أَنَّهُمْ
Appears 33 times in Quran
Occurrences in Quran
Found 33 verses containing "أَنَّهُمْ".
وَلَوْ أَنَّهُمْ ءَامَنُوا۟ وَٱتَّقَوْا۟ لَمَثُوبَةٌ مِّنْ عِندِ ٱللَّهِ خَيْرٌ ۖ لَّوْ كَانُوا۟ يَعْلَمُونَ
3:180; 5:66-67.
3:180; 5:66-67.
3:180; 5:66, 67.
Important Words:
مثوبة (reward) is, like ثواب (with which it is synonymous), derived from ثاب which means, he returned, or he returned to a good condition. مثوبة and ثواب mean, requital or reward of good or bad deeds. Generally, they are used in the sense of a reward of good deeds (Aqrab).
Commentary:
If the Jews had possessed true faith in God and had acted in His fear, they would not have devoted all their energies to the acquisition of worldly gains but would have sought the good of the Hereafter. They have, however, been seeking the advantage of the present life only and have neglected the Hereafter altogether, which shows that they are utterly lacking in true faith and are not leading righteous lives.
a
3:180; 5:66-67.
a
3:180; 5:66, 67.
110
Important Words:
مثوبة (reward) is, like ثواب (with which it is synonymous), derived from ثاب which means, he returned, or he returned to a good condition. مثوبة and ثواب mean, requital or reward of good or bad deeds. Generally, they are used in the sense of a reward of good deeds (Aqrab).
Commentary:
If the Jews had possessed true faith in God and had acted in His fear, they would not have devoted all their energies to the acquisition of worldly gains but would have sought the good of the Hereafter. They have, however, been seeking the advantage of the present life only and have neglected the Hereafter altogether, which shows that they are utterly lacking in true faith and are not leading righteous lives.
a
3:180; 5:66-67.
مِّنَ ٱلَّذِينَ هَادُوا۟ يُحَرِّفُونَ ٱلْكَلِمَ عَن مَّوَاضِعِهِۦ وَيَقُولُونَ سَمِعْنَا وَعَصَيْنَا وَٱسْمَعْ غَيْرَ مُسْمَعٍ وَرَٰعِنَا لَيًّۢا بِأَلْسِنَتِهِمْ وَطَعْنًا فِى ٱلدِّينِ ۚ وَلَوْ أَنَّهُمْ قَالُوا۟ سَمِعْنَا وَأَطَعْنَا وَٱسْمَعْ وَٱنظُرْنَا لَكَانَ خَيْرًا لَّهُمْ وَأَقْوَمَ وَلَٰكِن لَّعَنَهُمُ ٱللَّهُ بِكُفْرِهِمْ فَلَا يُؤْمِنُونَ إِلَّا قَلِيلًا
یعنی منہ سے تو رَاعِنَا کہہ دیتے ہیں مگر ان کے دل اس سے متفق نہیں ہوتے۔ دل میں وہ رسول کریم صلی اللہ علیہ وسلم کو حقیر سمجھتے ہیں اور خیال کرتے ہیں کہ اس سے کسی رعایت کی طلب کی ہمیں کوئی ضرورت نہیں۔
عربی کے لفظ ہیں فَـلَا یُؤْمِنُوْنَ اِلَّا قَلِیْـلًا جن کا مطلب یہ ہے کہ وہ صرف قلیل ایمان لاتے ہیں۔ مگر محاورہ میں اس کے معنے بالکل ایمان نہ لانے کے ہیں۔
2:76; 3:79; 5:42.
2:105.
The expression Ghaira Musma‘in means; (1) mayest thou not hear by reason of deafness; (2) mayest thou not hear what may please thee; (3) mayest thou not be obeyed.
2:76; 3:79; 5:42.
2:105.
Commentary:
The verb یقولون (they say) is used in Arabic both for words of mouth, and for what one expresses by one’s condition or conduct (see 2:31). In this verse, the expression has been used of the Jews in both these senses, viz. "They say with their tongues that they have heard and obeyed, but their conduct shows that instead of obeying they disobey and defy."
The expression غیر مسمع (without being heard) gives a number of meanings: (1) mayest thou not be made to hear, i.e. mayest thou not hear by reason of deafness; (2) mayest thou not hear any speech or news which thou wouldst like or which may please thee; (3) may not what thou sayest be accepted, or may not thy invitation be accepted and thy call responded to; (4) mayest thou not be obeyed; or (5) the expression may mean, though it was not certainly intended by the Jews, mayest thou not hear anything offensive or unpleasant.
For the expression راعنا (ra‘ina) see note on 2:105.
The Jews used the aforesaid ambiguous expressions in order (1) to conceal what evil thoughts they entertained about the Holy Prophet; (2) to make Muslims imitate them and use analogous expressions while addressing the Holy Prophet; and (3) to taunt Muslims with regard to matters affecting their religion, saying to them in effect, "We speak to your Prophet jestingly and abuse him in ambiguous words; if he had been a true Prophet of God, he would have certainly come to know of this."
c
2:76; 3:79; 5:42.
d
2:105.
2
یعنی منہ سے تو رَاعِنَا کہہ دیتے ہیں مگر ان کے دل اس سے متفق نہیں ہوتے۔ دل میں وہ رسول کریم صلی اللہ علیہ وسلم کو حقیر سمجھتے ہیں اور خیال کرتے ہیں کہ اس سے کسی رعایت کی طلب کی ہمیں کوئی ضرورت نہیں۔
3
عربی کے لفظ ہیں فَـلَا یُؤْمِنُوْنَ اِلَّا قَلِیْـلًا جن کا مطلب یہ ہے کہ وہ صرف قلیل ایمان لاتے ہیں۔ مگر محاورہ میں اس کے معنے بالکل ایمان نہ لانے کے ہیں۔
a
2:76; 3:79; 5:42.
b
2:105.
521
Commentary:
The verb یقولون (they say) is used in Arabic both for words of mouth, and for what one expresses by one’s condition or conduct (see 2:31). In this verse, the expression has been used of the Jews in both these senses, viz. "They say with their tongues that they have heard and obeyed, but their conduct shows that instead of obeying they disobey and defy."
The expression غیر مسمع (without being heard) gives a number of meanings: (1) mayest thou not be made to hear, i.e. mayest thou not hear by reason of deafness; (2) mayest thou not hear any speech or news which thou wouldst like or which may please thee; (3) may not what thou sayest be accepted, or may not thy invitation be accepted and thy call responded to; (4) mayest thou not be obeyed; or (5) the expression may mean, though it was not certainly intended by the Jews, mayest thou not hear anything offensive or unpleasant.
For the expression راعنا (ra‘ina) see note on 2:105.
The Jews used the aforesaid ambiguous expressions in order (1) to conceal what evil thoughts they entertained about the Holy Prophet; (2) to make Muslims imitate them and use analogous expressions while addressing the Holy Prophet; and (3) to taunt Muslims with regard to matters affecting their religion, saying to them in effect, "We speak to your Prophet jestingly and abuse him in ambiguous words; if he had been a true Prophet of God, he would have certainly come to know of this."
a
2:76; 3:79; 5:42.
b
2:105.
613
The expression Ghaira Musma‘in means; (1) mayest thou not hear by reason of deafness; (2) mayest thou not hear what may please thee; (3) mayest thou not be obeyed.
أَلَمْ تَرَ إِلَى ٱلَّذِينَ يَزْعُمُونَ أَنَّهُمْ ءَامَنُوا۟ بِمَآ أُنزِلَ إِلَيْكَ وَمَآ أُنزِلَ مِن قَبْلِكَ يُرِيدُونَ أَن يَتَحَاكَمُوٓا۟ إِلَى ٱلطَّٰغُوتِ وَقَدْ أُمِرُوٓا۟ أَن يَكْفُرُوا۟ بِهِۦ وَيُرِيدُ ٱلشَّيْطَٰنُ أَن يُضِلَّهُمْ ضَلَٰلًۢا بَعِيدًا
یہ آیت منافقوں کے متعلق ہے جو رسولِ کریم صلی اللہ علیہ وسلم سے فیصلہ کروانے کی بجائے دوسرے لوگوں کے فیصلہ کو پسند کرتے تھے۔
Commentary:
The words, They desire to seek judgement from the rebellious, need not be taken as referring to any particular incident; they speak of a general tendency among hypocrites.
2
یہ آیت منافقوں کے متعلق ہے جو رسولِ کریم صلی اللہ علیہ وسلم سے فیصلہ کروانے کی بجائے دوسرے لوگوں کے فیصلہ کو پسند کرتے تھے۔
534
Commentary:
The words, They desire to seek judgement from the rebellious, need not be taken as referring to any particular incident; they speak of a general tendency among hypocrites.
وَمَآ أَرْسَلْنَا مِن رَّسُولٍ إِلَّا لِيُطَاعَ بِإِذْنِ ٱللَّهِ ۚ وَلَوْ أَنَّهُمْ إِذ ظَّلَمُوٓا۟ أَنفُسَهُمْ جَآءُوكَ فَٱسْتَغْفَرُوا۟ ٱللَّهَ وَٱسْتَغْفَرَ لَهُمُ ٱلرَّسُولُ لَوَجَدُوا۟ ٱللَّهَ تَوَّابًا رَّحِيمًا
4:111.
4:111
It is sometimes sought to be inferred from these words that though a Prophet is to be always obeyed by the people to whom he preaches his Message, yet he himself does not give allegiance to any other Prophet. This is evidently a wrong inference. The fact that a Prophet is the object of other people’s obedience does not preclude the possibility of his being himself subordinate to, and a follower of, another Prophet. Aaron was a subordinate Prophet to Moses (20:94).
4:111.
Commentary:
It is sometimes sought to be inferred from the words, We have sent no Messenger but that he should be obeyed by the command of Allah, that though a Prophet is to be always obeyed by the people to whom he preaches his message, yet he himself gives allegiance to no other Prophet nor can he be subject to the Law of any other Prophet. This is evidently a very wrong inference. The simple and straightforward meaning of the words is only this that when God sends a Prophet, He means that those to whom he is sent should obey him. But the fact that a Prophet is the object of other people’s obedience cannot preclude the possibility of his being himself subordinate to, and a follower of another Prophet. A governor is sent to a province to be obeyed but that does not mean that he is not subordinate to the Governor General, if any, or to the king. According to the Quran, Aaron was a subordinate Prophet to Moses. This is why, when Moses went up to the Mount leaving Aaron behind him to look after the Israelites, and the Israelites took to worshipping the calf, Moses severely reprimanded him on his return, saying "Hast thou then disobeyed my command?" (20:94). In this connection see also 5:45.
a
4:111.
a
4:111.
537
Commentary:
It is sometimes sought to be inferred from the words, We have sent no Messenger but that he should be obeyed by the command of Allah, that though a Prophet is to be always obeyed by the people to whom he preaches his message, yet he himself gives allegiance to no other Prophet nor can he be subject to the Law of any other Prophet. This is evidently a very wrong inference. The simple and straightforward meaning of the words is only this that when God sends a Prophet, He means that those to whom he is sent should obey him. But the fact that a Prophet is the object of other people’s obedience cannot preclude the possibility of his being himself subordinate to, and a follower of another Prophet. A governor is sent to a province to be obeyed but that does not mean that he is not subordinate to the Governor General, if any, or to the king. According to the Quran, Aaron was a subordinate Prophet to Moses. This is why, when Moses went up to the Mount leaving Aaron behind him to look after the Israelites, and the Israelites took to worshipping the calf, Moses severely reprimanded him on his return, saying "Hast thou then disobeyed my command?" (20:94). In this connection see also 5:45.
a
4:111
625
It is sometimes sought to be inferred from these words that though a Prophet is to be always obeyed by the people to whom he preaches his Message, yet he himself does not give allegiance to any other Prophet. This is evidently a wrong inference. The fact that a Prophet is the object of other people’s obedience does not preclude the possibility of his being himself subordinate to, and a follower of, another Prophet. Aaron was a subordinate Prophet to Moses (20:94).
وَلَوْ أَنَّا كَتَبْنَا عَلَيْهِمْ أَنِ ٱقْتُلُوٓا۟ أَنفُسَكُمْ أَوِ ٱخْرُجُوا۟ مِن دِيَٰرِكُم مَّا فَعَلُوهُ إِلَّا قَلِيلٌ مِّنْهُمْ ۖ وَلَوْ أَنَّهُمْ فَعَلُوا۟ مَا يُوعَظُونَ بِهِۦ لَكَانَ خَيْرًا لَّهُمْ وَأَشَدَّ تَثْبِيتًا
یعنی بڑے بڑے مجاہدات کرو۔
اس سے مراد جہاد کے لئے نکلنا ہے نہ کہ بے فائدہ نکلنا۔
6:78.
The words, Uqtulu Anfusakum, do not mean "slay yourselves" but "slay your people" (2:55), or "lay down your lives in the cause of God".
4:78.
Commentary:
This verse refers to the hypocrites of Medina. The words اقتلوا انفسکم (kill your people) do not mean "kill yourselves" because suicide has been declared in Islam to be unlawful.
The expression انفسکم simply means "your people" (see note on 2:55). The Refugees had to leave their hearths and homes and had to kill their own disbelieving kith and kin in the war that had been forced upon them by the latter.
c
6:78.
334
اُقْتُلُوْا اَنْفُسَكُمْ (Uqtulu Anfusakum) 的意思不是 “杀你们自己” 而是 “杀你们的民众” (2:55), 或者 “为安拉献出你们的生命。”
2
یعنی بڑے بڑے مجاہدات کرو۔
3
اس سے مراد جہاد کے لئے نکلنا ہے نہ کہ بے فائدہ نکلنا۔
a
4:78.
539
Commentary:
This verse refers to the hypocrites of Medina. The words اقتلوا انفسکم (kill your people) do not mean "kill yourselves" because suicide has been declared in Islam to be unlawful.
The expression انفسکم simply means "your people" (see note on 2:55). The Refugees had to leave their hearths and homes and had to kill their own disbelieving kith and kin in the war that had been forced upon them by the latter.
c
6:78.
627
The words, Uqtulu Anfusakum, do not mean "slay yourselves" but "slay your people" (2:55), or "lay down your lives in the cause of God".
وَلَوْ أَنَّهُمْ أَقَامُوا۟ ٱلتَّوْرَىٰةَ وَٱلْإِنجِيلَ وَمَآ أُنزِلَ إِلَيْهِم مِّن رَّبِّهِمْ لَأَكَلُوا۟ مِن فَوْقِهِمْ وَمِن تَحْتِ أَرْجُلِهِم ۚ مِّنْهُمْ أُمَّةٌ مُّقْتَصِدَةٌ ۖ وَكَثِيرٌ مِّنْهُمْ سَآءَ مَا يَعْمَلُونَ
قرآن مجید میں لفظ واؤ کا ہے جس کے معنے ’’اور‘‘ کے ہیں لیکن اردو محاورہ میں اس جگہ ’’اور‘‘ نہیں استعمال ہوتا بلکہ ’’لیکن‘‘ کا لفظ استعمال کرتے ہیں اس لئے ترجمہ میں وہی استعمال کیا گیا ہے۔
5:48.
(1) They would have received heavenly blessings, such as Divine revelation and communion with God, as well as worldly prosperity. (2) They would have had not only timely and abundant rains from above but the earth would also have yielded its produce for them in abundance. (3) God would have provided them with both heavenly and earthly means of progress.
5:48.
Commentary:
If Jews and Christians had given due consideration to the prophecies in their Scriptures, they would certainly have believed in the Quran, which had come in fulfilment of those prophecies.
The words, they would surely have eaten of good things from above them and from under their feet, mean: (1) they would have received both heavenly blessings, such as Divine revelation and communion with God, as well as worldly prosperity; (2) they would have had not only timely and abundant rains from above but the earth below their feet would also have yielded to them its produce in abundance; and (3) God would have provided them with both heavenly and earthly means of progress.
d
5:48.
384
(1) 他们会得到天上的赐福, 诸如安拉的启示以及与安拉的精神交流, 还有世俗的繁荣昌盛。(2) 他们不仅会有天上降下的及时和充分的雨水, 而且地上也会给他们生出丰富的产品。(3) 安拉会向他们提供天上和地上的进步方法。
1
قرآن مجید میں لفظ واؤ کا ہے جس کے معنے ’’اور‘‘ کے ہیں لیکن اردو محاورہ میں اس جگہ ’’اور‘‘ نہیں استعمال ہوتا بلکہ ’’لیکن‘‘ کا لفظ استعمال کرتے ہیں اس لئے ترجمہ میں وہی استعمال کیا گیا ہے۔
a
5:48.
697
Commentary:
If Jews and Christians had given due consideration to the prophecies in their Scriptures, they would certainly have believed in the Quran, which had come in fulfilment of those prophecies.
The words, they would surely have eaten of good things from above them and from under their feet, mean: (1) they would have received both heavenly blessings, such as Divine revelation and communion with God, as well as worldly prosperity; (2) they would have had not only timely and abundant rains from above but the earth below their feet would also have yielded to them its produce in abundance; and (3) God would have provided them with both heavenly and earthly means of progress.
a
5:48.
771
(1) They would have received heavenly blessings, such as Divine revelation and communion with God, as well as worldly prosperity. (2) They would have had not only timely and abundant rains from above but the earth would also have yielded its produce for them in abundance. (3) God would have provided them with both heavenly and earthly means of progress.
وَلَوْ أَنَّهُمْ رَضُوا۟ مَآ ءَاتَىٰهُمُ ٱللَّهُ وَرَسُولُهُۥ وَقَالُوا۟ حَسْبُنَا ٱللَّهُ سَيُؤْتِينَا ٱللَّهُ مِن فَضْلِهِۦ وَرَسُولُهُۥٓ إِنَّآ إِلَى ٱللَّهِ رَٰغِبُونَ
وَلَقَدْ جِئْتُمُونَا فُرَٰدَىٰ كَمَا خَلَقْنَٰكُمْ أَوَّلَ مَرَّةٍ وَتَرَكْتُم مَّا خَوَّلْنَٰكُمْ وَرَآءَ ظُهُورِكُمْ ۖ وَمَا نَرَىٰ مَعَكُمْ شُفَعَآءَكُمُ ٱلَّذِينَ زَعَمْتُمْ أَنَّهُمْ فِيكُمْ شُرَكَٰٓؤُا۟ ۚ لَقَد تَّقَطَّعَ بَيْنَكُمْ وَضَلَّ عَنكُم مَّا كُنتُمْ تَزْعُمُونَ
18:49.
18:49.
The words mean, "We gave you certain things so that you might thereby improve your spiritual condition, but you have left them behind your backs, i.e. you made no use of them, and now the time for their use has passed away."
18:49.
Important Words:
خولناکم (bestowed on you) is derived from خال which means, he became possessed of servants, slaves and other dependents as well as gifts, after having been without them. خوله الله مالا means, God conferred upon him property as a favour. The noun الخول means, slaves, servants and other dependents, or cattle, camels, etc. given to one by God; a gift or gifts (Lane). The word signifies the bestowal of things meant for the betterment and progress of the person receiving them (Mufradat).
Commentary:
As shown under Important Words, خول (bestowal) implies the giving of a thing for the purpose of setting things right or bettering the condition of the recipient. Thus, the sentence, you have left behind you that which We bestowed upon you, means, "We gave you certain things so that you might thereby improve your spiritual conditions, but you have left them behind, i.e. you made no use of them, and now the time for their use has passed away."
The words, We see not with you your intercessors, imply that your hope lay in your mediators, whom you supposed to be co-partners with God and who, you imagined, would help you; but your connection with them is now completely cut off and they are not here with you to render you any help; they have failed you and become entirely lost to you.
c
18:49.
a
18:49.
837
Important Words:
خولناکم (bestowed on you) is derived from خال which means, he became possessed of servants, slaves and other dependents as well as gifts, after having been without them. خوله الله مالا means, God conferred upon him property as a favour. The noun الخول means, slaves, servants and other dependents, or cattle, camels, etc. given to one by God; a gift or gifts (Lane). The word signifies the bestowal of things meant for the betterment and progress of the person receiving them (Mufradat).
Commentary:
As shown under Important Words, خول (bestowal) implies the giving of a thing for the purpose of setting things right or bettering the condition of the recipient. Thus, the sentence, you have left behind you that which We bestowed upon you, means, "We gave you certain things so that you might thereby improve your spiritual conditions, but you have left them behind, i.e. you made no use of them, and now the time for their use has passed away."
The words, We see not with you your intercessors, imply that your hope lay in your mediators, whom you supposed to be co-partners with God and who, you imagined, would help you; but your connection with them is now completely cut off and they are not here with you to render you any help; they have failed you and become entirely lost to you.
b
18:49.
878
The words mean, "We gave you certain things so that you might thereby improve your spiritual condition, but you have left them behind your backs, i.e. you made no use of them, and now the time for their use has passed away."
يَٰمَعْشَرَ ٱلْجِنِّ وَٱلْإِنسِ أَلَمْ يَأْتِكُمْ رُسُلٌ مِّنكُمْ يَقُصُّونَ عَلَيْكُمْ ءَايَٰتِى وَيُنذِرُونَكُمْ لِقَآءَ يَوْمِكُمْ هَٰذَا ۚ قَالُوا۟ شَهِدْنَا عَلَىٰٓ أَنفُسِنَا ۖ وَغَرَّتْهُمُ ٱلْحَيَوٰةُ ٱلدُّنْيَا وَشَهِدُوا۟ عَلَىٰٓ أَنفُسِهِمْ أَنَّهُمْ كَانُوا۟ كَٰفِرِينَ
39:72; 40:51; 67:9, 10.
7:38.
39:72; 40:51; 67:9-10.
7:38.
Commentary:
The words, Messengers from among yourselves, supply further evidence of the fact that the word jinn does not here refer to a separate creation but to only a section of human beings. We learn from the Quran that Moses and the Holy Prophet were sent as Messengers to jinn also (46:30-33; 72:2-16) and we find no trace of any separate Messengers having ever been raised from among jinn, which shows that the word jinn here refers only to a special class of men. It may also be noted here that this word when applied to the great and powerful persons from among men is generally used in a bad sense, being applied to the wicked among them.
a
39:72; 40:51; 67:9, 10.
b
7:38.
a
39:72; 40:51; 67:9-10.
b
7:38.
871
Commentary:
The words, Messengers from among yourselves, supply further evidence of the fact that the word jinn does not here refer to a separate creation but to only a section of human beings. We learn from the Quran that Moses and the Holy Prophet were sent as Messengers to jinn also (46:30-33; 72:2-16) and we find no trace of any separate Messengers having ever been raised from among jinn, which shows that the word jinn here refers only to a special class of men. It may also be noted here that this word when applied to the great and powerful persons from among men is generally used in a bad sense, being applied to the wicked among them.
a
39:72; 40:51; 67:9, 10.
b
7:38.
فَمَنْ أَظْلَمُ مِمَّنِ ٱفْتَرَىٰ عَلَى ٱللَّهِ كَذِبًا أَوْ كَذَّبَ بِـَٔايَٰتِهِۦٓ ۚ أُو۟لَٰٓئِكَ يَنَالُهُمْ نَصِيبُهُم مِّنَ ٱلْكِتَٰبِ ۖ حَتَّىٰٓ إِذَا جَآءَتْهُمْ رُسُلُنَا يَتَوَفَّوْنَهُمْ قَالُوٓا۟ أَيْنَ مَا كُنتُمْ تَدْعُونَ مِن دُونِ ٱللَّهِ ۖ قَالُوا۟ ضَلُّوا۟ عَنَّا وَشَهِدُوا۟ عَلَىٰٓ أَنفُسِهِمْ أَنَّهُمْ كَانُوا۟ كَٰفِرِينَ
افتراء سچا بھی ہوتا ہے اور جھوٹا بھی۔ سچا اس حالت میں کہ جو بات ایک شخص کسی کی طرف منسوب کرتا ہے وہ ہو تو سچی مگر قائل نے وہ بات نہ کہی ہو۔ اور جھوٹا اس صورت میں کہ جو بات قائل کی طرف منسوب کی جائے ہو بھی جھوٹی اور قائل نے کہی بھی نہ ہو۔
6:22; 10:18; 11:19; 61:8.
6:23; 40:74-75.
6:131.
The words mean that the rejectors of God’s Messengers will see with their own eyes the fulfilment of the prophecies foretelling their defeat and discomfiture and shall taste the punishment promised to them for opposing God’s Messengers.
6:22; 10:18; 11:19; 61:8.
6:23; 40:74-75.
6:131.
Commentary:
The verse gives the reasons why the rejecters of Divine Messengers deserve severe punishment. People incur the wrath of God because they treat His Messenger as a liar and reject the heavenly signs he brings with him. Indeed, impostors and the rejecters of true Messengers are equally doomed and can never escape the punishment ordained for them.
The words, who shall have their lot as ordained, mean that the rejecters of God’s Messengers will see before their very eyes the fulfilment of the prophecies foretelling their defeat and discomfiture and shall taste of the punishment promised to them for opposing God’s Messengers.
a
6:131.
e
6:22; 10:18; 11:19; 61:8.
f
6:23; 40:74-75.
490
这话意味着拒绝安拉的使者的人将亲眼看到预告他们失败的那些预言的实现, 并将遭受由于他们反对安拉的使者而为他们固定的惩罚。
1
افتراء سچا بھی ہوتا ہے اور جھوٹا بھی۔ سچا اس حالت میں کہ جو بات ایک شخص کسی کی طرف منسوب کرتا ہے وہ ہو تو سچی مگر قائل نے وہ بات نہ کہی ہو۔ اور جھوٹا اس صورت میں کہ جو بات قائل کی طرف منسوب کی جائے ہو بھی جھوٹی اور قائل نے کہی بھی نہ ہو۔
a
6:22; 10:18; 11:19; 61:8.
b
6:23; 40:74-75.
c
6:131.
938
Commentary:
The verse gives the reasons why the rejecters of Divine Messengers deserve severe punishment. People incur the wrath of God because they treat His Messenger as a liar and reject the heavenly signs he brings with him. Indeed, impostors and the rejecters of true Messengers are equally doomed and can never escape the punishment ordained for them.
The words, who shall have their lot as ordained, mean that the rejecters of God’s Messengers will see before their very eyes the fulfilment of the prophecies foretelling their defeat and discomfiture and shall taste of the punishment promised to them for opposing God’s Messengers.
b
6:22; 10:18; 11:19; 61:8.
c
6:23; 40:74-75.
d
6:131.
971
The words mean that the rejectors of God’s Messengers will see with their own eyes the fulfilment of the prophecies foretelling their defeat and discomfiture and shall taste the punishment promised to them for opposing God’s Messengers.
كَذَٰلِكَ حَقَّتْ كَلِمَتُ رَبِّكَ عَلَى ٱلَّذِينَ فَسَقُوٓا۟ أَنَّهُمْ لَا يُؤْمِنُونَ
10:97; 40:7.
10:97; 40:7.
a
10:97; 40:7.
a
10:97; 40:7.
1309
Commentary:
The verse points to the natural law that he who rebels against the authority of God and defies His Prophets is deprived of opportunities to believe.
a
10:97; 40:7.
وَلَمَّا سُقِطَ فِىٓ أَيْدِيهِمْ وَرَأَوْا۟ أَنَّهُمْ قَدْ ضَلُّوا۟ قَالُوا۟ لَئِن لَّمْ يَرْحَمْنَا رَبُّنَا وَيَغْفِرْ لَنَا لَنَكُونَنَّ مِنَ ٱلْخَٰسِرِينَ
The Arabic phrase in the text means, they repented; they wrung their hands by reason of repentance. The Arabs say of a man who repents, Suqita fi Yadihi (Lane).
Important Words:
سقط فی ایدیھم –– suqita (they were smitten with remorse). The word سقط (saqata) means, he or it fell down; or dropped down from a higher to a lower place. They say سقط فی کلامه i.e. he committed a mistake in his speech. سقط فلان عن عینی means, such a one fell from the place he held in my regard. سقط فی یدہ means, he repented of what he had done; or he grieved for, and regretted, an act of inadvertence done by him; or he became confounded or perplexed and unable to see his right course. So فلماسقط فی ایدیھم means, when they repented; or when they struck their hands upon their hands by reason of repentance; or when they repented greatly. The expression has also been read as سقط فی ایدیھم (saqata) meaning, سقط الندم فی ایدیھم i.e. shame and repentance fell into their hands (viz. their shame and repentance became apparent). The word سقط is intransitive but it is used in the verse as if it were transitive. Such apparently transitive use of the word is permissible in rare cases as in the expression تمرة مسقوطة i.e. a fallen date (Lane & Aqrab).
Commentary:
A party of those who had taken the calf for worship repented and felt ashamed of their deed before Moses returned, and, therefore, they were saved. The other party did not repent and, therefore, perished. They are here spoken of as "losers".
1039
Important Words:
سقط فی ایدیھم –– suqita (they were smitten with remorse). The word سقط (saqata) means, he or it fell down; or dropped down from a higher to a lower place. They say سقط فی کلامه i.e. he committed a mistake in his speech. سقط فلان عن عینی means, such a one fell from the place he held in my regard. سقط فی یدہ means, he repented of what he had done; or he grieved for, and regretted, an act of inadvertence done by him; or he became confounded or perplexed and unable to see his right course. So فلماسقط فی ایدیھم means, when they repented; or when they struck their hands upon their hands by reason of repentance; or when they repented greatly. The expression has also been read as سقط فی ایدیھم (saqata) meaning, سقط الندم فی ایدیھم i.e. shame and repentance fell into their hands (viz. their shame and repentance became apparent). The word سقط is intransitive but it is used in the verse as if it were transitive. Such apparently transitive use of the word is permissible in rare cases as in the expression تمرة مسقوطة i.e. a fallen date (Lane & Aqrab).
Commentary:
A party of those who had taken the calf for worship repented and felt ashamed of their deed before Moses returned, and, therefore, they were saved. The other party did not repent and, therefore, perished. They are here spoken of as "losers".
1054
The Arabic phrase in the text means, they repented; they wrung their hands by reason of repentance. The Arabs say of a man who repents, Suqita fi Yadihi (Lane).
وَمَا مَنَعَهُمْ أَن تُقْبَلَ مِنْهُمْ نَفَقَٰتُهُمْ إِلَّآ أَنَّهُمْ كَفَرُوا۟ بِٱللَّهِ وَبِرَسُولِهِۦ وَلَا يَأْتُونَ ٱلصَّلَوٰةَ إِلَّا وَهُمْ كُسَالَىٰ وَلَا يُنفِقُونَ إِلَّا وَهُمْ كَٰرِهُونَ
4:143.
4:143.
4:143.
Commentary:
Good works are of two kinds: (1) those done for the purification of one’s own soul, of which Prayer is the most important, and (2) those done for the uplift of one’s community, of which Zakah or other similar subscriptions form an important part. Hypocrites, the verse points out, are lazy and reluctant in both these fields.
a
4:143.
a
4:143.
1210
Commentary:
Good works are of two kinds: (1) those done for the purification of one’s own soul, of which Prayer is the most important, and (2) those done for the uplift of one’s community, of which Zakah or other similar subscriptions form an important part. Hypocrites, the verse points out, are lazy and reluctant in both these fields.
a
4:143.
مَا كَانَ لِلنَّبِىِّ وَٱلَّذِينَ ءَامَنُوٓا۟ أَن يَسْتَغْفِرُوا۟ لِلْمُشْرِكِينَ وَلَوْ كَانُوٓا۟ أُو۟لِى قُرْبَىٰ مِنۢ بَعْدِ مَا تَبَيَّنَ لَهُمْ أَنَّهُمْ أَصْحَٰبُ ٱلْجَحِيمِ
Commentary:
When a true believer is he who possesses the qualities mentioned in the preceding verse, he can never hesitate to sever his connection with disbelievers, if and when called upon to do so. It is in two ways that it can become "plain" that an idolater or a disbeliever is an inmate of Hell: firstly, if and when God informs His Prophet through some revelation that a certain idolater will not believe and will die as a disbeliever; secondly, when an idolater actually dies without repenting of idolatry. In either case, it is not permissible to pray for such idolaters. In ordinary circumstances, however, it is not disallowed to pray for disbelievers. The Holy Prophet is reported to have once said, "There lived a Prophet who, even though he was severely wounded by his people, went on praying to God, saying, 'My Lord, forgive my people, for they know not what they are doing.'" It was really to himself that the Holy Prophet referred in this saying. He was referring to the treatment he received at the hands of the people of Ta’if, and to the prayer that he, while bleeding and wounded, offered for them.
1262
Commentary:
When a true believer is he who possesses the qualities mentioned in the preceding verse, he can never hesitate to sever his connection with disbelievers, if and when called upon to do so. It is in two ways that it can become "plain" that an idolater or a disbeliever is an inmate of Hell: firstly, if and when God informs His Prophet through some revelation that a certain idolater will not believe and will die as a disbeliever; secondly, when an idolater actually dies without repenting of idolatry. In either case, it is not permissible to pray for such idolaters. In ordinary circumstances, however, it is not disallowed to pray for disbelievers. The Holy Prophet is reported to have once said, "There lived a Prophet who, even though he was severely wounded by his people, went on praying to God, saying, 'My Lord, forgive my people, for they know not what they are doing.'" It was really to himself that the Holy Prophet referred in this saying. He was referring to the treatment he received at the hands of the people of Ta’if, and to the prayer that he, while bleeding and wounded, offered for them.
أَوَلَا يَرَوْنَ أَنَّهُمْ يُفْتَنُونَ فِى كُلِّ عَامٍ مَّرَّةً أَوْ مَرَّتَيْنِ ثُمَّ لَا يَتُوبُونَ وَلَا هُمْ يَذَّكَّرُونَ
这节经文有助于解释9:101节经文。
The verse helps to explain 9:101.
Commentary:
The hypocrites are here asked the pertinent question: Is not the fact that events are taking place every now and then by which their faith is tried, and true and sincere Muslims are distinguished from those insincere and false, sufficient to open their eyes to the truth that God Himself is the author of Islam, and that in order to protect His religion and make it prosper, He is always separating the Faithful from the faithless, so that Muslims may become purified of all dross and impurities and Islam may come to possess a band of sincere and devoted followers. This fact alone, they are told, is sufficient to increase and strengthen the faith of those who have the seed of truth in their hearts. The verse also helps to explain 9:101 above, where it is said that God will punish the hypocrites "twice."
578
这节经文有助于解释9:101节经文。
1273
Commentary:
The hypocrites are here asked the pertinent question: Is not the fact that events are taking place every now and then by which their faith is tried, and true and sincere Muslims are distinguished from those insincere and false, sufficient to open their eyes to the truth that God Himself is the author of Islam, and that in order to protect His religion and make it prosper, He is always separating the Faithful from the faithless, so that Muslims may become purified of all dross and impurities and Islam may come to possess a band of sincere and devoted followers. This fact alone, they are told, is sufficient to increase and strengthen the faith of those who have the seed of truth in their hearts. The verse also helps to explain 9:101 above, where it is said that God will punish the hypocrites "twice."
1226
The verse helps to explain 9:101.
هُوَ ٱلَّذِى يُسَيِّرُكُمْ فِى ٱلْبَرِّ وَٱلْبَحْرِ ۖ حَتَّىٰٓ إِذَا كُنتُمْ فِى ٱلْفُلْكِ وَجَرَيْنَ بِهِم بِرِيحٍ طَيِّبَةٍ وَفَرِحُوا۟ بِهَا جَآءَتْهَا رِيحٌ عَاصِفٌ وَجَآءَهُمُ ٱلْمَوْجُ مِن كُلِّ مَكَانٍ وَظَنُّوٓا۟ أَنَّهُمْ أُحِيطَ بِهِمْ ۙ دَعَوُا۟ ٱللَّهَ مُخْلِصِينَ لَهُ ٱلدِّينَ لَئِنْ أَنجَيْتَنَا مِنْ هَٰذِهِۦ لَنَكُونَنَّ مِنَ ٱلشَّٰكِرِينَ
17:67; 29:66; 31:33.
اس جگہ مومن و کافر کا اکٹھا ذکر کیا ہے کیونکہ دونوں ایک ہی کشتی میں سوار ہوتے ہیں۔
یعنی کشتیوں کے شاندار چلنے پر۔
اس جگہ اب خالص کافروں کا ذکر ہے جو خداتعالیٰ کی نُصرت پر یقین نہیں رکھتے۔
17:67; 29:66; 31:33.
As a pleasant breeze sometimes develops into a violent gale and causes widespread destruction, similarly, the respite that is granted to disbelievers may prove the prelude to their destruction. To bring home to disbelievers this patent truth, their attention is drawn to the comforts and perils of a sea-voyage.
17:67; 29:66; 31:33.
Important Words:
عاصف (violent) is the active participle from عصف. They say عصفت الریح i.e. the wind blew violently or vehemently. عصفت الناقة براکبھا means, the she-camel went quickly with her rider, as if she were the wind. عصف الدھربھم means, the time destroyed them. عصف الزرع means, he cut the corn before its attaining maturity. ریح عاصف means, wind blowing violently or vehemently. یوم عاصف means, a day violent in respect of wind and storm (Lane & Aqrab).
Commentary:
The verse purports to say that on the part of God the system of punishing and showing mercy goes hand in hand, as does on the part of disbelievers the habit of acting wickedly in time of ease and repenting temporarily when punishment overtakes them. But disbelievers always ignore the fact that, just as a pleasant breeze sometimes develops into a violent gale and causes widespread destruction, similarly, the remission that is granted to them may prove the prelude to their destruction. To bring home to disbelievers this patent truth, their attention is drawn to the comforts and perils of a sea-voyage.
It is worthy of note that whereas the verse uses the pronoun "you" in the second person in the first two clauses, it suddenly changes to a pronoun of the third person (them, they) in the third and the following clauses. This is not without purpose. The first two clauses referred to both believers and disbelievers, for it is both for believers and disbelievers that God has provided the means of travel by land and sea. Hence the pronoun "you" has been used in the first two clauses. But as in the following clauses it has been pointed out that a section of the people become ungrateful, therefore here the second person has been changed into the third person, in order to show that it is only disbelievers that become ungrateful.
d
17:67; 29:66; 31:33.
1
اس جگہ مومن و کافر کا اکٹھا ذکر کیا ہے کیونکہ دونوں ایک ہی کشتی میں سوار ہوتے ہیں۔
2
یعنی کشتیوں کے شاندار چلنے پر۔
3
اس جگہ اب خالص کافروں کا ذکر ہے جو خداتعالیٰ کی نُصرت پر یقین نہیں رکھتے۔
a
17:67; 29:66; 31:33.
1298
Important Words:
عاصف (violent) is the active participle from عصف. They say عصفت الریح i.e. the wind blew violently or vehemently. عصفت الناقة براکبھا means, the she-camel went quickly with her rider, as if she were the wind. عصف الدھربھم means, the time destroyed them. عصف الزرع means, he cut the corn before its attaining maturity. ریح عاصف means, wind blowing violently or vehemently. یوم عاصف means, a day violent in respect of wind and storm (Lane & Aqrab).
Commentary:
The verse purports to say that on the part of God the system of punishing and showing mercy goes hand in hand, as does on the part of disbelievers the habit of acting wickedly in time of ease and repenting temporarily when punishment overtakes them. But disbelievers always ignore the fact that, just as a pleasant breeze sometimes develops into a violent gale and causes widespread destruction, similarly, the remission that is granted to them may prove the prelude to their destruction. To bring home to disbelievers this patent truth, their attention is drawn to the comforts and perils of a sea-voyage.
It is worthy of note that whereas the verse uses the pronoun "you" in the second person in the first two clauses, it suddenly changes to a pronoun of the third person (them, they) in the third and the following clauses. This is not without purpose. The first two clauses referred to both believers and disbelievers, for it is both for believers and disbelievers that God has provided the means of travel by land and sea. Hence the pronoun "you" has been used in the first two clauses. But as in the following clauses it has been pointed out that a section of the people become ungrateful, therefore here the second person has been changed into the third person, in order to show that it is only disbelievers that become ungrateful.
e
17:67; 29:66; 31:33.
1251
As a pleasant breeze sometimes develops into a violent gale and causes widespread destruction, similarly, the respite that is granted to disbelievers may prove the prelude to their destruction. To bring home to disbelievers this patent truth, their attention is drawn to the comforts and perils of a sea-voyage.
إِنَّمَا مَثَلُ ٱلْحَيَوٰةِ ٱلدُّنْيَا كَمَآءٍ أَنزَلْنَٰهُ مِنَ ٱلسَّمَآءِ فَٱخْتَلَطَ بِهِۦ نَبَاتُ ٱلْأَرْضِ مِمَّا يَأْكُلُ ٱلنَّاسُ وَٱلْأَنْعَٰمُ حَتَّىٰٓ إِذَآ أَخَذَتِ ٱلْأَرْضُ زُخْرُفَهَا وَٱزَّيَّنَتْ وَظَنَّ أَهْلُهَآ أَنَّهُمْ قَٰدِرُونَ عَلَيْهَآ أَتَىٰهَآ أَمْرُنَا لَيْلًا أَوْ نَهَارًا فَجَعَلْنَٰهَا حَصِيدًا كَأَن لَّمْ تَغْنَ بِٱلْأَمْسِ ۚ كَذَٰلِكَ نُفَصِّلُ ٱلْءَايَٰتِ لِقَوْمٍ يَتَفَكَّرُونَ
3:118.
11:69.
18:46.
The moral of the parable is that when nations become proud and vain and take life lightly, their decline sets in and they come to grief.
18:46.
3:118.
11:69.
Important Words:
حصیدا (a field that is mown down) is derived from حصد meaning, he reaped or cut with the scythe seed-produce or plants or herbage. They say حصدھم بالسیف i.e. he mowed them down with the sword; he slew them; he exerted his utmost power or exceeded ordinary bounds in slaying them; he exterminated them with the sword. The Arab proverb من زرع الشر حصد الندامةmeans, he who sows evil reaps regret. حصید means, reaped seed-produce; grain that is reaped; seed-produce torn up and carried away by the wind; slain or mown down with the sword, like seed-produce when reaped. حصاد means, time or season of reaping; what remains on the ground after the crop has been reaped; what falls off and becomes scattered of the seed-produce (Lane & Aqrab).
Commentary:
The life of this world has been likened here to rainwater. The verse purports to say that when rain descends from heaven, it causes various kinds of vegetation to grow. Some of them are useful for man and others for animals. But man, instead of ascribing this to the favour of God, looks upon it as the fruit of his own industry and skill. When, however, in consequence of his pride and vanity, a sudden visitation from God destroys all the produce of the earth, he cannot prevent or delay its destruction, let alone possess the power to produce it which he so vaingloriously claimed to have. The moral of the parable is that when nations become proud and vain, i.e. when they take life lightly, their decline sets in and they come to grief.
Water in this verse may also be taken to stand for the word of God. In this sense, the verse would mean that the word of God brings about mighty changes in the life of those who accept and follow it and various new sciences come into existence as a result of its study and new discoveries are made in the material as well as in the spiritual world. The revelation of the Quran gave birth not only to highly spiritual and righteous men but also to eminent philosophers and scientists. But when Muslims became vain and refused to acknowledge their debt to the word of God and began to look upon themselves as the real originators and creators of all these sciences, they fell from the high pedestal of material and spiritual glory to the depths of degradation and degeneration.
b
18:46.
c
3:118.
d
11:69.
a
18:46.
b
3:118.
c
11:69.
1300
Important Words:
حصیدا (a field that is mown down) is derived from حصد meaning, he reaped or cut with the scythe seed-produce or plants or herbage. They say حصدھم بالسیف i.e. he mowed them down with the sword; he slew them; he exerted his utmost power or exceeded ordinary bounds in slaying them; he exterminated them with the sword. The Arab proverb من زرع الشر حصد الندامةmeans, he who sows evil reaps regret. حصید means, reaped seed-produce; grain that is reaped; seed-produce torn up and carried away by the wind; slain or mown down with the sword, like seed-produce when reaped. حصاد means, time or season of reaping; what remains on the ground after the crop has been reaped; what falls off and becomes scattered of the seed-produce (Lane & Aqrab).
Commentary:
The life of this world has been likened here to rainwater. The verse purports to say that when rain descends from heaven, it causes various kinds of vegetation to grow. Some of them are useful for man and others for animals. But man, instead of ascribing this to the favour of God, looks upon it as the fruit of his own industry and skill. When, however, in consequence of his pride and vanity, a sudden visitation from God destroys all the produce of the earth, he cannot prevent or delay its destruction, let alone possess the power to produce it which he so vaingloriously claimed to have. The moral of the parable is that when nations become proud and vain, i.e. when they take life lightly, their decline sets in and they come to grief.
Water in this verse may also be taken to stand for the word of God. In this sense, the verse would mean that the word of God brings about mighty changes in the life of those who accept and follow it and various new sciences come into existence as a result of its study and new discoveries are made in the material as well as in the spiritual world. The revelation of the Quran gave birth not only to highly spiritual and righteous men but also to eminent philosophers and scientists. But when Muslims became vain and refused to acknowledge their debt to the word of God and began to look upon themselves as the real originators and creators of all these sciences, they fell from the high pedestal of material and spiritual glory to the depths of degradation and degeneration.
a
3:118.
b
11:69.
c
18:46.
1252
The moral of the parable is that when nations become proud and vain and take life lightly, their decline sets in and they come to grief.
لَا جَرَمَ أَنَّهُمْ فِى ٱلْءَاخِرَةِ هُمُ ٱلْأَخْسَرُونَ
16:110.
16:110.
16:110.
Important Words:
لاجرم (undoubtedly). They say جرمه i.e. he cut it or he cut it off. جرم لاھله means, he acquired or earned for his family. جرم also means, he committed a fault or sin or crime. The expression لاجرم means, there is no avoiding (lit. cutting) it; or it is absolutely necessary; verily or truly. It also sometimes gives the sense of "nay" (Lane).
Commentary:
The verse purports to say that though disbelievers may do a slight harm to the Prophets of God in this life, in the life to come they alone will suffer.
a
16:110.
b
16:110.
1404
Important Words:
لاجرم (undoubtedly). They say جرمه i.e. he cut it or he cut it off. جرم لاھله means, he acquired or earned for his family. جرم also means, he committed a fault or sin or crime. The expression لاجرم means, there is no avoiding (lit. cutting) it; or it is absolutely necessary; verily or truly. It also sometimes gives the sense of "nay" (Lane).
Commentary:
The verse purports to say that though disbelievers may do a slight harm to the Prophets of God in this life, in the life to come they alone will suffer.
b
16:110.
حَتَّىٰٓ إِذَا ٱسْتَيْـَٔسَ ٱلرُّسُلُ وَظَنُّوٓا۟ أَنَّهُمْ قَدْ كُذِبُوا۟ جَآءَهُمْ نَصْرُنَا فَنُجِّىَ مَن نَّشَآءُ ۖ وَلَا يُرَدُّ بَأْسُنَا عَنِ ٱلْقَوْمِ ٱلْمُجْرِمِينَ
2:215.
یہ حتّٰی ابتدائیہ ہے جس کے معنے’’اور‘‘ کے ہوتے ہیں اور وہی معنے ہم نے کیے ہیں۔
بعض مفسر لکھتے ہیں کہ جب رسول خدائی عذابوں کے آنے سے مایوس ہو گئے۔ لیکن ہم نے یہ ترجمہ کیا ہے کہ جب رسول لوگوں کے ایمان لانے سے مایوس ہو گئے اور کفار نے بھی یقین کر لیا کہ ان سے جھوٹ بولا جا رہا ہے۔ یعنی جو سنایا جا رہا ہے وحی الٰہی نہیں ہے بلکہ رسول کی خود ساختہ باتیں ہیں۔
2:215.
The particle hatta is sometimes used as a conjunction like wa signifying 'and' or 'even' as in Akaltus-Samaka hatta Ra’saha, i.e. I ate the fish and (even) its head (Lane).
The enemies of Prophets of God continue to increase in wickedness and opposition to them till a stage is reached when the Prophets begin to feel that those who were destined to believe had already believed and as for the rest they despair of their believing in them. But God’s Prophets never despair of God’s mercy and help (15:57). Their opponents, on the other hand, owing to the delay in the coming of Divine punishment, begin to feel secure in the thought that they will never be visited with any punishment and that the prophecies about the Prophets’ final success and about the discomfiture of their enemies were nothing but false utterances.
2:215.
Important Words:
کذبوا (they had been told a lie) is the passive plural from کذب (kadhaba) which means, he lied; or he uttered a falsehood; or he said what was untrue whether intentionally or unintentionally; he found his hopes to be false or vain. کذبه الحدیث means, he gave him a false account of the thing and said what was untrue. They say کذب الرأی i.e. he imagined the thing contrary to its real state. An Arab would say کذبتك عینك i.e. thine eye showed thee that which had no reality i.e. thou wast deceived in the vision. They say کذبته نفسه i.e. his soul made him desire things and conceive hopes that did not come to pass. کذب الرجل(kudhiba) means, the man was told a lie or a falsehood or an untruth (Lane & Aqrab).
Commentary:
Like the preceding verse, the verse under comment speaks of both the Prophets and their opponents. The first sentence speaks of the Prophets of God, and the second of their enemies. The verse purports to say that the enemies of Prophets so continue to increase in wickedness and opposition to them that a stage is reached when the Prophets begin to think that those who were destined to believe had already believed and they despair of the rest. Their opponents, on the other hand, owing to the delay in the coming of Divine punishment, begin to feel secure in the thought that they will never be visited with any punishment and that the prophecies of the Prophets about their own final success and about the discomfiture of their enemies were so many pieces of falsehood. When matters come to such a pass, God’s help comes to the Prophets and the leaders of disbelief are destroyed.
This is exactly what happens at the advent of every Prophet. The hour of final reckoning is delayed so long that disbelievers begin to have a false sense of security. Then God comes to the succour of His Prophets and makes their cause prevail.
The words, when the Messengers despaired, cannot be taken to mean that the Prophet despair of the help of God. This inference is obviously wrong and is belied by v. 88 of this very Surah wherein we have, none despairs of Allah’s mercy save the unbelieving people. As a matter of fact, Prophets never despair of God’s help. They only sometimes despair of their people believing in them, and this happens when the latter continue turning a deaf ear to their preaching.
Similarly, the words, they thought that they had been told a lie, do not mean that the Prophets thought so. The words only mean that their enemies thought so. The Prophets cannot entertain any doubt about the truth of their prophecies and of the promises of ultimate success made to them by God. Their faith in God is invincible; it stands on the firm rock of certitude. The pronoun "they" thus refers, not to the Prophets, but to their opponents mentioned in the previous verse. According to Arabic idiom it is allowable to use in the same sentence pronouns referring to different antecedents when the nouns to which they refer are clear from the context. But if the pronoun "they" be taken to refer to the Prophets, the sentence, they thought that they had been told a lie, would mean that wishful thinking and overconfidence in the help of God had made the Prophets interpret the Word of God containing promises of success in such a way as to believe in the very early triumph of their cause which, however, was not so ordained by God. Thus their own minds, as it were, lied to them or held out to them false hopes, by placing on the Word of God an interpretation which it did not bear.
The words, they thought that they had been told a lie, may also mean that the hopes that the Prophets had entertained about the repentance of their opponents turned out to be false. When at a certain stage the hostility of their opponents temporarily slackened, the Prophets began to entertain the hope that they would repent of their past misdeeds and would accept the truth, but that hope turned out to be a delusion. Taken in this sense, these words also serve as an explanation of the words "the Messengers despaired." See the different meanings of the word کذبوا under Important Words.
c
2:215.
1
یہ حتّٰی ابتدائیہ ہے جس کے معنے’’اور‘‘ کے ہوتے ہیں اور وہی معنے ہم نے کیے ہیں۔
2
بعض مفسر لکھتے ہیں کہ جب رسول خدائی عذابوں کے آنے سے مایوس ہو گئے۔ لیکن ہم نے یہ ترجمہ کیا ہے کہ جب رسول لوگوں کے ایمان لانے سے مایوس ہو گئے اور کفار نے بھی یقین کر لیا کہ ان سے جھوٹ بولا جا رہا ہے۔ یعنی جو سنایا جا رہا ہے وحی الٰہی نہیں ہے بلکہ رسول کی خود ساختہ باتیں ہیں۔
a
2:215.
1610
Important Words:
کذبوا (they had been told a lie) is the passive plural from کذب (kadhaba) which means, he lied; or he uttered a falsehood; or he said what was untrue whether intentionally or unintentionally; he found his hopes to be false or vain. کذبه الحدیث means, he gave him a false account of the thing and said what was untrue. They say کذب الرأی i.e. he imagined the thing contrary to its real state. An Arab would say کذبتك عینك i.e. thine eye showed thee that which had no reality i.e. thou wast deceived in the vision. They say کذبته نفسه i.e. his soul made him desire things and conceive hopes that did not come to pass. کذب الرجل(kudhiba) means, the man was told a lie or a falsehood or an untruth (Lane & Aqrab).
Commentary:
Like the preceding verse, the verse under comment speaks of both the Prophets and their opponents. The first sentence speaks of the Prophets of God, and the second of their enemies. The verse purports to say that the enemies of Prophets so continue to increase in wickedness and opposition to them that a stage is reached when the Prophets begin to think that those who were destined to believe had already believed and they despair of the rest. Their opponents, on the other hand, owing to the delay in the coming of Divine punishment, begin to feel secure in the thought that they will never be visited with any punishment and that the prophecies of the Prophets about their own final success and about the discomfiture of their enemies were so many pieces of falsehood. When matters come to such a pass, God’s help comes to the Prophets and the leaders of disbelief are destroyed.
This is exactly what happens at the advent of every Prophet. The hour of final reckoning is delayed so long that disbelievers begin to have a false sense of security. Then God comes to the succour of His Prophets and makes their cause prevail.
The words, when the Messengers despaired, cannot be taken to mean that the Prophet despair of the help of God. This inference is obviously wrong and is belied by v. 88 of this very Surah wherein we have, none despairs of Allah’s mercy save the unbelieving people. As a matter of fact, Prophets never despair of God’s help. They only sometimes despair of their people believing in them, and this happens when the latter continue turning a deaf ear to their preaching.
Similarly, the words, they thought that they had been told a lie, do not mean that the Prophets thought so. The words only mean that their enemies thought so. The Prophets cannot entertain any doubt about the truth of their prophecies and of the promises of ultimate success made to them by God. Their faith in God is invincible; it stands on the firm rock of certitude. The pronoun "they" thus refers, not to the Prophets, but to their opponents mentioned in the previous verse. According to Arabic idiom it is allowable to use in the same sentence pronouns referring to different antecedents when the nouns to which they refer are clear from the context. But if the pronoun "they" be taken to refer to the Prophets, the sentence, they thought that they had been told a lie, would mean that wishful thinking and overconfidence in the help of God had made the Prophets interpret the Word of God containing promises of success in such a way as to believe in the very early triumph of their cause which, however, was not so ordained by God. Thus their own minds, as it were, lied to them or held out to them false hopes, by placing on the Word of God an interpretation which it did not bear.
The words, they thought that they had been told a lie, may also mean that the hopes that the Prophets had entertained about the repentance of their opponents turned out to be false. When at a certain stage the hostility of their opponents temporarily slackened, the Prophets began to entertain the hope that they would repent of their past misdeeds and would accept the truth, but that hope turned out to be a delusion. Taken in this sense, these words also serve as an explanation of the words "the Messengers despaired." See the different meanings of the word کذبوا under Important Words.
c
2:215.
1417A
The particle hatta is sometimes used as a conjunction like wa signifying 'and' or 'even' as in Akaltus-Samaka hatta Ra’saha, i.e. I ate the fish and (even) its head (Lane).
1418
The enemies of Prophets of God continue to increase in wickedness and opposition to them till a stage is reached when the Prophets begin to feel that those who were destined to believe had already believed and as for the rest they despair of their believing in them. But God’s Prophets never despair of God’s mercy and help (15:57). Their opponents, on the other hand, owing to the delay in the coming of Divine punishment, begin to feel secure in the thought that they will never be visited with any punishment and that the prophecies about the Prophets’ final success and about the discomfiture of their enemies were nothing but false utterances.
لِيُبَيِّنَ لَهُمُ ٱلَّذِى يَخْتَلِفُونَ فِيهِ وَلِيَعْلَمَ ٱلَّذِينَ كَفَرُوٓا۟ أَنَّهُمْ كَانُوا۟ كَٰذِبِينَ
在复生日认识真理将会是如此的全面, 以致不信的人也会承认: 他们否认复生是愚蠢的。的确, 这是全面的、详尽的实现。
Realization of truth on the Day of Resurrection will be so complete that disbelievers will admit that they were foolish to deny Resurrection. Indeed, it would be a full and complete realization.
Commentary:
This verse gives the reason why there should be a life after death and a Day of Resurrection. In that life the veil would be lifted from all things and their reality would become manifest. If human life were limited to this world, then the truth of the Prophets and their teachings would ever remain a matter of controversy and the deniers of the Prophets would also forever remain deprived of guidance which is inconsistent with God’s Dignity and Mercy because He has created man to attain His nearness. A life after death is therefore necessary that man may realize the truth in that life which he could not realize in this life.
Elsewhere in the Quran (verse 65 below) the same purpose of creating an infallible faith in the existence of God has been declared to be the object of the advent of Prophets and Divine Books. The fact is that in the present life such matters as pertain to belief can be explained by reason and argument only to those who honestly seek after truth. They cannot be so demonstrated and established as to be beyond doubt. This is possible only in the life after death. But when in the afterlife truth will become quite manifest there will be no merit in accepting it; such acceptance may only be helpful in exciting God’s Mercy.
The clause, "that they were liars", confirms the above interpretation. Realization of the truth on the Day of Resurrection will be so complete that disbelievers will have to admit that they were foolish to deny Resurrection. Indeed, it would be a full and complete realization.
677
在复生日认识真理将会是如此的全面, 以致不信的人也会承认: 他们否认复生是愚蠢的。的确, 这是全面的、详尽的实现。
1841
Commentary:
This verse gives the reason why there should be a life after death and a Day of Resurrection. In that life the veil would be lifted from all things and their reality would become manifest. If human life were limited to this world, then the truth of the Prophets and their teachings would ever remain a matter of controversy and the deniers of the Prophets would also forever remain deprived of guidance which is inconsistent with God’s Dignity and Mercy because He has created man to attain His nearness. A life after death is therefore necessary that man may realize the truth in that life which he could not realize in this life.
Elsewhere in the Quran (verse 65 below) the same purpose of creating an infallible faith in the existence of God has been declared to be the object of the advent of Prophets and Divine Books. The fact is that in the present life such matters as pertain to belief can be explained by reason and argument only to those who honestly seek after truth. They cannot be so demonstrated and established as to be beyond doubt. This is possible only in the life after death. But when in the afterlife truth will become quite manifest there will be no merit in accepting it; such acceptance may only be helpful in exciting God’s Mercy.
The clause, "that they were liars", confirms the above interpretation. Realization of the truth on the Day of Resurrection will be so complete that disbelievers will have to admit that they were foolish to deny Resurrection. Indeed, it would be a full and complete realization.
1545
Realization of truth on the Day of Resurrection will be so complete that disbelievers will admit that they were foolish to deny Resurrection. Indeed, it would be a full and complete realization.
وَلَقَدْ نَعْلَمُ أَنَّهُمْ يَقُولُونَ إِنَّمَا يُعَلِّمُهُۥ بَشَرٌ ۗ لِّسَانُ ٱلَّذِى يُلْحِدُونَ إِلَيْهِ أَعْجَمِىٌّ وَهَٰذَا لِسَانٌ عَرَبِىٌّ مُّبِينٌ
تفصیل کے لئے دیکھئے تفسیر کبیر جلد چہارم صفحہ ۲۴۱۔
Names of different persons have been mentioned in the traditions who, according to the allegations of the disbelievers, helped the Holy Prophet in composing the Qur’an—Jabr, a Christian slave, ‘Aish or Ya‘ish, a servant of Al-Huwaitib Ibn-e-‘Abdul-‘Uzza and Abu Fuqaih who was known as Yasar and ‘Adas or ‘Addas, a slave of Aus bin Rabi‘ (Ma‘ani & Fath). The names of ‘Ammar, Suhaib, Salman, ‘Abdullah bin Salam and of Sergius, a Nestorian monk, have also been mentioned in this connection. In fact, the Qur’an here makes reference to two objections of disbelievers, one relating to certain slave converts from whom the Holy Prophet is alleged to have received help in composing the Qur’an which is mentioned in 25:5-7, and the other relating to what he heard of the Gospels from a certain Christian slave convert to Islam, and which was incorporated in the Qur’an to which this verse refers. Now with regard to the second objection, did the slave in question read the Arabic version of
Important Words:
یلحدون (they unjustly incline in making this insinuation) is derived from لحد. They say لحد المیت i.e. he buried the corpse. لحدالسھم عن الھدف means, the arrow deviated from the target. الحد الی فلان means, he inclined towards such a one. They say الحد فی الدین i.e. he deviated or swerved from the right way with respect to religion; he impugned religion. الحد فی الحرم means, he desecrated the haram and violated its sanctity. The Quranic expression لسان الذی یلحدون الیه means, the tongue of him unto whom they incline (Lane & Aqrab).
اعجمی (foreign) is derived from عجم (‘ajama) which means, he bit it: and he chewed it. عجم (‘ajuma) means, he had an impotence or an impediment or a difficulty in his speech or utterance and a want of clearness, chasteness, or correctness therein. They say اعجم الکلام i.e. he made the speech or language to want or be without or to have a quality the contrary of clearness, perspicuous-ness or distinctness or to want or be without chasteness or correctness. اعجم الکتاب means, he dotted the book or pointed it or he removed its want of clearness by means of diacritical points. The Arabs say, اعجم البابi.e. he closed the door. عجم means, foreigners as meaning others than Arabs; such as are not Arabs, especially Persians. عجمی signifies one who is of the race of the عجم though he may be chaste or correct in Arabic speech. قوم اعجم means, a people not of the Arabs. اعجم means, one having an impotence or impediment or difficulty in speech though he may be clear, perspicuous, chaste or correct in speaking a foreign language; and not clear, perspicuous, chaste or correct in speaking Arabic though he may be an Arab; and اعجمی signifies the same, (Lane, Aqrab & Mufradat).
Commentary:
Names of different persons have been mentioned in the traditions from whom disbelievers alleged the Holy Prophetreceived help in composing the Quran. According to some reports, it was a Christian slave named Jabr, who read the Christian Scriptures while making swords. The Prophet used to go and sit with him. According to another report, it was ‘Aish or Ya‘ish, a servant of al-Huwaitib Ibn ‘Abdul-‘Uzza, who knew the previous Scriptures and had embraced Islam and held firmly to the Faith. According to yet another report a slave named Abu Fuqaih who was also known as Yasar and was a Jew assisted the Holy Prophet in preparing the Quran. He was subjected to much persecution for his adoption of Islam and probably died sometime before the Hijrah. Again, ‘Abdullah bin Muslim al-Hadrami is reported to have said that his two Christian slaves named Yasar and Jabr, natives of ‘Ain at-Tamar, followed the trade of sword-cutters at Mecca. They used to read the Gospels while engaged in their work. When the Holy Prophet passed by their shop and saw them reading the Gospels he would stop there for a while. A report says that when one of them was asked whether he taught Muhammad the Bible he replied, ‘No, but he teaches me.’ Ibn ‘Abbas reports that the Holy Prophet gave instruction in Islam to a Roman slave named Bal‘am. The Quraish taunted the Prophet that he learned many things from him. The same is said of ‘Adas or ‘Addas, a slave of Ausa bin Rabi (Ma‘ani & Fath). The names of sundry other persons have also been mentioned from whom the Prophet was alleged by the Quraish to have received help, among them being ‘Ammar and Suhaib. The names of Salman, the Persian, and of ‘Abdullah bin Salam and of the Nestorian monk, Sergius, who according to Mas‘udi is the well-known Buhairah, have also been mentioned in this connection.
From the verse under comment, it appears that Meccans accused the Prophet of receiving help from a certain person in preparing the Quran and the verse answers the allegation by saying, But the tongue of him to whom they unjustly incline in making this insinuation is foreign, while this is Arabic tongue, plain and clear. The Christian critics say that this answer is irrelevant, for, as Arnold says: "admitting they were foreigners, they might nevertheless supply him with material" (Sherr’s Commentary of the Bible). It was the necessary material or subject matter, they allege, with which the foreigners supplied the Prophet and to say in reply that the tongue of the person who was alleged to teach him was not Arabic betrayed the irrelevancy of the answer. But these reverend gentlemen seem conveniently to ignore the patent fact that this was not the only objection with which the Quran was assailed. It has not hesitated to mention many other similar objections of disbelievers and has refuted them thoroughly. If the Quran could successfully rebut so many other objections of disbelievers, it could answer this one also. In fact it has adequately done so even in the verse under comment, but the reverend gentlemen themselves have not been able to understand the answer. Moreover, if the reply given in the Quran was so manifestly irrelevant as Christian critics pretend to find it, why did not the Meccans of the Prophet’s times who first made this objection, failed to detect this manifest irrelevancy and why did they not express their dissatisfaction with the answer? But not the slightest reference is to be found in any tradition to this so-called irrelevancy of this answer of the Quran. If Meccans had signified their dissatisfaction with this answer and had pointed out its absurdity and irrelevancy, the traditions would have mentioned it as they have mentioned so many other incidents calculated to impugn the Quran and render its position apparently indefensible.
The fact is that these critics themselves have not understood the objection. The traditions quoted above bring to light two objections of the Meccans. One was that Christian and Jewish slaves who had been converted to Islam secretly helped the Holy Prophet in composing the Quran. They furnished him with the necessary material which was subsequently rendered into Arabic. The other was that he listened to certain non-Muslim slaves while they recited the Gospels and incorporated into the Quran what he heard from them.
Thus Meccans made two objections. One of these the Quran has answered in this verse, while the other has been answered in vv. 25:5, 6, 7. This second objection along with its answer runs thus: And the disbelievers say, It is nothing but a lie which he has forged and at which other people have assisted him. But they have been guilty of a great injustice and have uttered an untruth. And they say: These are legends of the ancients; he has got them written down and they are dictated to him morning and evening, Nay, He Who knows the secrets in the heavens and the earth has revealed it. He truly is Most Forgiving and Merciful. The difference between these verses and the verse under comment is quite manifest. In the verse under comment disbelievers refer to a single man as having taught the Holy Prophet, while in Surah 25, it is not one man but many who are alleged, by disbelievers, to have assisted him in writing the Quran. To both these allegations different answers suiting the nature of the allegations have been given. Thus it is clear that Meccans had made two distinct and separate objections and both these have been answered in the Quran at different places, and traditions support this conclusion. It was with regard to several of the slave converts to Islam that it was alleged that they furnished material to the Prophet. To this allegation of the Meccans, chapter 25 refers in the words, at which other people have assisted him. From the same chapter it also appears that those who were alleged to have assisted the Prophet were Muslims, for the passage in question says: They are dictated to him morning and evening. Now it is an historical fact that while at Mecca Muslims assembled in the morning and evening in the house of Arqam for prayers and sat round the Holy Prophet with doors closed in order to avoid interference by disbelievers. Disbelievers alleged that the meetings were held to compose the Quran in secret, when the slave converts from Judaism and Christianity would tell the old histories of their religions, and the Prophet would have these accounts written down by his Companions. This is how disbelievers declared the Quran to be a forgery which was prepared by many persons, incidentally admitting by implication that a work of the unique excellence of the Quran could not be prepared by one man. Some Christian critics even in our own time have identified themselves with this allegation and have the hardihood to suggest that the letters with which some of the chapters of the Quran begin are the initial letters of the names of the Companions who composed them.
The objection gives rise to two inevitable questions: (a) whether those slave converts who were alleged to have assisted the Holy Prophet in writing the Quran were so learned and intelligent as to teach the Prophet what they were alleged to have taught him and (b) whether the Quran is a human production.
It is not difficult to find answers to both these questions. It does not require extraordinary intelligence to understand that those who helped the Prophet in producing and preparing the Quran and to whom he was indebted for what the Quran contained could not believe it to be the word of God and could not, for his sake, undergo willingly those inhuman cruelties and tyrannies which they suffered at the hands of disbelievers. Could these accomplices of the Holy Prophet in forging the Quran possibly endure the most cruel persecution for believing in a book which they themselves had fabricated? Are these Christian critics unaware of the persecution which these so-called forgers of the Quran bore without wavering and flinching?
With regard to the second question, viz. whether those great truths which are alleged to have been taught to the Prophet by the slave converts could possibly have been taught by them, the Quran says that what are spoken of as 'the legends of the ancients' and what are represented as being taught by the slave converts from Judaism and Christianity are not legends but great truths and mighty prophecies which have been made by Him 'Who knows the secrets in the heavens and the earth, and which it is beyond the power of any mortal to foretell'.
Now, if the objection mentioned in the verse under comment was the same as had been quoted and answered in 25:5-7 (which by common consent was revealed before the present Surah) viz. that some other persons had supplied the Prophet with material, the same convincing answer should have been given here also. But the answer given here is quite different from the one given in chapter 25. This shows that the objection referred to in the verse under comment has not been understood by these critics of the Quran. The present verse does not refer to the objection that a certain man provided material for the Quran. It refers to the second allegation of disbelievers viz. that the Prophet incorporated into the Quran what he heard from the Christian slave when the latter read the Gospels at his shop. The tradition says that there were two Christian slaves, Jabr and Yasar, who worked as sword-cutters at Mecca and read the Gospels at their shop and, when the Prophet passed by them, he used to stop there and listen to them. But on closer scrutiny it appears that really there was only one slave, Jabr, who was alleged to teach the Prophet. Another tradition, to which reference has already been made, supports this view and gives the name of Jabr only. Yet another tradition tells us that only one of the two Christian sword-cutters was asked whether he taught the Prophet, and he replied that, far from his teaching the Prophet, it was the Prophet who taught him. This not only shows that it was only one slave who read the Gospels, but also throws light on the purpose for which the Prophet sometimes stopped at his shop. He did not stop there to learn but to teach the man whom he considered to be religious-minded.
It has now been clearly established that the Quran refers to two objections of disbelievers, one relating to certain slave converts from whom the Prophet is alleged to have received help in preparing the Quran which is mentioned in chapter 25 and the other relating to what he heard of the Gospels from Jabr and incorporated in the Quran.
This second objection has been answered in the verse under comment. The verse purports to say that the tongue of him to whom they attribute the teaching of the Prophet being اعجمی i.e. foreign and defective, he could not impart to the Prophet in his faulty Arabic those great and eternal truths for explaining which the possession of sound and deep knowledge of Arabic was essential.
Other pertinent questions which arise here are, did the slave in question read an Arabic version of the Gospels and were the Gospels translated into Arabic in the Prophet’s time and were the Arabic versions so common that even slaves read them while working at their workshops? The original language of the Gospels was, according to Muslims, Hebrew, and according to Christians, Greek. If the existence of an Arabic version of the Bible in the time of the Prophet cannot be proved, it would follow that the slave in question read either a Hebrew or a Greek version. But if he read a Hebrew or a Greek Gospel, the question arises, how was the Prophet able to understand him, since he did not know either of these languages? Hence in order to understand the significance of the verse under comment, it has to be seen whether the Gospels had been translated into Arabic at the time of the Holy Prophet. That they had not been translated into Arabic is clear from the following facts:
Up to the time of the Prophet translations of the Gospels had not been made in any language. It was in the 13th or 14th centuries of the Christian era that the Gospels first began to be translated into other languages. The study of the Commentaries of the Quran by Muslim scholars also shows that Arabic versions of the Bible were not available to them, because when in their Commentaries they quote the New or the Old Testament they make very serious mistakes. They ascribe to these books stories which are not found in them. This clearly shows that Arabic versions of the Bible did not exist in their time, otherwise they would not have made such blunders.
Traditions also show that in the time of the Holy Prophet the Gospels were to be found only in Hebrew or Greek. In Bukhari we have the following about Waraqah bin Naufal; "He had become Christian in the days of ignorance and he used to write the Gospels in Hebrew." True, another tradition gives Arabic in place of Hebrew, as the language in which Waraqah wrote the Gospels but preference must be given to the tradition quoted from Bukhari because if the Arabic versions of the Bible could be available in the days of the Prophet many Muslims would have read them. But no such scholars of the Bible among early Muslims were to be found. We are even inclined to the view that the reporter had, by mistake, substituted the word "Hebrew" for "Greek" in the above tradition, because only Greek versions were current in those days and Hebrew versions had almost ceased to exist. That the Christian Scriptures had not been translated into Arabic by the time of the Prophet receives further support from the fact that even the Jewish tribes of Medina had not translated the Torah into Arabic by that time, and whenever he needed a reference to this book, he consulted ‘Abdullah bin Salam, a great Hebrew scholar. This view is also supported by the following testimony of a well-known Christian writer, Dr. Alexander Souter, M.A., LL.D., who writes in his book, "The Text and Canon of the New Testament" (Second Edition, 1925 p. 74), under the head, 'Arabic Versions': "These come partly and directly from Greek, and partly through Syriac and partly through Coptic. Mohammad himself knew the Gospel story only orally. The oldest manuscript goes no further back than the 8th century. Two versions of the Arabic are reported to have taken place at Alexandria in the 13th century." In short, there is no doubt about the fact that the Gospels had not been translated into Arabic at the time of the Prophet and those who had to consult them used the Greek or Hebrew version.
Thus it is clear that when Jabr, the Christian slave, read the Gospels, he must have read the Greek or the Hebrew version. And how could the Holy Prophet benefit by listening to a book in a language which he did not understand? The fact seems to be that when disbelievers saw the Prophet standing at Jabr’s shop they imagined that he must have learnt something from him. The Quran removes these doubts by saying, the tongue of him to whom they unjustly incline in making this insinuation is foreign, while this is Arabic tongue plain and clear, meaning that the man from whom the Prophet was alleged to have received material for the Quran must have read the book in Hebrew or Greek because his "tongue being foreign" he could not explain to the Holy Prophet in his defective Arabic those great truths which the Quran comprises. But the Prophet knew only Arabic and so he could not follow him, much less incorporate in the Quran what he heard from him.
In short, disbelievers brought two distinct charges against the Prophet. First, that he listened to a Christian slave while the latter read the Gospels at his workshop, and incorporated into the Quran what he heard from him. Secondly, that he received help from those slaves who had been converted to Islam from Judaism and Christianity and who met him in secret in the house of Arqam. Both these objections have been separately answered by the Quran, the first in the verse under comment and the second in 25:5-7.
It would be of some use to mention here the following facts which are relevant to the objections stated above.
1. The Quran has either abrogated or improved upon the teachings of former Scriptures. The Holy Prophet must have derived the knowledge of the teachings of those Scriptures from the same source—from God—from which he had derived the knowledge of the new teachings of the Quran which have supplanted previous Scriptures.
2. It has condemned some of the fundamental teachings of Christianity and has improved upon others. There is no known Christian sect with which it has not disagreed on one point or other. Now it is for Christian critics to say to which sect that man who is supposed to have "taught" the Holy Prophet belonged and how he could teach him things which were against his own beliefs. Certainly the Prophet’s so-called helpers could not have helped him in abrogating the teachings of their own religious Scriptures.
3. It has corrected many Biblical statements. For instance, it declares that Aaron did not take part in the worship of the calf. It clears David, Solomon and Noah of the sinful acts ascribed to them in the Bible. These are facts to the truth of which even Christian writers have had to bear witness today when more than 1350 years have passed since these truths were, for the first time, proclaimed by the Quran. Surely, no Christian slave could teach the Prophet these historical truths.
4. The Quran has made some very important prophecies with regard to some of the events mentioned in the Bible. No Jewish or Christian sect had any knowledge of them. But their truth has now come to light. For instance, the Quran states that God preserved the body of Pharaoh so that it might be a sign for the generations to come. No Christian slave could impart this knowledge to the Prophet.
5. It appears from the traditions that the Holy Prophet used to visit Jabr’s shop in the fourth or fifth year of the Call, when he was boycotted by Meccans. But chapters 18, 19, 20 and 25 of the Quran which deal with Jews and Christians had been revealed before that time. Ibn Mas‘ud who was one of very early converts to Islam says that chapters 17, 18, 19, 20 and 21 belong to the early Meccan period (Bukhari, Kitabut-Tafsir). All these Surahs abound in facts relating to Jews and Christians. How could the Prophet know these facts if the source of his information was the Christian slave, Jabr, the sword-cutter of Mecca?
1
تفصیل کے لئے دیکھئے تفسیر کبیر جلد چہارم صفحہ ۲۴۱۔
1904
Important Words:
یلحدون (they unjustly incline in making this insinuation) is derived from لحد. They say لحد المیت i.e. he buried the corpse. لحدالسھم عن الھدف means, the arrow deviated from the target. الحد الی فلان means, he inclined towards such a one. They say الحد فی الدین i.e. he deviated or swerved from the right way with respect to religion; he impugned religion. الحد فی الحرم means, he desecrated the haram and violated its sanctity. The Quranic expression لسان الذی یلحدون الیه means, the tongue of him unto whom they incline (Lane & Aqrab).
اعجمی (foreign) is derived from عجم (‘ajama) which means, he bit it: and he chewed it. عجم (‘ajuma) means, he had an impotence or an impediment or a difficulty in his speech or utterance and a want of clearness, chasteness, or correctness therein. They say اعجم الکلام i.e. he made the speech or language to want or be without or to have a quality the contrary of clearness, perspicuous-ness or distinctness or to want or be without chasteness or correctness. اعجم الکتاب means, he dotted the book or pointed it or he removed its want of clearness by means of diacritical points. The Arabs say, اعجم البابi.e. he closed the door. عجم means, foreigners as meaning others than Arabs; such as are not Arabs, especially Persians. عجمی signifies one who is of the race of the عجم though he may be chaste or correct in Arabic speech. قوم اعجم means, a people not of the Arabs. اعجم means, one having an impotence or impediment or difficulty in speech though he may be clear, perspicuous, chaste or correct in speaking a foreign language; and not clear, perspicuous, chaste or correct in speaking Arabic though he may be an Arab; and اعجمی signifies the same, (Lane, Aqrab & Mufradat).
Commentary:
Names of different persons have been mentioned in the traditions from whom disbelievers alleged the Holy Prophetreceived help in composing the Quran. According to some reports, it was a Christian slave named Jabr, who read the Christian Scriptures while making swords. The Prophet used to go and sit with him. According to another report, it was ‘Aish or Ya‘ish, a servant of al-Huwaitib Ibn ‘Abdul-‘Uzza, who knew the previous Scriptures and had embraced Islam and held firmly to the Faith. According to yet another report a slave named Abu Fuqaih who was also known as Yasar and was a Jew assisted the Holy Prophet in preparing the Quran. He was subjected to much persecution for his adoption of Islam and probably died sometime before the Hijrah. Again, ‘Abdullah bin Muslim al-Hadrami is reported to have said that his two Christian slaves named Yasar and Jabr, natives of ‘Ain at-Tamar, followed the trade of sword-cutters at Mecca. They used to read the Gospels while engaged in their work. When the Holy Prophet passed by their shop and saw them reading the Gospels he would stop there for a while. A report says that when one of them was asked whether he taught Muhammad the Bible he replied, ‘No, but he teaches me.’ Ibn ‘Abbas reports that the Holy Prophet gave instruction in Islam to a Roman slave named Bal‘am. The Quraish taunted the Prophet that he learned many things from him. The same is said of ‘Adas or ‘Addas, a slave of Ausa bin Rabi (Ma‘ani & Fath). The names of sundry other persons have also been mentioned from whom the Prophet was alleged by the Quraish to have received help, among them being ‘Ammar and Suhaib. The names of Salman, the Persian, and of ‘Abdullah bin Salam and of the Nestorian monk, Sergius, who according to Mas‘udi is the well-known Buhairah, have also been mentioned in this connection.
From the verse under comment, it appears that Meccans accused the Prophet of receiving help from a certain person in preparing the Quran and the verse answers the allegation by saying, But the tongue of him to whom they unjustly incline in making this insinuation is foreign, while this is Arabic tongue, plain and clear. The Christian critics say that this answer is irrelevant, for, as Arnold says: "admitting they were foreigners, they might nevertheless supply him with material" (Sherr’s Commentary of the Bible). It was the necessary material or subject matter, they allege, with which the foreigners supplied the Prophet and to say in reply that the tongue of the person who was alleged to teach him was not Arabic betrayed the irrelevancy of the answer. But these reverend gentlemen seem conveniently to ignore the patent fact that this was not the only objection with which the Quran was assailed. It has not hesitated to mention many other similar objections of disbelievers and has refuted them thoroughly. If the Quran could successfully rebut so many other objections of disbelievers, it could answer this one also. In fact it has adequately done so even in the verse under comment, but the reverend gentlemen themselves have not been able to understand the answer. Moreover, if the reply given in the Quran was so manifestly irrelevant as Christian critics pretend to find it, why did not the Meccans of the Prophet’s times who first made this objection, failed to detect this manifest irrelevancy and why did they not express their dissatisfaction with the answer? But not the slightest reference is to be found in any tradition to this so-called irrelevancy of this answer of the Quran. If Meccans had signified their dissatisfaction with this answer and had pointed out its absurdity and irrelevancy, the traditions would have mentioned it as they have mentioned so many other incidents calculated to impugn the Quran and render its position apparently indefensible.
The fact is that these critics themselves have not understood the objection. The traditions quoted above bring to light two objections of the Meccans. One was that Christian and Jewish slaves who had been converted to Islam secretly helped the Holy Prophet in composing the Quran. They furnished him with the necessary material which was subsequently rendered into Arabic. The other was that he listened to certain non-Muslim slaves while they recited the Gospels and incorporated into the Quran what he heard from them.
Thus Meccans made two objections. One of these the Quran has answered in this verse, while the other has been answered in vv. 25:5, 6, 7. This second objection along with its answer runs thus: And the disbelievers say, It is nothing but a lie which he has forged and at which other people have assisted him. But they have been guilty of a great injustice and have uttered an untruth. And they say: These are legends of the ancients; he has got them written down and they are dictated to him morning and evening, Nay, He Who knows the secrets in the heavens and the earth has revealed it. He truly is Most Forgiving and Merciful. The difference between these verses and the verse under comment is quite manifest. In the verse under comment disbelievers refer to a single man as having taught the Holy Prophet, while in Surah 25, it is not one man but many who are alleged, by disbelievers, to have assisted him in writing the Quran. To both these allegations different answers suiting the nature of the allegations have been given. Thus it is clear that Meccans had made two distinct and separate objections and both these have been answered in the Quran at different places, and traditions support this conclusion. It was with regard to several of the slave converts to Islam that it was alleged that they furnished material to the Prophet. To this allegation of the Meccans, chapter 25 refers in the words, at which other people have assisted him. From the same chapter it also appears that those who were alleged to have assisted the Prophet were Muslims, for the passage in question says: They are dictated to him morning and evening. Now it is an historical fact that while at Mecca Muslims assembled in the morning and evening in the house of Arqam for prayers and sat round the Holy Prophet with doors closed in order to avoid interference by disbelievers. Disbelievers alleged that the meetings were held to compose the Quran in secret, when the slave converts from Judaism and Christianity would tell the old histories of their religions, and the Prophet would have these accounts written down by his Companions. This is how disbelievers declared the Quran to be a forgery which was prepared by many persons, incidentally admitting by implication that a work of the unique excellence of the Quran could not be prepared by one man. Some Christian critics even in our own time have identified themselves with this allegation and have the hardihood to suggest that the letters with which some of the chapters of the Quran begin are the initial letters of the names of the Companions who composed them.
The objection gives rise to two inevitable questions: (a) whether those slave converts who were alleged to have assisted the Holy Prophet in writing the Quran were so learned and intelligent as to teach the Prophet what they were alleged to have taught him and (b) whether the Quran is a human production.
It is not difficult to find answers to both these questions. It does not require extraordinary intelligence to understand that those who helped the Prophet in producing and preparing the Quran and to whom he was indebted for what the Quran contained could not believe it to be the word of God and could not, for his sake, undergo willingly those inhuman cruelties and tyrannies which they suffered at the hands of disbelievers. Could these accomplices of the Holy Prophet in forging the Quran possibly endure the most cruel persecution for believing in a book which they themselves had fabricated? Are these Christian critics unaware of the persecution which these so-called forgers of the Quran bore without wavering and flinching?
With regard to the second question, viz. whether those great truths which are alleged to have been taught to the Prophet by the slave converts could possibly have been taught by them, the Quran says that what are spoken of as 'the legends of the ancients' and what are represented as being taught by the slave converts from Judaism and Christianity are not legends but great truths and mighty prophecies which have been made by Him 'Who knows the secrets in the heavens and the earth, and which it is beyond the power of any mortal to foretell'.
Now, if the objection mentioned in the verse under comment was the same as had been quoted and answered in 25:5-7 (which by common consent was revealed before the present Surah) viz. that some other persons had supplied the Prophet with material, the same convincing answer should have been given here also. But the answer given here is quite different from the one given in chapter 25. This shows that the objection referred to in the verse under comment has not been understood by these critics of the Quran. The present verse does not refer to the objection that a certain man provided material for the Quran. It refers to the second allegation of disbelievers viz. that the Prophet incorporated into the Quran what he heard from the Christian slave when the latter read the Gospels at his shop. The tradition says that there were two Christian slaves, Jabr and Yasar, who worked as sword-cutters at Mecca and read the Gospels at their shop and, when the Prophet passed by them, he used to stop there and listen to them. But on closer scrutiny it appears that really there was only one slave, Jabr, who was alleged to teach the Prophet. Another tradition, to which reference has already been made, supports this view and gives the name of Jabr only. Yet another tradition tells us that only one of the two Christian sword-cutters was asked whether he taught the Prophet, and he replied that, far from his teaching the Prophet, it was the Prophet who taught him. This not only shows that it was only one slave who read the Gospels, but also throws light on the purpose for which the Prophet sometimes stopped at his shop. He did not stop there to learn but to teach the man whom he considered to be religious-minded.
It has now been clearly established that the Quran refers to two objections of disbelievers, one relating to certain slave converts from whom the Prophet is alleged to have received help in preparing the Quran which is mentioned in chapter 25 and the other relating to what he heard of the Gospels from Jabr and incorporated in the Quran.
This second objection has been answered in the verse under comment. The verse purports to say that the tongue of him to whom they attribute the teaching of the Prophet being اعجمی i.e. foreign and defective, he could not impart to the Prophet in his faulty Arabic those great and eternal truths for explaining which the possession of sound and deep knowledge of Arabic was essential.
Other pertinent questions which arise here are, did the slave in question read an Arabic version of the Gospels and were the Gospels translated into Arabic in the Prophet’s time and were the Arabic versions so common that even slaves read them while working at their workshops? The original language of the Gospels was, according to Muslims, Hebrew, and according to Christians, Greek. If the existence of an Arabic version of the Bible in the time of the Prophet cannot be proved, it would follow that the slave in question read either a Hebrew or a Greek version. But if he read a Hebrew or a Greek Gospel, the question arises, how was the Prophet able to understand him, since he did not know either of these languages? Hence in order to understand the significance of the verse under comment, it has to be seen whether the Gospels had been translated into Arabic at the time of the Holy Prophet. That they had not been translated into Arabic is clear from the following facts:
Up to the time of the Prophet translations of the Gospels had not been made in any language. It was in the 13th or 14th centuries of the Christian era that the Gospels first began to be translated into other languages. The study of the Commentaries of the Quran by Muslim scholars also shows that Arabic versions of the Bible were not available to them, because when in their Commentaries they quote the New or the Old Testament they make very serious mistakes. They ascribe to these books stories which are not found in them. This clearly shows that Arabic versions of the Bible did not exist in their time, otherwise they would not have made such blunders.
Traditions also show that in the time of the Holy Prophet the Gospels were to be found only in Hebrew or Greek. In Bukhari we have the following about Waraqah bin Naufal; "He had become Christian in the days of ignorance and he used to write the Gospels in Hebrew." True, another tradition gives Arabic in place of Hebrew, as the language in which Waraqah wrote the Gospels but preference must be given to the tradition quoted from Bukhari because if the Arabic versions of the Bible could be available in the days of the Prophet many Muslims would have read them. But no such scholars of the Bible among early Muslims were to be found. We are even inclined to the view that the reporter had, by mistake, substituted the word "Hebrew" for "Greek" in the above tradition, because only Greek versions were current in those days and Hebrew versions had almost ceased to exist. That the Christian Scriptures had not been translated into Arabic by the time of the Prophet receives further support from the fact that even the Jewish tribes of Medina had not translated the Torah into Arabic by that time, and whenever he needed a reference to this book, he consulted ‘Abdullah bin Salam, a great Hebrew scholar. This view is also supported by the following testimony of a well-known Christian writer, Dr. Alexander Souter, M.A., LL.D., who writes in his book, "The Text and Canon of the New Testament" (Second Edition, 1925 p. 74), under the head, 'Arabic Versions': "These come partly and directly from Greek, and partly through Syriac and partly through Coptic. Mohammad himself knew the Gospel story only orally. The oldest manuscript goes no further back than the 8th century. Two versions of the Arabic are reported to have taken place at Alexandria in the 13th century." In short, there is no doubt about the fact that the Gospels had not been translated into Arabic at the time of the Prophet and those who had to consult them used the Greek or Hebrew version.
Thus it is clear that when Jabr, the Christian slave, read the Gospels, he must have read the Greek or the Hebrew version. And how could the Holy Prophet benefit by listening to a book in a language which he did not understand? The fact seems to be that when disbelievers saw the Prophet standing at Jabr’s shop they imagined that he must have learnt something from him. The Quran removes these doubts by saying, the tongue of him to whom they unjustly incline in making this insinuation is foreign, while this is Arabic tongue plain and clear, meaning that the man from whom the Prophet was alleged to have received material for the Quran must have read the book in Hebrew or Greek because his "tongue being foreign" he could not explain to the Holy Prophet in his defective Arabic those great truths which the Quran comprises. But the Prophet knew only Arabic and so he could not follow him, much less incorporate in the Quran what he heard from him.
In short, disbelievers brought two distinct charges against the Prophet. First, that he listened to a Christian slave while the latter read the Gospels at his workshop, and incorporated into the Quran what he heard from him. Secondly, that he received help from those slaves who had been converted to Islam from Judaism and Christianity and who met him in secret in the house of Arqam. Both these objections have been separately answered by the Quran, the first in the verse under comment and the second in 25:5-7.
It would be of some use to mention here the following facts which are relevant to the objections stated above.
1. The Quran has either abrogated or improved upon the teachings of former Scriptures. The Holy Prophet must have derived the knowledge of the teachings of those Scriptures from the same source—from God—from which he had derived the knowledge of the new teachings of the Quran which have supplanted previous Scriptures.
2. It has condemned some of the fundamental teachings of Christianity and has improved upon others. There is no known Christian sect with which it has not disagreed on one point or other. Now it is for Christian critics to say to which sect that man who is supposed to have "taught" the Holy Prophet belonged and how he could teach him things which were against his own beliefs. Certainly the Prophet’s so-called helpers could not have helped him in abrogating the teachings of their own religious Scriptures.
3. It has corrected many Biblical statements. For instance, it declares that Aaron did not take part in the worship of the calf. It clears David, Solomon and Noah of the sinful acts ascribed to them in the Bible. These are facts to the truth of which even Christian writers have had to bear witness today when more than 1350 years have passed since these truths were, for the first time, proclaimed by the Quran. Surely, no Christian slave could teach the Prophet these historical truths.
4. The Quran has made some very important prophecies with regard to some of the events mentioned in the Bible. No Jewish or Christian sect had any knowledge of them. But their truth has now come to light. For instance, the Quran states that God preserved the body of Pharaoh so that it might be a sign for the generations to come. No Christian slave could impart this knowledge to the Prophet.
5. It appears from the traditions that the Holy Prophet used to visit Jabr’s shop in the fourth or fifth year of the Call, when he was boycotted by Meccans. But chapters 18, 19, 20 and 25 of the Quran which deal with Jews and Christians had been revealed before that time. Ibn Mas‘ud who was one of very early converts to Islam says that chapters 17, 18, 19, 20 and 21 belong to the early Meccan period (Bukhari, Kitabut-Tafsir). All these Surahs abound in facts relating to Jews and Christians. How could the Prophet know these facts if the source of his information was the Christian slave, Jabr, the sword-cutter of Mecca?
1578
Names of different persons have been mentioned in the traditions who, according to the allegations of the disbelievers, helped the Holy Prophet in composing the Qur’an—Jabr, a Christian slave, ‘Aish or Ya‘ish, a servant of Al-Huwaitib Ibn-e-‘Abdul-‘Uzza and Abu Fuqaih who was known as Yasar and ‘Adas or ‘Addas, a slave of Aus bin Rabi‘ (Ma‘ani & Fath). The names of ‘Ammar, Suhaib, Salman, ‘Abdullah bin Salam and of Sergius, a Nestorian monk, have also been mentioned in this connection. In fact, the Qur’an here makes reference to two objections of disbelievers, one relating to certain slave converts from whom the Holy Prophet is alleged to have received help in composing the Qur’an which is mentioned in 25:5-7, and the other relating to what he heard of the Gospels from a certain Christian slave convert to Islam, and which was incorporated in the Qur’an to which this verse refers. Now with regard to the second objection, did the slave in question read the Arabic version of
لَا جَرَمَ أَنَّهُمْ فِى ٱلْءَاخِرَةِ هُمُ ٱلْخَٰسِرُونَ
11:23.
11:23.
11:23.
Commentary:
Such people who reject the word of God only for the sake of the paltry gains of this world and not on account of honest doubts and misgivings are guilty of a serious crime. They will be humiliated and disgraced in this life and will suffer a severe punishment in the life to come.
d
11:23.
a
11:23.
1910
Commentary:
Such people who reject the word of God only for the sake of the paltry gains of this world and not on account of honest doubts and misgivings are guilty of a serious crime. They will be humiliated and disgraced in this life and will suffer a severe punishment in the life to come.
b
11:23.
ٱلَّذِينَ ضَلَّ سَعْيُهُمْ فِى ٱلْحَيَوٰةِ ٱلدُّنْيَا وَهُمْ يَحْسَبُونَ أَنَّهُمْ يُحْسِنُونَ صُنْعًا
These people look upon the acquisition of physical comforts and worldly gains as the sole aim and object of their life. They have no place for God in their hearts.
11:22.
Commentary:
The verse means to say that these people look upon the acquisition of material comforts and worldly benefits and upon making new inventions and discoveries to add to those comforts as the sole aim and object of their life. They have no place for God in their hearts.
a
11:22.
2140
Commentary:
The verse means to say that these people look upon the acquisition of material comforts and worldly benefits and upon making new inventions and discoveries to add to those comforts as the sole aim and object of their life. They have no place for God in their hearts.
1735
These people look upon the acquisition of physical comforts and worldly gains as the sole aim and object of their life. They have no place for God in their hearts.
وَحَرَٰمٌ عَلَىٰ قَرْيَةٍ أَهْلَكْنَٰهَآ أَنَّهُمْ لَا يَرْجِعُونَ
23:100, 101; 36:32.
23:100-101; 36:32.
Important Words:
حرام (inviolable law) is inf. noun fromحرم . They say حرم علیه i.e. it was or became forbidden or unlawful to him. It (a place or a right or a function) or he was or became sacred or inviolable or entitled to respect or honour. حرام means, forbidden or prohibited or unlawful; sacred or inviolable (Lane & Aqrab). See also 2:145.
Commentary:
The verse means to say that it is an inviolable divine law that the dead are never sent back to this world. Those who pass away from this world pass away forever (23:100, 101; 39:43). This meaning of the verse is supported by a well-known saying of the Holy Prophet according to which a companion of his named ‘Abdullah was slain in a battle. The Prophet told ‘Abdullah’s son, Jabir, that he had seen in a dream that God was so pleased with his father that He had asked ‘Abdullah what thing he would love to have so that the same might be given to him, and ‘Abdullah replied that he wished to be sent back to the world so that he might fight and be slain again in the cause of truth, to which God the Almighty said: "This cannot be because the word has gone forth from Me that the dead shall not return to the world" (Majah & Nasa’i).
e
23:100, 101; 36:32.
c
23:100-101; 36:32.
2422
Important Words:
حرام (inviolable law) is inf. noun fromحرم . They say حرم علیه i.e. it was or became forbidden or unlawful to him. It (a place or a right or a function) or he was or became sacred or inviolable or entitled to respect or honour. حرام means, forbidden or prohibited or unlawful; sacred or inviolable (Lane & Aqrab). See also 2:145.
Commentary:
The verse means to say that it is an inviolable divine law that the dead are never sent back to this world. Those who pass away from this world pass away forever (23:100, 101; 39:43). This meaning of the verse is supported by a well-known saying of the Holy Prophet according to which a companion of his named ‘Abdullah was slain in a battle. The Prophet told ‘Abdullah’s son, Jabir, that he had seen in a dream that God was so pleased with his father that He had asked ‘Abdullah what thing he would love to have so that the same might be given to him, and ‘Abdullah replied that he wished to be sent back to the world so that he might fight and be slain again in the cause of truth, to which God the Almighty said: "This cannot be because the word has gone forth from Me that the dead shall not return to the world" (Majah & Nasa’i).
b
23:100, 101; 36:32.
1917
It is an inviolable Divine law that the dead are never sent back to this world. Those, who pass away from this world, pass away for ever (23:100, 101).
وَٱلَّذِينَ يُؤْتُونَ مَآ ءَاتَوا۟ وَّقُلُوبُهُمْ وَجِلَةٌ أَنَّهُمْ إِلَىٰ رَبِّهِمْ رَٰجِعُونَ
22:36.
22:36.
22:36.
Commentary:
Though true believers spend their wealth in the way of Allah and give it with both hands, yet they are afraid lest not having come up to the required standard they might be called to account for not doing all that they were expected to do.
d
22:36.
b
22:36.
2550
Commentary:
Though true believers spend their wealth in the way of Allah and give it with both hands, yet they are afraid lest not having come up to the required standard they might be called to account for not doing all that they were expected to do.
a
22:36.
إِنِّى جَزَيْتُهُمُ ٱلْيَوْمَ بِمَا صَبَرُوٓا۟ أَنَّهُمْ هُمُ ٱلْفَآئِزُونَ
أَلَمْ تَرَ أَنَّهُمْ فِى كُلِّ وَادٍ يَهِيمُونَ
یعنی شاعروں کے کلام کسی ایک مضمون کے متعلق نہیں ہوتے بلکہ جو جو مضمون ان کے ذہن میں آتا جاتا ہے اس کو اپنی نظم میں باندھتے جاتے ہیں۔ اصل مقصود ان کے مضمون کی ترتیب نہیں ہوتی بلکہ ایک قسم کے قافیوں اور ردیف کو اکٹھا کرنا ہوتا ہے۔ پس اشارتاً اس آیت میں یہ بھی پیشگوئی ہے کہ آئندہ شاعری کی رَو‘قافیہ اور ردیف کی طرف منتقل ہو جائے گی جو طریقہ کہ فارسی اور اردو شعرا نے اختیار کیا ہے۔ ورنہ جس وقت یہ آیت نازل ہوئی ہے عرب شعراء میں حقیقی معنوں میں ردیف کا استعمال شروع نہیں ہوا تھا۔
Important Words:
یھیمون (wander aimlessly) is derived from ھام which means, he was or became thirsty. They say ھام الرجل علی وجھه i.e. the man went at random, not knowing where he was going (Lane & Aqrab).
Commentary:
The poets pursue every colourful fancy. Their themes have little coherence and consistency, and they lack continuity. Their thought is fragmentary.
4
یعنی شاعروں کے کلام کسی ایک مضمون کے متعلق نہیں ہوتے بلکہ جو جو مضمون ان کے ذہن میں آتا جاتا ہے اس کو اپنی نظم میں باندھتے جاتے ہیں۔ اصل مقصود ان کے مضمون کی ترتیب نہیں ہوتی بلکہ ایک قسم کے قافیوں اور ردیف کو اکٹھا کرنا ہوتا ہے۔ پس اشارتاً اس آیت میں یہ بھی پیشگوئی ہے کہ آئندہ شاعری کی رَو‘قافیہ اور ردیف کی طرف منتقل ہو جائے گی جو طریقہ کہ فارسی اور اردو شعرا نے اختیار کیا ہے۔ ورنہ جس وقت یہ آیت نازل ہوئی ہے عرب شعراء میں حقیقی معنوں میں ردیف کا استعمال شروع نہیں ہوا تھا۔
2813
Important Words:
یھیمون (wander aimlessly) is derived from ھام which means, he was or became thirsty. They say ھام الرجل علی وجھه i.e. the man went at random, not knowing where he was going (Lane & Aqrab).
Commentary:
The poets pursue every colourful fancy. Their themes have little coherence and consistency, and they lack continuity. Their thought is fragmentary.
وَٱسْتَكْبَرَ هُوَ وَجُنُودُهُۥ فِى ٱلْأَرْضِ بِغَيْرِ ٱلْحَقِّ وَظَنُّوٓا۟ أَنَّهُمْ إِلَيْنَا لَا يُرْجَعُونَ
7:134.
7:134.
7:134.
e
7:134.
a
7:134.
d
7:134.
وَقِيلَ ٱدْعُوا۟ شُرَكَآءَكُمْ فَدَعَوْهُمْ فَلَمْ يَسْتَجِيبُوا۟ لَهُمْ وَرَأَوُا۟ ٱلْعَذَابَ ۚ لَوْ أَنَّهُمْ كَانُوا۟ يَهْتَدُونَ
10:29, 30; 16:87.
10:29, 30; 16:87.
10:29-30; 16:87.
a
10:29, 30; 16:87.
c
10:29-30; 16:87.
d
10:29, 30; 16:87.
أَلَمْ يَرَوْا۟ كَمْ أَهْلَكْنَا قَبْلَهُم مِّنَ ٱلْقُرُونِ أَنَّهُمْ إِلَيْهِمْ لَا يَرْجِعُونَ
17:18; 19:99; 20:129; 50:37.
21:96; 23:100.
Commentary:
The expression انھم الیھم لایرجعون may mean; (a) those who are destroyed do not come back to those who mock the Prophets; (b) the past generations were destroyed because they did not turn to their Prophets, i.e. did not listen to them.
c
17:18; 19:99; 20:129; 50:37.
d
21:96; 23:100, 101.
b
17:18; 19:99; 20:129; 50:37.
c
21:96; 23:100.
3233
Commentary:
The expression انھم الیھم لایرجعون may mean; (a) those who are destroyed do not come back to those who mock the Prophets; (b) the past generations were destroyed because they did not turn to their Prophets, i.e. did not listen to them.
c
17:18; 19:99; 20:129; 50:37.
d
21:96; 23:100, 101.
2443
The reference seems to be to Divine punishment which will be universal in character.
وَكَذَٰلِكَ حَقَّتْ كَلِمَتُ رَبِّكَ عَلَى ٱلَّذِينَ كَفَرُوٓا۟ أَنَّهُمْ أَصْحَٰبُ ٱلنَّارِ
10:34, 97.
10:34, 97.
10:34, 97.
Commentary:
The verse means to say that by their own perversity and persistent rejection of truth, and by their opposition to God’s Prophets, the disbelievers fully merit Divine punishment.
a
10:34, 97.
d
10:34, 97.
3498
Commentary:
The verse means to say that by their own perversity and persistent rejection of truth, and by their opposition to God’s Prophets, the disbelievers fully merit Divine punishment.
b
10:34, 97.
وَلَوْ أَنَّهُمْ صَبَرُوا۟ حَتَّىٰ تَخْرُجَ إِلَيْهِمْ لَكَانَ خَيْرًا لَّهُمْ ۚ وَٱللَّهُ غَفُورٌ رَّحِيمٌ
يَوْمَ يَبْعَثُهُمُ ٱللَّهُ جَمِيعًا فَيَحْلِفُونَ لَهُۥ كَمَا يَحْلِفُونَ لَكُمْ ۖ وَيَحْسَبُونَ أَنَّهُمْ عَلَىٰ شَىْءٍ ۚ أَلَآ إِنَّهُمْ هُمُ ٱلْكَٰذِبُونَ
When a person becomes an habitual or hardened liar, he regards his falsehood as truth. The hypocrites will protest their innocence even before God on the Day of Reckoning.
Important Words:
The verse shows that when a person becomes a habitual or hardened liar, he regards his falsehood as truth. The hypocrites will protest their innocence even before God on the Day of Reckoning.
4186
Important Words:
The verse shows that when a person becomes a habitual or hardened liar, he regards his falsehood as truth. The hypocrites will protest their innocence even before God on the Day of Reckoning.
3012
When a person becomes an habitual or hardened liar, he regards his falsehood as truth. The hypocrites will protest their innocence even before God on the Day of Reckoning.