ROOT ذ ب ح
8 verses • 8 derived words
📖 Lane's Lexicon
Classical definitions for root ذبح
Morphology Tree
Lemmas and their derived stems found in the Quran.
Occurrences in Quran
Found 8 verses containing words derived from "d h b H".
وَاِذۡ نَجَّیۡنٰکُمۡ مِّنۡ اٰلِ فِرۡعَوۡنَ یَسُوۡمُوۡنَکُمۡ سُوۡٓءَ الۡعَذَابِ یُذَبِّحُوۡنَ اَبۡنَآءَکُمۡ وَیَسۡتَحۡیُوۡنَ نِسَآءَکُمۡ ۚ وَفِیۡ ذٰلِکُمۡ بَلَآءٌ مِّنۡ رَّبِّکُمۡ عَظِیۡمٌ
14:7; 20:81; 44:31-32.
7:128, 142; 28:5.
法老不是一个特定的君主的名称。尼罗河流域和亚历山大港的统治者们也称为法老。穆撒生于君主尔马赛思二世 (RamesesⅡ, 古埃及几个国王的姓) 在位之时, 不得不在他儿子迈伦普塔二世 (MerenptahⅡ) 在位时与古以色列人一起离开埃及。尔马赛思二世 (RamesesⅡ) 被称为残暴的君主, 而他的继承者迈伦普塔二世 (MerenptahⅡ) 则被称之为 «出埃及记» 中的法老 {Enc. Bib和Peake’s Commentary on the Bible}。
14:7; 20:81; 44:31-32.
7:128, 142; 28:5.
Pharaoh was not the name of a particular monarch. The rulers of the Nile Valley and Alexandria were called Pharaohs. Moses was born in the reign of Pharaoh Rameses II, and had to leave Egypt with the Israelites in the reign of his son, Merenptah II. Rameses II, is called the Pharaoh of the Oppression and his successor Merenptah II, the Pharaoh of Exodus (Enc. Bib. & Peake’s Commentary on the Bible).
Al (people) is derived from the verb Ala which gives the sense of returning or governing or exercising control. The word thus means, the family or party of a man, or followers of a leader, or subjects of a ruler to whom they constantly return or who governs or exercises control over them (Lane).
Pharaoh had inflicted upon the Israelites grievous torments by imposing upon them hard and disgraceful labour. He also had given orders that their sons be slain and their daughters spared. In this way he sought to destroy not only their manhood but to kill in them manly qualities.
14:7; 20:81; 44:31, 32.
7:128, 142; 28:5.
Important Words:
آل (people) is derived from the verb آل which gives the sense of returning or governing or exercising control or managing. The noun آل thus means the family or party of a man, or followers of a leader, or subjects of a ruler to whom they constantly return or who governs or exercises control over them. The word اھل is also sometimes taken to be another form of the word آل and means what the latter word means.
فرعون (Pharaoh) is not a personal name. It was the title held by the ancient kings of Egypt. Every Egyptian king is called فرعون in the Bible. The personal name of the Pharaoh with whom Moses came in contact was Rameses II (Enc. Bib.).
یذبحون (slaying) is derived from ذبح which originally means, he slaughtered or cut open the throat of an animal, or he strangled a person to death. Here the word is used in the intensified form dhabbaha to signify (1) that Pharaoh and his people treated the Israelites as mere beasts, and (2) that they killed them most mercilessly. It does not mean that they actually slaughtered them like animals, for elsewhere the Quran, speaking of the same torment, uses the word یقتلونinstead of یذبحون (7:142).
نساء (women) is the plural of مراة (a woman) from a different root. Though the word generally means "women" (Aqrab), it is also sometimes used about girls, as the Quran itself has used it (4:128). It is also used to signify "wives" (33:33).
بلاء (trial) means, anything by means of which a person may be tried; a trial whether through a blessing or an affliction (Aqrab).
Commentary:
In verses 41-48 God reminded the Israelites of His blessings in general, particularly the blessing of prophethood, which He had bestowed on them. He now calls their attention to such favours as exalted the Israelites above other peoples. The first of them to which God refers here is their deliverance from the hands of Pharaoh and his people, who inflicted on them grievous torments.
Some Christian critics have objected that whereas the Bible nowhere speaks of the sons of the Israelites being slaughtered like beasts, the Quran so speaks of them. We have shown under Important Words that the word ذبح used in the verse does not signify actual slaughtering by cutting the throat. It also means strangling to death. As Pharaoh first ordered the male children of the Israelites to be strangled at birth and later changed the decree to other methods of killing, the Quran uses a word which covers all such forms of killing. As already hinted, the word ذبح in the sense of slaughtering is used figuratively to denote that Pharaoh and his people treated the Israelites most mercilessly, killing them in whatever manner they liked. Elsewhere the Quran uses the word قتل i.e. killing in place of ذبح i.e. slaughtering (7:142).
In Exod. 1:8-22, we read: "Now there arose a new king over Egypt which knew not Joseph. And he said unto his people, Behold the people of the children of Israel are more and mightier than we: Come on, let us deal wisely with them; lest they multiply. Therefore they (the Egyptians) did set over them taskmasters to afflict them (the Israelites) with their burdens. And they built for Pharaoh treasure cities, Pithom and Rameses. But the more they afflicted them, the more they multiplied and grew. And they were grieved because of the children of Israel. And the Egyptians made the children of Israel to serve with rigour; and they made their lives bitter with hard bondage, in mortar and in brick, and in all manner of service in the field: all their service, wherein they made them serve, was with rigour. And the king of Egypt spoke to the Hebrew midwives…When ye do the office of a midwife to the Hebrew women, and see them upon the stools, if it be a son, then ye shall kill him: but if it be a daughter, then she shall live. But the midwives feared God and did not as the king of Egypt commanded them, but saved the men children alive (putting up the excuse that Israelite women being healthier than Egyptians were generally delivered before the midwives arrived). And Pharaoh charged all his people, saying, Every son that is born ye shall cast into the river, and every daughter ye shall save alive."
The above quotation clearly shows that the Pharaoh whose name was Rameses II not only inflicted upon the Israelites grievous torments by imposing upon them hard and disgraceful labour, but also gave orders to kill their sons and spare their daughters who were thus allowed to grow to womanhood and became نساء as the Quran puts it. The Quran uses the word ذبح to signify that at first the order was to strangle the Israelite male children at birth and when that order failed in its purpose, another was issued to the effect that all male children should be thrown into the river—a most merciless form of killing in which all human feelings were laid aside and the Israelites were treated as mere beasts.
As the word بلاء (trial) may mean either a trial through a favour or blessing, or a trial through grief or affliction, the words "in that" occurring in the verse may either refer to the deliverance of the Israelites from Pharaoh’s people, in which case the word trial will mean a favour or a blessing; or they refer to the slaying of the male children, in which case it would mean grief or affliction.
God reminds the Israelites in the verse how He delivered them from grievous torments and afflictions and calls their attention to the magnitude of the Sign which He showed in their favour. He tells them that He had faithfully fulfilled the promises which He had made to Abraham and had left nothing undone, but when they transgressed and made an ill return for the favours that had been bestowed upon them, He withheld His favours from them and transferred the gift of prophecy to their brethren, the children of Ishmael.
God does not say that He delivered the children of Israel from Pharaoh, but that He delivered them from "Pharaoh’s people", for it was through his people that Pharaoh inflicted torments upon them, he himself remaining in the background. Moreover, the expression آل فرعونdoes not exclude Pharaoh, for it, according to Arabic idiom, may also mean, Pharaoh and his people.
b
14:7; 20:81; 44:31-32.
c
7:128, 142; 28:5.
49
法老不是一个特定的君主的名称。尼罗河流域和亚历山大港的统治者们也称为法老。穆撒生于君主尔马赛思二世 (RamesesⅡ, 古埃及几个国王的姓) 在位之时, 不得不在他儿子迈伦普塔二世 (MerenptahⅡ) 在位时与古以色列人一起离开埃及。尔马赛思二世 (RamesesⅡ) 被称为残暴的君主, 而他的继承者迈伦普塔二世 (MerenptahⅡ) 则被称之为 «出埃及记» 中的法老 {Enc. Bib和Peake’s Commentary on the Bible}。
a
14:7; 20:81; 44:31, 32.
b
7:128, 142; 28:5.
56
Important Words:
آل (people) is derived from the verb آل which gives the sense of returning or governing or exercising control or managing. The noun آل thus means the family or party of a man, or followers of a leader, or subjects of a ruler to whom they constantly return or who governs or exercises control over them. The word اھل is also sometimes taken to be another form of the word آل and means what the latter word means.
فرعون (Pharaoh) is not a personal name. It was the title held by the ancient kings of Egypt. Every Egyptian king is called فرعون in the Bible. The personal name of the Pharaoh with whom Moses came in contact was Rameses II (Enc. Bib.).
یذبحون (slaying) is derived from ذبح which originally means, he slaughtered or cut open the throat of an animal, or he strangled a person to death. Here the word is used in the intensified form dhabbaha to signify (1) that Pharaoh and his people treated the Israelites as mere beasts, and (2) that they killed them most mercilessly. It does not mean that they actually slaughtered them like animals, for elsewhere the Quran, speaking of the same torment, uses the word یقتلونinstead of یذبحون (7:142).
نساء (women) is the plural of مراة (a woman) from a different root. Though the word generally means "women" (Aqrab), it is also sometimes used about girls, as the Quran itself has used it (4:128). It is also used to signify "wives" (33:33).
بلاء (trial) means, anything by means of which a person may be tried; a trial whether through a blessing or an affliction (Aqrab).
Commentary:
In verses 41-48 God reminded the Israelites of His blessings in general, particularly the blessing of prophethood, which He had bestowed on them. He now calls their attention to such favours as exalted the Israelites above other peoples. The first of them to which God refers here is their deliverance from the hands of Pharaoh and his people, who inflicted on them grievous torments.
Some Christian critics have objected that whereas the Bible nowhere speaks of the sons of the Israelites being slaughtered like beasts, the Quran so speaks of them. We have shown under Important Words that the word ذبح used in the verse does not signify actual slaughtering by cutting the throat. It also means strangling to death. As Pharaoh first ordered the male children of the Israelites to be strangled at birth and later changed the decree to other methods of killing, the Quran uses a word which covers all such forms of killing. As already hinted, the word ذبح in the sense of slaughtering is used figuratively to denote that Pharaoh and his people treated the Israelites most mercilessly, killing them in whatever manner they liked. Elsewhere the Quran uses the word قتل i.e. killing in place of ذبح i.e. slaughtering (7:142).
In Exod. 1:8-22, we read: "Now there arose a new king over Egypt which knew not Joseph. And he said unto his people, Behold the people of the children of Israel are more and mightier than we: Come on, let us deal wisely with them; lest they multiply. Therefore they (the Egyptians) did set over them taskmasters to afflict them (the Israelites) with their burdens. And they built for Pharaoh treasure cities, Pithom and Rameses. But the more they afflicted them, the more they multiplied and grew. And they were grieved because of the children of Israel. And the Egyptians made the children of Israel to serve with rigour; and they made their lives bitter with hard bondage, in mortar and in brick, and in all manner of service in the field: all their service, wherein they made them serve, was with rigour. And the king of Egypt spoke to the Hebrew midwives…When ye do the office of a midwife to the Hebrew women, and see them upon the stools, if it be a son, then ye shall kill him: but if it be a daughter, then she shall live. But the midwives feared God and did not as the king of Egypt commanded them, but saved the men children alive (putting up the excuse that Israelite women being healthier than Egyptians were generally delivered before the midwives arrived). And Pharaoh charged all his people, saying, Every son that is born ye shall cast into the river, and every daughter ye shall save alive."
The above quotation clearly shows that the Pharaoh whose name was Rameses II not only inflicted upon the Israelites grievous torments by imposing upon them hard and disgraceful labour, but also gave orders to kill their sons and spare their daughters who were thus allowed to grow to womanhood and became نساء as the Quran puts it. The Quran uses the word ذبح to signify that at first the order was to strangle the Israelite male children at birth and when that order failed in its purpose, another was issued to the effect that all male children should be thrown into the river—a most merciless form of killing in which all human feelings were laid aside and the Israelites were treated as mere beasts.
As the word بلاء (trial) may mean either a trial through a favour or blessing, or a trial through grief or affliction, the words "in that" occurring in the verse may either refer to the deliverance of the Israelites from Pharaoh’s people, in which case the word trial will mean a favour or a blessing; or they refer to the slaying of the male children, in which case it would mean grief or affliction.
God reminds the Israelites in the verse how He delivered them from grievous torments and afflictions and calls their attention to the magnitude of the Sign which He showed in their favour. He tells them that He had faithfully fulfilled the promises which He had made to Abraham and had left nothing undone, but when they transgressed and made an ill return for the favours that had been bestowed upon them, He withheld His favours from them and transferred the gift of prophecy to their brethren, the children of Ishmael.
God does not say that He delivered the children of Israel from Pharaoh, but that He delivered them from "Pharaoh’s people", for it was through his people that Pharaoh inflicted torments upon them, he himself remaining in the background. Moreover, the expression آل فرعونdoes not exclude Pharaoh, for it, according to Arabic idiom, may also mean, Pharaoh and his people.
b
14:7; 20:81; 44:31-32.
c
7:128, 142; 28:5.
87
Pharaoh was not the name of a particular monarch. The rulers of the Nile Valley and Alexandria were called Pharaohs. Moses was born in the reign of Pharaoh Rameses II, and had to leave Egypt with the Israelites in the reign of his son, Merenptah II. Rameses II, is called the Pharaoh of the Oppression and his successor Merenptah II, the Pharaoh of Exodus (Enc. Bib. & Peake’s Commentary on the Bible).
88
Al (people) is derived from the verb Ala which gives the sense of returning or governing or exercising control. The word thus means, the family or party of a man, or followers of a leader, or subjects of a ruler to whom they constantly return or who governs or exercises control over them (Lane).
88A
Pharaoh had inflicted upon the Israelites grievous torments by imposing upon them hard and disgraceful labour. He also had given orders that their sons be slain and their daughters spared. In this way he sought to destroy not only their manhood but to kill in them manly qualities.
وَاِذۡ قَالَ مُوۡسٰی لِقَوۡمِہٖۤ اِنَّ اللّٰہَ یَاۡمُرُکُمۡ اَنۡ تَذۡبَحُوۡا بَقَرَۃً ۖ قَالُوۡۤا اَتَتَّخِذُنَا ہُزُوًا ۖ قَالَ اَعُوۡذُ بِاللّٰہِ اَنۡ اَکُوۡنَ مِنَ الۡجٰہِلِیۡنَ
اس جگہ بَقَرَۃٌ کا لفظ ہے اور یہ لفظ مؤنث و مذکر دونوں کے لئے بولا جاتا ہے۔ اَلْبَقَرُ کا لفظ اسم جنس کے لئے آتا ہے اور اس کے ساتھ ۃ وحدت کو بیان کرنے کے لئے لائی گئی ہے یعنی جنس بقر میں سے ایک۔ جیسا کہ بتایا جا چکا ہے۔ اَلْبَقَرَۃُ کا لفظ گائے بیل دونوں کے لئے بولا جاتا ہے۔ اردو میں چونکہ ایسا کوئی لفظ نہیں جو پورا مفہوم ادا کر دے اس لئے ہم نے اس کا ترجمہ ’’گائے‘‘ لکھا ہے۔ یوں تاریخ سے معلوم ہوتا ہے کہ اسرائیلی مصریوں سے متاثر تھے اور وہ بیل کی پوجا کرتے تھے۔
Important Words:
ھزوا (a jest) means: (1) jest; (2) the object or butt of a joke (Lisan). See also 2:14.
Commentary:
Here begins an account of another Israelite wrong which was allied to their worship of the calf. Though the calf mentioned in 2:52 was destroyed, yet veneration for the cow lingered in their hearts. The verse, along with those that follow, will be explained under verse 72 below.
4
اس جگہ بَقَرَۃٌ کا لفظ ہے اور یہ لفظ مؤنث و مذکر دونوں کے لئے بولا جاتا ہے۔ اَلْبَقَرُ کا لفظ اسم جنس کے لئے آتا ہے اور اس کے ساتھ ۃ وحدت کو بیان کرنے کے لئے لائی گئی ہے یعنی جنس بقر میں سے ایک۔ جیسا کہ بتایا جا چکا ہے۔ اَلْبَقَرَۃُ کا لفظ گائے بیل دونوں کے لئے بولا جاتا ہے۔ اردو میں چونکہ ایسا کوئی لفظ نہیں جو پورا مفہوم ادا کر دے اس لئے ہم نے اس کا ترجمہ ’’گائے‘‘ لکھا ہے۔ یوں تاریخ سے معلوم ہوتا ہے کہ اسرائیلی مصریوں سے متاثر تھے اور وہ بیل کی پوجا کرتے تھے۔
74
Important Words:
ھزوا (a jest) means: (1) jest; (2) the object or butt of a joke (Lisan). See also 2:14.
Commentary:
Here begins an account of another Israelite wrong which was allied to their worship of the calf. Though the calf mentioned in 2:52 was destroyed, yet veneration for the cow lingered in their hearts. The verse, along with those that follow, will be explained under verse 72 below.
قَالَ اِنَّہٗ یَقُوۡلُ اِنَّہَا بَقَرَۃٌ لَّا ذَلُوۡلٌ تُثِیۡرُ الۡاَرۡضَ وَلَا تَسۡقِی الۡحَرۡثَ مُسَلَّمَۃٌ لَّا شِیَۃَ فِیۡہَا ۚ قَالُوا الۡـٰٔنَ جِئۡتَ بِالۡحَقِّ ۚ فَذَبَحُوۡہَا وَمَا کَادُوۡا یَفۡعَلُوۡنَ
67:16.
67:16.
The Israelites had lived for a long time among the Egyptians who had great veneration for the cow. Thus reverence for this animal had crept into their minds also. This is why, when they made an idol for themselves, they made it in the shape of a calf (Qur’an 2:52 & Exod. 32: 4). In order that their minds should have been purged of the feeling of veneration for the cow, they were repeatedly commanded to sacrifice it (Num. 19: 1-9; Lev. 4: 1-21; 16: 3, 11). It seems that they had a particular cow, which served as a pet among them, and they had a misgiving that the order pertained to it. So they repeatedly asked Moses to specify the cow which God meant to be slaughtered, and as a result of their questioning some conditions were added to specify the animal.
67:16.
Commentary:
The Israelites had lived for a long time among the Egyptians who had great veneration for the cow. Thus reverence for the cow had crept into the minds of the Israelites as well. This is why, when they made an idol for themselves, they made it in the shape of a calf (Quran 2:52 & Exod. 32:4). It was, therefore, quite in the fitness of things that, in order to root out this evil inclination from the hearts of the Israelites, they should have been repeatedly commanded to sacrifice the cow. And this was actually the case (Num. 19:1-9; Lev. 4:1-21; 16:3, 11; etc.) A nation which freely slaughters an animal can never think of deifying it.
In the verses under comment, i.e. vv. 68 to 72, mention is made of Moses having ordered the Israelites to sacrifice a cow. It appears that at first they were bidden to sacrifice an ordinary cow, but it seems they had a particular cow which served as a pet among them and they had a natural misgiving that the order pertained to that cow. So they repeatedly asked Moses to specify the cow which God meant to be slaughtered, and as a result of their questionings some conditions were added to specify the animal. Finally, when the description given by Moses corresponded to the particular cow which they had in view, they had perforce to say, Now hast thou brought the truth, the words showing that from the very beginning they had in their mind some particular cow to which they thought the command pertained. Caught in their own net, they were guided aright and had to slaughter the very cow which served as a pet among them and thus a great step was taken to uproot the evil from their hearts.
This incident finds mention in the Bible also (Num. 19:1-9). The Quranic version, however, differs slightly from that of the Bible. According to the Quran, the Israelites were at first ordered to slaughter an ordinary cow, and it was only on their repeated questioning that descriptions were added to specify it. On the other hand, the Biblical version makes no mention of this questioning, but tells us that at the very outset the Israelites were ordered to slaughter a cow answering a particular description. Again, the narrative of the Quran, shows that it was with great reluctance that the Israelites finally complied with the command, but the Bible throws no light on the manner in which the divine behest was carried out. It is not difficult to see on which side the truth lies. It is too much to believe that the Israelites, who were ever ready to quarrel with Moses on receipt of an injunction against their wishes, should have carried out, without question, the order relating to the slaughter of a cow.
b
67:16.
a
67:16.
78
Commentary:
The Israelites had lived for a long time among the Egyptians who had great veneration for the cow. Thus reverence for the cow had crept into the minds of the Israelites as well. This is why, when they made an idol for themselves, they made it in the shape of a calf (Quran 2:52 & Exod. 32:4). It was, therefore, quite in the fitness of things that, in order to root out this evil inclination from the hearts of the Israelites, they should have been repeatedly commanded to sacrifice the cow. And this was actually the case (Num. 19:1-9; Lev. 4:1-21; 16:3, 11; etc.) A nation which freely slaughters an animal can never think of deifying it.
In the verses under comment, i.e. vv. 68 to 72, mention is made of Moses having ordered the Israelites to sacrifice a cow. It appears that at first they were bidden to sacrifice an ordinary cow, but it seems they had a particular cow which served as a pet among them and they had a natural misgiving that the order pertained to that cow. So they repeatedly asked Moses to specify the cow which God meant to be slaughtered, and as a result of their questionings some conditions were added to specify the animal. Finally, when the description given by Moses corresponded to the particular cow which they had in view, they had perforce to say, Now hast thou brought the truth, the words showing that from the very beginning they had in their mind some particular cow to which they thought the command pertained. Caught in their own net, they were guided aright and had to slaughter the very cow which served as a pet among them and thus a great step was taken to uproot the evil from their hearts.
This incident finds mention in the Bible also (Num. 19:1-9). The Quranic version, however, differs slightly from that of the Bible. According to the Quran, the Israelites were at first ordered to slaughter an ordinary cow, and it was only on their repeated questioning that descriptions were added to specify it. On the other hand, the Biblical version makes no mention of this questioning, but tells us that at the very outset the Israelites were ordered to slaughter a cow answering a particular description. Again, the narrative of the Quran, shows that it was with great reluctance that the Israelites finally complied with the command, but the Bible throws no light on the manner in which the divine behest was carried out. It is not difficult to see on which side the truth lies. It is too much to believe that the Israelites, who were ever ready to quarrel with Moses on receipt of an injunction against their wishes, should have carried out, without question, the order relating to the slaughter of a cow.
a
67:16.
108
The Israelites had lived for a long time among the Egyptians who had great veneration for the cow. Thus reverence for this animal had crept into their minds also. This is why, when they made an idol for themselves, they made it in the shape of a calf (Qur’an 2:52 & Exod. 32: 4). In order that their minds should have been purged of the feeling of veneration for the cow, they were repeatedly commanded to sacrifice it (Num. 19: 1-9; Lev. 4: 1-21; 16: 3, 11). It seems that they had a particular cow, which served as a pet among them, and they had a misgiving that the order pertained to it. So they repeatedly asked Moses to specify the cow which God meant to be slaughtered, and as a result of their questioning some conditions were added to specify the animal.
حُرِّمَتۡ عَلَیۡکُمُ الۡمَیۡتَۃُ وَالدَّمُ وَلَحۡمُ الۡخِنۡزِیۡرِ وَمَاۤ اُہِلَّ لِغَیۡرِ اللّٰہِ بِہٖ وَالۡمُنۡخَنِقَۃُ وَالۡمَوۡقُوۡذَۃُ وَالۡمُتَرَدِّیَۃُ وَالنَّطِیۡحَۃُ وَمَاۤ اَکَلَ السَّبُعُ اِلَّا مَا ذَکَّیۡتُمۡ وَمَا ذُبِحَ عَلَی النُّصُبِ وَاَنۡ تَسۡتَقۡسِمُوۡا بِالۡاَزۡلٰمِ ۚ ذٰلِکُمۡ فِسۡقٌ ۗ اَلۡیَوۡمَ یَئِسَ الَّذِیۡنَ کَفَرُوۡا مِنۡ دِیۡنِکُمۡ فَلَا تَخۡشَوۡہُمۡ وَاخۡشَوۡنِ ۚ الۡیَوۡمَ اَکۡمَلۡتُ لَکُمۡ دِیۡنَکُمۡ وَاَتۡمَمۡتُ عَلَیۡکُمۡ نِعۡمَتِیۡ وَرَضِیۡتُ لَکُمُ الۡاِسۡلٰمَ دِیۡنًا ۚ فَمَنِ اضۡطُرَّ فِیۡ مَخۡمَصَۃٍ غَیۡرَ مُتَجَانِفٍ لِّاِثۡمٍ ۙ فَاِنَّ اللّٰہَ غَفُوۡرٌ رَّحِیۡمٌ
2:174; 6:146.
5:91.
3:20, 86.
2:174; 6:146; 16:116.
اِكْمَالْ (Ikmal) (使…完美) 和 اِتْمَامْ (Itmam--------使…完整) 是动名词。第一个与质量有关而第二个与数量有关。第一个单词表明, «古兰经» 中体现的教义和律令以最完美的方式来影响人类身体、道德和精神的发展, 而第二个单词意指凡人类所需要的它无所不包。而且, 前一个单词与人类的身体方面即自我的外形有关, 而后一个关系到他们的精神即内在的自我。与安拉完美无缺的宗教和恩惠同时述及的是有关食物的法律。为的是指出食用合法的食物是形成良好品德的一种非常重要的基础。顺便说一下, 这是最后启示的一节经文。这节经文启示后仅82天, 穆圣就逝世了。
3:20, 86.
2:174; 6:146.
2:174; 6:146; 16:116.
Ikmal (perfecting) and Itmam (completing) are noun-infinitives, the first relating to quality and the second to quantity. The first word shows that doctrines and commandments affecting the physical, moral and spiritual development of man have been embodied in the Qur’an in their most perfect form; while the second signifies that nothing which was needed by man has been left out. Again, the former word pertains to commandments relating to the physical side of man or his external self, while the latter relates to his spiritual side or his inner self. The perfection and completion of God’s religion and favour have been mentioned side by side with the law relating to eatables in order to point out that the use of lawful and good food forms one of the very important bases of good morals which in turn provide a pedestal for spiritual progress. Incidentally, the verse was the last to be revealed, the Holy Prophet having died only 82 days after its revelation.
2:174; 6:146.
5:91.
3:20, 86.
2:174; 6:146; 16:116.
Important Words:
المیتة (an animal which dies of itself). Though generally speaking everything that is dead is میتة in its specific sense, the word signifies an animal that has died of itself without being properly slaughtered (Lane). See also 2:174.
المنخنقة (that which has been strangled) is derived from خنق. They say خنقه i.e. he squeezed his or its throat that he or it might die; he squeezed his or its throat so that he or it died; he strangled or throttled or choked him or it. اختنق or انخنقmeans, he or it became throttled or strangled or choked. شاة منخنقة means, a goat or sheep strangled or throttled (Lane).
الموقوذة (that which has been beaten to death) is derived from وقذه. They say وقذه i.e. he beat or struck him or it violently till he or it became relaxed and was at the point of death; he broke his or its skull, wounding the brain; he beat him or it till he or it died. شاة موقوذة means, a goat or sheep beaten to death either with a stick or staff or stones, etc. (Lane).
المتردیة (that which has been killed by a fall) is derived from ردی. They say ردی الرجل i.e. the man perished. رداه بحجر means, he threw stones at him and hit him. تردی means, he or it fell or tumbled down into a well or a pit. It also means, he or it fell down from a mountain, or a height and died. المتردیة means, that (a goat, etc.) which falls from a mountain or a height, or falls down a well, or a pit and dies (Lane).
النطیحة (that which has been gored to death) is derived from نطح. They say نطحه i.e. he (a ram, etc.) smote him or it with his horn. النطیحة means, a sheep or goat smitten with the horn and so killed (Lane).
ماذکیتم (that which you have properly slaughtered). ذکی (dhakka) is derived from ذکی (dhaka). They say ذکت النار i.e. the fire blazed or burned brightly. ذکت الارض means, the land was or became clean and pure. ذکی النار (dhakka) means, he made the fire blaze or burn brightly. ذکی العقل means, it (medicine, etc.) sharpened the intellect. ذکی الشاة means, he slaughtered the goat in the manner prescribed by the Law of Islam (Lane).
النصب (idols) is derived from نصب which means, he set up or he fixed. النصب according to some is singular, the plural of which is انصاب; and according to others, it is plural, of which the singular is نصاب. The word means, signs or marks set up to show the way; stones set up and worshipped to the exclusion of, or in preference to, God; anything that is so worshipped; stones which the pagan Arabs set to sacrifice or slay animals before them, the name of some deity being pronounced in the killing of such animals; idol or idols; but whereas idols were generally carved and had some form or shape, النصب were simple uncarved stones (Lane & Aqrab).
ازلام (divining arrows) is the plural of زلم and is derived from the verb زلم (zalama), meaning, he cut off the protruding part of a thing, such as the nose; he made his gift small in quantity as though he had cut off something from it. زلم السھم means, he cut or pared the arrow to make it proportionate and good-looking. زلم means, an arrow without a head and without feathers. ازلام (the plural of زلم) were those divining arrows by means of which pre-Islamic Arabs sought to know what was allotted to them. On some of these arrows the word "command" and on others "prohibition" were written, while others were left blank, and all these were kept together in a suitable vessel. When anyone wanted to do a certain thing or go on a journey, he would take out one of the arrows without looking at them and then act according to the instruction of "command" or "prohibition" as the case might be. If the blank arrow came out, the experiment was repeated, till an arrow bearing the word "command" or "prohibition" was taken out (Lane).
الیوم (this day) here really signifies "now". See 1:4.
مخمصة (hunger) is derived from مخمص. They say خمص البطن i.e. the belly was or became empty, i.e. hungry. خمصت القدم means, the foot rose from the ground or was hollow in the middle of the sole, so that it did not touch it. خمصه الجوع means, hunger rendered him lank in the belly. مخمصة therefore, means, emptiness of the belly; hunger (Lane & Aqrab).
Commentary:
This verse shows that the Quran does not consider the prosperity and predominance of Islam to be dependent on territorial conquest and the extension of material power, but on its being a perfect and complete religion. it draws the attention of Muslims to the fact that now that all the teachings needed for the moral and spiritual regeneration of man have been embodied in the Quran, it is up to them to win the premier place in the comity of nations by acting upon them and holding fast to them.
The words ikmal (perfecting) and itmam (completing) which are noun-infinitives from اکملت and اتممت (have I perfected and completed) occurring in the clause, This day have I perfected your religion for you and completed My favour upon you, are full of meaning and convey two different and distinct senses. The former, (i.e. perfection) relates to quality, and the latter, (i.e. completion) to quantity. The use of the word اکملت (I have perfected) with regard to the teaching of the Quran thus shows that doctrines and commandments affecting the physical, moral and spiritual development of man have been embodied in the Quran in their most perfect form; while the word اتممت (I have completed) shows that nothing which was needed by man has been left out. Again, the former, i.e. perfection, pertains to command-ments relating to the physical side of man or his external self, while the latter, i.e. completion, relates to his spiritual side or his inner self, viz. the completion of the spiritual blessings which follow the observance of the outward Law.
Thus, the verse hints that as the Divine Law has been perfected and completed in the Quran it shall not be superseded by any other Law. The Laws that preceded the Quran were meant for particular peoples and limited periods, being suited to their special requirements only. Similarly, the Prophets that preceded the Holy. Prophet of Islam were only sent to particular nations. This was quite in the fitness of things. The means of communication between different countries were then in a very undeveloped state and people living in one country knew little or nothing of the countries that lay far off from them. Moreover, nations of the earth were then in different stages of development, some being very backward and others only partially developed and the mind of man had not attained its full growth and development. Hence, the circumstances then obtaining required that separate Messengers be sent to separate nations who should give them such teachings as suited their particular needs and requirements. This state of things, however, was not to last forever, the Oneness of God presupposed oneness of mankind and it was quite natural that, when the God-given faculties of man became fully developed and the means of communication also improved so that intercourse between different nations became easier and more common, God should raise a Prophet for the whole of mankind and give him a perfect Law which should fulfil all the needs and meet all the problems of humanity
But the mere existence of a perfect Law cannot prevent the moral degeneration of humanity. So in spite of the presence of the Quran, it was necessary that heavenly Reformers should continue to appear in the world in times of degeneration, and, being inspired of God, should give new life to corrupt and degenerate humanity. In fact, the promise about the appearance of such Reformers is implied even in the words, This day have I completed My favour upon you, for if religion has been completed, it does not stand to reason that when mankind should consign God to oblivion and forget the object of their creation, God should make no provision for their regeneration. In that case, His favour upon them cannot be said to have been "completed". Thus, the very comple-tion of God’s favour upon Muslims requires that He should raise among them such Reformers as should breathe a new life into them, whenever their spiritual and moral degeneration demands it. Says the Holy Prophet, "God will raise among the Muslims at the head of each century a Reformer who would regenerate their religion for them" (Dawud, ch. on Malahim).
It may also be noted here that the perfection and completion of God’s religion and favour has been mentioned side by side with the law relating to eatables in order to point out that the use of lawful food forms one of the most important bases of good morals which in time provide a pedestal for spiritual progress.
a
2:174; 6:146.
b
5:91.
c
3:20, 86.
d
2:174; 6:146; 16:116.
370
اِكْمَالْ (Ikmal) (使…完美) 和 اِتْمَامْ (Itmam--------使…完整) 是动名词。第一个与质量有关而第二个与数量有关。第一个单词表明, «古兰经» 中体现的教义和律令以最完美的方式来影响人类身体、道德和精神的发展, 而第二个单词意指凡人类所需要的它无所不包。而且, 前一个单词与人类的身体方面即自我的外形有关, 而后一个关系到他们的精神即内在的自我。与安拉完美无缺的宗教和恩惠同时述及的是有关食物的法律。为的是指出食用合法的食物是形成良好品德的一种非常重要的基础。顺便说一下, 这是最后启示的一节经文。这节经文启示后仅82天, 穆圣就逝世了。
a
2:174; 6:146.
b
5:91.
c
3:20, 86.
d
2:174; 6:146; 16:116.
643
Important Words:
المیتة (an animal which dies of itself). Though generally speaking everything that is dead is میتة in its specific sense, the word signifies an animal that has died of itself without being properly slaughtered (Lane). See also 2:174.
المنخنقة (that which has been strangled) is derived from خنق. They say خنقه i.e. he squeezed his or its throat that he or it might die; he squeezed his or its throat so that he or it died; he strangled or throttled or choked him or it. اختنق or انخنقmeans, he or it became throttled or strangled or choked. شاة منخنقة means, a goat or sheep strangled or throttled (Lane).
الموقوذة (that which has been beaten to death) is derived from وقذه. They say وقذه i.e. he beat or struck him or it violently till he or it became relaxed and was at the point of death; he broke his or its skull, wounding the brain; he beat him or it till he or it died. شاة موقوذة means, a goat or sheep beaten to death either with a stick or staff or stones, etc. (Lane).
المتردیة (that which has been killed by a fall) is derived from ردی. They say ردی الرجل i.e. the man perished. رداه بحجر means, he threw stones at him and hit him. تردی means, he or it fell or tumbled down into a well or a pit. It also means, he or it fell down from a mountain, or a height and died. المتردیة means, that (a goat, etc.) which falls from a mountain or a height, or falls down a well, or a pit and dies (Lane).
النطیحة (that which has been gored to death) is derived from نطح. They say نطحه i.e. he (a ram, etc.) smote him or it with his horn. النطیحة means, a sheep or goat smitten with the horn and so killed (Lane).
ماذکیتم (that which you have properly slaughtered). ذکی (dhakka) is derived from ذکی (dhaka). They say ذکت النار i.e. the fire blazed or burned brightly. ذکت الارض means, the land was or became clean and pure. ذکی النار (dhakka) means, he made the fire blaze or burn brightly. ذکی العقل means, it (medicine, etc.) sharpened the intellect. ذکی الشاة means, he slaughtered the goat in the manner prescribed by the Law of Islam (Lane).
النصب (idols) is derived from نصب which means, he set up or he fixed. النصب according to some is singular, the plural of which is انصاب; and according to others, it is plural, of which the singular is نصاب. The word means, signs or marks set up to show the way; stones set up and worshipped to the exclusion of, or in preference to, God; anything that is so worshipped; stones which the pagan Arabs set to sacrifice or slay animals before them, the name of some deity being pronounced in the killing of such animals; idol or idols; but whereas idols were generally carved and had some form or shape, النصب were simple uncarved stones (Lane & Aqrab).
ازلام (divining arrows) is the plural of زلم and is derived from the verb زلم (zalama), meaning, he cut off the protruding part of a thing, such as the nose; he made his gift small in quantity as though he had cut off something from it. زلم السھم means, he cut or pared the arrow to make it proportionate and good-looking. زلم means, an arrow without a head and without feathers. ازلام (the plural of زلم) were those divining arrows by means of which pre-Islamic Arabs sought to know what was allotted to them. On some of these arrows the word "command" and on others "prohibition" were written, while others were left blank, and all these were kept together in a suitable vessel. When anyone wanted to do a certain thing or go on a journey, he would take out one of the arrows without looking at them and then act according to the instruction of "command" or "prohibition" as the case might be. If the blank arrow came out, the experiment was repeated, till an arrow bearing the word "command" or "prohibition" was taken out (Lane).
الیوم (this day) here really signifies "now". See 1:4.
مخمصة (hunger) is derived from مخمص. They say خمص البطن i.e. the belly was or became empty, i.e. hungry. خمصت القدم means, the foot rose from the ground or was hollow in the middle of the sole, so that it did not touch it. خمصه الجوع means, hunger rendered him lank in the belly. مخمصة therefore, means, emptiness of the belly; hunger (Lane & Aqrab).
Commentary:
This verse shows that the Quran does not consider the prosperity and predominance of Islam to be dependent on territorial conquest and the extension of material power, but on its being a perfect and complete religion. it draws the attention of Muslims to the fact that now that all the teachings needed for the moral and spiritual regeneration of man have been embodied in the Quran, it is up to them to win the premier place in the comity of nations by acting upon them and holding fast to them.
The words ikmal (perfecting) and itmam (completing) which are noun-infinitives from اکملت and اتممت (have I perfected and completed) occurring in the clause, This day have I perfected your religion for you and completed My favour upon you, are full of meaning and convey two different and distinct senses. The former, (i.e. perfection) relates to quality, and the latter, (i.e. completion) to quantity. The use of the word اکملت (I have perfected) with regard to the teaching of the Quran thus shows that doctrines and commandments affecting the physical, moral and spiritual development of man have been embodied in the Quran in their most perfect form; while the word اتممت (I have completed) shows that nothing which was needed by man has been left out. Again, the former, i.e. perfection, pertains to command-ments relating to the physical side of man or his external self, while the latter, i.e. completion, relates to his spiritual side or his inner self, viz. the completion of the spiritual blessings which follow the observance of the outward Law.
Thus, the verse hints that as the Divine Law has been perfected and completed in the Quran it shall not be superseded by any other Law. The Laws that preceded the Quran were meant for particular peoples and limited periods, being suited to their special requirements only. Similarly, the Prophets that preceded the Holy. Prophet of Islam were only sent to particular nations. This was quite in the fitness of things. The means of communication between different countries were then in a very undeveloped state and people living in one country knew little or nothing of the countries that lay far off from them. Moreover, nations of the earth were then in different stages of development, some being very backward and others only partially developed and the mind of man had not attained its full growth and development. Hence, the circumstances then obtaining required that separate Messengers be sent to separate nations who should give them such teachings as suited their particular needs and requirements. This state of things, however, was not to last forever, the Oneness of God presupposed oneness of mankind and it was quite natural that, when the God-given faculties of man became fully developed and the means of communication also improved so that intercourse between different nations became easier and more common, God should raise a Prophet for the whole of mankind and give him a perfect Law which should fulfil all the needs and meet all the problems of humanity
But the mere existence of a perfect Law cannot prevent the moral degeneration of humanity. So in spite of the presence of the Quran, it was necessary that heavenly Reformers should continue to appear in the world in times of degeneration, and, being inspired of God, should give new life to corrupt and degenerate humanity. In fact, the promise about the appearance of such Reformers is implied even in the words, This day have I completed My favour upon you, for if religion has been completed, it does not stand to reason that when mankind should consign God to oblivion and forget the object of their creation, God should make no provision for their regeneration. In that case, His favour upon them cannot be said to have been "completed". Thus, the very comple-tion of God’s favour upon Muslims requires that He should raise among them such Reformers as should breathe a new life into them, whenever their spiritual and moral degeneration demands it. Says the Holy Prophet, "God will raise among the Muslims at the head of each century a Reformer who would regenerate their religion for them" (Dawud, ch. on Malahim).
It may also be noted here that the perfection and completion of God’s religion and favour has been mentioned side by side with the law relating to eatables in order to point out that the use of lawful food forms one of the most important bases of good morals which in time provide a pedestal for spiritual progress.
a
5:91.b
3:20, 86.
c
2:174; 6:146.
d
2:174; 6:146; 16:116.
721
Ikmal (perfecting) and Itmam (completing) are noun-infinitives, the first relating to quality and the second to quantity. The first word shows that doctrines and commandments affecting the physical, moral and spiritual development of man have been embodied in the Qur’an in their most perfect form; while the second signifies that nothing which was needed by man has been left out. Again, the former word pertains to commandments relating to the physical side of man or his external self, while the latter relates to his spiritual side or his inner self. The perfection and completion of God’s religion and favour have been mentioned side by side with the law relating to eatables in order to point out that the use of lawful and good food forms one of the very important bases of good morals which in turn provide a pedestal for spiritual progress. Incidentally, the verse was the last to be revealed, the Holy Prophet having died only 82 days after its revelation.
وَاِذۡ قَالَ مُوۡسٰی لِقَوۡمِہِ اذۡکُرُوۡا نِعۡمَۃَ اللّٰہِ عَلَیۡکُمۡ اِذۡ اَنۡجٰٮکُمۡ مِّنۡ اٰلِ فِرۡعَوۡنَ یَسُوۡمُوۡنَکُمۡ سُوۡٓءَ الۡعَذَابِ وَیُذَبِّحُوۡنَ اَبۡنَآءَکُمۡ وَیَسۡتَحۡیُوۡنَ نِسَآءَکُمۡ ۚ وَفِیۡ ذٰلِکُمۡ بَلَآءٌ مِّنۡ رَّبِّکُمۡ عَظِیۡمٌ
2:50; 7:142; 28:5.
2:50; 7:142; 28:5.
2:50; 7:142; 28:5.
Commentary:
The verse means that Pharaoh afflicted the Israelites with grievous torment. He imposed heavy taxes and forced labour upon them and killed their male children. But God came to their help and saved them from this grievous torment. In this connection see Exod. 1:14, 22.
b
2:50; 7:142; 28:5.
a
2:50; 7:142; 28:5.
1661
Commentary:
The verse means that Pharaoh afflicted the Israelites with grievous torment. He imposed heavy taxes and forced labour upon them and killed their male children. But God came to their help and saved them from this grievous torment. In this connection see Exod. 1:14, 22.
c
2:50; 7:142; 28:5.
لَاُعَذِّبَنَّہٗ عَذَابًا شَدِیۡدًا اَوۡ لَاَاذۡبَحَنَّہٗۤ اَوۡ لَیَاۡتِیَنِّیۡ بِسُلۡطٰنٍ مُّبِیۡنٍ
عربی میں ذَبَحَ بمعنے قتل بھی آتا ہے۔ (تاج العروس)
Contrary to popular belief, based on fable and fiction, Hud-hud was not a bird employed by Solomon as his message-bearer since (a) it was inconsistent with Solomon’s dignity as a great monarch and a Divine Prophet to be so angry with a small bird as to be prepared to inflict severe punishment upon it or even to kill it. (b) Hud-hud seems to be well-acquainted with the rules and requirements of States and also well-versed in the knowledge about Divine Unity (vv. 25, 26) which birds are not. (c) Hud-hud, being not a migratory bird, cannot fly long distances and therefore could not have been selected for the journey to Sheba and back (v. 23). It follows from these facts that Hud-hud was not a bird but a man, even a very responsible officer of State or a general who had been entrusted with an important political mission by Solomon to the Queen of Sheba. The practice of exchange of envoys seems to have been quite popular in Solomon’s time. Moreover, it is a known fact that men are named after birds and anim
4
عربی میں ذَبَحَ بمعنے قتل بھی آتا ہے۔ (تاج العروس)
2160
Contrary to popular belief, based on fable and fiction, Hud-hud was not a bird employed by Solomon as his message-bearer since (a) it was inconsistent with Solomon’s dignity as a great monarch and a Divine Prophet to be so angry with a small bird as to be prepared to inflict severe punishment upon it or even to kill it. (b) Hud-hud seems to be well-acquainted with the rules and requirements of States and also well-versed in the knowledge about Divine Unity (vv. 25, 26) which birds are not. (c) Hud-hud, being not a migratory bird, cannot fly long distances and therefore could not have been selected for the journey to Sheba and back (v. 23). It follows from these facts that Hud-hud was not a bird but a man, even a very responsible officer of State or a general who had been entrusted with an important political mission by Solomon to the Queen of Sheba. The practice of exchange of envoys seems to have been quite popular in Solomon’s time. Moreover, it is a known fact that men are named after birds and anim
اِنَّ فِرۡعَوۡنَ عَلَا فِی الۡاَرۡضِ وَجَعَلَ اَہۡلَہَا شِیَعًا یَّسۡتَضۡعِفُ طَآئِفَۃً مِّنۡہُمۡ یُذَبِّحُ اَبۡنَآءَہُمۡ وَیَسۡتَحۡیٖ نِسَآءَہُمۡ ۚ اِنَّہٗ کَانَ مِنَ الۡمُفۡسِدِیۡنَ
10:84.
2:50; 7:142; 14:7.
在这个二十世纪中, 西方殖民主义强国行之非常有效的 “分而治之” 的政策, 看来在法老时代也做得非常成功。他把埃及人分成不同的团体和部分, 而且对他们作出别有用心的区别对待。他对有些人恩宠而对另一些人进行剥削和压迫。穆撒的民族属于后一类不幸的人们。“杀死他们的男儿, 留下他们的女儿” 这些话, 除了具有把以色列人置于他永久统治之下的明显意义外, 法老要消灭他们的男子而让他们的妇女活着的意思也可以是, 以他的剥削政策和残酷镇压的手段, 竭力想扼杀他们男子汉的气质, 这样可以使他们像女人般地胆怯。
10:84.
2:50; 7:142; 14:7.
The policy of "divide and rule" which has been practised with such deadly effect by the Western colonial Powers in this twentieth century seemed also to have been followed by Pharaoh with great success. He had split the people of Egypt into parties and sections and had made invidious distinctions between them. Some of them he favoured and others he exploited and suppressed. Moses’s people belonged to the latter unfortunate class. The words, slaughtering their sons and sparing their women, besides bearing the apparent sense that in order to keep the Israelites under permanent subjection Pharaoh destroyed their men and kept alive their women, may also signify that by his policy of exploitation and heartless suppression, he sought to kill all their manly qualities and thus made them timid like women.
10:84.
2:50; 7:142; 14:7.
Commentary:
The policy of "divide and rule" which has been practised with such deadly effect by the Colonial Powers of the west in this twentieth century was also followed by Pharaoh. He had split the people of Egypt into parties and sections and had made invidious distinctions between them. Some of them he favoured and others he exploited and suppressed. Moses’ people belonged to the latter unfortunate class.
The words, "he slew their sons and spared their women," besides bearing the apparent sense, viz. that in order to keep the Israelites under permanent subjection, Pharaoh destroyed their manhood and kept alive their women, may also signify that by his policy of exploitation and heartless suppression, Pharaoh sought to kill all manly qualities among the Israelites and thus made them timid like women.
d
10:84.
e
2:50; 7:142; 14:7.
960
在这个二十世纪中, 西方殖民主义强国行之非常有效的 “分而治之” 的政策, 看来在法老时代也做得非常成功。他把埃及人分成不同的团体和部分, 而且对他们作出别有用心的区别对待。他对有些人恩宠而对另一些人进行剥削和压迫。穆撒的民族属于后一类不幸的人们。“杀死他们的男儿, 留下他们的女儿” 这些话, 除了具有把以色列人置于他永久统治之下的明显意义外, 法老要消灭他们的男子而让他们的妇女活着的意思也可以是, 以他的剥削政策和残酷镇压的手段, 竭力想扼杀他们男子汉的气质, 这样可以使他们像女人般地胆怯。
d
10:84.
e
2:50; 7:142; 14:7.
2879
Commentary:
The policy of "divide and rule" which has been practised with such deadly effect by the Colonial Powers of the west in this twentieth century was also followed by Pharaoh. He had split the people of Egypt into parties and sections and had made invidious distinctions between them. Some of them he favoured and others he exploited and suppressed. Moses’ people belonged to the latter unfortunate class.
The words, "he slew their sons and spared their women," besides bearing the apparent sense, viz. that in order to keep the Israelites under permanent subjection, Pharaoh destroyed their manhood and kept alive their women, may also signify that by his policy of exploitation and heartless suppression, Pharaoh sought to kill all manly qualities among the Israelites and thus made them timid like women.
d
10:84.
e
2:50; 7:142; 14:7.
2196
The policy of "divide and rule" which has been practised with such deadly effect by the Western colonial Powers in this twentieth century seemed also to have been followed by Pharaoh with great success. He had split the people of Egypt into parties and sections and had made invidious distinctions between them. Some of them he favoured and others he exploited and suppressed. Moses’s people belonged to the latter unfortunate class. The words, slaughtering their sons and sparing their women, besides bearing the apparent sense that in order to keep the Israelites under permanent subjection Pharaoh destroyed their men and kept alive their women, may also signify that by his policy of exploitation and heartless suppression, he sought to kill all their manly qualities and thus made them timid like women.
فَلَمَّا بَلَغَ مَعَہُ السَّعۡیَ قَالَ یٰبُنَیَّ اِنِّیۡۤ اَرٰی فِی الۡمَنَامِ اَنِّیۡۤ اَذۡبَحُکَ فَانۡظُرۡ مَاذَا تَرٰی ۚ قَالَ یٰۤاَبَتِ افۡعَلۡ مَا تُؤۡمَرُ ۖ سَتَجِدُنِیۡۤ اِنۡ شَآءَ اللّٰہُ مِنَ الصّٰبِرِیۡنَ
اس خواب کے اصل معنے یہ تھے کہ تجھے مکہ کی بے آب و گیاہ وادی میں چھوڑ کر آنے والا ہوں۔ جو ایک قسم کی موت ہے اور یہ تعبیر لفظاً پوری ہوئی گو چھری سے ذبح کرنا لفظاً پورا نہ ہوا۔
The Qur’an and the Bible are at variance as to which of his two sons—Ishmael or Isaac—Abraham, in pursuance of God’s command, offered for sacrifice. According to the Bible it was Isaac (Gen. 22: 2). The Qur’an, on the other hand, declares clearly and unequivocally that it was Ishmael. The Bible contradicts itself in this respect. According to it, Abraham was commanded to offer his only son for sacrifice, but Isaac was at no time his only son. Ishmael was senior to Isaac by 13 years and for these many years was Abraham’s only son, and, being also his first born, was doubly dear to him. It stands to reason, therefore, that Abraham must have been required by God to offer for sacrifice his nearest and dearest thing which was his only and first-born son who was Ishmael. Some Christian evangelists have vainly tried to show that, 'Ishmael being of the handmaid, was born after the flesh while Isaac being born of the free woman was by promise' (Galatians, 4: 22, 23). Apart from the fact that Haga
Commentary:
See next verse.
3
اس خواب کے اصل معنے یہ تھے کہ تجھے مکہ کی بے آب و گیاہ وادی میں چھوڑ کر آنے والا ہوں۔ جو ایک قسم کی موت ہے اور یہ تعبیر لفظاً پوری ہوئی گو چھری سے ذبح کرنا لفظاً پورا نہ ہوا۔
3336
Commentary:
See next verse.
2497
The Qur’an and the Bible are at variance as to which of his two sons—Ishmael or Isaac—Abraham, in pursuance of God’s command, offered for sacrifice. According to the Bible it was Isaac (Gen. 22: 2). The Qur’an, on the other hand, declares clearly and unequivocally that it was Ishmael. The Bible contradicts itself in this respect. According to it, Abraham was commanded to offer his only son for sacrifice, but Isaac was at no time his only son. Ishmael was senior to Isaac by 13 years and for these many years was Abraham’s only son, and, being also his first born, was doubly dear to him. It stands to reason, therefore, that Abraham must have been required by God to offer for sacrifice his nearest and dearest thing which was his only and first-born son who was Ishmael. Some Christian evangelists have vainly tried to show that, 'Ishmael being of the handmaid, was born after the flesh while Isaac being born of the free woman was by promise' (Galatians, 4: 22, 23). Apart from the fact that Haga