Topic: Compromise
View Aspects
قُلْ يَٰٓأَهْلَ ٱلْكِتَٰبِ تَعَالَوْا۟ إِلَىٰ كَلِمَةٍ سَوَآءٍۭ بَيْنَنَا وَبَيْنَكُمْ أَلَّا نَعْبُدَ إِلَّا ٱللَّهَ وَلَا نُشْرِكَ بِهِۦ شَيْـًٔا وَلَا يَتَّخِذَ بَعْضُنَا بَعْضًا أَرْبَابًا مِّن دُونِ ٱللَّهِ ۚ فَإِن تَوَلَّوْا۟ فَقُولُوا۟ ٱشْهَدُوا۟ بِأَنَّا مُسْلِمُونَ
9:31.
’’کم سے کم‘‘ کسی لفظ کا ترجمہ نہیں بلکہ عبارت کا مفہوم ہے۔
9:31.
This verse is wrongly considered by some to provide a basis for a compromise between Islam on the one hand and Christianity and Judaism on the other. It is argued that if these religions also teach and inculcate the doctrine of Divine Unity, then other Islamic teachings supposed to be of comparatively little importance could safely be left alone. It is unthinkable that the idea of compromise in matters of faith could ever have been encouraged, with a people who, in the immediately preceding verses, have been severely condemned for their false beliefs and who are so forcefully challenged to a prayer-contest to invoke the curse of God upon the holders of false beliefs. The Holy Prophet, while writing his missionary epistle to Heraclius, used this very verse, yet he forcefully invited the latter to accept Islam and threatened him with Divine punishment if he refused to do so (Bukhari). This shows beyond doubt that the mere fact of his believing in Divine Unity could not, according to the Holy Prophet, save He
9:31.
Important Words:
اربابا (Lords) is the plural of رب (Lord) for which see 1:2. رب means, lord, master or owner; a chief or ruler to whom obedience is rendered; one who fosters, brings up, or nourishes (Lane & Aqrab).
Commentary:
This verse is wrongly considered by some to provide a basis for a compromise between Islam on the one hand and Christianity and Judaism on the other. It is argued that if these faiths become united in the doctrine of the Oneness of God, the verse permits the sacrifice of other Islamic teachings as being of comparatively little importance. Nothing can be farther from the truth. The Quran, the Hadith and the facts of history are all united in belying this ridiculous assumption. It is simply unthinkable that compromise in matters of faith could be allowed by any religion worth the name, particularly with a people who, in the immediately preceding verses, have been severely condemned for their beliefs and who are so forcefully challenged to a prayer contest to invoke the curse of God upon those who lie in their beliefs. The Holy Prophet, while writing his missionary epistle to Heraclius, used this very verse, yet he forcefully invited the latter to accept Islam and threatened him with Divine punishment if he refused to do so (Bukhari). This shows beyond doubt that the mere fact of his believing in the Oneness of God could not, according to the Holy Prophet, save Heraclius from God’s punishment. Elsewhere the Quran emphatically declares that, Surely the (true) religion with Allah is Islam, (i.e. complete submission); and whoso seeks a religion other than Islam, it shall not be accepted from him, and in the life to come he shall be among the losers (3:20 & 86). Can anything be clearer?
The truth is that this verse is intended to suggest an easy and simple method by which Jews and Christians can arrive at a right decision regarding the truth of Islam. Christians, in spite of claiming belief in the Unity of Godhead, felt satisfied in believing in the divinity of Jesus; and Jews, notwithstanding their claim to be monotheists, gave blind allegiance to their priests and divines, practically placing them in the position of God Himself. The verse exhorts both these communities to come back to their original belief in the Oneness of God and give up the worship of false deities who stand in the way of their accepting Islam. Thus, instead of seeking a compromise with these faiths, the verse virtually invites Christians and Jews to the faith of Islam, by drawing their attention to the doctrine of the Oneness of God which being, at least in its outer form, the common fundamental doctrine of all, could serve as a meeting ground for further approach.
It was exactly on these lines that Ahmad, the Promised Messiah, in his "Message of Peace", made an offer to the Hindus of India to enter into an agreement with the Muslims of his way of thinking to the effect that they (Hindus) would respect and honour the Holy Prophet of Islam and would look upon him as a true Messenger of God, even as he and his followers believed in Rama and Krishna as God’s Elect.
Special emphasis has been laid in the verse under comment on the Oneness of God—a doctrine on which in theory all revealed religions seem to agree, but regarding the details, of which no two Faiths are found to concur. Most religions claim to be monotheistic; but under the outer veneer of monotheism, polytheism very often lies hidden in most hideous forms. It is the simple faith of Islam alone which is really and truly monotheistic in all its aspects and which strongly condemns the association with God of anything or any being in His person, attributes, worship or works. It is most unfortunate, however, that in spite of Islam being such a strictly monotheistic faith, a section of present-day Muslims has drifted away into the quagmire of what cannot but be termed idol-worship in the wider sense of the word.
Incidentally, it may be noted that the letter mentioned by Bukhari and other Muslim traditionists as having been addressed by the Holy Prophet to Heraclius in the words of this verse inviting him to accept Islam has recently been discovered and found to contain the exact words quoted by Bukhari (R. Rel. vol. V. No. 8). This furnishes a strong proof of the essential authenticity of Bukhari and, for that matter, of other accepted works of Hadith.
a
9:31.
2
’’کم سے کم‘‘ کسی لفظ کا ترجمہ نہیں بلکہ عبارت کا مفہوم ہے۔
a
9:31.
353
Important Words:
اربابا (Lords) is the plural of رب (Lord) for which see 1:2. رب means, lord, master or owner; a chief or ruler to whom obedience is rendered; one who fosters, brings up, or nourishes (Lane & Aqrab).
Commentary:
This verse is wrongly considered by some to provide a basis for a compromise between Islam on the one hand and Christianity and Judaism on the other. It is argued that if these faiths become united in the doctrine of the Oneness of God, the verse permits the sacrifice of other Islamic teachings as being of comparatively little importance. Nothing can be farther from the truth. The Quran, the Hadith and the facts of history are all united in belying this ridiculous assumption. It is simply unthinkable that compromise in matters of faith could be allowed by any religion worth the name, particularly with a people who, in the immediately preceding verses, have been severely condemned for their beliefs and who are so forcefully challenged to a prayer contest to invoke the curse of God upon those who lie in their beliefs. The Holy Prophet, while writing his missionary epistle to Heraclius, used this very verse, yet he forcefully invited the latter to accept Islam and threatened him with Divine punishment if he refused to do so (Bukhari). This shows beyond doubt that the mere fact of his believing in the Oneness of God could not, according to the Holy Prophet, save Heraclius from God’s punishment. Elsewhere the Quran emphatically declares that, Surely the (true) religion with Allah is Islam, (i.e. complete submission); and whoso seeks a religion other than Islam, it shall not be accepted from him, and in the life to come he shall be among the losers (3:20 & 86). Can anything be clearer?
The truth is that this verse is intended to suggest an easy and simple method by which Jews and Christians can arrive at a right decision regarding the truth of Islam. Christians, in spite of claiming belief in the Unity of Godhead, felt satisfied in believing in the divinity of Jesus; and Jews, notwithstanding their claim to be monotheists, gave blind allegiance to their priests and divines, practically placing them in the position of God Himself. The verse exhorts both these communities to come back to their original belief in the Oneness of God and give up the worship of false deities who stand in the way of their accepting Islam. Thus, instead of seeking a compromise with these faiths, the verse virtually invites Christians and Jews to the faith of Islam, by drawing their attention to the doctrine of the Oneness of God which being, at least in its outer form, the common fundamental doctrine of all, could serve as a meeting ground for further approach.
It was exactly on these lines that Ahmad, the Promised Messiah, in his "Message of Peace", made an offer to the Hindus of India to enter into an agreement with the Muslims of his way of thinking to the effect that they (Hindus) would respect and honour the Holy Prophet of Islam and would look upon him as a true Messenger of God, even as he and his followers believed in Rama and Krishna as God’s Elect.
Special emphasis has been laid in the verse under comment on the Oneness of God—a doctrine on which in theory all revealed religions seem to agree, but regarding the details, of which no two Faiths are found to concur. Most religions claim to be monotheistic; but under the outer veneer of monotheism, polytheism very often lies hidden in most hideous forms. It is the simple faith of Islam alone which is really and truly monotheistic in all its aspects and which strongly condemns the association with God of anything or any being in His person, attributes, worship or works. It is most unfortunate, however, that in spite of Islam being such a strictly monotheistic faith, a section of present-day Muslims has drifted away into the quagmire of what cannot but be termed idol-worship in the wider sense of the word.
Incidentally, it may be noted that the letter mentioned by Bukhari and other Muslim traditionists as having been addressed by the Holy Prophet to Heraclius in the words of this verse inviting him to accept Islam has recently been discovered and found to contain the exact words quoted by Bukhari (R. Rel. vol. V. No. 8). This furnishes a strong proof of the essential authenticity of Bukhari and, for that matter, of other accepted works of Hadith.
a
9:31.
426A
This verse is wrongly considered by some to provide a basis for a compromise between Islam on the one hand and Christianity and Judaism on the other. It is argued that if these religions also teach and inculcate the doctrine of Divine Unity, then other Islamic teachings supposed to be of comparatively little importance could safely be left alone. It is unthinkable that the idea of compromise in matters of faith could ever have been encouraged, with a people who, in the immediately preceding verses, have been severely condemned for their false beliefs and who are so forcefully challenged to a prayer-contest to invoke the curse of God upon the holders of false beliefs. The Holy Prophet, while writing his missionary epistle to Heraclius, used this very verse, yet he forcefully invited the latter to accept Islam and threatened him with Divine punishment if he refused to do so (Bukhari). This shows beyond doubt that the mere fact of his believing in Divine Unity could not, according to the Holy Prophet, save He
وَدُّوا۟ لَوْ تُدْهِنُ فَيُدْهِنُونَ
17:74.
The verse may have special reference to the offers which the Quraish of Mecca made to the Holy Prophet in order to tempt him away from his fixed purpose; or it may possess general application, since Truth is as firm as rock while falsehood has no legs to stand upon and gives way to pressure or temptation and is ready to make compromises.
17:74; 56:82.
Important Words:
تدھن (thou shouldst be pliant) is derived from دھن which means, he was or became weak. أدھن فلانا means, he endeavoured to conciliate or make peace with such a one; he treated him with gentleness; he acted towards him with dishonesty or dissimulation; he pretended the contrary of what he concealed in his mind with regard to him; he strove to deceive him (Lane & Aqrab).
Commentary:
The verse may have special reference to the offers which the Quraish of Mecca had made to the Holy Prophet in order to tempt him away from his fixed purpose, or it may possess general application, since truth is as firm as rock while falsehood has no legs to stand upon and gives way to pressure or temptation and is ready to make compromises.
a
17:74.
1459
这节经文可能特指麦加的古莱西人向穆圣提出的建议, 想诱使他放弃自己坚定的宗旨;或者它指一般而言, 因为真理总是坚如磐石, 而谬误的事物是站不住脚的, 经不起压力或诱惑而易于妥协。
b
17:74; 56:82.
4313
Important Words:
تدھن (thou shouldst be pliant) is derived from دھن which means, he was or became weak. أدھن فلانا means, he endeavoured to conciliate or make peace with such a one; he treated him with gentleness; he acted towards him with dishonesty or dissimulation; he pretended the contrary of what he concealed in his mind with regard to him; he strove to deceive him (Lane & Aqrab).
Commentary:
The verse may have special reference to the offers which the Quraish of Mecca had made to the Holy Prophet in order to tempt him away from his fixed purpose, or it may possess general application, since truth is as firm as rock while falsehood has no legs to stand upon and gives way to pressure or temptation and is ready to make compromises.
b
17:74.
3093
The verse may have special reference to the offers which the Quraish of Mecca made to the Holy Prophet in order to tempt him away from his fixed purpose; or it may possess general application, since Truth is as firm as rock while falsehood has no legs to stand upon and gives way to pressure or temptation and is ready to make compromises.
قُلْ يَٰٓأَيُّهَا ٱلْكَٰفِرُونَ
由 قُل (Qul) 所表示的天命适用于每一个穆斯林。除了这一经章之外, 在第72、112、113、114各章开端都有这个词, 在 «古兰经» 内约有 306 节经文中都用到; 凡是用到的, 都是强调有这个词的章节的主题内容。因此, 信者应该以清楚而明确的字句向不信者反复高声地公开颂扬和传布在这经章中得到阐明和强调的伟大的伊斯兰教信条。
“听着! 不信的人们啊” 这个用语的用意是使人特别注意这经章的主题内容, 并强调其重要性。这个用语在 «古兰经» 中经常应用, 目的就在于此。
“不信者” 可以指那些顽固的不信者, 他们由于固执而蔑视真理, 已经完全不可能接受它; 不信真主似乎已成为他们存在的一部分。
The Divine command, expressed by the word Qul, applies to every Muslim. Besides the present Surah, the word is placed at the beginning of Chapters 72, 112, 113 and 114, and is used in about 306 verses of the Qur’an; and wherever it is used it emphasizes the importance of the subject-matter governed by it. Thus believers are enjoined to proclaim loudly and repeatedly, and to convey to disbelievers in clear and definite terms, the great principles of Islam enunciated and emphasized in this Surah.
The expression "O ye" is intended to draw pointed attention to the subject-matter of the Surah and to emphasize its importance. The expression has frequently been used in the Qur’an to serve this purpose.
"The disbelievers" may refer to those confirmed disbelievers who, by their persistent and defiant rejection of the Truth, rule out all possibility of accepting it, and disbelief becomes, as it were, part of their being.
Commentary:
The Divine command expressed by قل (say) applies, besides the Holy Prophet, to every Muslim. Besides the present Surah, this word is placed at the beginning of chapters 72, 112, 113 and 114, and is used in about 306 verses of the Quran, and wherever it is used it emphasizes the importance of the subject governed by it. Thus believers are enjoined to proclaim loudly and repeatedly, and to convey to disbelievers in clear and definite terms, the great principles of Islam enunciated and emphasized in the present Surah.
The use of ایھا (O ye) is intended to draw pointed attention to the subject matter of the Surah and to emphasize its importance. The expression has frequently been used in the Quran to serve this purpose.
The word الکافرون (the disbelievers) has a general application, or it may refer to those confirmed disbelievers who by their persistent and defiant rejection of truth rule out all possibility of accepting it and disbelief becomes, as it were, a part of their being.
1803
由 قُل (Qul) 所表示的天命适用于每一个穆斯林。除了这一经章之外, 在第72、112、113、114各章开端都有这个词, 在 «古兰经» 内约有 306 节经文中都用到; 凡是用到的, 都是强调有这个词的章节的主题内容。因此, 信者应该以清楚而明确的字句向不信者反复高声地公开颂扬和传布在这经章中得到阐明和强调的伟大的伊斯兰教信条。
1804
“听着! 不信的人们啊” 这个用语的用意是使人特别注意这经章的主题内容, 并强调其重要性。这个用语在 «古兰经» 中经常应用, 目的就在于此。
1805
“不信者” 可以指那些顽固的不信者, 他们由于固执而蔑视真理, 已经完全不可能接受它; 不信真主似乎已成为他们存在的一部分。
4858
Commentary:
The Divine command expressed by قل (say) applies, besides the Holy Prophet, to every Muslim. Besides the present Surah, this word is placed at the beginning of chapters 72, 112, 113 and 114, and is used in about 306 verses of the Quran, and wherever it is used it emphasizes the importance of the subject governed by it. Thus believers are enjoined to proclaim loudly and repeatedly, and to convey to disbelievers in clear and definite terms, the great principles of Islam enunciated and emphasized in the present Surah.
The use of ایھا (O ye) is intended to draw pointed attention to the subject matter of the Surah and to emphasize its importance. The expression has frequently been used in the Quran to serve this purpose.
The word الکافرون (the disbelievers) has a general application, or it may refer to those confirmed disbelievers who by their persistent and defiant rejection of truth rule out all possibility of accepting it and disbelief becomes, as it were, a part of their being.
3450
The Divine command, expressed by the word Qul, applies to every Muslim. Besides the present Surah, the word is placed at the beginning of Chapters 72, 112, 113 and 114, and is used in about 306 verses of the Qur’an; and wherever it is used it emphasizes the importance of the subject-matter governed by it. Thus believers are enjoined to proclaim loudly and repeatedly, and to convey to disbelievers in clear and definite terms, the great principles of Islam enunciated and emphasized in this Surah.
3451
The expression "O ye" is intended to draw pointed attention to the subject-matter of the Surah and to emphasize its importance. The expression has frequently been used in the Qur’an to serve this purpose.
3452
"The disbelievers" may refer to those confirmed disbelievers who, by their persistent and defiant rejection of the Truth, rule out all possibility of accepting it, and disbelief becomes, as it were, part of their being.
لَآ أَعْبُدُ مَا تَعْبُدُونَ
10:105; 39:15-16.
Commentary:
Various explanations have been given to the present and the next three verses by commentators. Some say that as the pagan Meccans had put their question in two forms, therefore two forms have been adopted in answer to their question. Others say that the repetition is for the sake of emphasis. Yet some others like Zajjaj are of the opinion that the first two sentences signify denial of worship in the present time and the last two sentences denial of it in future. As against this, Zamakhshari says that the first two sentences stand for denial of worship in future while the last two for that in the past. Be that as it may, when لا (no, not) governs مضارع, it signifies future tense. According to this usage of the particle the expression would mean: "I will never worship."
Moreover, the particle ما is used in two ways; as مصدریه transforming into infinitive the verb which it governs, and as موصوله meaning الذی i.e. "that which." Sometimes it is also used for rational beings and means من i.e. "he who." According to the various uses of the particle the verses would mean: I will not adopt your way of worship, or, I will not worship those that you worship, whether rational beings or irrational inanimate things. But the verses have a better and more appropriate translation if ما is taken as مصدریه in the former two verses and as موصوله in the latter two. Thus, the four verses would be interpreted something like this "I will never adopt your mode or manner of worship, nor will you adopt the manner in which I worship. And I shall not worship those things (idols) or rational or irrational beings whom you worship, nor will you worship Him Whom I worship."
b
10:105; 39:15-16.
4859
Commentary:
Various explanations have been given to the present and the next three verses by commentators. Some say that as the pagan Meccans had put their question in two forms, therefore two forms have been adopted in answer to their question. Others say that the repetition is for the sake of emphasis. Yet some others like Zajjaj are of the opinion that the first two sentences signify denial of worship in the present time and the last two sentences denial of it in future. As against this, Zamakhshari says that the first two sentences stand for denial of worship in future while the last two for that in the past. Be that as it may, when لا (no, not) governs مضارع, it signifies future tense. According to this usage of the particle the expression would mean: "I will never worship."
Moreover, the particle ما is used in two ways; as مصدریه transforming into infinitive the verb which it governs, and as موصوله meaning الذی i.e. "that which." Sometimes it is also used for rational beings and means من i.e. "he who." According to the various uses of the particle the verses would mean: I will not adopt your way of worship, or, I will not worship those that you worship, whether rational beings or irrational inanimate things. But the verses have a better and more appropriate translation if ما is taken as مصدریه in the former two verses and as موصوله in the latter two. Thus, the four verses would be interpreted something like this "I will never adopt your mode or manner of worship, nor will you adopt the manner in which I worship. And I shall not worship those things (idols) or rational or irrational beings whom you worship, nor will you worship Him Whom I worship."
وَلَآ أَنتُمْ عَٰبِدُونَ مَآ أَعْبُدُ
وَلَآ أَنَا۠ عَابِدٌ مَّا عَبَدتُّمْ
وَلَآ أَنتُمْ عَٰبِدُونَ مَآ أَعْبُدُ
«古兰经» 注释家对于这一节和以上三节经文有各种各样的解释。有人说, 因为不信教的那些麦加人以两种形式提出问题, 因此就采用了两种形式来回答他们的问题。有的说, 反复使用是为了强调。然而有些人像赞贾季 (زَجَّاج, Zajjaj) 一样, 持有这样的意见: 开头两句经文的含意是否定现在的礼拜, 最后两句是否定将来的礼拜。扎马克夏里 (زَمَخْشَرِی, Zamakhshari) 反对这个意见, 他说: 开头两句经文代表否定将来的礼拜, 而最后两句代表否定过去的礼拜。不管怎么说, 当小品词 لَا (La, 否; 不是) 支配不定过去式时, 它是指将来时态。根据小品词的这个用法, لَا اَعْبُدُ (La A‘budu) 这个用语的意思是: “我将绝不崇拜。”
小品词 مَا (Ma) 用法有两种形式。作为字根 (مَصْدَرِيَّة Masdariyyah), 它转化为限定动词的不定式, 作为连接名词 (مَوْصُوْلَة Mausulah) 的意思是 اَلَّذِی (Alladhi, ……的事物)。有时也可以作为有理性的人, 意思是“……的他”。在以上两节经文中, 可以把 مَا (Ma) 看作字根 (Masdariyyah), 在后两节中看作连接名词 (Mausulah)。这四节经文大致可以这样解释: “我绝不会采用你的崇拜的方式和方法, 你也不会采用我的崇拜的方式和方法。我将不会崇拜你所崇拜的那些东西 (偶像) 或有理性还是没有理性的存在者, 你也将不会崇拜我所崇拜的他 (安拉)。”
Various explanations have been given of the present and the preceding three verses by the Commentators. Some say that as the pagan Meccans had put their question in two forms, therefore, two forms have been adopted in answer to their question. Others say that the repetition is for the sake of emphasis. Yet some others like Zajjaj are of the opinion that the first two sentences signify denial of worship in the present time and the last two sentences denial of it in the future. As against this Zamakhshari says that the first two sentences stand for denial of worship in future while the last two for that in the past. Be that as it may, when the particle la (no; not) governs an aorist, it signifies the future tense. According to this use of the particle the expression la A‘budu would mean: 'I will never worship.'
The particle ma is used in two forms. As Masdariyyah it transforms into infinitive the verb which it governs and as Mausulah it means Alladhi (that wh
1806
«古兰经» 注释家对于这一节和以上三节经文有各种各样的解释。有人说, 因为不信教的那些麦加人以两种形式提出问题, 因此就采用了两种形式来回答他们的问题。有的说, 反复使用是为了强调。然而有些人像赞贾季 (زَجَّاج, Zajjaj) 一样, 持有这样的意见: 开头两句经文的含意是否定现在的礼拜, 最后两句是否定将来的礼拜。扎马克夏里 (زَمَخْشَرِی, Zamakhshari) 反对这个意见, 他说: 开头两句经文代表否定将来的礼拜, 而最后两句代表否定过去的礼拜。不管怎么说, 当小品词 لَا (La, 否; 不是) 支配不定过去式时, 它是指将来时态。根据小品词的这个用法, لَا اَعْبُدُ (La A‘budu) 这个用语的意思是: “我将绝不崇拜。”
1807
小品词 مَا (Ma) 用法有两种形式。作为字根 (مَصْدَرِيَّة Masdariyyah), 它转化为限定动词的不定式, 作为连接名词 (مَوْصُوْلَة Mausulah) 的意思是 اَلَّذِی (Alladhi, ……的事物)。有时也可以作为有理性的人, 意思是“……的他”。在以上两节经文中, 可以把 مَا (Ma) 看作字根 (Masdariyyah), 在后两节中看作连接名词 (Mausulah)。这四节经文大致可以这样解释: “我绝不会采用你的崇拜的方式和方法, 你也不会采用我的崇拜的方式和方法。我将不会崇拜你所崇拜的那些东西 (偶像) 或有理性还是没有理性的存在者, 你也将不会崇拜我所崇拜的他 (安拉)。”
3453
Various explanations have been given of the present and the preceding three verses by the Commentators. Some say that as the pagan Meccans had put their question in two forms, therefore, two forms have been adopted in answer to their question. Others say that the repetition is for the sake of emphasis. Yet some others like Zajjaj are of the opinion that the first two sentences signify denial of worship in the present time and the last two sentences denial of it in the future. As against this Zamakhshari says that the first two sentences stand for denial of worship in future while the last two for that in the past. Be that as it may, when the particle la (no; not) governs an aorist, it signifies the future tense. According to this use of the particle the expression la A‘budu would mean: 'I will never worship.'
The particle ma is used in two forms. As Masdariyyah it transforms into infinitive the verb which it governs and as Mausulah it means Alladhi (that wh
لَكُمْ دِينُكُمْ وَلِىَ دِينِ
这节经文的含意是, 因为在信者的生活方式和不信者的生活方式之间绝对没有会合之处, 还因为他们不仅在宗教的基本概念方面存在完全的分歧, 而且在宗教的细节和其他方面也存在分歧, 因此两者之间不可能有妥协。
عربی زبان میں دین کے کئی معنے ہیں جن میں سے ایک معنے طریقِ کار کے بھی ہیں۔
The verse signifies that as there is absolutely no meeting ground between the believers’ way of life and that of the disbelievers and as they are in complete disagreement not only with regard to the basic concepts of Religion but also with regard to its details and other aspects, therefore, there can possibly be no compromise between the two.
2:140; 10:42.
Commentary:
For different meanings of دین see 107:2. According to these the verse signifies: "As there is absolutely no meeting ground between your way of life and mine and as we are in complete disagreement not only with regard to the basic concepts of religion but also with regard to its details and other aspects, therefore, there cannot possibly be any compromise between us.
1808
这节经文的含意是, 因为在信者的生活方式和不信者的生活方式之间绝对没有会合之处, 还因为他们不仅在宗教的基本概念方面存在完全的分歧, 而且在宗教的细节和其他方面也存在分歧, 因此两者之间不可能有妥协。
1
عربی زبان میں دین کے کئی معنے ہیں جن میں سے ایک معنے طریقِ کار کے بھی ہیں۔
a
2:140; 10:42.
4860
Commentary:
For different meanings of دین see 107:2. According to these the verse signifies: "As there is absolutely no meeting ground between your way of life and mine and as we are in complete disagreement not only with regard to the basic concepts of religion but also with regard to its details and other aspects, therefore, there cannot possibly be any compromise between us.
3454
The verse signifies that as there is absolutely no meeting ground between the believers’ way of life and that of the disbelievers and as they are in complete disagreement not only with regard to the basic concepts of Religion but also with regard to its details and other aspects, therefore, there can possibly be no compromise between the two.