هُمُ ٱلظَّٰلِمُونَ
Appears 8 times in Quran
Occurrences in Quran
Found 8 verses containing "هُمُ ٱلظَّٰلِمُونَ".
ٱلطَّلَٰقُ مَرَّتَانِ ۖ فَإِمْسَاكٌۢ بِمَعْرُوفٍ أَوْ تَسْرِيحٌۢ بِإِحْسَٰنٍ ۗ وَلَا يَحِلُّ لَكُمْ أَن تَأْخُذُوا۟ مِمَّآ ءَاتَيْتُمُوهُنَّ شَيْـًٔا إِلَّآ أَن يَخَافَآ أَلَّا يُقِيمَا حُدُودَ ٱللَّهِ ۖ فَإِنْ خِفْتُمْ أَلَّا يُقِيمَا حُدُودَ ٱللَّهِ فَلَا جُنَاحَ عَلَيْهِمَا فِيمَا ٱفْتَدَتْ بِهِۦ ۗ تِلْكَ حُدُودُ ٱللَّهِ فَلَا تَعْتَدُوهَا ۚ وَمَن يَتَعَدَّ حُدُودَ ٱللَّهِ فَأُو۟لَٰٓئِكَ هُمُ ٱلظَّٰلِمُونَ
2:228.
2:232; 4:130; 65:3.
这节经文含有对离婚第五种约制。如果丈夫想和妻子离异, 他必须在三个不同时期声明离婚, 每次在她个别的洁净时期中并没有和她同过房, 在同一时期声明两次或三次离婚, 是不准许的。这在 مَرَّتَان (Marratan, 两次) 这一字中可以看出。这字的意思是, 发生在两个不同时期的一件事情, 而不是发生在同一时间的两件事情。穆圣把这种同一时间的集中声明, 不管几次, 都只作一次离婚声明看待 (تِرْمِذِی与داؤد)。根据纳萨伊 (نَسَائِی) 说, 有一天穆圣听到有人在同一时间内作了三次离婚声明, 非常生气地说, “在我还在你们中间时, 就把安拉的经典当儿戏吗?” 在第一和第二次声明离婚后, 丈夫在 عِدَّة (‘Iddat), 既等候时期内, 不论经过或不经过妻子的同意, 都可以召回离了婚的妻子; 但是等候时期过了以后, 他要经过她的同意而且要重新娶她才能收回。在第三次离婚后, 丈夫就丧失了这种权利, 这对夫妻就最终离异了。穆圣的一个伙伴有一次问他说, “«古兰经» 在这里只谈了两次离婚, 第三次离婚在什么地方?” 穆圣向他提到 “以厚道的做法辞离她们” 这句话, 意思是说, 第一和第二次离婚之后, 丈夫可以保留并且可以再娶她, 如果她也同意结婚的话; 但是如果他要最后离异的话, 他应与她离婚, 即第三次离婚 {جَرِيْر (Jarir) 与 مُسْنَد (Musnad)}。这一点在下一节经文中还要进一步说明。这样, 这里的 تَسْرِيْح (Tasrih) 这个字意为 طَلَاق (Talaq), 即离婚。
一个人和他的妻子离婚后, 他就丧失了他已给她的嫁妆 (办嫁妆的钱); 如果在离婚时他还没有给过她嫁妆, 在正式离婚之前, 他必须给她那笔钱。而且, 他不准许取回作为馈赠或礼物而给她的任何东西。
不过, 如果提出离婚的是女方, 法律上称为 خُلْع (khul‘), 她必须通过 قَاضِیْ (Qadi) 即法官, 正如 “你们 (双方) 害怕” 这几个字所暗示的那样。在这种情况下, 她必须归还男方全部或部分嫁妆以及男方过去送给她的礼品, 这要双方议定或由法官决定。盖斯•彬•撒比特 (قَيْس بِنْ ثَابِتْ, Qais bin Thabit) 的妻子杰米拉 (جَمِيْلَة, Jamilah) 那个案例提供了妇女行使 خُلْع 权的一个很好的实际说明。她要求和丈夫盖斯离婚, 理由是她不喜欢他, 也就是说, 他们性格不合, 不能相处在一起。穆圣给了他 خُلْع 的许可, 但是她必须把他给她的果园还给他 (布哈理)。
عام طور پر اس زمانہ کے علماء یہ سمجھتے ہیں کہ جس نے تین دفعہ طلاق کہہ دیا اس کی طلاق بائن ہو جاتی ہے یعنی اس کی بیوی اس سے دوبارہ اس وقت تک شادی نہیں کر سکتی جب تک کسی اور سے نکاح نہ کر لے مگر یہ غلط ہے کیونکہ قرآن کریم میں صاف فرمایا گیا ہے اَلطَّـلَا قُ مَرَّتٰنِ یعنی وہ طلاق جو بائن نہیں وہ دو دفعہ ہو سکتی ہے اس طور پر کہ پہلے مرد طلاق دے پھر یا تو طلاق واپس لے لے اور رجوع کرے یا عدت گزرنے دے اور نکاح کرے۔ پھر اَن بَن کی صورت میں دوبارہ طلاق دے۔ پس ایسی طلاق کا دو دفعہ ہونا تو قطعی طور پر ثابت ہے۔ پس ایک ہی دفعہ تین یا تین سے زیادہ بار طلاق کہہ دینے کو بائن قرار دین
تمہیں یعنی ملتِ اسلامیہ یا اسلام پر ایمان رکھنے والی حکومت کو۔
اِنْ خِفْتُمْ میں بتایا گیا ہے کہ اگر محکمہ قضا اس بات کا فیصلہ کرے کہ عورت خاوند کے پاس رہنے کے لئے راضی نہیں اور اس کی نارضا مندی کی وجہ سے مرد بھی عدل نہ رکھ سکے گا‘ تو عورت اگر کچھ دینا چاہے تو مرد کو اجازت ہے کہ کچھ مال لیکر اسے طلاق دے دے۔ لیکن وہ صرف اتنا ہی مال لے سکتا ہے جتنا اس نے خود دیا ہو اور کچھ نہیں۔
2:232; 4:130; 65:3.
This verse contains the fifth check on divorce. A man who seeks separation from his wife must pronounce divorce on three separate occasions, each in a separate period of purity when he has not gone in unto her during that period. The pronouncement of divorce twice or thrice at one and the same time is not permissible as is hinted in the word Marratan (twice) which signifies a thing happening on two separate occasions and not two things happening at one and the same time. The Holy Prophet treated such collective pronouncements, whatever their number, as only one divorce (Tirmidhi & Dawud). According to Nasa’i, the Holy Prophet was extremely angry when one day he was told that a person had made all the three pronouncements of divorce at one and the same time and said, "Is the Book of God going to be made a plaything while I am yet among you?" After the pronouncement of the first two divorces, the husband can take back the divorced wife within ‘Iddat, i.e. the period of waiting, with or
When a person divorces his wife, he forfeits the dower-money he has given her; and if at the time of divorce he has not yet given her the dower- money, he must make the payment before the divorce becomes effective. Again, he is not allowed to take back anything he might have given her in the form of gifts and presents.
If, however, it is the wife who demands separation, technically known as Khula‘, she must get it through a Qadi or judge as the words "you fear," in the plural number, hint. In this case she has to part with, in full or in part, her dowry as well as the gifts she might have received from her husband, as agreed upon by the parties or decided by the judge. The case of Jamilah, wife of Qais bin Thabit, provides a good illustration of the exercise of the right of Khula‘ by women. She demanded separation from her husband. Qais, on the ground that she did not like him, i.e. their temperaments being different she could not get on with him. She was granted Khula‘ by the Holy Prophet, but she had to return to her husband the orchard he had given her (Bukhari).
See 2:228.
2:232; 4:130; 65:3.
Important Words:
امساك (retain) is derived from امسك which is again derived from مسك. They say امسك به i.e. he stuck to it. امسك is both transitive and intransitive. امسكه means, he got hold of it and stopped and retained it. امسك عن الکلام means, he abstained from talking. امساك means, (1) to hold or stop or prevent or retain; (2) to refrain or abstain (Aqrab).
تسریح (send away) is the noun-infinitive from سرح (sarraha) which is derived from سرح. They say سرح المواشی i.e. the cattle went forth for grazing. سرح السیل means, the flood moved on leisurely. سرحه means, he sent him away. سرح فلان زوجته means, he sent away or divorced his wife (Aqrab).
حدود (limits) is the plural of حد i.e. a limit. حده means, he put a limit to it. حد الشیء عن الشیء means, he distinguished one thing from the other. الحد means, (1) the limit or the line where two things meet; (2) last limit or extremity of a thing; (3) that by which a thing may be defined; (4) prescribed punishment for an offence. حدود الله means God’s religious commandments (Aqrab).
Commentary:
This verse contains the fifth check on divorce. A man who seeks permanent and irrevocable separation from his wife must pronounce divorce on three separate occasions, each in a separate طھر i.e. period of purity, when the woman is clean and the man has not gone in unto her during that period of purity. The pronouncement of divorce twice or thrice at one and the same time is not permissible as the verse hints in the word مرتان (twice) which signifies a thing happening on two separate occasions and not two things happening at one and the same time. The Holy Prophet treated such collective pronouncements, whatever their number, as only one divorce (Tirmidhi & Dawud). According to Nasa’i, the Holy Prophet was extremely angry when one day he was told that a person had made all the three pronouncements of divorce at one and the same time, and said: "Is the Book of God going to be made a plaything while I am yet among you?"
After the pronouncement of the first two divorces, the husband can take back the divorced wife within ‘iddah, i.e. the period of waiting, with or without her consent; but after the period of waiting is over, he can take her back only with her consent and that after remarrying her. After the pronouncement of the third divorce, however, the husband forfeits this right and the couple are finally separated. A Companion of the Holy Prophet once asked him saying, "The Quran has here spoken of two divorces only, whence comes in the third!" The Prophet referred him to the Quranic words اوتسریح باحسان i.e. or send them away with kindness meaning thereby that after the pronouncement of the first two divorces the husband was free to retain his wife if he so desired but if he wanted irrevocable separation, he should "send her away", i.e. divorce her a third time (Jarir & Musnad). The point is further made clear in the succeeding verse. Thus the word تسریح here signifies طلاق i.e. divorce.
The present verse also makes it clear that when a person divorces his wife, he forfeits مھر i.e. the dower-money he has given her; and if at the time of divorce he has not yet given her the dower-money agreed on by the parties, he must make the payment before the divorce becomes effective. Again, he is not allowed to take back anything he might have given her in the form of gifts and presents as the clause it is not lawful for you that you take anything of what you have given them indicates.
If, however, it is the wife who demands separation, technically known as خلع (Khul‘a lit. the putting off of clothes etc., or the shedding of old leaves), she must get it through a Qadi or judge as the word خفتم (you fear), which has been put in the plural number, hints. In this case she has to part with, in full or in part, her dowry as well as the gifts she might have received from her husband, as agreed on by the parties or decided by the judge. The case of Jamilah, wife of Qais bin Thabit, provides a good illustration of the exercise of the right of Khul‘a by women. She demanded separation from her husband, Qais, on the ground that she did not like him, i.e. their temperaments being different, she could not get on with him. She was granted Kkul‘a by the Holy Prophet, but she had to return to her husband the orchard he had given her (Bukhari). This right, however, is not to be exercised in a light-hearted manner. The Holy Prophet has condemned the action of a woman who demands separation from her husband without valid reason even as he has condemned the action of a man who divorces his wife without genuine cause. He is reported to have said, "A woman who seeks separation from her husband without a legitimate cause shall be deprived of the fragrance of heaven" (Dawud & Tirmidhi). This is what is hinted in the concluding words, these are the limits prescribed by Allah, so transgress them not, etc. The husband and the wife are both warned to fear God and refrain from transgressing the limits imposed by God for their own good.
b
2:228.
c
2:232; 4:130; 65:3.
170
这节经文含有对离婚第五种约制。如果丈夫想和妻子离异, 他必须在三个不同时期声明离婚, 每次在她个别的洁净时期中并没有和她同过房, 在同一时期声明两次或三次离婚, 是不准许的。这在 مَرَّتَان (Marratan, 两次) 这一字中可以看出。这字的意思是, 发生在两个不同时期的一件事情, 而不是发生在同一时间的两件事情。穆圣把这种同一时间的集中声明, 不管几次, 都只作一次离婚声明看待 (تِرْمِذِی与داؤد)。根据纳萨伊 (نَسَائِی) 说, 有一天穆圣听到有人在同一时间内作了三次离婚声明, 非常生气地说, “在我还在你们中间时, 就把安拉的经典当儿戏吗?” 在第一和第二次声明离婚后, 丈夫在 عِدَّة (‘Iddat), 既等候时期内, 不论经过或不经过妻子的同意, 都可以召回离了婚的妻子; 但是等候时期过了以后, 他要经过她的同意而且要重新娶她才能收回。在第三次离婚后, 丈夫就丧失了这种权利, 这对夫妻就最终离异了。穆圣的一个伙伴有一次问他说, “«古兰经» 在这里只谈了两次离婚, 第三次离婚在什么地方?” 穆圣向他提到 “以厚道的做法辞离她们” 这句话, 意思是说, 第一和第二次离婚之后, 丈夫可以保留并且可以再娶她, 如果她也同意结婚的话; 但是如果他要最后离异的话, 他应与她离婚, 即第三次离婚 {جَرِيْر (Jarir) 与 مُسْنَد (Musnad)}。这一点在下一节经文中还要进一步说明。这样, 这里的 تَسْرِيْح (Tasrih) 这个字意为 طَلَاق (Talaq), 即离婚。
171
一个人和他的妻子离婚后, 他就丧失了他已给她的嫁妆 (办嫁妆的钱); 如果在离婚时他还没有给过她嫁妆, 在正式离婚之前, 他必须给她那笔钱。而且, 他不准许取回作为馈赠或礼物而给她的任何东西。
172
不过, 如果提出离婚的是女方, 法律上称为 خُلْع (khul‘), 她必须通过 قَاضِیْ (Qadi) 即法官, 正如 “你们 (双方) 害怕” 这几个字所暗示的那样。在这种情况下, 她必须归还男方全部或部分嫁妆以及男方过去送给她的礼品, 这要双方议定或由法官决定。盖斯•彬•撒比特 (قَيْس بِنْ ثَابِتْ, Qais bin Thabit) 的妻子杰米拉 (جَمِيْلَة, Jamilah) 那个案例提供了妇女行使 خُلْع 权的一个很好的实际说明。她要求和丈夫盖斯离婚, 理由是她不喜欢他, 也就是说, 他们性格不合, 不能相处在一起。穆圣给了他 خُلْع 的许可, 但是她必须把他给她的果园还给他 (布哈理)。
1
عام طور پر اس زمانہ کے علماء یہ سمجھتے ہیں کہ جس نے تین دفعہ طلاق کہہ دیا اس کی طلاق بائن ہو جاتی ہے یعنی اس کی بیوی اس سے دوبارہ اس وقت تک شادی نہیں کر سکتی جب تک کسی اور سے نکاح نہ کر لے مگر یہ غلط ہے کیونکہ قرآن کریم میں صاف فرمایا گیا ہے اَلطَّـلَا قُ مَرَّتٰنِ یعنی وہ طلاق جو بائن نہیں وہ دو دفعہ ہو سکتی ہے اس طور پر کہ پہلے مرد طلاق دے پھر یا تو طلاق واپس لے لے اور رجوع کرے یا عدت گزرنے دے اور نکاح کرے۔ پھر اَن بَن کی صورت میں دوبارہ طلاق دے۔ پس ایسی طلاق کا دو دفعہ ہونا تو قطعی طور پر ثابت ہے۔ پس ایک ہی دفعہ تین یا تین سے زیادہ بار طلاق کہہ دینے کو بائن قرار دین
2
تمہیں یعنی ملتِ اسلامیہ یا اسلام پر ایمان رکھنے والی حکومت کو۔
3
اِنْ خِفْتُمْ میں بتایا گیا ہے کہ اگر محکمہ قضا اس بات کا فیصلہ کرے کہ عورت خاوند کے پاس رہنے کے لئے راضی نہیں اور اس کی نارضا مندی کی وجہ سے مرد بھی عدل نہ رکھ سکے گا‘ تو عورت اگر کچھ دینا چاہے تو مرد کو اجازت ہے کہ کچھ مال لیکر اسے طلاق دے دے۔ لیکن وہ صرف اتنا ہی مال لے سکتا ہے جتنا اس نے خود دیا ہو اور کچھ نہیں۔
a
See 2:228.
b
2:232; 4:130; 65:3.
236
Important Words:
امساك (retain) is derived from امسك which is again derived from مسك. They say امسك به i.e. he stuck to it. امسك is both transitive and intransitive. امسكه means, he got hold of it and stopped and retained it. امسك عن الکلام means, he abstained from talking. امساك means, (1) to hold or stop or prevent or retain; (2) to refrain or abstain (Aqrab).
تسریح (send away) is the noun-infinitive from سرح (sarraha) which is derived from سرح. They say سرح المواشی i.e. the cattle went forth for grazing. سرح السیل means, the flood moved on leisurely. سرحه means, he sent him away. سرح فلان زوجته means, he sent away or divorced his wife (Aqrab).
حدود (limits) is the plural of حد i.e. a limit. حده means, he put a limit to it. حد الشیء عن الشیء means, he distinguished one thing from the other. الحد means, (1) the limit or the line where two things meet; (2) last limit or extremity of a thing; (3) that by which a thing may be defined; (4) prescribed punishment for an offence. حدود الله means God’s religious commandments (Aqrab).
Commentary:
This verse contains the fifth check on divorce. A man who seeks permanent and irrevocable separation from his wife must pronounce divorce on three separate occasions, each in a separate طھر i.e. period of purity, when the woman is clean and the man has not gone in unto her during that period of purity. The pronouncement of divorce twice or thrice at one and the same time is not permissible as the verse hints in the word مرتان (twice) which signifies a thing happening on two separate occasions and not two things happening at one and the same time. The Holy Prophet treated such collective pronouncements, whatever their number, as only one divorce (Tirmidhi & Dawud). According to Nasa’i, the Holy Prophet was extremely angry when one day he was told that a person had made all the three pronouncements of divorce at one and the same time, and said: "Is the Book of God going to be made a plaything while I am yet among you?"
After the pronouncement of the first two divorces, the husband can take back the divorced wife within ‘iddah, i.e. the period of waiting, with or without her consent; but after the period of waiting is over, he can take her back only with her consent and that after remarrying her. After the pronouncement of the third divorce, however, the husband forfeits this right and the couple are finally separated. A Companion of the Holy Prophet once asked him saying, "The Quran has here spoken of two divorces only, whence comes in the third!" The Prophet referred him to the Quranic words اوتسریح باحسان i.e. or send them away with kindness meaning thereby that after the pronouncement of the first two divorces the husband was free to retain his wife if he so desired but if he wanted irrevocable separation, he should "send her away", i.e. divorce her a third time (Jarir & Musnad). The point is further made clear in the succeeding verse. Thus the word تسریح here signifies طلاق i.e. divorce.
The present verse also makes it clear that when a person divorces his wife, he forfeits مھر i.e. the dower-money he has given her; and if at the time of divorce he has not yet given her the dower-money agreed on by the parties, he must make the payment before the divorce becomes effective. Again, he is not allowed to take back anything he might have given her in the form of gifts and presents as the clause it is not lawful for you that you take anything of what you have given them indicates.
If, however, it is the wife who demands separation, technically known as خلع (Khul‘a lit. the putting off of clothes etc., or the shedding of old leaves), she must get it through a Qadi or judge as the word خفتم (you fear), which has been put in the plural number, hints. In this case she has to part with, in full or in part, her dowry as well as the gifts she might have received from her husband, as agreed on by the parties or decided by the judge. The case of Jamilah, wife of Qais bin Thabit, provides a good illustration of the exercise of the right of Khul‘a by women. She demanded separation from her husband, Qais, on the ground that she did not like him, i.e. their temperaments being different, she could not get on with him. She was granted Kkul‘a by the Holy Prophet, but she had to return to her husband the orchard he had given her (Bukhari). This right, however, is not to be exercised in a light-hearted manner. The Holy Prophet has condemned the action of a woman who demands separation from her husband without valid reason even as he has condemned the action of a man who divorces his wife without genuine cause. He is reported to have said, "A woman who seeks separation from her husband without a legitimate cause shall be deprived of the fragrance of heaven" (Dawud & Tirmidhi). This is what is hinted in the concluding words, these are the limits prescribed by Allah, so transgress them not, etc. The husband and the wife are both warned to fear God and refrain from transgressing the limits imposed by God for their own good.
b
2:228.c
2:232; 4:130; 65:3.
280
This verse contains the fifth check on divorce. A man who seeks separation from his wife must pronounce divorce on three separate occasions, each in a separate period of purity when he has not gone in unto her during that period. The pronouncement of divorce twice or thrice at one and the same time is not permissible as is hinted in the word Marratan (twice) which signifies a thing happening on two separate occasions and not two things happening at one and the same time. The Holy Prophet treated such collective pronouncements, whatever their number, as only one divorce (Tirmidhi & Dawud). According to Nasa’i, the Holy Prophet was extremely angry when one day he was told that a person had made all the three pronouncements of divorce at one and the same time and said, "Is the Book of God going to be made a plaything while I am yet among you?" After the pronouncement of the first two divorces, the husband can take back the divorced wife within ‘Iddat, i.e. the period of waiting, with or
281
When a person divorces his wife, he forfeits the dower-money he has given her; and if at the time of divorce he has not yet given her the dower- money, he must make the payment before the divorce becomes effective. Again, he is not allowed to take back anything he might have given her in the form of gifts and presents.
282
If, however, it is the wife who demands separation, technically known as Khula‘, she must get it through a Qadi or judge as the words "you fear," in the plural number, hint. In this case she has to part with, in full or in part, her dowry as well as the gifts she might have received from her husband, as agreed upon by the parties or decided by the judge. The case of Jamilah, wife of Qais bin Thabit, provides a good illustration of the exercise of the right of Khula‘ by women. She demanded separation from her husband. Qais, on the ground that she did not like him, i.e. their temperaments being different she could not get on with him. She was granted Khula‘ by the Holy Prophet, but she had to return to her husband the orchard he had given her (Bukhari).
يَٰٓأَيُّهَا ٱلَّذِينَ ءَامَنُوٓا۟ أَنفِقُوا۟ مِمَّا رَزَقْنَٰكُم مِّن قَبْلِ أَن يَأْتِىَ يَوْمٌ لَّا بَيْعٌ فِيهِ وَلَا خُلَّةٌ وَلَا شَفَٰعَةٌ ۗ وَٱلْكَٰفِرُونَ هُمُ ٱلظَّٰلِمُونَ
14:32; 43:68.
See 2:49.
2:196; 14:32; 47:39; 57:11; 63:11.
On that day salvation will not be had for a price. It will depend only on one’s good works coupled with God’s grace.
There will be no occasion for forming new friendships on that day.
See {85}.
2:196; 14:32; 47:39; 57:11; 63:11.
14:32; 43:68.
aSee 2:49.
Important Words:
بیع (buying and selling) is derived from باع i.e. he sold; or he bought; or he bartered (Aqrab).
خلة (friendship) is derived from خل. They say خل الشیء i.e. he pierced the thing and made a hole through it. خل فی دعائه means, he was very particular in his prayer. خل الیه means, he was in need of his help and support. خاله means, he made friends with him and took him as brother. خلة is, therefore, that friendship or love which penetrates the heart and takes root in it. خلیل is one whose friendship and love is very deep and sincere; a most loving and bosom friend (Aqrab). The Holy Prophet is reported to have said: "If I had taken anyone as my خلیل I would have taken Abu Bakr as such, but my خلیل is God" (Bukhari, ch. on Manaqibun-Nabi).
شفاعة (intercession). See note on 2:49.
Commentary:
Though, as the preceding verses point out, the final victory of the Holy Prophet of Islam was sure, yet the path before Muslims was not strewn with roses. They had to make great sacrifices in order to reach the goal. It is to this fact that the verse under comment points. It makes particular reference to financial sacrifices.
The words, wherein there shall be no buying and selling, do not mean that there will be no trade and commerce on the Day of Judgement, but that on that great day nobody will be able to buy salvation, which will depend only on one’s good works coupled with God’s grace. The only buying or selling that will be of avail to men on the Day of Judgement will be that which they shall have made in their present life (9:111).
The words, nor friendship, signify that there will be no occasion for forming new friendships on that day. Those, however, who will have taken God as their friend in their life on this earth will certainly benefit by that friendship. It is to this fact that the Quran refers when it says: Friends on that day shall be foes to one another, except the God-fearing(43:68). The righteous have God as their friend, and He will continue to be their friend on the Day of Judgement!
For شفاعة (intercession), see note on 2:49.
a
2:196; 14:32; 47:39; 57:11; 63:11.
b
14:32; 43:68.
c
2:49.
a
2:196; 14:32; 47:39; 57:11; 63:11.
b
14:32; 43:68.
c
aSee 2:49.
261
Important Words:
بیع (buying and selling) is derived from باع i.e. he sold; or he bought; or he bartered (Aqrab).
خلة (friendship) is derived from خل. They say خل الشیء i.e. he pierced the thing and made a hole through it. خل فی دعائه means, he was very particular in his prayer. خل الیه means, he was in need of his help and support. خاله means, he made friends with him and took him as brother. خلة is, therefore, that friendship or love which penetrates the heart and takes root in it. خلیل is one whose friendship and love is very deep and sincere; a most loving and bosom friend (Aqrab). The Holy Prophet is reported to have said: "If I had taken anyone as my خلیل I would have taken Abu Bakr as such, but my خلیل is God" (Bukhari, ch. on Manaqibun-Nabi).
شفاعة (intercession). See note on 2:49.
Commentary:
Though, as the preceding verses point out, the final victory of the Holy Prophet of Islam was sure, yet the path before Muslims was not strewn with roses. They had to make great sacrifices in order to reach the goal. It is to this fact that the verse under comment points. It makes particular reference to financial sacrifices.
The words, wherein there shall be no buying and selling, do not mean that there will be no trade and commerce on the Day of Judgement, but that on that great day nobody will be able to buy salvation, which will depend only on one’s good works coupled with God’s grace. The only buying or selling that will be of avail to men on the Day of Judgement will be that which they shall have made in their present life (9:111).
The words, nor friendship, signify that there will be no occasion for forming new friendships on that day. Those, however, who will have taken God as their friend in their life on this earth will certainly benefit by that friendship. It is to this fact that the Quran refers when it says: Friends on that day shall be foes to one another, except the God-fearing(43:68). The righteous have God as their friend, and He will continue to be their friend on the Day of Judgement!
For شفاعة (intercession), see note on 2:49.
a
14:32; 43:68.
b
See 2:49.
f
2:196; 14:32; 47:39; 57:11; 63:11.
315
On that day salvation will not be had for a price. It will depend only on one’s good works coupled with God’s grace.
316
There will be no occasion for forming new friendships on that day.
317
See {85}.
فَمَنِ ٱفْتَرَىٰ عَلَى ٱللَّهِ ٱلْكَذِبَ مِنۢ بَعْدِ ذَٰلِكَ فَأُو۟لَٰٓئِكَ هُمُ ٱلظَّٰلِمُونَ
Dhalika refers to the statement made in the preceding verse. To say that such and such parts of food were disallowed by God whereas He had not forbidden them, amounted to forging a lie against God.
Commentary:
The word ذالك (this) refers to the statement made in the preceding verse. To say that such and such parts of food were disallowed by God whereas He had not forbidden them, or even without directly attributing any commandant to God persistently to abstain from partaking of a lawful food without just reason virtually amounted to forging a lie against God which only wrongdoers could resort to.
381
Commentary:
The word ذالك (this) refers to the statement made in the preceding verse. To say that such and such parts of food were disallowed by God whereas He had not forbidden them, or even without directly attributing any commandant to God persistently to abstain from partaking of a lawful food without just reason virtually amounted to forging a lie against God which only wrongdoers could resort to.
441
Dhalika refers to the statement made in the preceding verse. To say that such and such parts of food were disallowed by God whereas He had not forbidden them, amounted to forging a lie against God.
وَكَتَبْنَا عَلَيْهِمْ فِيهَآ أَنَّ ٱلنَّفْسَ بِٱلنَّفْسِ وَٱلْعَيْنَ بِٱلْعَيْنِ وَٱلْأَنفَ بِٱلْأَنفِ وَٱلْأُذُنَ بِٱلْأُذُنِ وَٱلسِّنَّ بِٱلسِّنِّ وَٱلْجُرُوحَ قِصَاصٌ ۚ فَمَن تَصَدَّقَ بِهِۦ فَهُوَ كَفَّارَةٌ لَّهُۥ ۚ وَمَن لَّمْ يَحْكُم بِمَآ أَنزَلَ ٱللَّهُ فَأُو۟لَٰٓئِكَ هُمُ ٱلظَّٰلِمُونَ
تورات میں لکھا ہے ’’اور جو کوئی کسی آدمی کو مار ڈالے وہ ضرور جان سے مارا جائے۔ اور اگر کوئی شخص اپنے ہمسایہ کو عیب دار بنادے تو جیسا اس نے کیا ویسا ہی اس سے کیا جائے یعنی عضو توڑنے کے بدلے عضو توڑنا ہو اور آنکھ کے بدلے آنکھ اور دانت کے بدلے دانت‘‘۔ (پرانا عہدنامہ احبار باب۲۴ آیت۱۹‘۲۰)
5:45, 48.
See Exod. 21:23-25 and Leviticus 24: 19-21. The words, and whoso waives the right thereto, constitute evidence of the fact that teaching about forgiveness of which Christians boast so much was no monopoly of the Gospels. It also formed part of the teaching of Moses though Moses’s teaching lays stress on retaliation, as does that of Jesus on forgiveness and non-resistance.
5:45, 48.
Commentary:
As the law mentioned in this verse is clearly stated to have belonged to the Torah, though it is not to be found in the Bible as we now have it, the words, And whoso waives the right thereto, constitute clear evidence of the fact that the teaching about forgiveness of which Christians boast so much was no monopoly of the Gospels. It was contained in the Torah also, though at the same time there can be no denying the fact that the teachings of Moses lay extra stress on retaliation, as do those of Jesus on forgiveness and non-resistance.
a
5:45, 48.
378
见 «出埃及记» 21:23-25和 «利未记» 24:19-21。“凡放弃这个权利的” 这些字, 指证了一个事实, 即基督徒常自我炫耀的宽恕之道, 并非 «新约书» 所独有。虽然穆撒的教导强调报复, 但是, 正好像伊撒关于宽恕和不抵抗的教导所做的那样, 宽恕也是穆撒教导的一部分。
2
تورات میں لکھا ہے ’’اور جو کوئی کسی آدمی کو مار ڈالے وہ ضرور جان سے مارا جائے۔ اور اگر کوئی شخص اپنے ہمسایہ کو عیب دار بنادے تو جیسا اس نے کیا ویسا ہی اس سے کیا جائے یعنی عضو توڑنے کے بدلے عضو توڑنا ہو اور آنکھ کے بدلے آنکھ اور دانت کے بدلے دانت‘‘۔ (پرانا عہدنامہ احبار باب۲۴ آیت۱۹‘۲۰)
a
5:45, 48.
677
Commentary:
As the law mentioned in this verse is clearly stated to have belonged to the Torah, though it is not to be found in the Bible as we now have it, the words, And whoso waives the right thereto, constitute clear evidence of the fact that the teaching about forgiveness of which Christians boast so much was no monopoly of the Gospels. It was contained in the Torah also, though at the same time there can be no denying the fact that the teachings of Moses lay extra stress on retaliation, as do those of Jesus on forgiveness and non-resistance.
c
5:45, 48.
751
See Exod. 21:23-25 and Leviticus 24: 19-21. The words, and whoso waives the right thereto, constitute evidence of the fact that teaching about forgiveness of which Christians boast so much was no monopoly of the Gospels. It also formed part of the teaching of Moses though Moses’s teaching lays stress on retaliation, as does that of Jesus on forgiveness and non-resistance.
يَٰٓأَيُّهَا ٱلَّذِينَ ءَامَنُوا۟ لَا تَتَّخِذُوٓا۟ ءَابَآءَكُمْ وَإِخْوَٰنَكُمْ أَوْلِيَآءَ إِنِ ٱسْتَحَبُّوا۟ ٱلْكُفْرَ عَلَى ٱلْإِيمَٰنِ ۚ وَمَن يَتَوَلَّهُم مِّنكُمْ فَأُو۟لَٰٓئِكَ هُمُ ٱلظَّٰلِمُونَ
3:29; 4:140, 145; 9:16; 58:23.
The verse refers to that class of disbelievers who were actively hostile to Islam and strove hard to exterminate it.
3:29; 4:140,145; 9:16; 58:23.
Commentary:
This verse deals with that class of idolaters who were actively hostile to Islam and strove hard to exterminate it. They had declared war on innocent Muslims, and such was their hatred of Islam that they even disregarded the ties of relationship with a view to harming them. It was with such implacable enemies of Islam that Muslims were forbidden to make friends, for such an act on their part would have amounted to treachery to Islam and would certainly have done it incalculable harm. As for other disbelievers who were not at war with Muslims, the Quran exhorts Muslims to be benevolent and kind to them (see 60:9,10). As a matter of fact, Islam attaches greater importance to the spiritual welfare of man than to his material well-being, and it is evident that friendly relations with men who prefer disbelief to faith are bound to exercise a baneful influence on spiritual growth.
b
3:29; 4:140, 145; 9:16; 58:23.
562
这节经文指的是非常敌视伊斯兰教并竭力想消灭它的那一类不信者。
b
3:29; 4:140,145; 9:16; 58:23.
1184
Commentary:
This verse deals with that class of idolaters who were actively hostile to Islam and strove hard to exterminate it. They had declared war on innocent Muslims, and such was their hatred of Islam that they even disregarded the ties of relationship with a view to harming them. It was with such implacable enemies of Islam that Muslims were forbidden to make friends, for such an act on their part would have amounted to treachery to Islam and would certainly have done it incalculable harm. As for other disbelievers who were not at war with Muslims, the Quran exhorts Muslims to be benevolent and kind to them (see 60:9,10). As a matter of fact, Islam attaches greater importance to the spiritual welfare of man than to his material well-being, and it is evident that friendly relations with men who prefer disbelief to faith are bound to exercise a baneful influence on spiritual growth.
c
3:29; 4:140, 145; 9:16; 58:23.
1171
The verse refers to that class of disbelievers who were actively hostile to Islam and strove hard to exterminate it.
أَفِى قُلُوبِهِم مَّرَضٌ أَمِ ٱرْتَابُوٓا۟ أَمْ يَخَافُونَ أَن يَحِيفَ ٱللَّهُ عَلَيْهِمْ وَرَسُولُهُۥ ۚ بَلْ أُو۟لَٰٓئِكَ هُمُ ٱلظَّٰلِمُونَ
The verse signifies that disbelievers suffer from one or all of the three spiritual diseases, or that some of them suffer from one disease and others from other diseases. In fact, the three main things that stand in the way of a man’s spiritual progress and retard and arrest it are doubt, fear and envy.
Commentary:
The verse signifies that disbelievers suffer from one or all of the three spiritual diseases or that some of them suffer from one disease and others from other diseases.
In fact, the three main things that stand in the way of a man’s spiritual progress and retard and arrest it, are doubt, fear and envy. These must be conquered before any real and substantial progress is possible.
2628
Commentary:
The verse signifies that disbelievers suffer from one or all of the three spiritual diseases or that some of them suffer from one disease and others from other diseases.
In fact, the three main things that stand in the way of a man’s spiritual progress and retard and arrest it, are doubt, fear and envy. These must be conquered before any real and substantial progress is possible.
2055
The verse signifies that disbelievers suffer from one or all of the three spiritual diseases, or that some of them suffer from one disease and others from other diseases. In fact, the three main things that stand in the way of a man’s spiritual progress and retard and arrest it are doubt, fear and envy.
يَٰٓأَيُّهَا ٱلَّذِينَ ءَامَنُوا۟ لَا يَسْخَرْ قَوْمٌ مِّن قَوْمٍ عَسَىٰٓ أَن يَكُونُوا۟ خَيْرًا مِّنْهُمْ وَلَا نِسَآءٌ مِّن نِّسَآءٍ عَسَىٰٓ أَن يَكُنَّ خَيْرًا مِّنْهُنَّ ۖ وَلَا تَلْمِزُوٓا۟ أَنفُسَكُمْ وَلَا تَنَابَزُوا۟ بِٱلْأَلْقَٰبِ ۖ بِئْسَ ٱلِٱسْمُ ٱلْفُسُوقُ بَعْدَ ٱلْإِيمَٰنِ ۚ وَمَن لَّمْ يَتُبْ فَأُو۟لَٰٓئِكَ هُمُ ٱلظَّٰلِمُونَ
68:12; 104:2.
68:12; 104:2.
68:12; 104:2.
Important Words:
لا تلمزوا (defame not) is derived from لمز. They say لمزہ i.e. he made a sign to him with the eye, or the like, as the head, and the lip, with low speech. This is the original signification; according to some other authorities the primary signification of the expression is: (1) he pushed him or impelled him or repelled him or he struck or beat him; (2) he blamed, upbraided, or reproached him; he found fault with him; or he did so in his face; or he spoke evil of him; or spoke of him in a manner that he disliked, mentioning vices or faults as chargeable to him, either behind his back or in his face, though it might be with truth (Lane, Aqrab & Raghib). See also 104:2.
لا تنابزوا (call not by nicknames) is derived from نبز which means, he called him by a surname or nick-name and is syn. with لقبه (laqqaba), mostly signifying, he called him by a nickname, or a name of reproach or an opprobrious appellation. It also signifies, he upbraided or reproached him; or the like, being syn. with لمزہ (Lane & Aqrab).
Commentary:
See next verse.
a
68:12; 104:2.
a
68:12; 104:2.
3849
Important Words:
لا تلمزوا (defame not) is derived from لمز. They say لمزہ i.e. he made a sign to him with the eye, or the like, as the head, and the lip, with low speech. This is the original signification; according to some other authorities the primary signification of the expression is: (1) he pushed him or impelled him or repelled him or he struck or beat him; (2) he blamed, upbraided, or reproached him; he found fault with him; or he did so in his face; or he spoke evil of him; or spoke of him in a manner that he disliked, mentioning vices or faults as chargeable to him, either behind his back or in his face, though it might be with truth (Lane, Aqrab & Raghib). See also 104:2.
لا تنابزوا (call not by nicknames) is derived from نبز which means, he called him by a surname or nick-name and is syn. with لقبه (laqqaba), mostly signifying, he called him by a nickname, or a name of reproach or an opprobrious appellation. It also signifies, he upbraided or reproached him; or the like, being syn. with لمزہ (Lane & Aqrab).
Commentary:
See next verse.
a
68:12; 104:2.
إِنَّمَا يَنْهَىٰكُمُ ٱللَّهُ عَنِ ٱلَّذِينَ قَٰتَلُوكُمْ فِى ٱلدِّينِ وَأَخْرَجُوكُم مِّن دِيَٰرِكُمْ وَظَٰهَرُوا۟ عَلَىٰٓ إِخْرَاجِكُمْ أَن تَوَلَّوْهُمْ ۚ وَمَن يَتَوَلَّهُمْ فَأُو۟لَٰٓئِكَ هُمُ ٱلظَّٰلِمُونَ
4:145; 5:52.
Commentary:
See preceding verse.
a
4:145; 5:52.
4217
Commentary:
See preceding verse.