وَاَخَذَ
Appears 2 times in Quran
Occurrences in Quran
Found 2 verses containing "وَاَخَذَ".
وَلَمَّا رَجَعَ مُوۡسٰۤی اِلٰی قَوۡمِہٖ غَضۡبٰنَ اَسِفًا قَالَ بِئۡسَمَا خَلَفۡتُمُوۡنِیۡ مِنۡۢ بَعۡدِیۡۤ ۖ اَعَجِلۡتُمۡ اَمۡرَ رَبِّکُمۡ ۖ وَاَلۡقَی الۡاَلۡوَاحَ وَاَخَذَ بِرَاۡسِ اَخِیۡہِ یَجُرُّہٗۤ اِلَیۡہِ ۚ قَالَ ابۡنَ اُمَّ اِنَّ الۡقَوۡمَ اسۡتَضۡعَفُوۡنِیۡ وَکَادُوۡا یَقۡتُلُوۡنَنِیۡ فَلَا تُشۡمِتۡ بِیَ الۡاَعۡدَآءَ وَلَا تَجۡعَلۡنِیۡ مَعَ الۡقَوۡمِ الظّٰلِمِیۡنَ
حضرت موسیٰ علیہ السلام قوم کے شرک کی وجہ سے غصہ میں بھرے ہوئے تھے اور زیادہ غصہ بھائی پر تھا کہ قوم میں شرک کے ظاہر ہونے پران سے لڑ کیوں نہ پڑے اور انہی پر زیادہ غصہ ظاہر کیا تاکہ باقی قوم ڈر جائے اور اصلاح کر لے۔
20:87.
20:95.
Moses seized Aaron by the head, not because the latter had countenanced or supported calf-worship, as he is represented to have done in the Bible (Exod. 32: 2-4), but because he did not successfully prevent the people from worshipping the calf. Display of anger on the part of Moses was due, not to any religious or legal offence committed by Aaron, but to his failure to manage affairs properly in his absence. The anger was justified because a great sacrilege had been committed and the whole work of Moses’s life was put in jeopardy.
Aaron appealed to Moses’s feelings of tenderness and brotherly affection.
20:87.
20:95.
Important Words:
فلاتشمت (make not rejoice). تشمت is formed from اشمت which is derived from شمت. They say شمت or شمت به i.e. he (an enemy) rejoiced; or he (someone) rejoiced at his enemy’s affliction. اشمته الله به means, God made him (the enemy) rejoice at his affliction. شمت علی العاطس means, he prayed for the sneezer that he might not be in a state in which his enemy might rejoice at his affliction (Lane).
Commentary:
When the return of Moses was delayed owing to the ten additional nights, his followers became impatient and thought that he was lost. They expressed their impatience in the words "we wot not what is become of him" (Exod. 32:1).
According to the Bible, Moses cast the tablets out of his hands and broke them beneath the Mount, so that they had to be renewed (Exod. 32:19; 34:1). But this is not borne out by the Quran which simply states, And he put down the tablets and this is more in harmony with the dignity of a Prophet.
Moses caught hold of Aaron’s head, not because the latter had abetted calf-worship, as he is represented to have done in the Bible (Exod. 32:2-4), but because he did not successfully prevent the people from worshipping the calf. As Moses’ representative, he should have effectively prevented the people from idol-worship, but he failed to do so. So the display of anger on the part of Moses was due not to any religious or legal offence committed by Aaron, but to his failure to manage affairs properly in the absence of Moses. Aaron had hoped that Moses would set things right on his return. That was only an error of judgement or lack of proper control, not a legal or religious offence.
The way in which Moses treated Aaron also shows that the latter was subordinate to the former. The treatment, however, should not be taken as a display of rough manners on the part of Moses. The anger of Moses was justified because a great sacrilege had been committed and the very work of his life was jeopardized; and Aaron being subordinate to Moses, the latter was entitled to take disciplinary action.
The words, Son of my mother, were used by Aaron not because Moses was a half-brother to him but because he wished to make an effective appeal to his feelings of tenderness and affection, and in this he succeeded.
The meaning of the particle مع (with) in the clause, and place me not with the unjust people, helps to explain its real sense in 4:70. Here, as well as there the particle gives the meaning of "among".
a
20:87.
b
20:95.
1
حضرت موسیٰ علیہ السلام قوم کے شرک کی وجہ سے غصہ میں بھرے ہوئے تھے اور زیادہ غصہ بھائی پر تھا کہ قوم میں شرک کے ظاہر ہونے پران سے لڑ کیوں نہ پڑے اور انہی پر زیادہ غصہ ظاہر کیا تاکہ باقی قوم ڈر جائے اور اصلاح کر لے۔
a
20:87.
b
20:95.
1040
Important Words:
فلاتشمت (make not rejoice). تشمت is formed from اشمت which is derived from شمت. They say شمت or شمت به i.e. he (an enemy) rejoiced; or he (someone) rejoiced at his enemy’s affliction. اشمته الله به means, God made him (the enemy) rejoice at his affliction. شمت علی العاطس means, he prayed for the sneezer that he might not be in a state in which his enemy might rejoice at his affliction (Lane).
Commentary:
When the return of Moses was delayed owing to the ten additional nights, his followers became impatient and thought that he was lost. They expressed their impatience in the words "we wot not what is become of him" (Exod. 32:1).
According to the Bible, Moses cast the tablets out of his hands and broke them beneath the Mount, so that they had to be renewed (Exod. 32:19; 34:1). But this is not borne out by the Quran which simply states, And he put down the tablets and this is more in harmony with the dignity of a Prophet.
Moses caught hold of Aaron’s head, not because the latter had abetted calf-worship, as he is represented to have done in the Bible (Exod. 32:2-4), but because he did not successfully prevent the people from worshipping the calf. As Moses’ representative, he should have effectively prevented the people from idol-worship, but he failed to do so. So the display of anger on the part of Moses was due not to any religious or legal offence committed by Aaron, but to his failure to manage affairs properly in the absence of Moses. Aaron had hoped that Moses would set things right on his return. That was only an error of judgement or lack of proper control, not a legal or religious offence.
The way in which Moses treated Aaron also shows that the latter was subordinate to the former. The treatment, however, should not be taken as a display of rough manners on the part of Moses. The anger of Moses was justified because a great sacrilege had been committed and the very work of his life was jeopardized; and Aaron being subordinate to Moses, the latter was entitled to take disciplinary action.
The words, Son of my mother, were used by Aaron not because Moses was a half-brother to him but because he wished to make an effective appeal to his feelings of tenderness and affection, and in this he succeeded.
The meaning of the particle مع (with) in the clause, and place me not with the unjust people, helps to explain its real sense in 4:70. Here, as well as there the particle gives the meaning of "among".
a
20:87.
b
20:95.
1055
Moses seized Aaron by the head, not because the latter had countenanced or supported calf-worship, as he is represented to have done in the Bible (Exod. 32: 2-4), but because he did not successfully prevent the people from worshipping the calf. Display of anger on the part of Moses was due, not to any religious or legal offence committed by Aaron, but to his failure to manage affairs properly in his absence. The anger was justified because a great sacrilege had been committed and the whole work of Moses’s life was put in jeopardy.
1056
Aaron appealed to Moses’s feelings of tenderness and brotherly affection.
وَاَخَذَ الَّذِیۡنَ ظَلَمُوا الصَّیۡحَۃُ فَاَصۡبَحُوۡا فِیۡ دِیٰرِہِمۡ جٰثِمِیۡنَ
7:79; 26:159; 54:32.
جَثَمَ کے لئے دیکھیں سورۂ اعراف آیت۷۹ نوٹ نمبر۱
7:79; 26:159; 54:32.
Seven different words and expressions have been used in the Qur’an to describe the punishment which overtook the tribe of Thamud. In the present verse and in 54:32, the word used is Saihah (punishment); in 7:79, Rajfah (an earthquake); in 26:159 simply ‘Adhab (chastisement); in 27:52, Dammarna- hum (We utterly destroyed them); in 51:45, Sa‘iqah (thunderbolt; or any destructive punishment); in 69:6, Taghiyah (an extraordinary punishment); and in 91:15, Damdama ‘Alaihim (He destroyed them completely). Though the words and expressions employed to describe the visitation seem to be different in form, yet they possess no discrepancy in meaning. The words which, however, appear to be contradictory, are Rajfah, Saihah, Sa‘iqah and Taghiyah. As the last three also mean punishment, therefore if the tribe of Thamud were destroyed by means of an earthquake all the above words may be rightly used to describe that catastrophe.
7:79; 26:159; 54:32.
Important Words:
الصیحة (punishment) is derived from صاح which means, he called out or cried vehemently or he shouted with his utmost force or power. صاح علیه means, he rebuked him. صیح بھم means, they were frightened or terrified. صیح فیھم means, they perished. صاحت الشجرة means, the tree became tall. صیحة means, a loud cry; punishment, castigation or chastisement; a hostile or predatory incursion by which a tribe is surprised (Lane & Aqrab).
Commentary:
Seven different words and expressions have been used in the Quran to describe the punishment which overtook the tribe of Thamud. In the verse under comment and in 54:32, the word used is صیحة (punishment); in 7:79, رجفة (an earthquake); in 26:159, عذاب (chastisement); in 27:52, دمرناھم (We utterly destroyed them); in 51:45, صاعقة (thunderbolt; any destructive punishment); in 69:6,طاغیة (an extraordinary punishment); and in 91:15, دمدم علیھم (their Lord destroyed them completely). Though the words and expressions employed to describe the visitation seem to be different in form, yet they possess no discrepancy in meaning. The only words which appear to be contradictory are Rajfah, Saihah, Sa‘iqah and Taghiyah. As, however, the last three also mean punishment, therefore if the tribe of Thamud were destroyed by means of an earthquake, all the above words may be rightly used to describe that catastrophe.
b
7:79; 26:159; 54:32.
1
جَثَمَ کے لئے دیکھیں سورۂ اعراف آیت۷۹ نوٹ نمبر۱
a
7:79; 26:159; 54:32.
1448
Important Words:
الصیحة (punishment) is derived from صاح which means, he called out or cried vehemently or he shouted with his utmost force or power. صاح علیه means, he rebuked him. صیح بھم means, they were frightened or terrified. صیح فیھم means, they perished. صاحت الشجرة means, the tree became tall. صیحة means, a loud cry; punishment, castigation or chastisement; a hostile or predatory incursion by which a tribe is surprised (Lane & Aqrab).
Commentary:
Seven different words and expressions have been used in the Quran to describe the punishment which overtook the tribe of Thamud. In the verse under comment and in 54:32, the word used is صیحة (punishment); in 7:79, رجفة (an earthquake); in 26:159, عذاب (chastisement); in 27:52, دمرناھم (We utterly destroyed them); in 51:45, صاعقة (thunderbolt; any destructive punishment); in 69:6,طاغیة (an extraordinary punishment); and in 91:15, دمدم علیھم (their Lord destroyed them completely). Though the words and expressions employed to describe the visitation seem to be different in form, yet they possess no discrepancy in meaning. The only words which appear to be contradictory are Rajfah, Saihah, Sa‘iqah and Taghiyah. As, however, the last three also mean punishment, therefore if the tribe of Thamud were destroyed by means of an earthquake, all the above words may be rightly used to describe that catastrophe.
c
7:79; 26:159; 54:32.
1328
Seven different words and expressions have been used in the Qur’an to describe the punishment which overtook the tribe of Thamud. In the present verse and in 54:32, the word used is Saihah (punishment); in 7:79, Rajfah (an earthquake); in 26:159 simply ‘Adhab (chastisement); in 27:52, Dammarna- hum (We utterly destroyed them); in 51:45, Sa‘iqah (thunderbolt; or any destructive punishment); in 69:6, Taghiyah (an extraordinary punishment); and in 91:15, Damdama ‘Alaihim (He destroyed them completely). Though the words and expressions employed to describe the visitation seem to be different in form, yet they possess no discrepancy in meaning. The words which, however, appear to be contradictory, are Rajfah, Saihah, Sa‘iqah and Taghiyah. As the last three also mean punishment, therefore if the tribe of Thamud were destroyed by means of an earthquake all the above words may be rightly used to describe that catastrophe.