Topic: Homicide
View Aspects
يَٰٓأَيُّهَا ٱلَّذِينَ ءَامَنُوا۟ لَا تَأْكُلُوٓا۟ أَمْوَٰلَكُم بَيْنَكُم بِٱلْبَٰطِلِ إِلَّآ أَن تَكُونَ تِجَٰرَةً عَن تَرَاضٍ مِّنكُمْ ۚ وَلَا تَقْتُلُوٓا۟ أَنفُسَكُمْ ۚ إِنَّ ٱللَّهَ كَانَ بِكُمْ رَحِيمًا
2:189.
2:189.
2:189.
Commentary:
By unlawful means is meant all those means and methods which are forbidden by the Law.
The verse declares all commercial transactions without the mutual consent of seller and buyer to be null and void.
The clause, kill not yourselves, makes it clear that the devouring of other person’s property by unlawful means, or carrying on transaction without the free consent of the parties concerned brings about the moral death of the guilty party.
The words, kill not yourselves, also imply interdiction of suicide. The Holy Prophet is reported to have said, "Whosoever kills himself with a weapon, will be brought on the Day of Judgement with the said weapon in his hand and will be thrown into the Fire wherein he will abide. And whosoever kills himself with a poison will be thrown into the Fire, with that poison in his hand, where he will continue to take it" (Kathir).
b
2:189.
a
2:189.
508
Commentary:
By unlawful means is meant all those means and methods which are forbidden by the Law.
The verse declares all commercial transactions without the mutual consent of seller and buyer to be null and void.
The clause, kill not yourselves, makes it clear that the devouring of other person’s property by unlawful means, or carrying on transaction without the free consent of the parties concerned brings about the moral death of the guilty party.
The words, kill not yourselves, also imply interdiction of suicide. The Holy Prophet is reported to have said, "Whosoever kills himself with a weapon, will be brought on the Day of Judgement with the said weapon in his hand and will be thrown into the Fire wherein he will abide. And whosoever kills himself with a poison will be thrown into the Fire, with that poison in his hand, where he will continue to take it" (Kathir).
c
2:189.
وَمَا كَانَ لِمُؤْمِنٍ أَن يَقْتُلَ مُؤْمِنًا إِلَّا خَطَـًٔا ۚ وَمَن قَتَلَ مُؤْمِنًا خَطَـًٔا فَتَحْرِيرُ رَقَبَةٍ مُّؤْمِنَةٍ وَدِيَةٌ مُّسَلَّمَةٌ إِلَىٰٓ أَهْلِهِۦٓ إِلَّآ أَن يَصَّدَّقُوا۟ ۚ فَإِن كَانَ مِن قَوْمٍ عَدُوٍّ لَّكُمْ وَهُوَ مُؤْمِنٌ فَتَحْرِيرُ رَقَبَةٍ مُّؤْمِنَةٍ ۖ وَإِن كَانَ مِن قَوْمٍۭ بَيْنَكُمْ وَبَيْنَهُم مِّيثَٰقٌ فَدِيَةٌ مُّسَلَّمَةٌ إِلَىٰٓ أَهْلِهِۦ وَتَحْرِيرُ رَقَبَةٍ مُّؤْمِنَةٍ ۖ فَمَن لَّمْ يَجِدْ فَصِيَامُ شَهْرَيْنِ مُتَتَابِعَيْنِ تَوْبَةً مِّنَ ٱللَّهِ ۗ وَكَانَ ٱللَّهُ عَلِيمًا حَكِيمًا
58:5.
As when actual or virtual state of war exists there is the likelihood that a Muslim may be killed by another Muslim by mistake, the present verse gives a timely warning to Muslims to be always on their guard against such an eventuality.
In case the slain person is a believer but happens to belong to a hostile people, then the offender shall only free a believing slave and no blood-money shall be levied on him, because money paid to a hostile people would go to strengthen their military power against Islam. In the expression, and if he be of a people between whom and you is a pact, the words, and he be a believer, have not been repeated, in order to point out that the law with regard to the Dhimmis (disbelievers under the protection of Muslims), or Mu‘ahids (disbelievers belonging to a people in alliance with Muslims) is the same as for the Muslims.
It is worthy of note that disbelievers who are in alliance with Muslims have not only been placed on a par with the latter, but even a distinction has been made in their favour. In case a Muslim is slain, the command relating to the payment of penalty has been placed after the injunction to free a slave; while in case one belonging to a people in alliance with Muslims is slain, the order has been reversed; the injunction to pay the penalty to his heirs having been put before the injunction to free a slave. This has been done to impress upon Muslims the need of showing special regard for treaties and pacts. The payment of penalty was an obligation which Muslims owed to disbelievers with whom they had made a pact, and it is in order to bring home to them the lesson that they should have particular regard for their pacts and treaties, that the injunction to pay the penalty has in their case been placed before the injunction to free a slave.
58:5.
Commentary:
As the preceding verses contained injunctions which if misconstrued or misapplied, were likely to lead to a Muslim being killed by a Muslim, the present verse gives a timely warning against such an eventuality.
The words, It does not become a believer to kill a believer, have been used to make a touching appeal to believers to abstain from killing each other, since they are like brothers. It, in no case, behoves a brother to kill a brother. The words thus contain an important injunction which forms a fitting sequence to the one contained in the preceding verses concerning the hypocrites. The verse cautions a Muslim to be always on his guard lest in carelessness he should happen to kill a brother Muslim.
In case the slain person is a believer but happens to belong to a hostile people, then the offender shall only free a believing slave and no blood money shall be levied on him, because money paid to a hostile people would go to strengthen their military power against Islam which can in no case be allowed.
In the expression, and if he be of a people between whom and you is a pact, the words, and he be a believer, have not been repeated, in order to point out that the law with regard to the dhimmis (disbelievers under the protection of Muslims), or Mu‘ahids (disbelievers belonging to a people in alliance with Muslims) is the same as for Muslims.
It is worthy of note here that disbelievers who are in alliance with Muslims have not only been placed on a par with the latter, but even a distinction has been made in favour of the former. In case a Muslim is slain, the command relating to the payment of fine has been placed after the injunction to free a slave; while in case one belonging to a people in alliance with Muslims is slain, the order has been reversed, the injunction to pay the fine to his heirs being put before the injunction to free a slave. This has been done to impress upon Muslims the need of showing special regard for treaties and pacts. The payment of fine was an obligation which Muslims owed to disbelievers with whom they had made a pact, and in order to bring home to Muslims the lesson that they should have particular regard for their pacts and treaties, the injunction to pay the fine has in their case been placed before the injunction to free a slave.
a
9:5.
b
58:5.
a
58:5.
561
Commentary:
As the preceding verses contained injunctions which if misconstrued or misapplied, were likely to lead to a Muslim being killed by a Muslim, the present verse gives a timely warning against such an eventuality.
The words, It does not become a believer to kill a believer, have been used to make a touching appeal to believers to abstain from killing each other, since they are like brothers. It, in no case, behoves a brother to kill a brother. The words thus contain an important injunction which forms a fitting sequence to the one contained in the preceding verses concerning the hypocrites. The verse cautions a Muslim to be always on his guard lest in carelessness he should happen to kill a brother Muslim.
In case the slain person is a believer but happens to belong to a hostile people, then the offender shall only free a believing slave and no blood money shall be levied on him, because money paid to a hostile people would go to strengthen their military power against Islam which can in no case be allowed.
In the expression, and if he be of a people between whom and you is a pact, the words, and he be a believer, have not been repeated, in order to point out that the law with regard to the dhimmis (disbelievers under the protection of Muslims), or Mu‘ahids (disbelievers belonging to a people in alliance with Muslims) is the same as for Muslims.
It is worthy of note here that disbelievers who are in alliance with Muslims have not only been placed on a par with the latter, but even a distinction has been made in favour of the former. In case a Muslim is slain, the command relating to the payment of fine has been placed after the injunction to free a slave; while in case one belonging to a people in alliance with Muslims is slain, the order has been reversed, the injunction to pay the fine to his heirs being put before the injunction to free a slave. This has been done to impress upon Muslims the need of showing special regard for treaties and pacts. The payment of fine was an obligation which Muslims owed to disbelievers with whom they had made a pact, and in order to bring home to Muslims the lesson that they should have particular regard for their pacts and treaties, the injunction to pay the fine has in their case been placed before the injunction to free a slave.
a
58:5.
649
As when actual or virtual state of war exists there is the likelihood that a Muslim may be killed by another Muslim by mistake, the present verse gives a timely warning to Muslims to be always on their guard against such an eventuality.
650
In case the slain person is a believer but happens to belong to a hostile people, then the offender shall only free a believing slave and no blood-money shall be levied on him, because money paid to a hostile people would go to strengthen their military power against Islam. In the expression, and if he be of a people between whom and you is a pact, the words, and he be a believer, have not been repeated, in order to point out that the law with regard to the Dhimmis (disbelievers under the protection of Muslims), or Mu‘ahids (disbelievers belonging to a people in alliance with Muslims) is the same as for the Muslims.
651
It is worthy of note that disbelievers who are in alliance with Muslims have not only been placed on a par with the latter, but even a distinction has been made in their favour. In case a Muslim is slain, the command relating to the payment of penalty has been placed after the injunction to free a slave; while in case one belonging to a people in alliance with Muslims is slain, the order has been reversed; the injunction to pay the penalty to his heirs having been put before the injunction to free a slave. This has been done to impress upon Muslims the need of showing special regard for treaties and pacts. The payment of penalty was an obligation which Muslims owed to disbelievers with whom they had made a pact, and it is in order to bring home to them the lesson that they should have particular regard for their pacts and treaties, that the injunction to pay the penalty has in their case been placed before the injunction to free a slave.
وَمَن يَقْتُلْ مُؤْمِنًا مُّتَعَمِّدًا فَجَزَآؤُهُۥ جَهَنَّمُ خَٰلِدًا فِيهَا وَغَضِبَ ٱللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَلَعَنَهُۥ وَأَعَدَّ لَهُۥ عَذَابًا عَظِيمًا
25:69, 70.
25:69, 70.
25:69-70.
Commentary:
The solidarity of Islam and the tie of brotherhood among believers have been made absolutely inviolable. One who knowingly kills a fellow Muslim is like one who kills a son of his own father under the very eyes of the latter. The father would have nothing to do with such a man.
c
25:69, 70.
a
25:69-70.
562
Commentary:
The solidarity of Islam and the tie of brotherhood among believers have been made absolutely inviolable. One who knowingly kills a fellow Muslim is like one who kills a son of his own father under the very eyes of the latter. The father would have nothing to do with such a man.
b
25:69, 70.
مِنْ أَجْلِ ذَٰلِكَ كَتَبْنَا عَلَىٰ بَنِىٓ إِسْرَٰٓءِيلَ أَنَّهُۥ مَن قَتَلَ نَفْسًۢا بِغَيْرِ نَفْسٍ أَوْ فَسَادٍ فِى ٱلْأَرْضِ فَكَأَنَّمَا قَتَلَ ٱلنَّاسَ جَمِيعًا وَمَنْ أَحْيَاهَا فَكَأَنَّمَآ أَحْيَا ٱلنَّاسَ جَمِيعًا ۚ وَلَقَدْ جَآءَتْهُمْ رُسُلُنَا بِٱلْبَيِّنَٰتِ ثُمَّ إِنَّ كَثِيرًا مِّنْهُم بَعْدَ ذَٰلِكَ فِى ٱلْأَرْضِ لَمُسْرِفُونَ
7:102; 9:70; 14:10; 40:23.
这节经文所暗示的是, 这里所谈及的与阿丹的两个儿子的类似的事情而且以后会发生更重要得多的事情。在以色列后裔的兄弟中要出现一位先知。这件事将触怒以色列人反对那位先知, 他们出于妒忌而要喝他的血, 正如该隐 (Cain) 要喝他弟弟亚伯 (Abel) 的血。那位先知不是一个平常的人。他是世界的改造者。真主任命他带给全人类那本永恒的经典。人类的未来要依靠他。因此, 杀死他就等于杀了整个人类; 而保全他的生命, 可以说是, 保全整个人类。
اس سے تورات کی تعلیم کی طرف اشارہ کیا گیا ہے۔ ورنہ یہ مرادنہیں کہ یہ واقعہ نہ ہوتا تو یہ حکم بھی نہ ملتا۔ درحقیقت اس میں اشارہ ہے کہ جب کوئی شخص کسی ایسے آدمی کو ماردے جو دنیا کے لئے اہم ہو تو اسے ایسا ہی سمجھا جائے گا جیسا کہ اس نے سب دنیا کو مار دیا۔
یعنی اس کے کام میں مدد دے۔
قرآن مجید میں اِنَّ تاکید کا حرف ہے اس کا ترجمہ اردو میں ناممکن ہے اس لئے ہم نے ’’کرتے جارہے ہیں‘‘ ترجمہ کر دیا ہے جو خود تاکید کے لئے بولا جاتا ہے۔
7:102; 9:70; 14:10; 40:23.
What is hinted at in the verse is that an incident similar to that of the two sons of Adam mentioned here but of much greater import was to take place later. There was to appear among the brethren of the Israelites a Prophet. This fact was to enrage the Israelites against that Prophet and they were to become thirsty for his blood on account of envy, even as Cain had become thirsty for the blood of his brother Abel. The Prophet was to be no ordinary soul. He was to be a World-Reformer, ordained to bring the eternal Law for all mankind whose entire future depended on him, and therefore slaying him was equivalent to slaying the whole of mankind, and the preservation of his life was, as it were, the preservation of the whole of mankind.
7:102; 9:70; 14:10; 40:23.
Commentary:
This verse draws a great moral from the simple incident related in the foregoing verses. The incident of the two sons of Adam had a parallel in the history of nations, as hinted in the words, On account of this We prescribed for the Children of Israel, etc. If the incident simply related to "the two sons of Adam" it had obviously no direct bearing on the Israelites.
As a matter of fact, what is hinted at is that an incident similar to that of the two sons of Adam mentioned here, but of much greater import, was to take place later. There was to appear among the brethren of the Israelites a Prophet whose offering God was to favour with acceptance, while that of his brethren, the Israelites, was to be rejected owing to their impiety and lack of righteousness. This was to enrage the Israelites against that Prophet and they were to become thirsty for his blood on account of envy, even as Cain had become thirsty for the blood of his brother Abel. The story of Cain and Abel was, therefore, intended, as hinted in the opening words of this verse, to serve as a warning for the Israelites. The Prophet meant to be raised from among the brethren of the Israelites was to be no ordinary soul. He was to be a World-Reformer ordained to bring the eternal Law for mankind whose entire future depended on him and, therefore, his slaying was equivalent to the slaying of the whole of mankind, and the preservation of his life was, as it were, the preservation of the life of the whole of mankind. This great soul had killed no person, nor had it created disorder in the land.
The advent of this Prophet was foretold in the Bible (Deut. 18:18-22), and therein it was also announced that God would demand requital of those who did not hearken to this Prophet.
a
7:102; 9:70; 14:10; 40:23.
373
这节经文所暗示的是, 这里所谈及的与阿丹的两个儿子的类似的事情而且以后会发生更重要得多的事情。在以色列后裔的兄弟中要出现一位先知。这件事将触怒以色列人反对那位先知, 他们出于妒忌而要喝他的血, 正如该隐 (Cain) 要喝他弟弟亚伯 (Abel) 的血。那位先知不是一个平常的人。他是世界的改造者。真主任命他带给全人类那本永恒的经典。人类的未来要依靠他。因此, 杀死他就等于杀了整个人类; 而保全他的生命, 可以说是, 保全整个人类。
2
اس سے تورات کی تعلیم کی طرف اشارہ کیا گیا ہے۔ ورنہ یہ مرادنہیں کہ یہ واقعہ نہ ہوتا تو یہ حکم بھی نہ ملتا۔ درحقیقت اس میں اشارہ ہے کہ جب کوئی شخص کسی ایسے آدمی کو ماردے جو دنیا کے لئے اہم ہو تو اسے ایسا ہی سمجھا جائے گا جیسا کہ اس نے سب دنیا کو مار دیا۔
3
یعنی اس کے کام میں مدد دے۔
4
قرآن مجید میں اِنَّ تاکید کا حرف ہے اس کا ترجمہ اردو میں ناممکن ہے اس لئے ہم نے ’’کرتے جارہے ہیں‘‘ ترجمہ کر دیا ہے جو خود تاکید کے لئے بولا جاتا ہے۔
a
7:102; 9:70; 14:10; 40:23.
668
Commentary:
This verse draws a great moral from the simple incident related in the foregoing verses. The incident of the two sons of Adam had a parallel in the history of nations, as hinted in the words, On account of this We prescribed for the Children of Israel, etc. If the incident simply related to "the two sons of Adam" it had obviously no direct bearing on the Israelites.
As a matter of fact, what is hinted at is that an incident similar to that of the two sons of Adam mentioned here, but of much greater import, was to take place later. There was to appear among the brethren of the Israelites a Prophet whose offering God was to favour with acceptance, while that of his brethren, the Israelites, was to be rejected owing to their impiety and lack of righteousness. This was to enrage the Israelites against that Prophet and they were to become thirsty for his blood on account of envy, even as Cain had become thirsty for the blood of his brother Abel. The story of Cain and Abel was, therefore, intended, as hinted in the opening words of this verse, to serve as a warning for the Israelites. The Prophet meant to be raised from among the brethren of the Israelites was to be no ordinary soul. He was to be a World-Reformer ordained to bring the eternal Law for mankind whose entire future depended on him and, therefore, his slaying was equivalent to the slaying of the whole of mankind, and the preservation of his life was, as it were, the preservation of the life of the whole of mankind. This great soul had killed no person, nor had it created disorder in the land.
The advent of this Prophet was foretold in the Bible (Deut. 18:18-22), and therein it was also announced that God would demand requital of those who did not hearken to this Prophet.
a
7:102; 9:70; 14:10; 40:23.
740
What is hinted at in the verse is that an incident similar to that of the two sons of Adam mentioned here but of much greater import was to take place later. There was to appear among the brethren of the Israelites a Prophet. This fact was to enrage the Israelites against that Prophet and they were to become thirsty for his blood on account of envy, even as Cain had become thirsty for the blood of his brother Abel. The Prophet was to be no ordinary soul. He was to be a World-Reformer, ordained to bring the eternal Law for all mankind whose entire future depended on him, and therefore slaying him was equivalent to slaying the whole of mankind, and the preservation of his life was, as it were, the preservation of the whole of mankind.
۞ قُلْ تَعَالَوْا۟ أَتْلُ مَا حَرَّمَ رَبُّكُمْ عَلَيْكُمْ ۖ أَلَّا تُشْرِكُوا۟ بِهِۦ شَيْـًٔا ۖ وَبِٱلْوَٰلِدَيْنِ إِحْسَٰنًا ۖ وَلَا تَقْتُلُوٓا۟ أَوْلَٰدَكُم مِّنْ إِمْلَٰقٍ ۖ نَّحْنُ نَرْزُقُكُمْ وَإِيَّاهُمْ ۖ وَلَا تَقْرَبُوا۟ ٱلْفَوَٰحِشَ مَا ظَهَرَ مِنْهَا وَمَا بَطَنَ ۖ وَلَا تَقْتُلُوا۟ ٱلنَّفْسَ ٱلَّتِى حَرَّمَ ٱللَّهُ إِلَّا بِٱلْحَقِّ ۚ ذَٰلِكُمْ وَصَّىٰكُم بِهِۦ لَعَلَّكُمْ تَعْقِلُونَ
6:121; 7:34.
17:32.
The injunctions which follow the word "forbidden" are what God commands us to carry out. The injunctions are expressly mentioned but the converse of them which is forbidden is implied. Thus, on the one hand, by using the word "forbidden" and, on the other, by following it up with positive commandments, the verse combines in itself both the direct injunctions and their converse. The verse may be construed in another way also. The first sentence should be taken as having ended with the words what your Lord has forbidden, and the next sentence as beginning with the word ‘Alaikum which would in this case mean, "It is enjoined on you." The verse will then read as follows: "Come, I will rehearse to you what your Lord has forbidden. It is enjoined on you that you associate not anything as partner with Him..."
4:37; 17:24.
17:32.
6:121; 7:34.
Important Words:
املاق (poverty) is derived from ملق. They say ملق الشیء i.e. he erased the thing. ملقه بالعصا means, he beat him with a stick. ملق الولد امه means, the child sucked from the breasts of his mother. املق الرجل means, the man spent all his money and became poor. املاق means, poverty or destitution (Aqrab).
Commentary:
The Quran has already given the commandments and prohibitions of the Islamic Law with regard to the fruits of the earth and the flesh of animals, in opposition to the laws devised by men. Now it gives general commandments and prohibitions.
It should be noted that the injunctions which follow the word "forbidden" are what God requires us to do, and not what He forbids us to do. Thus, it is the contrary of the injunctions given in the verse that is forbidden. The injunctions have been expressly mentioned and the converse of them which is forbidden is implied. Thus, on the one hand, by using the word "forbidden" and, on the other, by following it up with positive commandments, the verse combines in itself both the direct injunctions and their converse, and the attention of the reader has been drawn to both.
The verse may also be construed in another way. The first sentence should be taken as having finished with the words ما حرم ربکم i.e. what your Lord has forbidden, and the next sentence should be taken as beginning with the words علیکمwhich would in this case mean, "it is enjoined upon you or it is incumbent on you." The verse will then read as follows:"Come, I will rehearse to you what your Lord has forbidden. It is incumbent on you that you associate not anything as partner with Him…"
The order in which the injunctions are given in this verse is noteworthy. The injunctions begin with the words, Come, I will rehearse to you what your Lord has forbidden. The Arabic word for "Lord" is رب which means "Creator, Sustainer, and Nourisher" (see 1:2), and it is the very idea of "sustaining and nourishing" that governs the order of the injunctions here given. The first injunction, i.e. associate not anything as partner with Him, pertains to the Great Nourisher, Allah. The second injunction pertains to the lesser nourishers, viz. parents. The word احسان (doing good) expresses the idea that the service of the parents enjoined in the words, do good to parents, is to be performed in the best way possible, for احسان literally signifies "doing a thing very well." Next come those who are nourished and sustained by the "lesser nourishers", viz. children. Parents are bidden to nourish and bring up their children well, as implied in the words, kill not your children for fear of poverty. Indeed, he who neglects to bring up his children properly for fear of poverty virtually "kills" them. If it is the duty of the children to serve their parents well, it is equally the duty of the parents to bring up their children well.
The pronoun "you" in the clause, it is We Who provide for you and for them, refers to parents and the pronoun "them" refers to children, the former being put before the latter in order to draw our attention to the fact that God’s providing for the parents is a proof of the fact that He will also provide for the children.
The next injunction is contained in the words, approach not foul deeds. The word فواحش (foul deeds) is the plural of فاحشه one meaning of which is "fornication or adultery" (see 4:16), which is another form of killing one’s children; for the man who forms immoral connection with a woman other than his wife, not only destroys his seed but also neglects his own wife, which cannot but affect his begetting children in lawful wedlock. Similarly, illegitimate children born of a woman other than one’s wife are not one’s own children, nor are they properly looked after.
The words, whether open or secret, used in connection with فواحش (foul deeds) refer respectively to openly going in to prostitutes and to forming secret connections with women other than one’s wife.
Next to the relations between parents and children come brotherly and friendly relations which are referred to in the words, kill not the life which Allah has made sacred. This injunction requires us to treat our brethren and friends as well as members of our society with fairness and justice. The word "killing," it will be noted, pertains not only to actually killing but to an attempt at killing as well as causing serious injury and boycotting etc. (see meaning of قتل i.e. killing under 2:62; 3:155 & 4:158). The expression, save by right, used with regard to "killing" means "except when a man has made himself deserving of the treatment to be meted out to him." For instance, in case of murder a person will be put to death only by order of proper authority. Similarly, in case of "boycotting" a person will be boycotted only under the orders of the person or the body that possesses that power. It will not be right for any man to take the law in his own hands.
d
4:37; 17:24.
e
17:32.
f
6:121; 7:34.
a
4:37; 17:24.
b
17:32.
c
6:121; 7:34.
891
Important Words:
املاق (poverty) is derived from ملق. They say ملق الشیء i.e. he erased the thing. ملقه بالعصا means, he beat him with a stick. ملق الولد امه means, the child sucked from the breasts of his mother. املق الرجل means, the man spent all his money and became poor. املاق means, poverty or destitution (Aqrab).
Commentary:
The Quran has already given the commandments and prohibitions of the Islamic Law with regard to the fruits of the earth and the flesh of animals, in opposition to the laws devised by men. Now it gives general commandments and prohibitions.
It should be noted that the injunctions which follow the word "forbidden" are what God requires us to do, and not what He forbids us to do. Thus, it is the contrary of the injunctions given in the verse that is forbidden. The injunctions have been expressly mentioned and the converse of them which is forbidden is implied. Thus, on the one hand, by using the word "forbidden" and, on the other, by following it up with positive commandments, the verse combines in itself both the direct injunctions and their converse, and the attention of the reader has been drawn to both.
The verse may also be construed in another way. The first sentence should be taken as having finished with the words ما حرم ربکم i.e. what your Lord has forbidden, and the next sentence should be taken as beginning with the words علیکمwhich would in this case mean, "it is enjoined upon you or it is incumbent on you." The verse will then read as follows:"Come, I will rehearse to you what your Lord has forbidden. It is incumbent on you that you associate not anything as partner with Him…"
The order in which the injunctions are given in this verse is noteworthy. The injunctions begin with the words, Come, I will rehearse to you what your Lord has forbidden. The Arabic word for "Lord" is رب which means "Creator, Sustainer, and Nourisher" (see 1:2), and it is the very idea of "sustaining and nourishing" that governs the order of the injunctions here given. The first injunction, i.e. associate not anything as partner with Him, pertains to the Great Nourisher, Allah. The second injunction pertains to the lesser nourishers, viz. parents. The word احسان (doing good) expresses the idea that the service of the parents enjoined in the words, do good to parents, is to be performed in the best way possible, for احسان literally signifies "doing a thing very well." Next come those who are nourished and sustained by the "lesser nourishers", viz. children. Parents are bidden to nourish and bring up their children well, as implied in the words, kill not your children for fear of poverty. Indeed, he who neglects to bring up his children properly for fear of poverty virtually "kills" them. If it is the duty of the children to serve their parents well, it is equally the duty of the parents to bring up their children well.
The pronoun "you" in the clause, it is We Who provide for you and for them, refers to parents and the pronoun "them" refers to children, the former being put before the latter in order to draw our attention to the fact that God’s providing for the parents is a proof of the fact that He will also provide for the children.
The next injunction is contained in the words, approach not foul deeds. The word فواحش (foul deeds) is the plural of فاحشه one meaning of which is "fornication or adultery" (see 4:16), which is another form of killing one’s children; for the man who forms immoral connection with a woman other than his wife, not only destroys his seed but also neglects his own wife, which cannot but affect his begetting children in lawful wedlock. Similarly, illegitimate children born of a woman other than one’s wife are not one’s own children, nor are they properly looked after.
The words, whether open or secret, used in connection with فواحش (foul deeds) refer respectively to openly going in to prostitutes and to forming secret connections with women other than one’s wife.
Next to the relations between parents and children come brotherly and friendly relations which are referred to in the words, kill not the life which Allah has made sacred. This injunction requires us to treat our brethren and friends as well as members of our society with fairness and justice. The word "killing," it will be noted, pertains not only to actually killing but to an attempt at killing as well as causing serious injury and boycotting etc. (see meaning of قتل i.e. killing under 2:62; 3:155 & 4:158). The expression, save by right, used with regard to "killing" means "except when a man has made himself deserving of the treatment to be meted out to him." For instance, in case of murder a person will be put to death only by order of proper authority. Similarly, in case of "boycotting" a person will be boycotted only under the orders of the person or the body that possesses that power. It will not be right for any man to take the law in his own hands.
a
6:121; 7:34.
e
17:32.
928
The injunctions which follow the word "forbidden" are what God commands us to carry out. The injunctions are expressly mentioned but the converse of them which is forbidden is implied. Thus, on the one hand, by using the word "forbidden" and, on the other, by following it up with positive commandments, the verse combines in itself both the direct injunctions and their converse. The verse may be construed in another way also. The first sentence should be taken as having ended with the words what your Lord has forbidden, and the next sentence as beginning with the word ‘Alaikum which would in this case mean, "It is enjoined on you." The verse will then read as follows: "Come, I will rehearse to you what your Lord has forbidden. It is enjoined on you that you associate not anything as partner with Him..."
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
وَٱلَّذِينَ لَا يَدْعُونَ مَعَ ٱللَّهِ إِلَٰهًا ءَاخَرَ وَلَا يَقْتُلُونَ ٱلنَّفْسَ ٱلَّتِى حَرَّمَ ٱللَّهُ إِلَّا بِٱلْحَقِّ وَلَا يَزْنُونَ ۚ وَمَن يَفْعَلْ ذَٰلِكَ يَلْقَ أَثَامًا
6:152; 17:33, 34.
6:152; 17:33, 34.
Idolatry, murder and adultery are the three basic sins and the fountainheads of individual depravity and social and sexual immorality. The Qur’an has reverted to these sins again and again.
6:152; 17:33, 34.
Important Words:
أثاماً (punishment of sin) is infinitive noun from أثم which means, he fell into or committed a sin or crime: he did what was unlawful. أثام means, the requital or recompense of a sin or crime or punishment thereof (Lane).
Commentary:
The verse deals with the three basic sins, i.e. idolatry, murder and adultery, the fountainheads of individual depravity and social and sexual immorality. The Quran has reverted to these three sins again and again.
a
6:152; 17:33, 34.
c
6:152; 17:33, 34.
2696
Important Words:
أثاماً (punishment of sin) is infinitive noun from أثم which means, he fell into or committed a sin or crime: he did what was unlawful. أثام means, the requital or recompense of a sin or crime or punishment thereof (Lane).
Commentary:
The verse deals with the three basic sins, i.e. idolatry, murder and adultery, the fountainheads of individual depravity and social and sexual immorality. The Quran has reverted to these three sins again and again.
b
6:152; 17:33, 34.
2090
Idolatry, murder and adultery are the three basic sins and the fountainheads of individual depravity and social and sexual immorality. The Qur’an has reverted to these sins again and again.
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.