قَتۡلِ
Appears 5 times in Quran
Derived Words (3)
Words derived from the stem "قَتۡلِ".
- worse than killing
- killing
- slaughter
- slaying
- and their seeking to kill
Occurrences in Quran
Found 5 verses containing "قَتۡلِ".
وَاقۡتُلُوۡہُمۡ حَیۡثُ ثَقِفۡتُمُوۡہُمۡ وَاَخۡرِجُوۡہُمۡ مِّنۡ حَیۡثُ اَخۡرَجُوۡکُمۡ ۚ وَالۡفِتۡنَۃُ اَشَدُّ مِنَ الۡقَتۡلِ ۚ وَلَا تُقٰتِلُوۡہُمۡ عِنۡدَ الۡمَسۡجِدِ الۡحَرَامِ حَتّٰی یُقٰتِلُوۡکُمۡ فِیۡہِ ۖ فَاِنۡ قٰتَلُوۡکُمۡ فَاقۡتُلُوۡہُمۡ ۗ کَذٰلِکَ جَزَآءُ الۡکٰفِرِیۡنَ
عربی میں ’’نہ‘‘ کا لفظ نہیں لیکن یہ لفظ حتّٰی کے اندر مخفی ہے۔ اگر اسے خطوط میں رکھا جائے تو معنے بالکل الٹ بن جاتے ہیں اس وجہ سے خطوط میں ’’نہ‘‘ کا لفظ نہیں رکھا گیا‘ بلکہ ظاہر کیا گیا ہے۔
کَذٰلِکَ کا لفظی ترجمہ ’’اسی طرح‘‘ ہے لیکن اردو میں ’’یہی‘‘ کے لفظ سے ہی مضمون ٹھیک ادا ہوتا ہے۔
2:218.
This verse relates to conditions when war has actually broken out. Obviously, it enjoins Muslims to fight against only such disbelievers as are the first to take up arms against them.
The words signify that Mecca being the centre and the most sacred place of Islam, no non-Muslim should be allowed to remain in it.
2:218.
Important Words:
ثقفتموھم (you met them) is derived from ثقف. They say ثقفه i.e. (1) he faced him or he met him; (2) he caught hold of him; (3) he got the better of him (Aqrab).
فتنة (persecution) is derived from فتن. They say فتن فلانا i.e. he led him astray; he tried or tested him. The expression فتن فلاناعن رأیه means, he prevented him from holding his views. The words فتن الصائغ الذھب mean, the goldsmith melted the gold in the crucible to ascertain its genuineness. فتنه means, he put him in a state of trial or persecution. Thus فتنة means: (1) trial; (2) torture and persecution; (3) divergence of views among men and the disputes and fighting that take place as a result thereof (Aqrab). See also 2:103.
Commentary:
The verse relates to conditions when a war has actually broken out. Obviously it does not apply to all disbelievers, for it only says, "kill them" and not "kill the disbelievers". The pronoun "them" clearly refers to, those who fight against you, as mentioned in the previous verse. The verse calls upon Muslims to fight against only such disbelievers as take up arms against them. It does not call upon them to slay each and every disbeliever that may happen to come in their way. Indeed this verse affords a remarkable instance of the way in which the plain words of the Quran are generally distorted by the opponents of Islam.
The clause, and drive them out from where they have driven you out, refers to the time when the enemies of Islam compelled the Holy Prophet and his Companions to flee from Mecca. It enjoins Muslims to bear in mind that they have eventually to conquer Mecca which being the centre and the most sacred place of Islam, no non-Muslim would be allowed to remain in it.
The clause, persecution is worse than killing, provides an argument in support of defensive war. The disbelievers were persecuting Muslims in diverse ways with a view to turning them away from their faith and they were also creating disorder in the land. It was certainly better to put a stop to this state of affairs by fighting against the aggressors than to allow it to continue. There are circumstances when, to every right-thinking man, war becomes necessary.
The words فتنة (persecution) and قتل (killing) may be interpreted in another way also. فتنة means, "persecution or war waged against a people with a view to turning them from their faith", and قتل means, "an ordinary secular war". Now the verse points out that a war of religious persecution is worse than an ordinary war; for, firstly, worldly interests are nothing as compared with matters of faith; and secondly, wars caused by religious differences are more bitter and cruel, and seldom come to an end.
The clause, and fight them not in and near the Sacred Mosque until they fight you therein, contains a very important principle. Even after the declaration of war, there are restrictions to be observed, and Muslims should never be the first to break them. The sanctity of the holy precincts of the Ka‘bah must be safeguarded even in time of war. If, however, the other party violates its sanctity, Muslims may retaliate so that the attacking party may thereby be brought to its senses.
b
2:218.
128
128本节经文讲的是战争已经实际爆发时的一些情况。很明显, 穆斯林奉命只同首先动武反对他们的不信教的人进行战斗。
2
عربی میں ’’نہ‘‘ کا لفظ نہیں لیکن یہ لفظ حتّٰی کے اندر مخفی ہے۔ اگر اسے خطوط میں رکھا جائے تو معنے بالکل الٹ بن جاتے ہیں اس وجہ سے خطوط میں ’’نہ‘‘ کا لفظ نہیں رکھا گیا‘ بلکہ ظاہر کیا گیا ہے۔
3
کَذٰلِکَ کا لفظی ترجمہ ’’اسی طرح‘‘ ہے لیکن اردو میں ’’یہی‘‘ کے لفظ سے ہی مضمون ٹھیک ادا ہوتا ہے۔
a
2:218.
198
Important Words:
ثقفتموھم (you met them) is derived from ثقف. They say ثقفه i.e. (1) he faced him or he met him; (2) he caught hold of him; (3) he got the better of him (Aqrab).
فتنة (persecution) is derived from فتن. They say فتن فلانا i.e. he led him astray; he tried or tested him. The expression فتن فلاناعن رأیه means, he prevented him from holding his views. The words فتن الصائغ الذھب mean, the goldsmith melted the gold in the crucible to ascertain its genuineness. فتنه means, he put him in a state of trial or persecution. Thus فتنة means: (1) trial; (2) torture and persecution; (3) divergence of views among men and the disputes and fighting that take place as a result thereof (Aqrab). See also 2:103.
Commentary:
The verse relates to conditions when a war has actually broken out. Obviously it does not apply to all disbelievers, for it only says, "kill them" and not "kill the disbelievers". The pronoun "them" clearly refers to, those who fight against you, as mentioned in the previous verse. The verse calls upon Muslims to fight against only such disbelievers as take up arms against them. It does not call upon them to slay each and every disbeliever that may happen to come in their way. Indeed this verse affords a remarkable instance of the way in which the plain words of the Quran are generally distorted by the opponents of Islam.
The clause, and drive them out from where they have driven you out, refers to the time when the enemies of Islam compelled the Holy Prophet and his Companions to flee from Mecca. It enjoins Muslims to bear in mind that they have eventually to conquer Mecca which being the centre and the most sacred place of Islam, no non-Muslim would be allowed to remain in it.
The clause, persecution is worse than killing, provides an argument in support of defensive war. The disbelievers were persecuting Muslims in diverse ways with a view to turning them away from their faith and they were also creating disorder in the land. It was certainly better to put a stop to this state of affairs by fighting against the aggressors than to allow it to continue. There are circumstances when, to every right-thinking man, war becomes necessary.
The words فتنة (persecution) and قتل (killing) may be interpreted in another way also. فتنة means, "persecution or war waged against a people with a view to turning them from their faith", and قتل means, "an ordinary secular war". Now the verse points out that a war of religious persecution is worse than an ordinary war; for, firstly, worldly interests are nothing as compared with matters of faith; and secondly, wars caused by religious differences are more bitter and cruel, and seldom come to an end.
The clause, and fight them not in and near the Sacred Mosque until they fight you therein, contains a very important principle. Even after the declaration of war, there are restrictions to be observed, and Muslims should never be the first to break them. The sanctity of the holy precincts of the Ka‘bah must be safeguarded even in time of war. If, however, the other party violates its sanctity, Muslims may retaliate so that the attacking party may thereby be brought to its senses.
b
2:218.
220
This verse relates to conditions when war has actually broken out. Obviously, it enjoins Muslims to fight against only such disbelievers as are the first to take up arms against them.
221
The words signify that Mecca being the centre and the most sacred place of Islam, no non-Muslim should be allowed to remain in it.
یَسۡـَٔلُوۡنَکَ عَنِ الشَّہۡرِ الۡحَرَامِ قِتَالٍ فِیۡہِ ۖ قُلۡ قِتَالٌ فِیۡہِ کَبِیۡرٌ ۖ وَّصَدٌّ عَنۡ سَبِیۡلِ اللّٰہِ وَکُفۡرٌۢ بِہٖ وَالۡمَسۡجِدِ الۡحَرَامِ وَاِخۡرَاجُ اَہۡلِہٖ مِنۡہُ اَکۡبَرُ عِنۡدَ اللّٰہِ ۚ وَالۡفِتۡنَۃُ اَکۡبَرُ مِنَ الۡقَتۡلِ ۗ وَلَا یَزَالُوۡنَ یُقٰتِلُوۡنَکُمۡ حَتّٰی یَرُدُّوۡکُمۡ عَنۡ دِیۡنِکُمۡ اِنِ اسۡتَطٰعُوۡا ۚ وَمَنۡ یَّرۡتَدِدۡ مِنۡکُمۡ عَنۡ دِیۡنِہٖ فَیَمُتۡ وَہُوَ کَافِرٌ فَاُولٰٓئِکَ حَبِطَتۡ اَعۡمٰلُہُمۡ فِی الدُّنۡیَا وَالۡاٰخِرَۃِ ۖ وَاُولٰٓئِکَ اَصۡحٰبُ النَّارِ ۖ ہُمۡ فِیۡہَا خٰلِدُوۡنَ
2:192.
3:87, 91; 4:138; 5:55; 47:26.
3:23; 7:148; 18:106.
信者们被告知, 假如不信仰者亵渎了圣月的圣洁, 他们应毫不犹豫地在圣月中惩罚他们, 只有这样, 神圣事物的圣洁性才能得到保障 (2:195)。注释者通常阐述, 而事实上也有这样的传说, 大意是说, 有一次穆圣派遣阿布杜拉•彬•贾希 (عَبْدُالله بِنْ جَحْش, ‘Abdullah bin Jahsh) 去传递有关一伙古来西人出发去麦加的消息。当阿布杜拉 (عَبْدُالله, ‘Abdullah) 和他的同伴到达一个名叫纳赫拉 (نَخْلَة, Nakhla) 的地方时, 他们遇上了一小伙人。阿布杜拉袭击了这伙人, 杀死了其中的一个并俘获了两个。发生这件事的日期是有疑问的, 有的认为它是在圣月中, 而另一些不以为然。消息传到麦加, 古来西人利用关于日期的怀疑而提出抗议, 说是穆斯林亵渎了圣月。加注的本节经文就在当时被启示了。
یعنی ان دونوں کی حرمت کو ضائع کرنے کی کوشش کرنا ہے۔
2:192.
3:87, 91; 4:138; 5:55; 47:26.
3:23; 7:148; 18:106.
The believers were told that if disbelievers violated the sanctity of the Sacred Months, they should not hesitate to punish them in the Sacred Months, for thus alone could the sanctity of a sacred thing be safeguarded (2:195). Commentators generally state, and in fact there are also traditions to this effect, that on one occasion the Holy Prophet sent ‘Abdullah bin Jahsh to bring news about a party of the Quraish proceeding to Mecca. When ‘Abdullah and his companions reached a place called Nakhlah, they met a small party. ‘Abdullah attacked the party, killing one of them and capturing two. The date on which this happened was doubtful, some considering it to be one within the Sacred Month and others not. The news reached Mecca, the Quraish took advantage of the doubt and protested that the Muslims had violated the Sacred Month. The verse under comment was revealed on that occasion.
2:192.
3:84, 91; 4:138; 5:55; 47:26.
3:23; 7:148; 18:106.
Important Words:
کبیر (great transgression) really stands for ذنب کبیر i.e. a great sin or great transgression or great offence. اکبر is in the comparative degree and means, a greater sin, etc.
صد (to hinder) is the infinitive from صد. They say صدہ i.e. he prevented him; he turned him back. صد عنه اومنه means, he kept back from it. Thus the word is both transitive and intransitive. صد, therefore, means: (1) to hinder or to prevent; (2) a hindrance or a barrier; (3) a mountain or a wall, etc., because it serves as a barrier (Aqrab).
یردوکم (turn you back) and یرتدد (turns back) are both derived from رد. They say ردہ i.e. he turned him back; and ارتد i.e.he himself turned back. ارتد عن الاسلام means, he turned back from Islam and reverted to a state of disbelief. مرتد means, one who turns back from his religion, particularly from Islam; one who apostatizes (Taj).
حبطت (shall be in vain). حبط البعیر means, the stomach of the camel became inflated and his belly became bound by eating unwholesome food. حبط عمله means: (1) his work or deed became null and void and went for nothing; (2) his work or deed became evil and corrupt. حبط دمه means, his blood went unavenged. حبط ماء البئر means, the water of the well receded and went down never to return to its original level (Aqrab & Lane).
Commentary:
The words translated as "to be ungrateful to Him and the Sacred Mosque" may also be rendered as "to be ungrateful to Him and to hinder men from the Sacred Mosque".
The Quran has already explained that if disbelievers violate the sanctity of a sacred month, Muslims may also retaliate in a sacred month; for thus only can the sanctity of a sacred thing be safeguarded (2:195).
The present verse provides a further reason for defending Islam, if need be, in a sacred month. Disbelievers, particularly those of Mecca, had violated the sanctity of things far more sacred than a "sacred month"––they were trying forcibly to turn men form the way of God; they were preventing people from approaching the Sacred Mosque and they had forced the Muslim dwellers of Mecca to flee from it. This was a form of persecution which was certainly much more heinous than fighting in a Sacred Month.
Commentators generally state, and in fact there are also traditions to the effect, that once the Holy Prophet sent one of his Companions, named ‘Abdullah bin Jahsh, to bring news about a party of the Quraish proceeding to Mecca. When ‘Abdullah and his comrades reached a place called Nakhlah, they met a small party proceeding to Mecca. Guided by his own judgement and without any instruction to that effect from the Prophet, ‘Abdullah attacked the party, killing one of them and capturing two. The date was doubtful, some considering it to be as one of the Sacred Month and others as not. When the news reached Mecca, the Quraish took advantage of the doubt as regards date and clamoured that the Muslims had violated the Sacred Month. The verse under comment was revealed on that occasion (Tabari, Hisham & Zurqani).
The verse acknowledges the sanctity of the Sacred Months and considers it an act of sin and transgression knowingly to fight in a sacred month, but forcefully points out that the sanctities which disbelievers were violating were far more worthy of safeguarding. Disbelievers were forcibly preventing people from accepting Islam. They did not allow Muslims to approach the Sacred Mosque and they had mercilessly turned the Prophet and his followers out of their homes.
The verse should not be understood to imply that Muslims did start a fight in a sacred month, it only purports to bring home to disbelievers the fact that in view of their persistent violation of highly sacred thing, it does not lie in their mouth to accuse Muslim of violating the sanctity of a sacred month.
The clause it is they whose works shall be vain in this world and the next does not mean that everything that a renegade from Islam, or, for that matter, everything that a disbeliever, does will go for nothing and produce no result. The clause only means that such actions of the renegades as they might do to weaken the cause of Islam in this world as well as those of their actions which they might perform in opposition to the teaching of Islam in order to win the pleasure of God in the world to come, will all be in vain. Thus the clause does not refer to such good actions as a person may perform in the state o unbelief; for, as the Quran expressly states, these must have their reward (99:8) which may either take the form of the acceptance of Islam or that of the lightening of punishment. The Holy Prophet is reported to have said about his uncle Abu Talib that on account of the good treatment the latter extended to him, he is likely to be only lightly punished for his non-acceptance of Islam (Bukhari). On another occasion when Hakim bin Hizam, a nephew of his wife Khadijah, asked the Prophet whether he would get any reward for the good deeds he did before he accepted Islam, the Holy Prophet said, "your very acceptance of Islam is a reward thereof" (Bukhari).
The clause, their works shall be vain in this world and the next, also signifies that if such men as apostatize from Islam had not done so, their deeds would have brought them the great reward promised to Muslims both in this world and the next, but by apostatizing from Islam they had totally deprived themselves of this twofold reward.
Finally, the clause, and they will not cease fighting you until they turn you back from your faith, if they can, throws a flood of light on the attitude of disbelievers towards Muslim. They were not only the first to begin hostilities, but had also vowed not to cease fighting until Islam had been totally wiped out from Arabia and not a soul remained to call himself a Muslim. This clear testimony of the Quran should be an eye-opener for those who accuse Muslims of being aggressors in their early struggle against disbelievers. The words, if they can, are highly eulogistic of the Companions of the Holy Prophet. Do what they could, disbelievers would never be able to turn back Muslims from their faith. Their love for Islam was too deep to be extirpated by persecution however severe and bitter it might be.
b
2:192.
c
3:87, 91; 4:138; 5:55; 47:26.
d
3:23; 7:148; 18:106.
159
信者们被告知, 假如不信仰者亵渎了圣月的圣洁, 他们应毫不犹豫地在圣月中惩罚他们, 只有这样, 神圣事物的圣洁性才能得到保障 (2:195)。注释者通常阐述, 而事实上也有这样的传说, 大意是说, 有一次穆圣派遣阿布杜拉•彬•贾希 (عَبْدُالله بِنْ جَحْش, ‘Abdullah bin Jahsh) 去传递有关一伙古来西人出发去麦加的消息。当阿布杜拉 (عَبْدُالله, ‘Abdullah) 和他的同伴到达一个名叫纳赫拉 (نَخْلَة, Nakhla) 的地方时, 他们遇上了一小伙人。阿布杜拉袭击了这伙人, 杀死了其中的一个并俘获了两个。发生这件事的日期是有疑问的, 有的认为它是在圣月中, 而另一些不以为然。消息传到麦加, 古来西人利用关于日期的怀疑而提出抗议, 说是穆斯林亵渎了圣月。加注的本节经文就在当时被启示了。
2
یعنی ان دونوں کی حرمت کو ضائع کرنے کی کوشش کرنا ہے۔
a
2:192.
b
3:84, 91; 4:138; 5:55; 47:26.
c
3:23; 7:148; 18:106.
224
Important Words:
کبیر (great transgression) really stands for ذنب کبیر i.e. a great sin or great transgression or great offence. اکبر is in the comparative degree and means, a greater sin, etc.
صد (to hinder) is the infinitive from صد. They say صدہ i.e. he prevented him; he turned him back. صد عنه اومنه means, he kept back from it. Thus the word is both transitive and intransitive. صد, therefore, means: (1) to hinder or to prevent; (2) a hindrance or a barrier; (3) a mountain or a wall, etc., because it serves as a barrier (Aqrab).
یردوکم (turn you back) and یرتدد (turns back) are both derived from رد. They say ردہ i.e. he turned him back; and ارتد i.e.he himself turned back. ارتد عن الاسلام means, he turned back from Islam and reverted to a state of disbelief. مرتد means, one who turns back from his religion, particularly from Islam; one who apostatizes (Taj).
حبطت (shall be in vain). حبط البعیر means, the stomach of the camel became inflated and his belly became bound by eating unwholesome food. حبط عمله means: (1) his work or deed became null and void and went for nothing; (2) his work or deed became evil and corrupt. حبط دمه means, his blood went unavenged. حبط ماء البئر means, the water of the well receded and went down never to return to its original level (Aqrab & Lane).
Commentary:
The words translated as "to be ungrateful to Him and the Sacred Mosque" may also be rendered as "to be ungrateful to Him and to hinder men from the Sacred Mosque".
The Quran has already explained that if disbelievers violate the sanctity of a sacred month, Muslims may also retaliate in a sacred month; for thus only can the sanctity of a sacred thing be safeguarded (2:195).
The present verse provides a further reason for defending Islam, if need be, in a sacred month. Disbelievers, particularly those of Mecca, had violated the sanctity of things far more sacred than a "sacred month"––they were trying forcibly to turn men form the way of God; they were preventing people from approaching the Sacred Mosque and they had forced the Muslim dwellers of Mecca to flee from it. This was a form of persecution which was certainly much more heinous than fighting in a Sacred Month.
Commentators generally state, and in fact there are also traditions to the effect, that once the Holy Prophet sent one of his Companions, named ‘Abdullah bin Jahsh, to bring news about a party of the Quraish proceeding to Mecca. When ‘Abdullah and his comrades reached a place called Nakhlah, they met a small party proceeding to Mecca. Guided by his own judgement and without any instruction to that effect from the Prophet, ‘Abdullah attacked the party, killing one of them and capturing two. The date was doubtful, some considering it to be as one of the Sacred Month and others as not. When the news reached Mecca, the Quraish took advantage of the doubt as regards date and clamoured that the Muslims had violated the Sacred Month. The verse under comment was revealed on that occasion (Tabari, Hisham & Zurqani).
The verse acknowledges the sanctity of the Sacred Months and considers it an act of sin and transgression knowingly to fight in a sacred month, but forcefully points out that the sanctities which disbelievers were violating were far more worthy of safeguarding. Disbelievers were forcibly preventing people from accepting Islam. They did not allow Muslims to approach the Sacred Mosque and they had mercilessly turned the Prophet and his followers out of their homes.
The verse should not be understood to imply that Muslims did start a fight in a sacred month, it only purports to bring home to disbelievers the fact that in view of their persistent violation of highly sacred thing, it does not lie in their mouth to accuse Muslim of violating the sanctity of a sacred month.
The clause it is they whose works shall be vain in this world and the next does not mean that everything that a renegade from Islam, or, for that matter, everything that a disbeliever, does will go for nothing and produce no result. The clause only means that such actions of the renegades as they might do to weaken the cause of Islam in this world as well as those of their actions which they might perform in opposition to the teaching of Islam in order to win the pleasure of God in the world to come, will all be in vain. Thus the clause does not refer to such good actions as a person may perform in the state o unbelief; for, as the Quran expressly states, these must have their reward (99:8) which may either take the form of the acceptance of Islam or that of the lightening of punishment. The Holy Prophet is reported to have said about his uncle Abu Talib that on account of the good treatment the latter extended to him, he is likely to be only lightly punished for his non-acceptance of Islam (Bukhari). On another occasion when Hakim bin Hizam, a nephew of his wife Khadijah, asked the Prophet whether he would get any reward for the good deeds he did before he accepted Islam, the Holy Prophet said, "your very acceptance of Islam is a reward thereof" (Bukhari).
The clause, their works shall be vain in this world and the next, also signifies that if such men as apostatize from Islam had not done so, their deeds would have brought them the great reward promised to Muslims both in this world and the next, but by apostatizing from Islam they had totally deprived themselves of this twofold reward.
Finally, the clause, and they will not cease fighting you until they turn you back from your faith, if they can, throws a flood of light on the attitude of disbelievers towards Muslim. They were not only the first to begin hostilities, but had also vowed not to cease fighting until Islam had been totally wiped out from Arabia and not a soul remained to call himself a Muslim. This clear testimony of the Quran should be an eye-opener for those who accuse Muslims of being aggressors in their early struggle against disbelievers. The words, if they can, are highly eulogistic of the Companions of the Holy Prophet. Do what they could, disbelievers would never be able to turn back Muslims from their faith. Their love for Islam was too deep to be extirpated by persecution however severe and bitter it might be.
a
2:192.
b
3:87, 91; 4:138; 5:55; 47:26.
c
3:23; 7:148; 18:106.
260
The believers were told that if disbelievers violated the sanctity of the Sacred Months, they should not hesitate to punish them in the Sacred Months, for thus alone could the sanctity of a sacred thing be safeguarded (2:195). Commentators generally state, and in fact there are also traditions to this effect, that on one occasion the Holy Prophet sent ‘Abdullah bin Jahsh to bring news about a party of the Quraish proceeding to Mecca. When ‘Abdullah and his companions reached a place called Nakhlah, they met a small party. ‘Abdullah attacked the party, killing one of them and capturing two. The date on which this happened was doubtful, some considering it to be one within the Sacred Month and others not. The news reached Mecca, the Quraish took advantage of the doubt and protested that the Muslims had violated the Sacred Month. The verse under comment was revealed on that occasion.
فَبِمَا نَقۡضِہِمۡ مِّیۡثٰقَہُمۡ وَکُفۡرِہِمۡ بِاٰیٰتِ اللّٰہِ وَقَتۡلِہِمُ الۡاَنۡۢبِیَآءَ بِغَیۡرِ حَقٍّ وَّقَوۡلِہِمۡ قُلُوۡبُنَا غُلۡفٌۢ ۚ بَلۡ طَبَعَ اللّٰہُ عَلَیۡہَا بِکُفۡرِہِمۡ فَلَا یُؤۡمِنُوۡنَ اِلَّا قَلِیۡلًا
اس جگہ سب نبیوں کے قتل کا ذکر ہے اور سب تاریخیں اس پر متفق ہیں کہ سب نبیوں کو انہوں نے قتل نہیں کیا۔ پس اس جگہ قتل کے ارادہ کا ذکر ہے اور مصدر یا فعل کبھی مکمل ہوتا ہے۔ کبھی ادھورا اور دونوں کے لئے ایک لفظ بولا جاتا ہے۔ پس اس جگہ بھی قتل سے مراد قتل کا ارادہ یا ایسی تکلیفیں ہیں جن کا نتیجہ بعض دفعہ قتل ہوتا ہے۔
5:14.
3:182.
2:89.
2:89; 16:109; 83:15.
See {27}.
5:14.
3:182.
2:89.
2:89; 16:109; 83:15.
Important Words:
طبع (sealed) is similar to ختم for which see 2:8. طبع means, he sealed, stamped, imprinted or impressed (Lane).
غلف (wrapped in covers). See 2:89.
Commentary:
See 2:8; 2:62; 2:89.
a
5:14
b
3:182.
c
2:89.
d
2:89; 16:109; 83:15.
2
اس جگہ سب نبیوں کے قتل کا ذکر ہے اور سب تاریخیں اس پر متفق ہیں کہ سب نبیوں کو انہوں نے قتل نہیں کیا۔ پس اس جگہ قتل کے ارادہ کا ذکر ہے اور مصدر یا فعل کبھی مکمل ہوتا ہے۔ کبھی ادھورا اور دونوں کے لئے ایک لفظ بولا جاتا ہے۔ پس اس جگہ بھی قتل سے مراد قتل کا ارادہ یا ایسی تکلیفیں ہیں جن کا نتیجہ بعض دفعہ قتل ہوتا ہے۔
d
5:14.
e
3:182.
f
2:89.
g
2:89; 16:109; 83:15.
619
Important Words:
طبع (sealed) is similar to ختم for which see 2:8. طبع means, he sealed, stamped, imprinted or impressed (Lane).
غلف (wrapped in covers). See 2:89.
Commentary:
See 2:8; 2:62; 2:89.
d
5:14.
e
3:182.
f
2:89.
g
2:89; 16:109; 83:15.
695
See {27}.
وَلَا تَقۡتُلُوا النَّفۡسَ الَّتِیۡ حَرَّمَ اللّٰہُ اِلَّا بِالۡحَقِّ ۗ وَمَنۡ قُتِلَ مَظۡلُوۡمًا فَقَدۡ جَعَلۡنَا لِوَلِیِّہٖ سُلۡطٰنًا فَلَا یُسۡرِف فِّی الۡقَتۡلِ ۖ اِنَّہٗ کَانَ مَنۡصُوۡرًا
6:152; 25:69.
6:152; 25:69.
In the preceding two verses reference was made to the two indirect ways of slaying. The verse under comment speaks of direct murder. After the murderer is convicted by a properly constituted court, the heirs of the murdered person have the right either to have the murderer legally executed or accept blood money in lieu of the death of the murdered person. If, however, it is against the interests of public peace or morality to allow blood money to the heirs or if the demand of the heirs be found to be not bona-fide, the court may refuse to accept their option and order the murderer’s execution. In fact, both the heirs and the State equally share the right to pardon or punish the guilty person. This right of the State in regard to the punishment of the guilty person covers all matters to which the injunction about retribution applies. Whereas in the earlier part of the verse the rights of the party offended against have been safeguarded, the words, let him not exceed the prescribed bounds in slay
6:152; 25:69.
Commentary:
In the preceding two verses reference was made to the two indirect ways of killing. The verse under comment, however, speaks of direct murder. It declares it unlawful to kill a soul, the killing of which has been forbidden by God.
The word نفس (soul) means anything which breathes and therefore includes all living things. So the words, which Allah has forbidden, have been added in order to restrict their application to man, it being lawful to kill other animals except under certain conditions when their killing also is forbidden.
The word ولی (heir) is applied to any person who is entitled to inherit another man’s property after the latter’s death. But one may nominate a person other than his legal heir as his ولی. If a person is murdered, his ولی (heir) has the right to demand satisfaction. But after the murderer is convicted by a properly constituted court, the heir of the murdered person has the right either to have the murderer legally executed or accept blood-money in lieu of the death of the murdered person. If, however, it is considered against the interests of public peace or morality to allow blood money to the heir or if the demand of the heir be found to be not bona fide, the court may refuse to accept the option of the heir and order the murderer’s execution. In fact, both the heir and the State equally share the right to pardon or punish the guilty person. This right of the State in regard to the punishment of the guilty person covers all matters to which the injunction of قصاص(retaliation) applies. The Caliph ‘Ali is reported to have punished a guilty person whom the aggrieved party had pardoned on the plea that the dictates of public peace demanded his punishment. ‘Ali was convinced that the fear of being harmed by the offender had made the aggrieved person pardon him. See also 2:179.
Whereas in the earlier part of the verse the rights of the party offended against have been safeguarded, the words, let him not exceed the prescribed bounds in slaying, safeguard the interests of the offender. They mean to say that the aggrieved party should not exceed legitimate bounds by adopting a cruel method of killing. In fact, these words imply a recommendation in favour of the murderer. They also show that although "life for life" is the general rule, the heirs of the murdered person may not always act upon this rule. The murderer is to suffer the extreme penalty of the law only when the dictates of equity, retaliation, public peace and morality absolutely demand it. His life should be spared if this act of grace is calculated to lead to his moral reformation. In the words, for therein he is helped by law, the aggrieved person is reminded of his responsibilities. He is told that he, too, is responsible for the maintenance of peace. As God has safeguarded his rights, he should have regard for the rights of others—he should not always insist upon his "pound of flesh".
d
6:152; 25:69.
b
6:152; 25:69.
1963
Commentary:
In the preceding two verses reference was made to the two indirect ways of killing. The verse under comment, however, speaks of direct murder. It declares it unlawful to kill a soul, the killing of which has been forbidden by God.
The word نفس (soul) means anything which breathes and therefore includes all living things. So the words, which Allah has forbidden, have been added in order to restrict their application to man, it being lawful to kill other animals except under certain conditions when their killing also is forbidden.
The word ولی (heir) is applied to any person who is entitled to inherit another man’s property after the latter’s death. But one may nominate a person other than his legal heir as his ولی. If a person is murdered, his ولی (heir) has the right to demand satisfaction. But after the murderer is convicted by a properly constituted court, the heir of the murdered person has the right either to have the murderer legally executed or accept blood-money in lieu of the death of the murdered person. If, however, it is considered against the interests of public peace or morality to allow blood money to the heir or if the demand of the heir be found to be not bona fide, the court may refuse to accept the option of the heir and order the murderer’s execution. In fact, both the heir and the State equally share the right to pardon or punish the guilty person. This right of the State in regard to the punishment of the guilty person covers all matters to which the injunction of قصاص(retaliation) applies. The Caliph ‘Ali is reported to have punished a guilty person whom the aggrieved party had pardoned on the plea that the dictates of public peace demanded his punishment. ‘Ali was convinced that the fear of being harmed by the offender had made the aggrieved person pardon him. See also 2:179.
Whereas in the earlier part of the verse the rights of the party offended against have been safeguarded, the words, let him not exceed the prescribed bounds in slaying, safeguard the interests of the offender. They mean to say that the aggrieved party should not exceed legitimate bounds by adopting a cruel method of killing. In fact, these words imply a recommendation in favour of the murderer. They also show that although "life for life" is the general rule, the heirs of the murdered person may not always act upon this rule. The murderer is to suffer the extreme penalty of the law only when the dictates of equity, retaliation, public peace and morality absolutely demand it. His life should be spared if this act of grace is calculated to lead to his moral reformation. In the words, for therein he is helped by law, the aggrieved person is reminded of his responsibilities. He is told that he, too, is responsible for the maintenance of peace. As God has safeguarded his rights, he should have regard for the rights of others—he should not always insist upon his "pound of flesh".
c
6:152; 25:69.
1616
In the preceding two verses reference was made to the two indirect ways of slaying. The verse under comment speaks of direct murder. After the murderer is convicted by a properly constituted court, the heirs of the murdered person have the right either to have the murderer legally executed or accept blood money in lieu of the death of the murdered person. If, however, it is against the interests of public peace or morality to allow blood money to the heirs or if the demand of the heirs be found to be not bona-fide, the court may refuse to accept their option and order the murderer’s execution. In fact, both the heirs and the State equally share the right to pardon or punish the guilty person. This right of the State in regard to the punishment of the guilty person covers all matters to which the injunction about retribution applies. Whereas in the earlier part of the verse the rights of the party offended against have been safeguarded, the words, let him not exceed the prescribed bounds in slay
قُل لَّنۡ یَّنۡفَعَکُمُ الۡفِرَارُ اِنۡ فَرَرۡتُمۡ مِّنَ الۡمَوۡتِ اَوِ الۡقَتۡلِ وَاِذًا لَّا تُمَتَّعُوۡنَ اِلَّا قَلِیۡلًا
4:79; 62:9.
یعنی اگر تم بھاگو گے تو یا تو کفار تمہیں قتل کر دیں گے یا خداتعالیٰ اسلام کو پھر جلد غلبہ دے دے گا اور مسلمان تمہیں سزا دیں گے جیسا کہ اگلی آیت سے ظاہر ہے۔
4:79; 62:9.
4:79; 62:9.
a
4:79; 62:9.
3
یعنی اگر تم بھاگو گے تو یا تو کفار تمہیں قتل کر دیں گے یا خداتعالیٰ اسلام کو پھر جلد غلبہ دے دے گا اور مسلمان تمہیں سزا دیں گے جیسا کہ اگلی آیت سے ظاہر ہے۔
a
4:79; 62:9.
a
4:79; 62:9.