ROOT ا ب و
99 verses • 47 derived words
📖 Lane's Lexicon
Classical definitions for root ابو
Morphology Tree
Lemmas and their derived stems found in the Quran.
آبَاء
Lemmaاَبٌ
Lemmaاَبَوَانۡ
LemmaOther / General
Occurrences in Quran
Found 99 verses containing words derived from "A b w".
اَمۡ کُنۡتُمۡ شُہَدَآءَ اِذۡ حَضَرَ یَعۡقُوۡبَ الۡمَوۡتُ اِذۡ قَالَ لِبَنِیۡہِ مَا تَعۡبُدُوۡنَ مِنۡۢ بَعۡدِیۡ قَالُوۡا نَعۡبُدُ اِلٰہَکَ وَاِلٰہَ اٰبَآئِکَ اِبۡرٰہٖمَ وَاِسۡمٰعِیۡلَ وَاِسۡحٰقَ اِلٰہًا وّٰحِدًا وَّنَحۡنُ لَہٗ مُسۡلِمُوۡنَ
Ishmael was the uncle of Jacob, and yet the children of Jacob here include Ishmael among their "fathers" which shows that the word Ab (father) also sometimes means uncle. Jacob’s sons, the Israelites, held Ishmael in great respect.
In corroboration of what the Qur’an says about Jacob’s will to his sons, Rodwell quotes the following from Midrash Rabbah: "At the time when our father Jacob quitted this world, he summoned his twelve sons and said to them, 'Hearken to your father Israel' (Gen. 49: 2). Have you any doubts in your hearts concerning the Holy One, blessed be He. They said, Hear, O Israel, our father, as there is no doubt in thy heart, so neither is there in ours. For the Lord is our God, and He is one" (Mider. Rabbah on Gen. par. 98, & on Deut. par. 2). Compare also Targ. Jer. on Deut. 6: 4.
Important Words:
اله (God) is derived from اله (alaha) which means, he worshipped. So اله means, a thing or person or being worshipped, whether true or false; a deity (Aqrab).
Commentary:
Jacob or Israel was the son of Isaac who was a son of Abraham. Thus Ishmael was the uncle of Jacob, and yet the children of Jacob here include Ishmael among their "fathers" which proves two things: firstly, that the word اب (father) is also used of uncle; and secondly, that up to the time of Jacob’s sons, Ishmael was held in due respect by the Israelites. Nay, the children of Israel mention the name of Ishmael even before that of their own grandfather, Isaac, and do not mention any other son of Abraham.
The words, were you present when death came to Jacob, signify that the principle of submission to the will of God is not an innovation introduced by Islam, but has been recognized by good and righteous people in all times and even Israel, the founder of the Jewish tribes, acted upon that principle, so much so, that the only thought that came to his mind when death approached him was to enjoin the same noble principle upon his children. Israel wished his sons to become pious Muslims; will not the Jews of the Holy Prophet’s day act upon that principle?
In corroboration of what the Quran says about Jacob’s will to his sons, Rodwell quotes the following from Midrash Rabbah: "At the time when our father Jacob quitted this world, he summoned his twelve sons and said to them, Hearken to your father Israel (Gen. 49:2). Have you any doubts in your hearts concerning the Holy One, blessed be He. They said, Hear, o Israel, our father, as there is no doubt in thy heart, so neither is there in ours. For the Lord is our God, and He is One" (Midr. Rabbah on Gen. par. 98, and on Deut. par. 2). Compare also Targ. Jer. on Deut. 6:4.
140
Important Words:
اله (God) is derived from اله (alaha) which means, he worshipped. So اله means, a thing or person or being worshipped, whether true or false; a deity (Aqrab).
Commentary:
Jacob or Israel was the son of Isaac who was a son of Abraham. Thus Ishmael was the uncle of Jacob, and yet the children of Jacob here include Ishmael among their "fathers" which proves two things: firstly, that the word اب (father) is also used of uncle; and secondly, that up to the time of Jacob’s sons, Ishmael was held in due respect by the Israelites. Nay, the children of Israel mention the name of Ishmael even before that of their own grandfather, Isaac, and do not mention any other son of Abraham.
The words, were you present when death came to Jacob, signify that the principle of submission to the will of God is not an innovation introduced by Islam, but has been recognized by good and righteous people in all times and even Israel, the founder of the Jewish tribes, acted upon that principle, so much so, that the only thought that came to his mind when death approached him was to enjoin the same noble principle upon his children. Israel wished his sons to become pious Muslims; will not the Jews of the Holy Prophet’s day act upon that principle?
In corroboration of what the Quran says about Jacob’s will to his sons, Rodwell quotes the following from Midrash Rabbah: "At the time when our father Jacob quitted this world, he summoned his twelve sons and said to them, Hearken to your father Israel (Gen. 49:2). Have you any doubts in your hearts concerning the Holy One, blessed be He. They said, Hear, o Israel, our father, as there is no doubt in thy heart, so neither is there in ours. For the Lord is our God, and He is One" (Midr. Rabbah on Gen. par. 98, and on Deut. par. 2). Compare also Targ. Jer. on Deut. 6:4.
150
Ishmael was the uncle of Jacob, and yet the children of Jacob here include Ishmael among their "fathers" which shows that the word Ab (father) also sometimes means uncle. Jacob’s sons, the Israelites, held Ishmael in great respect.
151
In corroboration of what the Qur’an says about Jacob’s will to his sons, Rodwell quotes the following from Midrash Rabbah: "At the time when our father Jacob quitted this world, he summoned his twelve sons and said to them, 'Hearken to your father Israel' (Gen. 49: 2). Have you any doubts in your hearts concerning the Holy One, blessed be He. They said, Hear, O Israel, our father, as there is no doubt in thy heart, so neither is there in ours. For the Lord is our God, and He is one" (Mider. Rabbah on Gen. par. 98, & on Deut. par. 2). Compare also Targ. Jer. on Deut. 6: 4.
وَاِذَا قِیۡلَ لَہُمُ اتَّبِعُوۡا مَاۤ اَنۡزَلَ اللّٰہُ قَالُوۡا بَلۡ نَتَّبِعُ مَاۤ اَلۡفَیۡنَا عَلَیۡہِ اٰبَآءَنَاۤ ۗ اَوَلَوۡ کَانَ اٰبَآؤُہُمۡ لَا یَعۡقِلُوۡنَ شَیۡـًٔا وَّلَا یَہۡتَدُوۡنَ
5:105; 10:79; 21:53, 54; 31:22.
قرآنی الفاظ اَوَلَوْ ہیں۔ چونکہ عربی میں سوال کا لفظ بہرحال پہلے آتا ہے اور اردو میں عطف کے بعد۔ اس کا ترجمہ یہ ہوگا ’’اور کیا اگر‘‘ مگر اردو میں ’’اور کیا اگر‘‘ یہ تینوں لفظ جمع نہیں ہوتے بلکہ ایسے موقع پر ’’اورکیا‘‘ کی جگہ ایک لفظ ’’بھلا‘‘ کا بولا جاتا ہے۔ پس وہی لفظ اس جگہ استعمال کیا گیا ہے۔
5:105; 10:79; 21:53, 54; 31:22.
It is indeed strange, but nevertheless regrettable, that in matters of religion which so deeply concern his eternal life man is often content to follow blindly in the footsteps of his elders. But in worldly matters where only the interests of this life are at stake, and that too partially, he takes meticulous care to see that he adopts the right course, and does not blindly follow others.
5:105; 10:79; 21:53, 54; 31:22.
Commentary:
It is indeed strange, but nevertheless a hard fact, that in matters of religion which so deeply concern man, he is often content to follow blindly the footsteps of his forefathers and does not even care to satisfy himself that his forefathers were wise and well-guided people. On the other hand, in worldly matters where only the interests of this life are at stake, and that too partially, he often takes meticulous care to see that he adopts the right course and does not blindly follow others.
e
5:105; 10:79; 21:53, 54; 31:22.
2
قرآنی الفاظ اَوَلَوْ ہیں۔ چونکہ عربی میں سوال کا لفظ بہرحال پہلے آتا ہے اور اردو میں عطف کے بعد۔ اس کا ترجمہ یہ ہوگا ’’اور کیا اگر‘‘ مگر اردو میں ’’اور کیا اگر‘‘ یہ تینوں لفظ جمع نہیں ہوتے بلکہ ایسے موقع پر ’’اورکیا‘‘ کی جگہ ایک لفظ ’’بھلا‘‘ کا بولا جاتا ہے۔ پس وہی لفظ اس جگہ استعمال کیا گیا ہے۔
a
5:105; 10:79; 21:53, 54; 31:22.
177
Commentary:
It is indeed strange, but nevertheless a hard fact, that in matters of religion which so deeply concern man, he is often content to follow blindly the footsteps of his forefathers and does not even care to satisfy himself that his forefathers were wise and well-guided people. On the other hand, in worldly matters where only the interests of this life are at stake, and that too partially, he often takes meticulous care to see that he adopts the right course and does not blindly follow others.
b
5:105; 10:79; 21:53, 54; 31:22.
195
It is indeed strange, but nevertheless regrettable, that in matters of religion which so deeply concern his eternal life man is often content to follow blindly in the footsteps of his elders. But in worldly matters where only the interests of this life are at stake, and that too partially, he takes meticulous care to see that he adopts the right course, and does not blindly follow others.
فَاِذَا قَضَیۡتُمۡ مَّنٰسِکَکُمۡ فَاذۡکُرُوا اللّٰہَ کَذِکۡرِکُمۡ اٰبَآءَکُمۡ اَوۡ اَشَدَّ ذِکۡرًا ۗ فَمِنَ النَّاسِ مَنۡ یَّقُوۡلُ رَبَّنَاۤ اٰتِنَا فِی الدُّنۡیَا وَمَا لَہٗ فِی الۡاٰخِرَۃِ مِنۡ خَلٰقٍ
2:129.
See 2:153.
4:135; 42:21.
2:129.
See 2:153.
4:135; 42:21.
Important Words:
فاذکروا (celebrate praises of) is derived from ذکر which means, (1) he talked of him by way of praising him; (2) he remembered him in his heart (Aqrab & Mufradat). See also 2:41, 153.
او (or) is a preposition, used to convey a number of meanings, the more important being: (1) or; (2) and; (3) nay; (4) unless; (5) until (Aqrab & Lane).
خلاق (share) means, an abundant share in what is good (Aqrab).
Commentary:
The clause, celebrate the praises of Allah as you celebrated the praises of your fathers, points to a practice of pagan Arabs who used to gather together at a certain place in Mina after the performance of the rites of Pilgrimage and glorify their forefathers by reciting poems in their praise. Muslims are here bidden to glorify God instead, and praise Him as they used to praise their forefathers, and, the words "even more than that" have been added to emphasize that God’s praises should transcend all, for the word او (or) also means, "nay". It is also possible that the word ك (as) in the expression کذکرکم (as you celebrated praises) has been used only to denote general similarity without reference to degree, and the word او (or) has been used in the sense of "and". In this case the verse would mean that though in the general manner of praise your celebration of God’s praises may resemble the praises with which you glorified your fathers, in degree it should excel it, being اشد (stronger, loftier and firmer).
Here is a good example of how the Quran, while retaining some old customs, improved upon and, spiritualised them to serve the ends of Islam.
The clause, when you have performed the acts of worship prescribed for you, celebrate the praises of Allah as you celebrated the praises of your fathers or even more than that, has yet another meaning. As the word ذکر also means 'remembering' and the word اب (father) includes mother as well (12:101), the clause may also signify that the rites of Pilgrimage, if performed in the right spirit, should fill the heart of man with such love for God as to make him always remember Him just as a child remembers his parents. This is why the Quran begins the word اذکروا with the conjunction ف meaning "so" or "then", hinting that the result of the performance of the rites of Pilgrimage should be that a pilgrim should ever after remember his Creator with the fondness displayed by a child for his parents. But this is only the first stage. With holier men God’s love should be even greater, as the verse hints in the words, or even more than that. Says the Holy Prophet, "The sign of true faith is that a believer’s love for God and His Apostle should be greater than his love for any other being or thing" (Bukhari).
The concluding clause, i.e. of men there are some who say, 'Our Lord, grant us (good things) in this world, and such a one shall have no share in the Hereafter, points to the fact that if the pilgrim confines himself to the celebration of the praises of his fathers and forgets his Creator, he would be like a person who spends all his efforts in the pursuit of this world, even his prayers being confined to search after worldly things. Such a person shall evidently have no claim to the good things of the Hereafter. It is also significant that in this clause the Quran does not use the word حسنة (good things) with the words فی الدنیا (in this world) thereby hinting that such men generally make no distinction between the good things of this world and the bad things thereof, their sole object being the things of this world, irrespective of whether they are good or bad.
As explained under Important Words, the word خلاق (share) occurring in the clause, such a one shall have no share in the Hereafter, really means, "an abundant share in what is good". So the verse would really mean not that such a person will get only a small share in the Hereafter but that, by remaining engrossed in the things of this world, he will deprive himself of a big share and will get no share at all. As the Quran has to condense vast subjects in a small space, it purposely uses words and constructions that take the smallest space but convey the vastest meaning.
a
2:129.
b
2:153.
c
4:135; 42:21.
a
2:129.
b
See 2:153.
c
4:135; 42:21.
207
Important Words:
فاذکروا (celebrate praises of) is derived from ذکر which means, (1) he talked of him by way of praising him; (2) he remembered him in his heart (Aqrab & Mufradat). See also 2:41, 153.
او (or) is a preposition, used to convey a number of meanings, the more important being: (1) or; (2) and; (3) nay; (4) unless; (5) until (Aqrab & Lane).
خلاق (share) means, an abundant share in what is good (Aqrab).
Commentary:
The clause, celebrate the praises of Allah as you celebrated the praises of your fathers, points to a practice of pagan Arabs who used to gather together at a certain place in Mina after the performance of the rites of Pilgrimage and glorify their forefathers by reciting poems in their praise. Muslims are here bidden to glorify God instead, and praise Him as they used to praise their forefathers, and, the words "even more than that" have been added to emphasize that God’s praises should transcend all, for the word او (or) also means, "nay". It is also possible that the word ك (as) in the expression کذکرکم (as you celebrated praises) has been used only to denote general similarity without reference to degree, and the word او (or) has been used in the sense of "and". In this case the verse would mean that though in the general manner of praise your celebration of God’s praises may resemble the praises with which you glorified your fathers, in degree it should excel it, being اشد (stronger, loftier and firmer).
Here is a good example of how the Quran, while retaining some old customs, improved upon and, spiritualised them to serve the ends of Islam.
The clause, when you have performed the acts of worship prescribed for you, celebrate the praises of Allah as you celebrated the praises of your fathers or even more than that, has yet another meaning. As the word ذکر also means 'remembering' and the word اب (father) includes mother as well (12:101), the clause may also signify that the rites of Pilgrimage, if performed in the right spirit, should fill the heart of man with such love for God as to make him always remember Him just as a child remembers his parents. This is why the Quran begins the word اذکروا with the conjunction ف meaning "so" or "then", hinting that the result of the performance of the rites of Pilgrimage should be that a pilgrim should ever after remember his Creator with the fondness displayed by a child for his parents. But this is only the first stage. With holier men God’s love should be even greater, as the verse hints in the words, or even more than that. Says the Holy Prophet, "The sign of true faith is that a believer’s love for God and His Apostle should be greater than his love for any other being or thing" (Bukhari).
The concluding clause, i.e. of men there are some who say, 'Our Lord, grant us (good things) in this world, and such a one shall have no share in the Hereafter, points to the fact that if the pilgrim confines himself to the celebration of the praises of his fathers and forgets his Creator, he would be like a person who spends all his efforts in the pursuit of this world, even his prayers being confined to search after worldly things. Such a person shall evidently have no claim to the good things of the Hereafter. It is also significant that in this clause the Quran does not use the word حسنة (good things) with the words فی الدنیا (in this world) thereby hinting that such men generally make no distinction between the good things of this world and the bad things thereof, their sole object being the things of this world, irrespective of whether they are good or bad.
As explained under Important Words, the word خلاق (share) occurring in the clause, such a one shall have no share in the Hereafter, really means, "an abundant share in what is good". So the verse would really mean not that such a person will get only a small share in the Hereafter but that, by remaining engrossed in the things of this world, he will deprive himself of a big share and will get no share at all. As the Quran has to condense vast subjects in a small space, it purposely uses words and constructions that take the smallest space but convey the vastest meaning.
b
2:129.
c
See 2:153.
d
4:135; 42:21.
یُوۡصِیۡکُمُ اللّٰہُ فِیۡۤ اَوۡلٰدِکُمۡ ۖ لِلذَّکَرِ مِثۡلُ حَظِّ الۡاُنۡثَیَیۡنِ ۚ فَاِنۡ کُنَّ نِسَآءً فَوۡقَ اثۡنَتَیۡنِ فَلَہُنَّ ثُلُثَا مَا تَرَکَ ۖ وَاِنۡ کَانَتۡ وٰحِدَۃً فَلَہَا النِّصۡفُ ۚ وَلِاَبَوَیۡہِ لِکُلِّ وٰحِدٍ مِّنۡہُمَا السُّدُسُ مِمَّا تَرَکَ اِنۡ کَانَ لَہٗ وَلَدٌ ۚ فَاِنۡ لَّمۡ یَکُنۡ لَّہٗ وَلَدٌ وَّوَرِثَہٗۤ اَبَوَاہُ فَلِاُمِّہِ الثُّلُثُ ۚ فَاِنۡ کَانَ لَہٗۤ اِخۡوَۃٌ فَلِاُمِّہِ السُّدُسُ ۚ مِنۡۢ بَعۡدِ وَصِیَّۃٍ یُّوۡصِیۡ بِہَاۤ اَوۡ دَیۡنٍ ۗ اٰبَآؤُکُمۡ وَاَبۡنَآؤُکُمۡ لَا تَدۡرُوۡنَ اَیُّہُمۡ اَقۡرَبُ لَکُمۡ نَفۡعًا ۚ فَرِیۡضَۃً مِّنَ اللّٰہِ ۗ اِنَّ اللّٰہَ کَانَ عَلِیۡمًا حَکِیۡمًا
4:177.
这节经文规定一个死者的近亲不论男女或出生的先后应得他遗产的份额。儿女、双亲、丈夫与妻子是主要继承人, 如果他们活着, 不论在什么情况下应得自己的一份, 其他有名份的亲戚只能在特殊情况下得到他们的一份。男的比女的应得的份额要多一倍, 因为他们负责维持家计 (مَعَانِی, Ma‘ani, ii.P.32)。这节经文开始时制定关于子女所得份额的比例的一般法则。一个儿子应得等于两个女儿的份额。因此, 凡是儿子和女儿都有的情况下, 就按这一法则办事。如果只有女儿而没有儿子, 经文规定把遗产的三分之二分给两个以上的女儿; 把二分之一给独生女。如果是两个女儿那应该分得多少, 经文没明确说明。但此句中用一个连接词 ف (fa, 但是), “但是如果有两个以上的女儿”, 这清楚地指出两个女儿已包括在前面 “两个女儿” 这几个字中。而且两个女人应得的份数可以在这节经文开始时所说的男女应得份数的比例中推想出来。按照那个比例, 一个儿子可得两个女儿的份数。因此, 如果有一个儿子和一个女儿, 那个儿子可得三分之二的遗产。可是, 由于一个儿子可得等于 “两个女儿” 的份额, 因此没有儿子而有两个女儿的情况下可得三分之二, 即等于经文明确说明给三个女儿相同的份额。因此, 这节经文的结构表明, 如果死者有两个女儿而没有儿子, 她们像有三个女儿的情况那样也可得三分之二的遗产。假如 «古兰经» 的这一句并不指两个女儿应得的份额, 那么, 这句用字就应该像这样, “一个男人应得一个女人两倍的份额”, 而不是像现在那样的句子。关于双亲的份额经文中谈了三种情况: (1) 如果一个人死了留下一个或几个儿女, 那么, 父母亲中每个人应得六分之一。(2) 如果一个人死后无儿女, 他的父母是惟一继承人 (死者没有妻子或丈夫), 那么, 母亲应得三分之一的财产, 其馀的三分之二归父亲所有。(3) 还有第三种情况, 实际上是第二种情况的例外。一个人死后无嗣, 他的父母亲是惟一的继承人, 但他有兄弟姐妹, 那么, 虽然他的兄弟姐妹不能继承他的财产, 但他们的存在会影响他父母亲的份额, 因为, 在这种情况下, 母亲将得六分之一 (不是像第二种情况那样得三份之一), 其余的六分之五归父亲所有。父亲在这种情况下被授予较大的份额的理由是, 父亲还要负担死者兄弟姐妹的生活。关于继承权的这一论题, 在随后的经文中继续谈下去。
4:177.
Father and mother both (Lane).
Walad means, (1) a child, son, daughter or a young one; (2) children, sons, daughters, offspring or young ones. The word is used both as singular and plural, feminine and masculine (Lane).
The verse prescribes suitable shares for all near relatives in the property of a deceased person without distinction of sex or order of birth. Children, parents, husbands and wives are the principal heirs who, if alive, get suitable shares in all circumstances, other relations having a title only in special cases. A male has been given double the share of a female because he has been made responsible for the maintenance of his family (Ma‘ani, ii. p.32). The verse begins by laying down a general rule as to the proportion of shares between sons and daughters. A son is to have as much as two daughters. So, wherever there are both sons and daughters, this rule will come in force. When, however, there are only daughters and no son, the verse allots two- thirds of the legacy to the daughters, if there are more than two of them; and one-half if there is only one. The share of daughters in case there are two is not expressly stated. But the use of the conjunction fa’ (but) in the clause, but if there be
4:177.
Important Words:
ابویه (his parents) is really ابوینه, the letter ن being dropped owing to اضافة. The word ابوین is the genitive of ابوان which is the dual form of اب which is originally ابو meaning, father or grandfather or any male ancestor or paternal uncle. ابوانliterally meaning "two fathers" signifies "father and mother" (Lane).
ولد (child) is very general in its significance meaning: (1) a child, son, daughter or a young one; (2) children, sons, daughters, offspring or young ones. Thus the word is used both as singular and plural, feminine and masculine (Lane).
Commentary:
This and the succeeding verse combined with the last verse of the Surah give the Islamic law of inheritance in a nutshell.
Islam prescribes suitable shares for all near relatives in the property of a deceased person without distinction of sex or order of birth. Children, parents, husbands and wives are the principal heirs who, if alive, get suitable shares in all circumstances, other relations having a title only in special cases. A male has been given double the share of a female because he has been made responsible for the maintenance of the family (Ma‘ani, vol. ii, p. 32).
The Islamic law of inheritance is perfect and it safeguards against all evils that result from laws prescribed by, or in vogue in, other faiths and communities. It aims at a fair distribution of wealth and equal chances of progress for all. To give the property of a deceased parent to the firstborn son only or to exclude the female members from inheritance or to disinherit parents in the presence of children has proved a veritable curse for society in many ways—moral, social and economic. The Islamic law of inheritance, reinforced by the system of Zakah (prescribed alms) and by the injunction prohibiting the giving and taking of interest, provides a golden mean between capitalism and communism—the two evil extremes of the present-day economic system.
The verse begins by laying down a general rule as to the proportion of shares between sons and daughters. A son is to have as much as two daughters. So wherever there are both sons and daughters, this rule will come in force. When, however, there are only daughters and no son, the verse allots two-thirds of the legacy to the daughters if there are more than two of them, and one-half if there is only one. The share of daughters, in case there are two, is not expressly stated. But the use of the conjunction فا (but) in the clause, but if there be females only, numbering more than two, clearly points to the fact that the share of two females has been referred to in the preceding words "two females". Moreover, the share of two females can be gathered from what has already been said in the beginning of the verse about the ratio between the shares of the males and the females. According to that ratio, a son is to get as much as two daughters. Thus, if there be one son and one daughter, the son will have two-thirds. But as the share of one son has been made equal to that of "two daughters", the latter, in case there is no son, will have two-thirds, viz., the same share as has been expressly fixed for three daughters. Thus, the very construction of the verse shows that if there be two daughters and no son, they too, as in the case of three daughters, will get two-thirds. If it had not been the object of the Quran to point to the share of two daughters in the clause, it would have been something like this, "a male shall have twice as much as a female", and not as it is now.
The above meaning is corroborated by a saying of the Holy Prophet himself. It is related that when a Companion of the Holy Prophet named Sa‘d bin Rabi‘ah died in the Battle of Uhud, leaving two daughters and one widow, his brother took away the whole property, leaving nothing for the two daughters. Thereupon the widow of Sa‘d went to the Holy Prophet and said, "Here are the two daughters of Sa‘d. Their uncle has taken the whole of his property and has left nothing for them." The Holy Prophet told her to wait till God should decide the matter. Then this verse was revealed and the Prophet called upon Sa‘d’s brother to give two-thirds of Sa‘d’s property to his two daughters and one-eighth to their mother and keep the rest for himself (Tirmidhi & Dawud).
The verse speaks of three cases as regards the share of the parents: (1) If a person dies leaving one or more children, then each of his parents shall have one-sixth; (2) If a person dies issueless and his parents are the sole heirs (there being no wife or husband of the deceased person), then the mother will have one-third of the property and the remaining two-thirds will go to the father; (3) There is a third case, which is really an exception to the second case. A man dies without issue and his parents are his sole heirs, but he has brothers or sisters. Then, although his brother or sisters will not inherit from him, yet their presence will affect the share of the parents, for, in this case, the mother will have one-sixth (instead of one-third, as in the second case) and the remaining five-sixths will go to the father. The reason why the father is awarded a larger share in this case is that the father has also to support the brothers or sisters of the deceased. The subject of inheritance is continued in the succeeding verse.
b
4:177.
314
这节经文规定一个死者的近亲不论男女或出生的先后应得他遗产的份额。儿女、双亲、丈夫与妻子是主要继承人, 如果他们活着, 不论在什么情况下应得自己的一份, 其他有名份的亲戚只能在特殊情况下得到他们的一份。男的比女的应得的份额要多一倍, 因为他们负责维持家计 (مَعَانِی, Ma‘ani, ii.P.32)。这节经文开始时制定关于子女所得份额的比例的一般法则。一个儿子应得等于两个女儿的份额。因此, 凡是儿子和女儿都有的情况下, 就按这一法则办事。如果只有女儿而没有儿子, 经文规定把遗产的三分之二分给两个以上的女儿; 把二分之一给独生女。如果是两个女儿那应该分得多少, 经文没明确说明。但此句中用一个连接词 ف (fa, 但是), “但是如果有两个以上的女儿”, 这清楚地指出两个女儿已包括在前面 “两个女儿” 这几个字中。而且两个女人应得的份数可以在这节经文开始时所说的男女应得份数的比例中推想出来。按照那个比例, 一个儿子可得两个女儿的份数。因此, 如果有一个儿子和一个女儿, 那个儿子可得三分之二的遗产。可是, 由于一个儿子可得等于 “两个女儿” 的份额, 因此没有儿子而有两个女儿的情况下可得三分之二, 即等于经文明确说明给三个女儿相同的份额。因此, 这节经文的结构表明, 如果死者有两个女儿而没有儿子, 她们像有三个女儿的情况那样也可得三分之二的遗产。假如 «古兰经» 的这一句并不指两个女儿应得的份额, 那么, 这句用字就应该像这样, “一个男人应得一个女人两倍的份额”, 而不是像现在那样的句子。关于双亲的份额经文中谈了三种情况: (1) 如果一个人死了留下一个或几个儿女, 那么, 父母亲中每个人应得六分之一。(2) 如果一个人死后无儿女, 他的父母是惟一继承人 (死者没有妻子或丈夫), 那么, 母亲应得三分之一的财产, 其馀的三分之二归父亲所有。(3) 还有第三种情况, 实际上是第二种情况的例外。一个人死后无嗣, 他的父母亲是惟一的继承人, 但他有兄弟姐妹, 那么, 虽然他的兄弟姐妹不能继承他的财产, 但他们的存在会影响他父母亲的份额, 因为, 在这种情况下, 母亲将得六分之一 (不是像第二种情况那样得三份之一), 其余的六分之五归父亲所有。父亲在这种情况下被授予较大的份额的理由是, 父亲还要负担死者兄弟姐妹的生活。关于继承权的这一论题, 在随后的经文中继续谈下去。
b
4:177.
494
Important Words:
ابویه (his parents) is really ابوینه, the letter ن being dropped owing to اضافة. The word ابوین is the genitive of ابوان which is the dual form of اب which is originally ابو meaning, father or grandfather or any male ancestor or paternal uncle. ابوانliterally meaning "two fathers" signifies "father and mother" (Lane).
ولد (child) is very general in its significance meaning: (1) a child, son, daughter or a young one; (2) children, sons, daughters, offspring or young ones. Thus the word is used both as singular and plural, feminine and masculine (Lane).
Commentary:
This and the succeeding verse combined with the last verse of the Surah give the Islamic law of inheritance in a nutshell.
Islam prescribes suitable shares for all near relatives in the property of a deceased person without distinction of sex or order of birth. Children, parents, husbands and wives are the principal heirs who, if alive, get suitable shares in all circumstances, other relations having a title only in special cases. A male has been given double the share of a female because he has been made responsible for the maintenance of the family (Ma‘ani, vol. ii, p. 32).
The Islamic law of inheritance is perfect and it safeguards against all evils that result from laws prescribed by, or in vogue in, other faiths and communities. It aims at a fair distribution of wealth and equal chances of progress for all. To give the property of a deceased parent to the firstborn son only or to exclude the female members from inheritance or to disinherit parents in the presence of children has proved a veritable curse for society in many ways—moral, social and economic. The Islamic law of inheritance, reinforced by the system of Zakah (prescribed alms) and by the injunction prohibiting the giving and taking of interest, provides a golden mean between capitalism and communism—the two evil extremes of the present-day economic system.
The verse begins by laying down a general rule as to the proportion of shares between sons and daughters. A son is to have as much as two daughters. So wherever there are both sons and daughters, this rule will come in force. When, however, there are only daughters and no son, the verse allots two-thirds of the legacy to the daughters if there are more than two of them, and one-half if there is only one. The share of daughters, in case there are two, is not expressly stated. But the use of the conjunction فا (but) in the clause, but if there be females only, numbering more than two, clearly points to the fact that the share of two females has been referred to in the preceding words "two females". Moreover, the share of two females can be gathered from what has already been said in the beginning of the verse about the ratio between the shares of the males and the females. According to that ratio, a son is to get as much as two daughters. Thus, if there be one son and one daughter, the son will have two-thirds. But as the share of one son has been made equal to that of "two daughters", the latter, in case there is no son, will have two-thirds, viz., the same share as has been expressly fixed for three daughters. Thus, the very construction of the verse shows that if there be two daughters and no son, they too, as in the case of three daughters, will get two-thirds. If it had not been the object of the Quran to point to the share of two daughters in the clause, it would have been something like this, "a male shall have twice as much as a female", and not as it is now.
The above meaning is corroborated by a saying of the Holy Prophet himself. It is related that when a Companion of the Holy Prophet named Sa‘d bin Rabi‘ah died in the Battle of Uhud, leaving two daughters and one widow, his brother took away the whole property, leaving nothing for the two daughters. Thereupon the widow of Sa‘d went to the Holy Prophet and said, "Here are the two daughters of Sa‘d. Their uncle has taken the whole of his property and has left nothing for them." The Holy Prophet told her to wait till God should decide the matter. Then this verse was revealed and the Prophet called upon Sa‘d’s brother to give two-thirds of Sa‘d’s property to his two daughters and one-eighth to their mother and keep the rest for himself (Tirmidhi & Dawud).
The verse speaks of three cases as regards the share of the parents: (1) If a person dies leaving one or more children, then each of his parents shall have one-sixth; (2) If a person dies issueless and his parents are the sole heirs (there being no wife or husband of the deceased person), then the mother will have one-third of the property and the remaining two-thirds will go to the father; (3) There is a third case, which is really an exception to the second case. A man dies without issue and his parents are his sole heirs, but he has brothers or sisters. Then, although his brother or sisters will not inherit from him, yet their presence will affect the share of the parents, for, in this case, the mother will have one-sixth (instead of one-third, as in the second case) and the remaining five-sixths will go to the father. The reason why the father is awarded a larger share in this case is that the father has also to support the brothers or sisters of the deceased. The subject of inheritance is continued in the succeeding verse.
b
4:177.
573
Father and mother both (Lane).
574
Walad means, (1) a child, son, daughter or a young one; (2) children, sons, daughters, offspring or young ones. The word is used both as singular and plural, feminine and masculine (Lane).
574A
The verse prescribes suitable shares for all near relatives in the property of a deceased person without distinction of sex or order of birth. Children, parents, husbands and wives are the principal heirs who, if alive, get suitable shares in all circumstances, other relations having a title only in special cases. A male has been given double the share of a female because he has been made responsible for the maintenance of his family (Ma‘ani, ii. p.32). The verse begins by laying down a general rule as to the proportion of shares between sons and daughters. A son is to have as much as two daughters. So, wherever there are both sons and daughters, this rule will come in force. When, however, there are only daughters and no son, the verse allots two- thirds of the legacy to the daughters, if there are more than two of them; and one-half if there is only one. The share of daughters in case there are two is not expressly stated. But the use of the conjunction fa’ (but) in the clause, but if there be
وَلَا تَنۡکِحُوۡا مَا نَکَحَ اٰبَآؤُکُمۡ مِّنَ النِّسَآءِ اِلَّا مَا قَدۡ سَلَفَ ۚ اِنَّہٗ کَانَ فٰحِشَۃً وَّمَقۡتًا وَّسَآءَ سَبِیۡلًا
The words do not mean that stepmothers taken as wives or two sisters taken in marriage together before this verse was revealed could be retained. What they mean is simply this that if such men repent and make amends, no harm will come to them for what unlawful acts they might have committed in the past. The past will be forgiven but the women whom it is unlawful to marry are to be divorced at once.
Important Words:
مقتا (hateful). مقته means, he hated him on account of a foul or evil action committed by him; he hated him with a violent hatred on account of a foul or evil action. مقتtherefore, means, violent hatred based on some foul or evil action; contracting marriage with the former wife of one’s father which is considered to be a most hateful act (Aqrab).
Commentary:
The clause, except what has already passed, does not mean that stepmothers taken as wives before this verse was revealed could be retained. What the words mean is simply that if such men repent and amend, no harm will come to them for what unlawful acts they might have committed in the past. The past will certainly be forgiven but the women whom it was unlawful to marry were to be divorced at once after this verse was revealed. In fact, the position of women in pre-Islamic Arabia was so degraded that men looked upon their stepmothers as part of the chattels, left by their fathers, with whom they did what they liked. Islam accorded to women inviolable rights which could not be infringed with impunity.
502
Important Words:
مقتا (hateful). مقته means, he hated him on account of a foul or evil action committed by him; he hated him with a violent hatred on account of a foul or evil action. مقتtherefore, means, violent hatred based on some foul or evil action; contracting marriage with the former wife of one’s father which is considered to be a most hateful act (Aqrab).
Commentary:
The clause, except what has already passed, does not mean that stepmothers taken as wives before this verse was revealed could be retained. What the words mean is simply that if such men repent and amend, no harm will come to them for what unlawful acts they might have committed in the past. The past will certainly be forgiven but the women whom it was unlawful to marry were to be divorced at once after this verse was revealed. In fact, the position of women in pre-Islamic Arabia was so degraded that men looked upon their stepmothers as part of the chattels, left by their fathers, with whom they did what they liked. Islam accorded to women inviolable rights which could not be infringed with impunity.
585
The words do not mean that stepmothers taken as wives or two sisters taken in marriage together before this verse was revealed could be retained. What they mean is simply this that if such men repent and make amends, no harm will come to them for what unlawful acts they might have committed in the past. The past will be forgiven but the women whom it is unlawful to marry are to be divorced at once.
وَاِذَا قِیۡلَ لَہُمۡ تَعَالَوۡا اِلٰی مَاۤ اَنۡزَلَ اللّٰہُ وَاِلَی الرَّسُوۡلِ قَالُوۡا حَسۡبُنَا مَا وَجَدۡنَا عَلَیۡہِ اٰبَآءَنَاۤ ۚ اَوَلَوۡ کَانَ اٰبَآؤُہُمۡ لَا یَعۡلَمُوۡنَ شَیۡـًٔا وَّلَا یَہۡتَدُوۡنَ
2:171; 31:22.
Commentary:
It is indeed strange that when science and knowledge advance and new discoveries and new inventions are made, people are quick to throw overboard worn out ideas and theories tenaciously held by their forefathers and hasten to accept and benefit by the new inventions and discoveries; but when a Prophet brings to them a new guidance from God, they refuse to accept it on the ground that it does not agree with the beliefs and ideas held by their ancestors and with their own time-honoured notions and theories. How foolish is this attitude and how lame and absurd the excuse for the rejection of divine truths! This is how the Quran exposes the untenability of the position of the rejecters of truth.
a
2:171; 31:22.
732
Commentary:
It is indeed strange that when science and knowledge advance and new discoveries and new inventions are made, people are quick to throw overboard worn out ideas and theories tenaciously held by their forefathers and hasten to accept and benefit by the new inventions and discoveries; but when a Prophet brings to them a new guidance from God, they refuse to accept it on the ground that it does not agree with the beliefs and ideas held by their ancestors and with their own time-honoured notions and theories. How foolish is this attitude and how lame and absurd the excuse for the rejection of divine truths! This is how the Quran exposes the untenability of the position of the rejecters of truth.
۞ وَاِذۡ قَالَ اِبۡرٰہِیۡمُ لِاَبِیۡہِ اٰزَرَ اَتَتَّخِذُ اَصۡنَامًا اٰلِہَۃً ۖ اِنِّیۡۤ اَرٰٮکَ وَقَوۡمَکَ فِیۡ ضَلٰلٍ مُّبِیۡنٍ
19:43.
«旧约全书» 中, 伊布拉欣父亲的名字叫特拉 (Terah) (创始记11:26), 而«新约全书»中, 他叫他拉 (Tharah) «路加» 3:34)。«塔尔姆德» (Talmud) 同意 «路加» 的意见。Eusebius (尤西比斯,) 基督教会历史之父, 称呼伊布拉欣的父亲的名字为阿他尔 (Athar) (Sale)。这表明, 即使在犹太教人之间, 对伊布拉欣的父亲的名字意见也不统一。尤西比斯一定有强力的理由, 才和 «创始记» 和 «路加» 的意见不同。正确的形式看来是阿他尔 (Athar), 后来才改成他拉 (Tharah) 或特拉 (Terah)。阿他尔 (Athar) 与 «古兰经» 中的阿泽尔 (Azar) 那一名字非常相似, 只是在发音上稍微有些不同, 两种形式几乎全同。基督教作家, 因此, 对 «古兰经» 中称伊布拉欣的父亲为阿泽尔这一点没有争论的理由。再者, 伊布拉欣的父亲在 «塔尔姆德» (Talmud) 中也叫泽拉 (Zarah), (Sale) 而泽拉 (Zarah) 和阿泽尔 (Azar) 两字约略相同。这表明 «古兰经» 中的译名要可靠得多。此外, 阿泽尔被称为伊布拉欣的 اَبْ (Ab, 父亲) (26:87), اَبْ (Ab, 父亲) 这一单词可用於父亲、伯 (叔) 父和祖父, 等等。在2:133节经文中, 伊司马仪是雅尔孤布的伯父, 也被称作是他的 اَبْ (Ab, 父亲), 但不是他真正的父亲。伊布拉欣答应过阿泽尔, 他的 اَبْ (Ab, 父亲), 向安拉祈求宽恕他, 但当他开始知道阿泽尔是安拉的敌人时, 他放弃了为他祈祷的诺言; 实际上他是被禁止这样做的 (9:114)。可是, 在14:42节经文中, 伊布拉欣为他的 وَالِدْ (Walid) 祈祷, 而 Walid 这个单词只用於父亲。这样说明, 阿泽尔 (آذَرْ, Azar) 被称作伊布拉欣的 اَبْ (Ab, 父亲), 但不是他父亲。很可能是他的姨父、舅父、姑父或叔伯。 «圣经» 中有几段也支持这一推断。伊布拉欣娶了特拉的女儿莎拉 (سَارَه, Sarah)。(«创始记» 20:12) 这说明特拉 (Terah) 不是他的父亲, 因为他不可能娶他的亲姐妹。这看来是, 他的父亲死了, 他由叔伯、舅父、姨父或姑父阿泽尔即阿他尔抚养长大, 后者把女儿莎拉嫁给了他。由於阿泽尔把伊布拉欣养大, 像是他的父亲, 后者看来曾经被叫过他的儿子, 这样就造成了把阿泽尔即阿他尔当作伊布拉欣的真父亲的这种错误。在 «塔尔姆德» 中也可看到, 阿泽尔迫害伊布拉欣, 为了打坏偶像的犯法行为把他带到国王那里, 假如阿泽尔是伊布拉欣的父亲, 他就不会对亲儿子采取这样极端的步骤了。
19:43.
In the Old Testament the name of Abraham’s father is given as Terah (Gen.11: 26) and in the New Testament (Luke, 3: 34) it is Tharah. The Talmud agrees with Luke. Eusebius, the father of ecclesiastical history, gives Athar as the name of Abraham’s father (Sale). This shows that even among the Jews there existed no unanimity of opinion about the name of Abraham’s father. Eusebius must have strong reasons for differing from Genesis and Luke. The correct form appears to be Athar, which later became changed into Tharah or Terah. Athar closely resembles the name given in the Qur’an (Azar), only there is a slight difference of pronunciation, the two forms being almost identical. Christian writers, therefore, have no reason to quarrel with the Qur’an for calling Abraham’s father by the name Azar. Moreover, Abraham’s father is also called Zarah in the Talmud (Sale), and Zarah is approximately the same as Azar. This shows that the Quranic version is much more reliable. Besides, Azar has been called Ab
19:43.
Important Words:
اب (father) which is originally ابو gives the following meanings: a father; an ancestor; a paternal uncle. ابوالمرأة means, the woman’s husband. ابوالمثوی means, master or owner of the dwelling (Lane). See also 4:12.
آزر (Azar). For the discussion of the word and the relationship of Azar with Abraham see under Commentary below. The word is considered by some to be of non-Arabic origin, though in Arabic too it has a root. Thus آزر النبات means, the vegetation grew thick and strong. آزر فلانا means, he strengthened such and such a person. آزرہ means, he sympathized with and helped him (Aqrab). The name, which thus appears to be attributive, was given to Azar probably because he helped his people in establishing idol-worship. According to Mujahid, آزر was originally the name of an idol (Qadir).
Commentary:
With this verse the Quran turns to an account of Abraham, which is given here for two reasons: Firstly, because it is the idolatrous Quraish that are chiefly addressed in these verses and they revered Abraham as their progenitor and patriarch. Hence, by giving an account of Abraham, God wants to tell the Quraish that their great ancestor Abraham was also, like the Holy Prophet, opposed to idolatry, which shows that idol-worship is a later innovation. Secondly, by means of this account, God wants to impress upon idolaters the hollow and unsound foundation on which stands the belief and practice of idol-worship and the absurd ideas which give rise to idolatry.
In the present verse Abraham is represented as arguing with his اب (father) on the subject of idolatry. This اب (father) is here named Azar. Now we have to see in what relation this man stood to Abraham and what his true name was. Christian writers have criticized the Quran on the, ground that it calls Abraham’s father by the name Azar while his true name was Terah. It is true that in Gen. 11:26 Abraham’s father is named Terah. But it is equally true that in Luke 3: 34 Abraham is called the son of Thara and not Terah. The reader should note the change not only in the first consonant but also in the vowel that follows. The Talmud also gives the name of Abraham’s father as Thara. Eusebius, the great Church historian, who has been rightly styled the Father of Ecclesiastical History, gives, in spite of Gen. 11:26 and Luke: 3: 34, which could not be unknown to him, Athar as the name of Abraham’s father (Sale). This clearly shows that even among the Jews there existed no unanimity as to the name of Abraham’s father. The fact that Eusebius, followed neither Gen. 11:26, nor Luke 3: 34 shows that he had strong reasons to differ from these two well-known sources. The correct form thus appears to be Athar, which later became changed into Thara or Terah. Now the form adopted by Eusebius is almost, if not exactly, the same as given by the Quran. If there is any difference, it is only that of pronunciation; otherwise both forms, i.e. Azar and Athar, are identical. Christians have, therefore, no reason to quarrel with the Quran for calling Abraham’s father by the name Azar. It may also be noted that Abraham’s father is also called Zarah in the Talmud (Sale) and Zarah is approximately the same as Azar. All this goes to prove not only that the Quran is not wrong on calling the father of Abraham by the name Azar, but also that the Quranic version is much more reliable than that of the Bible.
The next question we have to consider is that of the relationship in which Azar stood to Abraham. In the Quran, he has been called Abraham’s اب (ab), a word applied, as shown under Important Words, not only to father but also to uncle, grandfather, etc. who stand in the position of a father. From the Quran it appears that Azar, though called the (ab) of Abraham, was not really his father. In 9:114 we are told that Abraham had made a promise to Azar, his اب (ab), to pray to God for his forgiveness, but when he came to know that he was an enemy of God, he abstained from praying for him and was actually forbidden to do so (see also 26:87 where again Azar is spoken as the اب of Abraham). Elsewhere, however, the Quran itself records a prayer of Abraham which he offered in the last days of his life, after he had built the Ka‘bah in company with his son, Ishmael. In this prayer, Abraham prays for his father and is not forbidden to pray for him; but here Abraham does not use for him the word اب but والد (14:42). Now, as has already been stated, the word ابmay be applied to a person other than the real father, but the word والد (walid) which means "the begetter" is applied to none but the actual father. This clearly shows that Azar who has been called the اب (ab) of Abraham was a different person from the والد (walid) of Abraham. He was probably his uncle.
Some passages of the Bible also support this conclusion. We are told that Abraham married Sarah, the daughter of Terah (Gen. 20:12). This shows that Terah was not his real father, for in that case he could not marry Terah’s daughter, his own sister. It appears that his father being dead, he was brought up by his uncle, Azar or Athar, who gave him his daughter Sarah in marriage. As Azar brought up Abraham and was in the position of a father to him, the latter came to be ascribed to him as a son, and this led to the error of Azar or Athar being taken as the real father of Abraham. Again, from the Talmud it appears that Azar prosecuted Abraham and presented him before the king for the offence of breaking idols. If Azar had been the real father of Abraham, he would not have followed such a course against his own son.
e
19:43.
432
«旧约全书» 中, 伊布拉欣父亲的名字叫特拉 (Terah) (创始记11:26), 而«新约全书»中, 他叫他拉 (Tharah) «路加» 3:34)。«塔尔姆德» (Talmud) 同意 «路加» 的意见。Eusebius (尤西比斯,) 基督教会历史之父, 称呼伊布拉欣的父亲的名字为阿他尔 (Athar) (Sale)。这表明, 即使在犹太教人之间, 对伊布拉欣的父亲的名字意见也不统一。尤西比斯一定有强力的理由, 才和 «创始记» 和 «路加» 的意见不同。正确的形式看来是阿他尔 (Athar), 后来才改成他拉 (Tharah) 或特拉 (Terah)。阿他尔 (Athar) 与 «古兰经» 中的阿泽尔 (Azar) 那一名字非常相似, 只是在发音上稍微有些不同, 两种形式几乎全同。基督教作家, 因此, 对 «古兰经» 中称伊布拉欣的父亲为阿泽尔这一点没有争论的理由。再者, 伊布拉欣的父亲在 «塔尔姆德» (Talmud) 中也叫泽拉 (Zarah), (Sale) 而泽拉 (Zarah) 和阿泽尔 (Azar) 两字约略相同。这表明 «古兰经» 中的译名要可靠得多。此外, 阿泽尔被称为伊布拉欣的 اَبْ (Ab, 父亲) (26:87), اَبْ (Ab, 父亲) 这一单词可用於父亲、伯 (叔) 父和祖父, 等等。在2:133节经文中, 伊司马仪是雅尔孤布的伯父, 也被称作是他的 اَبْ (Ab, 父亲), 但不是他真正的父亲。伊布拉欣答应过阿泽尔, 他的 اَبْ (Ab, 父亲), 向安拉祈求宽恕他, 但当他开始知道阿泽尔是安拉的敌人时, 他放弃了为他祈祷的诺言; 实际上他是被禁止这样做的 (9:114)。可是, 在14:42节经文中, 伊布拉欣为他的 وَالِدْ (Walid) 祈祷, 而 Walid 这个单词只用於父亲。这样说明, 阿泽尔 (آذَرْ, Azar) 被称作伊布拉欣的 اَبْ (Ab, 父亲), 但不是他父亲。很可能是他的姨父、舅父、姑父或叔伯。 «圣经» 中有几段也支持这一推断。伊布拉欣娶了特拉的女儿莎拉 (سَارَه, Sarah)。(«创始记» 20:12) 这说明特拉 (Terah) 不是他的父亲, 因为他不可能娶他的亲姐妹。这看来是, 他的父亲死了, 他由叔伯、舅父、姨父或姑父阿泽尔即阿他尔抚养长大, 后者把女儿莎拉嫁给了他。由於阿泽尔把伊布拉欣养大, 像是他的父亲, 后者看来曾经被叫过他的儿子, 这样就造成了把阿泽尔即阿他尔当作伊布拉欣的真父亲的这种错误。在 «塔尔姆德» 中也可看到, 阿泽尔迫害伊布拉欣, 为了打坏偶像的犯法行为把他带到国王那里, 假如阿泽尔是伊布拉欣的父亲, 他就不会对亲儿子采取这样极端的步骤了。
a
19:43.
820
Important Words:
اب (father) which is originally ابو gives the following meanings: a father; an ancestor; a paternal uncle. ابوالمرأة means, the woman’s husband. ابوالمثوی means, master or owner of the dwelling (Lane). See also 4:12.
آزر (Azar). For the discussion of the word and the relationship of Azar with Abraham see under Commentary below. The word is considered by some to be of non-Arabic origin, though in Arabic too it has a root. Thus آزر النبات means, the vegetation grew thick and strong. آزر فلانا means, he strengthened such and such a person. آزرہ means, he sympathized with and helped him (Aqrab). The name, which thus appears to be attributive, was given to Azar probably because he helped his people in establishing idol-worship. According to Mujahid, آزر was originally the name of an idol (Qadir).
Commentary:
With this verse the Quran turns to an account of Abraham, which is given here for two reasons: Firstly, because it is the idolatrous Quraish that are chiefly addressed in these verses and they revered Abraham as their progenitor and patriarch. Hence, by giving an account of Abraham, God wants to tell the Quraish that their great ancestor Abraham was also, like the Holy Prophet, opposed to idolatry, which shows that idol-worship is a later innovation. Secondly, by means of this account, God wants to impress upon idolaters the hollow and unsound foundation on which stands the belief and practice of idol-worship and the absurd ideas which give rise to idolatry.
In the present verse Abraham is represented as arguing with his اب (father) on the subject of idolatry. This اب (father) is here named Azar. Now we have to see in what relation this man stood to Abraham and what his true name was. Christian writers have criticized the Quran on the, ground that it calls Abraham’s father by the name Azar while his true name was Terah. It is true that in Gen. 11:26 Abraham’s father is named Terah. But it is equally true that in Luke 3: 34 Abraham is called the son of Thara and not Terah. The reader should note the change not only in the first consonant but also in the vowel that follows. The Talmud also gives the name of Abraham’s father as Thara. Eusebius, the great Church historian, who has been rightly styled the Father of Ecclesiastical History, gives, in spite of Gen. 11:26 and Luke: 3: 34, which could not be unknown to him, Athar as the name of Abraham’s father (Sale). This clearly shows that even among the Jews there existed no unanimity as to the name of Abraham’s father. The fact that Eusebius, followed neither Gen. 11:26, nor Luke 3: 34 shows that he had strong reasons to differ from these two well-known sources. The correct form thus appears to be Athar, which later became changed into Thara or Terah. Now the form adopted by Eusebius is almost, if not exactly, the same as given by the Quran. If there is any difference, it is only that of pronunciation; otherwise both forms, i.e. Azar and Athar, are identical. Christians have, therefore, no reason to quarrel with the Quran for calling Abraham’s father by the name Azar. It may also be noted that Abraham’s father is also called Zarah in the Talmud (Sale) and Zarah is approximately the same as Azar. All this goes to prove not only that the Quran is not wrong on calling the father of Abraham by the name Azar, but also that the Quranic version is much more reliable than that of the Bible.
The next question we have to consider is that of the relationship in which Azar stood to Abraham. In the Quran, he has been called Abraham’s اب (ab), a word applied, as shown under Important Words, not only to father but also to uncle, grandfather, etc. who stand in the position of a father. From the Quran it appears that Azar, though called the (ab) of Abraham, was not really his father. In 9:114 we are told that Abraham had made a promise to Azar, his اب (ab), to pray to God for his forgiveness, but when he came to know that he was an enemy of God, he abstained from praying for him and was actually forbidden to do so (see also 26:87 where again Azar is spoken as the اب of Abraham). Elsewhere, however, the Quran itself records a prayer of Abraham which he offered in the last days of his life, after he had built the Ka‘bah in company with his son, Ishmael. In this prayer, Abraham prays for his father and is not forbidden to pray for him; but here Abraham does not use for him the word اب but والد (14:42). Now, as has already been stated, the word ابmay be applied to a person other than the real father, but the word والد (walid) which means "the begetter" is applied to none but the actual father. This clearly shows that Azar who has been called the اب (ab) of Abraham was a different person from the والد (walid) of Abraham. He was probably his uncle.
Some passages of the Bible also support this conclusion. We are told that Abraham married Sarah, the daughter of Terah (Gen. 20:12). This shows that Terah was not his real father, for in that case he could not marry Terah’s daughter, his own sister. It appears that his father being dead, he was brought up by his uncle, Azar or Athar, who gave him his daughter Sarah in marriage. As Azar brought up Abraham and was in the position of a father to him, the latter came to be ascribed to him as a son, and this led to the error of Azar or Athar being taken as the real father of Abraham. Again, from the Talmud it appears that Azar prosecuted Abraham and presented him before the king for the offence of breaking idols. If Azar had been the real father of Abraham, he would not have followed such a course against his own son.
b
19:43.
864
In the Old Testament the name of Abraham’s father is given as Terah (Gen.11: 26) and in the New Testament (Luke, 3: 34) it is Tharah. The Talmud agrees with Luke. Eusebius, the father of ecclesiastical history, gives Athar as the name of Abraham’s father (Sale). This shows that even among the Jews there existed no unanimity of opinion about the name of Abraham’s father. Eusebius must have strong reasons for differing from Genesis and Luke. The correct form appears to be Athar, which later became changed into Tharah or Terah. Athar closely resembles the name given in the Qur’an (Azar), only there is a slight difference of pronunciation, the two forms being almost identical. Christian writers, therefore, have no reason to quarrel with the Qur’an for calling Abraham’s father by the name Azar. Moreover, Abraham’s father is also called Zarah in the Talmud (Sale), and Zarah is approximately the same as Azar. This shows that the Quranic version is much more reliable. Besides, Azar has been called Ab
وَمِنۡ اٰبَآئِہِمۡ وَذُرِّیّٰتِہِمۡ وَاِخۡوٰنِہِمۡ ۖ وَاجۡتَبَیۡنٰہُمۡ وَہَدَیۡنٰہُمۡ اِلٰی صِرٰطٍ مُّسۡتَقِیۡمٍ
وَمَا قَدَرُوا اللّٰہَ حَقَّ قَدۡرِہٖۤ اِذۡ قَالُوۡا مَاۤ اَنۡزَلَ اللّٰہُ عَلٰی بَشَرٍ مِّنۡ شَیۡءٍ ۗ قُلۡ مَنۡ اَنۡزَلَ الۡکِتٰبَ الَّذِیۡ جَآءَ بِہٖ مُوۡسٰی نُوۡرًا وَّہُدًی لِّلنَّاسِ ۖ تَجۡعَلُوۡنَہٗ قَرَاطِیۡسَ تُبۡدُوۡنَہَا وَتُخۡفُوۡنَ کَثِیۡرًا ۖ وَّعُلِّمۡتُمۡ مَّا لَمۡ تَعۡلَمُوۡۤا اَنۡتُمۡ وَلَاۤ اٰبَآؤُکُمۡ ۖ قُلِ اللّٰہُ ۖ ثُمَّ ذَرۡہُمۡ فِیۡ خَوۡضِہِمۡ یَلۡعَبُوۡنَ
22:75; 39:68.
36:16; 67:10.
The words mean, "If this Book (the Qur’an) has not been revealed by God, then who embodied in it such wise and comprehensive teachings as were known neither to you nor to your forefathers—teachings which it was beyond your power to produce. Only God could give such teachings."
The Jews have been condemned here for disclosing one part of the Torah and hiding the other part which contains prophecies and Signs about the advent of the Holy Prophet.
22:75; 39:68.
36:16; 67:10.
Commentary:
In this verse, the Quran gives the reason why there are differences in religion. Differences spring from ignorance, from a lack of true estimation or true understanding, as indicated by the words, they do not make a just estimate of Allah. Indeed, those who say that Allah has not revealed anything to any man make a very poor estimate of His attributes. To hold such a view about God is highly derogatory to His glory and most inconsistent with His attributes.
As regards religious beliefs, there were two classes of men in the days of the Holy Prophet. Firstly, there were those who denied revelation in toto. According to them, there had never been any revelation in any age. Secondly, there were those who believed that there had been revelation in the past, but that God had sent no revelation in their own age. To the first-mentioned class belonged the مشرکون (Idolaters), i.e. those who ascribed co-partners to God and worshipped idols. To the second class belonged the People of the Book. As the words, Allah has not revealed anything to any man, may mean: (1) that God has never revealed anything to any man; or (2) that He has not revealed anything to any man in the present age, so they may be ascribed to both idol-worshippers and the People of the Book. In the foregoing verses only the former were addressed, but now the latter have also been included in the address.
As regards the People of the Book, the Quran specifically states: Say, Who revealed the Book which Moses brought, a light and guidance for the people, though you treat it as scraps of paper which you show while you conceal much, i.e. you have split up the Book of Moses into parts, disclosing one part and concealing the other which contains prophecies and signs of the advent of the Holy Prophet. You deny the Quranic revelation, but your own Book contains evidence of its truth which you suppress.
The above reply, however, could not satisfy the idol-worshippers who did not believe in the Book of Moses or, for that matter, in any revealed Book. The Quran, therefore, gives them a rational answer. It says, And you have been taught that which neither you nor your fathers knew. This is an argument which is meant to prove the Divine origin of the Quran rationally and is meant not merely for the People of the Book but also for idol-worshippers. The argument may be put thus: "If this Book (the Quran) has not been revealed by God, then who embodied in it such wise and comprehensive teachings as were known neither to you nor to your forefathers—teachings which it was beyond your power to produce ? Such teachings could not proceed from a man. Only God could give such teachings."
The last words of the verse, i.e. leave them to amuse themselves with their vain discourse, do not mean that you should abandon preaching to disbelievers. The meaning is, "Tell them and make clear to them that the Quran is the Word of God, for it is superhuman and full of wisdom; but if they still persist in ridiculing it, then leave them alone while they thus amuse themselves." This injunction is similar to the one given in 6:69 above.
a
22:75; 39:68.
b
36:16; 67:10.
a
22:75; 39:68.
b
36:16; 67:10.
834
Commentary:
In this verse, the Quran gives the reason why there are differences in religion. Differences spring from ignorance, from a lack of true estimation or true understanding, as indicated by the words, they do not make a just estimate of Allah. Indeed, those who say that Allah has not revealed anything to any man make a very poor estimate of His attributes. To hold such a view about God is highly derogatory to His glory and most inconsistent with His attributes.
As regards religious beliefs, there were two classes of men in the days of the Holy Prophet. Firstly, there were those who denied revelation in toto. According to them, there had never been any revelation in any age. Secondly, there were those who believed that there had been revelation in the past, but that God had sent no revelation in their own age. To the first-mentioned class belonged the مشرکون (Idolaters), i.e. those who ascribed co-partners to God and worshipped idols. To the second class belonged the People of the Book. As the words, Allah has not revealed anything to any man, may mean: (1) that God has never revealed anything to any man; or (2) that He has not revealed anything to any man in the present age, so they may be ascribed to both idol-worshippers and the People of the Book. In the foregoing verses only the former were addressed, but now the latter have also been included in the address.
As regards the People of the Book, the Quran specifically states: Say, Who revealed the Book which Moses brought, a light and guidance for the people, though you treat it as scraps of paper which you show while you conceal much, i.e. you have split up the Book of Moses into parts, disclosing one part and concealing the other which contains prophecies and signs of the advent of the Holy Prophet. You deny the Quranic revelation, but your own Book contains evidence of its truth which you suppress.
The above reply, however, could not satisfy the idol-worshippers who did not believe in the Book of Moses or, for that matter, in any revealed Book. The Quran, therefore, gives them a rational answer. It says, And you have been taught that which neither you nor your fathers knew. This is an argument which is meant to prove the Divine origin of the Quran rationally and is meant not merely for the People of the Book but also for idol-worshippers. The argument may be put thus: "If this Book (the Quran) has not been revealed by God, then who embodied in it such wise and comprehensive teachings as were known neither to you nor to your forefathers—teachings which it was beyond your power to produce ? Such teachings could not proceed from a man. Only God could give such teachings."
The last words of the verse, i.e. leave them to amuse themselves with their vain discourse, do not mean that you should abandon preaching to disbelievers. The meaning is, "Tell them and make clear to them that the Quran is the Word of God, for it is superhuman and full of wisdom; but if they still persist in ridiculing it, then leave them alone while they thus amuse themselves." This injunction is similar to the one given in 6:69 above.
a
22:75; 39:68.
b
36:16; 67:10.
873
The words mean, "If this Book (the Qur’an) has not been revealed by God, then who embodied in it such wise and comprehensive teachings as were known neither to you nor to your forefathers—teachings which it was beyond your power to produce. Only God could give such teachings."
874
The Jews have been condemned here for disclosing one part of the Torah and hiding the other part which contains prophecies and Signs about the advent of the Holy Prophet.
سَیَقُوۡلُ الَّذِیۡنَ اَشۡرَکُوۡا لَوۡ شَآءَ اللّٰہُ مَاۤ اَشۡرَکۡنَا وَلَاۤ اٰبَآؤُنَا وَلَا حَرَّمۡنَا مِنۡ شَیۡءٍ ۚ کَذٰلِکَ کَذَّبَ الَّذِیۡنَ مِنۡ قَبۡلِہِمۡ حَتّٰی ذَاقُوۡا بَاۡسَنَا ۗ قُلۡ ہَلۡ عِنۡدَکُمۡ مِّنۡ عِلۡمٍ فَتُخۡرِجُوۡہُ لَنَاۤ ۖ اِنۡ تَتَّبِعُوۡنَ اِلَّا الظَّنَّ وَاِنۡ اَنۡتُمۡ اِلَّا تَخۡرُصُوۡنَ
16:36; 43:21.
حَتّٰی کا لفظ آیت میں ہے اور اردو میں اس کا ترجمہ لفظ ’’نہ‘‘ کی زیادتی سے ہوا کرتا ہے اس لئے ہم نے اسے بڑھا دیا ہے۔
16:36; 43:21.
16:36; 43:21
Commentary:
Being unable to answer the arguments given against idolatry and man-made laws in the foregoing passage, idolatrous Arabs had recourse to the trite plea in support of idol-worship: If Allah had pleased, we could not have joined gods with Him. From this they inferred that attributing co-partners to God was in accordance with God’s will. The Quran gives four answers to this plea, two in the present verse and two in the next. The first answer is contained in the words: In like manner did those who were before them accuse God’s Messengers of falsehood, until they tasted of Our wrath. These words signify that this plea of theirs is not a new one. The same plea was brought forward by those gone before. If this plea was true, and the act of setting up associate with God was in accordance with God’s will, why should He have punished the previous peoples? The very fact that God punished them for their associating gods with Him shows that this act of theirs was not in accordance with His will. The second answer is contained in the words: Have you any knowledge? Then produce it for us. You follow nothing but mere conjecture. And you do nothing but lie, i.e. you possess no argument based on true knowledge to support your assertion; what you say is mere conjecture. The remaining two answers are given in the next verse.
e
16:36; 43:21.
4
حَتّٰی کا لفظ آیت میں ہے اور اردو میں اس کا ترجمہ لفظ ’’نہ‘‘ کی زیادتی سے ہوا کرتا ہے اس لئے ہم نے اسے بڑھا دیا ہے۔
b
16:36; 43:21
888
Commentary:
Being unable to answer the arguments given against idolatry and man-made laws in the foregoing passage, idolatrous Arabs had recourse to the trite plea in support of idol-worship: If Allah had pleased, we could not have joined gods with Him. From this they inferred that attributing co-partners to God was in accordance with God’s will. The Quran gives four answers to this plea, two in the present verse and two in the next. The first answer is contained in the words: In like manner did those who were before them accuse God’s Messengers of falsehood, until they tasted of Our wrath. These words signify that this plea of theirs is not a new one. The same plea was brought forward by those gone before. If this plea was true, and the act of setting up associate with God was in accordance with God’s will, why should He have punished the previous peoples? The very fact that God punished them for their associating gods with Him shows that this act of theirs was not in accordance with His will. The second answer is contained in the words: Have you any knowledge? Then produce it for us. You follow nothing but mere conjecture. And you do nothing but lie, i.e. you possess no argument based on true knowledge to support your assertion; what you say is mere conjecture. The remaining two answers are given in the next verse.
c
16:36; 43:21.