Topic: Treasure
View Aspects
بِسْمِ ٱللَّهِ ٱلرَّحْمَٰنِ ٱلرَّحِيمِ
a除第九章以外, 每章前都有这一节; 27:31中也有。96:2也可看到。
با (Ba) 是一个虚词, 它有多种意义, 经中较常用的意义是 “以”。بِسْم (Bism) 是复合词, 因此, 意指 “以……的名义”。按照阿拉伯人的用法, 词语 اِقْرَاْ (Iqra’) 或 اَقْرَاُ (Aqra’u) 或 نَقْرَاُ (Naqra’u) 或 اِشْرَعْ (Ishra‘)或 اَشْرَعُ (Ashra‘u)或 نَشْرَعُ (Nashra‘u) 在 بِسْمِ الله (Bismillah) 前可以这样理解: “以安拉之名开始” 或 “以安拉之名诵读” 或 “我或我们以安拉之名开始” 或 “我或我们以安拉之名诵读。” 在这译文 بِسْمِ الله 这一用语被译成 “奉安拉之名”, 这是一个更为熟悉的译法 (Lane)。
اَلرَّحْمٰن (Ar-Rahman, 无限博爱者) 与 اَلرَّحِيْم (Ar-Rahim, 永久仁慈者) 都源于同一词根 رَحِمَ (Rahima) 意为: 他显示仁慈; 他是慈爱与善良的; 他宽恕。الرَّحْمٰن 这个词结合 رِقَّة (Riqqah) 即 “温柔” 与 اِحْسَان (Ihsan) 即 “善良” (مُفْرَدَات--------Mufradat)。اَلرَّحْمٰن 属于 فَعْلَان (Fa‘lan) 的范畴, اَلرَّحِيْم 属于 فَعِيْل (Fa‘il) 的范畴。按照阿拉伯语规则, 在词根上越多加字母, 它的意义就变得越广泛越深入细致 (كَشَّاف--------Kashshaf)。فَعْلَان 这个范畴传达丰满与广泛这么一个思想而 فَعِيْل 这个范畴表示重复与给予那些应得的人以慷慨的报酬 (مُحِيْط--------Muhit)。这样, اَلرَّحْمٰن 表示 “包括所有世界的仁慈”, 而 اَلرَّحِيْم 表示“有限范围但重复出现的仁慈”。鉴于上述词义, اَلرَّحْمٰن 是对一切造物, 不管他们是否努力或工作都表示他是赠予的与广泛的仁慈的主, 而 اَلرَّحِيْم 是对人类行动的反应而且作为这些行动的结果而慷概并重复地表示仁慈的主。前者仅用于安拉, 而后者也可用于人。前者的恩泽不仅及于信者与不信者, 而且及于整体造物; 后者多半及于信者。根据穆圣的话, 前一常德一般与今生有关而后一常德一般与后世有关 (مُحِيْط), 意思是, 由于今世多半是行动的世界而后世是这些行动将被一一报答的世界, 安拉的无限博爱这一常德向人们提供了今生他们各方面行动所需的物质, 而安拉的永久仁慈这一常德为将来人生带来结果。我们需要的以及我们生活所依赖的一切事物纯粹是安拉的一种恩典并且是在我们做任何事情之前或甚至在我们出生以前就向我们提供了, 而来日生活为我们预存的种种幸福将作为对我们行动的报答而给予我们。这说明, اَلرَّحْمٰن 是在我们出生之前给我们各种天赋的赐予主而 اَلرَّحِيْم 是作为我们已作的行为的报答而给予我们以种种幸福的授与主。
“اَلله” (安拉) 是真主的本名, 他是一切完美常德的惟一持有者并完全超脱一切可想像到的缺点。在阿拉伯语言中, “اَلله” (Allah) 这个词从不用于任何其他事物或神。其他语言对真主都没有一个有鉴别性的或专有的名字。其他语言中见到的许多名字都是其常德的或形容的名字而且常用作复数, 而 “اَلله” (Allah) 这个词从不用作复数, 它是一个单数的名词, 不是源于其他的词, 也从没有作过形容词。由于汉语中没有一个与之等同的单词, (因此) 就在全部译文中一直用原文的名字 “安拉”。这一看法由阿拉伯语言著名权威界所确证。“安拉”, 根据有关此词最为正确的意见, 是一个专有名词, 用于必然独自存在的真主, 包含着一切完美的常德, “ال” (Al) 这两个字母同这个词总是在一起的 (Lane)。
اِسْم (Ism) 意指一个名字或常德 (Aqrab)。在这节经文中它具有这两种意思。它意指安拉, 是安拉的本体名称, 而所述及的 اَلرَّحْمٰن (无限博爱的) 与 اَلرَّحِيْم (永远仁慈的), 那是安拉的常德的名字。بِسْمِ اللهِ الرَّحْمٰنِ الرَّحِيْم (奉无限博爱、永久仁慈的安拉之名), 是 «古兰经» 每章的第一节经文, «悔改» 一章除外, 不过这一章并非独立的一章而是 «战利品» 一章的继续。有一种说法, 相传是 伊本·阿巴斯 (اِبْنِ عَبَّاس, Ibn-e-‘Abbas) 说的, 大意是当启示任何一新章时, 启示的第一节经文是 بِسْمِ الله, 如无 بِسْمِ الله, 穆圣就不知道已开始新的一章 (داؤد--------Dawud)。这一说法说明: (1) بِسْمِ الله 这一节是 «古兰经» 的一部分而不是多余的事物, (2) «悔改» 章不是独立的一章。它也驳斥了有些人所表达的信念即 بِسْمِ الله 仅是 «开端» 章的一部分而不是 «古兰经» 每一章的一部分。相传穆圣曾进一步说过: بِسْمِ الله 这一节是 «古兰经» 每一章的一部分 («布哈里» 与 قُطْنِىْ--------Qutni)。这节居于每章之首, 具有以下重大意义。«古兰经» 是安拉的知识的宝库, 如无安拉的特殊恩典就不能接近它: “只有纯洁的人才能了解它 (的意义)” (56:80)。这样, بِسْمِ الله 被放在每章的开端来提醒一个穆斯林, 为了能接近并受益于 «古兰经» 中包含的安拉知识的宝藏, 他不仅应以一颗纯洁的心去接近它, 而且也应不断祈求安拉的帮助。بِسْمِ الله 这一节还有另一个重要目的。它是每章意义的要旨, 由于影响道德与精神事态的一切问题总会在这方面或那方面与安拉的基本常德 رَحْمٰنِيَّة (Rahmaniyyah, 无限博爱) 与 رَحِيْمِيَّة (Rahimiyyah, 永久仁慈) 有关。这样, 每章实际上在详细显示这一切所提及的安拉的常德的某些方面。有人争论说 بِسْمِ الله 这一惯用语是从较早的基督教 «圣经» 借用的。萨尔 (Sale) 说, 它是从 «波斯琐罗亚斯德教圣书» (Zend-Avesta) 借用的, 而罗德伟尔 (Rodwell) 的意见, 它是在伊斯兰教以前的阿拉伯人从犹太教徒那里借来的, 随后收编入 «古兰经»。以上两种看法都显然是错误的。首先, 穆斯林从未声称过这一或与此相似的惯用语在 «古兰经» 启示以前是没有人知道的。其次, 如果因为以完全相同或相似形式来表达的这一惯用语在伊斯兰教甚至 «古兰经» 启示以前就被阿拉伯人有时用过, 那么, 它可能就不是起源于 «古兰经», 这种争论也是错误的。其实, 就在 «古兰经» 中说, 素莱曼 (سُلَيْمَان, Solomon) 给女皇希白 (سَباء, Sheba) 的一封信中用过这一惯用语 (27:31)。穆斯林声言的是 (而且这一声言从未被驳斥过), 事实上«古兰经» 是使用这一惯用语的第一部被启示的经典。以下一种说法也是错误的: 这一惯用语句在伊斯兰教以前的阿拉伯人中间非常流行; 因为阿拉伯人过去不喜欢对安拉使用 اَلرَّحْمٰن 这个名字, 这是大家知道的事实。再者,如果这样的一些惯用语句过去曾为人知的话,这仅能证实 «古兰经» 中这一教导的真理:每一个民族都有过传警告者 (35:25); 而且也证实了 «古兰经» 中包含着过去启示的许多经典中的一切永恒真理 (98:5)。当然, «古兰经» 增添了多得多的内容而且在接收任何内容时, 改进了其形式或用法, 或者形式和用法都改进。
بَاء کے معنے معیت اور استعانت کے ہیں اور اس کا لفظی ترجمہ’’ سے‘‘ اور ’’ساتھ‘‘ ہے مگر چونکہ ان الفاظ سے معنے واضح نہیں ہوتے اس لئے ’’لے کر‘‘ کا لفظ استعمال کیا گیا ہے جو دونوں معنوں پر مشتمل ہے۔
Ar-Rahman (The Gracious) and Ar-Rahim (The Merciful) are both derived from the same root Rahima meaning, he showed mercy; he was kind and good; he forgave. The word Rahmah combines the idea of Riqqah, i.e. 'tenderness' and Ihsan, i.e. 'goodness' (Mufradat). Ar-Rahman is in the measure of Fa‘lan and Ar-Rahim in the measure of Fa‘il. According to the rules of the Arabic language, the larger the number of letters added to the root-word, the more extensive or more intensive does the meaning become (Kashshaf). The measure of Fa‘lan conveys the idea of fullness and extensiveness, while the measure of Fa‘il denotes the idea of repetition and giving liberal reward to those who deserve it (Muhit). Thus, whereas the word Ar-Rahman would denote "mercy comprehending the entire universe", the word Ar-Rahim would denote "mercy limited in its scope but repeatedly shown." In view of the above meanings Ar-Rahman
Placed before every chapter except ch.9; also in 27:31. See also 96:2.
Important Words:
ب (in) occurring here in combination with اسم is a particle used to convey a number of meanings, the one more applicable here being that of 'with'. The compound word بسم therefore would mean 'with the name of.' According to the Arab usage, the words iqra’ or aqra’u or naqra’u or ishra’ or ashra‘u or nashra‘u would be taken to be understood before بسم اللّٰه. The expression بسم اللّٰه would thus mean 'begin with the name of Allah' or 'recite with the name of Allah,' or 'I or we begin with the name of Allah.' or 'I or we recite with the name of Allah.' In the translation the words بسم اللّٰه have been rendered as "in the name of Allah", which is a more familiar form (Lane).
اسم (name), which is derived either from وسم (a mark) or سمو (height), means a name or attribute (Aqrab). Here it is used in both senses; for, firstly, it refers to 'Allah' which is the personal name of God; and, secondly, it refers to Ar-Rahman (Gracious) and Ar-Rahim (Merciful) which are His attributive names.
اللّٰه (Allah) is the name of the Supreme Being, Who is the sole possessor of all perfect attributes and is free from all defects. In the Arabic language, the word Allah is never used for any other thing or being. No other language has a distinctive name for the Supreme Being. The names found in other languages are all attributive or descriptive and are often used in the plural, but the word "Allah" is never used in the plural number. It is a simple substantive, not derived. It is never used as a qualifying word. Hence, in the absence of a parallel word in the English language, the original name "Allah" has been retained throughout the translation.
This view is corroborated by eminent authorities of the Arabic language. Lane says: "اللّٰه (Allah) according to the most correct of the opinions respecting it is a proper name, applied to the Being, Who exists necessarily by Himself, comprising all the attributes of perfection, the ال (al) being in-separable from it" (Arabic-English Lexicon). For a fuller discussion of the word 'Allah,' the reader is referred to Tafsir-e-Kabir by Hadrat Mirza Bashir-ud-Din Mahmud Ahmad, Head of the Ahmadiyya Community.
الرحمن (Gracious) and الرحیم (Merciful) are both derived from the same root رحم meaning, he showed mercy; he was kind and good; he forgave. The word رحمة combines the idea of رقة i.e. 'tenderness' and احسان i.e. 'goodness' (Mufradat). الرحمن is in the measure of فعلان and الرحیم in the measure of فعیل. According to the rules of the Arabic language, the larger the number of letters added to the root word, the more extensive or more intensive does the meaning become (Kashshaf). The measure of فعلان thus conveys the idea of fullness and extensiveness, while the measure of فعیل denotes the idea of repetition and giving liberal reward to those who deserve it (Muhit). Thus the word الرحمن would denote "mercy comprehending the entire universe," whereas the word الرحیم would denote "a mercy limited in its scope but shown repeatedly".
In view of the above, الرحمان is One Who shows mercy gratuitously and extensively to all creation without regard to effort or work, and الرحیم is One Who shows mercy in response to, and as a result of, the actions of man but shows it liberally and repeatedly. The former is applicable only to God, while the latter is applied to man also. The former extends not only to the believers and unbelievers but to the whole creation; the latter applies mostly to the believers. The Holy Prophet is reported to have said: الرحمان رحمان الدنیا و الرحیم رحیم الآخرة i.e. the attribute الرحمن generally pertains to this life, while the attribute الرحیم generally pertains to the life to come (Muhit), meaning that as this world is mostly the world of actions and the next a world where actions will be particularly rewarded, God’s attribute of الرحمن provides man with material for his works in this life, whereas His attribute of الرحیم brings about results in the life to come.
The abundance of everything which we enjoy in this life, which is indeed all a favour of God, is provided for us before we do anything to deserve it or even before we are born, while the blessings in store for us in the life to come will be given to us as a reward of our actions. This shows that الرحمن is the Bestower of gifts which precede our birth, while الرحیم is the giver of blessings which follow our deeds as their reward.
Commentary:
(i) The verse بسم اللّٰه الرحمن الرحیم is the first verse of every chapter of the Quran, except the chapter Bara’ah, which, however, is not an indepen-dent chapter but a continuation of the chapter Anfal. There is a saying reported by Ibn ‘Abbas to the effect that whenever any new chapter was revealed, Bismillah was the first verse to be revealed, and without Bismillah the Holy Prophet did not know that a new chapter had begun (Dawud). This hadith goes to prove that (1) the verse Bismillah is part of the Quran and not something supernumerary and (2) that the chapter Bara’at is not an independent chapter. It also refutes the belief expressed by some that Bismillah is a part only of Al-Fatihah and not of all the Quranic chapters. Such views are further refuted by the hadith in which the Holy Prophet is reported to have said, definitely, that the verse Bismillah is a part of all the Quranic chapters (Bukhari & Qutni).
(ii) The Holy Prophet attached great importance to the verse Bismillah. He is reported to have said that any important work which is done without reciting Bismillah is apt to prove devoid of God’s blessings. Thus, it is a general practice among Muslims to commence every work with a recital of this prayer.
(iii) The place of this verse in the beginning of every chapter has the following significance:
1. The Quran is a treasure of divine knowledge to which access cannot be had without the special favour of God. In 56:80 God says regarding the Quran: None shall touch it except those who are purified, meaning that except the favoured ones who have been purified by the hand of God, none shall grasp the deeper meaning of the Quran. Thus Bismillah has been placed at the beginning of each chapter to remind the reader that in order to have access to and benefit from the treasures of divine knowledge contained in the Quran, he should not only approach it with pure motives but also constantly invoke the help of God and try to lead a righteous life.
2. In the Old Testament (Deut. 18:18,19) we read: "I will raise them (the Israelites) up a prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee (Moses), and I will put my words in his mouth, and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him. And it shall come to pass, that whosoever will not hearken unto my words which he shall speak in my name, I will require it of him." As the Holy Prophet of Islam was raised in the likeness of Moses (Quran, 73:16), so in fulfilment of the above prophecy God so ordained that each time a new Surah was revealed, it was begun by the words: In the name of Allah. This meant that every chapter of the Quran, i.e. every new proclamation made by God through the Holy Prophet, should commence with this verse so that on the one hand the prophecy made by Moses might be fulfilled and on the other, there might be a constant repetition of the warning to the Jews and Christians that if they hearkened not to the words of the new Prophet, they would be answerable to God.
3. In the Old Testament, we also read: "But the prophet, which shall presume to speak a word in my name, which I have not commanded him to speak, or that shall speak in the name of other gods, even that prophet shall die" (Deut. 18:20). The verse Bismillah (in the name of God) has, therefore, been placed at the beginning of every chapter of the Quran so that the fact might be brought home to the Jews and Christians in particular and to other peoples in general that the success which attended the career of the Holy Prophet was a positive proof of the fact that all that he spoke was spoken by the command of God; for if it had been otherwise, he would surely have met with early destruction. The verse Bismillah is thus a standing challenge to the Jews and Christians, and every time it is repeated at the head of a chapter it serves as an argument for the truth of the Holy Prophet. This result could not have been attained if the verse had been put only in the beginning of the Quran.
4. The verse Bismillah placed before every chapter of the Quran also serves another important purpose. It is a key to the meaning of each individual chapter. This is so because all questions affecting moral and spiritual matters are related in one way or another with these fundamental divine attributes: Rahmaniyyat (grace) and Rahimiyyat (mercy). Thus each chapter is, in fact, a detailed exposition of some aspect of the divine attributes mentioned in the verse.
(iv) Some Christian writers have raised the objection that the formula of Bismillah has been borrowed from earlier Scriptures, insinuating that it cannot therefore be of Divine origin. Wherry, in his commentary has expressed the opinion that it has been borrowed from the Zend-Avesta where it has the form: بنام ایزد بخشائنده وبخشائش گر i.e. With the name of God, Forgiving, Kind. A similar objection has been raised by Sale. Rodwell, however, has expressed the opinion that the Quran borrowed the formula from the Jews, among whom it was in vogue and from whom its use was borrowed by pre-Islamic Arabs. Both these criticisms are wrong and beside the point; for firstly it has never been claimed by the Muslims that the formula in this or similar form was not known before the revelation of the Quran; secondly it is wrong to argue that the formula could not be of Divine origin even if it was sometimes used by the pre-Islamic peoples in an identical or similar form before its revelation in the Quran. As a matter of fact, the Quran itself states that Solomon used the phrase in his letter to the Queen of Sheba (27:31). What Muslims claim—and this claim has never been refuted—is that the Quran was the first Scripture to use the formula in the way it did [see (iii) above]. It is also wrong to say that the formula was in common vogue among pre-Islamic Arabs, for it is well known that Arabs had an aversion to the use of the name Ar-Rahman for God. Again, if such formulae for the praise of God were known before, it only goes to corroborate the truth of the Quranic teaching that there has not been a people to whom a Teacher has not been sent (35:25), and that the Quran is a repository of all permanent truths contained in the previous Books (98:4). It adds much more, of course, and, whatever it adopts, it improves its form or use or both.
(v) It has been asked why the word اسم (name) has been used before the word اللّٰه (Allah) in the verse Bismillah. This may be explained in a number of ways:
1. In the Arabic language the particle ب is used not only to signify connection or invoke help, but also in swearing. So if the word اسم had been dropped, the phrase باللّٰه (billah) might have meant "I swear by Allah." The introduction of اسم (name) removes this ambiguity.
2. God being the source of all goodness, even the invoking of His names proves a blessing. Says the Quran (55:79): Blessed be the name of thy Lord, the Owner of Majesty and Honour. The Holy Prophet sometimes healed people by invoking the various names of God. Therefore, the word اسم (name) has been added in order to remind the Faithful that to remember the names of God is to merit a blessing.
3. The use of the word "name" further indicates that God is hidden and can be known only through His names, i.e. attributes. By reciting Bismillah, a believer seeks the help of God through His attributes of Ar-Rahman and Ar-Rahim.
4. Again, the inner meanings of the Quran are a guarded treasure and nobody can have access to them, except under proper authority. The person who begins a recitation with the formula, In the name of Allah, says, as it were, to the guardian angels of this spiritual treasure, "I am approaching it in the name of Allah, so open to me the treasures of the inner meanings of the Quran." To the one who approaches the Quran in such a spirit, the treasures will indeed be opened. The verse, None shall touch it except those who are purified (56:80), likewise, shows that only the pure in spirit can find access to the deep secrets of the Quran.
5. Another reason for introducing the word "name" in Bismillah is to draw attention to the prophecy of Moses (Deut. 18:18-20) to which reference has already been made.
a
a除第九章以外, 每章前都有这一节; 27:31中也有。96:2也可看到。
1
با (Ba) 是一个虚词, 它有多种意义, 经中较常用的意义是 “以”。بِسْم (Bism) 是复合词, 因此, 意指 “以……的名义”。按照阿拉伯人的用法, 词语 اِقْرَاْ (Iqra’) 或 اَقْرَاُ (Aqra’u) 或 نَقْرَاُ (Naqra’u) 或 اِشْرَعْ (Ishra‘)或 اَشْرَعُ (Ashra‘u)或 نَشْرَعُ (Nashra‘u) 在 بِسْمِ الله (Bismillah) 前可以这样理解: “以安拉之名开始” 或 “以安拉之名诵读” 或 “我或我们以安拉之名开始” 或 “我或我们以安拉之名诵读。” 在这译文 بِسْمِ الله 这一用语被译成 “奉安拉之名”, 这是一个更为熟悉的译法 (Lane)。
2
اَلرَّحْمٰن (Ar-Rahman, 无限博爱者) 与 اَلرَّحِيْم (Ar-Rahim, 永久仁慈者) 都源于同一词根 رَحِمَ (Rahima) 意为: 他显示仁慈; 他是慈爱与善良的; 他宽恕。الرَّحْمٰن 这个词结合 رِقَّة (Riqqah) 即 “温柔” 与 اِحْسَان (Ihsan) 即 “善良” (مُفْرَدَات--------Mufradat)。اَلرَّحْمٰن 属于 فَعْلَان (Fa‘lan) 的范畴, اَلرَّحِيْم 属于 فَعِيْل (Fa‘il) 的范畴。按照阿拉伯语规则, 在词根上越多加字母, 它的意义就变得越广泛越深入细致 (كَشَّاف--------Kashshaf)。فَعْلَان 这个范畴传达丰满与广泛这么一个思想而 فَعِيْل 这个范畴表示重复与给予那些应得的人以慷慨的报酬 (مُحِيْط--------Muhit)。这样, اَلرَّحْمٰن 表示 “包括所有世界的仁慈”, 而 اَلرَّحِيْم 表示“有限范围但重复出现的仁慈”。鉴于上述词义, اَلرَّحْمٰن 是对一切造物, 不管他们是否努力或工作都表示他是赠予的与广泛的仁慈的主, 而 اَلرَّحِيْم 是对人类行动的反应而且作为这些行动的结果而慷概并重复地表示仁慈的主。前者仅用于安拉, 而后者也可用于人。前者的恩泽不仅及于信者与不信者, 而且及于整体造物; 后者多半及于信者。根据穆圣的话, 前一常德一般与今生有关而后一常德一般与后世有关 (مُحِيْط), 意思是, 由于今世多半是行动的世界而后世是这些行动将被一一报答的世界, 安拉的无限博爱这一常德向人们提供了今生他们各方面行动所需的物质, 而安拉的永久仁慈这一常德为将来人生带来结果。我们需要的以及我们生活所依赖的一切事物纯粹是安拉的一种恩典并且是在我们做任何事情之前或甚至在我们出生以前就向我们提供了, 而来日生活为我们预存的种种幸福将作为对我们行动的报答而给予我们。这说明, اَلرَّحْمٰن 是在我们出生之前给我们各种天赋的赐予主而 اَلرَّحِيْم 是作为我们已作的行为的报答而给予我们以种种幸福的授与主。
3
“اَلله” (安拉) 是真主的本名, 他是一切完美常德的惟一持有者并完全超脱一切可想像到的缺点。在阿拉伯语言中, “اَلله” (Allah) 这个词从不用于任何其他事物或神。其他语言对真主都没有一个有鉴别性的或专有的名字。其他语言中见到的许多名字都是其常德的或形容的名字而且常用作复数, 而 “اَلله” (Allah) 这个词从不用作复数, 它是一个单数的名词, 不是源于其他的词, 也从没有作过形容词。由于汉语中没有一个与之等同的单词, (因此) 就在全部译文中一直用原文的名字 “安拉”。这一看法由阿拉伯语言著名权威界所确证。“安拉”, 根据有关此词最为正确的意见, 是一个专有名词, 用于必然独自存在的真主, 包含着一切完美的常德, “ال” (Al) 这两个字母同这个词总是在一起的 (Lane)。
4
اِسْم (Ism) 意指一个名字或常德 (Aqrab)。在这节经文中它具有这两种意思。它意指安拉, 是安拉的本体名称, 而所述及的 اَلرَّحْمٰن (无限博爱的) 与 اَلرَّحِيْم (永远仁慈的), 那是安拉的常德的名字。بِسْمِ اللهِ الرَّحْمٰنِ الرَّحِيْم (奉无限博爱、永久仁慈的安拉之名), 是 «古兰经» 每章的第一节经文, «悔改» 一章除外, 不过这一章并非独立的一章而是 «战利品» 一章的继续。有一种说法, 相传是 伊本·阿巴斯 (اِبْنِ عَبَّاس, Ibn-e-‘Abbas) 说的, 大意是当启示任何一新章时, 启示的第一节经文是 بِسْمِ الله, 如无 بِسْمِ الله, 穆圣就不知道已开始新的一章 (داؤد--------Dawud)。这一说法说明: (1) بِسْمِ الله 这一节是 «古兰经» 的一部分而不是多余的事物, (2) «悔改» 章不是独立的一章。它也驳斥了有些人所表达的信念即 بِسْمِ الله 仅是 «开端» 章的一部分而不是 «古兰经» 每一章的一部分。相传穆圣曾进一步说过: بِسْمِ الله 这一节是 «古兰经» 每一章的一部分 («布哈里» 与 قُطْنِىْ--------Qutni)。这节居于每章之首, 具有以下重大意义。«古兰经» 是安拉的知识的宝库, 如无安拉的特殊恩典就不能接近它: “只有纯洁的人才能了解它 (的意义)” (56:80)。这样, بِسْمِ الله 被放在每章的开端来提醒一个穆斯林, 为了能接近并受益于 «古兰经» 中包含的安拉知识的宝藏, 他不仅应以一颗纯洁的心去接近它, 而且也应不断祈求安拉的帮助。بِسْمِ الله 这一节还有另一个重要目的。它是每章意义的要旨, 由于影响道德与精神事态的一切问题总会在这方面或那方面与安拉的基本常德 رَحْمٰنِيَّة (Rahmaniyyah, 无限博爱) 与 رَحِيْمِيَّة (Rahimiyyah, 永久仁慈) 有关。这样, 每章实际上在详细显示这一切所提及的安拉的常德的某些方面。有人争论说 بِسْمِ الله 这一惯用语是从较早的基督教 «圣经» 借用的。萨尔 (Sale) 说, 它是从 «波斯琐罗亚斯德教圣书» (Zend-Avesta) 借用的, 而罗德伟尔 (Rodwell) 的意见, 它是在伊斯兰教以前的阿拉伯人从犹太教徒那里借来的, 随后收编入 «古兰经»。以上两种看法都显然是错误的。首先, 穆斯林从未声称过这一或与此相似的惯用语在 «古兰经» 启示以前是没有人知道的。其次, 如果因为以完全相同或相似形式来表达的这一惯用语在伊斯兰教甚至 «古兰经» 启示以前就被阿拉伯人有时用过, 那么, 它可能就不是起源于 «古兰经», 这种争论也是错误的。其实, 就在 «古兰经» 中说, 素莱曼 (سُلَيْمَان, Solomon) 给女皇希白 (سَباء, Sheba) 的一封信中用过这一惯用语 (27:31)。穆斯林声言的是 (而且这一声言从未被驳斥过), 事实上«古兰经» 是使用这一惯用语的第一部被启示的经典。以下一种说法也是错误的: 这一惯用语句在伊斯兰教以前的阿拉伯人中间非常流行; 因为阿拉伯人过去不喜欢对安拉使用 اَلرَّحْمٰن 这个名字, 这是大家知道的事实。再者,如果这样的一些惯用语句过去曾为人知的话,这仅能证实 «古兰经» 中这一教导的真理:每一个民族都有过传警告者 (35:25); 而且也证实了 «古兰经» 中包含着过去启示的许多经典中的一切永恒真理 (98:5)。当然, «古兰经» 增添了多得多的内容而且在接收任何内容时, 改进了其形式或用法, 或者形式和用法都改进。
3
بَاء کے معنے معیت اور استعانت کے ہیں اور اس کا لفظی ترجمہ’’ سے‘‘ اور ’’ساتھ‘‘ ہے مگر چونکہ ان الفاظ سے معنے واضح نہیں ہوتے اس لئے ’’لے کر‘‘ کا لفظ استعمال کیا گیا ہے جو دونوں معنوں پر مشتمل ہے۔
a
Placed before every chapter except ch.9; also in 27:31. See also 96:2.
1
Important Words:
ب (in) occurring here in combination with اسم is a particle used to convey a number of meanings, the one more applicable here being that of 'with'. The compound word بسم therefore would mean 'with the name of.' According to the Arab usage, the words iqra’ or aqra’u or naqra’u or ishra’ or ashra‘u or nashra‘u would be taken to be understood before بسم اللّٰه. The expression بسم اللّٰه would thus mean 'begin with the name of Allah' or 'recite with the name of Allah,' or 'I or we begin with the name of Allah.' or 'I or we recite with the name of Allah.' In the translation the words بسم اللّٰه have been rendered as "in the name of Allah", which is a more familiar form (Lane).
اسم (name), which is derived either from وسم (a mark) or سمو (height), means a name or attribute (Aqrab). Here it is used in both senses; for, firstly, it refers to 'Allah' which is the personal name of God; and, secondly, it refers to Ar-Rahman (Gracious) and Ar-Rahim (Merciful) which are His attributive names.
اللّٰه (Allah) is the name of the Supreme Being, Who is the sole possessor of all perfect attributes and is free from all defects. In the Arabic language, the word Allah is never used for any other thing or being. No other language has a distinctive name for the Supreme Being. The names found in other languages are all attributive or descriptive and are often used in the plural, but the word "Allah" is never used in the plural number. It is a simple substantive, not derived. It is never used as a qualifying word. Hence, in the absence of a parallel word in the English language, the original name "Allah" has been retained throughout the translation.
This view is corroborated by eminent authorities of the Arabic language. Lane says: "اللّٰه (Allah) according to the most correct of the opinions respecting it is a proper name, applied to the Being, Who exists necessarily by Himself, comprising all the attributes of perfection, the ال (al) being in-separable from it" (Arabic-English Lexicon). For a fuller discussion of the word 'Allah,' the reader is referred to Tafsir-e-Kabir by Hadrat Mirza Bashir-ud-Din Mahmud Ahmad, Head of the Ahmadiyya Community.
الرحمن (Gracious) and الرحیم (Merciful) are both derived from the same root رحم meaning, he showed mercy; he was kind and good; he forgave. The word رحمة combines the idea of رقة i.e. 'tenderness' and احسان i.e. 'goodness' (Mufradat). الرحمن is in the measure of فعلان and الرحیم in the measure of فعیل. According to the rules of the Arabic language, the larger the number of letters added to the root word, the more extensive or more intensive does the meaning become (Kashshaf). The measure of فعلان thus conveys the idea of fullness and extensiveness, while the measure of فعیل denotes the idea of repetition and giving liberal reward to those who deserve it (Muhit). Thus the word الرحمن would denote "mercy comprehending the entire universe," whereas the word الرحیم would denote "a mercy limited in its scope but shown repeatedly".
In view of the above, الرحمان is One Who shows mercy gratuitously and extensively to all creation without regard to effort or work, and الرحیم is One Who shows mercy in response to, and as a result of, the actions of man but shows it liberally and repeatedly. The former is applicable only to God, while the latter is applied to man also. The former extends not only to the believers and unbelievers but to the whole creation; the latter applies mostly to the believers. The Holy Prophet is reported to have said: الرحمان رحمان الدنیا و الرحیم رحیم الآخرة i.e. the attribute الرحمن generally pertains to this life, while the attribute الرحیم generally pertains to the life to come (Muhit), meaning that as this world is mostly the world of actions and the next a world where actions will be particularly rewarded, God’s attribute of الرحمن provides man with material for his works in this life, whereas His attribute of الرحیم brings about results in the life to come.
The abundance of everything which we enjoy in this life, which is indeed all a favour of God, is provided for us before we do anything to deserve it or even before we are born, while the blessings in store for us in the life to come will be given to us as a reward of our actions. This shows that الرحمن is the Bestower of gifts which precede our birth, while الرحیم is the giver of blessings which follow our deeds as their reward.
Commentary:
(i) The verse بسم اللّٰه الرحمن الرحیم is the first verse of every chapter of the Quran, except the chapter Bara’ah, which, however, is not an indepen-dent chapter but a continuation of the chapter Anfal. There is a saying reported by Ibn ‘Abbas to the effect that whenever any new chapter was revealed, Bismillah was the first verse to be revealed, and without Bismillah the Holy Prophet did not know that a new chapter had begun (Dawud). This hadith goes to prove that (1) the verse Bismillah is part of the Quran and not something supernumerary and (2) that the chapter Bara’at is not an independent chapter. It also refutes the belief expressed by some that Bismillah is a part only of Al-Fatihah and not of all the Quranic chapters. Such views are further refuted by the hadith in which the Holy Prophet is reported to have said, definitely, that the verse Bismillah is a part of all the Quranic chapters (Bukhari & Qutni).
(ii) The Holy Prophet attached great importance to the verse Bismillah. He is reported to have said that any important work which is done without reciting Bismillah is apt to prove devoid of God’s blessings. Thus, it is a general practice among Muslims to commence every work with a recital of this prayer.
(iii) The place of this verse in the beginning of every chapter has the following significance:
1. The Quran is a treasure of divine knowledge to which access cannot be had without the special favour of God. In 56:80 God says regarding the Quran: None shall touch it except those who are purified, meaning that except the favoured ones who have been purified by the hand of God, none shall grasp the deeper meaning of the Quran. Thus Bismillah has been placed at the beginning of each chapter to remind the reader that in order to have access to and benefit from the treasures of divine knowledge contained in the Quran, he should not only approach it with pure motives but also constantly invoke the help of God and try to lead a righteous life.
2. In the Old Testament (Deut. 18:18,19) we read: "I will raise them (the Israelites) up a prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee (Moses), and I will put my words in his mouth, and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him. And it shall come to pass, that whosoever will not hearken unto my words which he shall speak in my name, I will require it of him." As the Holy Prophet of Islam was raised in the likeness of Moses (Quran, 73:16), so in fulfilment of the above prophecy God so ordained that each time a new Surah was revealed, it was begun by the words: In the name of Allah. This meant that every chapter of the Quran, i.e. every new proclamation made by God through the Holy Prophet, should commence with this verse so that on the one hand the prophecy made by Moses might be fulfilled and on the other, there might be a constant repetition of the warning to the Jews and Christians that if they hearkened not to the words of the new Prophet, they would be answerable to God.
3. In the Old Testament, we also read: "But the prophet, which shall presume to speak a word in my name, which I have not commanded him to speak, or that shall speak in the name of other gods, even that prophet shall die" (Deut. 18:20). The verse Bismillah (in the name of God) has, therefore, been placed at the beginning of every chapter of the Quran so that the fact might be brought home to the Jews and Christians in particular and to other peoples in general that the success which attended the career of the Holy Prophet was a positive proof of the fact that all that he spoke was spoken by the command of God; for if it had been otherwise, he would surely have met with early destruction. The verse Bismillah is thus a standing challenge to the Jews and Christians, and every time it is repeated at the head of a chapter it serves as an argument for the truth of the Holy Prophet. This result could not have been attained if the verse had been put only in the beginning of the Quran.
4. The verse Bismillah placed before every chapter of the Quran also serves another important purpose. It is a key to the meaning of each individual chapter. This is so because all questions affecting moral and spiritual matters are related in one way or another with these fundamental divine attributes: Rahmaniyyat (grace) and Rahimiyyat (mercy). Thus each chapter is, in fact, a detailed exposition of some aspect of the divine attributes mentioned in the verse.
(iv) Some Christian writers have raised the objection that the formula of Bismillah has been borrowed from earlier Scriptures, insinuating that it cannot therefore be of Divine origin. Wherry, in his commentary has expressed the opinion that it has been borrowed from the Zend-Avesta where it has the form: بنام ایزد بخشائنده وبخشائش گر i.e. With the name of God, Forgiving, Kind. A similar objection has been raised by Sale. Rodwell, however, has expressed the opinion that the Quran borrowed the formula from the Jews, among whom it was in vogue and from whom its use was borrowed by pre-Islamic Arabs. Both these criticisms are wrong and beside the point; for firstly it has never been claimed by the Muslims that the formula in this or similar form was not known before the revelation of the Quran; secondly it is wrong to argue that the formula could not be of Divine origin even if it was sometimes used by the pre-Islamic peoples in an identical or similar form before its revelation in the Quran. As a matter of fact, the Quran itself states that Solomon used the phrase in his letter to the Queen of Sheba (27:31). What Muslims claim—and this claim has never been refuted—is that the Quran was the first Scripture to use the formula in the way it did [see (iii) above]. It is also wrong to say that the formula was in common vogue among pre-Islamic Arabs, for it is well known that Arabs had an aversion to the use of the name Ar-Rahman for God. Again, if such formulae for the praise of God were known before, it only goes to corroborate the truth of the Quranic teaching that there has not been a people to whom a Teacher has not been sent (35:25), and that the Quran is a repository of all permanent truths contained in the previous Books (98:4). It adds much more, of course, and, whatever it adopts, it improves its form or use or both.
(v) It has been asked why the word اسم (name) has been used before the word اللّٰه (Allah) in the verse Bismillah. This may be explained in a number of ways:
1. In the Arabic language the particle ب is used not only to signify connection or invoke help, but also in swearing. So if the word اسم had been dropped, the phrase باللّٰه (billah) might have meant "I swear by Allah." The introduction of اسم (name) removes this ambiguity.
2. God being the source of all goodness, even the invoking of His names proves a blessing. Says the Quran (55:79): Blessed be the name of thy Lord, the Owner of Majesty and Honour. The Holy Prophet sometimes healed people by invoking the various names of God. Therefore, the word اسم (name) has been added in order to remind the Faithful that to remember the names of God is to merit a blessing.
3. The use of the word "name" further indicates that God is hidden and can be known only through His names, i.e. attributes. By reciting Bismillah, a believer seeks the help of God through His attributes of Ar-Rahman and Ar-Rahim.
4. Again, the inner meanings of the Quran are a guarded treasure and nobody can have access to them, except under proper authority. The person who begins a recitation with the formula, In the name of Allah, says, as it were, to the guardian angels of this spiritual treasure, "I am approaching it in the name of Allah, so open to me the treasures of the inner meanings of the Quran." To the one who approaches the Quran in such a spirit, the treasures will indeed be opened. The verse, None shall touch it except those who are purified (56:80), likewise, shows that only the pure in spirit can find access to the deep secrets of the Quran.
5. Another reason for introducing the word "name" in Bismillah is to draw attention to the prophecy of Moses (Deut. 18:18-20) to which reference has already been made.
a
Placed before every Chapter except Chapter 9; also in 27:31. See also 96:2.1
Ba’ is a particle used to convey a number of meanings, the one more applicable here being 'with'. The compound word Bism, therefore, would mean 'with the name of'. According to Arab usage, the words Iqra’ or Aqra’u or Naqra’u or Ishra‘ or Ashra‘u or Nashra‘u would be taken to be understood before Bismillah which expression would thus mean, 'begin with the name of Allah' or 'recite with the name of Allah', or 'I or we begin with the name of Allah', or 'I or we recite with the name of Allah'. In the translation the expression Bismillah has been rendered as 'in the name of Allah' which is a more familiar form (Lane).2
Ism means, a name or attribute (Aqrab). Here it is used in both senses. It refers to Allah which is the substantive name of God; and to Ar-Rahman (The Gracious) and Ar-Rahim (The Merciful) which are His attributive names.3
Allah is the name of the Supreme Being Who is the Sole Possessor of all perfect attributes and is completely free from all conceivable defects. In the Arabic language, the word Allah is never used for any other thing or being. No other language has a distinctive or proper name for the Supreme Being. The names found in other languages are all attributive or descriptive and are often used in the plural, but the word "Allah" is never used in the plural number. It is a simple substantive, not derived and is never used as a qualifying word. In the absence of a parallel word in the English language, the original name "Allah" has been retained throughout the Translation. This view is corroborated by eminent authorities of the Arabic language. "Allah", according to the most correct of the opinions respecting it, is a proper name, applied to the Being Who exists necessarily by Himself, comprising all the attributes of perfection, the al being inseparable from it (Lane).4
Ar-Rahman (The Gracious) and Ar-Rahim (The Merciful) are both derived from the same root Rahima meaning, he showed mercy; he was kind and good; he forgave. The word Rahmah combines the idea of Riqqah, i.e. 'tenderness' and Ihsan, i.e. 'goodness' (Mufradat). Ar-Rahman is in the measure of Fa‘lan and Ar-Rahim in the measure of Fa‘il. According to the rules of the Arabic language, the larger the number of letters added to the root-word, the more extensive or more intensive does the meaning become (Kashshaf). The measure of Fa‘lan conveys the idea of fullness and extensiveness, while the measure of Fa‘il denotes the idea of repetition and giving liberal reward to those who deserve it (Muhit). Thus, whereas the word Ar-Rahman would denote "mercy comprehending the entire universe", the word Ar-Rahim would denote "mercy limited in its scope but repeatedly shown." In view of the above meanings Ar-Rahman
وَإِن كُنتُمْ فِى رَيْبٍ مِّمَّا نَزَّلْنَا عَلَىٰ عَبْدِنَا فَأْتُوا۟ بِسُورَةٍ مِّن مِّثْلِهِۦ وَٱدْعُوا۟ شُهَدَآءَكُم مِّن دُونِ ٱللَّهِ إِن كُنتُمْ صَٰدِقِينَ
10:39; 11:14; 17:89; 52:35.
«古兰经» 无可比拟的优美绝伦的主题, 在五个不同的地方被述及, 即: 2:24; 10:39; 11:14; 17:89与52:34, 35中。五处中有两处 (2:24与10:39) 的挑战是相同的, 而在其余三处, 曾向不信道的人提出了三个不同的要求。初看, 三个不同地方的挑战的不同形式似乎不协调。其实并非如此。实际上, 这些经文内一定的要求是时常存在的, 挑战在穆圣时代, 甚至到现在, 在 «古兰经» 所述及的所有不同形式中都是开放的。
在解释这些不同形式挑战以前, 值得注意的是: «古兰经» 提到这些要求时, 始终不忘财产与权力。如前所述, 除了在本节经文中, 没有新的挑战, 而只是重复10:39 中的那个挑战, 由此得到一个肯定的结论:在财产与权力问题和创作像 «古兰经» 或其一部分的挑战之间存在着一种紧密的连系。这一连系在于这样一个事实:即 «古兰经» 是以一种无价之宝向不信道的人提出的。当不信道的人向穆圣要求各种物质财宝时 (11:13), 他告诉他们, 他的 «古兰经» 是他的无与伦比的财宝; 当他们问: “为什么没有一个天使同他一起来?” (11:13) 他回答他们说, 天使确已降临于他, 因为天使们的使命是带来主的启示, 而主的启示已赐给了他。因此, 这两种要求—对于财宝与天使降临的要求—已由天使带来的无与伦比的财宝 «古兰经» 全被满足了, 创作此类天经的挑战是为证明它的无可匹敌的素质而提出的。
现在可以把含有这项挑战的不同经文分开来看。17:89 中提出的最大一个要求, 要求不信道的人拿一本具有像 «古兰经» 全文那样包含多种多样素质的书来。那节经文中并不要求不信道的人把他们的文章做为主的言语陈述。他们可以拿出他们自己的文章并宣称它可与 «古兰经» 相提并论, 或甚至超过 古兰经»。但是, 由于当时提出那个挑战时, 全部 «古兰经» 尚未降下, 并不要求不信道的人当时当地写出像 «古兰经» 那样的经文; 这种挑战因此暗示他们永远也写不出像 «古兰经» 那样的文章, 既写不出当时那种形式的
«古兰经», 也将写不出像将要降示完整的 «古兰经»。而且, 此一挑战并不只局限於穆圣时代的不信道的人, 也可延续到所有时代抱有疑问的人以及评论家。在11:14 节经文中, 不信道的人们被约照写十章而不是写全部 «古兰经», 理由是, 那节经文中的问题并不全面涉及整部 «古兰经» 的完美而是仅涉及其部分的完美。不信道的人反对其中某些部分, 说它们有缺陷。因此, 未曾要求他们写出像全部 «古兰经» 那样一本完整的经典, 而只是用十章来替代他们认为有缺陷的那些 «古兰经» 部分, 这样就可检验它们主张的真实性。说到选择十章这个特定数目, 可以这么说, 因为在17:89 中, 全部 «古兰经» 被声称为一部完美无缺的经典, 反对 «古兰经» 的人就被约照写 «古兰经» 那样的全部经典; 但是在11:14 节经文中的问题是, 某些部分受到反对, 因此请他们挑选他们认为最有缺陷的十个部分, 然后写出类似那些部分的文章。在10:39 节中, 只要求不信教的人写出类似 «古兰经» 中的一章。这是因为, 不像上述的两节经文, 那节经文的挑战是支持 «古兰经» 本身所作出的一个宣称, 而不是驳斥不信教者的反对意见的。在10:38节经文中, «古兰经» 声称有五种非常显著的特点。为了支持这一声称, 10:39 节经文对那些否认或怀疑它的人们提出一个挑战, 要他们以同样完美的形式写出一个单章, 其中要含有像第十章所含有的这些素质。第五次挑战写出像 «古兰经» 那样的经典, 是在这节注释 (2:24) 经文中, 这节像10:39 节一样也约请不信道者写出诸如 «古兰经» 那样的一个单章。这个挑战是在
«古兰经» 被声称为引导正直的人达到精神进步最高阶段之后。不信道的人被告知, 假如他们对 «古兰经» 是源自安拉有怀疑的话, 他们应该写出一章, 使之可与 «古兰经» 对其信者那样产生精神影响方面相比拟。请看我会出版的英文较大版本的古兰注释 (The Larger Edition of Commentary, PP.58-62)。
以上解说可以表明, 这些约请不信教的人写出诸如 «古兰经» 的挑战十分明显而一一分开的, 这些挑战始终存在, 其中没有一个可以替代或取消另一个。可是, 由于 «古兰经» 包含崇高的思想, 必然要用最美丽的措词与最简洁朴实的风格来作为表示那些思想的工具; 否则它的主题就会含糊不清, 使人产生疑问, «古兰经» 的绝美经文就会损毁。这样, 不论用什么形式, 不论在哪一方面, 不信教的人所受到的写出类如 «古兰经» 的文章的挑战, 文体优美与措词雅致使之与 «古兰经» 媲美, 都形成其挑战的一部分。
10:39; 11:14; 17:89; 52:35.
The subject of the incomparable excellence of the Qur’an has been dealt with at five different places, i.e. in 2:24; 10:39; 11:14; 17:89 & 52:34, 35. In two of these five verses (2:24 & 10:39) the challenge is identical, while in the remaining three verses three separate and different demands have been made from disbelievers. At first sight this difference in the form of the challenge at different places seems to be incongruous. But it is not so. In fact, these verses contain certain demands which stand for all time. The challenge is open even today in all the different forms mentioned in the Qur’an as it was in the time of the Holy Prophet.
Before explaining the various forms of these challenges it is worth noting that their mention in the Qur’an is invariably accompanied by a reference to wealth and power, except in the present verse which, as already stated, does not contain a new challenge but only repeats the challenge made in 10:39. From this it may be safely concluded that there
10:39; 11:14; 17:89; 52:35.
Important Words:
عبد (servant). For the root meaning of the word see note under 1:5. As explained there, the verb عبد means, he showed complete submissiveness and humility; or he received the imprint of a thing. So عبد would mean a person who, through complete submission and humility to God, has become, as it were, an image of God. The word has been used here about the Holy Prophet by way of endearment and is expressive of the exalted position he holds in the sight of God.
شھداء (helpers) is the plural of شھید which is derived from شھد i.e. he was present; or he gave witness, etc. Thus شھیدmeans, one who is present; one who sees or witnesses; one who gives testimony or evidence; one who possesses much knowledge; one from whose knowledge nothing is hidden (Aqrab & Lane); also a helper (Mufradat). Following the last mentioned signification the word may also refer here to the Jews who were friends of the disbelievers (5:81) and spoke of the idolaters as being better guided in religion than those who believe (4:52).
Commentary:
In the preceding two verses the Quran gave its first commandment to the people. Having been thus directly addressed by God, the polytheistic disbelievers felt a natural reaction to repudiate the monotheistic teaching of the Quran, because they felt that its acceptance meant that they should give up their long cherished beliefs.
In the present verse God says that if the Quran created doubts and disquietude in their minds and is not worthy of acceptance, the disbelievers should produce one like it. If they cannot, then this very fact would prove them to be wrong.
The subject of the incomparable excellence of the Quran, has been dealt with at five different places in the Quran, i.e. in 2:24; 10:39; 11:14; 17:89; & 52:34, 35, and disbelievers have been challenged, to produce its equal.
In two of these five verses (2:24 & 10:39) the challenge is identical, while in the remaining three verses three separate and different demands have been made from disbelievers. Thus, to begin with the largest demand in 17:89, disbelievers are challenged to produce the like of the whole Quran, and they have been told that even if all jinn and men should join together, they would not be able to produce it. In 11:14 the challenge is limited to the production of ten chapters. In 2:24 and 10:39, however, it has been confined to one Surah only; while in 52:34-35, the condition of even one Surahhas been omitted and disbelievers have been given the option of producing even a single narration similar to any one narration (i.e. announcement) of the Quran. On the face of it, this difference in the form of the challenge at different places seems to be incongruent and to spring from a lack of harmony in the Quran. Some commentators have endeavoured to explain away this seeming incongruity by saying that it was due to the challenge having been made at different times. At first disbelievers were called upon to produce the like of the whole Quran. When they failed to do so, the challenge was whittled down to the production of the like of any ten chapters. When, however, they were unable to produce even ten chapters, the challenge was further reduced to the production of a single chapter; and, lastly, disbelievers were asked to produce even a single narration like any narration of the Quran. This explanation, however, does not seem to be satisfactory. The different Surahs containing these different challenges were revealed, in the following order: (1) 52:34, 35; (2) 17:89; (3) 11:14; (4) 10:39; (5) 2:24 (Rodwell). Now in Surah 52, the first to be revealed, the challenge is not qualified by any condition as regards size, disbelievers having been given the choice of producing even one single narration similar to any narration of the Quran. It is very strange that, whereas at first the challenge was unqualified and disbelievers were called upon to produce something comparable to any narration of the Quran, later it began to be hedged round by conditions and stipulations, first requiring disbelievers to produce the like of the whole book, then reducing the challenge to ten Surahs, and last of all reducing it to a single chapter. The order is most unnatural.
Moreover, some of the Surahs which contain this challenge were revealed on occasions so close to one another that some commentators have found it difficult to fix their order of priority with certainty. Hence it is unwise to settle this question on the basis of the chronological order of the Surahs containing this challenge.
Another point worth considering in this connection is that the verses in question do not mention any historical event but contain only a general challenge which stands for all time. Now the question is, in what form should the challenge be delivered to the world? Should disbelievers be called upon to produce the like of the whole Quran, or to produce ten Surahs like any ten Surahs of the Quran, or should they be called upon to bring forward the like of one Surah only or the like of any single piece of the Quran? If it is enough to make a demand for the like of a single piece of the Quran, why should a demand for the like of a Surah be made, and if it is enough to make a demand for the like of one Surah, the demand for the production of ten Surahs or, for that matter, for the whole of the Quran seems extravagant.
The fact is that these verses contain certain demands which stand for all time, and there is no need to enter into the question of their chronological order. The challenge can be made even today in all the different forms mentioned in the Quran as it was made at the time of the Holy Prophet.
Before explaining the various forms of these challenges it is worth noting that mention of them in the Quran is invariably accompanied by a reference to wealth and power, except in 2:24, which, as already stated, does not contain a new challenge but only repeats the challenge made in 10:39. From this it may be concluded that there exists a close connection between the question of wealth and power and the challenge for the production of the like of the Quran or a part thereof. This connection lies in the fact that the Quran has been held out to disbelievers as a priceless treasure. When disbelievers demanded material treasures from the Holy Prophet and asked, Wherefore has not a treasure been sent down to him (11:13), they were told in reply that he possessed a matchless treasure in the Quran. The same reply was repeated when disbelievers asked, Wherefore has not an angel come with him? (11:13). They were told in reply that angels did descend upon him; for their function was to bring the word of God, and the Divine Word had already been vouchsafed to him. Thus both the demand for a treasure and the demand for the descent of angels have been jointly met by offering the Quran as a matchless treasure brought down by angels, and the challenge to produce the like of the Quran has been put forward as a proof of its peerless quality.
Let us now take the different verses containing this challenge separately. The greatest demand is that made in 17:89, where disbelievers are required to bring a book like the whole of the Quran in all its manifold qualities. In this verse disbelievers are not required to represent their composition as the word of God. They may bring it forward as their own composition and declare it to be the equal of or, for that matter, better than the Quran. As, however, it was necessary to define in what respect the work to be produced was to resemble the Quran, the Quran says in the next verse, And of a truth We have (herein) set forth for mankind in various ways, all kinds of similitudes, but most of men would reject everything but disbelief (17:90), hinting thereby that if disbelievers reject the Divine origin of the Quran and believe it to be the work of the Prophet himself, then let them produce a book which, like the Quran, should possess the following excellences: (a) it should throw light on every essential subject pertaining to religion; (b) its discussion of these subjects should be exhaustive, offering detailed guidance on every question; (c) it should be free from all harm and contain nothing but good; and (d) it should aim not at the good of any particular people or community but at the well-being of all mankind, containing guidance for all temperaments and dispositions as well as for all circumstances and conditions. But as at the time when this challenge was made the whole of the Quran had not yet been revealed, disbelievers were not required to produce the like of the Quran there and then; and the challenge thus implied a prophecy that they would not be able to produce the like of it, neither in the form in which it then was nor when it became complete. Again, the challenge was not confined to the disbelievers of the Prophet’s time alone, but extended to doubters and critics of all times.
The second verse which contains a challenge is 11:14. In this verse the disbelievers’ objection that the Prophet had not come with a treasure, nor had an angel come to him, has been met by calling upon them to bring similar Surahswhich they should represent as the word of God. The latter demand, i.e. that pertaining to the representation of the required production as the word of God, has a reference to the objection of the disbelievers that no angel has come down to the Prophet. They are told that if no angel has really come to him and his claim to receive divine revelation through the medium of angels is false, then let them also produce ten Surahs, claiming, like him, that they have been brought down to them by angels, and then see what their end would be. If they had not the courage to forge a lie against God, how could they think that the Prophet could be guilty of such fabrication or, if he had dared to commit this forgery, why had he remained secure from God’s punishment?
The reason why the disbelievers in this verse have been called upon to produce ten Surahs and not the whole Quran is that the question here did not relate to the perfection of the Quran in all respects, but to that of only a portion of it. The disbelievers had objected to some parts of it being defective, as is evident from the words: They imagine that thou art now perhaps going to abandon part of that which has been revealed to thee (11:13). Hence, they have not been required here to bring a complete book like the whole Quran, but only ten Surahs in place of those parts of the Quran which they deem to be defective, in order that the truth of their assertion may be tested.
As for the selection of the specific number 10 for this purpose, it should be noted that in Arabic 10 represents a complete number. As the object was to refute the assertion of the disbelievers that certain portions of the Quran were defective, therefore the disbelievers were given the option of making as many as ten efforts to substantiate their claim. They were thus asked to produce ten Surahs not because they could produce less than that number but because the best way to refute their objection was to afford them several opportunities to substantiate the truth of their assertion. In short, since in 17:89 the whole Quran was claimed to be a perfect Book, its opponents were called upon to produce the like of the whole Quran; but since in 11:14 the point was that certain portions of it were objected to, so they were asked to choose ten such portions as appeared to them to be most defective and then, produce a composition even like those portions.
The third verse where the Quran has been declared to be matchless is 10:39. Here disbelievers have been called upon to produce the like of only one Surah of the Quran. This is so because, unlike the above-mentioned two verses, the challenge made in this verse is in support of a claim made by the Quran itself and not in refutation of any objection on the part of disbelievers. In the verses preceding 10:39, it was claimed that God possessed full authority over all things (see 10:32-36), and as a proof of this, in 10:38 the Quran was put forward as possessing the following excellences: (a) it contains teachings which could not be devised by man; (b) it has come in fulfilment of the prophecies contained in the previous Scriptures; (c) in it the imperfect teachings of the previous Scriptures have been perfected; (d) the word of God embodied in it has been made secure from being interpolated or tampered with by man; and (e) its teachings are meant for all men and all time. In support of this claim, verse 10:39 throws out a challenge to those who deny or doubt it to produce a single chapter containing these excellences in the same perfect form in which they are contained in this chapter, i.e. ch.10.
The verses 52:34, 35 contain the smallest of all demands. In these verses disbelievers are challenged to produce a single piece or a single announcement like any piece or announcement of the Quran. This demand also has been made in support of a claim made by the Quran itself and not in refutation of any objection on the part of disbelievers. Hence the smallness of the demand. The claim in question is made in the opening verses of chapter 52, i.e. Surah At-Tur, to the effect that the Quranic revelation which was promised to mankind through Moses on Mount Sinai, will continue to be written, read and published throughout the world and that its followers will continue to multiply and will comprise not only common men but persons of great spiritual and temporal eminence, and that the fountain of the new faith will continue to provide the water of eternal life to all the countries of the world so that the fulfilment of these prophecies will constitute a proof of the fact that there is a Day of Judgement. Thereafter the Quran proceeds in 52:34, 35 to challenge disbelievers that, if they look upon the revelation of the Quran to be a fabrication, then they should come forward and make a prophecy like the one made above. This challenge is unconditional and without qualification. Disbelievers are not required to represent what they produce as the word of God, nor is it laid down as a condition that their prophecy should be of their own devising. They may as they like either make a prophecy of their own devising or borrow it from any other Scripture. Again, disbelievers are not asked to bring forward as many prophecies as there are in the Quran—and these are legion—but to bring forward only one single prophecy similar to any one of the prophecies made in the beginning of the Surah. They are told that they will not be able to fulfil this demand, for such a prophecy could be made only by the Being Who is the Creator and Owner of the heavens and the earth, along with their treasures, and Who not only knows, but possesses mastery of, the unseen. This challenge also stands for all time.
The fifth challenge to produce a like of the Quran is contained in the verse under comment (2:24) and here also, as in 10:39, disbelievers have been called upon to bring a Surah like that of the Quran, not in refutation of any of their objections, but in support of a claim made by the Quran itself. In the case of the verse under comment this claim is stated in the beginning of the Surah in 2:3 which says: This is a perfect Book; there is no doubt in it; it is a guidance for the righteous. Similarly, 10:39 is also preceded with the words: there is no doubt about it (10:38). This shows that the challenge to produce a chapter like one of the Quran has special reference to the peculiarity which is described by the words, there is no doubt about it. The challenge given in the present Surah is preceded by the claim that the Quran is a guidance for those who fear God (2:3), which means that it guides the righteous to the highest stages of spiritual progress. Hence in the above challenge it has been declared that if disbelievers are in doubt as to the Divine origin of the Quran, then they should bring forward a Surah that may be comparable to the Quran in the spiritual influence it exercises over its followers.
One of the characteristics of the Quran is that, whatever chapter of it we may read, it casts a subtle and sublime spiritual influence over our minds. Thus, instead of creating doubts it dispels them and takes men to a stage where no doubt can possibly survive, which is the stage of communion with God. This stage can be attained only by the study of the Quran; no other Book can compare with it in this respect.
The above explanation will show that all these challenges calling upon disbelievers to produce the like of the Quran are quite distinct and separate one from another, and all of them stand for all time, none of them superseding or cancelling any other. The misconception that these challenges are one and the same seems to have arisen from the wrong notion that in all of them it is the elegance of the Quranic style and diction that has been held out as unique and incomparable and that it is such elegance of Arabic diction that disbelievers have been called upon to produce. But this is not the case. The challenges made in the five Surahs referred to above are not one or identical nor do they make the same demand; each has a distinct and separate demand of its own and it is in keeping with the nature of these demands that disbelievers have been called upon to produce the like of the whole Quran or a part of it.
The question now remains whether these demands also include a challenge to produce a work comparable to the Quran in elegance of style and diction. The answer is that they certainly do so, but only in an indirect way and not as a direct and fundamental demand, for sublime ideas can only be expressed in sublime language. As the Quran comprises sublime and lofty ideas, it was inevitable that the most beautiful diction and the most chaste style should have been employed as the vehicle for the expression of those ideas; otherwise, the subject matter was liable to remain obscure and doubtful and the perfect beauty of the Quran would have become marred. Thus, in whatever form and in whatever respect disbelievers have been challenged to produce a composition like the Quran, the demand for beauty of style and elegance of diction comparable to those of the Quran also forms a part of the challenge.
d
10:39; 11:14; 17:89; 52:35.
29Q
«古兰经» 无可比拟的优美绝伦的主题, 在五个不同的地方被述及, 即: 2:24; 10:39; 11:14; 17:89与52:34, 35中。五处中有两处 (2:24与10:39) 的挑战是相同的, 而在其余三处, 曾向不信道的人提出了三个不同的要求。初看, 三个不同地方的挑战的不同形式似乎不协调。其实并非如此。实际上, 这些经文内一定的要求是时常存在的, 挑战在穆圣时代, 甚至到现在, 在 «古兰经» 所述及的所有不同形式中都是开放的。
在解释这些不同形式挑战以前, 值得注意的是: «古兰经» 提到这些要求时, 始终不忘财产与权力。如前所述, 除了在本节经文中, 没有新的挑战, 而只是重复10:39 中的那个挑战, 由此得到一个肯定的结论:在财产与权力问题和创作像 «古兰经» 或其一部分的挑战之间存在着一种紧密的连系。这一连系在于这样一个事实:即 «古兰经» 是以一种无价之宝向不信道的人提出的。当不信道的人向穆圣要求各种物质财宝时 (11:13), 他告诉他们, 他的 «古兰经» 是他的无与伦比的财宝; 当他们问: “为什么没有一个天使同他一起来?” (11:13) 他回答他们说, 天使确已降临于他, 因为天使们的使命是带来主的启示, 而主的启示已赐给了他。因此, 这两种要求—对于财宝与天使降临的要求—已由天使带来的无与伦比的财宝 «古兰经» 全被满足了, 创作此类天经的挑战是为证明它的无可匹敌的素质而提出的。
现在可以把含有这项挑战的不同经文分开来看。17:89 中提出的最大一个要求, 要求不信道的人拿一本具有像 «古兰经» 全文那样包含多种多样素质的书来。那节经文中并不要求不信道的人把他们的文章做为主的言语陈述。他们可以拿出他们自己的文章并宣称它可与 «古兰经» 相提并论, 或甚至超过 古兰经»。但是, 由于当时提出那个挑战时, 全部 «古兰经» 尚未降下, 并不要求不信道的人当时当地写出像 «古兰经» 那样的经文; 这种挑战因此暗示他们永远也写不出像 «古兰经» 那样的文章, 既写不出当时那种形式的
«古兰经», 也将写不出像将要降示完整的 «古兰经»。而且, 此一挑战并不只局限於穆圣时代的不信道的人, 也可延续到所有时代抱有疑问的人以及评论家。在11:14 节经文中, 不信道的人们被约照写十章而不是写全部 «古兰经», 理由是, 那节经文中的问题并不全面涉及整部 «古兰经» 的完美而是仅涉及其部分的完美。不信道的人反对其中某些部分, 说它们有缺陷。因此, 未曾要求他们写出像全部 «古兰经» 那样一本完整的经典, 而只是用十章来替代他们认为有缺陷的那些 «古兰经» 部分, 这样就可检验它们主张的真实性。说到选择十章这个特定数目, 可以这么说, 因为在17:89 中, 全部 «古兰经» 被声称为一部完美无缺的经典, 反对 «古兰经» 的人就被约照写 «古兰经» 那样的全部经典; 但是在11:14 节经文中的问题是, 某些部分受到反对, 因此请他们挑选他们认为最有缺陷的十个部分, 然后写出类似那些部分的文章。在10:39 节中, 只要求不信教的人写出类似 «古兰经» 中的一章。这是因为, 不像上述的两节经文, 那节经文的挑战是支持 «古兰经» 本身所作出的一个宣称, 而不是驳斥不信教者的反对意见的。在10:38节经文中, «古兰经» 声称有五种非常显著的特点。为了支持这一声称, 10:39 节经文对那些否认或怀疑它的人们提出一个挑战, 要他们以同样完美的形式写出一个单章, 其中要含有像第十章所含有的这些素质。第五次挑战写出像 «古兰经» 那样的经典, 是在这节注释 (2:24) 经文中, 这节像10:39 节一样也约请不信道者写出诸如 «古兰经» 那样的一个单章。这个挑战是在
«古兰经» 被声称为引导正直的人达到精神进步最高阶段之后。不信道的人被告知, 假如他们对 «古兰经» 是源自安拉有怀疑的话, 他们应该写出一章, 使之可与 «古兰经» 对其信者那样产生精神影响方面相比拟。请看我会出版的英文较大版本的古兰注释 (The Larger Edition of Commentary, PP.58-62)。
以上解说可以表明, 这些约请不信教的人写出诸如 «古兰经» 的挑战十分明显而一一分开的, 这些挑战始终存在, 其中没有一个可以替代或取消另一个。可是, 由于 «古兰经» 包含崇高的思想, 必然要用最美丽的措词与最简洁朴实的风格来作为表示那些思想的工具; 否则它的主题就会含糊不清, 使人产生疑问, «古兰经» 的绝美经文就会损毁。这样, 不论用什么形式, 不论在哪一方面, 不信教的人所受到的写出类如 «古兰经» 的文章的挑战, 文体优美与措词雅致使之与 «古兰经» 媲美, 都形成其挑战的一部分。
a
10:39; 11:14; 17:89; 52:35.
30
Important Words:
عبد (servant). For the root meaning of the word see note under 1:5. As explained there, the verb عبد means, he showed complete submissiveness and humility; or he received the imprint of a thing. So عبد would mean a person who, through complete submission and humility to God, has become, as it were, an image of God. The word has been used here about the Holy Prophet by way of endearment and is expressive of the exalted position he holds in the sight of God.
شھداء (helpers) is the plural of شھید which is derived from شھد i.e. he was present; or he gave witness, etc. Thus شھیدmeans, one who is present; one who sees or witnesses; one who gives testimony or evidence; one who possesses much knowledge; one from whose knowledge nothing is hidden (Aqrab & Lane); also a helper (Mufradat). Following the last mentioned signification the word may also refer here to the Jews who were friends of the disbelievers (5:81) and spoke of the idolaters as being better guided in religion than those who believe (4:52).
Commentary:
In the preceding two verses the Quran gave its first commandment to the people. Having been thus directly addressed by God, the polytheistic disbelievers felt a natural reaction to repudiate the monotheistic teaching of the Quran, because they felt that its acceptance meant that they should give up their long cherished beliefs.
In the present verse God says that if the Quran created doubts and disquietude in their minds and is not worthy of acceptance, the disbelievers should produce one like it. If they cannot, then this very fact would prove them to be wrong.
The subject of the incomparable excellence of the Quran, has been dealt with at five different places in the Quran, i.e. in 2:24; 10:39; 11:14; 17:89; & 52:34, 35, and disbelievers have been challenged, to produce its equal.
In two of these five verses (2:24 & 10:39) the challenge is identical, while in the remaining three verses three separate and different demands have been made from disbelievers. Thus, to begin with the largest demand in 17:89, disbelievers are challenged to produce the like of the whole Quran, and they have been told that even if all jinn and men should join together, they would not be able to produce it. In 11:14 the challenge is limited to the production of ten chapters. In 2:24 and 10:39, however, it has been confined to one Surah only; while in 52:34-35, the condition of even one Surahhas been omitted and disbelievers have been given the option of producing even a single narration similar to any one narration (i.e. announcement) of the Quran. On the face of it, this difference in the form of the challenge at different places seems to be incongruent and to spring from a lack of harmony in the Quran. Some commentators have endeavoured to explain away this seeming incongruity by saying that it was due to the challenge having been made at different times. At first disbelievers were called upon to produce the like of the whole Quran. When they failed to do so, the challenge was whittled down to the production of the like of any ten chapters. When, however, they were unable to produce even ten chapters, the challenge was further reduced to the production of a single chapter; and, lastly, disbelievers were asked to produce even a single narration like any narration of the Quran. This explanation, however, does not seem to be satisfactory. The different Surahs containing these different challenges were revealed, in the following order: (1) 52:34, 35; (2) 17:89; (3) 11:14; (4) 10:39; (5) 2:24 (Rodwell). Now in Surah 52, the first to be revealed, the challenge is not qualified by any condition as regards size, disbelievers having been given the choice of producing even one single narration similar to any narration of the Quran. It is very strange that, whereas at first the challenge was unqualified and disbelievers were called upon to produce something comparable to any narration of the Quran, later it began to be hedged round by conditions and stipulations, first requiring disbelievers to produce the like of the whole book, then reducing the challenge to ten Surahs, and last of all reducing it to a single chapter. The order is most unnatural.
Moreover, some of the Surahs which contain this challenge were revealed on occasions so close to one another that some commentators have found it difficult to fix their order of priority with certainty. Hence it is unwise to settle this question on the basis of the chronological order of the Surahs containing this challenge.
Another point worth considering in this connection is that the verses in question do not mention any historical event but contain only a general challenge which stands for all time. Now the question is, in what form should the challenge be delivered to the world? Should disbelievers be called upon to produce the like of the whole Quran, or to produce ten Surahs like any ten Surahs of the Quran, or should they be called upon to bring forward the like of one Surah only or the like of any single piece of the Quran? If it is enough to make a demand for the like of a single piece of the Quran, why should a demand for the like of a Surah be made, and if it is enough to make a demand for the like of one Surah, the demand for the production of ten Surahs or, for that matter, for the whole of the Quran seems extravagant.
The fact is that these verses contain certain demands which stand for all time, and there is no need to enter into the question of their chronological order. The challenge can be made even today in all the different forms mentioned in the Quran as it was made at the time of the Holy Prophet.
Before explaining the various forms of these challenges it is worth noting that mention of them in the Quran is invariably accompanied by a reference to wealth and power, except in 2:24, which, as already stated, does not contain a new challenge but only repeats the challenge made in 10:39. From this it may be concluded that there exists a close connection between the question of wealth and power and the challenge for the production of the like of the Quran or a part thereof. This connection lies in the fact that the Quran has been held out to disbelievers as a priceless treasure. When disbelievers demanded material treasures from the Holy Prophet and asked, Wherefore has not a treasure been sent down to him (11:13), they were told in reply that he possessed a matchless treasure in the Quran. The same reply was repeated when disbelievers asked, Wherefore has not an angel come with him? (11:13). They were told in reply that angels did descend upon him; for their function was to bring the word of God, and the Divine Word had already been vouchsafed to him. Thus both the demand for a treasure and the demand for the descent of angels have been jointly met by offering the Quran as a matchless treasure brought down by angels, and the challenge to produce the like of the Quran has been put forward as a proof of its peerless quality.
Let us now take the different verses containing this challenge separately. The greatest demand is that made in 17:89, where disbelievers are required to bring a book like the whole of the Quran in all its manifold qualities. In this verse disbelievers are not required to represent their composition as the word of God. They may bring it forward as their own composition and declare it to be the equal of or, for that matter, better than the Quran. As, however, it was necessary to define in what respect the work to be produced was to resemble the Quran, the Quran says in the next verse, And of a truth We have (herein) set forth for mankind in various ways, all kinds of similitudes, but most of men would reject everything but disbelief (17:90), hinting thereby that if disbelievers reject the Divine origin of the Quran and believe it to be the work of the Prophet himself, then let them produce a book which, like the Quran, should possess the following excellences: (a) it should throw light on every essential subject pertaining to religion; (b) its discussion of these subjects should be exhaustive, offering detailed guidance on every question; (c) it should be free from all harm and contain nothing but good; and (d) it should aim not at the good of any particular people or community but at the well-being of all mankind, containing guidance for all temperaments and dispositions as well as for all circumstances and conditions. But as at the time when this challenge was made the whole of the Quran had not yet been revealed, disbelievers were not required to produce the like of the Quran there and then; and the challenge thus implied a prophecy that they would not be able to produce the like of it, neither in the form in which it then was nor when it became complete. Again, the challenge was not confined to the disbelievers of the Prophet’s time alone, but extended to doubters and critics of all times.
The second verse which contains a challenge is 11:14. In this verse the disbelievers’ objection that the Prophet had not come with a treasure, nor had an angel come to him, has been met by calling upon them to bring similar Surahswhich they should represent as the word of God. The latter demand, i.e. that pertaining to the representation of the required production as the word of God, has a reference to the objection of the disbelievers that no angel has come down to the Prophet. They are told that if no angel has really come to him and his claim to receive divine revelation through the medium of angels is false, then let them also produce ten Surahs, claiming, like him, that they have been brought down to them by angels, and then see what their end would be. If they had not the courage to forge a lie against God, how could they think that the Prophet could be guilty of such fabrication or, if he had dared to commit this forgery, why had he remained secure from God’s punishment?
The reason why the disbelievers in this verse have been called upon to produce ten Surahs and not the whole Quran is that the question here did not relate to the perfection of the Quran in all respects, but to that of only a portion of it. The disbelievers had objected to some parts of it being defective, as is evident from the words: They imagine that thou art now perhaps going to abandon part of that which has been revealed to thee (11:13). Hence, they have not been required here to bring a complete book like the whole Quran, but only ten Surahs in place of those parts of the Quran which they deem to be defective, in order that the truth of their assertion may be tested.
As for the selection of the specific number 10 for this purpose, it should be noted that in Arabic 10 represents a complete number. As the object was to refute the assertion of the disbelievers that certain portions of the Quran were defective, therefore the disbelievers were given the option of making as many as ten efforts to substantiate their claim. They were thus asked to produce ten Surahs not because they could produce less than that number but because the best way to refute their objection was to afford them several opportunities to substantiate the truth of their assertion. In short, since in 17:89 the whole Quran was claimed to be a perfect Book, its opponents were called upon to produce the like of the whole Quran; but since in 11:14 the point was that certain portions of it were objected to, so they were asked to choose ten such portions as appeared to them to be most defective and then, produce a composition even like those portions.
The third verse where the Quran has been declared to be matchless is 10:39. Here disbelievers have been called upon to produce the like of only one Surah of the Quran. This is so because, unlike the above-mentioned two verses, the challenge made in this verse is in support of a claim made by the Quran itself and not in refutation of any objection on the part of disbelievers. In the verses preceding 10:39, it was claimed that God possessed full authority over all things (see 10:32-36), and as a proof of this, in 10:38 the Quran was put forward as possessing the following excellences: (a) it contains teachings which could not be devised by man; (b) it has come in fulfilment of the prophecies contained in the previous Scriptures; (c) in it the imperfect teachings of the previous Scriptures have been perfected; (d) the word of God embodied in it has been made secure from being interpolated or tampered with by man; and (e) its teachings are meant for all men and all time. In support of this claim, verse 10:39 throws out a challenge to those who deny or doubt it to produce a single chapter containing these excellences in the same perfect form in which they are contained in this chapter, i.e. ch.10.
The verses 52:34, 35 contain the smallest of all demands. In these verses disbelievers are challenged to produce a single piece or a single announcement like any piece or announcement of the Quran. This demand also has been made in support of a claim made by the Quran itself and not in refutation of any objection on the part of disbelievers. Hence the smallness of the demand. The claim in question is made in the opening verses of chapter 52, i.e. Surah At-Tur, to the effect that the Quranic revelation which was promised to mankind through Moses on Mount Sinai, will continue to be written, read and published throughout the world and that its followers will continue to multiply and will comprise not only common men but persons of great spiritual and temporal eminence, and that the fountain of the new faith will continue to provide the water of eternal life to all the countries of the world so that the fulfilment of these prophecies will constitute a proof of the fact that there is a Day of Judgement. Thereafter the Quran proceeds in 52:34, 35 to challenge disbelievers that, if they look upon the revelation of the Quran to be a fabrication, then they should come forward and make a prophecy like the one made above. This challenge is unconditional and without qualification. Disbelievers are not required to represent what they produce as the word of God, nor is it laid down as a condition that their prophecy should be of their own devising. They may as they like either make a prophecy of their own devising or borrow it from any other Scripture. Again, disbelievers are not asked to bring forward as many prophecies as there are in the Quran—and these are legion—but to bring forward only one single prophecy similar to any one of the prophecies made in the beginning of the Surah. They are told that they will not be able to fulfil this demand, for such a prophecy could be made only by the Being Who is the Creator and Owner of the heavens and the earth, along with their treasures, and Who not only knows, but possesses mastery of, the unseen. This challenge also stands for all time.
The fifth challenge to produce a like of the Quran is contained in the verse under comment (2:24) and here also, as in 10:39, disbelievers have been called upon to bring a Surah like that of the Quran, not in refutation of any of their objections, but in support of a claim made by the Quran itself. In the case of the verse under comment this claim is stated in the beginning of the Surah in 2:3 which says: This is a perfect Book; there is no doubt in it; it is a guidance for the righteous. Similarly, 10:39 is also preceded with the words: there is no doubt about it (10:38). This shows that the challenge to produce a chapter like one of the Quran has special reference to the peculiarity which is described by the words, there is no doubt about it. The challenge given in the present Surah is preceded by the claim that the Quran is a guidance for those who fear God (2:3), which means that it guides the righteous to the highest stages of spiritual progress. Hence in the above challenge it has been declared that if disbelievers are in doubt as to the Divine origin of the Quran, then they should bring forward a Surah that may be comparable to the Quran in the spiritual influence it exercises over its followers.
One of the characteristics of the Quran is that, whatever chapter of it we may read, it casts a subtle and sublime spiritual influence over our minds. Thus, instead of creating doubts it dispels them and takes men to a stage where no doubt can possibly survive, which is the stage of communion with God. This stage can be attained only by the study of the Quran; no other Book can compare with it in this respect.
The above explanation will show that all these challenges calling upon disbelievers to produce the like of the Quran are quite distinct and separate one from another, and all of them stand for all time, none of them superseding or cancelling any other. The misconception that these challenges are one and the same seems to have arisen from the wrong notion that in all of them it is the elegance of the Quranic style and diction that has been held out as unique and incomparable and that it is such elegance of Arabic diction that disbelievers have been called upon to produce. But this is not the case. The challenges made in the five Surahs referred to above are not one or identical nor do they make the same demand; each has a distinct and separate demand of its own and it is in keeping with the nature of these demands that disbelievers have been called upon to produce the like of the whole Quran or a part of it.
The question now remains whether these demands also include a challenge to produce a work comparable to the Quran in elegance of style and diction. The answer is that they certainly do so, but only in an indirect way and not as a direct and fundamental demand, for sublime ideas can only be expressed in sublime language. As the Quran comprises sublime and lofty ideas, it was inevitable that the most beautiful diction and the most chaste style should have been employed as the vehicle for the expression of those ideas; otherwise, the subject matter was liable to remain obscure and doubtful and the perfect beauty of the Quran would have become marred. Thus, in whatever form and in whatever respect disbelievers have been challenged to produce a composition like the Quran, the demand for beauty of style and elegance of diction comparable to those of the Quran also forms a part of the challenge.
d
10:39; 11:14; 17:89; 52:35.
44
The subject of the incomparable excellence of the Qur’an has been dealt with at five different places, i.e. in 2:24; 10:39; 11:14; 17:89 & 52:34, 35. In two of these five verses (2:24 & 10:39) the challenge is identical, while in the remaining three verses three separate and different demands have been made from disbelievers. At first sight this difference in the form of the challenge at different places seems to be incongruous. But it is not so. In fact, these verses contain certain demands which stand for all time. The challenge is open even today in all the different forms mentioned in the Qur’an as it was in the time of the Holy Prophet.
Before explaining the various forms of these challenges it is worth noting that their mention in the Qur’an is invariably accompanied by a reference to wealth and power, except in the present verse which, as already stated, does not contain a new challenge but only repeats the challenge made in 10:39. From this it may be safely concluded that there
وَرَسُولًا إِلَىٰ بَنِىٓ إِسْرَٰٓءِيلَ أَنِّى قَدْ جِئْتُكُم بِـَٔايَةٍ مِّن رَّبِّكُمْ ۖ أَنِّىٓ أَخْلُقُ لَكُم مِّنَ ٱلطِّينِ كَهَيْـَٔةِ ٱلطَّيْرِ فَأَنفُخُ فِيهِ فَيَكُونُ طَيْرًۢا بِإِذْنِ ٱللَّهِ ۖ وَأُبْرِئُ ٱلْأَكْمَهَ وَٱلْأَبْرَصَ وَأُحْىِ ٱلْمَوْتَىٰ بِإِذْنِ ٱللَّهِ ۖ وَأُنَبِّئُكُم بِمَا تَأْكُلُونَ وَمَا تَدَّخِرُونَ فِى بُيُوتِكُمْ ۚ إِنَّ فِى ذَٰلِكَ لَءَايَةً لَّكُمْ إِن كُنتُم مُّؤْمِنِينَ
43:60; 61:7.
5:111.
“以色列人的使者” 这一句说明: 伊撒的使命的范围限于以色列人之家。他不是全世界的使者 «马太福音» 10:5-6; 15:24; 19:28。«使徒行传» 3:25, 26; 13:46。«路加福音» 19:10; 22:28-30。
طَیْر (Tair) 意指鸟。这词隐喻翱翔在精神境界中的心灵高尚的人, 正像 اَسَدْ (Asad) (字面意义为狮子) 比喻勇敢的人; دَابَّة (Dabbah) 比喻无价值的人--------人类的寄生虫 (34:15)。
خَلَقَ (Khalaqa) 的意思是: 他测量、设计、形成或计划; 安拉创造、产生以前从未存在过的物和人, 也就是说, 安拉是一切的创始者 (Lane和 لِسَانْ--------Lisan)。
هَيْئَة (Hai’ah) 意指形状; 型式; 外表; 状况; 样式或品质 (Lane)。
طِيْن (Tin) 意指泥土; 土壤; 坯模等。从比喻的意义上来说, اَلطِّيْن (At-Tin) 可以指那种具有温顺性格的人, 他们像柔软的粘土, 适於塑造成良好的类型。
أُبْرِئُ (’Ubri’u) 是原自 بَرِئَ (Bari’a), 意指他从某事中解脱出来。因此这词意味着: 我治愈疾病; 我宣布某人没有缺陷 (Lane)。
اَكْمَه (Akmah) 意指: 晚间看不见东西的人; 生来就瞎的人; 以后成为瞎子的人; 失去理性和智力的人 (مُفْرَدَات, Mufradat)。
«圣经»中没有提到为大家所公认的伊撒 (耶稣) 创造鸟这一奇迹。如果伊撒确实创造过鸟, «圣经» 就没有理由不提这事,尤其是因为创造鸟是一种奇迹, 任何-个安拉的使者以前都没有显示过类似的奇迹。提到这样的奇迹肯定会证实伊撒比所有其他先知优越, 并且会证实其以后的追随者强加他为上帝 (主) 的说法。خَلْق (Khalq) 有不同的意义: (1) 测量; 确定; 设计, (2) 形成; 做和创造等, 此节经文中所用这个词的意思为前一个意义。作为 “创造” 这个词的意思来说, 在 «古兰经» 中Khalq的行为被认为不是属于任何其他人和物的, 而是属于安拉 (13:17; 16:21; 22:74; 25:4; 31:11, 12; 35:41和46:5)。按照上面的解释并且记住 “泥土” 这词的隐喻含义, “我为你们 (的好处) 将以 (具有泥土特性的人) 创造像飞鸟形状的创造物……成为高飞的人” 这一句整段的意思是: 如果出生卑贱、但具有天生的上进能力的普通人遇到他 (安拉) 并接受其启示, 他们的一生中会经受彻底变化, 他们会从卑躬屈膝、追求实利, 关心尘世俗事不见其他东西的人变成翱翔在高尚精神穹苍中的飞鸟。这是确实发生过的事。出身卑微和受人藐视的加利利渔夫, 在高贵的训诫和他们的主人的榜样的影响下, 像鸟一样高飞, 向以色列人布讲福音。
至于医治盲人和麻疯病人, 从 «圣经» 中看来, 患有某些疾病 (麻疯, 等等) 的人们被以色列人看作是不洁净的人而不准他和其他人进行社交接触。“我宣告解放了; ”这句话的意思是, 害有这样一些病痛的人在失去了合法或社会上的种种能力和优点的情况下工作, 这些限制由伊撒去除了。或者, 伊撒过去经常给患有这些病痛的人医治。安拉派遣的先知是精神上的医生: 他们给精神上丧失视力的人们以眼睛, 给精神上的聋子以听觉, 以及恢复在精神上已死亡的人的生命 (马太福音13:15)。在这种情况下, اَكْمَه (Akmah) 这一单词可以意味着这样一种人, 他有信仰的光明, 但由于缺乏决心而经不起考验。他在白天看得见东西, 也就是说, 只要没有考验而且信仰的阳光照耀着晴空时他看得见东西, 但是夜晚来临时, 也就是说, 出现考验而不得不作出牺牲时, 他就丧失了精神上的视力而站着不动了 (参阅2:21)。同样的, اَبْرَص, Abras (麻疯) 这一单词从精神方面的意义讲, 可以意味着一个在信仰方面不完全的人, 在他身上各块健康的皮肤之间有一块块病肤。
“我将使死者复活” 这一句, 并不是说伊撒真能使死人复活。在这个世界上真正死了的人是从来也不会复活的。«古兰经» 全部教义都是绝对反对这样的一种信念的 (2:29; 23:100, 101; 21:96; 39:59, 60; 40:12; 45:27)。安拉派遣的使者给信奉他们的人的生活中带来的道德上奇迹般的改造, 以宗教的专用语来说, 称为 “使死者复生”。
整个句子的意思可以是: 伊撒告诉他的弟子应该吃些什么, 也就是他们必须使用什么来满足身体需要, 以及应该贮存什么, 也就是说贮存什么做为天国的精神财富。换句话说, 他告诉他们应该用正当合法的手段获取他们的报酬, 并且应该把他们的储蓄用于安拉的道上, 不要顾虑明天, 听它由安拉安排。(马太福音6:25, 26)。
یعنی جس طرح پرندہ انڈے سی کر بچے نکالتا ہے میں بھی اسی طرح انسانوں میں سے روحانی قابلیت کے لوگوں کو اپنی تربیت میں لے کر ایک دن اس قابل بنا دیتا ہوں کہ وہ خداتعالیٰ کی طرف روحانی پرواز کرنے والے بن جاتے ہیں۔ یہ مرادنہیں کہ میں خدا بن جاؤں گا اور نہ یہ مراد ہے کہ زندہ پرندے پیدا کروں گا۔
یہود کو حکم تھا کہ اندھوں اور مبروص کو ناپاک سمجھیں (احبار باب۱۳ و باب۲۱) مسیحؑ سے اللہ تعالیٰ نے اس ظلم کا ازالہ کروایا۔ اسی کو اس جگہ بیان کیا گیا ہے۔ لوگوں نے غلطی سے یہ سمجھ لیا کہ مادر زاد اندھوں اور مبروص کو وہ اچھا کرتے تھے۔ حالانکہ مادر زاد کے الفاظ قرآن میں نہیں۔ اور موتیا بند کے مریضوں اور مبروصوں کو عام طور پر ڈاکٹر اور حکیم اچھا کرتے رہتے ہیں مگر بدقسمتی سے مسیحؑ کے متعلق جو آیتیں آتی ہیں مسلمان ان کے وہ معنے کرتے ہیں جن سے مسیحؑ کی خدائی ثابت ہو۔
یعنی تم کو ان نیک کاموں کی خبر دوں گا جن کے کرنے سے انسان اللہ تعالیٰ کا مقرب ہو جاتا ہے۔
43:60; 61:7.
5:111.
The words "a Messenger to the Children of Israel" show that the mission of Jesus was confined to the House of Israel. He was not a World- Messenger (Matt. 10: 5, 6; 15: 24; 19: 28. Acts, 3: 25, 26; 13: 46. Luke, 19: 10; 22: 28-30).
Khalaqa means, he measured, designed, fashioned or planned; God produced or created or brought into existence a thing or being without there being any previously existing pattern or model or similitude, i.e. he originated it (Lane & Lisan).
Tin means, clay; earth; mould; etc. Figuratively, at-Tin may signify such persons as possess docile natures suitable for being moulded into any good shape like pliable clay.
Hai’ah means, form; fashion; garb; state; manner; mode or quality (Lane).
Tair means, a bird. Metaphorically the word signifies a highly spiritual man who soars high into spiritual regions as Asad (literally a lion) is used for a brave man and Dabbah for a worthless person, a worm of the earth (34:15).
’Ubri’u is derived from Bari’a which means, he was or became clear or free from a thing and signifies, I heal; I declare a person free from the defect attributed to him (Lane).
Akmah means, one who cannot see at night; one born blind; one who becomes blind afterward; one deprived of reason and understanding (Mufradat).
There is no mention in the Bible of the miracle which is popularly believed to have been performed by Jesus that he created birds. If Jesus had really created birds, there is no reason why the Bible should have omitted to mention this, particularly when the creating of birds was a miracle the like of which had never been shown before by any Messenger of God. The mention of such a miracle would certainly have established his great superiority over all other Prophets and would have lent some support to the claim to Divinity which has been foisted upon him by his later followers. Of the different meanings of Khalq—(1) measuring; determining; designing, (2) fashioning; making and creating, etc. it is in the former sense that this word has been used in this verse. In the sense of "creating," the act of Khalq has not been attributed in the Qur’an to any other being or thing except God (13:17; 16:21; 22:74; 25:4; 31:11, 12; 35:41 & 46:5). In the light of the above explanation, and keeping in
The entire clause may mean that Jesus told his disciples what they should eat, i.e. what they should spend to meet their physical needs, and what they should store up i.e. what they should lay up as spiritual treasure in Heaven. In other words he told them that their earnings should be honestly and lawfully acquired and that they should spend their savings in the way of God, having no thought for the morrow which should be left to God (Matt. 6: 25, 26).
43:60; 61:7.
5:111.
Important Words:
اخلق (I fashion out) is derived from خلق. They say خلقه meaning: (1) he measured it, or he determined its measure or proportion (e.g. they say خلق الادیم meaning, he determined the leather with a view to cutting it); (2) he designed or fashioned or planned it; (3) he made it according to a certain measure or design; (4) He (God) produced or created or brought into existence a thing or being without there being any previously existing pattern or model or similitude, i.e.He originated it; (5) he forged or fabricated a story or a lie; (6) he made a thing smooth, even and equable (Lane & Lisan).
الطین (clay) is derived from طان i.e. he made his work or deed good; he performed or executed his work or deed well. طانه الله علی الخیر means, God created him with a disposition or adaptation to that which is good, i.e. created him with a good natural disposition. طانه means, he coated or plastered it with clay or mud. طین means, clay, earth, mould, soil or mud. طینةmeans, any material sub-stance of which anything having form consists; the natural constitution or disposition of a thing. The term ابن الطین is sometimes used to signify Adam (Lane). Figuratively الطین may signify such persons as possess docile natures suitable for being moulded into any good shape like pliable clay.
الطیر (bird) which is the plural of طائر (a bird) and is also sometimes used as singular is derived from طار i.e. (1) he or it flew or moved in the air by means of wings; (2) he or it ran or moved quickly or fled. طار عقله means, his reason fled. طارت الابل means, the she-camel conceived. طار لکل منھم سھمه means, the share of each came to him. الطیر or طیر is both the plural of طائر (bird) and the noun infinitive from the verb طار. So طیر means: (1) flying birds, insects, etc.; (2) a flying bird, insect, etc., for طیر is sometimes also used as singular; (3) as an infinitive noun طیر would also give the different meanings conveyed by its verbal forms (Lane).
ھیئة (manner) is the noun infinitive from ھاء. They say ھاء الرجل meaning, the man was or became of good form and appearance or other properties denoted by ھیئة, the noun infinitive. ھاء الیه means, he desired or longed to see or find him or it. ھیأه means, he gave him or he made him have a garb or guise, etc.; he prepared or arranged it and put it in a good state. تھیأ لامر means, he became prepared for the thing, or the matter. ھیئة means, form, fashion, appearance or figure; guise or garb; state, condition or case; manner, mode or quality (Aqrab & Lane).
ابری (I heal) is derived from بری i.e. he was or became clear or free from a thing. بری من المرض means, he became free from disease, i.e. he recovered from it. بری من الدین means, he became clear of debt. ابرأه means, he cured or healed him of the disease; he declared him innocent or free from the defect attributed to him; he acquitted him (Aqrab & Lane).
الاکمه (blind) is derived from کمه i.e. he became blind; or his eyes did not see at night. کمه فلان also means, he was or became deprived of reason or understanding. کمه النھار means, the day became dark, i.e. the sun became overcast with clouds. اکمه means, one who cannot see at night; one who is born blind; one who becomes blind afterwards; one who is deprived of reason and understanding (Aqrab & Mufradat).
ابرص (leprous) is derived from برص i.e. he was or became affected with برص (leprosy) viz. a sort of whiteness that appears upon parts of the body by reason of a corrupt state of health or constitution. The moon is sometimes called الابرص because of its white hue. ارض برصاء means, a land of which the herbage has become depastured at several places so that it has become bare thereof (Aqrab & Lane). A variety of leprosy of the Hebrews (probably identical with modern leprosy) was characterized by the presence of smooth, shining, depressed white patches or scales, the hair on which participated in the whiteness, while the skin and adjacent flesh became insensible (Webster).
تاکلون (you will eat) is derived from اکل i.e. he ate; he ate up; he devoured; he consumed; he wore away, etc. The Holy Prophet is reported to have said, امرت بقریة تاکل القری i.e. I have been commanded to migrate to a town (Medina) which shall devour, (i.e. subdue and conquer) other towns (Lane).
Commentary:
With this verse begins an account of Jesus’ ministry as a Prophet of God. By using the words, a Messenger to the Children of Israel, the verse makes it clear that Jesus’ mission was confined to the House of Israel. He was not a universal Messenger. In fact, as the Gospel itself states, he expressly ordered his disciples not to preach his message to any but the Israelites: "These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, 'Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not: but go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel' " (Matt. 10:5, 6). It cannot be argued that this prohibition was confined to the lifetime of Jesus and that after his death his disciples were at liberty to preach to all the nations of the world, for this supposition is belied by the Gospel itself: "But when they persecute you in this city, flee ye into another: for verily I say unto you, Ye shall not have gone over the cities of Israel, till the son of man be come" (Matt. 10:23). According to this verse, the followers of Jesus were enjoined to confine their preaching to the Children of Israel till the time of his second coming. The same injunction is contained in Matt. 15: 24; 18: 11, 12; 19: 28; Acts 3: 25, 26; 13: 46; Luke 19: 10; 15: 4; 22: 28-30.
Only in Matt. 28:19 there appears some ambiguity about the mission of Jesus but on deeper reflection it becomes clear that here too it is the tribes of Israel that are meant, and not all peoples and all nations. The early disciples understood these words of Jesus in this very sense: "Now they which were scattered abroad upon the persecution that arose about Stephen travelled as far as Phenice, and Cyprus, and Antioch, preaching the word to none but unto the Jews only" (Acts 11: 19).
For a clear understanding of the other parts of the present verse, i.e. making birds of clay, etc. it is necessary to remember that it was Jesus’ habit to talk in parables—a way of talking which was predicted in the previous Scriptures to be a characteristic of his speech. Says the Gospel: "All these things spake Jesus unto the multitudes in parables; and without a parable spake he not unto them: that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, saying, I will open my mouth in parables" (Matt. 13:34, 35). Later historians also have referred to this peculiar characteristic of Jesus: "In his popular addresses Jesus would make free use of parables. He spoke in parables to all classes but especially to the people. Without parables he was not wont to speak to them" (Enc. Bib. under Jesus). With this torchlight of history in our hands, it does not remain difficult for us to understand or explain the "signs" of Jesus as mentioned in the present verse.
There is no mention in the Bible of the miracle of creating birds popularly believed to have been performed by Jesus. If Jesus had really created birds, there is no reason why the Bible should have omitted to mention it, particularly when the creation of birds was a miracle the like of which had never been shown before by any Messenger of God. The mention of such a miracle would certainly have established his superiority over other Prophets and would have lent some support to the claim to divinity which has been foisted upon him by his later followers. Of the different meanings of خلق i.e. measuring, determining, designing or fashioning; making and creating, etc. given under Important Words above, it is in the former sense that this word has been used in this verse. In the sense of "creating'', the act of khalq has not been attributed in the Quran to any other being or thing except God. In fact, the Quran has laid the greatest emphasis on this exclusive attribute of God Who has been again and again declared to be the sole "Creator" of all things. All others to whom creation has been attributed are declared by the Quran to have been themselves created by God and to be devoid of all power to create anything (e.g. see 13:17; 16:21; 22:74; 25:4; 31:11, 12; 35:41 and 46:5). Even the silly notion that the power of creating though the unshared prerogative of God, might have been temporarily delegated by Him to another is rejected by the Quran (39:30 & 16:72).
In the light of the above explanation, and keeping in view the figurative sense of "clay", for which see Important Words above, the clause, I will fashion out for you a creation out of clay after the manner of a bird, then I will breathe into it (a new spirit) and it will become a soaring being, would mean that if ordinary men of humble origin but possessing the inherent power of growth and development came into contact with Jesus and accepted his message they would undergo a complete transformation in their lives. From men grovelling in the dust and not seeing beyond their material cares and mundane concerns, they would become converted into birds soaring high into the lofty regions of the spiritual firmament. And this is exactly what happened. The humble and despised fishermen of Galilee, under the impact of the ennobling teaching of their Master, began soaring like birds, preaching to the world of Israel the word of God and bravely facing all sorts of hardships and privations and making sacrifices that should adorn the history of any nation. Says Jesus: "I say unto you, Take no thought for your life, what ye shall eat, and what ye shall drink; nor yet for your body, what ye shall put on. Is not the life more than meat, and the body than raiment? Behold the fowls of the air: for they sow not, neither do they reap, nor gather into barns; yet your heavenly Father feedeth them. Are ye not much better than they?" (Matt. 6:25, 26).
The miracle relating to the making of birds from clay may be interpreted in another way as well. In the time of Jesus people had a special liking for the practice of occult sciences —hypnotism, mesmerism, etc. So it is possible that God granted him special power of this kind in order to impress the people and make them believe in him. In this case the sign of making birds would mean that Jesus made small clay models of birds and then through a sort of mesmerism made them appear to fly in the air. But this did not convert them into real living birds; for as soon as the influence was removed, they fell down to the ground like so many lumps of earth. This miracle of Jesus was more or less like the miracle of the rod of Moses which was temporarily made to look like a real serpent but was actually not so. But whatever the significance of the sign, it was performed, as the verse clearly puts it, by the command of Allah, and Jesus possessed no power of creation. (For fuller description see Izalah’-e-Auham by Ahmad, the Promised Messiah).
As for healing the blind and the leprous, it appears from the Bible that persons suffering from certain diseases (leprosy, etc.) were considered unclean and were, therefore, not allowed to come in contact with other men. If, therefore, the word ابری be taken to mean, "I declare to be free", the clause would signify that the legal or social disabilities and disadvantages under which persons suffering from such maladies laboured were removed by Jesus. If, however, the word be interpreted as "I heal," then the clause would mean that Jesus used to heal persons suffering from these diseases. But as indicated above, Jesus used to speak in metaphors. So just as the "creation" spoken of is spiritual creation, the diseases mentioned are spiritual diseases. The Prophets of God are spiritual physicians; they give eyes to those that have lost spiritual sight, and they give hearing to those who are spiritually deaf, and they restore life to those who are spiritually dead (see also Matt. 13:15). In this case the word اکمه (blind or one who is blind at night) would stand for such person as possesses the light of faith but being weak, cannot stand trials. He sees in the daytime, i.e. so long as there are no trials and the sun of faith shines forth unclouded; but when the night comes on, i.e. when there are trials, and sacrifices have to be made, he loses his spiritual vision and stands still (cf. 2:21). Similarly, the word ابرص(leprous) would, in the spiritual sense, stand for one who is imperfect in faith, having patches of diseased skin among healthy ones. But even if these words be taken in their physical sense, Jesus is proved to possess no peculiar power. All Prophets heal diseases and ailments by the power of prayer. In this case, however, the word اکمه (blind) would be taken in the sense of one who cannot see at night or one whose sight is weak.
The clause, I will quicken the dead, does not mean that Jesus actually brought the dead to life. Those actually dead are never restored to life in this world. Such a belief is diametrically opposed to the whole Quranic teaching (23:100, 101; 21:96; 39:59, 60; 2:29; 40:12; 45:27). The sayings of the Holy Prophet are also clear on this point. For instance, it is related that when Jabir’s father, who was a Companion of the Holy Prophet, was killed in the Battle of Uhud and the lad was much grieved, the Holy Prophet consolingly told him that God had lovingly spoken to his father in the other world and had asked him to beg of Him anything he liked, for that would be given to him. Thereupon Jabir’s father said, "Grant me, my Lord, another lease of life on earth that I may again be killed in Thy way". God replied, "I would certainly have done so, but the word has gone forth from Me that the dead shall not be sent back to the earth" (Tirmidhi & Majah).
That the so-called dead who are reported to have been raised by Jesus were not actually dead is clear from the Gospels as well. The incident described in Matt. 9:23-25 sheds some light on it. As a matter of fact, Prophets are only sent to give life to those who are spiritually dead. Jesus, Moses, Abraham and, above all, the Holy Prophet of Islam brought about a complete change in the lives of their followers. This, in religious language, is termed raising the dead to life. Literally, too, the word موتی (the dead) does not necessarily mean those physically dead. It is also used about those who are dead spiritually, morally or intellectually. The Quran freely speaks of the quickening of the dead in the sense of granting life to the spiritually dead (e.g. 3:28; 6:123; 8:43; 25:50; 36:71). In 8:25 the Holy Prophet himself has been spoken of as giving life to the dead. Says the Quran: O ye who believe, respond to Allah and the Messenger when he calls you that he may give you life. Here it is spiritual and intellectual life that is meant, for Muslims do not believe that the Holy Prophet ever brought an actually dead person to life.
The miracles of Jesus, as mentioned in this verse, have been stated in a natural order. First of all is mentioned the change in the outlook and way of life of those that came in contact with him. From men of the world, they became men of God. They rose from the dust and began soaring in the air. Then are mentioned some of the more common spiritual diseases of which Jesus cured the people; the blind were given spiritual sight and those having diseased skins were healed. Finally, the spiritually dead are declared to have received through Jesus a new life. Thus not only a natural order but a sort of progressive order is found in the verse, the climax, so far as individual reformation is concerned, being reached with the miracle relating to the quickening of the dead. But if the verse be interpreted literally, no arrangement seems to exist in the order in which the miracles are described here, i.e. (1) the creation of birds out of clay; (2) the healing of the blind; (3) the healing of those suffering from leprosy, i.e. those who had patches of disease on their skin; and (4) the raising of the dead to life.
The true climax, however, reaches in the miracle or sign mentioned in the clause, I will announce to you what you will eat and what you will store up in your houses. According to Abul-Baqa’, the words نبأ (news) and انبأ (he gave the news) are used in the Quran for announcing matters of great importance (Kulliyyat). This shows that, what Jesus is here represented as announcing to the people, are matters of supreme im-portance to his followers. The language of the verse being parabolic, the word تاکلون (you will eat) will be taken figuratively, mean, "you will subdue or conquer" (see under Important Words above). Thus the clause, I will announce to you what you will eat, would mean, "I will let you know what you will subdue or conquer", i.e. "I will announce to you the conquests you are destined to make in future". The other expression, i.e. I will also let you know what you will store up in your houses, would mean, "I will let you know the deeds which you should or would leave behind for posterity".
The entire clause may have yet another meaning. It may mean that Jesus told his disciples: (1) what they should eat, i.e. what they should spend to meet their physical needs, and (2) what they should store up, i.e. what they should lay up as a spiritual treasure in Heaven. In other words, Jesus told them that their earnings should be honestly and lawfully acquired and that they should spend their savings in the way of God, having no thought for the morrow which should be left to God (see Matt. 6:25, 26 as quoted above).
e
43:60; 61:7.
f
5:111.
237
“以色列人的使者” 这一句说明: 伊撒的使命的范围限于以色列人之家。他不是全世界的使者 «马太福音» 10:5-6; 15:24; 19:28。«使徒行传» 3:25, 26; 13:46。«路加福音» 19:10; 22:28-30。
238
طَیْر (Tair) 意指鸟。这词隐喻翱翔在精神境界中的心灵高尚的人, 正像 اَسَدْ (Asad) (字面意义为狮子) 比喻勇敢的人; دَابَّة (Dabbah) 比喻无价值的人--------人类的寄生虫 (34:15)。
239
خَلَقَ (Khalaqa) 的意思是: 他测量、设计、形成或计划; 安拉创造、产生以前从未存在过的物和人, 也就是说, 安拉是一切的创始者 (Lane和 لِسَانْ--------Lisan)。
240
هَيْئَة (Hai’ah) 意指形状; 型式; 外表; 状况; 样式或品质 (Lane)。
241
طِيْن (Tin) 意指泥土; 土壤; 坯模等。从比喻的意义上来说, اَلطِّيْن (At-Tin) 可以指那种具有温顺性格的人, 他们像柔软的粘土, 适於塑造成良好的类型。
242
أُبْرِئُ (’Ubri’u) 是原自 بَرِئَ (Bari’a), 意指他从某事中解脱出来。因此这词意味着: 我治愈疾病; 我宣布某人没有缺陷 (Lane)。
243
اَكْمَه (Akmah) 意指: 晚间看不见东西的人; 生来就瞎的人; 以后成为瞎子的人; 失去理性和智力的人 (مُفْرَدَات, Mufradat)。
244
«圣经»中没有提到为大家所公认的伊撒 (耶稣) 创造鸟这一奇迹。如果伊撒确实创造过鸟, «圣经» 就没有理由不提这事,尤其是因为创造鸟是一种奇迹, 任何-个安拉的使者以前都没有显示过类似的奇迹。提到这样的奇迹肯定会证实伊撒比所有其他先知优越, 并且会证实其以后的追随者强加他为上帝 (主) 的说法。خَلْق (Khalq) 有不同的意义: (1) 测量; 确定; 设计, (2) 形成; 做和创造等, 此节经文中所用这个词的意思为前一个意义。作为 “创造” 这个词的意思来说, 在 «古兰经» 中Khalq的行为被认为不是属于任何其他人和物的, 而是属于安拉 (13:17; 16:21; 22:74; 25:4; 31:11, 12; 35:41和46:5)。按照上面的解释并且记住 “泥土” 这词的隐喻含义, “我为你们 (的好处) 将以 (具有泥土特性的人) 创造像飞鸟形状的创造物……成为高飞的人” 这一句整段的意思是: 如果出生卑贱、但具有天生的上进能力的普通人遇到他 (安拉) 并接受其启示, 他们的一生中会经受彻底变化, 他们会从卑躬屈膝、追求实利, 关心尘世俗事不见其他东西的人变成翱翔在高尚精神穹苍中的飞鸟。这是确实发生过的事。出身卑微和受人藐视的加利利渔夫, 在高贵的训诫和他们的主人的榜样的影响下, 像鸟一样高飞, 向以色列人布讲福音。
至于医治盲人和麻疯病人, 从 «圣经» 中看来, 患有某些疾病 (麻疯, 等等) 的人们被以色列人看作是不洁净的人而不准他和其他人进行社交接触。“我宣告解放了; ”这句话的意思是, 害有这样一些病痛的人在失去了合法或社会上的种种能力和优点的情况下工作, 这些限制由伊撒去除了。或者, 伊撒过去经常给患有这些病痛的人医治。安拉派遣的先知是精神上的医生: 他们给精神上丧失视力的人们以眼睛, 给精神上的聋子以听觉, 以及恢复在精神上已死亡的人的生命 (马太福音13:15)。在这种情况下, اَكْمَه (Akmah) 这一单词可以意味着这样一种人, 他有信仰的光明, 但由于缺乏决心而经不起考验。他在白天看得见东西, 也就是说, 只要没有考验而且信仰的阳光照耀着晴空时他看得见东西, 但是夜晚来临时, 也就是说, 出现考验而不得不作出牺牲时, 他就丧失了精神上的视力而站着不动了 (参阅2:21)。同样的, اَبْرَص, Abras (麻疯) 这一单词从精神方面的意义讲, 可以意味着一个在信仰方面不完全的人, 在他身上各块健康的皮肤之间有一块块病肤。
“我将使死者复活” 这一句, 并不是说伊撒真能使死人复活。在这个世界上真正死了的人是从来也不会复活的。«古兰经» 全部教义都是绝对反对这样的一种信念的 (2:29; 23:100, 101; 21:96; 39:59, 60; 40:12; 45:27)。安拉派遣的使者给信奉他们的人的生活中带来的道德上奇迹般的改造, 以宗教的专用语来说, 称为 “使死者复生”。
245
整个句子的意思可以是: 伊撒告诉他的弟子应该吃些什么, 也就是他们必须使用什么来满足身体需要, 以及应该贮存什么, 也就是说贮存什么做为天国的精神财富。换句话说, 他告诉他们应该用正当合法的手段获取他们的报酬, 并且应该把他们的储蓄用于安拉的道上, 不要顾虑明天, 听它由安拉安排。(马太福音6:25, 26)。
1
یعنی جس طرح پرندہ انڈے سی کر بچے نکالتا ہے میں بھی اسی طرح انسانوں میں سے روحانی قابلیت کے لوگوں کو اپنی تربیت میں لے کر ایک دن اس قابل بنا دیتا ہوں کہ وہ خداتعالیٰ کی طرف روحانی پرواز کرنے والے بن جاتے ہیں۔ یہ مرادنہیں کہ میں خدا بن جاؤں گا اور نہ یہ مراد ہے کہ زندہ پرندے پیدا کروں گا۔
2
یہود کو حکم تھا کہ اندھوں اور مبروص کو ناپاک سمجھیں (احبار باب۱۳ و باب۲۱) مسیحؑ سے اللہ تعالیٰ نے اس ظلم کا ازالہ کروایا۔ اسی کو اس جگہ بیان کیا گیا ہے۔ لوگوں نے غلطی سے یہ سمجھ لیا کہ مادر زاد اندھوں اور مبروص کو وہ اچھا کرتے تھے۔ حالانکہ مادر زاد کے الفاظ قرآن میں نہیں۔ اور موتیا بند کے مریضوں اور مبروصوں کو عام طور پر ڈاکٹر اور حکیم اچھا کرتے رہتے ہیں مگر بدقسمتی سے مسیحؑ کے متعلق جو آیتیں آتی ہیں مسلمان ان کے وہ معنے کرتے ہیں جن سے مسیحؑ کی خدائی ثابت ہو۔
3
یعنی تم کو ان نیک کاموں کی خبر دوں گا جن کے کرنے سے انسان اللہ تعالیٰ کا مقرب ہو جاتا ہے۔
b
43:60; 61:7.
c
5:111.
339
Important Words:
اخلق (I fashion out) is derived from خلق. They say خلقه meaning: (1) he measured it, or he determined its measure or proportion (e.g. they say خلق الادیم meaning, he determined the leather with a view to cutting it); (2) he designed or fashioned or planned it; (3) he made it according to a certain measure or design; (4) He (God) produced or created or brought into existence a thing or being without there being any previously existing pattern or model or similitude, i.e.He originated it; (5) he forged or fabricated a story or a lie; (6) he made a thing smooth, even and equable (Lane & Lisan).
الطین (clay) is derived from طان i.e. he made his work or deed good; he performed or executed his work or deed well. طانه الله علی الخیر means, God created him with a disposition or adaptation to that which is good, i.e. created him with a good natural disposition. طانه means, he coated or plastered it with clay or mud. طین means, clay, earth, mould, soil or mud. طینةmeans, any material sub-stance of which anything having form consists; the natural constitution or disposition of a thing. The term ابن الطین is sometimes used to signify Adam (Lane). Figuratively الطین may signify such persons as possess docile natures suitable for being moulded into any good shape like pliable clay.
الطیر (bird) which is the plural of طائر (a bird) and is also sometimes used as singular is derived from طار i.e. (1) he or it flew or moved in the air by means of wings; (2) he or it ran or moved quickly or fled. طار عقله means, his reason fled. طارت الابل means, the she-camel conceived. طار لکل منھم سھمه means, the share of each came to him. الطیر or طیر is both the plural of طائر (bird) and the noun infinitive from the verb طار. So طیر means: (1) flying birds, insects, etc.; (2) a flying bird, insect, etc., for طیر is sometimes also used as singular; (3) as an infinitive noun طیر would also give the different meanings conveyed by its verbal forms (Lane).
ھیئة (manner) is the noun infinitive from ھاء. They say ھاء الرجل meaning, the man was or became of good form and appearance or other properties denoted by ھیئة, the noun infinitive. ھاء الیه means, he desired or longed to see or find him or it. ھیأه means, he gave him or he made him have a garb or guise, etc.; he prepared or arranged it and put it in a good state. تھیأ لامر means, he became prepared for the thing, or the matter. ھیئة means, form, fashion, appearance or figure; guise or garb; state, condition or case; manner, mode or quality (Aqrab & Lane).
ابری (I heal) is derived from بری i.e. he was or became clear or free from a thing. بری من المرض means, he became free from disease, i.e. he recovered from it. بری من الدین means, he became clear of debt. ابرأه means, he cured or healed him of the disease; he declared him innocent or free from the defect attributed to him; he acquitted him (Aqrab & Lane).
الاکمه (blind) is derived from کمه i.e. he became blind; or his eyes did not see at night. کمه فلان also means, he was or became deprived of reason or understanding. کمه النھار means, the day became dark, i.e. the sun became overcast with clouds. اکمه means, one who cannot see at night; one who is born blind; one who becomes blind afterwards; one who is deprived of reason and understanding (Aqrab & Mufradat).
ابرص (leprous) is derived from برص i.e. he was or became affected with برص (leprosy) viz. a sort of whiteness that appears upon parts of the body by reason of a corrupt state of health or constitution. The moon is sometimes called الابرص because of its white hue. ارض برصاء means, a land of which the herbage has become depastured at several places so that it has become bare thereof (Aqrab & Lane). A variety of leprosy of the Hebrews (probably identical with modern leprosy) was characterized by the presence of smooth, shining, depressed white patches or scales, the hair on which participated in the whiteness, while the skin and adjacent flesh became insensible (Webster).
تاکلون (you will eat) is derived from اکل i.e. he ate; he ate up; he devoured; he consumed; he wore away, etc. The Holy Prophet is reported to have said, امرت بقریة تاکل القری i.e. I have been commanded to migrate to a town (Medina) which shall devour, (i.e. subdue and conquer) other towns (Lane).
Commentary:
With this verse begins an account of Jesus’ ministry as a Prophet of God. By using the words, a Messenger to the Children of Israel, the verse makes it clear that Jesus’ mission was confined to the House of Israel. He was not a universal Messenger. In fact, as the Gospel itself states, he expressly ordered his disciples not to preach his message to any but the Israelites: "These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, 'Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not: but go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel' " (Matt. 10:5, 6). It cannot be argued that this prohibition was confined to the lifetime of Jesus and that after his death his disciples were at liberty to preach to all the nations of the world, for this supposition is belied by the Gospel itself: "But when they persecute you in this city, flee ye into another: for verily I say unto you, Ye shall not have gone over the cities of Israel, till the son of man be come" (Matt. 10:23). According to this verse, the followers of Jesus were enjoined to confine their preaching to the Children of Israel till the time of his second coming. The same injunction is contained in Matt. 15: 24; 18: 11, 12; 19: 28; Acts 3: 25, 26; 13: 46; Luke 19: 10; 15: 4; 22: 28-30.
Only in Matt. 28:19 there appears some ambiguity about the mission of Jesus but on deeper reflection it becomes clear that here too it is the tribes of Israel that are meant, and not all peoples and all nations. The early disciples understood these words of Jesus in this very sense: "Now they which were scattered abroad upon the persecution that arose about Stephen travelled as far as Phenice, and Cyprus, and Antioch, preaching the word to none but unto the Jews only" (Acts 11: 19).
For a clear understanding of the other parts of the present verse, i.e. making birds of clay, etc. it is necessary to remember that it was Jesus’ habit to talk in parables—a way of talking which was predicted in the previous Scriptures to be a characteristic of his speech. Says the Gospel: "All these things spake Jesus unto the multitudes in parables; and without a parable spake he not unto them: that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, saying, I will open my mouth in parables" (Matt. 13:34, 35). Later historians also have referred to this peculiar characteristic of Jesus: "In his popular addresses Jesus would make free use of parables. He spoke in parables to all classes but especially to the people. Without parables he was not wont to speak to them" (Enc. Bib. under Jesus). With this torchlight of history in our hands, it does not remain difficult for us to understand or explain the "signs" of Jesus as mentioned in the present verse.
There is no mention in the Bible of the miracle of creating birds popularly believed to have been performed by Jesus. If Jesus had really created birds, there is no reason why the Bible should have omitted to mention it, particularly when the creation of birds was a miracle the like of which had never been shown before by any Messenger of God. The mention of such a miracle would certainly have established his superiority over other Prophets and would have lent some support to the claim to divinity which has been foisted upon him by his later followers. Of the different meanings of خلق i.e. measuring, determining, designing or fashioning; making and creating, etc. given under Important Words above, it is in the former sense that this word has been used in this verse. In the sense of "creating'', the act of khalq has not been attributed in the Quran to any other being or thing except God. In fact, the Quran has laid the greatest emphasis on this exclusive attribute of God Who has been again and again declared to be the sole "Creator" of all things. All others to whom creation has been attributed are declared by the Quran to have been themselves created by God and to be devoid of all power to create anything (e.g. see 13:17; 16:21; 22:74; 25:4; 31:11, 12; 35:41 and 46:5). Even the silly notion that the power of creating though the unshared prerogative of God, might have been temporarily delegated by Him to another is rejected by the Quran (39:30 & 16:72).
In the light of the above explanation, and keeping in view the figurative sense of "clay", for which see Important Words above, the clause, I will fashion out for you a creation out of clay after the manner of a bird, then I will breathe into it (a new spirit) and it will become a soaring being, would mean that if ordinary men of humble origin but possessing the inherent power of growth and development came into contact with Jesus and accepted his message they would undergo a complete transformation in their lives. From men grovelling in the dust and not seeing beyond their material cares and mundane concerns, they would become converted into birds soaring high into the lofty regions of the spiritual firmament. And this is exactly what happened. The humble and despised fishermen of Galilee, under the impact of the ennobling teaching of their Master, began soaring like birds, preaching to the world of Israel the word of God and bravely facing all sorts of hardships and privations and making sacrifices that should adorn the history of any nation. Says Jesus: "I say unto you, Take no thought for your life, what ye shall eat, and what ye shall drink; nor yet for your body, what ye shall put on. Is not the life more than meat, and the body than raiment? Behold the fowls of the air: for they sow not, neither do they reap, nor gather into barns; yet your heavenly Father feedeth them. Are ye not much better than they?" (Matt. 6:25, 26).
The miracle relating to the making of birds from clay may be interpreted in another way as well. In the time of Jesus people had a special liking for the practice of occult sciences —hypnotism, mesmerism, etc. So it is possible that God granted him special power of this kind in order to impress the people and make them believe in him. In this case the sign of making birds would mean that Jesus made small clay models of birds and then through a sort of mesmerism made them appear to fly in the air. But this did not convert them into real living birds; for as soon as the influence was removed, they fell down to the ground like so many lumps of earth. This miracle of Jesus was more or less like the miracle of the rod of Moses which was temporarily made to look like a real serpent but was actually not so. But whatever the significance of the sign, it was performed, as the verse clearly puts it, by the command of Allah, and Jesus possessed no power of creation. (For fuller description see Izalah’-e-Auham by Ahmad, the Promised Messiah).
As for healing the blind and the leprous, it appears from the Bible that persons suffering from certain diseases (leprosy, etc.) were considered unclean and were, therefore, not allowed to come in contact with other men. If, therefore, the word ابری be taken to mean, "I declare to be free", the clause would signify that the legal or social disabilities and disadvantages under which persons suffering from such maladies laboured were removed by Jesus. If, however, the word be interpreted as "I heal," then the clause would mean that Jesus used to heal persons suffering from these diseases. But as indicated above, Jesus used to speak in metaphors. So just as the "creation" spoken of is spiritual creation, the diseases mentioned are spiritual diseases. The Prophets of God are spiritual physicians; they give eyes to those that have lost spiritual sight, and they give hearing to those who are spiritually deaf, and they restore life to those who are spiritually dead (see also Matt. 13:15). In this case the word اکمه (blind or one who is blind at night) would stand for such person as possesses the light of faith but being weak, cannot stand trials. He sees in the daytime, i.e. so long as there are no trials and the sun of faith shines forth unclouded; but when the night comes on, i.e. when there are trials, and sacrifices have to be made, he loses his spiritual vision and stands still (cf. 2:21). Similarly, the word ابرص(leprous) would, in the spiritual sense, stand for one who is imperfect in faith, having patches of diseased skin among healthy ones. But even if these words be taken in their physical sense, Jesus is proved to possess no peculiar power. All Prophets heal diseases and ailments by the power of prayer. In this case, however, the word اکمه (blind) would be taken in the sense of one who cannot see at night or one whose sight is weak.
The clause, I will quicken the dead, does not mean that Jesus actually brought the dead to life. Those actually dead are never restored to life in this world. Such a belief is diametrically opposed to the whole Quranic teaching (23:100, 101; 21:96; 39:59, 60; 2:29; 40:12; 45:27). The sayings of the Holy Prophet are also clear on this point. For instance, it is related that when Jabir’s father, who was a Companion of the Holy Prophet, was killed in the Battle of Uhud and the lad was much grieved, the Holy Prophet consolingly told him that God had lovingly spoken to his father in the other world and had asked him to beg of Him anything he liked, for that would be given to him. Thereupon Jabir’s father said, "Grant me, my Lord, another lease of life on earth that I may again be killed in Thy way". God replied, "I would certainly have done so, but the word has gone forth from Me that the dead shall not be sent back to the earth" (Tirmidhi & Majah).
That the so-called dead who are reported to have been raised by Jesus were not actually dead is clear from the Gospels as well. The incident described in Matt. 9:23-25 sheds some light on it. As a matter of fact, Prophets are only sent to give life to those who are spiritually dead. Jesus, Moses, Abraham and, above all, the Holy Prophet of Islam brought about a complete change in the lives of their followers. This, in religious language, is termed raising the dead to life. Literally, too, the word موتی (the dead) does not necessarily mean those physically dead. It is also used about those who are dead spiritually, morally or intellectually. The Quran freely speaks of the quickening of the dead in the sense of granting life to the spiritually dead (e.g. 3:28; 6:123; 8:43; 25:50; 36:71). In 8:25 the Holy Prophet himself has been spoken of as giving life to the dead. Says the Quran: O ye who believe, respond to Allah and the Messenger when he calls you that he may give you life. Here it is spiritual and intellectual life that is meant, for Muslims do not believe that the Holy Prophet ever brought an actually dead person to life.
The miracles of Jesus, as mentioned in this verse, have been stated in a natural order. First of all is mentioned the change in the outlook and way of life of those that came in contact with him. From men of the world, they became men of God. They rose from the dust and began soaring in the air. Then are mentioned some of the more common spiritual diseases of which Jesus cured the people; the blind were given spiritual sight and those having diseased skins were healed. Finally, the spiritually dead are declared to have received through Jesus a new life. Thus not only a natural order but a sort of progressive order is found in the verse, the climax, so far as individual reformation is concerned, being reached with the miracle relating to the quickening of the dead. But if the verse be interpreted literally, no arrangement seems to exist in the order in which the miracles are described here, i.e. (1) the creation of birds out of clay; (2) the healing of the blind; (3) the healing of those suffering from leprosy, i.e. those who had patches of disease on their skin; and (4) the raising of the dead to life.
The true climax, however, reaches in the miracle or sign mentioned in the clause, I will announce to you what you will eat and what you will store up in your houses. According to Abul-Baqa’, the words نبأ (news) and انبأ (he gave the news) are used in the Quran for announcing matters of great importance (Kulliyyat). This shows that, what Jesus is here represented as announcing to the people, are matters of supreme im-portance to his followers. The language of the verse being parabolic, the word تاکلون (you will eat) will be taken figuratively, mean, "you will subdue or conquer" (see under Important Words above). Thus the clause, I will announce to you what you will eat, would mean, "I will let you know what you will subdue or conquer", i.e. "I will announce to you the conquests you are destined to make in future". The other expression, i.e. I will also let you know what you will store up in your houses, would mean, "I will let you know the deeds which you should or would leave behind for posterity".
The entire clause may have yet another meaning. It may mean that Jesus told his disciples: (1) what they should eat, i.e. what they should spend to meet their physical needs, and (2) what they should store up, i.e. what they should lay up as a spiritual treasure in Heaven. In other words, Jesus told them that their earnings should be honestly and lawfully acquired and that they should spend their savings in the way of God, having no thought for the morrow which should be left to God (see Matt. 6:25, 26 as quoted above).
c
43:60; 61:7.
d
5:111.
419A
The words "a Messenger to the Children of Israel" show that the mission of Jesus was confined to the House of Israel. He was not a World- Messenger (Matt. 10: 5, 6; 15: 24; 19: 28. Acts, 3: 25, 26; 13: 46. Luke, 19: 10; 22: 28-30).
420
Khalaqa means, he measured, designed, fashioned or planned; God produced or created or brought into existence a thing or being without there being any previously existing pattern or model or similitude, i.e. he originated it (Lane & Lisan).
420A
Tin means, clay; earth; mould; etc. Figuratively, at-Tin may signify such persons as possess docile natures suitable for being moulded into any good shape like pliable clay.
420B
Hai’ah means, form; fashion; garb; state; manner; mode or quality (Lane).
420C
Tair means, a bird. Metaphorically the word signifies a highly spiritual man who soars high into spiritual regions as Asad (literally a lion) is used for a brave man and Dabbah for a worthless person, a worm of the earth (34:15).
420D
’Ubri’u is derived from Bari’a which means, he was or became clear or free from a thing and signifies, I heal; I declare a person free from the defect attributed to him (Lane).
420E
Akmah means, one who cannot see at night; one born blind; one who becomes blind afterward; one deprived of reason and understanding (Mufradat).
420F
There is no mention in the Bible of the miracle which is popularly believed to have been performed by Jesus that he created birds. If Jesus had really created birds, there is no reason why the Bible should have omitted to mention this, particularly when the creating of birds was a miracle the like of which had never been shown before by any Messenger of God. The mention of such a miracle would certainly have established his great superiority over all other Prophets and would have lent some support to the claim to Divinity which has been foisted upon him by his later followers. Of the different meanings of Khalq—(1) measuring; determining; designing, (2) fashioning; making and creating, etc. it is in the former sense that this word has been used in this verse. In the sense of "creating," the act of Khalq has not been attributed in the Qur’an to any other being or thing except God (13:17; 16:21; 22:74; 25:4; 31:11, 12; 35:41 & 46:5). In the light of the above explanation, and keeping in
420G
The entire clause may mean that Jesus told his disciples what they should eat, i.e. what they should spend to meet their physical needs, and what they should store up i.e. what they should lay up as spiritual treasure in Heaven. In other words he told them that their earnings should be honestly and lawfully acquired and that they should spend their savings in the way of God, having no thought for the morrow which should be left to God (Matt. 6: 25, 26).
۞ وَمِنْ أَهْلِ ٱلْكِتَٰبِ مَنْ إِن تَأْمَنْهُ بِقِنطَارٍ يُؤَدِّهِۦٓ إِلَيْكَ وَمِنْهُم مَّنْ إِن تَأْمَنْهُ بِدِينَارٍ لَّا يُؤَدِّهِۦٓ إِلَيْكَ إِلَّا مَا دُمْتَ عَلَيْهِ قَآئِمًا ۗ ذَٰلِكَ بِأَنَّهُمْ قَالُوا۟ لَيْسَ عَلَيْنَا فِى ٱلْأُمِّيِّۦنَ سَبِيلٌ وَيَقُولُونَ عَلَى ٱللَّهِ ٱلْكَذِبَ وَهُمْ يَعْلَمُونَ
ڈھیر قِنْطَار کا ترجمہ ہے مگر اردو میں ڈھیر نہیں کہتے۔ بلکہ کسی چیز کا ڈھیر کہتے ہیں اس لئے ہم نے مال کا لفظ زائد کر دیا ہے اور اسے بریکٹ میں رکھا ہے کیونکہ اس کے بغیر صحیح معنے ظاہر نہ ہوتے تھے۔
In the time of the Holy Prophet the idea had gained ground among the Jews that it was no sin to rob a Gentile (non-Jew) Arab of his possession and property because the latter followed a false religion. Possibly, the idea had its origin in the Jewish law of usury, which makes an invidious distinction between a Jew and a non-Jew regarding the giving and taking of interest (Exod. 22: 25; Lev. 25: 36, 37; Deut. 23: 20).
Commentary:
The words, We are not liable to blame in the matter of the unlearned, refer to a notion prevalent among Jews in the time of the Holy Prophet that it was no sin to rob the gentile Arabs of their possessions, because the latter followed a false religion. The Jews believed that they were at liberty to do as they liked concerning Muslims and would not be called to account for it. Possibly, they deduced this queer doctrine from the Jewish law of usury, which makes an invidious distinction between a Jew and a non-Jew regarding the giving and taking of interest (Exod. 22:25; Lev. 25:36, 37; Deut. 23:20, 21).
Another meaning of this verse is obtained if we take the words "trust", "treasure", "dinar", etc., in a figurative sense. The Bible contains not only prophecies about the Holy Prophet of Islam, but also clear injunctions to the People of the Book to accept him when he made his appearance. This was in the nature of a "trust" with them. But when the Promised Prophet appeared, they refused to surrender that trust, except a few of them who accepted Islam. These it is that are spoken of as returning the treasure they are trusted with, whereas those who not only rejected the Holy Prophet but even refused to admit that their scriptures contained any prophecies about him are likened to such as would not even return a "dinar" entrusted to them unless you keep standing over them, i.e. unless you force them in argument to admit the truth.
3
ڈھیر قِنْطَار کا ترجمہ ہے مگر اردو میں ڈھیر نہیں کہتے۔ بلکہ کسی چیز کا ڈھیر کہتے ہیں اس لئے ہم نے مال کا لفظ زائد کر دیا ہے اور اسے بریکٹ میں رکھا ہے کیونکہ اس کے بغیر صحیح معنے ظاہر نہ ہوتے تھے۔
364
Commentary:
The words, We are not liable to blame in the matter of the unlearned, refer to a notion prevalent among Jews in the time of the Holy Prophet that it was no sin to rob the gentile Arabs of their possessions, because the latter followed a false religion. The Jews believed that they were at liberty to do as they liked concerning Muslims and would not be called to account for it. Possibly, they deduced this queer doctrine from the Jewish law of usury, which makes an invidious distinction between a Jew and a non-Jew regarding the giving and taking of interest (Exod. 22:25; Lev. 25:36, 37; Deut. 23:20, 21).
Another meaning of this verse is obtained if we take the words "trust", "treasure", "dinar", etc., in a figurative sense. The Bible contains not only prophecies about the Holy Prophet of Islam, but also clear injunctions to the People of the Book to accept him when he made his appearance. This was in the nature of a "trust" with them. But when the Promised Prophet appeared, they refused to surrender that trust, except a few of them who accepted Islam. These it is that are spoken of as returning the treasure they are trusted with, whereas those who not only rejected the Holy Prophet but even refused to admit that their scriptures contained any prophecies about him are likened to such as would not even return a "dinar" entrusted to them unless you keep standing over them, i.e. unless you force them in argument to admit the truth.
429
In the time of the Holy Prophet the idea had gained ground among the Jews that it was no sin to rob a Gentile (non-Jew) Arab of his possession and property because the latter followed a false religion. Possibly, the idea had its origin in the Jewish law of usury, which makes an invidious distinction between a Jew and a non-Jew regarding the giving and taking of interest (Exod. 22: 25; Lev. 25: 36, 37; Deut. 23: 20).
وَإِنْ أَرَدتُّمُ ٱسْتِبْدَالَ زَوْجٍ مَّكَانَ زَوْجٍ وَءَاتَيْتُمْ إِحْدَىٰهُنَّ قِنطَارًا فَلَا تَأْخُذُوا۟ مِنْهُ شَيْـًٔا ۚ أَتَأْخُذُونَهُۥ بُهْتَٰنًا وَإِثْمًا مُّبِينًا
If for some special reason a man wishes to divorce one wife and marry another, he is not allowed to take back from the former what he has already given her, no matter how big the sum may be.
Important Words:
بھتان (lying) is the noun-infinitive from بھت. They say بھته i.e. he slandered him or accused him falsely; or he did so in such a manner as to make him confounded at the falsity of the charge. بھتان therefore means, a calumny, slander or false accusation; falsehood by reason of which one is perplexed or confounded and is rendered unable to see his right course; a false accusation of adultery against a woman (Lane & Aqrab).
Commentary:
The verse does not mean that man can divorce his wife at will. Anas, a Companion of the Holy Prophet, relates that once Abu Ayyub and Abu Talha wanted to divorce their wives (without valid reason) and asked the Holy Prophet about it. He counselled them not to do so, characterizing their act as an act of injustice. Thereupon, they abandoned their intention of divorcing their wives and retained them. This does not mean that a husband cannot divorce his wife without obtaining the permission of the authorities; he can do so, if he so desires; but he will certainly be accountable before God if he does so without valid reason. Elsewhere the Holy Prophet is reported to have said, "Surely of the things sanctioned by the Law of Islam the most hateful in the sight of God is divorce" (Dawud, ch. on, Talaq).
If for some special reason a man wishes to divorce one wife and marry another, he is not allowed to take back from the former what he has already given her, no matter however big the sum may be. If he does so, he will be guilty of infidelity and sin.
500
Important Words:
بھتان (lying) is the noun-infinitive from بھت. They say بھته i.e. he slandered him or accused him falsely; or he did so in such a manner as to make him confounded at the falsity of the charge. بھتان therefore means, a calumny, slander or false accusation; falsehood by reason of which one is perplexed or confounded and is rendered unable to see his right course; a false accusation of adultery against a woman (Lane & Aqrab).
Commentary:
The verse does not mean that man can divorce his wife at will. Anas, a Companion of the Holy Prophet, relates that once Abu Ayyub and Abu Talha wanted to divorce their wives (without valid reason) and asked the Holy Prophet about it. He counselled them not to do so, characterizing their act as an act of injustice. Thereupon, they abandoned their intention of divorcing their wives and retained them. This does not mean that a husband cannot divorce his wife without obtaining the permission of the authorities; he can do so, if he so desires; but he will certainly be accountable before God if he does so without valid reason. Elsewhere the Holy Prophet is reported to have said, "Surely of the things sanctioned by the Law of Islam the most hateful in the sight of God is divorce" (Dawud, ch. on, Talaq).
If for some special reason a man wishes to divorce one wife and marry another, he is not allowed to take back from the former what he has already given her, no matter however big the sum may be. If he does so, he will be guilty of infidelity and sin.
582
If for some special reason a man wishes to divorce one wife and marry another, he is not allowed to take back from the former what he has already given her, no matter how big the sum may be.
قُل لَّآ أَقُولُ لَكُمْ عِندِى خَزَآئِنُ ٱللَّهِ وَلَآ أَعْلَمُ ٱلْغَيْبَ وَلَآ أَقُولُ لَكُمْ إِنِّى مَلَكٌ ۖ إِنْ أَتَّبِعُ إِلَّا مَا يُوحَىٰٓ إِلَىَّ ۚ قُلْ هَلْ يَسْتَوِى ٱلْأَعْمَىٰ وَٱلْبَصِيرُ ۚ أَفَلَا تَتَفَكَّرُونَ
11:32.
10:16; 46:10.
Commentary:
The words, I do not say to you, I possess the treasures of Allah, imply that when the Quran says that the Messengers of God are the announcers of glad tidings, this should not be construed to mean that as soon as a person believes in a Prophet of God, he acquires wealth. He will have to wait for the favours of God to come at their appointed time.
The words, nor do I say to you, I am an angel, here imply that it is not in the power of the Prophet to bring down punishment, for he is not "an angel of punishment."
After the above declarations it might be asked what good there was in following the Prophet when worldly favours took time in coming and when the Prophet was so powerless against his enemies. The Quran answers this implied question by saying that the getting of a treasure was not the only boon which one could desire. The perfect guidance which was received through the Prophet was a great blessing in itself for those who accepted the guidance were like one who possessed eyes, while those who rejected it were like one who had no eyes, and the blind and the seeing could never be alike. These are matters to be reflected upon and pondered over.
a
11:32.
b
10:16; 46:10.
d
11:32.
e
10:16; 46:10.
796
Commentary:
The words, I do not say to you, I possess the treasures of Allah, imply that when the Quran says that the Messengers of God are the announcers of glad tidings, this should not be construed to mean that as soon as a person believes in a Prophet of God, he acquires wealth. He will have to wait for the favours of God to come at their appointed time.
The words, nor do I say to you, I am an angel, here imply that it is not in the power of the Prophet to bring down punishment, for he is not "an angel of punishment."
After the above declarations it might be asked what good there was in following the Prophet when worldly favours took time in coming and when the Prophet was so powerless against his enemies. The Quran answers this implied question by saying that the getting of a treasure was not the only boon which one could desire. The perfect guidance which was received through the Prophet was a great blessing in itself for those who accepted the guidance were like one who possessed eyes, while those who rejected it were like one who had no eyes, and the blind and the seeing could never be alike. These are matters to be reflected upon and pondered over.
c
11:32.
d
10:16; 46:10.
فَلَعَلَّكَ تَارِكٌۢ بَعْضَ مَا يُوحَىٰٓ إِلَيْكَ وَضَآئِقٌۢ بِهِۦ صَدْرُكَ أَن يَقُولُوا۟ لَوْلَآ أُنزِلَ عَلَيْهِ كَنزٌ أَوْ جَآءَ مَعَهُۥ مَلَكٌ ۚ إِنَّمَآ أَنتَ نَذِيرٌ ۚ وَٱللَّهُ عَلَىٰ كُلِّ شَىْءٍ وَكِيلٌ
قرآن مجید میں لَعَلَّ کا لفظ ہے اور لغت نے لَعَلَّ کے یہ معنے دئے ہیں کہ متکلم اپنے مقابل کے متعلق دلی خواہش کے اظہار کے لئے کبھی یہ لفظ استعمال کرتا ہے۔ اس لئے ہم نے یہ ترجمہ کیا ہے کہ شاید کفار تجھ سے اب یہ توقع رکھتے ہیں کہ تو قرآن کا کچھ حصہ چُھپا دے جو توقع صرف ان کا وہم ہے عملاً ناممکن ہے۔
17:94; 25:9.
13:8.
17:74.
The word, la‘alla, is used to denote either a state of hope or of fear, whether that state pertains to the speaker or to the addressee or to someone else.
It is a peculiarity of the Quranic diction that sometimes it omits the question and only gives the answer, the question being implied in the answer itself. The present verse is an example of this peculiarity. In the preceding verse believers were promised forgiveness and a great reward. Thereupon disbelievers mockingly asked the Holy Prophet, 'Where is the promised reward of which we do not see the slightest sign? You do not have even the money which you need so badly, nor do the angels descend from heaven to help you.' The Qur’an turns the tables upon them and answers their irony with an irony, saying, 'Ah! How "weighty" is the objection of these people and perhaps, O Prophet, from fear of being unable to answer it, you would hide a part of Our revelation which contains prophecies regarding the prosperity and triumph of Islam! This is only their wishful thinking, their vain and futile hope. Such a thing can never happen.'
17:74.
17:94; 25:9.
13:8.
Important Words:
فلعلك (thou art now perhaps). The word لعل is used to denote either a state of hope or of fear, whether that state pertains to the speaker or to the addressee or to someone else. In the Quranic expression فلعلك تارك بعض مایوحی الیك (thou art now perhaps going to abandon part of that which has been revealed to thee) the word لعل has been used to signify that "the people imagine that thou art now perhaps going to abandon, etc." (Mufradat). See also 2:22.
کنز (treasure) is the noun-infinitive from کنز (kanaza). They say کنز المال i.e. he buried the property or treasure in the earth; he collected the property and treasured it, or he hoarded it or stored it in secret. کنز الرمح means, he stuck or fixed the spear in the ground. کنز التمر means, he stored or packed up the dates (in the receptacle). کنز (kanz) means, treasure; property buried in the earth; any property whereof the portion that should be given in alms is not given; property that is preserved in a receptacle; anything abundant and collected together; gold and silver; a treasure of knowledge or science; that in which property is preserved or that in which property is buried or hoarded in secret (Lane & Aqrab).
Commentary:
It is a peculiarity of Quranic diction that sometimes it omits to give the question and only gives the answer, the question being implied in the answer itself. The present verse constitutes an example of this style. In the previous verse believers were promised forgiveness and a great reward. Thereupon disbelievers asked the Holy Prophet in a jeering and ironical manner, "You say your followers will get a great reward and their sins will be forgiven. We know nothing about the forgiveness of their sins. But where is the promised reward of which we do not see the slightest sign? You do not have even the money which you need so badly, nor do the angels descend from heaven to help you." The Quran turns the tables upon the disbelievers and answers their irony, with an irony, saying, "How weighty indeed is the objection of these people and perhaps, o Prophet, from fear of being unable to answer it, you would hide a part of Our revelation which contains prophecies regarding the prosperity and triumph of Islam!" meaning that such a thing can never be.
The verse is capable of another interpretation also. In this case the word لعل would be taken to refer to the hope of disbelievers that the Holy Prophet may, out of fear of their objections, suppress part of the Divine revelation. The verse declares such hopes to be vain and futile, for the Holy Prophet was "only a warner," and the function and duty of a warner is only to issue the warning and deliver his message faithfully; he has no right to suppress any portion of the message. Again, by using the words "only a Warner" the verse also hints that the Holy Prophet did not claim to be God so that the treasures of the earth might be under his control; he was only a human being. If it be said here that believers who were promised "a great reward" (see the preceding verse) were also human beings like the Holy Prophet, it should be remembered that they were promised the reward not immediately but after they had established their title to it by displaying patience and steadfastness under trials and hardships for a considerable time. So disbelievers could demand from the Holy Prophet clear and palpable signs of the prosperity promised to him only when the promised time had come and not earlier. To come attended with power and glory in the very beginning is a sign of personal authority which belongs to God alone and not to any human being."
The words, Allah is Guardian over all things, are intended to point to the fact that all these promises will certainly come to pass. The Holy Prophet will assuredly get both مغفرة (lit. covering up) and a great reward, and the angels of God will undoubtedly descend to bring his work to completion and make null and void the machinations of his enemies. Not only will he himself be favoured with a great reward, but his followers and disciples also would become rulers and kings. Any fair-minded and impartial person can see that both these promises were literally fulfilled.
Some hostile critics of Islam have pretended to infer from this verse that the Holy Prophet was actually prepared to abandon a portion of the Quran out of fear of the objections of his opponents. But the context spurns this baseless interpretation. Can any reasonable person imagine that the demand for the descent of helping angels or for the possession of a treasure was such that, on account of it, the Holy Prophet should, in any way, have become prepared to suppress part of Divine revelation, or that he was unaware of the fact that he was only a warner whose duty was to deliver the Message, whatever it might be? Again, did he not know that God had clearly spoken to him saying He Himself was "Guardian over all things"? So the words, thou art now perhaps going to abandon part of that which has been revealed to thee, contain only a vain hope on the part of the disbelievers that the Prophet might give up part of his revelation; they do not at all find any intention or readiness on his part to do so. Do not these critics know that when at Mecca a deputation of the Quraish waited on the Holy Prophet and asked him to give up preaching against their idols and threatened to crush him and his tribe in case he refused to do so, the prompt answer he gave was that even if they put the sun on his right and the moon on his left he would not swerve a hair’s breadth from the teachings which God had given him? Could he, whom the threats or cajolery of the Quraish at a time when he was extremely weak could not induce to give up his preaching, have become so unnerved by these silly objections as to become ready to conceal a part of the DivineWord?
The verse that follows also gives the lie to such an inference, for it contains a challenge to the world to produce ten Surahs like any ten Surahs of the Quran. If there had been any doubt in the Prophet’s mind concerning any portion of the Quran, could that very portion possibly have been followed by a challenge like this? This challenge shows that he believed in the truth of every word of the Quran with a conviction firm as a rock.
d
17:74.
e
17:94; 25:9.
f
13:8.
1
قرآن مجید میں لَعَلَّ کا لفظ ہے اور لغت نے لَعَلَّ کے یہ معنے دئے ہیں کہ متکلم اپنے مقابل کے متعلق دلی خواہش کے اظہار کے لئے کبھی یہ لفظ استعمال کرتا ہے۔ اس لئے ہم نے یہ ترجمہ کیا ہے کہ شاید کفار تجھ سے اب یہ توقع رکھتے ہیں کہ تو قرآن کا کچھ حصہ چُھپا دے جو توقع صرف ان کا وہم ہے عملاً ناممکن ہے۔
a
17:74.
b
17:94; 25:9.
c
13:8.
1394
Important Words:
فلعلك (thou art now perhaps). The word لعل is used to denote either a state of hope or of fear, whether that state pertains to the speaker or to the addressee or to someone else. In the Quranic expression فلعلك تارك بعض مایوحی الیك (thou art now perhaps going to abandon part of that which has been revealed to thee) the word لعل has been used to signify that "the people imagine that thou art now perhaps going to abandon, etc." (Mufradat). See also 2:22.
کنز (treasure) is the noun-infinitive from کنز (kanaza). They say کنز المال i.e. he buried the property or treasure in the earth; he collected the property and treasured it, or he hoarded it or stored it in secret. کنز الرمح means, he stuck or fixed the spear in the ground. کنز التمر means, he stored or packed up the dates (in the receptacle). کنز (kanz) means, treasure; property buried in the earth; any property whereof the portion that should be given in alms is not given; property that is preserved in a receptacle; anything abundant and collected together; gold and silver; a treasure of knowledge or science; that in which property is preserved or that in which property is buried or hoarded in secret (Lane & Aqrab).
Commentary:
It is a peculiarity of Quranic diction that sometimes it omits to give the question and only gives the answer, the question being implied in the answer itself. The present verse constitutes an example of this style. In the previous verse believers were promised forgiveness and a great reward. Thereupon disbelievers asked the Holy Prophet in a jeering and ironical manner, "You say your followers will get a great reward and their sins will be forgiven. We know nothing about the forgiveness of their sins. But where is the promised reward of which we do not see the slightest sign? You do not have even the money which you need so badly, nor do the angels descend from heaven to help you." The Quran turns the tables upon the disbelievers and answers their irony, with an irony, saying, "How weighty indeed is the objection of these people and perhaps, o Prophet, from fear of being unable to answer it, you would hide a part of Our revelation which contains prophecies regarding the prosperity and triumph of Islam!" meaning that such a thing can never be.
The verse is capable of another interpretation also. In this case the word لعل would be taken to refer to the hope of disbelievers that the Holy Prophet may, out of fear of their objections, suppress part of the Divine revelation. The verse declares such hopes to be vain and futile, for the Holy Prophet was "only a warner," and the function and duty of a warner is only to issue the warning and deliver his message faithfully; he has no right to suppress any portion of the message. Again, by using the words "only a Warner" the verse also hints that the Holy Prophet did not claim to be God so that the treasures of the earth might be under his control; he was only a human being. If it be said here that believers who were promised "a great reward" (see the preceding verse) were also human beings like the Holy Prophet, it should be remembered that they were promised the reward not immediately but after they had established their title to it by displaying patience and steadfastness under trials and hardships for a considerable time. So disbelievers could demand from the Holy Prophet clear and palpable signs of the prosperity promised to him only when the promised time had come and not earlier. To come attended with power and glory in the very beginning is a sign of personal authority which belongs to God alone and not to any human being."
The words, Allah is Guardian over all things, are intended to point to the fact that all these promises will certainly come to pass. The Holy Prophet will assuredly get both مغفرة (lit. covering up) and a great reward, and the angels of God will undoubtedly descend to bring his work to completion and make null and void the machinations of his enemies. Not only will he himself be favoured with a great reward, but his followers and disciples also would become rulers and kings. Any fair-minded and impartial person can see that both these promises were literally fulfilled.
Some hostile critics of Islam have pretended to infer from this verse that the Holy Prophet was actually prepared to abandon a portion of the Quran out of fear of the objections of his opponents. But the context spurns this baseless interpretation. Can any reasonable person imagine that the demand for the descent of helping angels or for the possession of a treasure was such that, on account of it, the Holy Prophet should, in any way, have become prepared to suppress part of Divine revelation, or that he was unaware of the fact that he was only a warner whose duty was to deliver the Message, whatever it might be? Again, did he not know that God had clearly spoken to him saying He Himself was "Guardian over all things"? So the words, thou art now perhaps going to abandon part of that which has been revealed to thee, contain only a vain hope on the part of the disbelievers that the Prophet might give up part of his revelation; they do not at all find any intention or readiness on his part to do so. Do not these critics know that when at Mecca a deputation of the Quraish waited on the Holy Prophet and asked him to give up preaching against their idols and threatened to crush him and his tribe in case he refused to do so, the prompt answer he gave was that even if they put the sun on his right and the moon on his left he would not swerve a hair’s breadth from the teachings which God had given him? Could he, whom the threats or cajolery of the Quraish at a time when he was extremely weak could not induce to give up his preaching, have become so unnerved by these silly objections as to become ready to conceal a part of the DivineWord?
The verse that follows also gives the lie to such an inference, for it contains a challenge to the world to produce ten Surahs like any ten Surahs of the Quran. If there had been any doubt in the Prophet’s mind concerning any portion of the Quran, could that very portion possibly have been followed by a challenge like this? This challenge shows that he believed in the truth of every word of the Quran with a conviction firm as a rock.
a
17:94; 25:9.
b
13:8.
e
17:74.
1301
The word, la‘alla, is used to denote either a state of hope or of fear, whether that state pertains to the speaker or to the addressee or to someone else.
1302
It is a peculiarity of the Quranic diction that sometimes it omits the question and only gives the answer, the question being implied in the answer itself. The present verse is an example of this peculiarity. In the preceding verse believers were promised forgiveness and a great reward. Thereupon disbelievers mockingly asked the Holy Prophet, 'Where is the promised reward of which we do not see the slightest sign? You do not have even the money which you need so badly, nor do the angels descend from heaven to help you.' The Qur’an turns the tables upon them and answers their irony with an irony, saying, 'Ah! How "weighty" is the objection of these people and perhaps, O Prophet, from fear of being unable to answer it, you would hide a part of Our revelation which contains prophecies regarding the prosperity and triumph of Islam! This is only their wishful thinking, their vain and futile hope. Such a thing can never happen.'
وَلَآ أَقُولُ لَكُمْ عِندِى خَزَآئِنُ ٱللَّهِ وَلَآ أَعْلَمُ ٱلْغَيْبَ وَلَآ أَقُولُ إِنِّى مَلَكٌ وَلَآ أَقُولُ لِلَّذِينَ تَزْدَرِىٓ أَعْيُنُكُمْ لَن يُؤْتِيَهُمُ ٱللَّهُ خَيْرًا ۖ ٱللَّهُ أَعْلَمُ بِمَا فِىٓ أَنفُسِهِمْ ۖ إِنِّىٓ إِذًا لَّمِنَ ٱلظَّٰلِمِينَ
6:51.
6:51.
6:51.
Commentary:
In the first part of this verse Noah answers the objections of his opponents about himself in another form. He says that they taunt him for being a mere human being like themselves. But his claim is not inconsistent with his being a human being. He is only a Prophet, and it was not necessary for a Prophet to be different in kind from those to whom he was sent. On the contrary, it is necessary that he should be one of them and similar to them. If he had ascribed divinity to himself and had said that God had delegated His authority to him, then indeed they could have asked how a human being like them could discharge Divine functions. But he has made no such claim. His only claim is that God had chosen him as an instrument for conveying to men the knowledge which He wishes to disclose to them.
The words, Allah will not bestow any good upon them, contain a further answer to the objections of Noah’s enemies about his followers. Noah says that they taunted his followers with being mean and lowly, but who could say what was going to happen in future or how God intended to bestow on these very poor people the blessings of Heaven and the earth. He further reinforces his argument by saying that truly mean is that person whose heart is corrupt, but the condition of the heart or the mind is known to God alone. They judged his followers by their outward condition while God, Who knew the real condition of their hearts, knew that they were not mean but the noblest of men. This is the significance of the words, Allah knows best whatever is in their minds.
d
6:51.
a
6:51.
1413
Commentary:
In the first part of this verse Noah answers the objections of his opponents about himself in another form. He says that they taunt him for being a mere human being like themselves. But his claim is not inconsistent with his being a human being. He is only a Prophet, and it was not necessary for a Prophet to be different in kind from those to whom he was sent. On the contrary, it is necessary that he should be one of them and similar to them. If he had ascribed divinity to himself and had said that God had delegated His authority to him, then indeed they could have asked how a human being like them could discharge Divine functions. But he has made no such claim. His only claim is that God had chosen him as an instrument for conveying to men the knowledge which He wishes to disclose to them.
The words, Allah will not bestow any good upon them, contain a further answer to the objections of Noah’s enemies about his followers. Noah says that they taunted his followers with being mean and lowly, but who could say what was going to happen in future or how God intended to bestow on these very poor people the blessings of Heaven and the earth. He further reinforces his argument by saying that truly mean is that person whose heart is corrupt, but the condition of the heart or the mind is known to God alone. They judged his followers by their outward condition while God, Who knew the real condition of their hearts, knew that they were not mean but the noblest of men. This is the significance of the words, Allah knows best whatever is in their minds.
b
6:51.
قَالَ ٱجْعَلْنِى عَلَىٰ خَزَآئِنِ ٱلْأَرْضِ ۖ إِنِّى حَفِيظٌ عَلِيمٌ
Joseph preferred charge of the finance department. His choice seems to have been dictated by the desire to give his single-minded attention to the successful running of the department which so deeply concerned the fulfilment of the King’s dream.
Commentary:
Most probably the King offered Joseph the post of Prime Minister, but Joseph preferred charge of the finance department. His choice seems to have been dictated by the desire to enjoy comparative freedom from the material cares and court intrigues which are incidental to premiership and also to give his single-minded attention to the successful running of the department with which the fulfilment of the King’s dream was so deeply concerned.
1559
Commentary:
Most probably the King offered Joseph the post of Prime Minister, but Joseph preferred charge of the finance department. His choice seems to have been dictated by the desire to enjoy comparative freedom from the material cares and court intrigues which are incidental to premiership and also to give his single-minded attention to the successful running of the department with which the fulfilment of the King’s dream was so deeply concerned.
1390
Joseph preferred charge of the finance department. His choice seems to have been dictated by the desire to give his single-minded attention to the successful running of the department which so deeply concerned the fulfilment of the King’s dream.
وَإِن مِّن شَىْءٍ إِلَّا عِندَنَا خَزَآئِنُهُۥ وَمَا نُنَزِّلُهُۥٓ إِلَّا بِقَدَرٍ مَّعْلُومٍ
40:14.
40:14.
God possesses an unlimited stock of everything. But in His infinite mercy He directs the minds of men to a particular thing only when a real and genuine need for it arises. Like the material universe, the Qur’an is a spiritual universe in which lie hidden treasures of spiritual knowledge which are revealed to man according to the needs of the time.
40:14.
Commentary:
This verse further explains the meaning of the previous verse. It purports to say that God possesses an unlimited stock of everything. But in His infinite mercy He directs the minds of men to a certain thing only when a real and genuine need for it arises. Then it happens that men begin to find access to the required thing and derive benefit from it. For example, there was a time when men did not know the various uses and properties of iron. When, however, the proper time arrived for all its manifold potentialities and uses to be known, they were discovered and these discoveries led to a great change in human affairs. Similar is the case of coal and of petroleum. These things opened up a great vista of progress for mankind. Again, discovery of electricity and the wonderful inventions that have come in its wake have revolutionized human life. Thus the universe has been unfolding its secrets from age to age. The verse under comment purports to say that, like the material universe, the Quran is a spiritual universe in which lie hidden treasures of spiritual knowledge which are revealed to man according to the needs of the time. It is not like other books that it should have served its purpose and then become a dead thing. On the contrary, like the physical universe, the Quran comprehends unlimited treasures of spiritual knowledge for all times. It is, therefore, impossible that it should be left without Divine protection until all the generations for whom its treasures are meant have received them. Other revealed Scriptures never laid any claim about the inexhaustibility of their treasures and therefore they did not enjoy eternal Divine protection.
The subject matter of the previous verse has been further developed in the verse under comment, viz. the protection and preservation of the Quran, but, in a different form. The present verse is intended to point to the provision for the removal of such doubts and misgivings as were to arise in future in the hearts of the people, including Muslims themselves.
d
40:14.
a
40:14.
1728
Commentary:
This verse further explains the meaning of the previous verse. It purports to say that God possesses an unlimited stock of everything. But in His infinite mercy He directs the minds of men to a certain thing only when a real and genuine need for it arises. Then it happens that men begin to find access to the required thing and derive benefit from it. For example, there was a time when men did not know the various uses and properties of iron. When, however, the proper time arrived for all its manifold potentialities and uses to be known, they were discovered and these discoveries led to a great change in human affairs. Similar is the case of coal and of petroleum. These things opened up a great vista of progress for mankind. Again, discovery of electricity and the wonderful inventions that have come in its wake have revolutionized human life. Thus the universe has been unfolding its secrets from age to age. The verse under comment purports to say that, like the material universe, the Quran is a spiritual universe in which lie hidden treasures of spiritual knowledge which are revealed to man according to the needs of the time. It is not like other books that it should have served its purpose and then become a dead thing. On the contrary, like the physical universe, the Quran comprehends unlimited treasures of spiritual knowledge for all times. It is, therefore, impossible that it should be left without Divine protection until all the generations for whom its treasures are meant have received them. Other revealed Scriptures never laid any claim about the inexhaustibility of their treasures and therefore they did not enjoy eternal Divine protection.
The subject matter of the previous verse has been further developed in the verse under comment, viz. the protection and preservation of the Quran, but, in a different form. The present verse is intended to point to the provision for the removal of such doubts and misgivings as were to arise in future in the hearts of the people, including Muslims themselves.
d
40:14.
1490
God possesses an unlimited stock of everything. But in His infinite mercy He directs the minds of men to a particular thing only when a real and genuine need for it arises. Like the material universe, the Qur’an is a spiritual universe in which lie hidden treasures of spiritual knowledge which are revealed to man according to the needs of the time.
قُل لَّوْ أَنتُمْ تَمْلِكُونَ خَزَآئِنَ رَحْمَةِ رَبِّىٓ إِذًا لَّأَمْسَكْتُمْ خَشْيَةَ ٱلْإِنفَاقِ ۚ وَكَانَ ٱلْإِنسَٰنُ قَتُورًا
Commentary:
This verse reverts to the subject of the human soul dealt with in v. 86 and purports to say that the treasures of Divine knowledge which lie hidden in the word of God know no end or limit while the knowledge that is acquired by so-called spiritualists by their occult practices is very limited. This is why the Elect of God diffuse Divine knowledge freely while so-called spiritualists are very parsimonious in acquainting even their closest disciples with the knowledge they claim to acquire by their unnatural practices. The truth is that the powers of God are limitless and so are the great treasures of Divine knowledge which He vouchsafes to His Elect. They diffuse and expend it freely without fear of its becoming exhausted so that God’s creatures may become acquainted with all the innumerable stages of His nearness and that they may realize Him and become at one with Him.
2029
Commentary:
This verse reverts to the subject of the human soul dealt with in v. 86 and purports to say that the treasures of Divine knowledge which lie hidden in the word of God know no end or limit while the knowledge that is acquired by so-called spiritualists by their occult practices is very limited. This is why the Elect of God diffuse Divine knowledge freely while so-called spiritualists are very parsimonious in acquainting even their closest disciples with the knowledge they claim to acquire by their unnatural practices. The truth is that the powers of God are limitless and so are the great treasures of Divine knowledge which He vouchsafes to His Elect. They diffuse and expend it freely without fear of its becoming exhausted so that God’s creatures may become acquainted with all the innumerable stages of His nearness and that they may realize Him and become at one with Him.
وَأَمَّا ٱلْجِدَارُ فَكَانَ لِغُلَٰمَيْنِ يَتِيمَيْنِ فِى ٱلْمَدِينَةِ وَكَانَ تَحْتَهُۥ كَنزٌ لَّهُمَا وَكَانَ أَبُوهُمَا صَٰلِحًا فَأَرَادَ رَبُّكَ أَن يَبْلُغَآ أَشُدَّهُمَا وَيَسْتَخْرِجَا كَنزَهُمَا رَحْمَةً مِّن رَّبِّكَ ۚ وَمَا فَعَلْتُهُۥ عَنْ أَمْرِى ۚ ذَٰلِكَ تَأْوِيلُ مَا لَمْ تَسْطِع عَّلَيْهِ صَبْرًا
穆撒的精神境界指明了这样一个事实: 由于伊斯兰教的教导是根据律令和原则的与穆撒经典的有些原则有根本不同之处, 因此犹太教徒和穆斯林的真正合作是不可能的。第61-83节经文的详细解释, 见 «大版本的注释本» 1517-1530页。
دیوار سے مراد یہود و نصاریٰ کے بزرگ ہیں۔ یعنی موسٰیؑ اور عیسیٰؑ اور ان کے باپ سے مراد حضرت ابراہیم علیہ السلام اور کَنْز سے مراد وہ علمی خزانہ ہے جسے موسٰیؑ اور عیسیٰ ؑ کی قوموں نے محفوظ کیا ہوا تھا مگر ان کی بے توجہی سے اس کے ضائع ہونے کا خطرہ پیدا ہو گیا تب اسے محمدرسول اللہ صلی اللہ علیہ و سلم نے محفوظ کر دیا یعنی صحیح کلام کو جو بائبل اور انجیل میں تھا محفوظ کر دیا تاکہ جب بھی یہود اور نصاریٰ کو ہوش آئے وہ اس سے فائدہ اٹھا کر محمد رسول اللہ صلی اللہ علیہ و سلم پر ایمان لے آئیں۔
یعنی خداتعالیٰ کی وحی سے کیا ہے۔
The orphan boys are Moses and Jesus, and their righteous father is Abraham. Their treasure was the true teaching bequeathed by them to their peoples which was in danger of being lost through the latter’s irreligiousness. This treasure was safeguarded in the Qur’an in order that when they may awaken to a realization of truth of the Quranic teaching they may accept it.
It was done under Divine command.
The Vision of Moses points to the fact that because Islamic teaching was based on laws and principles which differed fundamentally from some principles of the Mosaic Law, true and real cooperation between Jews and Muslims was impossible. For a detailed explanation of v. 61-83, see "The Larger Edition of the Commentary," (pp. 1517-1530).
Commentary:
As already pointed out جدار (the wall) represents the elders of the Jews i.e. Moses, Jesus (18:78) and Abraham of whom the Quran says, "and in the next he will surely be among the righteous" (2:131).
By کنز (treasure) is meant the treasure of divine knowledge which was vouchsafed to Moses and Jesus.
The verse purports to say that God preserved in the Quran the great treasure of spiritual knowledge which was vouchsafed to Moses and Jesus (98:4) and which was in danger of being lost because of the irreligiousness of the Jews and their engrossment in worldly affairs so that, when they awaken to a realization of truth, they may accept it.
The words, as a mercy from thy Lord, mean that the preservation by God of the imperishable part of the teachings of Moses and Jesus in the Quran was an act of mercy on His part because the Jews by their repeated rebellion and transgression had forfeited all title to Divine mercy. But despite their iniquities God had mercy on them and preserved their own treasures of spiritual knowledge in the Quran for their guidance.
The words, I did it not of my own accord, mean that the Holy Prophet had no hand in the preservation of this great treasure of divine knowledge. A reference to this fact has also been made in the words, "Nor does he speak of his own desire" (53:4).
After a perusal of the incidents mentioned in the preceding verses and their explanation it becomes abundantly clear that the Vision of Moses has been mentioned here to point to the following facts:
(a) That it was decreed and was in the fitness of things that the Holy Prophet should appear after Christians who constitute the second part of the Mosaic Dispensation had become corrupt.
(b) That because Islamic teaching was based on laws and principles which differed fundamentally from some principles of the Mosaic Law, true and real cooperation between Jews and Muslims was impossible, but salvation without subscribing to Islamic principles was also unthinkable.
(c) That Jews and Christians would refuse to accept the Holy Prophet and would follow their own separate course but they will have to give their allegiance to him in the long run.
(d) That, after a long and fatiguing journey and after having despaired of obtaining real peace and contentment of mind through their own unaided efforts, Jews and Christians would be compelled to take stock of their whole position with the result that they would realize that as their religion had long outlived its usefulness they should have given it up long before.
(e) That after the dawning of this realization upon them, the prophecies concerning them which have been preserved in the Quran will lead Jews and Christians to accept the Holy Prophet.
(f) That after having accepted Islam they will submit themselves to limitations and restrictions which it has imposed upon man to regulate his moral conduct, and that by subduing their unrestrained passions they will become resigned to Divine decree and thus will draw upon themselves God’s grace and will bathe in the sea of His Mercy.
In fact, the Isra’ of Moses constituted a beautiful prelude to the coming Islamic Dispensation which was to supplant the Mosaic Law.
773
穆撒的精神境界指明了这样一个事实: 由于伊斯兰教的教导是根据律令和原则的与穆撒经典的有些原则有根本不同之处, 因此犹太教徒和穆斯林的真正合作是不可能的。第61-83节经文的详细解释, 见 «大版本的注释本» 1517-1530页。
3
دیوار سے مراد یہود و نصاریٰ کے بزرگ ہیں۔ یعنی موسٰیؑ اور عیسیٰؑ اور ان کے باپ سے مراد حضرت ابراہیم علیہ السلام اور کَنْز سے مراد وہ علمی خزانہ ہے جسے موسٰیؑ اور عیسیٰ ؑ کی قوموں نے محفوظ کیا ہوا تھا مگر ان کی بے توجہی سے اس کے ضائع ہونے کا خطرہ پیدا ہو گیا تب اسے محمدرسول اللہ صلی اللہ علیہ و سلم نے محفوظ کر دیا یعنی صحیح کلام کو جو بائبل اور انجیل میں تھا محفوظ کر دیا تاکہ جب بھی یہود اور نصاریٰ کو ہوش آئے وہ اس سے فائدہ اٹھا کر محمد رسول اللہ صلی اللہ علیہ و سلم پر ایمان لے آئیں۔
4
یعنی خداتعالیٰ کی وحی سے کیا ہے۔
2121
Commentary:
As already pointed out جدار (the wall) represents the elders of the Jews i.e. Moses, Jesus (18:78) and Abraham of whom the Quran says, "and in the next he will surely be among the righteous" (2:131).
By کنز (treasure) is meant the treasure of divine knowledge which was vouchsafed to Moses and Jesus.
The verse purports to say that God preserved in the Quran the great treasure of spiritual knowledge which was vouchsafed to Moses and Jesus (98:4) and which was in danger of being lost because of the irreligiousness of the Jews and their engrossment in worldly affairs so that, when they awaken to a realization of truth, they may accept it.
The words, as a mercy from thy Lord, mean that the preservation by God of the imperishable part of the teachings of Moses and Jesus in the Quran was an act of mercy on His part because the Jews by their repeated rebellion and transgression had forfeited all title to Divine mercy. But despite their iniquities God had mercy on them and preserved their own treasures of spiritual knowledge in the Quran for their guidance.
The words, I did it not of my own accord, mean that the Holy Prophet had no hand in the preservation of this great treasure of divine knowledge. A reference to this fact has also been made in the words, "Nor does he speak of his own desire" (53:4).
After a perusal of the incidents mentioned in the preceding verses and their explanation it becomes abundantly clear that the Vision of Moses has been mentioned here to point to the following facts:
(a) That it was decreed and was in the fitness of things that the Holy Prophet should appear after Christians who constitute the second part of the Mosaic Dispensation had become corrupt.
(b) That because Islamic teaching was based on laws and principles which differed fundamentally from some principles of the Mosaic Law, true and real cooperation between Jews and Muslims was impossible, but salvation without subscribing to Islamic principles was also unthinkable.
(c) That Jews and Christians would refuse to accept the Holy Prophet and would follow their own separate course but they will have to give their allegiance to him in the long run.
(d) That, after a long and fatiguing journey and after having despaired of obtaining real peace and contentment of mind through their own unaided efforts, Jews and Christians would be compelled to take stock of their whole position with the result that they would realize that as their religion had long outlived its usefulness they should have given it up long before.
(e) That after the dawning of this realization upon them, the prophecies concerning them which have been preserved in the Quran will lead Jews and Christians to accept the Holy Prophet.
(f) That after having accepted Islam they will submit themselves to limitations and restrictions which it has imposed upon man to regulate his moral conduct, and that by subduing their unrestrained passions they will become resigned to Divine decree and thus will draw upon themselves God’s grace and will bathe in the sea of His Mercy.
In fact, the Isra’ of Moses constituted a beautiful prelude to the coming Islamic Dispensation which was to supplant the Mosaic Law.
1717
The orphan boys are Moses and Jesus, and their righteous father is Abraham. Their treasure was the true teaching bequeathed by them to their peoples which was in danger of being lost through the latter’s irreligiousness. This treasure was safeguarded in the Qur’an in order that when they may awaken to a realization of truth of the Quranic teaching they may accept it.
1717A
It was done under Divine command.
1718
The Vision of Moses points to the fact that because Islamic teaching was based on laws and principles which differed fundamentally from some principles of the Mosaic Law, true and real cooperation between Jews and Muslims was impossible. For a detailed explanation of v. 61-83, see "The Larger Edition of the Commentary," (pp. 1517-1530).
أَوْ يُلْقَىٰٓ إِلَيْهِ كَنزٌ أَوْ تَكُونُ لَهُۥ جَنَّةٌ يَأْكُلُ مِنْهَا ۚ وَقَالَ ٱلظَّٰلِمُونَ إِن تَتَّبِعُونَ إِلَّا رَجُلًا مَّسْحُورًا
مَسْحُوْر کے معنے ایسے شخص کے ہیں جس کو کھانا دیا جائے۔ یعنی لوگ اس کو لالچ دینے کے لئے امداد دیں۔
11:13; 17:94.
17:48.
Commentary:
The objection which was begun in the preceding verse is continued in the verse under comment. "The Prophet," the disbelievers say, "should have possessed treasures of wealth which he should have distributed among his followers. He should also have had other accessories of greatness in the form of gardens and fountains. But he has none of these things. He seems to be a bewitched, or, at best a self-deceived man, a man who lives in a world of his own imagination, in a fool’s paradise."
e
11:13; 17:94.
f
17:48.
1
مَسْحُوْر کے معنے ایسے شخص کے ہیں جس کو کھانا دیا جائے۔ یعنی لوگ اس کو لالچ دینے کے لئے امداد دیں۔
b
11:13; 17:94.
c
17:48.
2647
Commentary:
The objection which was begun in the preceding verse is continued in the verse under comment. "The Prophet," the disbelievers say, "should have possessed treasures of wealth which he should have distributed among his followers. He should also have had other accessories of greatness in the form of gardens and fountains. But he has none of these things. He seems to be a bewitched, or, at best a self-deceived man, a man who lives in a world of his own imagination, in a fool’s paradise."
c
11:13; 17:94.
d
17:48.
وَكُنُوزٍ وَمَقَامٍ كَرِيمٍ
۞ إِنَّ قَٰرُونَ كَانَ مِن قَوْمِ مُوسَىٰ فَبَغَىٰ عَلَيْهِمْ ۖ وَءَاتَيْنَٰهُ مِنَ ٱلْكُنُوزِ مَآ إِنَّ مَفَاتِحَهُۥ لَتَنُوٓأُ بِٱلْعُصْبَةِ أُو۟لِى ٱلْقُوَّةِ إِذْ قَالَ لَهُۥ قَوْمُهُۥ لَا تَفْرَحْ ۖ إِنَّ ٱللَّهَ لَا يُحِبُّ ٱلْفَرِحِينَ
29:40; 40:25.
فَبَغٰی عَلَیْھِمْ ظالم بادشاہوں کا قاعدہ ہے کہ وہ چھوٹے عہدوں پر رعایا میں سے کچھ لوگ مقرر کرتے ہیں اور یہ لوگ اپنے ہم قوموں پر ظلم کرنے میں خود حاکموں سے بھی آگے نکلے ہوئے ہوتے ہیں۔ انگریز کے زمانہ میں دیکھ لو‘ انگریز سپرنٹنڈنٹ پولیس اور انگریز ڈپٹی کمشنر اتنا ظلم نہیں کرتا تھا جتنا کہ ایک ہندوستانی تھانے دار یا کانسٹیبل یا پٹواری یا تحصیلدار ظلم کرتے تھے۔ فرعون نے بھی یہی چال چلی تھی۔ اور بعض ریونیو افسر یا تحصیلدار خود بنی اسرائیل سے مقرر کر دیئے تھے۔ اور وہ لوگ قبطیوں سے بھی زیادہ اپنی قوم یعنی بنی اسرائیل پر ظلم کرتے تھے۔ کیونکہ وہ خیال کرتے تھے کہ با
اٰ تَیْنٰـہُ مِنَ الْـکُنُوّزِ اس سے یہ مرادنہیں کہ یہ خزانے اس کے ذاتی تھے‘ بلکہ اس کے معنے یہ ہیں کہ وہ ایک تحصیلدار یا افسر مال تھا یا افسر خزانہ تھا۔ جس کی تحویل میں سرکاری خزانے رہتے تھے۔ چنانچہ حضرت یوسف علیہ السلام بھی اپنے وقت کے فرعون کے ملازم تھے۔ سورہ یوسف رکوع۷ میں ہے کہ جب فرعونِ مصر نے یوسف علیہ السلام کو قید سے نکالنے کے بعد کہا کہ ہم تم کو اپنے دربار میں بڑا مقام دیں گے۔ تو یوسف علیہ السلام نے کہا کہ مجھے آپ ملک کے خزانوں کا افسر بنا دیں۔ میں اس فن کو خوب جانتا ہوں اور اقتصادیات کا ماہر ہوں۔ اس سے پتہ لگتا ہے کہ حضرت یوسف علیہ السلام کے زمانہ میں
اِنَّ مَفَاتِحَہٗ لَتَنُوْٓ أُ بِالْعُصْبَۃِ اُولِی الْقُوَّۃِ بعض مفسرین نے اس آیت سے قارون کی دولت کا ایک الف لیلوی اندازہ لگایا ہے۔ حالانکہ اس آیت سے یہ تو پتہ لگتا ہے کہ قارون مال دار آدمی تھا مگر کوئی جنّاتی خزانہ اس کے قبضہ میں ثابت نہیں ہوتا۔ یہ کہ خزانہ کی کنجیاں ایک مضبوط جماعت کے لئے بھی اٹھانی مشکل تھیں۔ اس کی توجیہہ کرتے ہوئے یہ یاد رکھنا چاہیے کہ یہ خزانہ حکومت کا تھا اور اس وقت بادشاہ جب ملک میں سفر کرتے تھے تو سینکڑوں ہزاروں اونٹوں پر خزانے کے دوہرے بکس رکھ کر ساتھ لے جاتے تھے کیونکہ اس وقت موٹر نہیں ہوتے تھے نہ مختلف علاقوں میں سرکاری خزانے ب
29:40; 40:25.
Qarun (Korah) was fabulously rich. He stood high in the favour of Pharaoh and was very likely his treasurer. It seems that he was officer in charge of the gold mines belonging to Pharaoh and was a specialist in the art of digging out gold from the mines. In Southern Egypt the territory of Karu was famed for gold mines. The suffix "An" or "On" meaning "pillar," or "light" the combined word "Kur-on" signifies, 'the pillar of Karu' and was the title of Pharaoh’s Minister of Mineralogy. He is said to be an Israelite and a believer in Moses. In order to win favours from Pharaoh he seemed to have persecuted his own people and to have behaved arrogantly towards them. As a result Divine punishment descended upon him and he perished.
Mafatih is the plural of both Maftah and Miftah, the former word meaning a hoard; a treasure; and the latter meaning a key (Lane).
29:40; 40:25.
Important Words:
کنوز (treasures of hoarded wealth) is the plural of کنز which is noun-inf. from کنز (kanaza). They say کنز المال i.e. he buried the property or treasure in the earth; he hoarded it, or stored, or he collected the property and treasured it. کنز therefore, means, treasure, property buried in the earth; property that is preserved in a receptacle; that receptacle in which property is buried or preserved or hoarded; treasure-boxes; anything abundant and collected together (Lane & Aqrab).
مفاتح (stores) is the plural of مفتح (maftah) which is derived from فتح. They say فتح الباب i.e. he opened the door. مفتح (maftah) means, a hoard; a treasure, a store or store room or magazine; buried property. مفتح (miftah) of which مفاتح also is the plural and مفتاح (plural مفاتیح) mean a key (Lane & Aqrab).
لتنوء (would have weighed down) is derived fromناء which means, he rose or rose with difficulty and effort under a load; he was oppressed by weight and fell down. ناء بحمله means, he rose with his burden with effort and difficulty. ناء به الحملmeans, the burden weighed him down (Aqrab).
Commentary:
It would appear that Korah was an Israelite who stood high in the favour of Pharaoh and held one of the principal offices of State under him. Very likely he was Pharaoh’s treasurer. When Pharaoh went on official tour the royal treasures were probably transported under Korah’s charge. In order to safeguard his position and to win further favours from Pharaoh, Korah seemed to have persecuted his own people and behaved haughtily and tyrannically towards them.
The name of Qarun (Korah) seems also to have been symbolically used here for men of material wealth. Abundance of riches has proved the undoing of many a man. Elated with riches and wealth and lulled into a false sense of security, wealthy people are prone to reject God’s Message and defy His Prophets. Korah as it appears from the Bible (Num. 16:1-35), was a believer in Moses. According to Rabbinical literature he was fabulously rich (Jew. Enc.) and in the pride of wealth revolted against Moses and Aaron and consequently perished with his 250 followers, the earth having swallowed them up.
d
29:40; 40:25.
2
فَبَغٰی عَلَیْھِمْ ظالم بادشاہوں کا قاعدہ ہے کہ وہ چھوٹے عہدوں پر رعایا میں سے کچھ لوگ مقرر کرتے ہیں اور یہ لوگ اپنے ہم قوموں پر ظلم کرنے میں خود حاکموں سے بھی آگے نکلے ہوئے ہوتے ہیں۔ انگریز کے زمانہ میں دیکھ لو‘ انگریز سپرنٹنڈنٹ پولیس اور انگریز ڈپٹی کمشنر اتنا ظلم نہیں کرتا تھا جتنا کہ ایک ہندوستانی تھانے دار یا کانسٹیبل یا پٹواری یا تحصیلدار ظلم کرتے تھے۔ فرعون نے بھی یہی چال چلی تھی۔ اور بعض ریونیو افسر یا تحصیلدار خود بنی اسرائیل سے مقرر کر دیئے تھے۔ اور وہ لوگ قبطیوں سے بھی زیادہ اپنی قوم یعنی بنی اسرائیل پر ظلم کرتے تھے۔ کیونکہ وہ خیال کرتے تھے کہ با
3
اٰ تَیْنٰـہُ مِنَ الْـکُنُوّزِ اس سے یہ مرادنہیں کہ یہ خزانے اس کے ذاتی تھے‘ بلکہ اس کے معنے یہ ہیں کہ وہ ایک تحصیلدار یا افسر مال تھا یا افسر خزانہ تھا۔ جس کی تحویل میں سرکاری خزانے رہتے تھے۔ چنانچہ حضرت یوسف علیہ السلام بھی اپنے وقت کے فرعون کے ملازم تھے۔ سورہ یوسف رکوع۷ میں ہے کہ جب فرعونِ مصر نے یوسف علیہ السلام کو قید سے نکالنے کے بعد کہا کہ ہم تم کو اپنے دربار میں بڑا مقام دیں گے۔ تو یوسف علیہ السلام نے کہا کہ مجھے آپ ملک کے خزانوں کا افسر بنا دیں۔ میں اس فن کو خوب جانتا ہوں اور اقتصادیات کا ماہر ہوں۔ اس سے پتہ لگتا ہے کہ حضرت یوسف علیہ السلام کے زمانہ میں
4
اِنَّ مَفَاتِحَہٗ لَتَنُوْٓ أُ بِالْعُصْبَۃِ اُولِی الْقُوَّۃِ بعض مفسرین نے اس آیت سے قارون کی دولت کا ایک الف لیلوی اندازہ لگایا ہے۔ حالانکہ اس آیت سے یہ تو پتہ لگتا ہے کہ قارون مال دار آدمی تھا مگر کوئی جنّاتی خزانہ اس کے قبضہ میں ثابت نہیں ہوتا۔ یہ کہ خزانہ کی کنجیاں ایک مضبوط جماعت کے لئے بھی اٹھانی مشکل تھیں۔ اس کی توجیہہ کرتے ہوئے یہ یاد رکھنا چاہیے کہ یہ خزانہ حکومت کا تھا اور اس وقت بادشاہ جب ملک میں سفر کرتے تھے تو سینکڑوں ہزاروں اونٹوں پر خزانے کے دوہرے بکس رکھ کر ساتھ لے جاتے تھے کیونکہ اس وقت موٹر نہیں ہوتے تھے نہ مختلف علاقوں میں سرکاری خزانے ب
b
29:40; 40:25.
2930
Important Words:
کنوز (treasures of hoarded wealth) is the plural of کنز which is noun-inf. from کنز (kanaza). They say کنز المال i.e. he buried the property or treasure in the earth; he hoarded it, or stored, or he collected the property and treasured it. کنز therefore, means, treasure, property buried in the earth; property that is preserved in a receptacle; that receptacle in which property is buried or preserved or hoarded; treasure-boxes; anything abundant and collected together (Lane & Aqrab).
مفاتح (stores) is the plural of مفتح (maftah) which is derived from فتح. They say فتح الباب i.e. he opened the door. مفتح (maftah) means, a hoard; a treasure, a store or store room or magazine; buried property. مفتح (miftah) of which مفاتح also is the plural and مفتاح (plural مفاتیح) mean a key (Lane & Aqrab).
لتنوء (would have weighed down) is derived fromناء which means, he rose or rose with difficulty and effort under a load; he was oppressed by weight and fell down. ناء بحمله means, he rose with his burden with effort and difficulty. ناء به الحملmeans, the burden weighed him down (Aqrab).
Commentary:
It would appear that Korah was an Israelite who stood high in the favour of Pharaoh and held one of the principal offices of State under him. Very likely he was Pharaoh’s treasurer. When Pharaoh went on official tour the royal treasures were probably transported under Korah’s charge. In order to safeguard his position and to win further favours from Pharaoh, Korah seemed to have persecuted his own people and behaved haughtily and tyrannically towards them.
The name of Qarun (Korah) seems also to have been symbolically used here for men of material wealth. Abundance of riches has proved the undoing of many a man. Elated with riches and wealth and lulled into a false sense of security, wealthy people are prone to reject God’s Message and defy His Prophets. Korah as it appears from the Bible (Num. 16:1-35), was a believer in Moses. According to Rabbinical literature he was fabulously rich (Jew. Enc.) and in the pride of wealth revolted against Moses and Aaron and consequently perished with his 250 followers, the earth having swallowed them up.
a
29:40; 40:25.
2231
Qarun (Korah) was fabulously rich. He stood high in the favour of Pharaoh and was very likely his treasurer. It seems that he was officer in charge of the gold mines belonging to Pharaoh and was a specialist in the art of digging out gold from the mines. In Southern Egypt the territory of Karu was famed for gold mines. The suffix "An" or "On" meaning "pillar," or "light" the combined word "Kur-on" signifies, 'the pillar of Karu' and was the title of Pharaoh’s Minister of Mineralogy. He is said to be an Israelite and a believer in Moses. In order to win favours from Pharaoh he seemed to have persecuted his own people and to have behaved arrogantly towards them. As a result Divine punishment descended upon him and he perished.
2232
Mafatih is the plural of both Maftah and Miftah, the former word meaning a hoard; a treasure; and the latter meaning a key (Lane).
أَمْ عِندَهُمْ خَزَآئِنُ رَحْمَةِ رَبِّكَ ٱلْعَزِيزِ ٱلْوَهَّابِ
17:101; 52:38.
17:101; 52:38.
17:101; 52:38.
Commentary:
In reply to the refusal of disbelievers to accept the Holy Prophet on the plea that he was a mere mortal like them and nothing more, the verse reproachfully asks them: Since when have they arrogated to themselves the possession of the treasures of Divine mercy? It is God’s own special prerogative to select, in His infallible wisdom, whom He deems fit to be the bearer of His Message and the conveyer of His will to His creatures.
c
17:101; 52:38.
a
17:101; 52:38.
3380
Commentary:
In reply to the refusal of disbelievers to accept the Holy Prophet on the plea that he was a mere mortal like them and nothing more, the verse reproachfully asks them: Since when have they arrogated to themselves the possession of the treasures of Divine mercy? It is God’s own special prerogative to select, in His infallible wisdom, whom He deems fit to be the bearer of His Message and the conveyer of His will to His creatures.
d
17:101; 52:38.
أَمْ عِندَهُمْ خَزَآئِنُ رَبِّكَ أَمْ هُمُ ٱلْمُصَۣيْطِرُونَ
38:10.
Commentary:
God has been Gracious and Merciful to men, in that He has sent the Holy Prophet and has revealed the Quran to him that they may understand the object of their life and, by following him, may attain it and establish a true and real connection with God. But they refuse to accept him, thinking him to be too low to be entitled to demand and command their allegiance. The verse answers this objection of disbelievers by telling them that God in His infallible wisdom has chosen the Prophet to be humanity’s infallible Guide and Teacher. How can they dare arrogate to themselves the right and role of being the distributors or guardians of the treasures of God’s mercy?
b
38:10.
3955
Commentary:
God has been Gracious and Merciful to men, in that He has sent the Holy Prophet and has revealed the Quran to him that they may understand the object of their life and, by following him, may attain it and establish a true and real connection with God. But they refuse to accept him, thinking him to be too low to be entitled to demand and command their allegiance. The verse answers this objection of disbelievers by telling them that God in His infallible wisdom has chosen the Prophet to be humanity’s infallible Guide and Teacher. How can they dare arrogate to themselves the right and role of being the distributors or guardians of the treasures of God’s mercy?
هُمُ ٱلَّذِينَ يَقُولُونَ لَا تُنفِقُوا۟ عَلَىٰ مَنْ عِندَ رَسُولِ ٱللَّهِ حَتَّىٰ يَنفَضُّوا۟ ۗ وَلِلَّهِ خَزَآئِنُ ٱلسَّمَٰوَٰتِ وَٱلْأَرْضِ وَلَٰكِنَّ ٱلْمُنَٰفِقِينَ لَا يَفْقَهُونَ
Insincere and dishonest himself, a hypocrite considers others to be like him. The Hypocrites of Medina had made an entirely foolish and wrong estimate of the sincerity of purpose of the Holy Prophet’s Companions in that they thought that they (his Companions) had gathered round him from considerations of their material interests, and that the moment they found that their expectations had not materialized, they would desert him. Time completely belied their fond and futile expectations.
Commentary:
Insincere and dishonest himself, a hypocrite considers others to be like him. The verse points out that the hypocrites of Medina had made an entirely foolish and wrong estimate of the sincerity of purpose of the Holy Prophet’s Companions. They had quite a wrong notion that the Companions of the Holy Prophet had gathered round him from considerations of material interest, and that the moment they would find that their hopes had not materialised, they would desert him. Time completely belied their fond and futile expectations.
4249
Commentary:
Insincere and dishonest himself, a hypocrite considers others to be like him. The verse points out that the hypocrites of Medina had made an entirely foolish and wrong estimate of the sincerity of purpose of the Holy Prophet’s Companions. They had quite a wrong notion that the Companions of the Holy Prophet had gathered round him from considerations of material interest, and that the moment they would find that their hopes had not materialised, they would desert him. Time completely belied their fond and futile expectations.
3052
Insincere and dishonest himself, a hypocrite considers others to be like him. The Hypocrites of Medina had made an entirely foolish and wrong estimate of the sincerity of purpose of the Holy Prophet’s Companions in that they thought that they (his Companions) had gathered round him from considerations of their material interests, and that the moment they found that their expectations had not materialized, they would desert him. Time completely belied their fond and futile expectations.