured with the Holy Spirit, was influenced by the Evil Spirit and was (God forbid!) himself a devil.
That بینات (manifest Signs) and روح القدس (the Spirit of Holiness) are the common characteristics of all the Prophets of God and not an exclusive distinction of Jesus is apparent from other verses of the Quran as well. Says the Quran: That was because their Messengers came to them with بینات (manifest Signs) but they disbelieved; so Allah seized them. Surely, He is strong and severe in chastising (40:23). Also see 2:100. And elsewhere the Quran says about the Holy Prophet, Say, theروح القدس (Spirit of Holiness) has brought it (the Quran) down from thy Lord with truth that He may strengthen those who believe and as a guidance and glad tidings for Muslims (16:103). The Quran goes still further and declares that the Spirit of Holiness descends not only on Prophets but also on true believers (58:23).
In this connection we have also the testimony of the Holy Prophet who is reported to have said to the poet Hassan, "Reply, O Hassan (to the disbelievers), on behalf of the Prophet of God, and O God, help Thou Hassan with روح القدس i.e. the Spirit of Holiness" (Bukhari & Muslim).
Hassan also declares in a couplet of his that روح القدس i.e. the Holy Spirit was always with the Muslims. Says he:
و جبریل رسول الله فینا
و روح القدس لیس له كفاء
"And Gabriel, the Messenger of God, is among us and the Spirit of Holiness has no match" (Muslim).
From the above it is clear that البینات (manifest Signs) and روح القدس (the Spirit of Holiness) are not the exclusive privileges of Jesus but were vouchsafed to all the Prophets of God. Even holy men other than Prophets have received the Spirit of Holiness from God. The specific mention of "manifest Signs" and "the Spirit of Holiness" in this verse is thus meant only to bring home to the Jews that the rejection of Jesus was entirely unjustified.
It is commonly believed that روح القدس is another name of the angel Gabriel (Jarir & Kathir). As explained under 2:31, out of His infinite wisdom, God has appointed different angels to execute His will and manifest His attributes in the universe; and the angel to whom the work of bringing about purification in the world and of reflecting God’s attribute of holiness has been assigned is called, روح القدس. The expression "Holy Spirit" is also met with in the Old Testament (Ps. 51:11). Some commentators have also interpreted روح القدس as a special manifestation of God’s اسم اعظم i.e. His chief attribute of Holiness (Kathir).
a
See 2:54.
b
5:47; 57:28.
c
2:254; 3:185; 5:111; 43:64.
d
16:103.
119
It is commonly believed that the Spirit of holiness is another name of the angel Gabriel (Jarir & Kathir). Ruhul-Qudus also means, the holy or blessed Word of God.
وَإِذْ أَخَذْنَا مِيثَٰقَكُمْ وَرَفَعْنَا فَوْقَكُمُ ٱلطُّورَ خُذُوا۟ مَآ ءَاتَيْنَٰكُم بِقُوَّةٍ وَٱسْمَعُوا۟ ۖ قَالُوا۟ سَمِعْنَا وَعَصَيْنَا وَأُشْرِبُوا۟ فِى قُلُوبِهِمُ ٱلْعِجْلَ بِكُفْرِهِمْ ۚ قُلْ بِئْسَمَا يَأْمُرُكُم بِهِۦٓ إِيمَٰنُكُمْ إِن كُنتُم مُّؤْمِنِينَ
2:64; 4:155; 7:172.
وَرَفَعْنَا فَوْقَـکُمُ الطُّوْرَ: یعنی تم کو اس کے دامن میں کھڑا کیا تھا۔
عربی کا محاورہ ہے اُشْرِبَ فُـلَا نٌ حُبَّ فُـلَا نٍ اور معنے یہ ہوتے ہیں خَالَطَہٗ حُبُّہٗ قَلْبَہٗ (اقرب) یعنی فلاں کی محبت اس کے دل میں رچ گئی۔ پس اُشْرِبَ مجہول کے صیغہ میں محبت کے رَچ جانے کے لئے بھی استعمال ہوتا ہے۔ بحر محیط میں لکھا ہے۔ وَ قَالُوْا اَشْرَبْتُ الْبَیَاضَ الْحُمْرَۃَ اَی خَلَطْتُّـھَا بِالْحُمْرَۃِ یعنی عرب بعض دفعہ کہتے ہیں کہ میں نے سفیدی کو سرخی پلائی اور مراد ہوتی ہے کہ سفید رنگ میں سرخ رنگ ملا دیا۔ ایک شاعر کہتا ہے۔
اِذَا مَا الْقَلْبُ اُشْرِبَ حُبَّ شَیْئٍ۔ فَـلَا تَـاْمَـلُ لَـہٗ عَنْـہُ انْـصِرَافـًا
ی
See {105}.
The words signify that they practically refused to obey. For the meaning of Qala see {57}.
The expression Ushriba Fi Qalbihi Hubbu Fulanin means, the love of such a person permeated his heart (Aqrab). The word is so used because love is like alcohol that intoxicates one who partakes of it. The words used in the text mean, the love of the calf had sunk deep into their hearts.
2:64; 4:155; 7:172.
Important Words:
اشربوا (were permeated with) is derived from شرب meaning, he drank. اشرب means, he was made to drink. The expression,اشرب فی قلبه حب فلان means, the love of such and such a person permeated his heart (Aqrab). The word is so used because love is like alcohol that intoxicates one who partakes of it. The clause, اشربوا فی قلوبھم العجل (lit. they were made to drink into their hearts the calf) must really be read as اشربوا فی قلوبھم حب العجل (lit. they were made to drink into their hearts the love of the calf), the word حب (love) being understood before the word عجل (calf).
Commentary:
For an explanation of the expression, raised high above you the Mount, see under 2:64.
The words, they said, We hear and we disobey, signify that they practically refused to obey God. They did not necessarily use these exact words; for the word, as pointed out under 2:31, sometimes conveys the sense not of actual speech but of practical conduct.
Reference to calf-worship in verse 93 is not a mere reiteration of what has been already said in verse 55; the incident has been mentioned here as an illustration of what has been said about the Jews in the previous verse. Their attention is drawn to their conduct in the days of Moses. When Moses was absent from them for a short time only, they took the image of a calf for their idol, although they had witnessed how God had helped Moses and had shown mighty Signs at his hands; and that at a time when they had given a solemn promise not to worship anything besides God. In spite of that promise, they showed active opposition to the commandments of God by their deeds.
In the concluding portion of the verse, it is pointed out that the Jews professed to believe in what was revealed to them by God, but their belief was of a strange character for in spite of it, they persisted in their opposition to the Prophets. If this was believing, then their faith was only leading them astray.
c
2:64; 4:155; 7:172.
1
وَرَفَعْنَا فَوْقَـکُمُ الطُّوْرَ: یعنی تم کو اس کے دامن میں کھڑا کیا تھا۔
2
عربی کا محاورہ ہے اُشْرِبَ فُـلَا نٌ حُبَّ فُـلَا نٍ اور معنے یہ ہوتے ہیں خَالَطَہٗ حُبُّہٗ قَلْبَہٗ (اقرب) یعنی فلاں کی محبت اس کے دل میں رچ گئی۔ پس اُشْرِبَ مجہول کے صیغہ میں محبت کے رَچ جانے کے لئے بھی استعمال ہوتا ہے۔ بحر محیط میں لکھا ہے۔ وَ قَالُوْا اَشْرَبْتُ الْبَیَاضَ الْحُمْرَۃَ اَی خَلَطْتُّـھَا بِالْحُمْرَۃِ یعنی عرب بعض دفعہ کہتے ہیں کہ میں نے سفیدی کو سرخی پلائی اور مراد ہوتی ہے کہ سفید رنگ میں سرخ رنگ ملا دیا۔ ایک شاعر کہتا ہے۔
اِذَا مَا الْقَلْبُ اُشْرِبَ حُبَّ شَیْئٍ۔ فَـلَا تَـاْمَـلُ لَـہٗ عَنْـہُ انْـصِرَافـًا
ی
b
2:64; 4:155; 7:172.
100
Important Words:
اشربوا (were permeated with) is derived from شرب meaning, he drank. اشرب means, he was made to drink. The expression,اشرب فی قلبه حب فلان means, the love of such and such a person permeated his heart (Aqrab). The word is so used because love is like alcohol that intoxicates one who partakes of it. The clause, اشربوا فی قلوبھم العجل (lit. they were made to drink into their hearts the calf) must really be read as اشربوا فی قلوبھم حب العجل (lit. they were made to drink into their hearts the love of the calf), the word حب (love) being understood before the word عجل (calf).
Commentary:
For an explanation of the expression, raised high above you the Mount, see under 2:64.
The words, they said, We hear and we disobey, signify that they practically refused to obey God. They did not necessarily use these exact words; for the word, as pointed out under 2:31, sometimes conveys the sense not of actual speech but of practical conduct.
Reference to calf-worship in verse 93 is not a mere reiteration of what has been already said in verse 55; the incident has been mentioned here as an illustration of what has been said about the Jews in the previous verse. Their attention is drawn to their conduct in the days of Moses. When Moses was absent from them for a short time only, they took the image of a calf for their idol, although they had witnessed how God had helped Moses and had shown mighty Signs at his hands; and that at a time when they had given a solemn promise not to worship anything besides God. In spite of that promise, they showed active opposition to the commandments of God by their deeds.
In the concluding portion of the verse, it is pointed out that the Jews professed to believe in what was revealed to them by God, but their belief was of a strange character for in spite of it, they persisted in their opposition to the Prophets. If this was believing, then their faith was only leading them astray.
b
2:64; 4:155; 7:172.121
See {105}.
121A
The words signify that they practically refused to obey. For the meaning of Qala see {57}.
122
The expression Ushriba Fi Qalbihi Hubbu Fulanin means, the love of such a person permeated his heart (Aqrab). The word is so used because love is like alcohol that intoxicates one who partakes of it. The words used in the text mean, the love of the calf had sunk deep into their hearts.
ٱلَّذِينَ ءَاتَيْنَٰهُمُ ٱلْكِتَٰبَ يَتْلُونَهُۥ حَقَّ تِلَاوَتِهِۦٓ أُو۟لَٰٓئِكَ يُؤْمِنُونَ بِهِۦ ۗ وَمَن يَكْفُرْ بِهِۦ فَأُو۟لَٰٓئِكَ هُمُ ٱلْخَٰسِرُونَ
3:114.
اَلَّذِیْنَ اٰتَیْنَاھُمُ الْکِتٰبَ میں اَلْکِتَابَ سے مراد قرآن کریم ہے اور اس آیت میں اللہ تعالیٰ نے یہود کو ملزم قرار دیا ہے کہ تم نے تو تورات کو پسِ پشت پھینک رکھا تھا۔ مگر اب یہ لوگ جن کو ہم نے قرآن کریم دیا ہے اس پر پوری طرح عمل کرتے ہیں اور اس پر ان کا رسمی ایمان نہیں۔ بلکہ پختہ ایمان ہے۔ (تفصیل کے لئے دیکھیں تفسیر کبیر جلد دوم صفحہ ۱۴۹)۔
3:114.
The words refer to Muslims and not to Jews and Christians, because it is the Muslims who are the true and sincere followers of the Qur’an and not the Jews or the Christians who refused to believe in it and rejected it as a piece of fabrication (Qatadah). This meaning of Yatluna is supported by Ibn-e- ‘Abbas, ‘Abdullah bin Mas‘ud, ‘Ata, and ‘Ikrimah.
3:114.
Commentary:
The words, they to whom We have given the Book, clearly refer here to Muslims and not to Jews and Christians, because it is the Muslims that were the true and sincere followers of the Quran and not Jews and Christians who refused to believe in the Quran and rejected it as a piece of fabrication. Jews and Christians have been referred to in the concluding portion of the verse where, owing to their rejection of the Quran, they are spoken of as the losers. The verse provides very high and well-merited praise for the Companions of the Holy Prophet who have been described as true followers of God’s guidance.
f
3:114.
1
اَلَّذِیْنَ اٰتَیْنَاھُمُ الْکِتٰبَ میں اَلْکِتَابَ سے مراد قرآن کریم ہے اور اس آیت میں اللہ تعالیٰ نے یہود کو ملزم قرار دیا ہے کہ تم نے تو تورات کو پسِ پشت پھینک رکھا تھا۔ مگر اب یہ لوگ جن کو ہم نے قرآن کریم دیا ہے اس پر پوری طرح عمل کرتے ہیں اور اس پر ان کا رسمی ایمان نہیں۔ بلکہ پختہ ایمان ہے۔ (تفصیل کے لئے دیکھیں تفسیر کبیر جلد دوم صفحہ ۱۴۹)۔
a
3:114.
128
Commentary:
The words, they to whom We have given the Book, clearly refer here to Muslims and not to Jews and Christians, because it is the Muslims that were the true and sincere followers of the Quran and not Jews and Christians who refused to believe in the Quran and rejected it as a piece of fabrication. Jews and Christians have been referred to in the concluding portion of the verse where, owing to their rejection of the Quran, they are spoken of as the losers. The verse provides very high and well-merited praise for the Companions of the Holy Prophet who have been described as true followers of God’s guidance.
b
3:114.
142
The words refer to Muslims and not to Jews and Christians, because it is the Muslims who are the true and sincere followers of the Qur’an and not the Jews or the Christians who refused to believe in it and rejected it as a piece of fabrication (Qatadah). This meaning of Yatluna is supported by Ibn-e- ‘Abbas, ‘Abdullah bin Mas‘ud, ‘Ata, and ‘Ikrimah.
ٱلَّذِينَ ءَاتَيْنَٰهُمُ ٱلْكِتَٰبَ يَعْرِفُونَهُۥ كَمَا يَعْرِفُونَ أَبْنَآءَهُمْ ۖ وَإِنَّ فَرِيقًا مِّنْهُمْ لَيَكْتُمُونَ ٱلْحَقَّ وَهُمْ يَعْلَمُونَ
6:21.
2:175; 5:16, 6:92.
The pronoun it (or him) may be taken as referring either to the change of the Qiblah or to the Holy Prophet. The clause means that the People of the Book know on the basis of the prophecies found in their revealed Scriptures that a Prophet will appear among the Arabs who will have special relation with the Ka‘bah.
Ya‘rifuna-hu is derived from ‘Arafa which means, he knew or recognized or perceived a thing. Though the word is also used about such knowledge as is derived through the physical senses, it is particularly used of such knowledge as is obtained by pondering and meditating (Mufradat).
6:21.
2:175; 5:16; 6:92.
Important Words:
یعرفون (recognise) is derived from عرف which means, he knew or recognized or perceived a thing. Though the word is also used of such knowledge as is derived through the senses, it is particularly used of such knowledge as is obtained by thinking and meditating (Mufradat & Aqrab).
Commentary:
The pronoun hu (him or it) occurring in the clause "recognise him or it" may be taken as referring either to the change of Qiblah or to the Holy Prophet. The clause means that the People of the Book know, on the basis of the prophecies found in their Scriptures, that a Prophet would appear among the Arabs and that he would be connected with the Ka‘bah.
The sentence, some of them conceal the truth knowingly, refers to the learned men of the Jews who were well versed in their scriptures and knew the prophecies relating to the advent of the Holy Prophet of Islam but deliberately suppressed those prophecies in order to conceal them from the people.
b
2:175; 5:16, 6:92.
c
6:21.
a
6:21.
b
2:175; 5:16; 6:92.
153
Important Words:
یعرفون (recognise) is derived from عرف which means, he knew or recognized or perceived a thing. Though the word is also used of such knowledge as is derived through the senses, it is particularly used of such knowledge as is obtained by thinking and meditating (Mufradat & Aqrab).
Commentary:
The pronoun hu (him or it) occurring in the clause "recognise him or it" may be taken as referring either to the change of Qiblah or to the Holy Prophet. The clause means that the People of the Book know, on the basis of the prophecies found in their Scriptures, that a Prophet would appear among the Arabs and that he would be connected with the Ka‘bah.
The sentence, some of them conceal the truth knowingly, refers to the learned men of the Jews who were well versed in their scriptures and knew the prophecies relating to the advent of the Holy Prophet of Islam but deliberately suppressed those prophecies in order to conceal them from the people.
c
6:21.
d
2:175; 5:16, 6:92.
169
The pronoun it (or him) may be taken as referring either to the change of the Qiblah or to the Holy Prophet. The clause means that the People of the Book know on the basis of the prophecies found in their revealed Scriptures that a Prophet will appear among the Arabs who will have special relation with the Ka‘bah.
170
Ya‘rifuna-hu is derived from ‘Arafa which means, he knew or recognized or perceived a thing. Though the word is also used about such knowledge as is derived through the physical senses, it is particularly used of such knowledge as is obtained by pondering and meditating (Mufradat).
۞ لَّيْسَ ٱلْبِرَّ أَن تُوَلُّوا۟ وُجُوهَكُمْ قِبَلَ ٱلْمَشْرِقِ وَٱلْمَغْرِبِ وَلَٰكِنَّ ٱلْبِرَّ مَنْ ءَامَنَ بِٱللَّهِ وَٱلْيَوْمِ ٱلْءَاخِرِ وَٱلْمَلَٰٓئِكَةِ وَٱلْكِتَٰبِ وَٱلنَّبِيِّۦنَ وَءَاتَى ٱلْمَالَ عَلَىٰ حُبِّهِۦ ذَوِى ٱلْقُرْبَىٰ وَٱلْيَتَٰمَىٰ وَٱلْمَسَٰكِينَ وَٱبْنَ ٱلسَّبِيلِ وَٱلسَّآئِلِينَ وَفِى ٱلرِّقَابِ وَأَقَامَ ٱلصَّلَوٰةَ وَءَاتَى ٱلزَّكَوٰةَ وَٱلْمُوفُونَ بِعَهْدِهِمْ إِذَا عَٰهَدُوا۟ ۖ وَٱلصَّٰبِرِينَ فِى ٱلْبَأْسَآءِ وَٱلضَّرَّآءِ وَحِينَ ٱلْبَأْسِ ۗ أُو۟لَٰٓئِكَ ٱلَّذِينَ صَدَقُوا۟ ۖ وَأُو۟لَٰٓئِكَ هُمُ ٱلْمُتَّقُونَ
2:190.
76:9.
9:4; 13:21.
2:215; 6:43; 7:95.
49:16.
本节经文提出了伊斯兰教教义的要旨。它开始说到伊斯兰教的基本信念和教义。这些信念和教义是一切行动的来源和基础, 而人的行动的正直取决于这种正直性--------信仰安拉、信仰末日、信仰天使、信仰经典和众先知。接着还提到了一些关于人类行动更为重要的法令。
وَلٰکِنَّ الْبِرَّ میں بِرٌّ مصدر ہے اور عربی قاعدہ کے مطابق اس کے معنے بَآرٌّ یعنی نیک ہونے کے بھی ہو سکتے ہیں اس لئے ہم نے وہی ترجمہ کیا ہے۔
2:190.
76:9.
9:4; 13:21.
2:215; 6:43; 7:95.
49:16.
‘Ala Hubbi-hi means, for love of God; notwithstanding love of money.
Al-Ba’sa’ and al-Ba’s are both derived from Ba’usa and Ba’isa. i.e.; he was or became strong and valiant in war or fight; he was or became in a state of great want or poverty or distress. Al-Ba’sa’ means, might or strength in war or fight; war or fight; fear; harm, etc., ad-Darra’ is especially that evil or affliction which relates to one’s person as disease, etc., and al-Ba’sa’ is that which relates to property, as poverty, etc. (Lane).
The verse gives a gist of Islamic teaching. It begins with the basic Islamic beliefs and doctrines which are the source and basis of all actions and on the rightness of which depends the rightness of human actions—belief in God, in the Last Day, in angels, Revealed Books and Divine Prophets. After this some of the more important ordinances relating to man’s actions are mentioned.
2:190.
76:9.
9:4; 13:21.
2:215; 6:43; 7:95.
49:16.
Important Words:
البر (righteousness) is derived from بر. They say بر والدہ i.e. he obeyed his father or he behaved kindly and lovingly towards him. بر الله means, he obeyed God. بر فی قوله means, he spoke truthfully. برت الصلوة means, the Prayer was accepted. بر(birr) therefore, means: (1) a gift or favour; (2) obedience; (3) righteousness; (4) truthfulness (Aqrab); also (5) extensive goodness or goodness of a high order (Mufradat). And بر (barr) is one who does good to others. It is also one of the attributive names of God (Aqrab).
ابن السبیل (wayfarer) literally means, son of the road. The word signifies: (1) one who travels much (Lane); (2) a traveller or wayfarer who is far away from home, i.e. one who is on a long journey (Mufradat); (3) simply one on journey; (4) one whose way has been cut short to him, i.e. one who is stranded on the way (Aqrab).
الرقاب (captives) is the plural of رقبة (a captive or a slave) which is derived from رقب. They say رقبه i.e. he waited for or looked for him; he watched or guarded him; he was on his guard against him; he put a rope round his neck. رقبة means: (1) neck; (2) the hinder part thereof; (3) a person or being possessing a neck; (4) a slave or bondman or captive or prisoner, particularly a slave or captive who has contracted with his owner or custodian for his freedom. Thus the expression فی الرقاب would mean, in the ransoming of slaves or captives, etc. (Aqrab, Mufradat & Lane).
الباساء (poverty) and الباس (war) are both derived from بؤس orبئس i.e. (1) he was or became strong and valiant in war or fight; (2) he was or became in a state of great want or poverty or distress. الباساء means: (1), distress; (2) poverty; (3) hardship; (4) misfortune; (5) calamity; and (6) war. And البأس means (1) might or strength in war or fight; (2) courage, valour and prowess; (3) war or fight; (4) fear; (5) punishment or torment; and (6) harm or injury, as in لاباس به i.e. there is no harm in it (Lane & Aqrab). See also below.
الضراء (afflictions) is derived from ضر meaning, he caused him a loss or an injury. الضراء means: (1) vicissitudes of time; (2) hardship; (3) loss of life or property; (4) afflictions; and (5) famine (Aqrab). الضراء is especially that evil or affliction which relates to one’s person, as disease, etc. whereas البأساء is that which relates to property, as poverty, etc. (Lane).
Commentary:
The verse points to an important principle relating to form and spirit. Every commandment must have an outward form as well as an underlying spirit. What, however, is really meant is the underlying spirit and not the outward form which mostly serves as an outer shell for preserving the inner kernel. To illustrate this principle, the verse refers to the commandment relating to the turning of faces to a particular direction while offering Prayers. The verse points out that Islam has not directed the Faithful to face in a particular direction during Prayers, because it considers such an act to be of any intrinsic virtue. The fixing of a special direction is merely meant to bring about uniformity, whereas what really counts is the purpose underlying it, which is perfection of faith and deeds. The Quran, accordingly, proceeds to give in a nutshell the Islamic teachings about these two subjects.
The literal translation of the clauses ولکن البر من آمن is, "but righteousness is one who believes" which is obviously incomplete. So some words must be understood here. According to Sibawaih, a great authority on Arabic syntax, the rules of the Arabic language sometimes permit the omitting of a word for the sake of brevity or for laying special stress or for affording greater elasticity in speech. In accordance with this rule, the clause would read: ولکن البر من آمن i.e. "but righteousness is the righteousness of one who believes." Instances of such omissions of words are not lacking in the Arabic language (Sibawaih, i. 109).
According to yet another rule of the Arabic language, a مصدر (infinitive noun) is sometimes used in place of an اسم فاعل(active participle) in order to convey an intensified sense. Thus the word بر (righteousness) in the verse would mean بر الکامل i.e. "perfectly righteous or very righteous," and the clause would be translated as "perfectly righteous or very righteous is he who believes in Allah…"
The pronoun in the expression حبه (love of Him) may refer either to the word "Allah" in the previous clause, and in that case, the clause آتی المال علی حبه would mean, "spends his money for love of God". Or it may refer to the word مال(money). In this case, the clause would mean, "spends his money notwithstanding his love for money". Lastly, it may also refer to the noun implied in the verb آتی i.e. the act of spending. In this case the clause would mean "spends his money for the love of spending it". All these meanings are correct and may be applied. Indeed, it is one of the inimitable beauties of the Quranic diction that it chooses words and constructions that go to convey a variety of meanings in the shortest of expressions.
The verse affords another example of this kind in the expression ابن السبیل (son of the road). As explained under Important Words, this expression gives no less than four meanings and all are equally applicable here. So spending on ابن السبیل would signify (1) spending money in order to encourage travelling, which is a means of increasing knowledge and extending social relations; (2) helping such travellers as are on long journeys and are far away from home; (3) helping all wayfarers; and (4) helping such wayfarers and travellers as become stranded on the way. This is indeed a wonderful example of the combination of brevity and comprehensiveness. The verse also throws some light on the Islamic teaching about slavery. Islam prescribes it as a sign of true faith and perfect righteousness that money be spent on emancipating slaves. Nay, even such as are made captives from among those who attack Muslims with a view to annihilating them, are to be shown mercy and granted freedom out of money supplied by Muslims. For the discussion of Islamic teachings about slavery see 24:34.
The word الصابرین (the patient) in this verse is in the accusative case, while, according to the common rules of Arabic grammar, it should be in the nominative case like the preceding word الموفون (those who fulfil). The change is not without purpose and has been made to put emphasis on the word. According to Abu ‘Ali, a well-known authority on Arabic syntax, when a sentence contains a number of nouns of praise or dispraise, it is considered idiomatic to vary their grammatical inflection (Muhit, part ii). This is done to intensify the meaning.
As pointed out in the beginning, this verse gives a gist of the teachings of Islam. It begins with the fundamental Islamic beliefs and doctrines which are the source and basis of all actions and on the rectitude of which depends the rectitude of' one’s actions. The most fundamental of these is belief in God Who is the central point of all faith. Second in importance is belief in the Last Day or the Day of Judgement, upon a real understanding of which depends the direction of man’s actions in this life. Then follows belief in angels who serve as a sort of intermediaries between God and His creation. Then there are Divine Scriptures embodying God’s revelation which point out the way to the attainment of His pleasure and the purification of man’s soul. Lastly are Prophets who are the recipients of God’s revelations, communicating to man the will of God and serving as models to be followed and imitated by him. These five objects of faith have been mentioned here in their natural order and not necessarily in order of importance.
After stating the fundamental objects of faith, the verse proceeds to mention some of the more important ordinances relating to man’s actions. Pride of place is given to charity which a man gives not as a duty imposed on him, but as prompted by love, solicitude and sympathy for his kinsmen and fellow beings or out of love for common humanity. Next come the commandments regarding Prayer and Zakah which help to establish a true connection between God and man on the one hand and regulate relations between man and man on the other. Finally are laid down the two bulwarks of character and morality, i.e. (1) the redemption of promises and pledges; and (2) the displaying of fortitude, patience and steadfastness in time of distress, the first-mentioned forming one of the bases of international morality and the latter the means of its perfection.
b
2:190.
c
76:9.
d
9:4; 13:21.
e
2:215; 6:43; 7:95.
f
49:16.
114
本节经文提出了伊斯兰教教义的要旨。它开始说到伊斯兰教的基本信念和教义。这些信念和教义是一切行动的来源和基础, 而人的行动的正直取决于这种正直性--------信仰安拉、信仰末日、信仰天使、信仰经典和众先知。接着还提到了一些关于人类行动更为重要的法令。
1
وَلٰکِنَّ الْبِرَّ میں بِرٌّ مصدر ہے اور عربی قاعدہ کے مطابق اس کے معنے بَآرٌّ یعنی نیک ہونے کے بھی ہو سکتے ہیں اس لئے ہم نے وہی ترجمہ کیا ہے۔
b
2:190.
c
76:9.
d
9:4; 13:21.
e
2:215; 6:43; 7:95.
f
49:16.
184
Important Words:
البر (righteousness) is derived from بر. They say بر والدہ i.e. he obeyed his father or he behaved kindly and lovingly towards him. بر الله means, he obeyed God. بر فی قوله means, he spoke truthfully. برت الصلوة means, the Prayer was accepted. بر(birr) therefore, means: (1) a gift or favour; (2) obedience; (3) righteousness; (4) truthfulness (Aqrab); also (5) extensive goodness or goodness of a high order (Mufradat). And بر (barr) is one who does good to others. It is also one of the attributive names of God (Aqrab).
ابن السبیل (wayfarer) literally means, son of the road. The word signifies: (1) one who travels much (Lane); (2) a traveller or wayfarer who is far away from home, i.e. one who is on a long journey (Mufradat); (3) simply one on journey; (4) one whose way has been cut short to him, i.e. one who is stranded on the way (Aqrab).
الرقاب (captives) is the plural of رقبة (a captive or a slave) which is derived from رقب. They say رقبه i.e. he waited for or looked for him; he watched or guarded him; he was on his guard against him; he put a rope round his neck. رقبة means: (1) neck; (2) the hinder part thereof; (3) a person or being possessing a neck; (4) a slave or bondman or captive or prisoner, particularly a slave or captive who has contracted with his owner or custodian for his freedom. Thus the expression فی الرقاب would mean, in the ransoming of slaves or captives, etc. (Aqrab, Mufradat & Lane).
الباساء (poverty) and الباس (war) are both derived from بؤس orبئس i.e. (1) he was or became strong and valiant in war or fight; (2) he was or became in a state of great want or poverty or distress. الباساء means: (1), distress; (2) poverty; (3) hardship; (4) misfortune; (5) calamity; and (6) war. And البأس means (1) might or strength in war or fight; (2) courage, valour and prowess; (3) war or fight; (4) fear; (5) punishment or torment; and (6) harm or injury, as in لاباس به i.e. there is no harm in it (Lane & Aqrab). See also below.
الضراء (afflictions) is derived from ضر meaning, he caused him a loss or an injury. الضراء means: (1) vicissitudes of time; (2) hardship; (3) loss of life or property; (4) afflictions; and (5) famine (Aqrab). الضراء is especially that evil or affliction which relates to one’s person, as disease, etc. whereas البأساء is that which relates to property, as poverty, etc. (Lane).
Commentary:
The verse points to an important principle relating to form and spirit. Every commandment must have an outward form as well as an underlying spirit. What, however, is really meant is the underlying spirit and not the outward form which mostly serves as an outer shell for preserving the inner kernel. To illustrate this principle, the verse refers to the commandment relating to the turning of faces to a particular direction while offering Prayers. The verse points out that Islam has not directed the Faithful to face in a particular direction during Prayers, because it considers such an act to be of any intrinsic virtue. The fixing of a special direction is merely meant to bring about uniformity, whereas what really counts is the purpose underlying it, which is perfection of faith and deeds. The Quran, accordingly, proceeds to give in a nutshell the Islamic teachings about these two subjects.
The literal translation of the clauses ولکن البر من آمن is, "but righteousness is one who believes" which is obviously incomplete. So some words must be understood here. According to Sibawaih, a great authority on Arabic syntax, the rules of the Arabic language sometimes permit the omitting of a word for the sake of brevity or for laying special stress or for affording greater elasticity in speech. In accordance with this rule, the clause would read: ولکن البر من آمن i.e. "but righteousness is the righteousness of one who believes." Instances of such omissions of words are not lacking in the Arabic language (Sibawaih, i. 109).
According to yet another rule of the Arabic language, a مصدر (infinitive noun) is sometimes used in place of an اسم فاعل(active participle) in order to convey an intensified sense. Thus the word بر (righteousness) in the verse would mean بر الکامل i.e. "perfectly righteous or very righteous," and the clause would be translated as "perfectly righteous or very righteous is he who believes in Allah…"
The pronoun in the expression حبه (love of Him) may refer either to the word "Allah" in the previous clause, and in that case, the clause آتی المال علی حبه would mean, "spends his money for love of God". Or it may refer to the word مال(money). In this case, the clause would mean, "spends his money notwithstanding his love for money". Lastly, it may also refer to the noun implied in the verb آتی i.e. the act of spending. In this case the clause would mean "spends his money for the love of spending it". All these meanings are correct and may be applied. Indeed, it is one of the inimitable beauties of the Quranic diction that it chooses words and constructions that go to convey a variety of meanings in the shortest of expressions.
The verse affords another example of this kind in the expression ابن السبیل (son of the road). As explained under Important Words, this expression gives no less than four meanings and all are equally applicable here. So spending on ابن السبیل would signify (1) spending money in order to encourage travelling, which is a means of increasing knowledge and extending social relations; (2) helping such travellers as are on long journeys and are far away from home; (3) helping all wayfarers; and (4) helping such wayfarers and travellers as become stranded on the way. This is indeed a wonderful example of the combination of brevity and comprehensiveness. The verse also throws some light on the Islamic teaching about slavery. Islam prescribes it as a sign of true faith and perfect righteousness that money be spent on emancipating slaves. Nay, even such as are made captives from among those who attack Muslims with a view to annihilating them, are to be shown mercy and granted freedom out of money supplied by Muslims. For the discussion of Islamic teachings about slavery see 24:34.
The word الصابرین (the patient) in this verse is in the accusative case, while, according to the common rules of Arabic grammar, it should be in the nominative case like the preceding word الموفون (those who fulfil). The change is not without purpose and has been made to put emphasis on the word. According to Abu ‘Ali, a well-known authority on Arabic syntax, when a sentence contains a number of nouns of praise or dispraise, it is considered idiomatic to vary their grammatical inflection (Muhit, part ii). This is done to intensify the meaning.
As pointed out in the beginning, this verse gives a gist of the teachings of Islam. It begins with the fundamental Islamic beliefs and doctrines which are the source and basis of all actions and on the rectitude of which depends the rectitude of' one’s actions. The most fundamental of these is belief in God Who is the central point of all faith. Second in importance is belief in the Last Day or the Day of Judgement, upon a real understanding of which depends the direction of man’s actions in this life. Then follows belief in angels who serve as a sort of intermediaries between God and His creation. Then there are Divine Scriptures embodying God’s revelation which point out the way to the attainment of His pleasure and the purification of man’s soul. Lastly are Prophets who are the recipients of God’s revelations, communicating to man the will of God and serving as models to be followed and imitated by him. These five objects of faith have been mentioned here in their natural order and not necessarily in order of importance.
After stating the fundamental objects of faith, the verse proceeds to mention some of the more important ordinances relating to man’s actions. Pride of place is given to charity which a man gives not as a duty imposed on him, but as prompted by love, solicitude and sympathy for his kinsmen and fellow beings or out of love for common humanity. Next come the commandments regarding Prayer and Zakah which help to establish a true connection between God and man on the one hand and regulate relations between man and man on the other. Finally are laid down the two bulwarks of character and morality, i.e. (1) the redemption of promises and pledges; and (2) the displaying of fortitude, patience and steadfastness in time of distress, the first-mentioned forming one of the bases of international morality and the latter the means of its perfection.
a
2:190.
b
76:9.
c
9:4; 13:21.
d
2:215; 6:43; 7:95.
e
49:16.
202
‘Ala Hubbi-hi means, for love of God; notwithstanding love of money.
202A
Al-Ba’sa’ and al-Ba’s are both derived from Ba’usa and Ba’isa. i.e.; he was or became strong and valiant in war or fight; he was or became in a state of great want or poverty or distress. Al-Ba’sa’ means, might or strength in war or fight; war or fight; fear; harm, etc., ad-Darra’ is especially that evil or affliction which relates to one’s person as disease, etc., and al-Ba’sa’ is that which relates to property, as poverty, etc. (Lane).
203
The verse gives a gist of Islamic teaching. It begins with the basic Islamic beliefs and doctrines which are the source and basis of all actions and on the rightness of which depends the rightness of human actions—belief in God, in the Last Day, in angels, Revealed Books and Divine Prophets. After this some of the more important ordinances relating to man’s actions are mentioned.
سَلْ بَنِىٓ إِسْرَٰٓءِيلَ كَمْ ءَاتَيْنَٰهُم مِّنْ ءَايَةٍۭ بَيِّنَةٍ ۗ وَمَن يُبَدِّلْ نِعْمَةَ ٱللَّهِ مِنۢ بَعْدِ مَا جَآءَتْهُ فَإِنَّ ٱللَّهَ شَدِيدُ ٱلْعِقَابِ
کَمْ سے مراد تعداد کی کثرت ہے اور مراد یہ ہے کہ ان سے پوچھو تو انہیں خود اقرار کرنا ہوگا کہ اللہ تعالیٰ نے بہت سے کھلے کھلے نشانات ہمیں دئیے تھے۔
یہ مرادنہیں کہ وہ سزا دینے میں سخت ہے بلکہ یہ مراد ہے کہ اس کی سزا انسان پر سخت ہی گزرتی ہے۔
17:102; 28:37.
This does not mean that God is unnecessarily severe in punishment, but that Divine punishment is bound to be felt severely.
17:102; 28:37.
Commentary:
The preceding verses referred to those weak in faith who had not yet "come into submission wholly" (2:209). The position of these people was that they had received a favour of God but practically they sought to "change" it. They wished to be known as Muslims and yet to be free to live as they liked. This was exactly what the Israelites had done before. So the Quran fittingly turns here to the story of the children of Israel who afforded an object-lesson for Muslims. The Holy Prophet and, for that matter, every reader of the Quran is asked to enquire of the descendants of Israel how many and how varied were the Signs which God had bestowed upon them as a favour and how persistent and impudent was their rejection of His Messengers and their disregard of His teachings.
The expression, whoso changes the gift of God, appears to be rather peculiar; but really the word یبدل (changes) gives a very interesting meaning. For believers it means, accepting the teaching of a Prophet in theory but rejecting it in practice, as unfortunately is very often the case with the weak in faith. They receive a thing as a gift or blessing, but by abstaining from acting upon it, they incur the displeasure of God, thus practically "changing" a favour into a disfavour.
For disbelievers the expression means converting a مبشر Prophet into a منذر Prophet. The Quran speaks of the Prophets of God as a نعمة i.e. a favour or gift (5:21) and it further holds that the mission of every Prophet is twofold—he is a مبشر or bearer of glad tidings for those who accept him, and he is a منذر or warner of coming punishment for those who reject him (18:57). Now when God sends a Prophet, He wishes the people to accept him as a bearer of glad tidings only, and it is the people themselves who reverse the position by rejecting him. In this way the people, as it were, "change" the مبشر Prophet into the منذر Prophet.
Again, for Israelites or Jews the expression, whoso changes the gift of Allah, may mean that though they knew that their Scriptures embodied the word of God which was a favour and a blessing, yet they had the audacity to interfere with it in order to meet their own ends (5:14), thus "changing" the very substance of God’s favour.
The expression may have yet another meaning. The شریعة or Law being meant as a guidance, is a mercy or a blessing of God (5:4 & 6:155, 156). But Christians, who are an offshoot of the Jews have "changed" it into a curse (Gal. 3:13).
The expression "gift of God" may refer to the manifold and multifarious favours which God had bestowed upon the Israelites in the form of Prophets and their noble teachings. But they "changed" the gift of God by rejecting the Prophets and disobeying their teachings. The expression may also refer to the Holy Prophet and the religion brought by him; they are certainly the greatest gifts of God for mankind, and whoever rejects Islam either by disbelieving or disobeying its teachings, deserves God’s severest punishment. In either case, the verse also warns hypocrites and those weak of faith among Muslims that if they accepted the Holy Prophet outwardly but rejected him in their heart or if they accepted his teachings as being from God but did not act upon them, they would be "changing" the gift of God and would make themselves liable to severe punishment.
a
17:102; 28:37.
152
这并不意味着安拉的惩罚是不必要的严厉, 而是说安拉的惩罚必定令人感到严厉。
1
کَمْ سے مراد تعداد کی کثرت ہے اور مراد یہ ہے کہ ان سے پوچھو تو انہیں خود اقرار کرنا ہوگا کہ اللہ تعالیٰ نے بہت سے کھلے کھلے نشانات ہمیں دئیے تھے۔
2
یہ مرادنہیں کہ وہ سزا دینے میں سخت ہے بلکہ یہ مراد ہے کہ اس کی سزا انسان پر سخت ہی گزرتی ہے۔
a
17:102; 28:37.
218
Commentary:
The preceding verses referred to those weak in faith who had not yet "come into submission wholly" (2:209). The position of these people was that they had received a favour of God but practically they sought to "change" it. They wished to be known as Muslims and yet to be free to live as they liked. This was exactly what the Israelites had done before. So the Quran fittingly turns here to the story of the children of Israel who afforded an object-lesson for Muslims. The Holy Prophet and, for that matter, every reader of the Quran is asked to enquire of the descendants of Israel how many and how varied were the Signs which God had bestowed upon them as a favour and how persistent and impudent was their rejection of His Messengers and their disregard of His teachings.
The expression, whoso changes the gift of God, appears to be rather peculiar; but really the word یبدل (changes) gives a very interesting meaning. For believers it means, accepting the teaching of a Prophet in theory but rejecting it in practice, as unfortunately is very often the case with the weak in faith. They receive a thing as a gift or blessing, but by abstaining from acting upon it, they incur the displeasure of God, thus practically "changing" a favour into a disfavour.
For disbelievers the expression means converting a مبشر Prophet into a منذر Prophet. The Quran speaks of the Prophets of God as a نعمة i.e. a favour or gift (5:21) and it further holds that the mission of every Prophet is twofold—he is a مبشر or bearer of glad tidings for those who accept him, and he is a منذر or warner of coming punishment for those who reject him (18:57). Now when God sends a Prophet, He wishes the people to accept him as a bearer of glad tidings only, and it is the people themselves who reverse the position by rejecting him. In this way the people, as it were, "change" the مبشر Prophet into the منذر Prophet.
Again, for Israelites or Jews the expression, whoso changes the gift of Allah, may mean that though they knew that their Scriptures embodied the word of God which was a favour and a blessing, yet they had the audacity to interfere with it in order to meet their own ends (5:14), thus "changing" the very substance of God’s favour.
The expression may have yet another meaning. The شریعة or Law being meant as a guidance, is a mercy or a blessing of God (5:4 & 6:155, 156). But Christians, who are an offshoot of the Jews have "changed" it into a curse (Gal. 3:13).
The expression "gift of God" may refer to the manifold and multifarious favours which God had bestowed upon the Israelites in the form of Prophets and their noble teachings. But they "changed" the gift of God by rejecting the Prophets and disobeying their teachings. The expression may also refer to the Holy Prophet and the religion brought by him; they are certainly the greatest gifts of God for mankind, and whoever rejects Islam either by disbelieving or disobeying its teachings, deserves God’s severest punishment. In either case, the verse also warns hypocrites and those weak of faith among Muslims that if they accepted the Holy Prophet outwardly but rejected him in their heart or if they accepted his teachings as being from God but did not act upon them, they would be "changing" the gift of God and would make themselves liable to severe punishment.
b
17:102; 28:37.
253
This does not mean that God is unnecessarily severe in punishment, but that Divine punishment is bound to be felt severely.
ٱلطَّلَٰقُ مَرَّتَانِ ۖ فَإِمْسَاكٌۢ بِمَعْرُوفٍ أَوْ تَسْرِيحٌۢ بِإِحْسَٰنٍ ۗ وَلَا يَحِلُّ لَكُمْ أَن تَأْخُذُوا۟ مِمَّآ ءَاتَيْتُمُوهُنَّ شَيْـًٔا إِلَّآ أَن يَخَافَآ أَلَّا يُقِيمَا حُدُودَ ٱللَّهِ ۖ فَإِنْ خِفْتُمْ أَلَّا يُقِيمَا حُدُودَ ٱللَّهِ فَلَا جُنَاحَ عَلَيْهِمَا فِيمَا ٱفْتَدَتْ بِهِۦ ۗ تِلْكَ حُدُودُ ٱللَّهِ فَلَا تَعْتَدُوهَا ۚ وَمَن يَتَعَدَّ حُدُودَ ٱللَّهِ فَأُو۟لَٰٓئِكَ هُمُ ٱلظَّٰلِمُونَ
2:228.
2:232; 4:130; 65:3.
这节经文含有对离婚第五种约制。如果丈夫想和妻子离异, 他必须在三个不同时期声明离婚, 每次在她个别的洁净时期中并没有和她同过房, 在同一时期声明两次或三次离婚, 是不准许的。这在 مَرَّتَان (Marratan, 两次) 这一字中可以看出。这字的意思是, 发生在两个不同时期的一件事情, 而不是发生在同一时间的两件事情。穆圣把这种同一时间的集中声明, 不管几次, 都只作一次离婚声明看待 (تِرْمِذِی与داؤد)。根据纳萨伊 (نَسَائِی) 说, 有一天穆圣听到有人在同一时间内作了三次离婚声明, 非常生气地说, “在我还在你们中间时, 就把安拉的经典当儿戏吗?” 在第一和第二次声明离婚后, 丈夫在 عِدَّة (‘Iddat), 既等候时期内, 不论经过或不经过妻子的同意, 都可以召回离了婚的妻子; 但是等候时期过了以后, 他要经过她的同意而且要重新娶她才能收回。在第三次离婚后, 丈夫就丧失了这种权利, 这对夫妻就最终离异了。穆圣的一个伙伴有一次问他说, “«古兰经» 在这里只谈了两次离婚, 第三次离婚在什么地方?” 穆圣向他提到 “以厚道的做法辞离她们” 这句话, 意思是说, 第一和第二次离婚之后, 丈夫可以保留并且可以再娶她, 如果她也同意结婚的话; 但是如果他要最后离异的话, 他应与她离婚, 即第三次离婚 {جَرِيْر (Jarir) 与 مُسْنَد (Musnad)}。这一点在下一节经文中还要进一步说明。这样, 这里的 تَسْرِيْح (Tasrih) 这个字意为 طَلَاق (Talaq), 即离婚。
一个人和他的妻子离婚后, 他就丧失了他已给她的嫁妆 (办嫁妆的钱); 如果在离婚时他还没有给过她嫁妆, 在正式离婚之前, 他必须给她那笔钱。而且, 他不准许取回作为馈赠或礼物而给她的任何东西。
不过, 如果提出离婚的是女方, 法律上称为 خُلْع (khul‘), 她必须通过 قَاضِیْ (Qadi) 即法官, 正如 “你们 (双方) 害怕” 这几个字所暗示的那样。在这种情况下, 她必须归还男方全部或部分嫁妆以及男方过去送给她的礼品, 这要双方议定或由法官决定。盖斯•彬•撒比特 (قَيْس بِنْ ثَابِتْ, Qais bin Thabit) 的妻子杰米拉 (جَمِيْلَة, Jamilah) 那个案例提供了妇女行使 خُلْع 权的一个很好的实际说明。她要求和丈夫盖斯离婚, 理由是她不喜欢他, 也就是说, 他们性格不合, 不能相处在一起。穆圣给了他 خُلْع 的许可, 但是她必须把他给她的果园还给他 (布哈理)。
عام طور پر اس زمانہ کے علماء یہ سمجھتے ہیں کہ جس نے تین دفعہ طلاق کہہ دیا اس کی طلاق بائن ہو جاتی ہے یعنی اس کی بیوی اس سے دوبارہ اس وقت تک شادی نہیں کر سکتی جب تک کسی اور سے نکاح نہ کر لے مگر یہ غلط ہے کیونکہ قرآن کریم میں صاف فرمایا گیا ہے اَلطَّـلَا قُ مَرَّتٰنِ یعنی وہ طلاق جو بائن نہیں وہ دو دفعہ ہو سکتی ہے اس طور پر کہ پہلے مرد طلاق دے پھر یا تو طلاق واپس لے لے اور رجوع کرے یا عدت گزرنے دے اور نکاح کرے۔ پھر اَن بَن کی صورت میں دوبارہ طلاق دے۔ پس ایسی طلاق کا دو دفعہ ہونا تو قطعی طور پر ثابت ہے۔ پس ایک ہی دفعہ تین یا تین سے زیادہ بار طلاق کہہ دینے کو بائن قرار دین
تمہیں یعنی ملتِ اسلامیہ یا اسلام پر ایمان رکھنے والی حکومت کو۔
اِنْ خِفْتُمْ میں بتایا گیا ہے کہ اگر محکمہ قضا اس بات کا فیصلہ کرے کہ عورت خاوند کے پاس رہنے کے لئے راضی نہیں اور اس کی نارضا مندی کی وجہ سے مرد بھی عدل نہ رکھ سکے گا‘ تو عورت اگر کچھ دینا چاہے تو مرد کو اجازت ہے کہ کچھ مال لیکر اسے طلاق دے دے۔ لیکن وہ صرف اتنا ہی مال لے سکتا ہے جتنا اس نے خود دیا ہو اور کچھ نہیں۔
2:232; 4:130; 65:3.
This verse contains the fifth check on divorce. A man who seeks separation from his wife must pronounce divorce on three separate occasions, each in a separate period of purity when he has not gone in unto her during that period. The pronouncement of divorce twice or thrice at one and the same time is not permissible as is hinted in the word Marratan (twice) which signifies a thing happening on two separate occasions and not two things happening at one and the same time. The Holy Prophet treated such collective pronouncements, whatever their number, as only one divorce (Tirmidhi & Dawud). According to Nasa’i, the Holy Prophet was extremely angry when one day he was told that a person had made all the three pronouncements of divorce at one and the same time and said, "Is the Book of God going to be made a plaything while I am yet among you?" After the pronouncement of the first two divorces, the husband can take back the divorced wife within ‘Iddat, i.e. the period of waiting, with or
When a person divorces his wife, he forfeits the dower-money he has given her; and if at the time of divorce he has not yet given her the dower- money, he must make the payment before the divorce becomes effective. Again, he is not allowed to take back anything he might have given her in the form of gifts and presents.
If, however, it is the wife who demands separation, technically known as Khula‘, she must get it through a Qadi or judge as the words "you fear," in the plural number, hint. In this case she has to part with, in full or in part, her dowry as well as the gifts she might have received from her husband, as agreed upon by the parties or decided by the judge. The case of Jamilah, wife of Qais bin Thabit, provides a good illustration of the exercise of the right of Khula‘ by women. She demanded separation from her husband. Qais, on the ground that she did not like him, i.e. their temperaments being different she could not get on with him. She was granted Khula‘ by the Holy Prophet, but she had to return to her husband the orchard he had given her (Bukhari).
See 2:228.
2:232; 4:130; 65:3.
Important Words:
امساك (retain) is derived from امسك which is again derived from مسك. They say امسك به i.e. he stuck to it. امسك is both transitive and intransitive. امسكه means, he got hold of it and stopped and retained it. امسك عن الکلام means, he abstained from talking. امساك means, (1) to hold or stop or prevent or retain; (2) to refrain or abstain (Aqrab).
تسریح (send away) is the noun-infinitive from سرح (sarraha) which is derived from سرح. They say سرح المواشی i.e. the cattle went forth for grazing. سرح السیل means, the flood moved on leisurely. سرحه means, he sent him away. سرح فلان زوجته means, he sent away or divorced his wife (Aqrab).
حدود (limits) is the plural of حد i.e. a limit. حده means, he put a limit to it. حد الشیء عن الشیء means, he distinguished one thing from the other. الحد means, (1) the limit or the line where two things meet; (2) last limit or extremity of a thing; (3) that by which a thing may be defined; (4) prescribed punishment for an offence. حدود الله means God’s religious commandments (Aqrab).
Commentary:
This verse contains the fifth check on divorce. A man who seeks permanent and irrevocable separation from his wife must pronounce divorce on three separate occasions, each in a separate طھر i.e. period of purity, when the woman is clean and the man has not gone in unto her during that period of purity. The pronouncement of divorce twice or thrice at one and the same time is not permissible as the verse hints in the word مرتان (twice) which signifies a thing happening on two separate occasions and not two things happening at one and the same time. The Holy Prophet treated such collective pronouncements, whatever their number, as only one divorce (Tirmidhi & Dawud). According to Nasa’i, the Holy Prophet was extremely angry when one day he was told that a person had made all the three pronouncements of divorce at one and the same time, and said: "Is the Book of God going to be made a plaything while I am yet among you?"
After the pronouncement of the first two divorces, the husband can take back the divorced wife within ‘iddah, i.e. the period of waiting, with or without her consent; but after the period of waiting is over, he can take her back only with her consent and that after remarrying her. After the pronouncement of the third divorce, however, the husband forfeits this right and the couple are finally separated. A Companion of the Holy Prophet once asked him saying, "The Quran has here spoken of two divorces only, whence comes in the third!" The Prophet referred him to the Quranic words اوتسریح باحسان i.e. or send them away with kindness meaning thereby that after the pronouncement of the first two divorces the husband was free to retain his wife if he so desired but if he wanted irrevocable separation, he should "send her away", i.e. divorce her a third time (Jarir & Musnad). The point is further made clear in the succeeding verse. Thus the word تسریح here signifies طلاق i.e. divorce.
The present verse also makes it clear that when a person divorces his wife, he forfeits مھر i.e. the dower-money he has given her; and if at the time of divorce he has not yet given her the dower-money agreed on by the parties, he must make the payment before the divorce becomes effective. Again, he is not allowed to take back anything he might have given her in the form of gifts and presents as the clause it is not lawful for you that you take anything of what you have given them indicates.
If, however, it is the wife who demands separation, technically known as خلع (Khul‘a lit. the putting off of clothes etc., or the shedding of old leaves), she must get it through a Qadi or judge as the word خفتم (you fear), which has been put in the plural number, hints. In this case she has to part with, in full or in part, her dowry as well as the gifts she might have received from her husband, as agreed on by the parties or decided by the judge. The case of Jamilah, wife of Qais bin Thabit, provides a good illustration of the exercise of the right of Khul‘a by women. She demanded separation from her husband, Qais, on the ground that she did not like him, i.e. their temperaments being different, she could not get on with him. She was granted Kkul‘a by the Holy Prophet, but she had to return to her husband the orchard he had given her (Bukhari). This right, however, is not to be exercised in a light-hearted manner. The Holy Prophet has condemned the action of a woman who demands separation from her husband without valid reason even as he has condemned the action of a man who divorces his wife without genuine cause. He is reported to have said, "A woman who seeks separation from her husband without a legitimate cause shall be deprived of the fragrance of heaven" (Dawud & Tirmidhi). This is what is hinted in the concluding words, these are the limits prescribed by Allah, so transgress them not, etc. The husband and the wife are both warned to fear God and refrain from transgressing the limits imposed by God for their own good.
b
2:228.
c
2:232; 4:130; 65:3.
170
这节经文含有对离婚第五种约制。如果丈夫想和妻子离异, 他必须在三个不同时期声明离婚, 每次在她个别的洁净时期中并没有和她同过房, 在同一时期声明两次或三次离婚, 是不准许的。这在 مَرَّتَان (Marratan, 两次) 这一字中可以看出。这字的意思是, 发生在两个不同时期的一件事情, 而不是发生在同一时间的两件事情。穆圣把这种同一时间的集中声明, 不管几次, 都只作一次离婚声明看待 (تِرْمِذِی与داؤد)。根据纳萨伊 (نَسَائِی) 说, 有一天穆圣听到有人在同一时间内作了三次离婚声明, 非常生气地说, “在我还在你们中间时, 就把安拉的经典当儿戏吗?” 在第一和第二次声明离婚后, 丈夫在 عِدَّة (‘Iddat), 既等候时期内, 不论经过或不经过妻子的同意, 都可以召回离了婚的妻子; 但是等候时期过了以后, 他要经过她的同意而且要重新娶她才能收回。在第三次离婚后, 丈夫就丧失了这种权利, 这对夫妻就最终离异了。穆圣的一个伙伴有一次问他说, “«古兰经» 在这里只谈了两次离婚, 第三次离婚在什么地方?” 穆圣向他提到 “以厚道的做法辞离她们” 这句话, 意思是说, 第一和第二次离婚之后, 丈夫可以保留并且可以再娶她, 如果她也同意结婚的话; 但是如果他要最后离异的话, 他应与她离婚, 即第三次离婚 {جَرِيْر (Jarir) 与 مُسْنَد (Musnad)}。这一点在下一节经文中还要进一步说明。这样, 这里的 تَسْرِيْح (Tasrih) 这个字意为 طَلَاق (Talaq), 即离婚。
171
一个人和他的妻子离婚后, 他就丧失了他已给她的嫁妆 (办嫁妆的钱); 如果在离婚时他还没有给过她嫁妆, 在正式离婚之前, 他必须给她那笔钱。而且, 他不准许取回作为馈赠或礼物而给她的任何东西。
172
不过, 如果提出离婚的是女方, 法律上称为 خُلْع (khul‘), 她必须通过 قَاضِیْ (Qadi) 即法官, 正如 “你们 (双方) 害怕” 这几个字所暗示的那样。在这种情况下, 她必须归还男方全部或部分嫁妆以及男方过去送给她的礼品, 这要双方议定或由法官决定。盖斯•彬•撒比特 (قَيْس بِنْ ثَابِتْ, Qais bin Thabit) 的妻子杰米拉 (جَمِيْلَة, Jamilah) 那个案例提供了妇女行使 خُلْع 权的一个很好的实际说明。她要求和丈夫盖斯离婚, 理由是她不喜欢他, 也就是说, 他们性格不合, 不能相处在一起。穆圣给了他 خُلْع 的许可, 但是她必须把他给她的果园还给他 (布哈理)。
1
عام طور پر اس زمانہ کے علماء یہ سمجھتے ہیں کہ جس نے تین دفعہ طلاق کہہ دیا اس کی طلاق بائن ہو جاتی ہے یعنی اس کی بیوی اس سے دوبارہ اس وقت تک شادی نہیں کر سکتی جب تک کسی اور سے نکاح نہ کر لے مگر یہ غلط ہے کیونکہ قرآن کریم میں صاف فرمایا گیا ہے اَلطَّـلَا قُ مَرَّتٰنِ یعنی وہ طلاق جو بائن نہیں وہ دو دفعہ ہو سکتی ہے اس طور پر کہ پہلے مرد طلاق دے پھر یا تو طلاق واپس لے لے اور رجوع کرے یا عدت گزرنے دے اور نکاح کرے۔ پھر اَن بَن کی صورت میں دوبارہ طلاق دے۔ پس ایسی طلاق کا دو دفعہ ہونا تو قطعی طور پر ثابت ہے۔ پس ایک ہی دفعہ تین یا تین سے زیادہ بار طلاق کہہ دینے کو بائن قرار دین
2
تمہیں یعنی ملتِ اسلامیہ یا اسلام پر ایمان رکھنے والی حکومت کو۔
3
اِنْ خِفْتُمْ میں بتایا گیا ہے کہ اگر محکمہ قضا اس بات کا فیصلہ کرے کہ عورت خاوند کے پاس رہنے کے لئے راضی نہیں اور اس کی نارضا مندی کی وجہ سے مرد بھی عدل نہ رکھ سکے گا‘ تو عورت اگر کچھ دینا چاہے تو مرد کو اجازت ہے کہ کچھ مال لیکر اسے طلاق دے دے۔ لیکن وہ صرف اتنا ہی مال لے سکتا ہے جتنا اس نے خود دیا ہو اور کچھ نہیں۔
a
See 2:228.
b
2:232; 4:130; 65:3.
236
Important Words:
امساك (retain) is derived from امسك which is again derived from مسك. They say امسك به i.e. he stuck to it. امسك is both transitive and intransitive. امسكه means, he got hold of it and stopped and retained it. امسك عن الکلام means, he abstained from talking. امساك means, (1) to hold or stop or prevent or retain; (2) to refrain or abstain (Aqrab).
تسریح (send away) is the noun-infinitive from سرح (sarraha) which is derived from سرح. They say سرح المواشی i.e. the cattle went forth for grazing. سرح السیل means, the flood moved on leisurely. سرحه means, he sent him away. سرح فلان زوجته means, he sent away or divorced his wife (Aqrab).
حدود (limits) is the plural of حد i.e. a limit. حده means, he put a limit to it. حد الشیء عن الشیء means, he distinguished one thing from the other. الحد means, (1) the limit or the line where two things meet; (2) last limit or extremity of a thing; (3) that by which a thing may be defined; (4) prescribed punishment for an offence. حدود الله means God’s religious commandments (Aqrab).
Commentary:
This verse contains the fifth check on divorce. A man who seeks permanent and irrevocable separation from his wife must pronounce divorce on three separate occasions, each in a separate طھر i.e. period of purity, when the woman is clean and the man has not gone in unto her during that period of purity. The pronouncement of divorce twice or thrice at one and the same time is not permissible as the verse hints in the word مرتان (twice) which signifies a thing happening on two separate occasions and not two things happening at one and the same time. The Holy Prophet treated such collective pronouncements, whatever their number, as only one divorce (Tirmidhi & Dawud). According to Nasa’i, the Holy Prophet was extremely angry when one day he was told that a person had made all the three pronouncements of divorce at one and the same time, and said: "Is the Book of God going to be made a plaything while I am yet among you?"
After the pronouncement of the first two divorces, the husband can take back the divorced wife within ‘iddah, i.e. the period of waiting, with or without her consent; but after the period of waiting is over, he can take her back only with her consent and that after remarrying her. After the pronouncement of the third divorce, however, the husband forfeits this right and the couple are finally separated. A Companion of the Holy Prophet once asked him saying, "The Quran has here spoken of two divorces only, whence comes in the third!" The Prophet referred him to the Quranic words اوتسریح باحسان i.e. or send them away with kindness meaning thereby that after the pronouncement of the first two divorces the husband was free to retain his wife if he so desired but if he wanted irrevocable separation, he should "send her away", i.e. divorce her a third time (Jarir & Musnad). The point is further made clear in the succeeding verse. Thus the word تسریح here signifies طلاق i.e. divorce.
The present verse also makes it clear that when a person divorces his wife, he forfeits مھر i.e. the dower-money he has given her; and if at the time of divorce he has not yet given her the dower-money agreed on by the parties, he must make the payment before the divorce becomes effective. Again, he is not allowed to take back anything he might have given her in the form of gifts and presents as the clause it is not lawful for you that you take anything of what you have given them indicates.
If, however, it is the wife who demands separation, technically known as خلع (Khul‘a lit. the putting off of clothes etc., or the shedding of old leaves), she must get it through a Qadi or judge as the word خفتم (you fear), which has been put in the plural number, hints. In this case she has to part with, in full or in part, her dowry as well as the gifts she might have received from her husband, as agreed on by the parties or decided by the judge. The case of Jamilah, wife of Qais bin Thabit, provides a good illustration of the exercise of the right of Khul‘a by women. She demanded separation from her husband, Qais, on the ground that she did not like him, i.e. their temperaments being different, she could not get on with him. She was granted Kkul‘a by the Holy Prophet, but she had to return to her husband the orchard he had given her (Bukhari). This right, however, is not to be exercised in a light-hearted manner. The Holy Prophet has condemned the action of a woman who demands separation from her husband without valid reason even as he has condemned the action of a man who divorces his wife without genuine cause. He is reported to have said, "A woman who seeks separation from her husband without a legitimate cause shall be deprived of the fragrance of heaven" (Dawud & Tirmidhi). This is what is hinted in the concluding words, these are the limits prescribed by Allah, so transgress them not, etc. The husband and the wife are both warned to fear God and refrain from transgressing the limits imposed by God for their own good.
b
2:228.c
2:232; 4:130; 65:3.
280
This verse contains the fifth check on divorce. A man who seeks separation from his wife must pronounce divorce on three separate occasions, each in a separate period of purity when he has not gone in unto her during that period. The pronouncement of divorce twice or thrice at one and the same time is not permissible as is hinted in the word Marratan (twice) which signifies a thing happening on two separate occasions and not two things happening at one and the same time. The Holy Prophet treated such collective pronouncements, whatever their number, as only one divorce (Tirmidhi & Dawud). According to Nasa’i, the Holy Prophet was extremely angry when one day he was told that a person had made all the three pronouncements of divorce at one and the same time and said, "Is the Book of God going to be made a plaything while I am yet among you?" After the pronouncement of the first two divorces, the husband can take back the divorced wife within ‘Iddat, i.e. the period of waiting, with or
281
When a person divorces his wife, he forfeits the dower-money he has given her; and if at the time of divorce he has not yet given her the dower- money, he must make the payment before the divorce becomes effective. Again, he is not allowed to take back anything he might have given her in the form of gifts and presents.
282
If, however, it is the wife who demands separation, technically known as Khula‘, she must get it through a Qadi or judge as the words "you fear," in the plural number, hint. In this case she has to part with, in full or in part, her dowry as well as the gifts she might have received from her husband, as agreed upon by the parties or decided by the judge. The case of Jamilah, wife of Qais bin Thabit, provides a good illustration of the exercise of the right of Khula‘ by women. She demanded separation from her husband. Qais, on the ground that she did not like him, i.e. their temperaments being different she could not get on with him. She was granted Khula‘ by the Holy Prophet, but she had to return to her husband the orchard he had given her (Bukhari).
۞ وَٱلْوَٰلِدَٰتُ يُرْضِعْنَ أَوْلَٰدَهُنَّ حَوْلَيْنِ كَامِلَيْنِ ۖ لِمَنْ أَرَادَ أَن يُتِمَّ ٱلرَّضَاعَةَ ۚ وَعَلَى ٱلْمَوْلُودِ لَهُۥ رِزْقُهُنَّ وَكِسْوَتُهُنَّ بِٱلْمَعْرُوفِ ۚ لَا تُكَلَّفُ نَفْسٌ إِلَّا وُسْعَهَا ۚ لَا تُضَآرَّ وَٰلِدَةٌۢ بِوَلَدِهَا وَلَا مَوْلُودٌ لَّهُۥ بِوَلَدِهِۦ ۚ وَعَلَى ٱلْوَارِثِ مِثْلُ ذَٰلِكَ ۗ فَإِنْ أَرَادَا فِصَالًا عَن تَرَاضٍ مِّنْهُمَا وَتَشَاوُرٍ فَلَا جُنَاحَ عَلَيْهِمَا ۗ وَإِنْ أَرَدتُّمْ أَن تَسْتَرْضِعُوٓا۟ أَوْلَٰدَكُمْ فَلَا جُنَاحَ عَلَيْكُمْ إِذَا سَلَّمْتُم مَّآ ءَاتَيْتُم بِٱلْمَعْرُوفِ ۗ وَٱتَّقُوا۟ ٱللَّهَ وَٱعْلَمُوٓا۟ أَنَّ ٱللَّهَ بِمَا تَعْمَلُونَ بَصِيرٌ
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.