خَیۡر
Appears 170 times in Quran
📖 Lane's Lexicon
Classical definitions for root خير
Derived Stems (102)
Derived Words (9)
Words derived from the lemma "خَیۡر".
- for good
- wealth
- better
- good
- good for thee
- in a state of prosperity
- one better
- with happiness
- good
- the best
- the best man
- a better
- a better
- any good
- best
- better
- good
- good deed
- it is good
- it will be good
- much wealth
- well
- good
- whatever good
- a better reward
- be better
- best
- better
- better off
- better reward
- good
- is best
- is better
- is good
- is still better
- is the best
- shall be better
- the best
- Best
- the Best
- the Best of
- the Best of those
- of good
- and good
Occurrences in Quran
Found 170 verses containing "خَیۡر".
فَلَمَّا جَآءَ سُلَیۡمٰنَ قَالَ اَتُمِدُّوۡنَنِ بِمَالٍ فَمَاۤ اٰتٰٮنِۦَ اللّٰہُ خَیۡرٌ مِّمَّاۤ اٰتٰٮکُمۡ بَلۡ اَنۡتُمۡ بِہَدِیَّتِکُمۡ تَفۡرَحُوۡنَ
Solomon seems evidently to have become greatly offended with the Queen’s behaviour in sending him presents. He took it as an insult. He had demanded her surrender and instead was presented with paltry presents. The Sabaeans first had either attacked Solomon’s territory or had sought to create unrest in it. This is why the sending of presents by the Queen offended and annoyed him. In ordinary circumstances he would have been pleased with the presents.
Commentary:
Solomon seems evidently to have become greatly offended with the Queen’s behaviour in sending him presents which seemed to include a throne. He took it as an insult. He had demanded her unconditional surrender and instead was presented with paltry presents. The Sabaeans had either attacked Solomon’s territory or had sought to create unrest in it. This is why the sending of presents offended and annoyed him. In ordinary circumstances, as a righteous man of God, he should have been pleased with the presents.
2837
Commentary:
Solomon seems evidently to have become greatly offended with the Queen’s behaviour in sending him presents which seemed to include a throne. He took it as an insult. He had demanded her unconditional surrender and instead was presented with paltry presents. The Sabaeans had either attacked Solomon’s territory or had sought to create unrest in it. This is why the sending of presents offended and annoyed him. In ordinary circumstances, as a righteous man of God, he should have been pleased with the presents.
2169
Solomon seems evidently to have become greatly offended with the Queen’s behaviour in sending him presents. He took it as an insult. He had demanded her surrender and instead was presented with paltry presents. The Sabaeans first had either attacked Solomon’s territory or had sought to create unrest in it. This is why the sending of presents by the Queen offended and annoyed him. In ordinary circumstances he would have been pleased with the presents.
قُلِ الۡحَمۡدُ لِلّٰہِ وَسَلٰمٌ عَلٰی عِبَادِہِ الَّذِیۡنَ اصۡطَفٰۤی ۗ آٰللّٰہُ خَیۡرٌ اَمَّا یُشۡرِکُوۡنَ
37:182, 183.
37:182, 183.
With this verse is closed the discourse about Moses, David, Solomon, Salih and Lot with an invocation of Divine peace and blessings on God’s Messengers and His Elect to whom humanity is indebted for all that is good and virtuous in the world and then the Surah proceeds to give arguments in support of the existence of God and of His great power and Unity.
37:182-183.
Commentary:
With this verse is closed the discourse about Moses, David, Solomon, Salih and Lot with an invocation of divine peace and blessings on God’s Messengers and His Elect to whom humanity is indebted for all that is good and virtuous in the world, and then the Surah proceeds to give arguments in support of the existence of God, His great Power and Unity.
a
37:182, 183.
a
37:182-183.
2853
Commentary:
With this verse is closed the discourse about Moses, David, Solomon, Salih and Lot with an invocation of divine peace and blessings on God’s Messengers and His Elect to whom humanity is indebted for all that is good and virtuous in the world, and then the Surah proceeds to give arguments in support of the existence of God, His great Power and Unity.
a
37:182, 183.
2181
With this verse is closed the discourse about Moses, David, Solomon, Salih and Lot with an invocation of Divine peace and blessings on God’s Messengers and His Elect to whom humanity is indebted for all that is good and virtuous in the world and then the Surah proceeds to give arguments in support of the existence of God and of His great power and Unity.
وَاِذۡ قَالَ مُوۡسٰی لِقَوۡمِہٖ یٰقَوۡمِ اِنَّکُمۡ ظَلَمۡتُمۡ اَنۡفُسَکُمۡ بِاتِّخَاذِکُمُ الۡعِجۡلَ فَتُوۡبُوۡۤا اِلٰی بَارِئِکُمۡ فَاقۡتُلُوۡۤا اَنۡفُسَکُمۡ ذٰلِکُمۡ خَیۡرٌ لَّکُمۡ عِنۡدَ بَارِئِکُمۡ فَتَابَ عَلَیۡکُمۡ ۚ اِنَّہٗ ہُوَ التَّوَّابُ الرَّحِیۡمُ
اَنْفُسَكُمْ (Anfusa-kum, 你们的恶欲) 的意思是你们的亲属; 你们的歹念。نَفْس (Nafs) 是 اَنْفُسْ (Anfus) 的单数, 也意谓感情; 欲望。古以色列人被命令通过禁欲来清洗他们的心灵的恶欲。«圣经»上说他们被命令: “杀你们的兄弟、朋友和邻居。” («出埃及记»32:27), 但这说法并没得到 «古兰经» 的证实, 按 «古兰经» 所说, 他们得到了宽恕 (4:154)。甚至他们的首领萨米里也并没有被处死 (20:98)。
فَاقْتُلُوْا اَنْفُسَکُمْ بائیبل سے پتہ لگتا ہے کہ بنی اسرائیل کو یہ حکم دیا گیا تھا کہ ہر بھائی اپنے بھائی کو‘ ہر دوست اپنے دوست کو اور ہر پڑوسی اپنے پڑوسی کو قتل کرے۔ چنانچہ بائیبل کے بیان کے مطابق اس دن تین ہزار آدمی مارے گئے (خروج باب۳۲۔ آیت۲۷۔ ۲۸) لیکن چونکہ تورات کی یہی تعلیم ہے کہ کسی شخص کو بغیر اس کے کہ اس نے کوئی اور آدمی قتل کیا ہو قتل کرنا ناجائز ہے اس لئے یہ معنے درست نہیں ہو سکتے اس کے مقابلہ میں بعض مفسرین نے اس کے معنے لفظی لئے ہیں اور کہا ہے کہ ہر شخص خود کشی کرے۔ لیکن خود کشی بھی جائز نہیں اس لئے یہی صورت باقی رہ جاتی ہے کہ ہم اس سارے واقعہ کو ایک
Anfusa-kum (your evil desires) means, your kith and kin; your evil desires. Nafs which is the singular of Anfus also means, passion; desire. The Israelites were commanded to purge their souls of evil desires through mortification. The biblical statement that they were commanded 'to slay every man his brother, every man his companion and every man his neighbour' (Exod. 32: 27) is not supported by the Qur’an according to which they were pardoned (4:154). Even their leader Samiri was not killed (20:98).
Important Words:
باری (Maker) is derived from بری which means, he shaped or fashioned a reed into a pen, or he shaped an arrow. باریmeans, one who forms or fashions a thing by cutting; one who shapes out or pares a thing. باری is to be distinguished from خالق for whereas the latter word means, one who brings a thing into existence according to the proper plan or measure, or one who brings a thing into existence from a state of nonexistence, the former word, i.e. باری signifies one who fashions a thing into its proper shape. Generally, however, باری is used as somewhat synonymous with خالق, for it is the formation of a shape which is the result in each case (Mufradat & Lane).
Commentary:
It appears from this verse that, although after the incident of calf-worship a general pardon was granted to the Israelites, yet it was thought essential to punish the ringleaders who were ordered to be slain. The clause فاقتلوا انفسکم does not mean "slay yourselves", but "slay your men or slay your kith and kin". The latter meaning is borne out by 2:85, where God says, you shall not turn your people out of your homes. Similarly, in 24:62, we read: When you enter houses, greet your people with salam. In these verses the expression انفسکم has been used in the sense of 'your people or your brethren'. See also 2:86 & 4:67.
Speaking of this incident, the Bible says: "Put ye every man his sword upon his thigh, and go to and fro from gate to gate throughout the camp, and slay every man his brother, and every man his companion, and every man his neighbour. And the sons of Levi did according to the word of Moses: and there fell of the people that day about three thousand men" (Exod. 32:27, 28).
In the above passage, the number of persons slain has been put at three thousand, but this is apparently an error. Similarly, the number of the Israelites who came out of Egypt is represented in the Bible as six hundred thousand (Exod. 12:37) which also is clearly wrong. Such a large number could not live as servants and labourers of the Egyptians, who themselves speak of them as "a small community" (the Quran, 26:55). The error has apparently arisen from a confusion of the words إلف (ilf) and ألف (alf), the former meaning "a family", and the latter "a thousand" (Aqrab). Really, there were only 600 families of the Israelites who lived in Egypt and who left the country under the leadership of Moses, but they were misconstrued into 600 thousands. Similarly, the number of persons slain could scarcely be three thousand. There were most likely only three families the leaders of which took part in setting up the calf for worship, and these were put to death, by their own kinsmen at the bidding of Moses.
The words فاقتلوا أنفسکم (slay yourselves) have also been construed as "kill your desires"–an interpretation borne out by the usage of the Arabic language. Some commentators prefer this interpretation to the one given above on the ground that the Israelites, having been forgiven by God at the intercession of Moses, could not have been ordered to slay their brethren, for such an order would have been incompatible with the forgiveness granted to them. This argument, however, does not appear to be sound for forgiveness of a people as a whole is not incompatible with the punishment of a few ringleaders.
The clause, turn ye therefore to your Maker, implies an exhortation to the Israelites to turn to their باری or Maker or Fashioner, which means that they should work a change or reformation in themselves.
54
اَنْفُسَكُمْ (Anfusa-kum, 你们的恶欲) 的意思是你们的亲属; 你们的歹念。نَفْس (Nafs) 是 اَنْفُسْ (Anfus) 的单数, 也意谓感情; 欲望。古以色列人被命令通过禁欲来清洗他们的心灵的恶欲。«圣经»上说他们被命令: “杀你们的兄弟、朋友和邻居。” («出埃及记»32:27), 但这说法并没得到 «古兰经» 的证实, 按 «古兰经» 所说, 他们得到了宽恕 (4:154)。甚至他们的首领萨米里也并没有被处死 (20:98)。
1
فَاقْتُلُوْا اَنْفُسَکُمْ بائیبل سے پتہ لگتا ہے کہ بنی اسرائیل کو یہ حکم دیا گیا تھا کہ ہر بھائی اپنے بھائی کو‘ ہر دوست اپنے دوست کو اور ہر پڑوسی اپنے پڑوسی کو قتل کرے۔ چنانچہ بائیبل کے بیان کے مطابق اس دن تین ہزار آدمی مارے گئے (خروج باب۳۲۔ آیت۲۷۔ ۲۸) لیکن چونکہ تورات کی یہی تعلیم ہے کہ کسی شخص کو بغیر اس کے کہ اس نے کوئی اور آدمی قتل کیا ہو قتل کرنا ناجائز ہے اس لئے یہ معنے درست نہیں ہو سکتے اس کے مقابلہ میں بعض مفسرین نے اس کے معنے لفظی لئے ہیں اور کہا ہے کہ ہر شخص خود کشی کرے۔ لیکن خود کشی بھی جائز نہیں اس لئے یہی صورت باقی رہ جاتی ہے کہ ہم اس سارے واقعہ کو ایک
61
Important Words:
باری (Maker) is derived from بری which means, he shaped or fashioned a reed into a pen, or he shaped an arrow. باریmeans, one who forms or fashions a thing by cutting; one who shapes out or pares a thing. باری is to be distinguished from خالق for whereas the latter word means, one who brings a thing into existence according to the proper plan or measure, or one who brings a thing into existence from a state of nonexistence, the former word, i.e. باری signifies one who fashions a thing into its proper shape. Generally, however, باری is used as somewhat synonymous with خالق, for it is the formation of a shape which is the result in each case (Mufradat & Lane).
Commentary:
It appears from this verse that, although after the incident of calf-worship a general pardon was granted to the Israelites, yet it was thought essential to punish the ringleaders who were ordered to be slain. The clause فاقتلوا انفسکم does not mean "slay yourselves", but "slay your men or slay your kith and kin". The latter meaning is borne out by 2:85, where God says, you shall not turn your people out of your homes. Similarly, in 24:62, we read: When you enter houses, greet your people with salam. In these verses the expression انفسکم has been used in the sense of 'your people or your brethren'. See also 2:86 & 4:67.
Speaking of this incident, the Bible says: "Put ye every man his sword upon his thigh, and go to and fro from gate to gate throughout the camp, and slay every man his brother, and every man his companion, and every man his neighbour. And the sons of Levi did according to the word of Moses: and there fell of the people that day about three thousand men" (Exod. 32:27, 28).
In the above passage, the number of persons slain has been put at three thousand, but this is apparently an error. Similarly, the number of the Israelites who came out of Egypt is represented in the Bible as six hundred thousand (Exod. 12:37) which also is clearly wrong. Such a large number could not live as servants and labourers of the Egyptians, who themselves speak of them as "a small community" (the Quran, 26:55). The error has apparently arisen from a confusion of the words إلف (ilf) and ألف (alf), the former meaning "a family", and the latter "a thousand" (Aqrab). Really, there were only 600 families of the Israelites who lived in Egypt and who left the country under the leadership of Moses, but they were misconstrued into 600 thousands. Similarly, the number of persons slain could scarcely be three thousand. There were most likely only three families the leaders of which took part in setting up the calf for worship, and these were put to death, by their own kinsmen at the bidding of Moses.
The words فاقتلوا أنفسکم (slay yourselves) have also been construed as "kill your desires"–an interpretation borne out by the usage of the Arabic language. Some commentators prefer this interpretation to the one given above on the ground that the Israelites, having been forgiven by God at the intercession of Moses, could not have been ordered to slay their brethren, for such an order would have been incompatible with the forgiveness granted to them. This argument, however, does not appear to be sound for forgiveness of a people as a whole is not incompatible with the punishment of a few ringleaders.
The clause, turn ye therefore to your Maker, implies an exhortation to the Israelites to turn to their باری or Maker or Fashioner, which means that they should work a change or reformation in themselves.
95
Anfusa-kum (your evil desires) means, your kith and kin; your evil desires. Nafs which is the singular of Anfus also means, passion; desire. The Israelites were commanded to purge their souls of evil desires through mortification. The biblical statement that they were commanded 'to slay every man his brother, every man his companion and every man his neighbour' (Exod. 32: 27) is not supported by the Qur’an according to which they were pardoned (4:154). Even their leader Samiri was not killed (20:98).
مَنۡ جَآءَ بِالۡحَسَنَۃِ فَلَہٗ خَیۡرٌ مِّنۡہَا وَہُمۡ مِّنۡ فَزَعٍ یَّوۡمَئِذٍ اٰمِنُوۡنَ
4:41; 6:161; 28:85.
4:41; 6:161; 28:85.
4:41; 6:161; 28:85.
Commentary:
Those who believed in the Holy Prophet and did righteous deeds had a good reward and became immune from all fear and apprehension about the future. And the burning of heart, as says the next verse, was the lot of the disbelievers and evildoers. These verses may also apply to the condition of believers and disbelievers in the life after death.
a
4:41; 6:161; 28:85.
a
4:41; 6:161; 28:85.
2872
Commentary:
Those who believed in the Holy Prophet and did righteous deeds had a good reward and became immune from all fear and apprehension about the future. And the burning of heart, as says the next verse, was the lot of the disbelievers and evildoers. These verses may also apply to the condition of believers and disbelievers in the life after death.
a
4:41; 6:161; 28:85.
وَاِذۡ قُلۡتُمۡ یٰمُوۡسٰی لَنۡ نَّصۡبِرَ عَلٰی طَعَامٍ وّٰحِدٍ فَادۡعُ لَنَا رَبَّکَ یُخۡرِجۡ لَنَا مِمَّا تُنۡۢبِتُ الۡاَرۡضُ مِنۡۢ بَقۡلِہَا وَقِثَّآئِہَا وَفُوۡمِہَا وَعَدَسِہَا وَبَصَلِہَا ۖ قَالَ اَتَسۡتَبۡدِلُوۡنَ الَّذِیۡ ہُوَ اَدۡنٰی بِالَّذِیۡ ہُوَ خَیۡرٌ ۚ اِہۡبِطُوۡا مِصۡرًا فَاِنَّ لَکُمۡ مَّا سَاَلۡتُمۡ ۗ وَضُرِبَتۡ عَلَیۡہِمُ الذِّلَّۃُ وَالۡمَسۡکَنَۃُ وَبَآءُوۡ بِغَضَبٍ مِّنَ اللّٰہِ ۗ ذٰلِکَ بِاَنَّہُمۡ کَانُوۡا یَکۡفُرُوۡنَ بِاٰیٰتِ اللّٰہِ وَیَقۡتُلُوۡنَ النَّبِیّٖنَ بِغَیۡرِ الۡحَقِّ ۗ ذٰلِکَ بِمَا عَصَوۡا وَّکَانُوۡا یَعۡتَدُوۡنَ
3:113.
2:91; 3:113; 5:61.
2:88; 3:22, 113, 184; 5:71.
قَتْل (Qatl) 这词除了它的主要意义为实际杀死之外, 还有企图或打算杀死; 拷打; 诅咒; 与之无关以及抵销事物的坏影响; 而词语 يَقْتُلُوْنَ النَّبِيّٖنَ (yaqtulunan-Nabiyyin) 并不含意为古以色列人实际上杀害了那些先知, 因为直到穆撒那时期, 并不知道有先知曾被他们杀害。事实上, 穆撒是第一位先知被送往作为民族的古以色列人那里去的。这些话只有他和他的兄弟哈融 (哈伦) 用得上, 但很明显他们没有被古以色列人杀死, 尽管他们有时候曾一心想把他们俩兄弟杀死 («出埃及记»17:4)。因此 قَتْل (Qatl) 这词在本节经文中不能解释为 “真正杀死”。它只能含意为他们极端反对先知, 如果他们能够的话, 他们想把他们俩兄弟杀死。请参考3:22和40:29。
3:113.
2:91; 3:113; 5:61.
2:88; 3:22, 113, 184; 5:71.
Having lived for a long time in bondage and in a state of dependence, the Israelites had become cowardly and indolent. So God intended them to stay in the desert for some time and to live on game and wild herbs in order that they might shed their cowardice and indolence by living an independent life in the desert. Thus revitalized, they were to be led to the Promised Land and made rulers of Palestine. The Israelites, however, failed to understand the real purpose of God or, having understood it, failed to appreciate it and foolishly insisted upon living in a town. God wanted to prepare them for rule over the Promised Land but those unfortunate people hungered after husbandry. So they were told to go down to a town where they would get the desired things.
The word Qatl besides its primary sense of actual killing means, to attempt or intend to kill; to beat; to curse; to have nothing to do with, and to neutralise the blighting influence of a thing; and the expression Yaqtulunan- Nabiyyin does not signify that the Israelites actually slew the Prophets, because, up to the time of Moses no Prophet is known to have been slain by them. As a matter of fact, Moses was the first Prophet who was sent to the Israelites as a nation. He and his brother, Aaron, are the only persons to whom these words can be applied, but obviously they were not killed by the Israelites, although they were sometimes bent upon killing them (Exod. 17: 4). Hence, the word Qatl in the verse cannot possibly mean "actual killing." It only means that they severely opposed the Prophets and would have killed them if they could. See also 3:22 & 40:29.
3:113.
2:91; 3:113; 5:61.
2:88; 3:22, 113, 184; 5:71.
Important Words:
فومھا (its wheat). فوم means: (1) wheat; (2) any corn suitable for making bread; (3) garlic; (4) chick-pea (Aqrab).
مصر (a town) means:(1) a town or a city; (2) the frontier between two countries; (3) the thing that intervenes between two things (Aqrab).
یقتلون (would kill) is derived from قتل i.e. he killed. The infinitive means: (1) killing with a sword or with a stone or with poison or by any other means; (2) attempting to kill; (3) making up the mind to kill; (4) boycotting or cutting off all connections; (5) killing one’s carnal desires; (6) weakening the strength of a thing, as alcohol is "killed" with the addition of water, or hunger is "killed" with food, etc.; (7) humbling a person completely; (8) rendering a person like unto one killed either physically or morally or spiritually; (9) acquiring complete and certain knowledge about a thing; and (10) cursing a person or thing (Aqrab, Mufradat & Lisan)
Commentary:
In this verse another instance is cited to show how the Israelites made no effort to turn the favours of God to good account. When they were in the desert, God sent them Manna and Salwa. But soon after this they began to exhibit discontent with one kind of food and to clamour for a variety of grain, onions, salad and green-stuff (Num. 11:5-11). It may be noted that both Manna and Salwa taken together were considered one kind of food as they were taken continuously for a long time. It is further learnt from the Bible that the supply of Salwa was discontinued after a while and the Israelites were thus left to live on Manna alone (Num. 11:6). As the demand was not based on a right understanding of the wisdom of God Who wanted the Israelites to breathe the free air of the desert for a time, they met with disgrace and drew upon themselves the wrath of God.
God’s displeasure with the Israelites was not due to their demand for other food. The real cause lay elsewhere. Having lived for a long time in bondage and a state of dependence, they had become cowardly and indolent. So God wished them to stay in the desert for sometime, living on game and wild herbs, that they might get rid of their cowardice and indolence by living an independent life in the desert. Thus revitalized, they were to be led to the Promised Land and made rulers of Palestine. The Israelites, however, failed to understand the real purpose of God or having understood it, failed to appreciate it, and foolishly insisted upon living in a town. God pointed out their error, saying that they had asked for a life of agriculture in preference to what was to lead them to sovereignty. He wanted to prepare them for rule over the Promised Land, but they hungered for husbandry. So He indignantly ordered them to go down to a town where they would get the desired things.
The Israelites deserved punishment, because their impatience was the outcome of a want of faith in the promise of God. This lack of faith in God was due to their opposition to His Prophets and, disbelief in His Signs, and they opposed the Prophets because they were transgressors and evildoers. The Prophets invited them to guidance and virtue which they disliked, and, as a result, they opposed them. Thus the Quran admirably traces the causal sequence of every evil to its origin and strikes at its very root so as to prevent all possibility of recurrence.
The words, we will not remain content with one kind of food, contain a threat and are full of arrogance. If the Israelites had meant simply to express a wish, the words would have been "we are unable to remain content with one kind of food," and not as they stand in the Quran. The Bible gives a vivid picture of their insolent and almost rebellious attitude on this occasion (Num. 11:5-15).
The words یقتلون النبیین translated in the verse as "would kill the Prophets" do not mean that the Israelites actually killed the Prophets, because, up to the time of Moses, no Prophet is known to have been slain by them. As a matter of fact, Moses is the first Prophet who was sent to the Israelites as a nation. Thus Moses and his brother, Aaron, are the only persons to whom the words can be applied; but obviously these two Prophets were not killed by the Israelites, although the latter often opposed them and were sometimes even bent upon killing them (Exod. 17:4). Hence, the word قتل in the verse cannot possibly mean actual killing. Its only meaning here is that they severely opposed the Prophets and were even prepared to kill them. This interpretation finds corroboration not only in Arabic lexicons, for which see Important Words, but the Quran itself supports it in a number of verses where the word قتل has been used undoubtedly, not in the sense of actual killing but in that of attempting to kill or intending to kill (3:22 and 40:29). Bukhari also relates a tradition to the effect that once certain hot-headed Quraish youths brutally assaulted the Holy Prophet in the precincts of the Ka‘bah, whereupon Abu Bakr rushed to his rescue, saying, اتقتلون رجلا ان یقول ربی الله "Do you kill a man because he says Allah is his Lord and Master?" (chapter on Tafsir). In this hadith the word قتل is clearly used in the sense of attempting to kill or intending to kill and not actual killing.
It will not be out of place to point out here that the purport of verse 2:59 discussed above is altogether different from the one under comment. Though in both of them God apparently orders the Israelites to go to some habitation, yet the meaning is entirely different, rather quite the opposite in each case. As a matter of fact, whereas in verse 2:59 God Himself willingly commands the Israelites to go to some habitation, His ordering them to "go down into a town" in the verse under comment is expressive of definite displeasure and anger. In the previous verse the قریة or habitation meant only a habitation found in the desert by going into which the Israelites did not leave the free desert life but rather combined it with the facilities of a habitation. On the contrary, by "going down into" a مصر i.e. a town or city as mentioned in the verse under comment, they altogether abandoned the desert life and adopted a life of ease, as is led in towns and cities. Hence the difference. This is why the Quran uses the simple word ادخلوا i.e. "enter" in 2:59 and the word اھبطوا i.e. "go down", a term expressive of decline, in the verse under comment. Similarly, whereas in verse 2:59 the Quran follows up the commandment with the words eat therefrom plentifully wherever you like, in the present verse the commandment is followed by the words and they were smitten with abasement and destitution. The difference is apparent. The former expression is indicative of the freedom of life in the desert, and the latter of the suffocating atmosphere and mental slavery of towns and cities.
a
3:113.
b
2:91; 3:113; 5:61.
c
2:88; 3:22, 113, 184; 5:71.
57
قَتْل (Qatl) 这词除了它的主要意义为实际杀死之外, 还有企图或打算杀死; 拷打; 诅咒; 与之无关以及抵销事物的坏影响; 而词语 يَقْتُلُوْنَ النَّبِيّٖنَ (yaqtulunan-Nabiyyin) 并不含意为古以色列人实际上杀害了那些先知, 因为直到穆撒那时期, 并不知道有先知曾被他们杀害。事实上, 穆撒是第一位先知被送往作为民族的古以色列人那里去的。这些话只有他和他的兄弟哈融 (哈伦) 用得上, 但很明显他们没有被古以色列人杀死, 尽管他们有时候曾一心想把他们俩兄弟杀死 («出埃及记»17:4)。因此 قَتْل (Qatl) 这词在本节经文中不能解释为 “真正杀死”。它只能含意为他们极端反对先知, 如果他们能够的话, 他们想把他们俩兄弟杀死。请参考3:22和40:29。
a
3:113.
b
2:91; 3:113; 5:61.
c
2:88; 3:22, 113, 184; 5:71.
68
Important Words:
فومھا (its wheat). فوم means: (1) wheat; (2) any corn suitable for making bread; (3) garlic; (4) chick-pea (Aqrab).
مصر (a town) means:(1) a town or a city; (2) the frontier between two countries; (3) the thing that intervenes between two things (Aqrab).
یقتلون (would kill) is derived from قتل i.e. he killed. The infinitive means: (1) killing with a sword or with a stone or with poison or by any other means; (2) attempting to kill; (3) making up the mind to kill; (4) boycotting or cutting off all connections; (5) killing one’s carnal desires; (6) weakening the strength of a thing, as alcohol is "killed" with the addition of water, or hunger is "killed" with food, etc.; (7) humbling a person completely; (8) rendering a person like unto one killed either physically or morally or spiritually; (9) acquiring complete and certain knowledge about a thing; and (10) cursing a person or thing (Aqrab, Mufradat & Lisan)
Commentary:
In this verse another instance is cited to show how the Israelites made no effort to turn the favours of God to good account. When they were in the desert, God sent them Manna and Salwa. But soon after this they began to exhibit discontent with one kind of food and to clamour for a variety of grain, onions, salad and green-stuff (Num. 11:5-11). It may be noted that both Manna and Salwa taken together were considered one kind of food as they were taken continuously for a long time. It is further learnt from the Bible that the supply of Salwa was discontinued after a while and the Israelites were thus left to live on Manna alone (Num. 11:6). As the demand was not based on a right understanding of the wisdom of God Who wanted the Israelites to breathe the free air of the desert for a time, they met with disgrace and drew upon themselves the wrath of God.
God’s displeasure with the Israelites was not due to their demand for other food. The real cause lay elsewhere. Having lived for a long time in bondage and a state of dependence, they had become cowardly and indolent. So God wished them to stay in the desert for sometime, living on game and wild herbs, that they might get rid of their cowardice and indolence by living an independent life in the desert. Thus revitalized, they were to be led to the Promised Land and made rulers of Palestine. The Israelites, however, failed to understand the real purpose of God or having understood it, failed to appreciate it, and foolishly insisted upon living in a town. God pointed out their error, saying that they had asked for a life of agriculture in preference to what was to lead them to sovereignty. He wanted to prepare them for rule over the Promised Land, but they hungered for husbandry. So He indignantly ordered them to go down to a town where they would get the desired things.
The Israelites deserved punishment, because their impatience was the outcome of a want of faith in the promise of God. This lack of faith in God was due to their opposition to His Prophets and, disbelief in His Signs, and they opposed the Prophets because they were transgressors and evildoers. The Prophets invited them to guidance and virtue which they disliked, and, as a result, they opposed them. Thus the Quran admirably traces the causal sequence of every evil to its origin and strikes at its very root so as to prevent all possibility of recurrence.
The words, we will not remain content with one kind of food, contain a threat and are full of arrogance. If the Israelites had meant simply to express a wish, the words would have been "we are unable to remain content with one kind of food," and not as they stand in the Quran. The Bible gives a vivid picture of their insolent and almost rebellious attitude on this occasion (Num. 11:5-15).
The words یقتلون النبیین translated in the verse as "would kill the Prophets" do not mean that the Israelites actually killed the Prophets, because, up to the time of Moses, no Prophet is known to have been slain by them. As a matter of fact, Moses is the first Prophet who was sent to the Israelites as a nation. Thus Moses and his brother, Aaron, are the only persons to whom the words can be applied; but obviously these two Prophets were not killed by the Israelites, although the latter often opposed them and were sometimes even bent upon killing them (Exod. 17:4). Hence, the word قتل in the verse cannot possibly mean actual killing. Its only meaning here is that they severely opposed the Prophets and were even prepared to kill them. This interpretation finds corroboration not only in Arabic lexicons, for which see Important Words, but the Quran itself supports it in a number of verses where the word قتل has been used undoubtedly, not in the sense of actual killing but in that of attempting to kill or intending to kill (3:22 and 40:29). Bukhari also relates a tradition to the effect that once certain hot-headed Quraish youths brutally assaulted the Holy Prophet in the precincts of the Ka‘bah, whereupon Abu Bakr rushed to his rescue, saying, اتقتلون رجلا ان یقول ربی الله "Do you kill a man because he says Allah is his Lord and Master?" (chapter on Tafsir). In this hadith the word قتل is clearly used in the sense of attempting to kill or intending to kill and not actual killing.
It will not be out of place to point out here that the purport of verse 2:59 discussed above is altogether different from the one under comment. Though in both of them God apparently orders the Israelites to go to some habitation, yet the meaning is entirely different, rather quite the opposite in each case. As a matter of fact, whereas in verse 2:59 God Himself willingly commands the Israelites to go to some habitation, His ordering them to "go down into a town" in the verse under comment is expressive of definite displeasure and anger. In the previous verse the قریة or habitation meant only a habitation found in the desert by going into which the Israelites did not leave the free desert life but rather combined it with the facilities of a habitation. On the contrary, by "going down into" a مصر i.e. a town or city as mentioned in the verse under comment, they altogether abandoned the desert life and adopted a life of ease, as is led in towns and cities. Hence the difference. This is why the Quran uses the simple word ادخلوا i.e. "enter" in 2:59 and the word اھبطوا i.e. "go down", a term expressive of decline, in the verse under comment. Similarly, whereas in verse 2:59 the Quran follows up the commandment with the words eat therefrom plentifully wherever you like, in the present verse the commandment is followed by the words and they were smitten with abasement and destitution. The difference is apparent. The former expression is indicative of the freedom of life in the desert, and the latter of the suffocating atmosphere and mental slavery of towns and cities.
a
3:113.
b
2:91; 3:113; 5:61.
c
2:88; 3:22, 113, 184; 5:71.
102
Having lived for a long time in bondage and in a state of dependence, the Israelites had become cowardly and indolent. So God intended them to stay in the desert for some time and to live on game and wild herbs in order that they might shed their cowardice and indolence by living an independent life in the desert. Thus revitalized, they were to be led to the Promised Land and made rulers of Palestine. The Israelites, however, failed to understand the real purpose of God or, having understood it, failed to appreciate it and foolishly insisted upon living in a town. God wanted to prepare them for rule over the Promised Land but those unfortunate people hungered after husbandry. So they were told to go down to a town where they would get the desired things.
103
The word Qatl besides its primary sense of actual killing means, to attempt or intend to kill; to beat; to curse; to have nothing to do with, and to neutralise the blighting influence of a thing; and the expression Yaqtulunan- Nabiyyin does not signify that the Israelites actually slew the Prophets, because, up to the time of Moses no Prophet is known to have been slain by them. As a matter of fact, Moses was the first Prophet who was sent to the Israelites as a nation. He and his brother, Aaron, are the only persons to whom these words can be applied, but obviously they were not killed by the Israelites, although they were sometimes bent upon killing them (Exod. 17: 4). Hence, the word Qatl in the verse cannot possibly mean "actual killing." It only means that they severely opposed the Prophets and would have killed them if they could. See also 3:22 & 40:29.
اَلۡحَجُّ اَشۡہُرٌ مَّعۡلُوۡمٰتٌ ۚ فَمَنۡ فَرَضَ فِیۡہِنَّ الۡحَجَّ فَلَا رَفَثَ وَلَا فُسُوۡقَ وَلَا جِدَالَ فِی الۡحَجِّ ۗ وَمَا تَفۡعَلُوۡا مِنۡ خَیۡرٍ یَّعۡلَمۡہُ اللّٰہُ ۗ وَتَزَوَّدُوۡا فَاِنَّ خَیۡرَ الزَّادِ التَّقۡوٰی ۚ وَاتَّقُوۡنِ یٰۤاُولِی الۡاَلۡبٰبِ
2:190; 9:36.
3:98; 22:28.
Rafath includes all foul, immodest and lewd talk as well as acts relating to sex. Fusuq signifies transgression against the laws of God and disobedience of lawful authority, whether spiritual or temporal. And Jidal means, disputes and quarrels with co-travellers, companions and neighbours.
2:190; 9:36.
3:98; 22:28.
Important Words:
رفث (foul talk) means, foul, immodest or lewd talk or speech in relation to women. It also signifies acts leading to and including coition (Mufradat & Lane). See also 2:188.
فسوق (transgression) is the same as فسق for which see note on 2:27.
جدال (quarrelling) is derived from جدل. They say جدل الحبل i.e. he twisted the rope. جدل الرجل means, his dispute or quarrel became intensified. جادله means, he disputed or quarrelled with him. Thus جدال means, dispute or quarrel, or the use of strong and hot words (Aqrab).
تزودوا (furnish yourselves) and الزاد (provision) are both derived from زاد with واو as the central root letter. They say زادالرجلi.e. the man prepared a provision for himself for a journey, etc. تزود means, he took for himself a provision. تزودمن الامیرکتابا الی عامله means, he took from the caliph a letter of introduction to his governor so that the latter might afford him his assistance as and when required. الزاد means, any provision, etc. taken when proceeding on a journey (Aqrab). The word is used of extra store meant for future use (Mufradat).
Commentary:
The clause the months of the Hajj are well known is intended to hint that, in the matter of the time of Pilgrimage, the Quran gives no new commandment. The established custom is the right one, being rightly retained by the Arabs from the days of Abraham and Ishmael. The three lunar months during which one may formally undertake the Pilgrimage and enter into the state of Ihram are Shawwal, Dhul-Qa‘dah and the first ten days of Dhul-Hijjah (Bukhari).
The clause, there is to be no foul talk, nor any transgression nor any quarrelling during the Pilgrimage, does not mean that such acts are permissible at other times but that these are necessary conditions for the completion of Pilgrimage, which would be like a soulless body if one indulged in such things while undertaking it. Another purpose underlying these injunctions is that a person should abstain from them particularly during the period of Pilgrimage so that it might become easy for him to shun these things at other times as well. The three vices selected are typical of what should be scrupulously avoided in a religious gathering like that at the Pilgrimage. رفث (rafath) stands for all foul, immodest and lewd talk as well as acts relating to sex. فسوق (fusuq) stands for transgression against the laws of God and disobedience of lawful authority, whether spiritual or temporal. And جدال (jidal) stands for disputes and quarrels with co-travellers, companions and neighbours.
The clause, And furnish yourselves with necessary provisions, does not only refer to the preparation which one makes for an ordinary journey which is necessary in its own way, but also to the preparation which one has to make for a spiritual journey. In this sense the clause would signify "provide yourselves with piety and righteousness;" and in order to emphasize the latter kind of provision, the Quran fittingly adds, and surely the best provision is righteousness. But ordinary provision is also necessary; for, if a man does not take necessary provisions with him, he will be certainly put to great inconvenience and hardship on the way and will have to beg of others for help and both these things are detrimental to the noble object underlying Pilgrimage.
a
2:190; 9:36.
b
3:98; 22:28.
139
رَفَثْ (Rafath) 包括各种下流、不正派和淫猥的谈吐以及关于一些性行为。فُسُوْق (Fusuq) 意味着违反安拉的法规和对法权当局的不服从, 不论属于精神的或世俗的。而 جِدَال (Jidal) 是指同路人、伙伴和邻居的纷争与吵架。
a
2:190; 9:36.
b
3:98; 22:28.
204
Important Words:
رفث (foul talk) means, foul, immodest or lewd talk or speech in relation to women. It also signifies acts leading to and including coition (Mufradat & Lane). See also 2:188.
فسوق (transgression) is the same as فسق for which see note on 2:27.
جدال (quarrelling) is derived from جدل. They say جدل الحبل i.e. he twisted the rope. جدل الرجل means, his dispute or quarrel became intensified. جادله means, he disputed or quarrelled with him. Thus جدال means, dispute or quarrel, or the use of strong and hot words (Aqrab).
تزودوا (furnish yourselves) and الزاد (provision) are both derived from زاد with واو as the central root letter. They say زادالرجلi.e. the man prepared a provision for himself for a journey, etc. تزود means, he took for himself a provision. تزودمن الامیرکتابا الی عامله means, he took from the caliph a letter of introduction to his governor so that the latter might afford him his assistance as and when required. الزاد means, any provision, etc. taken when proceeding on a journey (Aqrab). The word is used of extra store meant for future use (Mufradat).
Commentary:
The clause the months of the Hajj are well known is intended to hint that, in the matter of the time of Pilgrimage, the Quran gives no new commandment. The established custom is the right one, being rightly retained by the Arabs from the days of Abraham and Ishmael. The three lunar months during which one may formally undertake the Pilgrimage and enter into the state of Ihram are Shawwal, Dhul-Qa‘dah and the first ten days of Dhul-Hijjah (Bukhari).
The clause, there is to be no foul talk, nor any transgression nor any quarrelling during the Pilgrimage, does not mean that such acts are permissible at other times but that these are necessary conditions for the completion of Pilgrimage, which would be like a soulless body if one indulged in such things while undertaking it. Another purpose underlying these injunctions is that a person should abstain from them particularly during the period of Pilgrimage so that it might become easy for him to shun these things at other times as well. The three vices selected are typical of what should be scrupulously avoided in a religious gathering like that at the Pilgrimage. رفث (rafath) stands for all foul, immodest and lewd talk as well as acts relating to sex. فسوق (fusuq) stands for transgression against the laws of God and disobedience of lawful authority, whether spiritual or temporal. And جدال (jidal) stands for disputes and quarrels with co-travellers, companions and neighbours.
The clause, And furnish yourselves with necessary provisions, does not only refer to the preparation which one makes for an ordinary journey which is necessary in its own way, but also to the preparation which one has to make for a spiritual journey. In this sense the clause would signify "provide yourselves with piety and righteousness;" and in order to emphasize the latter kind of provision, the Quran fittingly adds, and surely the best provision is righteousness. But ordinary provision is also necessary; for, if a man does not take necessary provisions with him, he will be certainly put to great inconvenience and hardship on the way and will have to beg of others for help and both these things are detrimental to the noble object underlying Pilgrimage.
a
2:190; 9:36.
b
3:98; 22:28.
233
Rafath includes all foul, immodest and lewd talk as well as acts relating to sex. Fusuq signifies transgression against the laws of God and disobedience of lawful authority, whether spiritual or temporal. And Jidal means, disputes and quarrels with co-travellers, companions and neighbours.
وَلَوۡ اَنَّہُمۡ اٰمَنُوۡا وَاتَّقَوۡا لَمَثُوۡبَۃٌ مِّنۡ عِنۡدِ اللّٰہِ خَیۡرٌ ۖ لَّوۡ کَانُوۡا یَعۡلَمُوۡنَ
3:180; 5:66-67.
3:180; 5:66-67.
3:180; 5:66, 67.
Important Words:
مثوبة (reward) is, like ثواب (with which it is synonymous), derived from ثاب which means, he returned, or he returned to a good condition. مثوبة and ثواب mean, requital or reward of good or bad deeds. Generally, they are used in the sense of a reward of good deeds (Aqrab).
Commentary:
If the Jews had possessed true faith in God and had acted in His fear, they would not have devoted all their energies to the acquisition of worldly gains but would have sought the good of the Hereafter. They have, however, been seeking the advantage of the present life only and have neglected the Hereafter altogether, which shows that they are utterly lacking in true faith and are not leading righteous lives.
a
3:180; 5:66-67.
a
3:180; 5:66, 67.
110
Important Words:
مثوبة (reward) is, like ثواب (with which it is synonymous), derived from ثاب which means, he returned, or he returned to a good condition. مثوبة and ثواب mean, requital or reward of good or bad deeds. Generally, they are used in the sense of a reward of good deeds (Aqrab).
Commentary:
If the Jews had possessed true faith in God and had acted in His fear, they would not have devoted all their energies to the acquisition of worldly gains but would have sought the good of the Hereafter. They have, however, been seeking the advantage of the present life only and have neglected the Hereafter altogether, which shows that they are utterly lacking in true faith and are not leading righteous lives.
a
3:180; 5:66-67.
مَّا یَوَدُّ الَّذِیۡنَ کَفَرُوۡا مِنۡ اَہۡلِ الۡکِتٰبِ وَلَا الۡمُشۡرِکِیۡنَ اَنۡ یُّنَزَّلَ عَلَیۡکُمۡ مِّنۡ خَیۡرٍ مِّنۡ رَّبِّکُمۡ ۗ وَاللّٰہُ یَخۡتَصُّ بِرَحۡمَتِہٖ مَنۡ یَّشَآءُ ۚ وَاللّٰہُ ذُو الۡفَضۡلِ الۡعَظِیۡمِ
3:75.
3:75.
3:75.
Commentary:
The People of the Book and the pagan tribes of Arabia grudged the favours which were being bestowed by God on Muslims. In reply to this, God says that He, being the Lord and Master of the entire Universe, could not forever bind Himself to one people but chose for His bounty whomsoever He pleased from among His creation. But now when He has chosen the Muslims, He is not confining His favours to one people only. The mission of the Holy Prophet being for all mankind, the call to come and receive God’s favours is universal and hence no people need now show envy or grudge. With the advent of Islam the era of الفضل العظیم i.e. "exceeding (viz. universal) bounty" had dawned.
c
3:75.
a
3:75.
112
Commentary:
The People of the Book and the pagan tribes of Arabia grudged the favours which were being bestowed by God on Muslims. In reply to this, God says that He, being the Lord and Master of the entire Universe, could not forever bind Himself to one people but chose for His bounty whomsoever He pleased from among His creation. But now when He has chosen the Muslims, He is not confining His favours to one people only. The mission of the Holy Prophet being for all mankind, the call to come and receive God’s favours is universal and hence no people need now show envy or grudge. With the advent of Islam the era of الفضل العظیم i.e. "exceeding (viz. universal) bounty" had dawned.
a
3:75.
۞ 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
وَاَقِیۡمُوا الصَّلٰوۃَ وَاٰتُوا الزَّکٰوۃَ ۚ وَمَا تُقَدِّمُوۡا لِاَنۡفُسِکُمۡ مِّنۡ خَیۡرٍ تَجِدُوۡہُ عِنۡدَ اللّٰہِ ۗ اِنَّ اللّٰہَ بِمَا تَعۡمَلُوۡنَ بَصِیۡرٌ
See 2:4.
73:21.
Commentary:
When one is subjected to continued persecution, one is apt to lose patience. But Muslims were enjoined to meekly endure troubles and torments, and in order to be able to do so, they were ordered to resort to الصلوة (prayers to God) on the one hand, and to الزکوة (helping mankind) on the other. By so doing, they would acquire from God the power to endure.
The words, whatever good you send on before you for yourselves, you shall find it with Allah, contain a deep spiritual truth. Whatever good man does is kept in store for him by Allah and nothing is lost. Every good work is like a seed which may lie hidden from the public view but is all the time a large tree in the making. So the Muslims should not think that their Prayers and their Zakah will be lost. They are sure to bring forth good fruit sooner or later.
c
2:4.
d
73:21.
e
2:95; 62:7.
a
See 2:4.
b
73:21.
117
Commentary:
When one is subjected to continued persecution, one is apt to lose patience. But Muslims were enjoined to meekly endure troubles and torments, and in order to be able to do so, they were ordered to resort to الصلوة (prayers to God) on the one hand, and to الزکوة (helping mankind) on the other. By so doing, they would acquire from God the power to endure.
The words, whatever good you send on before you for yourselves, you shall find it with Allah, contain a deep spiritual truth. Whatever good man does is kept in store for him by Allah and nothing is lost. Every good work is like a seed which may lie hidden from the public view but is all the time a large tree in the making. So the Muslims should not think that their Prayers and their Zakah will be lost. They are sure to bring forth good fruit sooner or later.
d
See 2:4.
e
73:21.