اٰیَۃٍ
Appears 11 times in Quran
Occurrences in Quran
Found 11 verses containing "اٰیَۃٍ".
۞ مَا نَنۡسَخۡ مِنۡ اٰیَۃٍ اَوۡ نُنۡسِہَا نَاۡتِ بِخَیۡرٍ مِّنۡہَاۤ اَوۡ مِثۡلِہَاۤ ۗ اَلَمۡ تَعۡلَمۡ اَنَّ اللّٰہَ عَلٰی کُلِّ شَیۡءٍ قَدِیۡرٌ
16:102.
说什么 «古兰经» 的某些经文已被废弃, 这是从本节经文中得出的错误推断, 这种结论显然是错误的和毫无根据的。这节经文根本没有表明 اٰيَة (Ayah) 这词是指 «古兰经» 中的经文。在前一节和以下几节经文中, 都提到那些持有经典的人以及他们对新的启示的嫉妒, 这表明在本节经文中所叙述的被废弃的经节是指先前的启示。有人指出, 先前的经文含有两类命令: (a) 那些由于情况的变化及新启示的广泛性而需要加以废弃的, (b) 那些含有永恒真理的, 而这些真理需要复兴, 以便使人想起那被忘却的真理。因此就有必要废弃那旧经文中的某些部分而代之以新的经文, 且也有必要恢复那些失散的经文。因此, 安拉废弃了先前启示中的某些部分而代之以新的与更好的部分, 并同时加上类似的补缺。这就是符合上下文和 «古兰经» 教义的全面精神的意义。«古兰经» 废弃了所有先前的经文, 因为鉴于人类的变化情况, 它提供了一部不仅比全部老的经典好, 而且也为各时代的全人类准备了新的经典。使命有局限性的、较差的教义必须让位于使命有普遍性的、较好的教义。在本节经文中 نَنْسَخْ (Nansakh, 我们废弃) 这词与 بِخَيْرٍ (Bi-khairin, 较好的一种) 这词有关, 而 نُنْسِهَا (Nunsiha, 我们使其忘掉) 这词与 بِمِثْلِهَا (Bi-Mithliha, 与它同类) 这词有关, 意思是, 当安拉废弃某一事物时, 他以更好的来取代它, 当他使某一事物被忘掉时, 他才恢复它。一些犹太教学者自己也承认, 古以色列人当了俘虏被巴比伦王尼布加尼撒运往巴比伦后, 基督教 «旧约全书» 的首五卷全部丢失了 (Enc. Bib.)。
اٰيَة (Ayah) 的意思是启示, 迹象, 命令, 或一节 «古兰经»。
اس سے یہ مرادنہیں کہ ہم قرآن شریف کی کسی آیت کو منسوخ کر دیں۔ بلکہ مطلب یہ ہے کہ جب ہم کسی نشان کو ٹلا دیتے ہیں تو اس سے بہتر نشان لے آتے ہیں یا کم سے کم ویسا ہی نشان اور ظاہر کرتے ہیں تاکہ دنیا کے لئے ہدایت کا موجب بنے۔
مفسرین نے اس کے یہ معنے کیے ہیں کہ جب قرآن کی کوئی آیت منسوخ کی جائے تو ویسی ہی آیت اور آجاتی ہے۔ لیکن اگر کتاب ہی کی آیت مراد لینی ہو تو اس آیت کے یہ معنے لینے چاہئیں کہ اگر ہم تورات اور انجیل میں سے کسی حصہ کو منسوخ کریں‘ تو قرآن کریم میں یا تو ویسی ہی تعلیم نازل کر دیں گے یا اس سے بہتر نازل کر دیں گے۔ قرآن کریم کی کوئی آیت منسوخ نہیں۔ نہ قیامت تک منس
16:102.
Ayah means, message, sign, command or a verse of the Qur’an (Lane).
It is mistakenly inferred from this verse that some verses of the Qur’an have been abrogated. The conclusion is patently erroneous and unwarranted. There is nothing in this verse to indicate that the word Ayah refers to Quranic verses. Both in the preceding and the following verses, a reference is made to the People of the Book and their jealousies against the new Revelation which shows that the Ayah spoken of in this verse as being abrogated, refers to the previous Revelations. It is pointed out that the previous Scriptures contained two kinds of commandments: (a) Those which, owing to changed conditions and to the universality of the new Revelation, required abrogation. (b) Those containing eternal truths which needed resuscitation so that people might be reminded of the forgotten truth. It was, therefore, necessary to abrogate certain portions of those Scriptures and bring in their place new ones, and also to restore the lost ones. So, God abrogated some portions of the previous Revelati
16:102.
Important Words:
ننسخ (We abrogate) is derived from نسخ which has two meanings: (1) he abrogated or annulled, irrespective of the fact whether he brought another in its place or not; (2) he prepared a true copy of a book (Aqrab). It is from the latter sense that the word نسخة or "copy" is derived. From the former sense we derive the words ناسخ i.e. the thing which comes to abrogate another, and منسوخ i.e. the thing which is abrogated.
ننسھا (We cause to be forgotten) is derived from نسی meaning, he forgot, or he failed to preserve in his mind. انسی is the causative form of نسی meaning, he made a person forget a thing (Aqrab).
مثل (like) has three distinct uses: (1) either it is used to denote the like of a thing; (2) or it is used to denote a thing itself; (3) or sometimes it is redundant, giving no special meaning (Aqrab & Misbah).
Commentary:
Some commentators have attempted to infer from this verse that some of the verses of the Quran have been abrogated by others. But this conclusion is grievously erroneous and unwarranted. There is nothing in this verse to indicate that the word آیة (Sign) occurring here refers to the Quranic verses. Both in the preceding and the following verses, a reference is made to the People of the Book and their jealousies for the new revelation, which clearly shows that the word آیة spoken of in this verse as being abrogated, refers to the previous revelation. It is pointed out in this verse that the previous Scriptures contained two kinds of commandments. Firstly, those which, owing to the changed conditions of the world and the universality of the new revelation, required abrogation; secondly, those containing eternal truths which did not require abrogation but simply resuscitation so that people might be reminded of the forgotten truth. It was, therefore, necessary (1) to abrogate certain portions and bring in their place new ones, and (2) to restore the lost ones. So, God abrogated some portions of the old Books, replacing them with new and better ones, and at the same time He re-introduced the missing portions by similar ones. This is the only meaning which is consistent with the context and the general spirit of Quranic teaching. In the verse the word ننسخ (We abrogate) relates to the words بخیر (one better) and the words ننسھا (cause to be forgotten) relate to the words بمثلھا (the like thereof) meaning that when God abrogates a certain thing He brings a better thing in its place and when He causes a thing to be forgotten, i.e. when people forget a thing, He brings it over again, i.e. He resuscitates it.
The Jews themselves admit that after the Israelites were carried as captives to Babylon by Nebuchadnezzar, the whole of the Pentateuch was lost (Enc. Bib, 653-654).
The meaning put on the verse by some Translators, viz., that certain verses of the Quran stand abrogated is not only opposed to the words of the Quran and the context of the verse, but is also against reason; nor can any authentic saying of the Holy Prophet be quoted in its favour. On the contrary, the Holy Prophet is reported to have said that the whole of the Quran must be strictly followed and he himself acted upon all its teachings throughout his life. Besides this, the Quran itself testifies to its own purity and integrity. The well-known verse: Verily, We Ourself have sent down this Exhortation and most surely We will be its Guardian (15:10) leads to no other conclusion. If the abrogation of any part of the Quran be conceded, the promise about its protection becomes null and void, for in that case it would be impossible to distinguish the abrogated portions from the rest of the Book. Again, there is absolutely no self-contradiction in the Quran, and therefore there is no need of resorting to the theory of abrogation. So-called contradictions only betray lack of deep study on the part of those who proclaim them. When one fails to understand two verses in their true relations, one is inclined to see a contradiction between them and then takes recourse to the convenient theory that one of the two verses must have been abrogated by the other. As soon as they appear to be reconcilable, the abrogation theory becomes gratuitous. This is why those who have upheld the abrogation theory have gradually been compelled to reduce the number of abrogated verses; for whereas the abrogated verses were formerly thought to be as many as 500, they have, by later scholars, been gradually reduced to only five. But even this is incorrect; for there is absolutely no verse in the Quran which is abrogated and we challenge any critic to come forward and prove that any verse of the Holy Book is abrogated. It is a pity that such beautiful significance of the verse under comment should have, as has been briefly portrayed above, become marred through ignorance and thoughtlessness. The verse has a reference to yet another significance as well. The People of the Book have been told that the Quran has come to abrogate all previous Scriptures; for, in view of the changed conditions of mankind, it has brought a new شریعة (Law) which is not only better than all the old codes of Law, but is also meant for all men and all times. An inferior thing with a limited mission must give place to a superior thing with a universal mission. Having explained this point, the Quran proceeds to say that although its teachings are meant for all time, yet a period is destined to come in the life of Islam when, though the letter of the Quran would still be intact, its spirit would be forgotten and lost by Muslims. When such a time comes, God will arrange to resuscitate the Quranic teachings, i.e. bring back "the like thereof" by raising a special Reformer from among Muslims. This prophecy is referred to more pointedly in 62:4 where God promises to raise a Reformer in the likeness of the Holy Prophet in the Latter Days. This Reformer, it is pointed out, would bring back the true faith to the world, even if it had soared away as high as the Pleiades (Bukhari, ch. on Tafsir). The prophecy has been fulfilled in the person of the Holy Founder of the Ahmadiyya Movement.
a
16:102.
75
说什么 «古兰经» 的某些经文已被废弃, 这是从本节经文中得出的错误推断, 这种结论显然是错误的和毫无根据的。这节经文根本没有表明 اٰيَة (Ayah) 这词是指 «古兰经» 中的经文。在前一节和以下几节经文中, 都提到那些持有经典的人以及他们对新的启示的嫉妒, 这表明在本节经文中所叙述的被废弃的经节是指先前的启示。有人指出, 先前的经文含有两类命令: (a) 那些由于情况的变化及新启示的广泛性而需要加以废弃的, (b) 那些含有永恒真理的, 而这些真理需要复兴, 以便使人想起那被忘却的真理。因此就有必要废弃那旧经文中的某些部分而代之以新的经文, 且也有必要恢复那些失散的经文。因此, 安拉废弃了先前启示中的某些部分而代之以新的与更好的部分, 并同时加上类似的补缺。这就是符合上下文和 «古兰经» 教义的全面精神的意义。«古兰经» 废弃了所有先前的经文, 因为鉴于人类的变化情况, 它提供了一部不仅比全部老的经典好, 而且也为各时代的全人类准备了新的经典。使命有局限性的、较差的教义必须让位于使命有普遍性的、较好的教义。在本节经文中 نَنْسَخْ (Nansakh, 我们废弃) 这词与 بِخَيْرٍ (Bi-khairin, 较好的一种) 这词有关, 而 نُنْسِهَا (Nunsiha, 我们使其忘掉) 这词与 بِمِثْلِهَا (Bi-Mithliha, 与它同类) 这词有关, 意思是, 当安拉废弃某一事物时, 他以更好的来取代它, 当他使某一事物被忘掉时, 他才恢复它。一些犹太教学者自己也承认, 古以色列人当了俘虏被巴比伦王尼布加尼撒运往巴比伦后, 基督教 «旧约全书» 的首五卷全部丢失了 (Enc. Bib.)。
76
اٰيَة (Ayah) 的意思是启示, 迹象, 命令, 或一节 «古兰经»。
2
اس سے یہ مرادنہیں کہ ہم قرآن شریف کی کسی آیت کو منسوخ کر دیں۔ بلکہ مطلب یہ ہے کہ جب ہم کسی نشان کو ٹلا دیتے ہیں تو اس سے بہتر نشان لے آتے ہیں یا کم سے کم ویسا ہی نشان اور ظاہر کرتے ہیں تاکہ دنیا کے لئے ہدایت کا موجب بنے۔
مفسرین نے اس کے یہ معنے کیے ہیں کہ جب قرآن کی کوئی آیت منسوخ کی جائے تو ویسی ہی آیت اور آجاتی ہے۔ لیکن اگر کتاب ہی کی آیت مراد لینی ہو تو اس آیت کے یہ معنے لینے چاہئیں کہ اگر ہم تورات اور انجیل میں سے کسی حصہ کو منسوخ کریں‘ تو قرآن کریم میں یا تو ویسی ہی تعلیم نازل کر دیں گے یا اس سے بہتر نازل کر دیں گے۔ قرآن کریم کی کوئی آیت منسوخ نہیں۔ نہ قیامت تک منس
a
16:102.
113
Important Words:
ننسخ (We abrogate) is derived from نسخ which has two meanings: (1) he abrogated or annulled, irrespective of the fact whether he brought another in its place or not; (2) he prepared a true copy of a book (Aqrab). It is from the latter sense that the word نسخة or "copy" is derived. From the former sense we derive the words ناسخ i.e. the thing which comes to abrogate another, and منسوخ i.e. the thing which is abrogated.
ننسھا (We cause to be forgotten) is derived from نسی meaning, he forgot, or he failed to preserve in his mind. انسی is the causative form of نسی meaning, he made a person forget a thing (Aqrab).
مثل (like) has three distinct uses: (1) either it is used to denote the like of a thing; (2) or it is used to denote a thing itself; (3) or sometimes it is redundant, giving no special meaning (Aqrab & Misbah).
Commentary:
Some commentators have attempted to infer from this verse that some of the verses of the Quran have been abrogated by others. But this conclusion is grievously erroneous and unwarranted. There is nothing in this verse to indicate that the word آیة (Sign) occurring here refers to the Quranic verses. Both in the preceding and the following verses, a reference is made to the People of the Book and their jealousies for the new revelation, which clearly shows that the word آیة spoken of in this verse as being abrogated, refers to the previous revelation. It is pointed out in this verse that the previous Scriptures contained two kinds of commandments. Firstly, those which, owing to the changed conditions of the world and the universality of the new revelation, required abrogation; secondly, those containing eternal truths which did not require abrogation but simply resuscitation so that people might be reminded of the forgotten truth. It was, therefore, necessary (1) to abrogate certain portions and bring in their place new ones, and (2) to restore the lost ones. So, God abrogated some portions of the old Books, replacing them with new and better ones, and at the same time He re-introduced the missing portions by similar ones. This is the only meaning which is consistent with the context and the general spirit of Quranic teaching. In the verse the word ننسخ (We abrogate) relates to the words بخیر (one better) and the words ننسھا (cause to be forgotten) relate to the words بمثلھا (the like thereof) meaning that when God abrogates a certain thing He brings a better thing in its place and when He causes a thing to be forgotten, i.e. when people forget a thing, He brings it over again, i.e. He resuscitates it.
The Jews themselves admit that after the Israelites were carried as captives to Babylon by Nebuchadnezzar, the whole of the Pentateuch was lost (Enc. Bib, 653-654).
The meaning put on the verse by some Translators, viz., that certain verses of the Quran stand abrogated is not only opposed to the words of the Quran and the context of the verse, but is also against reason; nor can any authentic saying of the Holy Prophet be quoted in its favour. On the contrary, the Holy Prophet is reported to have said that the whole of the Quran must be strictly followed and he himself acted upon all its teachings throughout his life. Besides this, the Quran itself testifies to its own purity and integrity. The well-known verse: Verily, We Ourself have sent down this Exhortation and most surely We will be its Guardian (15:10) leads to no other conclusion. If the abrogation of any part of the Quran be conceded, the promise about its protection becomes null and void, for in that case it would be impossible to distinguish the abrogated portions from the rest of the Book. Again, there is absolutely no self-contradiction in the Quran, and therefore there is no need of resorting to the theory of abrogation. So-called contradictions only betray lack of deep study on the part of those who proclaim them. When one fails to understand two verses in their true relations, one is inclined to see a contradiction between them and then takes recourse to the convenient theory that one of the two verses must have been abrogated by the other. As soon as they appear to be reconcilable, the abrogation theory becomes gratuitous. This is why those who have upheld the abrogation theory have gradually been compelled to reduce the number of abrogated verses; for whereas the abrogated verses were formerly thought to be as many as 500, they have, by later scholars, been gradually reduced to only five. But even this is incorrect; for there is absolutely no verse in the Quran which is abrogated and we challenge any critic to come forward and prove that any verse of the Holy Book is abrogated. It is a pity that such beautiful significance of the verse under comment should have, as has been briefly portrayed above, become marred through ignorance and thoughtlessness. The verse has a reference to yet another significance as well. The People of the Book have been told that the Quran has come to abrogate all previous Scriptures; for, in view of the changed conditions of mankind, it has brought a new شریعة (Law) which is not only better than all the old codes of Law, but is also meant for all men and all times. An inferior thing with a limited mission must give place to a superior thing with a universal mission. Having explained this point, the Quran proceeds to say that although its teachings are meant for all time, yet a period is destined to come in the life of Islam when, though the letter of the Quran would still be intact, its spirit would be forgotten and lost by Muslims. When such a time comes, God will arrange to resuscitate the Quranic teachings, i.e. bring back "the like thereof" by raising a special Reformer from among Muslims. This prophecy is referred to more pointedly in 62:4 where God promises to raise a Reformer in the likeness of the Holy Prophet in the Latter Days. This Reformer, it is pointed out, would bring back the true faith to the world, even if it had soared away as high as the Pleiades (Bukhari, ch. on Tafsir). The prophecy has been fulfilled in the person of the Holy Founder of the Ahmadiyya Movement.
b
16:102.
131A
Ayah means, message, sign, command or a verse of the Qur’an (Lane).
132
It is mistakenly inferred from this verse that some verses of the Qur’an have been abrogated. The conclusion is patently erroneous and unwarranted. There is nothing in this verse to indicate that the word Ayah refers to Quranic verses. Both in the preceding and the following verses, a reference is made to the People of the Book and their jealousies against the new Revelation which shows that the Ayah spoken of in this verse as being abrogated, refers to the previous Revelations. It is pointed out that the previous Scriptures contained two kinds of commandments: (a) Those which, owing to changed conditions and to the universality of the new Revelation, required abrogation. (b) Those containing eternal truths which needed resuscitation so that people might be reminded of the forgotten truth. It was, therefore, necessary to abrogate certain portions of those Scriptures and bring in their place new ones, and also to restore the lost ones. So, God abrogated some portions of the previous Revelati
وَلَئِنۡ اَتَیۡتَ الَّذِیۡنَ اُوۡتُوا الۡکِتٰبَ بِکُلِّ اٰیَۃٍ مَّا تَبِعُوۡا قِبۡلَتَکَ ۚ وَمَاۤ اَنۡتَ بِتَابِعٍ قِبۡلَتَہُمۡ ۚ وَمَا بَعۡضُہُمۡ بِتَابِعٍ قِبۡلَۃَ بَعۡضٍ ۚ وَلَئِنِ اتَّبَعۡتَ اَہۡوَآءَہُمۡ مِّنۡۢ بَعۡدِ مَا جَآءَکَ مِنَ الۡعِلۡمِ ۙ اِنَّکَ اِذًا لَّمِنَ الظّٰلِمِیۡنَ
عیسائی لوگ مشرق کی طرف منہ کرکے نماز پڑھا کرتے تھے۔ چنانچہ نجران کے عیسائی جب رسول کریم صلی اللہ علیہ وسلم کے پاس مذہبی گفتگو کرنے کے لئے آئے تو انہوں نے مشرق کی طرف ہی منہ کرکے نماز پڑھی تھی۔ عام طور پر اس کی وجہ وہ یہ بتاتے ہیں کہ مسیحؑ کی خبر دینے والا ستارہ مشرق کی طرف سے طلوع ہوا تھا۔
یہودیوں میں سامری قبیلہ کے لوگ جیسا کہ نئے عہدنامہ کی کتاب یوحنا باب ۴ آیت ۲۰ سے معلوم ہوتا ہے۔ یروشلم کے ایک پہاڑ کی طرف منہ کرکے عبادت کیا کرتے تھے اور باقی یہودی بیت المقدس کی طرف منہ کرکے نماز پڑھا کرتے تھے۔ پس ان سب میں اختلاف قبلہ تھا۔ اسی کی طرف اس آیت میں اشارہ کیا گیا ہے
109:3, 7.
6:57; 13:38.
This verse points to the hostility of Jews and Christians not only to Islam but also to one another. The Jews had Jerusalem as their Qiblah (Kings 8: 22-30; Dan. 6: 10; Ps. 5: 7 & Jonah, 2: 4), while the Samaritans, a disowned section of the Jews, who also followed the Mosaic Law, had adopted a certain mountain in Palestine, named Gerizim, as their Qiblah (Commentary on the New Testament by W. Walsham How, D.D.). The early Christians, followed the Qiblah of the Jews (Enc. Brit., 14th edition, v. 676 & Jew. Enc. vi. 53). The Christians of Najran worshipped in the Holy Prophet’s Mosque at Medina, with their faces turned to the East (Zurqani, iv. 41). Thus the Jews, the Samaritans, and the Christians followed different Qiblahs owing to their mutual jealousy and enmity. In these circumstances it was vain to expect them to follow the Qiblah of the Muslims.
109:3, 7.
6:57; 13:38.
Commentary:
This verse points to the hostility of Jews and Christians not only to Islam but also to one another. The Jews had Jerusalem as their Qiblah (See I. Kings 8:22-30; Dan. 6:10; Ps. 5:7; Jonah, 2:4) while the Samaritans, a disowned section of the Jews, who also followed the Mosaic Law, had adopted a certain mountain in Palestine, named Gerizim, as their Qiblah (John, 4:20 and Commentary on the New Testament by Right Rev. W. Walsham How, D.D., published by Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge, London, under this verse). As regards the early Christians, they followed the Qiblah of the Jews (Acts 3:1; Enc. Brit., 14th edition, v. 676; Jew. Enc. vi. 53) but we learn from authentic sources that when a party of the Christians of Najran paid a visit to Medina to have a discussion with the Holy Prophet on some doctrinal point, they worshipped in the Holy Prophet’s mosque at Medina with their faces turned to the East (Zurqani, iv. 41). Thus the Jews, the Samaritans, and the Christians followed different Qiblahs owing to their mutual jealousy and enmity. In these circumstances it was vain to expect them to follow the Qiblah of the Muslims, and when obsolete faiths refused to follow the true Qiblah, how could a true believer follow a Qiblah that had become obsolete.
The concluding clause speaks of the practice of the People of the Book as vain "desires," not because they were not originally based on revelation but because they were opposed to the new revelation that had appointed the Ka‘bah as Qiblah. He who insists on sticking to an order that is no longer in force, really follows naught but his own desire.
The words, then thou shalt surely be of the transgressors, do not evidently refer to the Holy Prophet, because, (1) he could in no circumstances go against Allah’s commandment, and (2) the foregoing part of this very verse says about him, nor wouldst thou follow their Qiblah, and (3) it is clearly stated in the preceding verse that he loved to turn his face towards the Ka‘bah and eagerly awaited a divine commandment to that effect. It is, therefore, unthinkable that the Prophet could forsake the Qiblah of his own liking. The words obviously refer, as supported by the rules of the Arabic language as well as the usage of the Quran, either to the reader in general or to every individual Muslim who followed the Holy Prophet.
a
109:3, 7.
b
6:57; 13:38.
1
عیسائی لوگ مشرق کی طرف منہ کرکے نماز پڑھا کرتے تھے۔ چنانچہ نجران کے عیسائی جب رسول کریم صلی اللہ علیہ وسلم کے پاس مذہبی گفتگو کرنے کے لئے آئے تو انہوں نے مشرق کی طرف ہی منہ کرکے نماز پڑھی تھی۔ عام طور پر اس کی وجہ وہ یہ بتاتے ہیں کہ مسیحؑ کی خبر دینے والا ستارہ مشرق کی طرف سے طلوع ہوا تھا۔
یہودیوں میں سامری قبیلہ کے لوگ جیسا کہ نئے عہدنامہ کی کتاب یوحنا باب ۴ آیت ۲۰ سے معلوم ہوتا ہے۔ یروشلم کے ایک پہاڑ کی طرف منہ کرکے عبادت کیا کرتے تھے اور باقی یہودی بیت المقدس کی طرف منہ کرکے نماز پڑھا کرتے تھے۔ پس ان سب میں اختلاف قبلہ تھا۔ اسی کی طرف اس آیت میں اشارہ کیا گیا ہے
a
109:3, 7.
b
6:57; 13:38.
152
Commentary:
This verse points to the hostility of Jews and Christians not only to Islam but also to one another. The Jews had Jerusalem as their Qiblah (See I. Kings 8:22-30; Dan. 6:10; Ps. 5:7; Jonah, 2:4) while the Samaritans, a disowned section of the Jews, who also followed the Mosaic Law, had adopted a certain mountain in Palestine, named Gerizim, as their Qiblah (John, 4:20 and Commentary on the New Testament by Right Rev. W. Walsham How, D.D., published by Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge, London, under this verse). As regards the early Christians, they followed the Qiblah of the Jews (Acts 3:1; Enc. Brit., 14th edition, v. 676; Jew. Enc. vi. 53) but we learn from authentic sources that when a party of the Christians of Najran paid a visit to Medina to have a discussion with the Holy Prophet on some doctrinal point, they worshipped in the Holy Prophet’s mosque at Medina with their faces turned to the East (Zurqani, iv. 41). Thus the Jews, the Samaritans, and the Christians followed different Qiblahs owing to their mutual jealousy and enmity. In these circumstances it was vain to expect them to follow the Qiblah of the Muslims, and when obsolete faiths refused to follow the true Qiblah, how could a true believer follow a Qiblah that had become obsolete.
The concluding clause speaks of the practice of the People of the Book as vain "desires," not because they were not originally based on revelation but because they were opposed to the new revelation that had appointed the Ka‘bah as Qiblah. He who insists on sticking to an order that is no longer in force, really follows naught but his own desire.
The words, then thou shalt surely be of the transgressors, do not evidently refer to the Holy Prophet, because, (1) he could in no circumstances go against Allah’s commandment, and (2) the foregoing part of this very verse says about him, nor wouldst thou follow their Qiblah, and (3) it is clearly stated in the preceding verse that he loved to turn his face towards the Ka‘bah and eagerly awaited a divine commandment to that effect. It is, therefore, unthinkable that the Prophet could forsake the Qiblah of his own liking. The words obviously refer, as supported by the rules of the Arabic language as well as the usage of the Quran, either to the reader in general or to every individual Muslim who followed the Holy Prophet.
a
109:3, 7.
b
6:57; 13:38.
168
This verse points to the hostility of Jews and Christians not only to Islam but also to one another. The Jews had Jerusalem as their Qiblah (Kings 8: 22-30; Dan. 6: 10; Ps. 5: 7 & Jonah, 2: 4), while the Samaritans, a disowned section of the Jews, who also followed the Mosaic Law, had adopted a certain mountain in Palestine, named Gerizim, as their Qiblah (Commentary on the New Testament by W. Walsham How, D.D.). The early Christians, followed the Qiblah of the Jews (Enc. Brit., 14th edition, v. 676 & Jew. Enc. vi. 53). The Christians of Najran worshipped in the Holy Prophet’s Mosque at Medina, with their faces turned to the East (Zurqani, iv. 41). Thus the Jews, the Samaritans, and the Christians followed different Qiblahs owing to their mutual jealousy and enmity. In these circumstances it was vain to expect them to follow the Qiblah of the Muslims.
سَاَصۡرِفُ عَنۡ اٰیٰتِیَ الَّذِیۡنَ یَتَکَبَّرُوۡنَ فِی الۡاَرۡضِ بِغَیۡرِ الۡحَقِّ وَاِنۡ یَّرَوۡا کُلَّ اٰیَۃٍ لَّا یُؤۡمِنُوۡا بِہَا وَاِنۡ یَّرَوۡا سَبِیۡلَ الرُّشۡدِ لَا یَتَّخِذُوۡہُ سَبِیۡلًا وَّاِنۡ یَّرَوۡا سَبِیۡلَ الۡغَیِّ یَتَّخِذُوۡہُ سَبِیۡلًا ۚ ذٰلِکَ بِاَنَّہُمۡ کَذَّبُوۡا بِاٰیٰتِنَا وَکَانُوۡا عَنۡہَا غٰفِلِیۡنَ
6:26.
6:26.
6:26.
Commentary:
This verse explains the true significance of the word دار (abode) occurring in the sentence, I shall show you the abode of the transgressors, contained in the preceding verse.
a
6:26.
a
6:26.
1036
Commentary:
This verse explains the true significance of the word دار (abode) occurring in the sentence, I shall show you the abode of the transgressors, contained in the preceding verse.
b
6:26.
وَمَا تَاۡتِیۡہِمۡ مِّنۡ اٰیَۃٍ مِّنۡ اٰیٰتِ رَبِّہِمۡ اِلَّا کَانُوۡا عَنۡہَا مُعۡرِضِیۡنَ
21:3; 26:6; 36:47.
21:3; 26:6; 36:47.
An important evidence of the knowledge and power of God are the prophecies that He reveals to His Messengers and the support and assistance that He vouchsafes to them against overwhelming odds. These are called Signs.
21:3; 26:6; 36:47.
Commentary:
An important evidence of the knowledge and power of God are the prophecies which He reveals to His Messengers and the aid and help which He vouchsafes them against overwhelming odds. These are called signs here. Thus, in order to prove the perfect knowledge and power of God, the verse refers to the powerful signs which God was showing to demonstrate the truth of the Holy Prophet and the wonderful way in which He was helping him.
a
21:3; 26:6; 36:47.
b
21:3; 26:6; 36:47.
752
Commentary:
An important evidence of the knowledge and power of God are the prophecies which He reveals to His Messengers and the aid and help which He vouchsafes them against overwhelming odds. These are called signs here. Thus, in order to prove the perfect knowledge and power of God, the verse refers to the powerful signs which God was showing to demonstrate the truth of the Holy Prophet and the wonderful way in which He was helping him.
a
21:3; 26:6; 36:47.
821
An important evidence of the knowledge and power of God are the prophecies that He reveals to His Messengers and the support and assistance that He vouchsafes to them against overwhelming odds. These are called Signs.
وَمِنۡہُمۡ مَّنۡ یَّسۡتَمِعُ اِلَیۡکَ ۖ وَجَعَلۡنَا عَلٰی قُلُوۡبِہِمۡ اَکِنَّۃً اَنۡ یَّفۡقَہُوۡہُ وَفِیۡۤ اٰذَانِہِمۡ وَقۡرًا ۚ وَاِنۡ یَّرَوۡا کُلَّ اٰیَۃٍ لَّا یُؤۡمِنُوۡا بِہَا ۚ حَتّٰۤی اِذَا جَآءُوۡکَ یُجٰدِلُوۡنَکَ یَقُوۡلُ الَّذِیۡنَ کَفَرُوۡۤا اِنۡ ہٰذَاۤ اِلَّاۤ اَسٰطِیۡرُ الۡاَوَّلِیۡنَ
قرآن مجید کی دوسری آیات بتاتی ہیں کہ یہ سزا انسانی بداعمالی کے نتیجہ میں ہوتی ہے ورنہ خداتعالیٰ کسی کو ایمان سے محروم نہیں کرتا۔ جیسا کہ فرماتا ہے بَلْ طَبَعَ اللّٰہُ عَلَیْھَا بِکُفْرِھِمْ (النسآء: ۱۵۶) کہ اللہ تعالیٰ نے ان کے دلوں پر ان کے کفر کی وجہ سے مہر لگائی ہے۔
یہ کافروں کا قول ہے۔ ورنہ قرآن مجید میں سب پرانے واقعات بطور پیشگوئی کے بیان ہوئے ہیں اور ایسے ہی واقعات رسول کریم صلی اللہ علیہ وسلم یا ان کی امت سے گزرے ہیں۔
10:43; 17:48.
17:47; 41:6.
10:43; 17:48.
17:47; 41:6.
Commentary:
For an explanation of "veils" and "deafness", see 2:8.
What the Quran calls "signs" are described by disbelievers as mere "fables of the ancients," which saying of theirs is condemned by God. This shows that in the sight of God the stories of past Prophets and past nations given in the Quran are not meant as "tales" or "stories" but as "signs", being prophecies of future events which, when fulfilled, will serve as "signs".
b
10:43; 17:48.
c
17:47; 41:6.
1
قرآن مجید کی دوسری آیات بتاتی ہیں کہ یہ سزا انسانی بداعمالی کے نتیجہ میں ہوتی ہے ورنہ خداتعالیٰ کسی کو ایمان سے محروم نہیں کرتا۔ جیسا کہ فرماتا ہے بَلْ طَبَعَ اللّٰہُ عَلَیْھَا بِکُفْرِھِمْ (النسآء: ۱۵۶) کہ اللہ تعالیٰ نے ان کے دلوں پر ان کے کفر کی وجہ سے مہر لگائی ہے۔
2
یہ کافروں کا قول ہے۔ ورنہ قرآن مجید میں سب پرانے واقعات بطور پیشگوئی کے بیان ہوئے ہیں اور ایسے ہی واقعات رسول کریم صلی اللہ علیہ وسلم یا ان کی امت سے گزرے ہیں۔
a
10:43; 17:48.
b
17:47; 41:6.
773
Commentary:
For an explanation of "veils" and "deafness", see 2:8.
What the Quran calls "signs" are described by disbelievers as mere "fables of the ancients," which saying of theirs is condemned by God. This shows that in the sight of God the stories of past Prophets and past nations given in the Quran are not meant as "tales" or "stories" but as "signs", being prophecies of future events which, when fulfilled, will serve as "signs".
b
10:43; 17:48.
c
17:47; 41:6.
وَقَالُوۡا مَہۡمَا تَاۡتِنَا بِہٖ مِنۡ اٰیَۃٍ لِّتَسۡحَرَنَا بِہَا فَمَا نَحۡنُ لَکَ بِمُؤۡمِنِیۡنَ
10:79.
فرعون کی قوم کی طرف اشارہ ہے۔
10:79.
10:79.
Commentary:
Pharaoh’s people proudly said to Moses that however great and powerful the signs he might show, they would never submit to him and would never allow the Israelites to go with him.
c
10:79.
1
فرعون کی قوم کی طرف اشارہ ہے۔
a
10:79.
1022
Commentary:
Pharaoh’s people proudly said to Moses that however great and powerful the signs he might show, they would never submit to him and would never allow the Israelites to go with him.
c
10:79.
وَلَوۡ جَآءَتۡہُمۡ کُلُّ اٰیَۃٍ حَتّٰی یَرَوُا الۡعَذَابَ الۡاَلِیۡمَ
10:89.
10:89.
10:89.
Commentary:
This verse shows that the signs of God do not benefit those who have no desire to benefit by them. They treat even the greatest of signs as mere fraud. Hence the assertion of disbelievers made in the time of every Prophet that no sign has been shown to them is no evidence of the absence of any sign. One should not be misled by such baseless assertions but should ponder over the claims of a Prophet independently and form one’s own judgement about them. One should judge the signs of the Prophet according to the criteria by which Divine Signs are judged.
d
10:89.
b
10:89.
1369
Commentary:
This verse shows that the signs of God do not benefit those who have no desire to benefit by them. They treat even the greatest of signs as mere fraud. Hence the assertion of disbelievers made in the time of every Prophet that no sign has been shown to them is no evidence of the absence of any sign. One should not be misled by such baseless assertions but should ponder over the claims of a Prophet independently and form one’s own judgement about them. One should judge the signs of the Prophet according to the criteria by which Divine Signs are judged.
c
10:89.
وَکَاَیِّنۡ مِّنۡ اٰیَۃٍ فِی السَّمٰوٰتِ وَالۡاَرۡضِ یَمُرُّوۡنَ عَلَیۡہَا وَہُمۡ عَنۡہَا مُعۡرِضُوۡنَ
21:33; 23:67.
21:33; 23:67.
The verse points to a fundamental difference between the attitude of a believer and a disbeliever. Whereas the believer goes about with his eyes open and is ready to grasp the slightest Divine hint, the disbeliever behaves like a blind man, refusing to benefit even from clear and manifest Signs.
21:33; 23:67.
Commentary:
The verse points to a fundamental difference between the attitude of a believer and a disbeliever. Whereas the former goes about with his eyes open and is ready to grasp the slightest divine hint, the latter behaves like a blind man, refusing to benefit even from clear and manifest signs. Both of them are endowed with identical faculties and natural powers, but whereas the believer makes proper use of them, the disbeliever does not.
f
21:33; 23:67.
a
21:33; 23:67.
1605
Commentary:
The verse points to a fundamental difference between the attitude of a believer and a disbeliever. Whereas the former goes about with his eyes open and is ready to grasp the slightest divine hint, the latter behaves like a blind man, refusing to benefit even from clear and manifest signs. Both of them are endowed with identical faculties and natural powers, but whereas the believer makes proper use of them, the disbeliever does not.
d
21:33; 23:67.
1416
The verse points to a fundamental difference between the attitude of a believer and a disbeliever. Whereas the believer goes about with his eyes open and is ready to grasp the slightest Divine hint, the disbeliever behaves like a blind man, refusing to benefit even from clear and manifest Signs.
وَاِذَا بَدَّلۡنَاۤ اٰیَۃً مَّکَانَ اٰیَۃٍ ۙ وَّاللّٰہُ اَعۡلَمُ بِمَا یُنَزِّلُ قَالُوۡۤا اِنَّمَاۤ اَنۡتَ مُفۡتَرٍۭ ۚ بَلۡ اَکۡثَرُہُمۡ لَا یَعۡلَمُوۡنَ
2:107.
The meaning is: "When We avert or delay punishment on account of a change for the better on the part of those who are threatened with it." There is no reference here to the abrogation of any of the verses of the Qur’an. There is no verse in the Qur’an which clashes with any other verse of the Book and which may therefore have to be regarded as abrogated. All parts of the Qur’an support and corroborate one another. There is nothing in the context either to suggest any reference to the idea of abrogation.
2:107.
Commentary:
Before proceeding to explain this verse it is necessary to understand the real meaning of the word ایة which, primarily means "a sign". Unless there is something in the context to show that a word is taken in any of its secondary senses, we must take it in its primary sense. The verses of the Quran are called ایات (signs) because every one of them constitutes a sign of guidance. The preceding verses spoke of the punishments which were in store for disbelievers. This fact lends support to the view that the word ایة is here used in its original sense, viz. in the sense of a sign. Now the fulfilment of the prophecies of punishment depends on the attitude of those concerning whom they are made. If they are obstinate and persist in rejecting the signs of God, the threatened punishment overtakes them. But if they show repentance it is averted, deferred or delayed, for God is Merciful and His attribute of Mercy predominates over all His other attributes. The case of the people of Jonah is a well-known instance for understanding the nature and purpose of the prophecies of punishment. Jonah predicted destruction of the people of Nineveh, but they repented and renounced their evil ways. So God had mercy on them and averted the impending punishment (10:99), and in place of the sign of punishment, He showed a sign of mercy. On such occasions, i.e. when God averts or delays a predicted punishment in consonance with His attribute of Mercy, the sons of darkness accuse their Prophet of falsehood and declare that his prophecy has not been fulfilled. These critics conveniently ignore the fact that there is a vast difference between a promise and a threat. If a person does not keep his promise, he is rightly regarded as guilty of breach of a solemn undertaking but if he does not carry into actual effect his threat, he cannot be accused of any breach of promise. On the contrary, it will be regarded as an act of generosity and kindness on his part not to have done so. According to Arabic idiom also, whereas the non-fulfilment of a promise is called a breach of promise, the non-fulfilment of threat is regarded as an act of generosity. The Arabs say الخلف فی الوعد عند العرب کذب وفی الوعید کرم i.e. the breach of promise is a lie but the non-fulfilment of a threat is an act of generosity. God is Merciful, and if a person repents, His Mercy demands that punishment should be averted from him, and in such a case it will be foolish to accuse the Prophet of falsehood. The words, and Allah knows best what He reveals, mean that God knows best what kind of sign is required to be shown under particular circumstances. He shows His signs according to the requirements of the time. If He sees that disbelievers have given up their evil course and are penitent, He refrains from punishing them and changes the form of the sign. In that case the threat of punishment is not carried out, and under such circumstances it is foolish to accuse the Prophet of falsehood. So the expression واذا بدلنا ایة مکان ایة would mean, When We avert or delay punishment on account of a change for the better on the part of those who are threatened with such punishment…
Taking the word ایة in the sense of Law, this expression would mean that when in certain matters the Law of Islam is found to differ from Laws previously revealed, disbelievers regard it as evidence of the Quran’s being a forgery. This meaning is in perfect harmony with the context. It is argued that when the Quran declares previous Laws to have been revealed by God, it should not have differed from them. But the admission that previous Laws have been revealed by God does not mean that none of their ordinances could be replaced by new ordinances. According to the Quran, the previous Laws were meant for particular peoples and for particular times. They were suited only to the requirements of the peoples for whom they were revealed. The Quran, on the other hand, constitutes a universal Law, meant for all peoples and all times, and therefore if it is found to contain certain teachings which differ from the teachings of previously revealed Scriptures, that is no evidence of the Quran’s being a forgery. On the other hand, it is but natural and necessary that the perfect and universal Law—the Quran—should differ in some of its ordinances from temporary and provisional Laws previously revealed.
It must be clearly understood that the verse contains no reference to the abrogation of any of the verses of the Quran. The Holy Prophet has not been reported to have ever declared any verse of the Quran to have been abrogated by another verse. Nor are there any verses in the Quran which clash with other parts of the Book and which may therefore have to be regarded as abrogated. All parts of the Quran support and corroborate one another. Moreover, there is nothing in the context to suggest any reference to the abrogation theory.
It is also worth remembering that the passage under comment was revealed in Mecca. In fact, the whole Surah belongs to the Meccan period. And the Surahs of the Meccan period deal with teachings pertaining to morals and matters of belief, and about these there can be no question of abrogation or revocation.
c
2:107.
689
这个意思是: “当我因为那些受到惩罚威胁的人变好而免予或延迟对他们的惩罚时。” 这并不指要废除 «古兰经» 中的任何一节经文。在 «古兰经» 中, 没有一节经文是与其他一节经文不一致的, 因而被认为要废除的。«古兰经» 所有经文都是相互证实的。此节经文的上下文中没有提出要废除任何经文的资料。
c
2:107.
1902
Commentary:
Before proceeding to explain this verse it is necessary to understand the real meaning of the word ایة which, primarily means "a sign". Unless there is something in the context to show that a word is taken in any of its secondary senses, we must take it in its primary sense. The verses of the Quran are called ایات (signs) because every one of them constitutes a sign of guidance. The preceding verses spoke of the punishments which were in store for disbelievers. This fact lends support to the view that the word ایة is here used in its original sense, viz. in the sense of a sign. Now the fulfilment of the prophecies of punishment depends on the attitude of those concerning whom they are made. If they are obstinate and persist in rejecting the signs of God, the threatened punishment overtakes them. But if they show repentance it is averted, deferred or delayed, for God is Merciful and His attribute of Mercy predominates over all His other attributes. The case of the people of Jonah is a well-known instance for understanding the nature and purpose of the prophecies of punishment. Jonah predicted destruction of the people of Nineveh, but they repented and renounced their evil ways. So God had mercy on them and averted the impending punishment (10:99), and in place of the sign of punishment, He showed a sign of mercy. On such occasions, i.e. when God averts or delays a predicted punishment in consonance with His attribute of Mercy, the sons of darkness accuse their Prophet of falsehood and declare that his prophecy has not been fulfilled. These critics conveniently ignore the fact that there is a vast difference between a promise and a threat. If a person does not keep his promise, he is rightly regarded as guilty of breach of a solemn undertaking but if he does not carry into actual effect his threat, he cannot be accused of any breach of promise. On the contrary, it will be regarded as an act of generosity and kindness on his part not to have done so. According to Arabic idiom also, whereas the non-fulfilment of a promise is called a breach of promise, the non-fulfilment of threat is regarded as an act of generosity. The Arabs say الخلف فی الوعد عند العرب کذب وفی الوعید کرم i.e. the breach of promise is a lie but the non-fulfilment of a threat is an act of generosity. God is Merciful, and if a person repents, His Mercy demands that punishment should be averted from him, and in such a case it will be foolish to accuse the Prophet of falsehood. The words, and Allah knows best what He reveals, mean that God knows best what kind of sign is required to be shown under particular circumstances. He shows His signs according to the requirements of the time. If He sees that disbelievers have given up their evil course and are penitent, He refrains from punishing them and changes the form of the sign. In that case the threat of punishment is not carried out, and under such circumstances it is foolish to accuse the Prophet of falsehood. So the expression واذا بدلنا ایة مکان ایة would mean, When We avert or delay punishment on account of a change for the better on the part of those who are threatened with such punishment…
Taking the word ایة in the sense of Law, this expression would mean that when in certain matters the Law of Islam is found to differ from Laws previously revealed, disbelievers regard it as evidence of the Quran’s being a forgery. This meaning is in perfect harmony with the context. It is argued that when the Quran declares previous Laws to have been revealed by God, it should not have differed from them. But the admission that previous Laws have been revealed by God does not mean that none of their ordinances could be replaced by new ordinances. According to the Quran, the previous Laws were meant for particular peoples and for particular times. They were suited only to the requirements of the peoples for whom they were revealed. The Quran, on the other hand, constitutes a universal Law, meant for all peoples and all times, and therefore if it is found to contain certain teachings which differ from the teachings of previously revealed Scriptures, that is no evidence of the Quran’s being a forgery. On the other hand, it is but natural and necessary that the perfect and universal Law—the Quran—should differ in some of its ordinances from temporary and provisional Laws previously revealed.
It must be clearly understood that the verse contains no reference to the abrogation of any of the verses of the Quran. The Holy Prophet has not been reported to have ever declared any verse of the Quran to have been abrogated by another verse. Nor are there any verses in the Quran which clash with other parts of the Book and which may therefore have to be regarded as abrogated. All parts of the Quran support and corroborate one another. Moreover, there is nothing in the context to suggest any reference to the abrogation theory.
It is also worth remembering that the passage under comment was revealed in Mecca. In fact, the whole Surah belongs to the Meccan period. And the Surahs of the Meccan period deal with teachings pertaining to morals and matters of belief, and about these there can be no question of abrogation or revocation.
d
2:107.
1577
The meaning is: "When We avert or delay punishment on account of a change for the better on the part of those who are threatened with it." There is no reference here to the abrogation of any of the verses of the Qur’an. There is no verse in the Qur’an which clashes with any other verse of the Book and which may therefore have to be regarded as abrogated. All parts of the Qur’an support and corroborate one another. There is nothing in the context either to suggest any reference to the idea of abrogation.
وَمَا تَاۡتِیۡہِمۡ مِّنۡ اٰیَۃٍ مِّنۡ اٰیٰتِ رَبِّہِمۡ اِلَّا کَانُوۡا عَنۡہَا مُعۡرِضِیۡنَ
6:5; 21:3; 26:6.
6:5; 21:3; 26:6.
6:5; 21:3; 26:6.
a
6:5; 21:3; 26:6.
a
6:5; 21:3; 26:6.
a
6:5; 21:3; 26:6.
وَمَا نُرِیۡہِمۡ مِّنۡ اٰیَۃٍ اِلَّا ہِیَ اَکۡبَرُ مِنۡ اُخۡتِہَا ۖ وَاَخَذۡنٰہُمۡ بِالۡعَذَابِ لَعَلَّہُمۡ یَرۡجِعُوۡنَ
Important Words:
أخت (sister) is the feminine of أخ. They say أخاہ i.e. he became a brother, a friend or a companion to him. آخاہ (akhahu) means, he fraternised with him; acted with him in a brotherly manner. اخیت بین الشیئین means, I united the two things. أخ means, a brother; a friend; a companion, or associate or a fellow, and أخت means, a sister (Lane & Aqrab).
3674
Important Words:
أخت (sister) is the feminine of أخ. They say أخاہ i.e. he became a brother, a friend or a companion to him. آخاہ (akhahu) means, he fraternised with him; acted with him in a brotherly manner. اخیت بین الشیئین means, I united the two things. أخ means, a brother; a friend; a companion, or associate or a fellow, and أخت means, a sister (Lane & Aqrab).