يَٰبُنَىَّ
Appears 6 times in Quran
Occurrences in Quran
Found 6 verses containing "يَٰبُنَىَّ".
قَالَ يَٰبُنَىَّ لَا تَقْصُصْ رُءْيَاكَ عَلَىٰٓ إِخْوَتِكَ فَيَكِيدُوا۟ لَكَ كَيْدًا ۖ إِنَّ ٱلشَّيْطَٰنَ لِلْإِنسَٰنِ عَدُوٌّ مُّبِينٌ
2:169; 18:51; 35:7.
2:169; 18:51; 35:7.
2:169; 18:51; 35:7.
Important Words
رؤیا (dream) is derived from رأی which means, (1) he saw with the eye; (2) he saw mentally; (3) he saw in a dream or vision; (4) he held the opinion; (5) he thought or considered, etc. The Arabs say رأیته رأی العین i.e. I saw him where the eye or sight fell upon him, i.e. I saw him actually with the eye. رؤیا means, a dream or vision seen in sleep. According to most lexicologists رؤیا is synonymous with حلم (hulm) but according to others the former is such as is good and the latter is the contrary (Lane).
Commentary:
Here again the Quran differs from the Bible and again the Quranic version is decidedly more reasonable and correct. According to the Quran, Joseph told his dream to his father first, while according to the Bible he first related it to his brothers (Gen. 37:9). But the Bible itself says that Joseph had seen another dream, even before this dream which the Quran relates and, on listening to this first dream, his brethren had said to him: "Shalt thou indeed reign over us or shalt thou indeed have dominion over us?" And they hated him yet the more for his dreams, and for his words (Gen. 37:5-8). Now, after the rebuke he had received from his brothers on telling them his first dream, it is highly unreasonable and improbable that Joseph should have related his second and similar dream to them before acquainting his father with it. So the Quranic account is clearly nearer truth and reason than the Biblical account.
The Quran represents Jacob, the father of Joseph, as having forbidden him to mention his dream to his brethren. It also gives the reason why he forbade him to do so. The reason was that the dream would excite their envy and they would be tempted to plot against him. That this fear of Jacob was only too well-founded is borne out by the Bible itself, for it says that Joseph’s brethren hated him yet the more for his dreams. This also goes to support the Quranic version.
The verse under comment mentions another important resemblance between Joseph and the Holy Prophet. Just as Jacob, on hearing the dream of Joseph, told him that when his brothers heard of it, they would plot against him and seek to do him harm, similarly, when Waraqah bin Naufal heard of the first revelation from the Holy Prophet, he told him that a time would come when his people would plot against him and turn him out of their town.
f
2:169; 18:51; 35:7.
a
2:169; 18:51; 35:7.
1510
Important Words
رؤیا (dream) is derived from رأی which means, (1) he saw with the eye; (2) he saw mentally; (3) he saw in a dream or vision; (4) he held the opinion; (5) he thought or considered, etc. The Arabs say رأیته رأی العین i.e. I saw him where the eye or sight fell upon him, i.e. I saw him actually with the eye. رؤیا means, a dream or vision seen in sleep. According to most lexicologists رؤیا is synonymous with حلم (hulm) but according to others the former is such as is good and the latter is the contrary (Lane).
Commentary:
Here again the Quran differs from the Bible and again the Quranic version is decidedly more reasonable and correct. According to the Quran, Joseph told his dream to his father first, while according to the Bible he first related it to his brothers (Gen. 37:9). But the Bible itself says that Joseph had seen another dream, even before this dream which the Quran relates and, on listening to this first dream, his brethren had said to him: "Shalt thou indeed reign over us or shalt thou indeed have dominion over us?" And they hated him yet the more for his dreams, and for his words (Gen. 37:5-8). Now, after the rebuke he had received from his brothers on telling them his first dream, it is highly unreasonable and improbable that Joseph should have related his second and similar dream to them before acquainting his father with it. So the Quranic account is clearly nearer truth and reason than the Biblical account.
The Quran represents Jacob, the father of Joseph, as having forbidden him to mention his dream to his brethren. It also gives the reason why he forbade him to do so. The reason was that the dream would excite their envy and they would be tempted to plot against him. That this fear of Jacob was only too well-founded is borne out by the Bible itself, for it says that Joseph’s brethren hated him yet the more for his dreams. This also goes to support the Quranic version.
The verse under comment mentions another important resemblance between Joseph and the Holy Prophet. Just as Jacob, on hearing the dream of Joseph, told him that when his brothers heard of it, they would plot against him and seek to do him harm, similarly, when Waraqah bin Naufal heard of the first revelation from the Holy Prophet, he told him that a time would come when his people would plot against him and turn him out of their town.
a
2:169; 18:51; 35:7.
وَهِىَ تَجْرِى بِهِمْ فِى مَوْجٍ كَٱلْجِبَالِ وَنَادَىٰ نُوحٌ ٱبْنَهُۥ وَكَانَ فِى مَعْزِلٍ يَٰبُنَىَّ ٱرْكَب مَّعَنَا وَلَا تَكُن مَّعَ ٱلْكَٰفِرِينَ
عربی میں موج مفرد ہے۔ مگر اردو میں اس جگہ جمع کا لفظ بولا جاتا ہے۔ اس لئے ہم نے ترجمہ میں موجوں کا لفظ استعمال کیا ہے۔
Commentary:
Commentators differ as to whether the person referred to in this verse as Noah’s son was his real son or only a near relative. According to some, he was his stepson. Ibn Mas‘ud, Ibn ‘Abbas, ‘Ikrimah, Ad-Dahhak, Ibn Jubair and many other commentators, however, are inclined to view that he was Noah’s own son. But discussion of this subject seems to be super-fluous and unnecessary.
Christian annotators have question-ed the authenticity of this incident on the ground that it does not agree with the Biblical account. But the authenticity of the Bible itself as a historical record is open to doubt and it is unreasonable to accept or reject an incident on its authority alone.
2
عربی میں موج مفرد ہے۔ مگر اردو میں اس جگہ جمع کا لفظ بولا جاتا ہے۔ اس لئے ہم نے ترجمہ میں موجوں کا لفظ استعمال کیا ہے۔
1423
Commentary:
Commentators differ as to whether the person referred to in this verse as Noah’s son was his real son or only a near relative. According to some, he was his stepson. Ibn Mas‘ud, Ibn ‘Abbas, ‘Ikrimah, Ad-Dahhak, Ibn Jubair and many other commentators, however, are inclined to view that he was Noah’s own son. But discussion of this subject seems to be super-fluous and unnecessary.
Christian annotators have question-ed the authenticity of this incident on the ground that it does not agree with the Biblical account. But the authenticity of the Bible itself as a historical record is open to doubt and it is unreasonable to accept or reject an incident on its authority alone.
وَإِذْ قَالَ لُقْمَٰنُ لِٱبْنِهِۦ وَهُوَ يَعِظُهُۥ يَٰبُنَىَّ لَا تُشْرِكْ بِٱللَّهِ ۖ إِنَّ ٱلشِّرْكَ لَظُلْمٌ عَظِيمٌ
鲁格曼 (لُقْمَان, Luqman) 看来不是一个阿拉伯人, 很可能是一个埃塞俄比亚 (Ethiopian) 人。有人说他属于埃及或努比亚 (Nubia)。也有些人认为他是希腊的 “伊索” (Greek “Aesop”)。从这节经文和下几节经文所包含的他讲给儿子听的有益的教训来看, 鲁格曼看来是安拉派遣的一位先知。
所有宗教教义最重要和基本的教理是只有一个安拉。其他一切崇高的理想和原理都来自这一教义。人类如果去崇拜安拉以外的其他事物或个人, 就会使自己堕落, 就会阻碍、抑制他个性的成长并使他的个性变得愚蠢可笑。
Luqman seems to be a non-Arab, very probably an Ethiopian. He is said to belong to Egypt or Nubia. By some he has also been identified with the Greek "Aesop." From the beautiful moral precepts he gave to his son and which are embodied in the present and the next few verses, Luqman appears to be a Prophet of God.
The first and basic principle of all religious teaching is that God is One. All noble ideals and principles flow from this doctrine. By worshipping any other thing or being beside Allah man degrades himself and stunts, stifles and stultifies his personality.
Commentary:
The first and basic principle of all religious teaching is that God is One. All other noble ideals flow from this principle. By worshipping any other thing or being beside God Who is the Creator, Lord and Sustainer, man degrades himself and stunts, stifles and stultifies his personality. So Luqman began his moral sermon by laying stress on this most supreme of all religious beliefs.
1005
鲁格曼 (لُقْمَان, Luqman) 看来不是一个阿拉伯人, 很可能是一个埃塞俄比亚 (Ethiopian) 人。有人说他属于埃及或努比亚 (Nubia)。也有些人认为他是希腊的 “伊索” (Greek “Aesop”)。从这节经文和下几节经文所包含的他讲给儿子听的有益的教训来看, 鲁格曼看来是安拉派遣的一位先知。
1006
所有宗教教义最重要和基本的教理是只有一个安拉。其他一切崇高的理想和原理都来自这一教义。人类如果去崇拜安拉以外的其他事物或个人, 就会使自己堕落, 就会阻碍、抑制他个性的成长并使他的个性变得愚蠢可笑。
3040
Commentary:
The first and basic principle of all religious teaching is that God is One. All other noble ideals flow from this principle. By worshipping any other thing or being beside God Who is the Creator, Lord and Sustainer, man degrades himself and stunts, stifles and stultifies his personality. So Luqman began his moral sermon by laying stress on this most supreme of all religious beliefs.
2304
Luqman seems to be a non-Arab, very probably an Ethiopian. He is said to belong to Egypt or Nubia. By some he has also been identified with the Greek "Aesop." From the beautiful moral precepts he gave to his son and which are embodied in the present and the next few verses, Luqman appears to be a Prophet of God.
2305
The first and basic principle of all religious teaching is that God is One. All noble ideals and principles flow from this doctrine. By worshipping any other thing or being beside Allah man degrades himself and stunts, stifles and stultifies his personality.
يَٰبُنَىَّ إِنَّهَآ إِن تَكُ مِثْقَالَ حَبَّةٍ مِّنْ خَرْدَلٍ فَتَكُن فِى صَخْرَةٍ أَوْ فِى ٱلسَّمَٰوَٰتِ أَوْ فِى ٱلْأَرْضِ يَأْتِ بِهَا ٱللَّهُ ۚ إِنَّ ٱللَّهَ لَطِيفٌ خَبِيرٌ
一切善或恶的行为都不会没有结果的。它会留下永久的痕迹。50:19节经文所讲的就是这一伟大的真理。
No action, good or bad, goes vain. It leaves its permanent imprint. It is to this great truth that reference has also been made in 50:19.
Commentary:
The verse points to an important law of nature, viz. that no action, good or bad, is in vain. It leaves its permanent imprint. It is to this great truth that reference has also been made in 50:19.
1008
一切善或恶的行为都不会没有结果的。它会留下永久的痕迹。50:19节经文所讲的就是这一伟大的真理。
3043
Commentary:
The verse points to an important law of nature, viz. that no action, good or bad, is in vain. It leaves its permanent imprint. It is to this great truth that reference has also been made in 50:19.
2308
No action, good or bad, goes vain. It leaves its permanent imprint. It is to this great truth that reference has also been made in 50:19.
يَٰبُنَىَّ أَقِمِ ٱلصَّلَوٰةَ وَأْمُرْ بِٱلْمَعْرُوفِ وَٱنْهَ عَنِ ٱلْمُنكَرِ وَٱصْبِرْ عَلَىٰ مَآ أَصَابَكَ ۖ إِنَّ ذَٰلِكَ مِنْ عَزْمِ ٱلْأُمُورِ
مَعْرُوْف یعنی وہ باتیں جو عرف عام میں اچھی سمجھی جاتی ہیں۔
قرآن مجید میں مِنْ عَزْمِ الْاُمُوْرِ ہے۔ مگر محاورہ کے مطابق اس کے معنے اَ لْاُمُوْرُ الْمَعْزُوْمَۃُ کے ہیں۔ یعنی ایسے کاموں کے جن کے لئے کمر ہمت کسنی پڑتی ہے۔ یہ ترکیب ایسی ہے جیسی مَسْجِدُ الْجَامِعِ کی ترکیب ہے۔
9:71.
Commentary:
After belief in the Oneness of God and in His attributes, becomes firmly rooted, man naturally feels attracted towards Him and wishes to worship Him, which in the form of Prayer is most essential for his spiritual development. And after he himself becomes true and sincere votary of His Creator, man’s next duty lies in reforming his fellow-beings. But as soon as he enters upon this noble but very arduous task difficulties and impediments bar his way. He is told, in the verse, to put up with all sorts of hardships and privations that lie in the way of the discharge of his great duties. This is the significance of Luqman’s exhortation to his son "to endure patiently whatever may befall thee."
1
مَعْرُوْف یعنی وہ باتیں جو عرف عام میں اچھی سمجھی جاتی ہیں۔
2
قرآن مجید میں مِنْ عَزْمِ الْاُمُوْرِ ہے۔ مگر محاورہ کے مطابق اس کے معنے اَ لْاُمُوْرُ الْمَعْزُوْمَۃُ کے ہیں۔ یعنی ایسے کاموں کے جن کے لئے کمر ہمت کسنی پڑتی ہے۔ یہ ترکیب ایسی ہے جیسی مَسْجِدُ الْجَامِعِ کی ترکیب ہے۔
a
9:71.
3044
Commentary:
After belief in the Oneness of God and in His attributes, becomes firmly rooted, man naturally feels attracted towards Him and wishes to worship Him, which in the form of Prayer is most essential for his spiritual development. And after he himself becomes true and sincere votary of His Creator, man’s next duty lies in reforming his fellow-beings. But as soon as he enters upon this noble but very arduous task difficulties and impediments bar his way. He is told, in the verse, to put up with all sorts of hardships and privations that lie in the way of the discharge of his great duties. This is the significance of Luqman’s exhortation to his son "to endure patiently whatever may befall thee."
فَلَمَّا بَلَغَ مَعَهُ ٱلسَّعْىَ قَالَ يَٰبُنَىَّ إِنِّىٓ أَرَىٰ فِى ٱلْمَنَامِ أَنِّىٓ أَذْبَحُكَ فَٱنظُرْ مَاذَا تَرَىٰ ۚ قَالَ يَٰٓأَبَتِ ٱفْعَلْ مَا تُؤْمَرُ ۖ سَتَجِدُنِىٓ إِن شَآءَ ٱللَّهُ مِنَ ٱلصَّٰبِرِينَ
اس خواب کے اصل معنے یہ تھے کہ تجھے مکہ کی بے آب و گیاہ وادی میں چھوڑ کر آنے والا ہوں۔ جو ایک قسم کی موت ہے اور یہ تعبیر لفظاً پوری ہوئی گو چھری سے ذبح کرنا لفظاً پورا نہ ہوا۔
The Qur’an and the Bible are at variance as to which of his two sons—Ishmael or Isaac—Abraham, in pursuance of God’s command, offered for sacrifice. According to the Bible it was Isaac (Gen. 22: 2). The Qur’an, on the other hand, declares clearly and unequivocally that it was Ishmael. The Bible contradicts itself in this respect. According to it, Abraham was commanded to offer his only son for sacrifice, but Isaac was at no time his only son. Ishmael was senior to Isaac by 13 years and for these many years was Abraham’s only son, and, being also his first born, was doubly dear to him. It stands to reason, therefore, that Abraham must have been required by God to offer for sacrifice his nearest and dearest thing which was his only and first-born son who was Ishmael. Some Christian evangelists have vainly tried to show that, 'Ishmael being of the handmaid, was born after the flesh while Isaac being born of the free woman was by promise' (Galatians, 4: 22, 23). Apart from the fact that Haga
Commentary:
See next verse.
3
اس خواب کے اصل معنے یہ تھے کہ تجھے مکہ کی بے آب و گیاہ وادی میں چھوڑ کر آنے والا ہوں۔ جو ایک قسم کی موت ہے اور یہ تعبیر لفظاً پوری ہوئی گو چھری سے ذبح کرنا لفظاً پورا نہ ہوا۔
3336
Commentary:
See next verse.
2497
The Qur’an and the Bible are at variance as to which of his two sons—Ishmael or Isaac—Abraham, in pursuance of God’s command, offered for sacrifice. According to the Bible it was Isaac (Gen. 22: 2). The Qur’an, on the other hand, declares clearly and unequivocally that it was Ishmael. The Bible contradicts itself in this respect. According to it, Abraham was commanded to offer his only son for sacrifice, but Isaac was at no time his only son. Ishmael was senior to Isaac by 13 years and for these many years was Abraham’s only son, and, being also his first born, was doubly dear to him. It stands to reason, therefore, that Abraham must have been required by God to offer for sacrifice his nearest and dearest thing which was his only and first-born son who was Ishmael. Some Christian evangelists have vainly tried to show that, 'Ishmael being of the handmaid, was born after the flesh while Isaac being born of the free woman was by promise' (Galatians, 4: 22, 23). Apart from the fact that Haga