Topic: Transgressions
View Aspects
قُلْ يَٰٓأَهْلَ ٱلْكِتَٰبِ لَا تَغْلُوا۟ فِى دِينِكُمْ غَيْرَ ٱلْحَقِّ وَلَا تَتَّبِعُوٓا۟ أَهْوَآءَ قَوْمٍ قَدْ ضَلُّوا۟ مِن قَبْلُ وَأَضَلُّوا۟ كَثِيرًا وَضَلُّوا۟ عَن سَوَآءِ ٱلسَّبِيلِ
4:172.
بظاہر غلو ہمیشہ ناجائز ہوتا ہے لیکن اگر کوئی چیز بے انتہا خوبیوں والی ہو تو اس میں انسان اپنے ذہن میں اگر غلو سے بھی کام لیتا ہو تو بھی وہ ناجائز نہیں ہوتا۔ بلکہ ٹھیک ہوتا ہے اس میں اس طرف اشارہ ہے کہ دین اپنے اندر خدا کی طرف سے خوبیاں رکھتا ہے اور اگر کوئی شخص اس کی تعریف میں بظاہر غلو سے بھی کام لے‘ تب بھی وہ غلو جائز ہی ہوتا ہے۔ ناجائز نہیں ہوتا۔
4:172.
4:172.
Commentary:
The words ولاتقولوا (and say not or speak not) may be taken to be understood before the words غیرالحق (which have been translated in the text as "unjustly" but which also mean an untruth), for it is the false doctrines of Christians that, more than their actions, have contributed to the corruption of their faith and their spiritual degradation. In this case, the verse would read thus: "Say, O People of the Book, exceed not the limits in the matter of your religion and speak not an untruth."
The words, nor follow the evil inclinations of a people who went astray before, indicate that the doctrines of Trinity, Atonement and Sonship are really borrowed doctrines. Having borrowed them from the nations that "went astray before", early Christian religious leaders made such alterations in their own doctrines as made them acceptable to the heathen nations with whom they came in contact. Modern research into the sources of Christianity goes to establish the truth of this Quranic statement made more than thirteen hundred years ago (Enc. Bib., col. 4695 Enc. R. Eth., vol. ii, p. 143; vol. vii, p. 436).
b
4:172.
1
بظاہر غلو ہمیشہ ناجائز ہوتا ہے لیکن اگر کوئی چیز بے انتہا خوبیوں والی ہو تو اس میں انسان اپنے ذہن میں اگر غلو سے بھی کام لیتا ہو تو بھی وہ ناجائز نہیں ہوتا۔ بلکہ ٹھیک ہوتا ہے اس میں اس طرف اشارہ ہے کہ دین اپنے اندر خدا کی طرف سے خوبیاں رکھتا ہے اور اگر کوئی شخص اس کی تعریف میں بظاہر غلو سے بھی کام لے‘ تب بھی وہ غلو جائز ہی ہوتا ہے۔ ناجائز نہیں ہوتا۔
b
4:172.
708
Commentary:
The words ولاتقولوا (and say not or speak not) may be taken to be understood before the words غیرالحق (which have been translated in the text as "unjustly" but which also mean an untruth), for it is the false doctrines of Christians that, more than their actions, have contributed to the corruption of their faith and their spiritual degradation. In this case, the verse would read thus: "Say, O People of the Book, exceed not the limits in the matter of your religion and speak not an untruth."
The words, nor follow the evil inclinations of a people who went astray before, indicate that the doctrines of Trinity, Atonement and Sonship are really borrowed doctrines. Having borrowed them from the nations that "went astray before", early Christian religious leaders made such alterations in their own doctrines as made them acceptable to the heathen nations with whom they came in contact. Modern research into the sources of Christianity goes to establish the truth of this Quranic statement made more than thirteen hundred years ago (Enc. Bib., col. 4695 Enc. R. Eth., vol. ii, p. 143; vol. vii, p. 436).
a
4:172.
لُعِنَ ٱلَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا۟ مِنۢ بَنِىٓ إِسْرَٰٓءِيلَ عَلَىٰ لِسَانِ دَاوُۥدَ وَعِيسَى ٱبْنِ مَرْيَمَ ۚ ذَٰلِكَ بِمَا عَصَوا۟ وَّكَانُوا۟ يَعْتَدُونَ
3:88; 4:48.
عَلٰی کے معنے ’’پر‘‘ کے ہوتے ہیں مگر اردو میں ’’زبان پر لعنت‘‘ نہیں کہتے ’’زبان سے لعنت‘‘ کہتے ہیں اور یہی ترجمہ کیا گیا ہے۔
3:88; 4:48.
Of all the Israelite Prophets, David and Jesus suffered most at the hands of the Jews. Jewish persecution of Jesus culminated in his being hung on the cross, and the hardships and privations to which David was subjected by these ungrateful people are reflected in the deep pathos of his Psalms. From the agony of their hearts did David and Jesus curse them. The curse of David resulted in the Israelites being punished by Nebuchadnezzar, who destroyed Jerusalem and carried the Israelites into captivity in 556 B.C.; and as a result of the curse of Jesus, they were visited by terrible afflictions by Titus, who captured Jerusalem in about 70 A.D., devastated the city and profaned the Temple by causing swine—an animal most hated and abhorred by Jews—to be slaughtered therein.
3:87, 88; 4:48.
Commentary:
Of all the Israelite Prophets, David and Jesus suffered most at the hands of the Jews. Jewish persecution of Jesus culminated in his being hung on the cross, and the hardships and privations to which David was subjected by these ungrateful people are reflected in the deep pathos of his Psalms. From the agony of their hearts did David and Jesus both curse them. The curse of David resulted in the Israelites being smitten by Nebuchadnezzar, who destroyed Jerusalem and carried the Israelites into captivity in 586 B.C.; while, as a result of the curse of Jesus, they were visited by terrible afflictions by Titus, who captured Jerusalem in about 70 A.D., devastated the city and profaned the Temple by causing swine to be slaughtered there—an animal hated and abhorred by Jews.
c
3:88; 4:48.
1
عَلٰی کے معنے ’’پر‘‘ کے ہوتے ہیں مگر اردو میں ’’زبان پر لعنت‘‘ نہیں کہتے ’’زبان سے لعنت‘‘ کہتے ہیں اور یہی ترجمہ کیا گیا ہے۔
a
3:87, 88; 4:48.
709
Commentary:
Of all the Israelite Prophets, David and Jesus suffered most at the hands of the Jews. Jewish persecution of Jesus culminated in his being hung on the cross, and the hardships and privations to which David was subjected by these ungrateful people are reflected in the deep pathos of his Psalms. From the agony of their hearts did David and Jesus both curse them. The curse of David resulted in the Israelites being smitten by Nebuchadnezzar, who destroyed Jerusalem and carried the Israelites into captivity in 586 B.C.; while, as a result of the curse of Jesus, they were visited by terrible afflictions by Titus, who captured Jerusalem in about 70 A.D., devastated the city and profaned the Temple by causing swine to be slaughtered there—an animal hated and abhorred by Jews.
b
3:88; 4:48.
782
Of all the Israelite Prophets, David and Jesus suffered most at the hands of the Jews. Jewish persecution of Jesus culminated in his being hung on the cross, and the hardships and privations to which David was subjected by these ungrateful people are reflected in the deep pathos of his Psalms. From the agony of their hearts did David and Jesus curse them. The curse of David resulted in the Israelites being punished by Nebuchadnezzar, who destroyed Jerusalem and carried the Israelites into captivity in 556 B.C.; and as a result of the curse of Jesus, they were visited by terrible afflictions by Titus, who captured Jerusalem in about 70 A.D., devastated the city and profaned the Temple by causing swine—an animal most hated and abhorred by Jews—to be slaughtered therein.
ٱدْعُوا۟ رَبَّكُمْ تَضَرُّعًا وَخُفْيَةً ۚ إِنَّهُۥ لَا يُحِبُّ ٱلْمُعْتَدِينَ
6:64; 7:206.
ظاہر دعا کے لئے گڑگڑانے کا لفظ استعمال کیا کیونکہ ظاہر دعا میں ہی انسان بناوٹ کرتا ہے لیکن خفیہ دعا میں بناوٹ نہیں کرتا۔ اس لئے خفیہ دعا کے لئے گڑگڑانے کی شرط نہیں لگائی کیونکہ جو خفیہ دعا کرے گا وہ عاجزانہ ہی کرے گا۔ اسے کسی بناوٹ کی ضرورت نہیں۔
6:64; 7:206.
b
6:64; 7:206.
1
ظاہر دعا کے لئے گڑگڑانے کا لفظ استعمال کیا کیونکہ ظاہر دعا میں ہی انسان بناوٹ کرتا ہے لیکن خفیہ دعا میں بناوٹ نہیں کرتا۔ اس لئے خفیہ دعا کے لئے گڑگڑانے کی شرط نہیں لگائی کیونکہ جو خفیہ دعا کرے گا وہ عاجزانہ ہی کرے گا۔ اسے کسی بناوٹ کی ضرورت نہیں۔
a
6:64; 7:206.
955
Commentary:
For an explanation of the words, in humility and in secret, see 6:64.
b
6:64; 7:206.
لَا يَرْقُبُونَ فِى مُؤْمِنٍ إِلًّا وَلَا ذِمَّةً ۚ وَأُو۟لَٰٓئِكَ هُمُ ٱلْمُعْتَدُونَ
9:8.
This and the preceding two verses give the reasons why Muslims were commanded to wage war against such idolaters (9:5). The reasons are: (1) They were treacherous and perfidious; they professed to be friendly to Muslims, but as soon as they found an opportunity to injure them, they broke their plighted word and this in spite of the fact that Muslims had trusted them. (2) They even disregarded the ties of relationship and slew their own kinsmen merely because the latter had embraced Islam (9:8). (3) Their object in making war was to prevent men from embracing Islam (9:9). (4) They were the first to attack Muslims (9:13).
9:8.
Important Words:
مومن (one who trusts) is the active participle from آمن which is derived from امن which means, he was or became safe or secure or free from fear. امنه علی کذا means, he trusted him in respect of such a thing. آمنه means, he rendered him safe or secure or free from fear; he trusted or confided in him. آمن بهmeans, he believed in him. مؤمن therefore, means, a believer; a faithful person; a person who trusts or confides in others; one who affords security and protection. المومن is also one of the attributes of God, meaning, He Who grants security and protection to His creatures (Lane).
Commentary:
This verse emphasizes the heinousness of the crime of disbelievers by adding the word مومن (one who trusts). These disbelievers would not be true even to those who trusted them. Thus, the present and the preceding two verses mention the reasons why Muslims were commanded to wage war against these idolaters in 9:5. These reasons are: (1) they were treacherous and perfidious; they professed to be friendly to Muslims, but as soon as they found an opportunity to injure them, they broke their plighted word and this in spite of the fact that Muslims trusted them (9:8 and the present verse); (2) they even disregarded the ties of relationship and killed their own kinsmen merely because the latter had embraced Islam (9:8); (3) their object in making war was to prevent men from embracing Islam (9:9); and (4) they were transgressors, i.e. the first to attack Muslims (the present verse).
d
9:8.
560
这节经文和上两节经文说明了穆斯林受命对这样一些多神教徒作战的理由 (9:5)。其理由是: (1) 他们是背信弃义的; 他们声言与穆斯林友好, 但他们一有伤害穆斯林的机会, 就违反他们的誓言, 而且不顾穆斯林信任他们的这种事实。(2) 他们甚至不顾戚谊, 只因为亲戚相信伊斯兰教, 他们就杀了他们的男亲戚 (9:8)。(3) 他们制造战争的目的是阻止人们信仰伊斯兰教 (9:9)。(4) 他们首先向穆斯林进攻 (9:13)。
b
9:8.
1173
Important Words:
مومن (one who trusts) is the active participle from آمن which is derived from امن which means, he was or became safe or secure or free from fear. امنه علی کذا means, he trusted him in respect of such a thing. آمنه means, he rendered him safe or secure or free from fear; he trusted or confided in him. آمن بهmeans, he believed in him. مؤمن therefore, means, a believer; a faithful person; a person who trusts or confides in others; one who affords security and protection. المومن is also one of the attributes of God, meaning, He Who grants security and protection to His creatures (Lane).
Commentary:
This verse emphasizes the heinousness of the crime of disbelievers by adding the word مومن (one who trusts). These disbelievers would not be true even to those who trusted them. Thus, the present and the preceding two verses mention the reasons why Muslims were commanded to wage war against these idolaters in 9:5. These reasons are: (1) they were treacherous and perfidious; they professed to be friendly to Muslims, but as soon as they found an opportunity to injure them, they broke their plighted word and this in spite of the fact that Muslims trusted them (9:8 and the present verse); (2) they even disregarded the ties of relationship and killed their own kinsmen merely because the latter had embraced Islam (9:8); (3) their object in making war was to prevent men from embracing Islam (9:9); and (4) they were transgressors, i.e. the first to attack Muslims (the present verse).
a
9:8.
1162
This and the preceding two verses give the reasons why Muslims were commanded to wage war against such idolaters (9:5). The reasons are: (1) They were treacherous and perfidious; they professed to be friendly to Muslims, but as soon as they found an opportunity to injure them, they broke their plighted word and this in spite of the fact that Muslims had trusted them. (2) They even disregarded the ties of relationship and slew their own kinsmen merely because the latter had embraced Islam (9:8). (3) Their object in making war was to prevent men from embracing Islam (9:9). (4) They were the first to attack Muslims (9:13).
فَمَآ ءَامَنَ لِمُوسَىٰٓ إِلَّا ذُرِّيَّةٌ مِّن قَوْمِهِۦ عَلَىٰ خَوْفٍ مِّن فِرْعَوْنَ وَمَلَإِي۟هِمْ أَن يَفْتِنَهُمْ ۚ وَإِنَّ فِرْعَوْنَ لَعَالٍ فِى ٱلْأَرْضِ وَإِنَّهُۥ لَمِنَ ٱلْمُسْرِفِينَ
28:5.
28:5.
28:5.
Commentary:
It appears from this verse that all the Israelites had not believed in Moses. Only a part of them had really believed in him. The rest followed him from only political or national considerations. The pronoun "his" in the clause, from among his people, may also refer to Pharaoh. In that case the clause would mean that some youths of the people of Pharaoh also believed in Moses. But the former interpretation seems to be more correct and is therefore preferable.
This verse also brings to light the fact that not unoften an appreciable number of the people to whom a Prophet of God preaches his Message become convinced of his truth, but they dare not profess their faith openly for fear of their leaders and chiefs. The pronoun "their" in the words "their chiefs" may refer either to the Israelites or to the people of Pharaoh. Preferably it refers to the people of Pharaoh. The chiefs of the people of Pharaoh have been called the chiefs of the Israelites because the latter were a subject people. But the pronoun need not necessarily be taken as referring to any particular people. The great men of a country are regarded as chiefs not merely because they belong to any particular community but also because, being members of the government, they possess influence and authority. Hence the high officials of the State, whether they belonged to the people of Pharaoh or the Israelites might rightly be called the chiefs of the Israelites and it was through both that Pharaoh tyrannized over the Israelites.
The words, Pharaoh was a tyrant in the land, show that Pharaoh was not a wise and sagacious monarch. He had embarked upon a policy of open repression and persecution which was calculated to incite the people to rebellion. This policy eventually led to the downfall of the dynasty.
a
28:5.
b
28:5.
1357
Commentary:
It appears from this verse that all the Israelites had not believed in Moses. Only a part of them had really believed in him. The rest followed him from only political or national considerations. The pronoun "his" in the clause, from among his people, may also refer to Pharaoh. In that case the clause would mean that some youths of the people of Pharaoh also believed in Moses. But the former interpretation seems to be more correct and is therefore preferable.
This verse also brings to light the fact that not unoften an appreciable number of the people to whom a Prophet of God preaches his Message become convinced of his truth, but they dare not profess their faith openly for fear of their leaders and chiefs. The pronoun "their" in the words "their chiefs" may refer either to the Israelites or to the people of Pharaoh. Preferably it refers to the people of Pharaoh. The chiefs of the people of Pharaoh have been called the chiefs of the Israelites because the latter were a subject people. But the pronoun need not necessarily be taken as referring to any particular people. The great men of a country are regarded as chiefs not merely because they belong to any particular community but also because, being members of the government, they possess influence and authority. Hence the high officials of the State, whether they belonged to the people of Pharaoh or the Israelites might rightly be called the chiefs of the Israelites and it was through both that Pharaoh tyrannized over the Israelites.
The words, Pharaoh was a tyrant in the land, show that Pharaoh was not a wise and sagacious monarch. He had embarked upon a policy of open repression and persecution which was calculated to incite the people to rebellion. This policy eventually led to the downfall of the dynasty.
a
28:5.
وَلَا تَقْتُلُوا۟ ٱلنَّفْسَ ٱلَّتِى حَرَّمَ ٱللَّهُ إِلَّا بِٱلْحَقِّ ۗ وَمَن قُتِلَ مَظْلُومًا فَقَدْ جَعَلْنَا لِوَلِيِّهِۦ سُلْطَٰنًا فَلَا يُسْرِف فِّى ٱلْقَتْلِ ۖ إِنَّهُۥ كَانَ مَنصُورًا
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
ٱذْهَبْ إِلَىٰ فِرْعَوْنَ إِنَّهُۥ طَغَىٰ
Commentary:
Moses now receives his commission to go to Pharaoh as a Messenger of God. The words, he has indeed exceeded all bounds, show that by his misdeeds Pharaoh had already incurred God’s wrath and had made himself deserving of Divine punishment. But, God, out of His mercy, sent Moses to him in order to warn him of the impending punishment if he did not give up his evil ways and to give him a last opportunity to repent and reform.
2256
Commentary:
Moses now receives his commission to go to Pharaoh as a Messenger of God. The words, he has indeed exceeded all bounds, show that by his misdeeds Pharaoh had already incurred God’s wrath and had made himself deserving of Divine punishment. But, God, out of His mercy, sent Moses to him in order to warn him of the impending punishment if he did not give up his evil ways and to give him a last opportunity to repent and reform.
قَالَا رَبَّنَآ إِنَّنَا نَخَافُ أَن يَفْرُطَ عَلَيْنَآ أَوْ أَن يَطْغَىٰ
26:13.
26:13.
26:13.
Important Words:
یفرط (commit excess) is derived from فرط which means, he preceded; went before; was or became first or foremost; had priority or precedence. فرط علیه means, he hastened to do him an evil action; he acted hastily and unjustly towards him; he did to him what was hateful or evil; he annoyed him. فرط علیه فی القول means, he exceeded the due bounds or just limits towards him in speech. The expression اننا نخاف ان یفرط علینا means, we fear that he may act hastily and unjustly towards us, or that he may hastily do to us an evil action or that he may hasten to punish us. أفرط علیه means, he acted insolently towards him. أفرط علی الرجل means, he burdened the man with what he could not bear (Lane & Aqrab).
Commentary:
Moses and Aaron are represented here as saying that Pharaoh might do them some harm or that he might exceed proper bounds in his talk about God i.e. might use derogatory language about God.
h
26:13.
a
26:13.
2267
Important Words:
یفرط (commit excess) is derived from فرط which means, he preceded; went before; was or became first or foremost; had priority or precedence. فرط علیه means, he hastened to do him an evil action; he acted hastily and unjustly towards him; he did to him what was hateful or evil; he annoyed him. فرط علیه فی القول means, he exceeded the due bounds or just limits towards him in speech. The expression اننا نخاف ان یفرط علینا means, we fear that he may act hastily and unjustly towards us, or that he may hastily do to us an evil action or that he may hasten to punish us. أفرط علیه means, he acted insolently towards him. أفرط علی الرجل means, he burdened the man with what he could not bear (Lane & Aqrab).
Commentary:
Moses and Aaron are represented here as saying that Pharaoh might do them some harm or that he might exceed proper bounds in his talk about God i.e. might use derogatory language about God.
f
26:13.
ثُمَّ صَدَقْنَٰهُمُ ٱلْوَعْدَ فَأَنجَيْنَٰهُمْ وَمَن نَّشَآءُ وَأَهْلَكْنَا ٱلْمُسْرِفِينَ
Commentary:
The verse embodies an effective answer to all the objections that were raised in v. 6 above, viz., (a) "these are but confused dreams," (b) "nay, he has forged it;" (c) nay, "he is a poet." The answer consists in the fact that every Prophet receives from God certain promises and prophecies about the ultimate success of his mission and the defeat and discomfiture of his enemies, and that these prophecies are literally fulfilled. The truth of this fact has been demonstrated throughout the ages in the time of every Prophet of God. The verse purports to say that if what the Holy Prophet claims to have received from God are mere confused dreams and not Divine revelations and if he is an impostor and a liar then how could the great prophecies about the triumph of his cause and the failure of his opponents made at a time when there appeared no likelihood of their being fulfilled, come to be true? Moreover, as a poet the Prophet could only compose elegant verse or could play with the emotions of men as poets generally do, but he could not bring about a wonderful change in the lives of his followers as he did and could not see into the future and make prophecies which in the teeth of the opposition of his powerful enemies and in spite of his own utter helplessness were fulfilled to the very letter. The answer seems to be as emphatic and effective as the objections are foolish and flimsy.
2351
Commentary:
The verse embodies an effective answer to all the objections that were raised in v. 6 above, viz., (a) "these are but confused dreams," (b) "nay, he has forged it;" (c) nay, "he is a poet." The answer consists in the fact that every Prophet receives from God certain promises and prophecies about the ultimate success of his mission and the defeat and discomfiture of his enemies, and that these prophecies are literally fulfilled. The truth of this fact has been demonstrated throughout the ages in the time of every Prophet of God. The verse purports to say that if what the Holy Prophet claims to have received from God are mere confused dreams and not Divine revelations and if he is an impostor and a liar then how could the great prophecies about the triumph of his cause and the failure of his opponents made at a time when there appeared no likelihood of their being fulfilled, come to be true? Moreover, as a poet the Prophet could only compose elegant verse or could play with the emotions of men as poets generally do, but he could not bring about a wonderful change in the lives of his followers as he did and could not see into the future and make prophecies which in the teeth of the opposition of his powerful enemies and in spite of his own utter helplessness were fulfilled to the very letter. The answer seems to be as emphatic and effective as the objections are foolish and flimsy.
قَالُوا۟ طَٰٓئِرُكُم مَّعَكُمْ ۚ أَئِن ذُكِّرْتُم ۚ بَلْ أَنتُمْ قَوْمٌ مُّسْرِفُونَ
طَائِر کے معنے عمل کے کیے گئے ہیں اس کے لئے دیکھئے سورۃ بنی اسرائیل آیت۱۴ نوٹ نمبر۲۔
Commentary:
طائر کم also means, your works. See 17:14.
2
طَائِر کے معنے عمل کے کیے گئے ہیں اس کے لئے دیکھئے سورۃ بنی اسرائیل آیت۱۴ نوٹ نمبر۲۔
3225A
Commentary:
طائر کم also means, your works. See 17:14.
وَقَالَ رَجُلٌ مُّؤْمِنٌ مِّنْ ءَالِ فِرْعَوْنَ يَكْتُمُ إِيمَٰنَهُۥٓ أَتَقْتُلُونَ رَجُلًا أَن يَقُولَ رَبِّىَ ٱللَّهُ وَقَدْ جَآءَكُم بِٱلْبَيِّنَٰتِ مِن رَّبِّكُمْ ۖ وَإِن يَكُ كَٰذِبًا فَعَلَيْهِ كَذِبُهُۥ ۖ وَإِن يَكُ صَادِقًا يُصِبْكُم بَعْضُ ٱلَّذِى يَعِدُكُمْ ۖ إِنَّ ٱللَّهَ لَا يَهْدِى مَنْ هُوَ مُسْرِفٌ كَذَّابٌ
69:45, 47.
یہ مطلب نہیں کہ جو حد سے بڑھ کر جھوٹ بولے‘ اسے کامیاب نہیں کرتا‘ بلکہ عربی زبان میں بعض دفعہ مبالغہ پر نفی لائی جاتی ہے اور مراد یہ ہوتی ہے کہ اس قسم کی تھوڑی سی چیز بھی برداشت نہیں کی جائے گی۔
69:45, 47.
The believing man had kept hidden his faith in order to give expression to it on a suitable occasion. The bold manner in which he expressed his belief and spoke to the people of Pharaoh shows that the concealment was not due to fear.
69:45, 47.
Commentary:
It seems that under the influence of Pharaoh’s wife who was a very righteous woman (66:12) some other members of his household had also believed in Moses and the "believing man" might have been one of them. The good man kept his faith concealed in order to give expression to it on a suitable occasion. The bold manner in which he expressed his belief and spoke to the people of Pharaoh shows that the concealment was not due to fear.
The verse also embodies an infallible criterion to test the truth of the claim of a Divine Reformer viz. that (1) a forger of lies is never allowed to grow and prosper and that (2) the opponents of a Divine Reformer do not go unpunished.
e
69:45, 47.
1
یہ مطلب نہیں کہ جو حد سے بڑھ کر جھوٹ بولے‘ اسے کامیاب نہیں کرتا‘ بلکہ عربی زبان میں بعض دفعہ مبالغہ پر نفی لائی جاتی ہے اور مراد یہ ہوتی ہے کہ اس قسم کی تھوڑی سی چیز بھی برداشت نہیں کی جائے گی۔
a
69:45, 47.
3516
Commentary:
It seems that under the influence of Pharaoh’s wife who was a very righteous woman (66:12) some other members of his household had also believed in Moses and the "believing man" might have been one of them. The good man kept his faith concealed in order to give expression to it on a suitable occasion. The bold manner in which he expressed his belief and spoke to the people of Pharaoh shows that the concealment was not due to fear.
The verse also embodies an infallible criterion to test the truth of the claim of a Divine Reformer viz. that (1) a forger of lies is never allowed to grow and prosper and that (2) the opponents of a Divine Reformer do not go unpunished.
a
69:45, 47.
2603
The believing man had kept hidden his faith in order to give expression to it on a suitable occasion. The bold manner in which he expressed his belief and spoke to the people of Pharaoh shows that the concealment was not due to fear.
إِنَّمَا ٱلسَّبِيلُ عَلَى ٱلَّذِينَ يَظْلِمُونَ ٱلنَّاسَ وَيَبْغُونَ فِى ٱلْأَرْضِ بِغَيْرِ ٱلْحَقِّ ۚ أُو۟لَٰٓئِكَ لَهُمْ عَذَابٌ أَلِيمٌ
10:24.
Commentary:
This verse further elaborates the theme of the previous two verses and purports to say that it is not those who claim recompense for the injury done to them who are to blame; on the contrary, the blame lies on those who go about trampling underfoot the rights of other people and creating mischief and disorder in the land. They will and must be punished.
a
10:24.
3632
Commentary:
This verse further elaborates the theme of the previous two verses and purports to say that it is not those who claim recompense for the injury done to them who are to blame; on the contrary, the blame lies on those who go about trampling underfoot the rights of other people and creating mischief and disorder in the land. They will and must be punished.
أَفَنَضْرِبُ عَنكُمُ ٱلذِّكْرَ صَفْحًا أَن كُنتُمْ قَوْمًا مُّسْرِفِينَ
以安拉的迹象为形式的醒世物将源源不断地显现。如果否定安拉的迹象有合理的依据, 认为安拉的迹象不会出现, 那么, 第一个先知出现之后就不应该有再来者。但是众先知却紧接着出现。
Duraba ‘an-hu means, he left him and turned away from him. Safaha ‘an-hu also means, he turned away from him and left him. The Quranic expression means, 'Shall We take away the Reminder from you and turn Ourselves away from you and leave you without guidance' (Lane)?
Heavenly Reminders in the form of Divine Signs will never cease to come. If rejection of Heavenly Signs had been a reasonable ground that they should discontinue to appear, then no Prophet would have come after the first one. But Prophets continued to appear.
Important Words:
أفنضرب (shall We take away). ضربه means, he struck him. They say, ضرب الدھر بیننا i.e. the time separated us. ضرب عنه means, he shunned, left or avoided him or turned away from him (Lane & Aqrab).
صفحا (neglecting) is derived from صفح. They say صفح عنه i.e. he turned away from him or he turned away from him and left him; he turned away from his sins, or he forgave him. ضربت عنه صفحا means, I turned away from him and left him. The word صفحاً is here an infinitive-noun and therefore is in the accus. case as in the phrase قعدت جلوساً (I sat down); or it is in the accus. case as an adv. noun, and the meaning is, I turned away from him aside.أفنضرب عنکم الذکر صفحاً would thus mean, shall We take away the Reminder from you or separate you from the Reminder and turn away Ourselves from you and neglect you. Or shall We then turn away the Reminder from you, and not invite you thereby to the Faith, turning away Ourselves from you. Or shall We then neglect you and not teach you what is incumbent on you (Lane & Aqrab). See also 2:274 and 15:86.
Commentary:
The verse means to say that Heavenly Reminders in the form of Divine signs will never cease to come. If rejection of heavenly signs had been a reasonable ground for their discontinuance no Prophet would have come after the first one. But Prophets continued to appear and to show signs in spite of the fact that most of them were rejected. The Prophets are sent to the world to lead men to God and to warn wrongdoers of the evil consequences of their transgressions and iniquitous behaviour. So long as man needs to be guided and led to God—and man will need guidance till the end of time—and so long as there are wicked men in the world who require to be warned and reformed, so long will Prophets continue to appear.
1220
以安拉的迹象为形式的醒世物将源源不断地显现。如果否定安拉的迹象有合理的依据, 认为安拉的迹象不会出现, 那么, 第一个先知出现之后就不应该有再来者。但是众先知却紧接着出现。
3645
Important Words:
أفنضرب (shall We take away). ضربه means, he struck him. They say, ضرب الدھر بیننا i.e. the time separated us. ضرب عنه means, he shunned, left or avoided him or turned away from him (Lane & Aqrab).
صفحا (neglecting) is derived from صفح. They say صفح عنه i.e. he turned away from him or he turned away from him and left him; he turned away from his sins, or he forgave him. ضربت عنه صفحا means, I turned away from him and left him. The word صفحاً is here an infinitive-noun and therefore is in the accus. case as in the phrase قعدت جلوساً (I sat down); or it is in the accus. case as an adv. noun, and the meaning is, I turned away from him aside.أفنضرب عنکم الذکر صفحاً would thus mean, shall We take away the Reminder from you or separate you from the Reminder and turn away Ourselves from you and neglect you. Or shall We then turn away the Reminder from you, and not invite you thereby to the Faith, turning away Ourselves from you. Or shall We then neglect you and not teach you what is incumbent on you (Lane & Aqrab). See also 2:274 and 15:86.
Commentary:
The verse means to say that Heavenly Reminders in the form of Divine signs will never cease to come. If rejection of heavenly signs had been a reasonable ground for their discontinuance no Prophet would have come after the first one. But Prophets continued to appear and to show signs in spite of the fact that most of them were rejected. The Prophets are sent to the world to lead men to God and to warn wrongdoers of the evil consequences of their transgressions and iniquitous behaviour. So long as man needs to be guided and led to God—and man will need guidance till the end of time—and so long as there are wicked men in the world who require to be warned and reformed, so long will Prophets continue to appear.
2670
Duraba ‘an-hu means, he left him and turned away from him. Safaha ‘an-hu also means, he turned away from him and left him. The Quranic expression means, 'Shall We take away the Reminder from you and turn Ourselves away from you and leave you without guidance' (Lane)?
2671
Heavenly Reminders in the form of Divine Signs will never cease to come. If rejection of Heavenly Signs had been a reasonable ground that they should discontinue to appear, then no Prophet would have come after the first one. But Prophets continued to appear.
وَإِن طَآئِفَتَانِ مِنَ ٱلْمُؤْمِنِينَ ٱقْتَتَلُوا۟ فَأَصْلِحُوا۟ بَيْنَهُمَا ۖ فَإِنۢ بَغَتْ إِحْدَىٰهُمَا عَلَى ٱلْأُخْرَىٰ فَقَٰتِلُوا۟ ٱلَّتِى تَبْغِى حَتَّىٰ تَفِىٓءَ إِلَىٰٓ أَمْرِ ٱللَّهِ ۚ فَإِن فَآءَتْ فَأَصْلِحُوا۟ بَيْنَهُمَا بِٱلْعَدْلِ وَأَقْسِطُوٓا۟ ۖ إِنَّ ٱللَّهَ يُحِبُّ ٱلْمُقْسِطِينَ
اِس آیت میں یو‘ این‘ او کا نقشہ کھینچا گیا ہے۔ افسوس لیگ آف نیشنز نے اس پر پورا عمل نہ کیا اور ناکام رہی۔
یو۔ این۔ او بھی بزدلی دکھا رہی ہے اور ناکامی کے آثار ہیں۔ جب تک پوری طرح اس آیت میں بتائی ہوئی شرائط پر یو۔ این۔ او عمل نہ کرے گی۔ کامیاب نہ ہوگی۔
لفظ مومن سے دھوکا نہیں کھانا چاہیے۔ مومن کا لفظ اس لئے رکھا ہے کہ مسلمان قومیں مسلمانوں کے درمیان ہی فیصلہ کرا سکتی ہیں ورنہ اصولی طور پر یہ آیت ساری قوموں کے لئے اپنے اندر راہنمائی رکھتی ہیں۔
یعنی صلح کرتے وقت اپنے فوائد سامنے نہ رکھا کرو۔ اصل مسئلہ کا فیصلہ کروایا کرو۔ اس بارہ میں صرف ایک مثال ملتی ہے اور وہ امریکہ کی ہے جس نے کوریا اور سویز کے جھگڑوں میں یہ نیک نمونہ دکھایا ہے۔
اس سے مراد یہ ہے کہ ان لڑنے والی قوموں میں صلح کراتے وقت اپنا کوئی فائدہ حاصل کرنے کی کوشش نہ کیا کرو۔
8:2.
A great danger to the security and solidarity of a Muslim State are the disputes and quarrels that haply might arise between different Muslim groups or parties. This verse provides an effective remedy to compose such differences. Primarily, it deals with the settlement of disputes between Muslim parties, but it equally embodies a sound basis on which a really effective League of Nations or a United Nations Organization can be built. The verse lays down a sound principle for the maintenance of international peace.
8:2.
Commentary:
The central theme of the Surah is the solidarity of Islam. Directions and rules of conduct which are calculated to achieve and maintain this solidarity have been laid down in it in some detail. Some of these rules have been mentioned in the preceding verses, others follow in the verses that come later. A great danger to the security and solidarity of the Muslim State or Community are the disputes and quarrels that haply might arise between different Muslim groups or parties. The verse under comment provides a most effective remedy to compose these quarrels. Primarily, the verse deals with the settlement of disputes between Muslim parties, but it equally embodies a sound basis on which a really effective "League of Nations" or a "United Nations Organisation" can be built. The verse lays down the following principles for the maintenance of international peace.
As soon as there are indications of disagreement between two nations, the other nations, instead of taking sides with one or the other, should at once serve notice upon them, calling upon them to submit their differences for settlement to a "League of Nations" or "United Nations Organisation", as the case may be. If they agree, the dispute will be amicably settled. But if one of them refuses to submit to the "League", or having submitted refuses to accept the award of the "League" and prepares to make war, the other nations should all fight it. It is evident that one nation, however strong, cannot withstand the united might of all other nations and is bound to make a speedy submission. In that event, terms of peace should be settled between the two original parties to the dispute. The other nations should act merely as mediators and not as parties to the dispute, and should not put forward new claims arising out of the conflict with the refractory nation, for that would lay the foundation of fresh disputes and quarrels. The terms of peace should be just and equitable with reference to the merits of the dispute; they should be confined to the original dispute between the parties and should not be allowed to travel beyond it.
It is only such a "League" or "Organisation" which can safely be entrusted with the maintenance of international peace, not a League or Organisation whose very existence is dependent upon the goodwill of others.
b
8:2.
1277
穆斯林国家的安全和团结所遇到的危险是穆斯林之间两派或两党偶尔可能引起的争吵和不和。这里提供了一个协调这样分歧的有效弥补方法。这个办法主要涉及的是穆斯林党派之间争执的解决办法, 但同样体现了缔结一个真正有效的各国联盟或联合国组织的基础。这里制订了一条维持国际和平的健全原则。
1
اِس آیت میں یو‘ این‘ او کا نقشہ کھینچا گیا ہے۔ افسوس لیگ آف نیشنز نے اس پر پورا عمل نہ کیا اور ناکام رہی۔
یو۔ این۔ او بھی بزدلی دکھا رہی ہے اور ناکامی کے آثار ہیں۔ جب تک پوری طرح اس آیت میں بتائی ہوئی شرائط پر یو۔ این۔ او عمل نہ کرے گی۔ کامیاب نہ ہوگی۔
2
لفظ مومن سے دھوکا نہیں کھانا چاہیے۔ مومن کا لفظ اس لئے رکھا ہے کہ مسلمان قومیں مسلمانوں کے درمیان ہی فیصلہ کرا سکتی ہیں ورنہ اصولی طور پر یہ آیت ساری قوموں کے لئے اپنے اندر راہنمائی رکھتی ہیں۔
3
یعنی صلح کرتے وقت اپنے فوائد سامنے نہ رکھا کرو۔ اصل مسئلہ کا فیصلہ کروایا کرو۔ اس بارہ میں صرف ایک مثال ملتی ہے اور وہ امریکہ کی ہے جس نے کوریا اور سویز کے جھگڑوں میں یہ نیک نمونہ دکھایا ہے۔
4
اس سے مراد یہ ہے کہ ان لڑنے والی قوموں میں صلح کراتے وقت اپنا کوئی فائدہ حاصل کرنے کی کوشش نہ کیا کرو۔
a
8:2.
3847
Commentary:
The central theme of the Surah is the solidarity of Islam. Directions and rules of conduct which are calculated to achieve and maintain this solidarity have been laid down in it in some detail. Some of these rules have been mentioned in the preceding verses, others follow in the verses that come later. A great danger to the security and solidarity of the Muslim State or Community are the disputes and quarrels that haply might arise between different Muslim groups or parties. The verse under comment provides a most effective remedy to compose these quarrels. Primarily, the verse deals with the settlement of disputes between Muslim parties, but it equally embodies a sound basis on which a really effective "League of Nations" or a "United Nations Organisation" can be built. The verse lays down the following principles for the maintenance of international peace.
As soon as there are indications of disagreement between two nations, the other nations, instead of taking sides with one or the other, should at once serve notice upon them, calling upon them to submit their differences for settlement to a "League of Nations" or "United Nations Organisation", as the case may be. If they agree, the dispute will be amicably settled. But if one of them refuses to submit to the "League", or having submitted refuses to accept the award of the "League" and prepares to make war, the other nations should all fight it. It is evident that one nation, however strong, cannot withstand the united might of all other nations and is bound to make a speedy submission. In that event, terms of peace should be settled between the two original parties to the dispute. The other nations should act merely as mediators and not as parties to the dispute, and should not put forward new claims arising out of the conflict with the refractory nation, for that would lay the foundation of fresh disputes and quarrels. The terms of peace should be just and equitable with reference to the merits of the dispute; they should be confined to the original dispute between the parties and should not be allowed to travel beyond it.
It is only such a "League" or "Organisation" which can safely be entrusted with the maintenance of international peace, not a League or Organisation whose very existence is dependent upon the goodwill of others.
a
8:2.
2793
A great danger to the security and solidarity of a Muslim State are the disputes and quarrels that haply might arise between different Muslim groups or parties. This verse provides an effective remedy to compose such differences. Primarily, it deals with the settlement of disputes between Muslim parties, but it equally embodies a sound basis on which a really effective League of Nations or a United Nations Organization can be built. The verse lays down a sound principle for the maintenance of international peace.
مَّنَّاعٍ لِّلْخَيْرِ مُعْتَدٍ مُّرِيبٍ
68:13.
68:13.
68:13.
a
68:13.
a
68:13.
a
68:13.
مُّسَوَّمَةً عِندَ رَبِّكَ لِلْمُسْرِفِينَ
11:84.
11:84.
11:84.
Commentary:
The Divine punishment which seized the people of Lot is variously described in the Quran by the words حاصب i.e. storm of stones (54:35); صیحة i.e. a blast and حجار ة من سجیل i.e. stones of clay (11:83). These people seemed to have been destroyed by a violent earthquake which turned parts of the earth upside down (11:83).
d
11:84.
e
11:84.
3913
Commentary:
The Divine punishment which seized the people of Lot is variously described in the Quran by the words حاصب i.e. storm of stones (54:35); صیحة i.e. a blast and حجار ة من سجیل i.e. stones of clay (11:83). These people seemed to have been destroyed by a violent earthquake which turned parts of the earth upside down (11:83).
d
11:84.
مَّنَّاعٍ لِّلْخَيْرِ مُعْتَدٍ أَثِيمٍ
50:26.
50:26.
50:26.
c
50:26.
b
50:26.
a
50:26.
وَمَا يُكَذِّبُ بِهِۦٓ إِلَّا كُلُّ مُعْتَدٍ أَثِيمٍ