Академия Корана - Вклад [ru]

MediaWiki:Edittools

2018-08-20T09:25:38Z

Maqivi:

<div id="editpage-specialchars" style="margin-top:1px;border:1px solid #aaa;padding:2px">
<span style="border-bottom:1px dotted gray; cursor:help" title="Эти ссылки служат для быстрой вставки разметки в окно редактирования"><small>[https://ru.holyquran.wiki/index.php?title=MediaWiki:Edittools&action=edit Быстрая] вставка</small></span>: <charinsert><nowiki>== + ==</nowiki></charinsert> <span style="font-size:1.3em"><charinsert>‘ «+» — … |</charinsert></span>
<charinsert>{{+}} {{+|}} [+] [[+]] <nowiki>[[</nowiki>|+]] {{изхи|+|}} </charinsert> <small><charinsert> <nowiki>&</nowiki>nbsp; <nowiki>#REDIRECT [[</nowiki>+]] {{DEFAULTSORT:+}} ~~~~</charinsert></small>

<span style="font-size:0.9em">
Шаблоны:
<charinsert><nowiki></nowiki> [[Файл:+|thumb|]] {{заготовка}} lang= ({{lang-ar|+|}}) {{s|+}} {{Категория
|+
|
}} {{Интервики
|ar=+
|az=
|ru=
|tr=
}}</charinsert>
<span style="white-space:nowrap"><charinsert><nowiki>{{nbsp|5+}}</nowiki> <nowiki>{{#if:||}}</nowiki> <nowiki>{{sfn|||p=}}</nowiki></charinsert></span>

<span style="font-size:0.9em">
Источники:
<charinsert> <ref><nowiki>см. также [[Коран]]: {{hqa|+|}}; {{hqa||}}.</nowiki></ref> <ref><nowiki>{{китаб|+||}}</nowiki></ref> <nowiki><ref name=""></nowiki>+</ref> <nowiki><ref name="+" /></nowiki> <nowiki>{{hqa6|+|}}</nowiki> <nowiki>{{hqa7|+|}}</nowiki></charinsert> …] <charinsert><nowiki>{{hqa8|+|||}}</nowiki> <nowiki>{{hqa9|+||}}</nowiki> <nowiki>{{hqa10||+|}}</nowiki> <nowiki>* {{book|. |||}}</nowiki></charinsert>

<span style="font-size:0.9em">
Алфавит:
<span style="font-size:1.1em">
<charinsert>ا А̄ А́ а̄ а́ Я́ я̄ я́ ā ب б ت т ث С̱ с̱ th ṯ ṡ ج дж ح Х̣ х̣ ḥ خ Х̮ х̮ kh ḫ د д ذ З̱ з̱ dh ḏ ẕ ر р ز з س с ش ш sh š ص С̣ с̣ ṣ ض Д̣ д̣ ḍ ط Т̣ т̣ ṭ ظ З̣ з̣ ẓ غ ʿ ‘ ع г gh ġ ḡ ف ф ق К̣ к̣ ك к ل л م м ن н ه х و У́ ӯ у́ Ю́ ю̄ ю́ ū ي Ӣ И́ ӣ и́ ы́ ī ﻯ О́ О̄ о́ о̄ Э́ э́ Е́ е́ ﺓ Т̈ т̈ ẗ ﺀ ’ ʾ </charinsert>


<span style="font-size:0.9em">
Теги:
<charinsert><>+</> <nowiki><br></nowiki> <ref>+</ref> <u>+</u> <s>+</s> <big>+</big> <small>+</small> <center>+</center> <sub>+</sub> <sup>+</sup> <code>+</code> <nowiki>+</nowiki> <includeonly>+</includeonly> <noinclude>{{doc}}</noinclude></charinsert>

<span style="font-size:0.9em">
Символы:
<span style="font-size:1.2em">
<charinsert>„+“</charinsert> <charinsert> ‘ “ ’ ” ~ # @ § ¶ № • · ← ↖ ↑ ↗ → ↘ ↓ ↙ ↔ ↕ ¡ ¿ \ ½ ¼ ¾ ≈ ≠ ± − × ÷ ° ^ ¹ ² ³ ₽ € £ ¥ $ ¢ † © ® ™</charinsert>

{{#ifeq:{{NAMESPACE}}|{{ns:0}}
|<div style="padding:3px; border:1px solid #c00; background:#fff0f0; margin-top:1px" id="editpage-copywarn2">Не копируйте тексты с других сайтов. ([[MediaWiki:Edittools|править]])</div>}}<noinclude>
[[ar:MediaWiki:Edittools]]
[[az:MediaWiki:Edittools]]
[[ru:MediaWiki:Edittools]]
[[tr:MediaWiki:Edittools]]
</noinclude>

Elmir Quliyev

2018-08-13T11:16:18Z

Maqivi:

{{заготовка}}
'''Elmir Quliyev'''

{| class="wikitable" style="float:right; margin-left:2em; width: 310px;"
|colspan="2" |<center>'''Коран. Перевод смыслов'''</center>
|-
|colspan="2" |<center>[[Файл:Elmir Kuliev Koran.jpg|315px]]</center>
|-
|''arabic''||<center>مترجم معاني القرآن الكريم</center>
|-
|''english''||<center>Quran. Meaningful translation and commentary</center>
|-
|''original name''||<center>Коран. Смысловой перевод и комментарии (ru)</center>
|-
|''autor''||Elmir Kuliev
|-
|''date of publishing''||
|-
|''language''||[[russian]]
|-
|''latest edition''||

|}

{{Категория
|Quran translators
|
}}

{{Интервики
|ar=المير كولييف
|az=Elmir Quliyev
|ru=Эльмир Кулиев
|tr=
}}

Файл:Elmir Kuliev Koran.jpg

2018-08-13T10:48:34Z

Maqivi:

Шаблон:S

2018-08-13T09:38:20Z

Maqivi: Новая страница: «<includeonly><span style="white-space: nowrap;">{{{1}}}</span></includeonly><noinclude> {{doc}} <!-- Пожалуйста, добавляйте категории…»

Шаблон:Категория

2018-08-13T09:12:26Z

Maqivi:

<includeonly>{{#if:{{{1|}}}|[[Категория:{{Str_trim|{{{1|}}}}}]]}}
{{#if:{{{2|}}}|[[Категория:{{Str_trim|{{{2|}}}}}]]}}
{{#if:{{{3|}}}|[[Категория:{{Str_trim|{{{3|}}}}}]]}}
{{#if:{{{4|}}}|[[Категория:{{Str_trim|{{{4|}}}}}]]}}
{{#if:{{{5|}}}|[[Категория:{{Str_trim|{{{5|}}}}}]]}}
{{#if:{{{6|}}}|[[Категория:{{Str_trim|{{{6|}}}}}]]}}
{{#if:{{{7|}}}|[[Категория:{{Str_trim|{{{7|}}}}}]]}}
{{#if:{{{8|}}}|[[Категория:{{Str_trim|{{{8|}}}}}]]}}
{{#if:{{{9|}}}|[[Категория:{{str_trim|{{{9|}}}}}]]}}
{{#if:{{{10|}}}|[[Категория:{{str_trim|{{{10|}}}}}]]}}</includeonly><noinclude>
{{doc}}</noinclude>

Шаблон:Str trim

2018-08-13T09:11:02Z

Maqivi: Новая страница: «<includeonly>{{{{{|safesubst:}}}#if:1|{{{1|}}}}}</includeonly>»

<includeonly>{{{{{|safesubst:}}}#if:1|{{{1|}}}}}</includeonly>

Elmir Quliyev

2018-08-13T09:10:04Z

Maqivi: Новая страница: «{{заготовка}} '''Elmir Quliyev''' {{Категория |Quran translators | }} {{Интервики |ar= |az= |en= |tr= }}»

{{заготовка}}
'''Elmir Quliyev'''

{{Категория
|Quran translators
|
}}

{{Интервики
|ar=
|az=
|en=
|tr=
}}

Шаблон:Заготовка

2018-08-13T09:09:55Z

Maqivi:

{{toc-right}}
{| class="wikitable mw-note"
|[[Файл:Шестерёнка.jpg|20px]] Эта статья очень короткая ({{PAGESIZE:{{PAGENAME}}}} б). Для того, чтобы статья могла быть опубликована на сайте Академии Корана, её нужно существенно дополнить (более 10 кб). ([https://en.quranacademy.org/encyclopedia/article/{{urlencode:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|PATH}}?preview=1 view], [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/{{FULLPAGENAMEE}} WP])
|}<includeonly>
[[Category:Articles alphabetically]]
[[Category:Short articles]]</includeonly>

Шаблон:Категория

2018-08-13T09:04:46Z

Maqivi: Новая страница: «<includeonly>{{#if:{{{1|}}}|}}}}}}} {{#if:{{{2|}}}|}}}}}}} {{#if:{{{3|}}}|Categorie:{{Str_trim|{{{3|…»

<includeonly>{{#if:{{{1|}}}|[[Categorie:{{Str_trim|{{{1|}}}}}]]}}
{{#if:{{{2|}}}|[[Categorie:{{Str_trim|{{{2|}}}}}]]}}
{{#if:{{{3|}}}|[[Categorie:{{Str_trim|{{{3|}}}}}]]}}
{{#if:{{{4|}}}|[[Categorie:{{Str_trim|{{{4|}}}}}]]}}
{{#if:{{{5|}}}|[[Categorie:{{Str_trim|{{{5|}}}}}]]}}
{{#if:{{{6|}}}|[[Categorie:{{Str_trim|{{{6|}}}}}]]}}
{{#if:{{{7|}}}|[[Categorie:{{Str_trim|{{{7|}}}}}]]}}
{{#if:{{{8|}}}|[[Categorie:{{Str_trim|{{{8|}}}}}]]}}
{{#if:{{{9|}}}|[[Categorie:{{str_trim|{{{9|}}}}}]]}}
{{#if:{{{10|}}}|[[Categorie:{{str_trim|{{{10|}}}}}]]}}</includeonly><noinclude>
{{doc}}</noinclude>

Шаблон:Интервики

2018-08-13T08:32:40Z

Maqivi: Новая страница: «WIKI}}}} WIKI}}}} ru:{{#if:{{{ru|}}}…»

[[ar:{{#if:{{{ar|}}}|{{{ar|}}}|{{urlencode:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|WIKI}}}}]]
[[az:{{#if:{{{az|}}}|{{{az|}}}|{{urlencode:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|WIKI}}}}]]
[[ru:{{#if:{{{ru|}}}|{{{ru|}}}|{{urlencode:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|WIKI}}}}]]
[[tr:{{#if:{{{tr|}}}|{{{tr|}}}|{{urlencode:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|WIKI}}}}]]<noinclude>
{{doc}}</noinclude>

Шаблон:Color

2018-08-13T08:27:55Z

Maqivi: Новая страница: «<span style="color:{{{1|#FF0000}}}">{{{2|цветной текст}}}</span><noinclude>{{doc}}</noinclude>»

<span style="color:{{{1|#FF0000}}}">{{{2|цветной текст}}}</span><noinclude>{{doc}}</noinclude>

Шаблон:Resize

2018-08-13T08:27:10Z

Maqivi: Новая страница: «{{#if:{{{2|}}} |<span style="font-size:{{{1|}}};">{{{2|}}}</span> |<span style="font-size:90%;">{{{1}}}</span> }}<noinclude>{{doc}}</noinclude>»

{{#if:{{{2|}}}
|<span style="font-size:{{{1|}}};">{{{2|}}}</span>
|<span style="font-size:90%;">{{{1}}}</span>
}}<noinclude>{{doc}}</noinclude>

Шаблон:Doc-end

2018-08-13T08:26:27Z

Maqivi: Новая страница: «</div><div style="background:#f0f8ff; border:1px dotted #8bcbff; padding:10px; margin-top:10px"> ''Во избежание поломок страниц, испо…»

</div><div style="background:#f0f8ff; border:1px dotted #8bcbff; padding:10px; margin-top:10px">
''Во избежание поломок страниц, использующих данный {{#ifeq:{{NAMESPACE}}|Модуль|модуль|шаблон}}, желательно экспериментировать в {{#ifeq:{{NAMESPACE}}|Модуль|[[Модуль:Песочница|Песочнице для модулей]]|своём [[ВП:ЛП|личном пространстве]]}}.''
</div><noinclude>{{doc-inline}}
См. [[Шаблон:Doc/begin]].

[[Категория:Шаблоны:Для документирования шаблонов|Template doc end]]
</noinclude>

Шаблон:Doc-inline

2018-08-13T08:25:41Z

Maqivi: Новая страница: «<div style="background:#F0F8FF; border:1px dotted #8BCBFF; padding:10px; margin-top:10px">{{#switch:{{NAMESPACE}}|{{ns:template}}|{{ns:mediawiki}}=Файл:Info…»

<div style="background:#F0F8FF; border:1px dotted #8BCBFF; padding:10px; margin-top:10px">{{#switch:{{NAMESPACE}}|{{ns:template}}|{{ns:mediawiki}}=[[Файл:Information.png|20px|link=]] {{resize|120%|Документация}}<hr>}}<noinclude>
Шаблон для визуального отделения «документации» от остальной части страницы. Цвет фона аналогичен шаблону {{tl|doc}}.

== Пример использования ==
{{tl|doc-inline}} // начало<br />
Текст документации<br />
{{tl|doc-end}} // конец
{{doc-end}}
[[Категория:Шаблоны:Для документирования шаблонов|{{PAGENAME}}]]
</noinclude>

Шаблон:Tl

2018-08-13T08:25:05Z

Maqivi: Новая страница: «<span style="color:#9098A0" class="wp-templatelink">{{{{{1}}}}}</span><noinclude>{{doc}}</noinclude>»

<span style="color:#9098A0" class="wp-templatelink">{{[[Шаблон:{{{1}}}|{{{1}}}]]}}</span><noinclude>{{doc}}</noinclude>

Шаблон:Ambox

2018-08-13T08:24:26Z

Maqivi: Новая страница: «<includeonly>{|class="metadata plainlinks mw-note ambox {{#if:{{{mini|}}}|ambox-mini}} {{#switch:{{{type|}}}|delete|serious|content|style|good|discussion|notice|m…»

<includeonly>{|class="metadata plainlinks mw-note ambox {{#if:{{{mini|}}}|ambox-mini}} {{#switch:{{{type|}}}|delete|serious|content|style|good|discussion|notice|merge=ambox-{{{type}}}|ambox-talk}}" {{#if:{{{style|}}}|style="{{{style}}}"}} {{#if:{{{id|}}}|id="{{{id}}}"}} {{#if:{{{data-label-1|}}}|data-{{{data-label-1|}}}="{{{data-value-1}}}"}} {{#if:{{{data-label-2|}}}|data-{{{data-label-2|}}}="{{{data-value-2}}}"}} {{#if:{{{data-label-3|}}}|data-{{{data-label-3|}}}="{{{data-value-3}}}"}}
{{#ifeq:{{{image|}}}|none||{{!}}class="ambox-image"{{!}}<div>{{#ifeq:{{{image}}}|blank|<span style="visibility:hidden;"> </span>|{{#switch:{{{image|{{{type}}}}}}|delete|serious=[[File:Stop hand nuvola.svg|40px|Критические проблемы]]|content=[[File:Emblem-important.png|40px|Проблемы с содержанием статьи]]|style=[[File:Broom icon.svg|40px|Стилевые проблемы]]|good=[[File:Green star boxed.png|40px|Статус статьи]]|discussion=[[File:Nuvola apps ksirc.png|40px|Обсуждение]]|merge=[[File:Merge-split-transwiki default.png|40x40px|Перенос содержимого]]|notice=[[File:Information.svg|40px|Информация]]|#default={{{image|[[File:Information.svg|40px|Информация]]}}}}}}}</div>}}
|class="ambox-text"|{{{text|<span style="font-size:smaller;color:#AAAAAA">Параметр ''text'' не задан</span>}}}{{#if:{{{text-small|}}}|<div class="ambox-text-small">{{{text-small}}}</div>}}
{{#if:{{{imageright|}}}|{{!}}class="ambox-imageright"{{!}}<div>{{{imageright}}}</div>}}
|class="widthhack"|
|}</includeonly><noinclude>{{doc}}</noinclude>

Шаблон:Якорь

2018-08-13T08:24:05Z

Maqivi: Новая страница: «{{#if: {{{1|}}}|<span id="{{anchorencode:{{{1|}}}}}"></span>{{#if: {{{2|}}}|<span id="{{anchorencode:{{{2|}}}}}"></span>{{#if: {{{3|}}}|<s…»

{{#if: {{{1|}}}|<span id="{{anchorencode:{{{1|}}}}}"></span>{{#if: {{{2|}}}|<span id="{{anchorencode:{{{2|}}}}}"></span>{{#if: {{{3|}}}|<span id="{{anchorencode:{{{3|}}}}}"></span>{{#if: {{{4|}}}|<span id="{{anchorencode:{{{4|}}}}}"></span>{{#if: {{{5|}}}|<span id="{{anchorencode:{{{5|}}}}}"></span>{{#if: {{{6|}}}|<span id="{{anchorencode:{{{6|}}}}}"></span>{{#if: {{{7|}}}|<span id="{{anchorencode:{{{7|}}}}}"></span>{{#if: {{{8|}}}|<span id="{{anchorencode:{{{8|}}}}}"></span>{{#if: {{{9|}}}|<span id="{{anchorencode:{{{9|}}}}}"></span>{{#if: {{{10|}}}|<span id="{{anchorencode:{{{10|}}}}}"></span>{{#if: {{{11|}}}|<span style="background:#FFDD80;padding:0.2em 0.5em"> [[Шаблон:Якорь]]: задано более 10 названий метки </span>}} }} }} }} }} }} }} }} }} }} }}<noinclude>{{Doc}}

</noinclude>

Шаблон:Tlinks

2018-08-13T08:23:38Z

Maqivi: Новая страница: «<includeonly><span style="float:right; font-size:{{{fontsize|11}}}px; font-weight:normal;" class="plainlinks">{{#ifexist:{{#rel2abs:{{{lc|}}}}}|{{#ifeq:{…»

<includeonly><span style="float:right; font-size:{{{fontsize|11}}}px; font-weight:normal;" class="plainlinks">{{#ifexist:{{#rel2abs:{{{lc|}}}}}|{{#ifeq:{{{dislooklink|}}}|yes||<nowiki>[</nowiki>[[{{{lc}}}|просмотр]]<nowiki>]</nowiki> }}<nowiki>[</nowiki>[{{fullurl:{{#rel2abs:{{{lc}}}}}|action=edit}} править]<nowiki>]</nowiki> {{#ifeq:{{{dishistlink|}}}|yes||<nowiki>[</nowiki>[{{fullurl:{{#rel2abs:{{{lc}}}}}|action=history}} история]<nowiki>]</nowiki>}}|<nowiki>[</nowiki>[{{fullurl:{{#rel2abs:{{{lc}}}}}|action=edit&redlink=1}} создать]<nowiki>]</nowiki>}} {{#ifeq:{{{diswatchlink|}}}|yes||<nowiki>[</nowiki>[{{fullurl:{{#rel2abs:{{{lc}}}}}|action=watch}} следить]<nowiki>]</nowiki> }}<nowiki>[</nowiki>[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=purge}} обновить]<nowiki>]</nowiki></span></includeonly><noinclude>{{doc}}</noinclude>

Шаблон:Заготовка

2018-08-13T08:22:17Z

Maqivi: Новая страница: «{{toc-right}} {| class="wikitable mw-note" |20px Эта статья очень короткая ({{PAGESIZE:{{PAGENAME}}}}…»

{{toc-right}}
{| class="wikitable mw-note"
|[[Файл:Шестерёнка.jpg|20px]] Эта статья очень короткая ({{PAGESIZE:{{PAGENAME}}}} б). Для того, чтобы статья могла быть опубликована на сайте Академии Корана, её нужно существенно дополнить (более 10 кб). ([https://ru.quranacademy.org/encyclopedia/article/{{urlencode:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|PATH}}?preview=1 просмотр], [http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/{{FULLPAGENAMEE}} WP])
|}<includeonly>
[[Категория:Статьи по алфавиту]]
[[Категория:Короткие статьи]]</includeonly>

Шаблон:Doc/end

2018-08-13T08:21:02Z

</div><div style="background:#f0f8ff; border:1px dotted #8bcbff; padding:10px; margin-top:10px">
''Во избежание поломок страниц, использующих данный {{#ifeq:{{NAMESPACE}}|Модуль|модуль|шаблон}}, желательно экспериментировать в {{#ifeq:{{NAMESPACE}}|Модуль|[[Модуль:Песочница|Песочнице для модулей]]|своём [[ВП:ЛП|личном пространстве]]}}. Соответствующая страница в [https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/{{FULLPAGENAME}} Википедии]''
</div><noinclude>{{doc-inline}}
См. [[Шаблон:Doc/begin]].

</noinclude>

Шаблон:Документировать

2018-08-13T08:20:43Z

Maqivi: Новая страница: «{{ambox |type=content |text='''Этому шаблону не хватает документации.''' |text-small=Вы можете помочь проект…»

{{ambox
|type=content
|text='''Этому шаблону не хватает документации.'''
|text-small=Вы можете помочь проекту, сделав <font size="+1"><u><includeonly>[[{{SUBJECTSPACE}}:{{PAGENAME:{{{1|{{SUBJECTPAGENAME}}/doc}}}}}|описание шаблона]]</includeonly><noinclude>{{color|red|описание шаблона}}</noinclude></u></font>: что он делает, как его использовать, какие параметры он принимает. Это поможет другим использовать его.<br />Для оформления можете воспользоваться {{tl|doc}} или {{tl|doc-inline}}. Не забывайте помещать описание внутрь <nowiki><noinclude></noinclude></nowiki>.<br />P.S. Также не забываем про [[Академия Корана:Категории|категорию]] и [[Академия Корана:Интервики|интервики]].
}}<includeonly>{{#if:{{{nocat|}}}||{{#ifeq:{{NAMESPACE}}|{{ns:10}}|[[Категория:Недокументированные шаблоны|{{PAGENAME}}]]|}}}}</includeonly><noinclude>{{doc-inline}}
Данное сообщение появляется при незаполненном шаблоне {{tl|doc}}.
{{doc/end}}
[[Категория:Недокументированные шаблоны| ]]</noinclude>

Шаблон:Doc/begin

2018-08-13T08:20:13Z

Maqivi: Новая страница: «<includeonly><div style="background:#F0F8FF;border:1px dotted #8BCBFF;padding:10px;margin-top:10px;clear:both;">{{#if:{{{editsection|}}}||__NOEDITSECTION__}} <div…»

<includeonly><div style="background:#F0F8FF;border:1px dotted #8BCBFF;padding:10px;margin-top:10px;clear:both;">{{#if:{{{editsection|}}}||__NOEDITSECTION__}}
<div padding-right:1em;">{{tlinks|lc={{{1}}}|diswatchlink=yes}}</div><span style="font-size:11pt;line-height:11pt;">[[Файл:Information.png|20px|Документация|link=|alt=(i)]] Документация</span>{{якорь|Документация|doc}}
----</includeonly><noinclude>
{{doc-inline}}
Используется в {{tl|doc}} для создания заглавия и навигации.

См. также:
* {{tl|Doc/end}}
</noinclude>

Шаблон:Doc

2018-08-13T08:19:28Z

Maqivi:

<includeonly>{{doc/begin|{{SUBJECTSPACE}}:{{PAGENAME:{{{1|{{SUBJECTPAGENAME}}/doc}}}}}|editsection={{{editsection|}}}}}
{{#if:{{{1|}}}|{{#ifexist:{{{1}}}|{{{{{1}}}|{{{2|}}}|{{{3|}}}|{{{4|}}}|{{{5|}}}}}|{{#ifexist:{{SUBJECTSPACE}}:{{{1}}}|{{{{{1}}}|{{{2|}}}|{{{3|}}}|{{{4|}}}|{{{5|}}}}}|{{Документировать|{{{1}}}}}}}}}|{{#ifexist:{{SUBJECTPAGENAME}}/doc|{{{{SUBJECTPAGENAME}}/doc}}|{{Документировать|{{SUBJECTPAGENAME}}/doc}}}}}}
[[ar:{{FULLPAGENAME}}]]
[[az:{{FULLPAGENAME}}]]
[[en:{{FULLPAGENAME}}]]
[[ru:{{FULLPAGENAME}}]]
{{doc/end}}</includeonly><noinclude>
{{doc}}

</noinclude>

MediaWiki:Edittools

2018-08-13T08:16:16Z

Maqivi:

<div id="editpage-specialchars" style="margin-top:1px;border:1px solid #aaa;padding:2px">
<span style="border-bottom:1px dotted gray; cursor:help" title="Эти ссылки служат для быстрой вставки разметки в окно редактирования"><small>[https://ru.holyquran.wiki/index.php?title=MediaWiki:Edittools&action=edit Быстрая] вставка</small></span>: <charinsert><nowiki>== + ==</nowiki></charinsert> <span style="font-size:1.3em"><charinsert>‘ «+» — … |</charinsert></span>
<charinsert>{{+}} {{+|}} [+] [[+]] <nowiki>[[</nowiki>|+]] {{изхи|+|}} </charinsert> <small><charinsert> <nowiki>&</nowiki>nbsp; <nowiki>#REDIRECT [[</nowiki>+]] {{DEFAULTSORT:+}} ~~~~</charinsert></small>

<span style="font-size:0.9em">
Шаблоны:
<charinsert><nowiki></nowiki> [[Файл:+|thumb|]] {{заготовка}} lang= ({{lang-ar|+|}}) {{s|+}} {{Категория
|+
|
}} {{Интервики
|ar=+
|az=
|en=
|tr=
}}</charinsert>
<span style="white-space:nowrap"><charinsert><nowiki>{{nbsp|5+}}</nowiki> <nowiki>{{#if:||}}</nowiki> <nowiki>{{sfn|||p=}}</nowiki></charinsert></span>

<span style="font-size:0.9em">
Источники:
<charinsert> <ref><nowiki>см. также [[Коран]]: {{hqa|+|}}; {{hqa||}}.</nowiki></ref> <ref><nowiki>{{китаб|+||}}</nowiki></ref> <nowiki><ref name=""></nowiki>+</ref> <nowiki><ref name="+" /></nowiki> <nowiki>{{hqa6|+|}}</nowiki> <nowiki>{{hqa7|+|}}</nowiki></charinsert> …] <charinsert><nowiki>{{hqa8|+|||}}</nowiki> <nowiki>{{hqa9|+||}}</nowiki> <nowiki>{{hqa10||+|}}</nowiki> <nowiki>* {{book|. |||}}</nowiki></charinsert>

<span style="font-size:0.9em">
Алфавит:
<span style="font-size:1.1em">
<charinsert>ا А̄ А́ а̄ а́ Я́ я̄ я́ ā ب б ت т ث С̱ с̱ th ṯ ṡ ج дж ح Х̣ х̣ ḥ خ Х̮ х̮ kh ḫ د д ذ З̱ з̱ dh ḏ ẕ ر р ز з س с ش ш sh š ص С̣ с̣ ṣ ض Д̣ д̣ ḍ ط Т̣ т̣ ṭ ظ З̣ з̣ ẓ غ ʿ ‘ ع г gh ġ ḡ ف ф ق К̣ к̣ ك к ل л م м ن н ه х و У́ ӯ у́ Ю́ ю̄ ю́ ū ي Ӣ И́ ӣ и́ ы́ ī ﻯ О́ О̄ о́ о̄ Э́ э́ Е́ е́ ﺓ Т̈ т̈ ẗ ﺀ ’ ʾ </charinsert>


<span style="font-size:0.9em">
Теги:
<charinsert><>+</> <nowiki><br></nowiki> <ref>+</ref> <u>+</u> <s>+</s> <big>+</big> <small>+</small> <center>+</center> <sub>+</sub> <sup>+</sup> <code>+</code> <nowiki>+</nowiki> <includeonly>+</includeonly> <noinclude>{{doc}}</noinclude></charinsert>

<span style="font-size:0.9em">
Символы:
<span style="font-size:1.2em">
<charinsert>„+“</charinsert> <charinsert> ‘ “ ’ ” ~ # @ § ¶ № • · ← ↖ ↑ ↗ → ↘ ↓ ↙ ↔ ↕ ¡ ¿ \ ½ ¼ ¾ ≈ ≠ ± − × ÷ ° ^ ¹ ² ³ ₽ € £ ¥ $ ¢ † © ® ™</charinsert>

{{#ifeq:{{NAMESPACE}}|{{ns:0}}
|<div style="padding:3px; border:1px solid #c00; background:#fff0f0; margin-top:1px" id="editpage-copywarn2">Не копируйте тексты с других сайтов. ([[MediaWiki:Edittools|править]])</div>}}<noinclude>
[[ar:MediaWiki:Edittools]]
[[az:MediaWiki:Edittools]]
[[en:MediaWiki:Edittools]]
[[tr:MediaWiki:Edittools]]
</noinclude>

MediaWiki:Edittools

2017-12-27T19:21:44Z

Maqivi:

<div id="editpage-specialchars" style="margin-top:1px;border:1px solid #aaa;padding:2px">
<span style="border-bottom:1px dotted gray; cursor:help" title="Эти ссылки служат для быстрой вставки разметки в окно редактирования"><small>Быстрая вставка</small></span>: <span style="font-size:1.3em"><charinsert> «+» „+“ — … |</charinsert></span>
<charinsert>{{+}} [[+]] [+] <nowiki>[[</nowiki>|+]] {{+|}} </charinsert> <small><charinsert>{{подст:+}} <nowiki><br></nowiki> <nowiki><br clear="all" /></nowiki> <nowiki>&</nowiki>nbsp; <nowiki>#REDIRECT [[</nowiki>+]] [[Категория:+]] {{DEFAULTSORT:+}} ~~~~</charinsert></small>

<span style="font-size:0.9em">
Теги:
<charinsert><>+</> <nowiki></nowiki> <u>+</u> <s>+</s> <small>+</small> <center>+</center> <big>+</big> <sub>+</sub> <sup>+</sup> <tt>+</tt> <code>+</code> <pre>+</pre> <nowiki>+</nowiki> <includeonly>+</includeonly> <noinclude>+</noinclude></charinsert>

<span style="font-size:0.9em">
Разделы:
<charinsert><nowiki>== + ==</nowiki></charinsert>   <charinsert><nowiki>=== + ===</nowiki></charinsert>   <charinsert><nowiki>== См. также ==</nowiki></charinsert>   <charinsert><nowiki>== Примечания ==
{{примечания}}</nowiki></charinsert>  <charinsert><nowiki>== Литература ==</nowiki></charinsert>

<span style="font-size:0.9em">
Шаблоны:
<charinsert> {{заготовка}} {{lang-ar||+}} {{refbegind}} {{s|+}} [[ar:+<nowiki>]] [[az:]] [[en:]] [[ru:]] [[tr:</nowiki>]]</charinsert>
<span style="white-space:nowrap"><charinsert><nowiki>{{nbsp|}}</nowiki></charinsert></span>

<span style="font-size:0.9em">
Источники:
<charinsert> <ref><nowiki>{{китаб|||}}</nowiki></ref> <nowiki><ref name=""></nowiki>+</ref> <nowiki><ref name="+" /></nowiki> <nowiki>{{sfn|||loc=""}}</nowiki> <nowiki>{{hqa||}}</nowiki> ,<nowiki>{{hqa3|}};</nowiki> <nowiki>{{hqa2|}}</nowiki> <nowiki>{{book|||}}</nowiki></charinsert>

<span style="font-size:0.9em">
Символы:
<span style="font-size:1.2em">
<charinsert>‘ “ ’ ” ~ # @ § ¶ № • · ← ↖ ↑ ↗ → ↘ ↓ ↙ ↔ ↕ ¡ ¿ \ ½ ¼ ¾ ≈ ≠ ± − × ÷ ° ^ ¹ ² ³ ₽ € £ ¥ $ ¢ † © ® ™</charinsert>

<span style="font-size:0.9em">
Арабский алфавит:
<span style="font-size:1.3888em">
<charinsert> ا ب ت ث ج ح خ د ذ ر ز س ش ص ض ط ظ ع غ ف ق ك ل م ن ه و ي ﻯ ﺓ </charinsert>

<span style="font-size:0.9em">
Транскрипция:
<charinsert> А̄ А́ а̄ а́ О́ о́ С̱ с̱ ṯ Э́ э́ Х̣ х̣ Х̮ х̮ Е́ е́ З̱ ḏ Ə ə Ӣ И́ ӣ и́ š С̣ ṣ с̣ Д̣ ḍ д̣ Т̣ ṭ т̣ З̣ з̣ … ы́ ‘ К̣ к̣ Ӯ У́ ӯ у́ Ю̄ Ю́ ю̄ ю́ Я̄ Я́ я̄ я́ Т̈ т̈ </charinsert>

{{#ifeq:{{NAMESPACE}}|{{ns:0}}
|<div style="padding:3px; border:1px solid #c00; background:#fff0f0; margin-top:1px" id="editpage-copywarn2">Не копируйте тексты с других сайтов.</div>}}<noinclude>
[[ar:MediaWiki:Edittools]]
[[az:MediaWiki:Edittools]]
[[ru:MediaWiki:Edittools]]
[[tr:MediaWiki:Edittools]]</noinclude>

List of Terms

2017-11-04T17:55:58Z

Maqivi: Откат правок Muhammad (обсуждение) к версии Hqaweb

{| class="wikitable" border="1"
|-
== А ==
! width="300" |English
! width="300" |Кириллица
! width="300" |العَرَبِية‎
|-
| [[ A'isha bint Abi Bakr ]] || [[Аиша бинт Абу Бакр]] || [[عائشة بنت أَبي بكر]]
|-
| [[Aaron]] || [[Харун]] (Аарон) || [[هارون‎]]
|-
| [[Ability]] (istiṭāʿa) || [[Возможность]] || [[ 5 ]]
|-
| [[Ablution]] (ghusl, wuḍūʾ, tayammum) || [[Омовение]] || [[ 6 ]]
|-
| [[Abode]] (dār) || [[Дом]] (обитель) || [[ 7 ]]
|-
| [[Abortion]] || [[Аборт]] || [[إجهاض]]
|-
| [['Abraha al-Ashram]] || [[Абраха аль-Ашрам]] || [[أبرهة الأشرم]]
|-
| [[Abraham]] || [[Ибрахим]] (Авраам) || [[إبراهيم‎]]
|-
| [[Abrogation]] || [[Отмена]] [аятов] || [[ 12 ]]
|-
| [[Abstinence]] || [[Аскетизм]] (зухд) || [[زهد‎]]
|-
| [[Abū Bakr]] || [[Абу Бакр]] || [[أبو بكر‎]]
|-
| [[Abū Lahab]] || [[Абу Лахаб]] || [[أبو لهب]]
|-
| [[Abyssinia]] || [[Эфиопия]] || [[ 19 ]]
|-
| [[Acquisition]] (kasb) || [[Приобретение]] (касб) || [[كسب‎]]
|-
| [[Ād]] || [[Адиты]] || [[عاد‎]]
|-
| [[Adam and Eve]] || [[Адам и Хавва]] || [[آدم و حواء]]
|-
| [[Ādam]] || [[Адам]] || [[ 24 ]]
|-
| [[Adoption]] || [[Усыновление и удочерение]] || [[ 25 ]]
|-
| [[Adoration]] || [[Поклонение]] || [[ 26 ]]
|-
| [[Adultery and Fornication]] (zinā) || [[Прелюбодеяние и блуд]] (зина) || [[زنا‎]]
|-
| [[Advice]] (naṣīḥa) || [[Наставление]] (насиха) || [[نصيحة]]
|-
| [[Afternoon]] || [[Послеполуденное время]] (аср) || [[ 32 ]]
|-
| [[Age of Ignorance]] || [[Эпоха невежества]] (джахилия) || [[ 33 ]]
|-
| [[Aggression]] (ʿadāʾ, iʿtidāʾ) || [[Агрессия]] || [[ 34 ]]
|-
| [[Agriculture]] (zirāʿa) || [[Земледелие]] || [[ 35 ]]
|-
| [[Agriculture and Vegetation]] || [[ Земледелие и растительность ]] || [[ 36 ]]
|-
| [[Aḥmad]] || [[Ахмад]] (пророк) || [[أحمد‎]]
|-
| [[Air and Wind]] || [[Воздух и ветер]] || [[ 38 ]]
|-
| [[Alaqa]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 39 ]]
|-
| [[ Al-'Arim ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 40 ]]
|-
| [[Alexander]] || [[Александр]] || [[ 41 ]]
|-
| [['Ali bin Abi Talib]] || [[Али ибн Абу Талиб]] || [[علي بن أبي طالب]]
|-
| [[Allāh]] || [[Аллах]] || [[الله]]
|-
| [[Alliance and Treaty]] (ʿahd; ʿaqd; aymān; dhimma; ḥilf; mīthāq) || [[Союзничество и договор]] || [[ 44 ]]
|-
| [[Almsgiving]] (ṣadaqa) || [[Садака]] || [[صدقة‎]]
|-
| [[Ambiguous]] || [[ Двусмысленный ]] || [[ 47 ]]
|-
| [[Amulets]] || [[Амулеты]] || [[ 48 ]]
|-
| [[Anatomy]] || [[Анатомия]] || [[ 49 ]]
|-
|-
| [[Angel(s)]] (malak, malāʾika) || [[Ангел]] || [[ 51 ]]
|-
| [[Anger]] (ghaḍab, ghayẓ, sakhaṭ) || [[Гнев]] || [[ 53 ]]
|-
| [[Animal Life]] || [[Животная жизнь]] || [[ 54 ]]
|-
| [[Animals]] (dābba, dawābb) || [[Животные]] || [[ 55 ]]
|-
| [[Anointing]] || [[Помазывание]] || [[ 56 ]]
|-
| [[Anonymous Mentions]] (mubhamāt) || [[ А ]] || [[ 57 ]]
|-
| [[Anṣār]] || [[Ансары]] || [[ 58 ]]
|-
| [[Anthropomorphism]] || [[Антропоморфизм]] || [[ 59 ]]
|-
| [[Antichrist]] || [[Антихрист]] (Масих ад-Даджал) || [[ 60 ]]
|-
| [[Apocalypse]] || [[Апокалипсис]] || [[ 61 ]]
|-
| [[Apologetics]] || [[Апологетика]] || [[ 62 ]]
|-
| [[Apostasy]] (ridda) || [[Вероотступничество]] (ридда) || [[ 64 ]]
|-
| [[Apostle]] || [[Апостол]] || [[ 65 ]]
|-
| [[Apparition]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 66 ]]
|-
| [[Apportionment]] (qadr, taqdīr) || [[ А ]] || [[ 67 ]]
|-
| [[Aqṣā Mosque]] || [[Аль-Акса]] || [[المسجد الاقصى‎]]
|-
| [[Arabic]] || [[Арабский]] || [[ 70 ]]
|-
| [[Arabic Language]] || [[Арабский язык]] || [[لغة عربية]]
|-
| [[Arabic Script]] || [[Арабская письменность]] || [[ 72 ]]
|-
| [[Arabs]] || [[Арабы]] || [[ 73 ]]
|-
| [[Arafāt]] || [[Арафат]] (гора) || [[ 74 ]]
|-
| [[Arbitration]] (taḥkīm) || [[ Арбитраж (третейский суд) ]] || [[ 77 ]]
|-
| [[ Archaeology and the Qur'an ]] || [[ Археология в Коране ]] || [[ 79 ]]
|-
| [[ Ark (fulk, safīna) ]] || [[ Ковчег ]] || [[ 81 ]]
|-
| [[ Arrogance ]] || [[ Высокомерие ]] || [[ 82 ]]
|-
| [[ Art and Architecture and the Qur'an ]] || [[ Искусство, архитектура в Коране ]] || [[ 83 ]]
|-
| [[ Artery and Vein ]] || [[ Артерия и вена ]] || [[ 84 ]]
|-
| [[ Ascension ]] || [[ Вознесение ]] || [[ 86 ]]
|-
| [[ Asceticism ]] || [[ Аскетизм ]] || [[ 87 ]]
|-
| [[ Ashes ]] || [[ Прах ]] || [[ 88 ]]
|-
| [[ Astray (ḍāll) ]] || [[ Заблудший ]] || [[ 90 ]]
|-
| [[ Atom (dharra) ]] || [[ Мельчайшая частица ]] || [[ 91 ]]
|-
| [[ Atonement ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 92 ]]
|-
| [[ Authority(ies) (sulṭān, ulū al-amr) ]] || [[ Власть ]] || [[ 94 ]]
|-
| [[ Avarice and Greed (bukhl, ḥirṣ, shuḥḥ) ]] || [[ Жадность и скупость ]] || [[ 96 ]]
|-
| [[ Awe of Allah (khashyat Allāh) ]] || [[ Богобоязненность ]] || [[ 97 ]]
|-
| [[ Ayyūb ]] || [[ Айюб (пророк) ]] || [[ 98 ]]
|-
| [[ Āzar ]] || [[ Азар ]] || [[ 99 ]]
|-
| [[ Baal ]] || [[ Ваал ]] || [[ 102 ]]
|-
| [[ Bābil (Babel) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 103 ]]
|-
| [[ Babylon ]] || [[ Вавилон ]] || [[ 104 ]]
|-
| [[ Backbiting (ghība) ]] || [[ Злословие ]] || [[ 105 ]]
|-
| [[ Badr ]] || [[ Бадр ]] || [[ 106 ]]
|-
| [[ Baha"is ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 108 ]]
|-
| [[ Baʿl ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 109 ]]
|-
| [[ Baptism ]] || [[ Крещение ]] || [[ 110 ]]
|-
| [[ Barelwis ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 111 ]]
|-
| [[ Barrier ]] || [[ Преграда ]] || [[ 112 ]]
|-
| [[ Barzakh ]] || [[ Барзах ]] || [[ 113 ]]
|-
| [[ Basmala (Theonymic Invocation) ]] || [[ Басмала ]] || [[ 116 ]]
|-
| [[ Beautiful Names of Allah (asmāʾ al-ḥusnā) ]] || [[ Прекрасные имена Аллаха ]] || [[ 117 ]]
|-
| [[ Beauty (ḥusn, jamāl, zīna) ]] || [[ Прелесть (красота, украшение) ]] || [[ 119 ]]
|-
| [[ Bedouin(s) (aʿrāb) ]] || [[ Бедуин ]] || [[ 121 ]]
|-
| [[ Beguilement (istidrāj, imhāl) ]] || [[ Отсрочка ]] || [[ 122 ]]
|-
| [[ Belief (īmān) ]] || [[ Вера (иман) ]] || [[ 123 ]]
|-
| [[ Belief and Unbelief ]] || [[ Вера и неверие ]] || [[ 124 ]]
|-
| [[ Believer(s) (muʾmin, muʾminūn) ]] || [[ Верующие ]] || [[ 125 ]]
|-
| [[ Belying the Prophet ]] || [[ Отвержение пророка ]] || [[ 126 ]]
|-
| [[ Benjamin ]] || [[ Буньямин (Вениамин) ]] || [[ 127 ]]
|-
| [[ Bible ]] || [[ Библия ]] || [[ 128 ]]
|-
| [[ Bilqis ]] || [[ Царица Савская ]] || [[ 129 ]]
|-
| [[ Biology as the Creation and Stages of Life ]] || [[ Биология как творение и стадии жизни ]] || [[ 130 ]]
|-
| [[ Birth (wilāda) ]] || [[ Рождение ]] || [[ 132 ]]
|-
| [[ Birth Control ]] || [[ Контроль рождаемости ]] || [[ 133 ]]
|-
| [[ Blasphemy (Ilḥād) ]] || [[ Богохульство ]] || [[ 135 ]]
|-
| [[ Blessing ]] || [[ Благословение ]] || [[ 136 ]]
|-
| [[ Blessings, Bounties and Favors of Allah (barakāt, faḍl Allāh, mann Allāh, naʿīm, niʿmat Allāh) ]] || [[ Благословения, щедроты и милости Аллаха ]] || [[ 137 ]]
|-
| [[ Blood (dam) ]] || [[ Кровь ]] || [[ دم]]
|-
| [[ Blood and Blood Clot ]] || [[ Кровь и сгусток крови ]] || [[ 139 ]]
|-
| [[ Blood Money (diya) ]] || [[ Плата за кровь ]] || [[ دية‎]]
|-
| [[ Bloodshed ]] || [[ Кровопролитие ]] || [[ 142 ]]
|-
| [[ Bloodshed (safk al-dam) ]] || [[ Кровопролитие ]] || [[ 143 ]]
|-
| [[ Boast ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 144 ]]
|-
| [[ Body (badan, jism, jasad) ]] || [[ Тело ]] || [[ 145 ]]
|-
| [[ Bones (ʿiẓām) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 146 ]]
|-
| [[ Book ]] || [[ Книга ]] || [[ 147 ]]
|-
| [[ Book(s) (kitāb, kutub, ṣuḥuf) ]] || [[ Книга, Книги ]] || [[ 148 ]]
|-
| [[ Booty ]] || [[ Трофеи ]] || [[ 149 ]]
|-
| [[ Booty (maghānim, ghanima, afāʾa, anfāl) ]] || [[ Трофеи ]] || [[ 150 ]]
|-
| [[ Boundaries and Precepts ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 151 ]]
|-
| [[ Boundaries of Allah (ḥudūd Allah) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 152 ]]
|-
| [[ Bowing and Prostrating (rukūʿ, sujūd) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 153 ]]
|-
| [[ Bowing and Prostration ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 154 ]]
|-
| [[ Bread ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 155 ]]
|-
| [[ Breaking Trusts and Contracts ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 156 ]]
|-
| [[ Breastfeeding (raḍāʿ) ]] || [[ Грудное вскармливание ]] || [[ 157 ]]
|-
| [[ Bribery (suḥt, ighlāl) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 158 ]]
|-
| [[ Bridewealth ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 159 ]]
|-
| [[ Brother and Brotherhood ]] || [[ Брат и братство ]] || [[ 160 ]]
|-
| [[ Brother and Brotherhood (akh, ikhwān, akhawāt) ]] || [[ Брат и братство ]] || [[ 161 ]]
|-
| [[ Burial ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 162 ]]
|-
| [[ Burial (iqbār, muwārāt) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 163 ]]
|-
| [[ Buying and Selling (bayʿ, shirāʾ) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 164 ]]
|-
| [[ Byzantines ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 165 ]]
|-
| [[ C ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ ]]
|-
| [[ Cain and Abel ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 167 ]]
|-
| [[ Calendar ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 168 ]]
|-
| [[ Calf (ʿijl) ]] || [[ Телец ]] || [[ 169 ]]
|-
| [[ Calf of Gold ]] || [[ Золотой телец ]] || [[ 170 ]]
|-
| [[ Caliph ]] || [[ Халиф ]] || [[ 171 ]]
|-
| [[ Caliph (khalīfa) ]] || [[ Халиф ]] || [[ 172 ]]
|-
| [[ Call to Prayer (adhān, iqāma) ]] || [[ Призыв к молитве ]] || [[ 173 ]]
|-
| [[ Calligraphy ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 174 ]]
|-
| [[ Calling to Allah (daʿwa) ]] || [[ Призыв к Аллаху ]] || [[ 175 ]]
|-
| [[ Calumny (buhtān) ]] || [[ Клевета ]] || [[ 176 ]]
|-
| [[ Camel ]] || [[ Верблюд ]] || [[ 177 ]]
|-
| [[ Camphor ]] || [[ Камфара ]] || [[ 178 ]]
|-
| [[ Canonical Recitations (qirāʾāt) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 179 ]]
|-
| [[ Captives ]] || [[ Пленники ]] || [[ 180 ]]
|-
| [[ Captives (asīr, asārā) ]] || [[ Пленники ]] || [[ 181 ]]
|-
| [[ Caravan ]] || [[ Караван ]] || [[ 182 ]]
|-
| [[ Caravan (qāfila, sayyāra) ]] || [[ Караван ]] || [[ 183 ]]
|-
| [[ Carrion ]] || [[ Мертвечина ]] || [[ 184 ]]
|-
| [[ Carrion (mayta) ]] || [[ Мертвечина ]] || [[ 185 ]]
|-
| [[ Cave ]] || [[ Пещера ]] || [[ 186 ]]
|-
| [[ Cave (ghār) ]] || [[ Пещера ]] || [[ 187 ]]
|-
| [[ Chambers (ḥujurāt) ]] || [[ Комнаты ]] || [[ 188 ]]
|-
| [[ Chastisement and Punishment ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 189 ]]
|-
| [[ Chastity ]] || [[ целомудрие ]] || [[ 190 ]]
|-
| [[ Chastity (iḥṣān, taʿaffuf) ]] || [[ целомудрие ]] || [[ 191 ]]
|-
| [[ Cheating ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 192 ]]
|-
| [[ Cheating (akl amwāl al-nās bi-l-bāṭil, bakhs, taghābun, taṭfīf) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 193 ]]
|-
| [[ Childhood and Youth (ṭifl, ghulām, fatā) ]] || [[ Детство и юность ]] || [[ 194 ]]
|-
| [[ Children ]] || [[ Дети ]] || [[ 195 ]]
|-
| [[ Children (dhurriyya, ibn, banūn, walad, awlād, ḥaml, mawʾūda) ]] || [[ Дети ]] || [[ 196 ]]
|-
| [[ Children of Israel ]] || [[ Дети Израиля ]] || [[ 197 ]]
|-
| [[ Children of Isrāʾīl (banū Isrāʾīl) ]] || [[ Дети Исраила ]] || [[ 198 ]]
|-
| [[ Christianity (naṣrāniyya) ]] || [[ Христианство ]] || [[ 199 ]]
|-
| [[ Christians and Christianity ]] || [[ Христиане и христианство ]] || [[ 200 ]]
|-
| [[ Chronicles of the Qurʾān (qaṣaṣ, qiṣaṣ al-Qurʾān) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 201 ]]
|-
| [[ Chronology and the Qur"an ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 202 ]]
|-
| [[ Church ]] || [[ Церковь ]] || [[ 203 ]]
|-
| [[ Churches, Synagogues and Monasteries (biyaʿ, ṣawāmiʿ) ]] || [[ Церкви, Синагоги и Монастыри ]] || [[ 204 ]]
|-
| [[ Circumcision ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 205 ]]
|-
| [[ City ]] || [[ Город ]] || [[ 206 ]]
|-
| [[ City (balad, qarya, madīna) ]] || [[ Город ]] || [[ 207 ]]
|-
| [[ Clay ]] || [[ Глина ]] || [[ 208 ]]
|-
| [[ Clay (ṭīn, ṣalṣāl) ]] || [[ Глина ]] || [[ 209 ]]
|-
| [[ Cleanliness and Ablution ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 210 ]]
|-
| [[ Client(s) (mawlā) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 211 ]]
|-
| [[ Clients and Clientage ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 212 ]]
|-
| [[ Clothing ]] || [[ Одежда ]] || [[ 213 ]]
|-
| [[ Clouds (ghamām, muzn, saḥāb, ʿāriḍ) ]] || [[ Облака ]] || [[ 214 ]]
|-
| [[ Codices of the Qur"an ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 215 ]]
|-
| [[ Coercion (ikrāh) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 216 ]]
|-
| [[ Coherence of the Qurʾān (naẓm) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 217 ]]
|-
| [[ Collection of the Qur"an ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 218 ]]
|-
| [[ Color(s) (lawn, alwān, ṣibgha) ]] || [[ Цвет, цвета ]] || [[ 219 ]]
|-
| [[ Colors ]] || [[ Цвета ]] || [[ 220 ]]
|-
| [[ Commanding Good and Forbidding Wrong (amr bil-maʿrūf, nahī ʿan al-munkar) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 221 ]]
|-
| [[ Commandments ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 222 ]]
|-
| [[ Community (umma) ]] || [[ Община ]] || [[ 223 ]]
|-
| [[ Community and Society in the Qur"an ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 224 ]]
|-
| [[ Companion (sāḥib) ]] || [[ Сподвижник ]] || [[ 225 ]]
|-
| [[ Companions of the Prophet ]] || [[ Сподвижники Пророка ]] || [[ 226 ]]
|-
| [[ Companions of the Prophet (aṣāḥ al-Rasūl) ]] || [[ Сподвижники Пророка ]] || [[ 227 ]]
|-
| [[ Competition (tanāfus fīl dunyā, takāthur, tafākhur, tasābuq fīl khayrāt) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 228 ]]
|-
| [[ Compilation of the Qurʾān (jamʿ al-Qurʾān) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 229 ]]
|-
| [[ Computers and the Qur"an ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 230 ]]
|-
| [[ Conceit ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 231 ]]
|-
| [[ Concubines ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 232 ]]
|-
| [[ Confidences (najwā, tanājī) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 233 ]]
|-
| [[ Conjecture (ẓann) ]] || [[ Предположение ]] || [[ 234 ]]
|-
| [[ Conquest ]] || [[ Победа ]] || [[ 235 ]]
|-
| [[ Conquest (fatḥ) ]] || [[ Победа ]] || [[ 236 ]]
|-
| [[ Consecration of Animals ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 237 ]]
|-
| [[ Consecration of Animals (Q 5:103) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 238 ]]
|-
| [[ Consolation ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 239 ]]
|-
| [[ Consultation ]] || [[ Совет ]] || [[ 240 ]]
|-
| [[ Consultation (shūrā) ]] || [[ Совет ]] || [[ 241 ]]
|-
| [[ Contamination ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 242 ]]
|-
| [[ Contemplation (tafakkur, tadabbur) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 243 ]]
|-
| [[ Contemporary Critical Practices and the Qur"an ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 244 ]]
|-
| [[ Contentment (riḍwān, riḍā, yarḍā) ]] || [[ Довольство ]] || [[ 245 ]]
|-
| [[ Contracts and Alliances ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 246 ]]
|-
| [[ Conversion ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 247 ]]
|-
| [[ Conveying the Message (balāgh) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 248 ]]
|-
| [[ Coral ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 249 ]]
|-
| [[ Corruption ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 250 ]]
|-
| [[ Corruption (fasād, fisq, ʿanat) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 251 ]]
|-
| [[ Cosmology ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 252 ]]
|-
| [[ Cosmology ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 253 ]]
|-
| [[ Courage ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 254 ]]
|-
| [[ Court ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 255 ]]
|-
| [[ Covenant ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 256 ]]
|-
| [[ Covenant (mīthāq) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 257 ]]
|-
| [[ Createdness of the Qur"an ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 258 ]]
|-
| [[ Creation ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 259 ]]
|-
| [[ Creation (khalq, takwīn) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 260 ]]
|-
| [[ Creeds ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 261 ]]
|-
| [[ Criterion ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 262 ]]
|-
| [[ Criterion (furqān) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 263 ]]
|-
| [[ Crucifixion ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 264 ]]
|-
| [[ Crucifixion (ṣalb) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 265 ]]
|-
| [[ Cups (akwāb) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 266 ]]
|-
| [[ Cups and Vessels ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 267 ]]
|-
| [[ Curse ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 268 ]]
|-
| [[ Curse (laʿna) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 269 ]]
|-
| [[ D ]] || [[ ]] || [[ ]]
|-
| [[ Darkness ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 271 ]]
|-
| [[ Darkness (aẓlama, muẓlimūn, janna al-layl) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 272 ]]
|-
| [[ Date Palm ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 273 ]]
|-
| [[ Date Palm (nakhl) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 274 ]]
|-
| [[ David ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 275 ]]
|-
| [[ Dawn (fajr, ṣubḥ) and Morning (bukra, ghuduw, ḍuḥā) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 276 ]]
|-
| [[ Dāwūd (David) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 277 ]]
|-
| [[ Day (yawm) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 278 ]]
|-
| [[ Day and Night ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 279 ]]
|-
| [[ Day of Judgment (Yawm al-ḥisāb) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 280 ]]
|-
| [[ Day, Times of ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 281 ]]
|-
| [[ Days of Allah (ayyām Allāh) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 282 ]]
|-
| [[ Days of God ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 283 ]]
|-
| [[ Death and the Dead ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 284 ]]
|-
| [[ Death and the Dead (mawt, yaqīn, mayyat) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 285 ]]
|-
| [[ Debate and Disputation ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 286 ]]
|-
| [[ Debt ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 287 ]]
|-
| [[ Debt (dayn) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 288 ]]
|-
| [[ Deceit and Delusion (ghurūr, khidāʿ, izlāl) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 289 ]]
|-
| [[ Decision ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 290 ]]
|-
| [[ Deeds (aʿmāl, ytafʿalūn, ḥasanāt, sayyiāʾt, al-bāqiyāt al-ṣāliḥāt) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 291 ]]
|-
| [[ Deferral ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 292 ]]
|-
| [[ Deliverance ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 293 ]]
|-
| [[ Deliverance (khalāṣ, maḥīṣ, rawḥ Allāh, najāt) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 294 ]]
|-
| [[ Deluge (ṭūfān) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 295 ]]
|-
| [[ Demanding Gratitude (mann) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 296 ]]
|-
| [[ Deobandis ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 297 ]]
|-
| [[ Descent of the Qurʾān (nuzūl, al-makkī wal-madanī) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 298 ]]
|-
| [[ Despair ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 299 ]]
|-
| [[ Despair (yaʾs, qunūṭ) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 300 ]]
|-
| [[ Destiny ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 301 ]]
|-
| [[ Devil ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 302 ]]
|-
| [[ Dhu l-Kifl ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 303 ]]
|-
| [[ Dhūl-Kifl ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 304 ]]
|-
| [[ Dhūl-Qarnayn ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 305 ]]
|-
| [[ Dialects ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 306 ]]
|-
| [[ Dialogues ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 307 ]]
|-
| [[ Dialogues in the Qurʾān (munājāt al-Qurʾān) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 308 ]]
|-
| [[ Difficult Passages ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 309 ]]
|-
| [[ Difficult Passages of the Qurʾān (mushkil al-Qurʾān) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 310 ]]
|-
| [[ Disbelief (kufr) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 311 ]]
|-
| [[ Disbeliever(s) (kāfirūn, kuffār) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 312 ]]
|-
| [[ Disciples of ʿĪṣā, upon him peace (ḥawāriyyūn) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 313 ]]
|-
| [[ Disobedience ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 314 ]]
|-
| [[ Disobedience (fusūq, ʿiṣyān) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 315 ]]
|-
| [[ Dissension ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 316 ]]
|-
| [[ Dissimulation ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 317 ]]
|-
| [[ Disunity and Disagreement (iftirāq, tafarruq, ikhtilāf, shiyaʿ) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 318 ]]
|-
| [[ Divination ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 319 ]]
|-
| [[ Divine Decree (qaḍāʾ and qadar; amr Allāh) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 320 ]]
|-
| [[ Dog ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 321 ]]
|-
| [[ Doubt ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 322 ]]
|-
| [[ Dowry (ṣadāq, ajr) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 323 ]]
|-
| [[ Dreams and Sleep ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 324 ]]
|-
| [[ Dreams and their Interpretation (ruʾyā, taʿbīr al-ruʾyā) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 325 ]]
|-
| [[ Drowning ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 326 ]]
|-
| [[ Drowning (gharq) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 327 ]]
|-
| [[ Druzes ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 328 ]]
|-
| [[ E ]] || [[ ]] || [[ ]]
|-
| [[ Ear(s) (udhun) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 330 ]]
|-
| [[ Ears ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 331 ]]
|-
| [[ Earth ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 332 ]]
|-
| [[ Earth (arḍ, sāhira) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 333 ]]
|-
| [[ East and West (mashriq, maghrib) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 334 ]]
|-
| [[ Eclipses (kusūf, khusūf) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 335 ]]
|-
| [[ Economics ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 336 ]]
|-
| [[ Egypt ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 337 ]]
|-
| [[ Egypt (miṣr) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 338 ]]
|-
| [[ Election ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 339 ]]
|-
| [[ Election (iṣṭifāʾ, ijtibāʾ) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 340 ]]
|-
| [[ Elijah ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 341 ]]
|-
| [[ Elisha ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 342 ]]
|-
| [[ Embellishments (zukhruf, zīna) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 343 ]]
|-
| [[ Emigrants and Helpers ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 344 ]]
|-
| [[ Emigration ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 345 ]]
|-
| [[ Enemies ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 346 ]]
|-
| [[ Enmity and Enemies (ʿadāwa, ʿudwān, aʿdāʾ) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 347 ]]
|-
| [[ Enormities (kabāʾir) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 348 ]]
|-
| [[ Enumerating Divine Favors (ʿadd niʿmat Allāh) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 349 ]]
|-
| [[ Envy ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 350 ]]
|-
| [[ Envy (ḥasad) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 351 ]]
|-
| [[ Epigraphy ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 352 ]]
|-
| [[ Error ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 353 ]]
|-
| [[ Eschatology ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 354 ]]
|-
| [[ Eternity ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 355 ]]
|-
| [[ Eternity (khulūd, abad, azal, sarmad) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 356 ]]
|-
| [[ Ethics ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 357 ]]
|-
| [[ Ethics and the Qur"an ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 358 ]]
|-
| [[ Ethiopia ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 359 ]]
|-
| [[ Etiquettes (ādāb) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 360 ]]
|-
| [[ Evening ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 361 ]]
|-
| [[ Evening (aṣīl, ʿashiyya, maghrib, ānāʾ al-layl) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 362 ]]
|-
| [[ Everyday Life, Qur"an In ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 363 ]]
|-
| [[ Evil ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 364 ]]
|-
| [[ Evil Deeds ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 365 ]]
|-
| [[ Excellence (iḥsān) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 366 ]]
|-
| [[ Exegesis of the Qur"an: Classical and Medieval ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 367 ]]
|-
| [[ Exegesis of the Qur"an: Early Modern and Contemporary ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 368 ]]
|-
| [[ Exegesis of the Qurʾān ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 369 ]]
|-
| [[ Exhortations ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 370 ]]
|-
| [[ Exhortations (ʿiẓa, mawʿiẓa) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 371 ]]
|-
| [[ Expeditions and Battles ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 372 ]]
|-
| [[ Expiation (kaffāra) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 373 ]]
|-
| [[ Eyes ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 374 ]]
|-
| [[ Eyes and Eyesight (ʿayn, ʿaynayn, baṣar, abṣār) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 375 ]]
|-
| [[ Ezekiel ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 376 ]]
|-
| [[ Ezra ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 377 ]]
|-
| [[ F ]] || [[ ]] || [[ ]]
|-
| [[ Fa†ima ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 379 ]]
|-
| [[ Face ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 380 ]]
|-
| [[ Face (wajh) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 381 ]]
|-
| [[ Face of Allah (wajh Allāh) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 382 ]]
|-
| [[ Face of God ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 383 ]]
|-
| [[ Failure ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 384 ]]
|-
| [[ Failure (khayb, khusrān, ḥubūṭ al-ʿamal) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 385 ]]
|-
| [[ Faith ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 386 ]]
|-
| [[ Fall of Man ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 387 ]]
|-
| [[ Falsehood (kadhib, iftirāʾ, bāṭil, ifk, taqawwal) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 388 ]]
|-
| [[ Family ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 389 ]]
|-
| [[ Family and Household (ahl) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 390 ]]
|-
| [[ Family of the Prophet ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 391 ]]
|-
| [[ Family of the Prophet (ahl al-bayt) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 392 ]]
|-
| [[ Famine ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 393 ]]
|-
| [[ Famine (masghaba, jūʿ, sana) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 394 ]]
|-
| [[ Farewell Pilgrimage ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 395 ]]
|-
| [[ Farewell Pilgrimage (ḥijjat al-wadāʿ) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 396 ]]
|-
| [[ Fasting ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 397 ]]
|-
| [[ Fasting (ṣawm) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 398 ]]
|-
| [[ Fate ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 399 ]]
|-
| [[ Fati.a ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 400 ]]
|-
| [[ Fatigue (naṣab, sina, lughūb) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 401 ]]
|-
| [[ Fear ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 402 ]]
|-
| [[ Fear (khawf, ḥidhr; ishfāq; rahaba; fazaʿ; ruʿb, wajal) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 403 ]]
|-
| [[ Feet ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 404 ]]
|-
| [[ Feet (qadam, aqdām, rijl, arjul) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 405 ]]
|-
| [[ Felicity and wretchedness (saʿāda, shiqwa) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 406 ]]
|-
| [[ Feminism and the Qur"an ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 407 ]]
|-
| [[ Festivals and Commemorative Days ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 408 ]]
|-
| [[ Fighting ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 409 ]]
|-
|-
| [[ Firʿawn ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 410 ]]
|-
| [[ Fire ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 411 ]]
|-
| [[ Fire, firebrand, torch (nār, qabas, shihāb) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 412 ]]
|-
| [[ Flogging ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 413 ]]
|-
| [[ Flying ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 414 ]]
|-
| [[ Food and Drink ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 415 ]]
|-
| [[ Food and Drink (ṭaʿām, sharāb; iṭʿām) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 416 ]]
|-
| [[ Fools (sufahāʾ) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 417 ]]
|-
| [[ Footstool (kursī) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 418 ]]
|-
| [[ Forbidden ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 419 ]]
|-
| [[ Foreign Vocabulary ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 420 ]]
|-
| [[ Foreign Words of the Qurʾān (al-mustaʿrab) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 421 ]]
|-
| [[ Foretelling in the Qur"an ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 422 ]]
|-
| [[ Forgery ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 423 ]]
|-
| [[ Forgetfulness (nisyān) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 424 ]]
|-
| [[ Forgiveness ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 425 ]]
|-
| [[ Forgiveness and Forbearance (ghufrān, maghfira, ʿafw, ṣafḥ, istighfār) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 426 ]]
|-
| [[ Form and Structure of the Qur"an ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 427 ]]
|-
| [[ Fosterage ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 428 ]]
|-
| [[ Freedom and Emancipation (ḥurr, taḥrīr, iʿtāq, fakku raqaba) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 429 ]]
|-
| [[ Freedom and Predestination ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 430 ]]
|-
| [[ Friday (Jumuʿa) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 431 ]]
|-
| [[ Friday Prayer ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 432 ]]
|-
| [[ Friends and Friendship ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 433 ]]
|-
| [[ Friends and Friendship (waliy, walāya) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 434 ]]
|-
| [[ Friends of Allah (awliyāʾ Allāh) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 435 ]]
|-
| [[ Fruits ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 436 ]]
|-
| [[ Furniture and Furnishings ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 437 ]]
|-
| [[ G ]] || [[ ]] || [[ ]]
|-
| [[ Gabriel ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 439 ]]
|-
| [[ Gambling ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 440 ]]
|-
| [[ Gambling (maysir) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 441 ]]
|-
| [[ Garden ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 442 ]]
|-
| [[ Garden (janna) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 443 ]]
|-
| [[ Garments (libās, thiyāb, ḥilya) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 444 ]]
|-
| [[ Gate (bāb) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 445 ]]
|-
| [[ Gender ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 446 ]]
|-
| [[ Generations ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 447 ]]
|-
| [[ Generosity (ikrām, inʿām) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 448 ]]
|-
| [[ Geography ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 449 ]]
|-
| [[ Geography of and in the Qurʾān ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 450 ]]
|-
| [[ Gift-Giving ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 451 ]]
|-
| [[ Glad Tidings and Warnings (bushrā, nudhur) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 452 ]]
|-
| [[ Glorification (tasbīḥ) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 453 ]]
|-
| [[ Glorification of God ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 454 ]]
|-
| [[ Glory ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 455 ]]
|-
| [[ God and his Attributes ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 456 ]]
|-
| [[ Gog and Magog ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 457 ]]
|-
| [[ Gold ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 458 ]]
|-
| [[ Gold and Silver (dhahab, wariq, fiḍḍa, ḥulī) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 459 ]]
|-
| [[ Goliath ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 460 ]]
|-
| [[ Good and Evil ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 461 ]]
|-
| [[ Good Deeds ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 462 ]]
|-
| [[ Good News ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 463 ]]
|-
| [[ Gospel ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 464 ]]
|-
| [[ Gossip ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 465 ]]
|-
| [[ Gossip (hamz, lamz, namīma) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 466 ]]
|-
| [[ Grace ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 467 ]]
|-
| [[ Grammar and the Qur"an ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 468 ]]
|-
| [[ Grasses ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 469 ]]
|-
| [[ Gratitude (shukr) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 470 ]]
|-
| [[ Gratitude and Ingratitude ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 471 ]]
|-
| [[ Grave (qabr, ajdāth) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 472 ]]
|-
| [[ Greetings (taḥiyya) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 473 ]]
|-
| [[ Guardianship ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 474 ]]
|-
| [[ Guardianship (kafāla, wilāyat ʿadl) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 475 ]]
|-
| [[ Guest and Hospitality (ḍayf) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 476 ]]
|-
| [[ Guidance and Misguidance (hudā, ḍalāl) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 477 ]]
|-
| [[ H ]] || [[ ]] || [[ ]]
|-
| [[ Hadith and the Qur"an ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 479 ]]
|-
| [[ Hafsa ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 480 ]]
|-
| [[ Hajj (ḥajj) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 481 ]]
|-
| [[ Hāmān ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 482 ]]
|-
| [[ Haman ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 483 ]]
|-
| [[ Hamza b. 'Abd al-Mu††alib ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 484 ]]
|-
| [[ Hand (s) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 485 ]]
|-
| [[ Hand of Allah (yad Allāh) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 486 ]]
|-
| [[ Hand(s) (yad, aydī) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 487 ]]
|-
| [[ Hanif ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 488 ]]
|-
| [[ Ḥanīf and Ḥunafāʾ ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 489 ]]
|-
| [[ Happiness and Sadness (faraḥ, ḥuzn) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 490 ]]
|-
| [[ Harmony and Balance (I’tidal, wasatiyya) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 491 ]]
|-
| [[ Hārūn (Aaron) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 492 ]]
|-
| [[ Harūt and Mārūt ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 493 ]]
|-
| [[ Harut and Marut ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 494 ]]
|-
| [[ Ḥawwāʾ (Eve) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 495 ]]
|-
| [[ Head (raʾs) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 496 ]]
|-
| [[ Health and Sickness (ṣāliḥ, ḥariḍ, mariḍ) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 497 ]]
|-
| [[ Hearing and Deafness ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 498 ]]
|-
| [[ Hearing and Deafness (samʿ, ṣumm) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 499 ]]
|-
| [[ Heart ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 500 ]]
|-
| [[ Heart (qalb, fuāʾd, ṣadr, baṣīra) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 501 ]]
|-
| [[ Heaven and Sky ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 502 ]]
|-
| [[ Heavenly Book ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 503 ]]
|-
| [[ Heedlessness (ghafla) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 504 ]]
|-
| [[ Heights (aʿrāf) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 505 ]]
|-
| [[ Hell (jaḥīm, jahannam, nār, saʿīr, ṣaqar) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 506 ]]
|-
| [[ Hell and Hellfire ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 507 ]]
|-
| [[ Hereafter (al-Ākhira) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 508 ]]
|-
| [[ Heresy ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 509 ]]
|-
| [[ Hidden and the Hidden ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 510 ]]
|-
| [[ Hides and Fleece ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 511 ]]
|-
| [[ Hiding Knowledge (katama) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 512 ]]
|-
| [[ Highmost Places (ʿIlliyyūn) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 513 ]]
|-
| [[ Hijr ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 514 ]]
|-
| [[ Hijra ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 515 ]]
|-
| [[ History and the Qur"an ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 516 ]]
|-
| [[ Holy Spirit ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 517 ]]
|-
| [[ Holy Spirit (rūḥ al-qudus) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 518 ]]
|-
| [[ Homosexuality ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 519 ]]
|-
| [[ Homosexuality ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 520 ]]
|-
| [[ Honey ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 521 ]]
|-
| [[ Honey (ʿasal) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 522 ]]
|-
| [[ Honor ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 523 ]]
|-
| [[ Hope ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 524 ]]
|-
| [[ Hope (rajāʾ, ṭamaʿ, amal) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 525 ]]
|-
| [[ Hospitality and Courtesy ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 526 ]]
|-
| [[ Hostages ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 527 ]]
|-
| [[ Hot and Cold ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 528 ]]
|-
| [[ Houris ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 529 ]]
|-
| [[ Houris (ḥūr) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 530 ]]
|-
| [[ House of ʿImrān (Āl ʿImrān) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 531 ]]
|-
| [[ House, Domestic and Divine ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 532 ]]
|-
| [[ Hud ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 533 ]]
|-
| [[ Hūd, upon him peace ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 534 ]]
|-
| [[ Hudaybiya ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 535 ]]
|-
| [[ Humans (banū Ādam) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 536 ]]
|-
| [[ Humility (khushūʿ, dhull) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 537 ]]
|-
| [[ Humor ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 538 ]]
|-
| [[ Ḥunayn ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 539 ]]
|-
| [[ Hunayn ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 540 ]]
|-
| [[ Hunting and Fishing ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 541 ]]
|-
| [[ Hunting and Game (ṣayd, ṣayd al-baḥr, ḥūt) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 542 ]]
|-
| [[ Hypocrisy and Hypocrites (nifāq, munāfiqūn) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 543 ]]
|-
| [[ Hypocrites and Hypocrisy ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 544 ]]
|-
| [[ I ]] || [[ ]] || [[ ]]
|-
| [[ Iafa and Marwa ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 546 ]]
|-
| [[ Iblis ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 547 ]]
|-
| [[ Ibrāhīm, upon him peace (Abraham) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 548 ]]
|-
| [[ Iconoclasm ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 549 ]]
|-
| [[ Idle Speech (laghw) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 550 ]]
|-
| [[ Idolatry and Idolaters ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 551 ]]
|-
| [[ Idols and Idolatry (aṣnām, awthān, jibt, ṭāghūt) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 552 ]]
|-
| [[ Idols and Images ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 553 ]]
|-
| [[ Idris ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 554 ]]
|-
| [[ Idrīs, upon him peace ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 555 ]]
|-
| [[ 'Ifrit ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 556 ]]
|-
| [[ Ignorance ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 557 ]]
|-
| [[ Ignorance (jahl) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 558 ]]
|-
| [[ Ilaf ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 559 ]]
|-
| [[ Illegitimacy ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 560 ]]
|-
| [[ Illiteracy ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 561 ]]
|-
| [[ 'Illiyyun ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 562 ]]
|-
| [[ Illness and Health ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 563 ]]
|-
| [[ Ilyās, upon him peace (Elijah) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 564 ]]
|-
| [[ Imam ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 565 ]]
|-
| [[ Immunity ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 566 ]]
|-
| [[ Impeccability ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 567 ]]
|-
| [[ Impotence ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 568 ]]
|-
| [[ 'Imran ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 569 ]]
|-
| [[ Indifference ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 570 ]]
|-
| [[ Infallibility of Prophets (ʿiṣmat al-anbiyā) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 571 ]]
|-
| [[ Infanticide ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 572 ]]
|-
| [[ Informants ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 573 ]]
|-
| [[ Ingratitude (kufr al-niʿma) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 574 ]]
|-
| [[ Inheritance ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 575 ]]
|-
| [[ Inheritance and Patrimony (mīrāth, turāth) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 576 ]]
|-
| [[ Inimitability ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 577 ]]
|-
| [[ Inimitability of the Qurʾān (iʿjāz) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 578 ]]
|-
| [[ Injīl (Evangel) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 579 ]]
|-
| [[ Injustice (ẓulm, ṭughyān) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 580 ]]
|-
| [[ Innate Nature (fiṭra) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 581 ]]
|-
| [[ Innovation ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 582 ]]
|-
| [[ Innovation (bidʿa) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 583 ]]
|-
| [[ Inquisition ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 584 ]]
|-
| [[ Insanity ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 585 ]]
|-
| [[ Insolence and Obstinacy ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 586 ]]
|-
| [[ Insolence and Obstinacy (ʿanīd) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 587 ]]
|-
| [[ Inspiration (ilhām) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 588 ]]
|-
| [[ Instruments ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 589 ]]
|-
| [[ Intellect ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 590 ]]
|-
| [[ Intellect (ʿaql, lubb) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 591 ]]
|-
| [[ Intention ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 592 ]]
|-
| [[ Intention (niyya) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 593 ]]
|-
| [[ Intercession ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 594 ]]
|-
| [[ Intercession (shafāʿa) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 595 ]]
|-
| [[ Interpretation (taʾwīl) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 596 ]]
|-
| [[ Intoxicants ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 597 ]]
|-
| [[ Intoxicants (khamr) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 598 ]]
|-
| [[ Invitation ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 599 ]]
|-
| [[ Iram ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 600 ]]
|-
| [[ Iram ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 601 ]]
|-
| [[ Iraq ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 602 ]]
|-
| [[ Iron (ḥadīd) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 603 ]]
|-
| [[ Īsā, upon him peace (Jesus) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 604 ]]
|-
| [[ Isaac ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 605 ]]
|-
| [[ Isaiah ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 606 ]]
|-
| [[ Isḥāq, upon him peace (Isaac) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 607 ]]
|-
| [[ Ishmael ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 608 ]]
|-
| [[ Islām ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 609 ]]
|-
| [[ Islam ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 610 ]]
|-
| [[ Ismāʿīl, upon him peace (Ishmael) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 611 ]]
|-
| [[ Israel ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 612 ]]
|-
| [[ J ]] || [[ ]] || [[ ]]
|-
| [[ Jacob ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 614 ]]
|-
| [[ Jāhiliyya ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 615 ]]
|-
| [[ Jālūt (Goliath) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 616 ]]
|-
| [[ Jerusalem ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 617 ]]
|-
| [[ Jesus ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 618 ]]
|-
| [[ Jews and Judaism ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 619 ]]
|-
| [[ Jibrīl, upon him peace (Gabriel) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 620 ]]
|-
| [[ Jibt ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 621 ]]
|-
| [[ Jihad ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 622 ]]
|-
| [[ Jihad ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 623 ]]
|-
| [[ Jinn ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 624 ]]
|-
| [[ Jinn ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 625 ]]
|-
| [[ Jizya ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 626 ]]
|-
| [[ Job ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 627 ]]
|-
| [[ John the Baptist ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 628 ]]
|-
| [[ Jonah ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 629 ]]
|-
| [[ Joseph ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 630 ]]
|-
| [[ Journey ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 631 ]]
|-
| [[ Joy and Misery ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 632 ]]
|-
| [[ Judgment ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 633 ]]
|-
| [[ Judgment (ḥukm, dīn, ḥisāb, raʾy etc ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 634 ]]
|-
| [[ Judi ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 635 ]]
|-
| [[ Just (al-Abrār, ṣiddiqūn, ṣāliḥūn) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 636 ]]
|-
| [[ Justice (ʿadl, qisṭ) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 637 ]]
|-
| [[ Justice and Injustice ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 638 ]]
|-
| [[ K ]] || [[ ]] || [[ ]]
|-
| [[ Kaʿba ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 640 ]]
|-
| [[ Ka'ba ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 641 ]]
|-
| [[ Kha.ir/Khi.r ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 642 ]]
|-
| [[ Khadija ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 643 ]]
|-
| [[ Khaḍir (al) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 644 ]]
|-
| [[ Kharijis ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 645 ]]
|-
| [[ Killing (qatl) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 646 ]]
|-
| [[ Kindered (ṣilat al-arḥām) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 647 ]]
|-
| [[ Kingdom and Kings (mulk, mulūk, malakūt) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 648 ]]
|-
| [[ Kings and Rulers ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 649 ]]
|-
| [[ Kinship ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 650 ]]
|-
| [[ Knowledge (ʿilm, maʿrifa) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 651 ]]
|-
| [[ Knowledge and Learning ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 652 ]]
|-
| [[ Korah ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 653 ]]
|-
| [[ L ]] || [[ ]] || [[ ]]
|-
| [[ Lactation ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 655 ]]
|-
| [[ Lamp ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 656 ]]
|-
| [[ Lamp (sirāj ) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 657 ]]
|-
| [[ Language and Speech (kalām, lisān) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 658 ]]
|-
| [[ Language and Style of the Qur"an ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 659 ]]
|-
| [[ Language of the Qurʾān (lughat al-Qurʾān) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 660 ]]
|-
| [[ Language, Concept of ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 661 ]]
|-
| [[ Last Judgment ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 662 ]]
|-
| [[ Laudation ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 663 ]]
|-
| [[ Laughter ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 664 ]]
|-
| [[ Laughter and Weeping (ḍaḥik, bukāʾ) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 665 ]]
|-
| [[ Law (shirʿa, sharīʿa) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 666 ]]
|-
| [[ Law and the Qur"an ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 667 ]]
|-
| [[ Lawful and Unlawful ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 668 ]]
|-
| [[ Lawful and Unlawful (ḥalāl, ḥarām) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 669 ]]
|-
| [[ Left Hand and Right Hand ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 670 ]]
|-
| [[ Legal Punishments (ḥudūd, taʿzīr) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 671 ]]
|-
| [[ Legal Responsibility (taklīf) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 672 ]]
|-
| [[ Lessons of History (ʿibra) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 673 ]]
|-
| [[ Lie ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 674 ]]
|-
| [[ Life ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 675 ]]
|-
| [[ Life (ʿīsha, maʿāsh, maʿīsha, ḥayawān) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 676 ]]
|-
| [[ Life of this World (ḥayāt al-dunyā) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 677 ]]
|-
| [[ Light ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 678 ]]
|-
| [[ Light (nūr, ḍawā) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 679 ]]
|-
| [[ Literacy ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 680 ]]
|-
| [[ Literary Structures of the Qur"an ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 681 ]]
|-
| [[ Literature and the Qur"an ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 682 ]]
|-
| [[ Load or Burden ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 683 ]]
|-
| [[ Loan (qarḍ) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 684 ]]
|-
| [[ Lord ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 685 ]]
|-
| [[ Lordship (Rubūbiyya) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 686 ]]
|-
| [[ Loss (naqṣ, khasār) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 687 ]]
|-
| [[ Lot ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 688 ]]
|-
| [[ Love and Affection ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 689 ]]
|-
| [[ Love, Desire, and Lust (wudd, ḥubb, hawā) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 690 ]]
|-
| [[ Loyalty ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 691 ]]
|-
| [[ Luqmān ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 692 ]]
|-
| [[ Luqman ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 693 ]]
|-
| [[ Lūṭ, upon him peace (Lot) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 694 ]]
|-
| [[ M ]] || [[ ]] || [[ ]]
|-
| [[ Madina ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 696 ]]
|-
| [[ Madyan ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 697 ]]
|-
| [[ Magians ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 698 ]]
|-
| [[ Magic ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 699 ]]
|-
| [[ Magic (siḥr) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 700 ]]
|-
| [[ Maintenance and Upkeep ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 701 ]]
|-
| [[ Majūs (Zoroastrians) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 702 ]]
|-
| [[ Makka ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 703 ]]
|-
| [[ Manifest and Hidden (shahāda, ẓahara, baṭana, ghayb) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 704 ]]
|-
| [[ Manual Labor ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 705 ]]
|-
| [[ Manuscripts of the Qur"an ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 706 ]]
|-
| [[ Markets ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 707 ]]
|-
| [[ Marriage and Divorce ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 708 ]]
|-
| [[ Marriage and Divorce (nikāḥ, zawāj, ṭalāq, liʿān, ẓihār, khulʿ) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 709 ]]
|-
| [[ Martyrdom and Martyrs (shahāda, shuhadāʾ) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 710 ]]
|-
| [[ Martyrs ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 711 ]]
|-
| [[ Marvels ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 712 ]]
|-
| [[ Mary ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 713 ]]
|-
| [[ Maryam (Mary) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 714 ]]
|-
| [[ Mashʿar al-Ḥarām ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 715 ]]
|-
| [[ Masjid al-Ḥarām ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 716 ]]
|-
| [[ Material Culture and the Qur"an ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 717 ]]
|-
| [[ Maturity ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 718 ]]
|-
| [[ Measurement ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 719 ]]
|-
| [[ Mecca ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 720 ]]
|-
| [[ Media and the Qur"an ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 721 ]]
|-
| [[ Medicine (shifāʾ, ṭibb) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 722 ]]
|-
| [[ Medicine and the Qur"an ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 723 ]]
|-
| [[ Medina ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 724 ]]
|-
| [[ Memory ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 725 ]]
|-
| [[ Men (rijāl) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 726 ]]
|-
| [[ Men of the Cave ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 727 ]]
|-
| [[ Menstruation ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 728 ]]
|-
| [[ Menstruation (ḥayḍ) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 729 ]]
|-
| [[ Mercy ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 730 ]]
|-
| [[ Mercy (raḥma) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 731 ]]
|-
| [[ Messenger ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 732 ]]
|-
| [[ Metals and Minerals ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 733 ]]
|-
| [[ Metaphor ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 734 ]]
|-
| [[ Michael ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 735 ]]
|-
| [[ Midian ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 736 ]]
|-
| [[ Mīkāʾīl, upon him peace ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 737 ]]
|-
| [[ Milk ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 738 ]]
|-
| [[ Minerals (ḥajar, maʿādin) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 739 ]]
|-
| [[ Miracles ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 740 ]]
|-
| [[ Miracles (muʿjizāt) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 741 ]]
|-
| [[ Miracles of the Prophet, upon him peace and blessings ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 742 ]]
|-
| [[ Miscreants (mujrimūn) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 743 ]]
|-
| [[ Mockery ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 744 ]]
|-
| [[ Mockery (huzuw, sukhr) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 745 ]]
|-
| [[ Model of Excellence (uswatun ḥasana) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 746 ]]
|-
| [[ Moderation ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 747 ]]
|-
| [[ Moderation and the Middle Path (wasaṭiyya) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 748 ]]
|-
| [[ Modesty ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 749 ]]
|-
| [[ Monasticism and Monks ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 750 ]]
|-
| [[ Monasticism and Monks (rahbāniyya, qissīsiyya) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 751 ]]
|-
| [[ Money ]] || [[Деньги]] || [[ 752 ]]
|-
| [[ Months ]] || [[Месяц]] || [[ 753 ]]
|-
| [[ Moon ]] || [[Луна]] || [[ 754 ]]
|-
| [[ Moon (qamar) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 755 ]]
|-
| [[ Morning ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 756 ]]
|-
| [[ Moses ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 757 ]]
|-
| [[ Mosque ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 758 ]]
|-
| [[ Mosque (masjid) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 759 ]]
|-
| [[ Mosque of the Dissension ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 760 ]]
|-
| [[ Mother of Mūsā (Umm Mūsā) ]] || [[Мать Мусы]] || [[ 761 ]]
|-
| [[ Mountains]] (jibāl) || [[Горы]] || [[ 762 ]]
|-
| [[ Mu af ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 763 ]]
|-
| [[ Mu.ammad ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 764 ]]
|-
| [[ Muhājirūn ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 765 ]]
|-
| [[ Muḥammad, upon him blessings and peace ]] || [[Мухаммад]] || [[ 766 ]]
|-
| [[ Muḥkam and Mutashābih Verses ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 767 ]]
|-
| [[ Murder ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 768 ]]
|-
| [[ Mūsā, upon him be peace (Moses) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 769 ]]
|-
| [[ Musaylima ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 770 ]]
|-
| [[ Music and Musical Instruments (samada, lahwa al-ḥadīth) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 771 ]]
|-
| [[ Mu'tazila ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 772 ]]
|-
| [[ Mute (abkam, bukm) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 773 ]]
|-
| [[ Mysterious Letters ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 774 ]]
|-
| [[ Myths and Legends (asāṭīr) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 775 ]]
|-
| [[ Myths and Legends in the Qur"an ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 776 ]]
|-
| [[ N ]] || [[ ]] || [[ ]]
|-
| [[ Na.ir (Banu al-) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 778 ]]
|-
| [[ Najran ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 779 ]]
|-
| [[ Names of the Prophet ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 780 ]]
|-
| [[ Names of the Qur"an ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 781 ]]
|-
| [[ Names of the Qurʾān ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 782 ]]
|-
| [[ Namus ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 783 ]]
|-
| [[ Narratives ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 784 ]]
|-
| [[ Nature as Signs ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 785 ]]
|-
| [[ Neck ornaments (qalāʾid) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 786 ]]
|-
| [[ Neighbors and Neighborhood (jār, jiwār) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 787 ]]
|-
| [[ News ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 788 ]]
|-
| [[ Night and Day (al-layl wal-nahār) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 789 ]]
|-
| [[ Night Journey and Ascension (al-isrāʾ wal-miʿrāj) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 790 ]]
|-
| [[ Night of Power ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 791 ]]
|-
| [[ Night of Qadr (Laylat al-qadr) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 792 ]]
|-
| [[ Nimrod ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 793 ]]
|-
| [[ Nimrūd ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 794 ]]
|-
| [[ Noah ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 795 ]]
|-
| [[ Nomads ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 796 ]]
|-
| [[ Noon ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 797 ]]
|-
| [[ Nose ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 798 ]]
|-
| [[ Nudity ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 799 ]]
|-
| [[ Nūḥ, upon him peace (Noah) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 800 ]]
|-
| [[ Numbers and Enumeration ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 801 ]]
|-
| [[ Numbers and Enumeration (ʿadd, ʿadad) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 802 ]]
|-
| [[ Numerology ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 803 ]]
|-
| [[ Numismatics ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 804 ]]
|-
| [[ O ]] || [[ ]] || [[ ]]
|-
| [[ Oaths ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 806 ]]
|-
| [[ Oaths (qasam, yamīn) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 807 ]]
|-
| [[ Obedience ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 808 ]]
|-
| [[ Obedience (ṭāʿa) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 809 ]]
|-
| [[ Occasions of Revelation ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 810 ]]
|-
| [[ Occasions of Revelation (asbāb al-nuzūl) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 811 ]]
|-
| [[ Oceans (baḥr, biḥār) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 812 ]]
|-
| [[ Odors and Smells ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 813 ]]
|-
| [[ Oft-Repeated ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 814 ]]
|-
| [[ Old Age (haram, ardhal al-ʿumur, ʿajz, shaykhūkha) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 815 ]]
|-
| [[ Olive(s) (zaytūn) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 816 ]]
|-
| [[ Opening Letters (ḥurūf muqaṭṭaʿat) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 817 ]]
|-
| [[ Opposition to Mu.ammad ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 818 ]]
|-
| [[ Oppressed of the Earth (mustaḍʿafūn) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 819 ]]
|-
| [[ Oppressed on Earth, The ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 820 ]]
|-
| [[ Oppression ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 821 ]]
|-
| [[ Oppression (baghī, ʿulūw, rahaq) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 822 ]]
|-
| [[ Orality ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 823 ]]
|-
| [[ Orality and Writing in Arabia ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 824 ]]
|-
| [[ Order of Sūras (tartīb al-suwar) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 825 ]]
|-
| [[ Ornamentation and Illumination ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 826 ]]
|-
| [[ Orphans ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 827 ]]
|-
| [[ Orphans (yatīm, yatāmā) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 828 ]]
|-
| [[ Orthography ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 829 ]]
|-
| [[ P ]] || [[ ]] || [[ ]]
|-
| [[ Pairs (azwāj, zawj) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 831 ]]
|-
| [[ Pairs and Pairing ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 832 ]]
|-
| [[ Parable ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 833 ]]
|-
| [[ Parables of the Qurʾān (amthāl al-Qurʾān) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 834 ]]
|-
| [[ Paradise ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 835 ]]
|-
| [[ Paradise(s) (janna, jannāt, firdaws, ʿadn, khuld, maʾwā) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 836 ]]
|-
| [[ Parents ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 837 ]]
|-
| [[ Parents (wālidān, abawān) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 838 ]]
|-
| [[ Parody of the Qur"an ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 839 ]]
|-
| [[ Parties and Factions ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 840 ]]
|-
| [[ Past Nations (al-umam al-khāliya) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 841 ]]
|-
| [[ Path (minhāj, sabīl, sharīʿa, shirʿa, ṣirāṭ, sunna) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 842 ]]
|-
| [[ Path of Allah (sabīl Allāh) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 843 ]]
|-
| [[ Path or Way ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 844 ]]
|-
| [[ Patriarchy ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 845 ]]
|-
| [[ Peace ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 846 ]]
|-
| [[ Peace (ṣulḥ, salām, musālama) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 847 ]]
|-
| [[ Pen and Writing (qalam, kitāb) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 848 ]]
|-
| [[ People (nās, qawm, malaʾa) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 849 ]]
|-
| [[ People of al-Rass (ahl al-Rass) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 850 ]]
|-
| [[ People of the Book ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 851 ]]
|-
| [[ People of the Book (ahl al-Kitāb) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 852 ]]
|-
| [[ People of the Cave (ahl al-kahf) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 853 ]]
|-
| [[ People of the Ditch ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 854 ]]
|-
| [[ People of the Elephant ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 855 ]]
|-
| [[ People of the Elephant (aṣḥāb al-fīl) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 856 ]]
|-
| [[ People of the Heights ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 857 ]]
|-
| [[ People of the House ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 858 ]]
|-
| [[ People of the Remembrance (ahl al-dhikr) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 859 ]]
|-
| [[ People of the Thicket ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 860 ]]
|-
| [[ People of Ukhdūd ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 861 ]]
|-
| [[ People of Wisdom (ulū al-albāb) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 862 ]]
|-
| [[ Perjury (ḥinth, qawl al-zūr) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 863 ]]
|-
| [[ Perseverance, Patience and Fortitude (ṣabr) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 864 ]]
|-
| [[ Persian Literature and the Qur"an ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 865 ]]
|-
| [[ Pharaoh ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 866 ]]
|-
| [[ Philosophy and the Qur"an ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 867 ]]
|-
| [[ Piety ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 868 ]]
|-
| [[ Pilgrimage ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 869 ]]
|-
| [[ Pillars of Islam (arkān al-islām) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 870 ]]
|-
| [[ Pit ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 871 ]]
|-
| [[ Place of Abraham ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 872 ]]
|-
| [[ Plagues ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 873 ]]
|-
| [[ Planets and Stars ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 874 ]]
|-
| [[ Plants and Vegetation (nabāt) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 875 ]]
|-
| [[ Play and Distraction (laʿib, lahw) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 876 ]]
|-
| [[ Pledge ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 877 ]]
|-
| [[ Pledge (bayʿa) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 878 ]]
|-
| [[ Poetry and Poets ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 879 ]]
|-
| [[ Poets and Poetry (shiʿr, shuʿarāʾ) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 880 ]]
|-
| [[ Polemic and Polemical Language ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 881 ]]
|-
| [[ Politics and the Qur"an ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 882 ]]
|-
| [[ Poll Tax ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 883 ]]
|-
| [[ Polysemy in the Qur"an ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 884 ]]
|-
| [[ Polytheism and Atheism ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 885 ]]
|-
| [[ Polytheism and Polytheists (shirk, mushrikūn) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 886 ]]
|-
| [[ Popular and Talismanic Uses of the Qur"an ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 887 ]]
|-
| [[ Portents ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 888 ]]
|-
| [[ Possession and Possessions ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 889 ]]
|-
| [[ Possessions and Property (māl, matāʿ, milk) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 890 ]]
|-
| [[ Post-Enlightenment Academic Study of the Qur"an ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 891 ]]
|-
| [[ Poverty (faqr, fāqa, matraba) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 892 ]]
|-
| [[ Poverty and the Poor ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 893 ]]
|-
| [[ Power (qudra) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 894 ]]
|-
| [[ Power and Impotence ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 895 ]]
|-
| [[ Praise ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 896 ]]
|-
| [[ Praise of Allāh Most High (ḥamd) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 897 ]]
|-
| [[ Praise Worthy Station (maqām maḥmūd) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 898 ]]
|-
| [[ Prayer ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 899 ]]
|-
| [[ Prayer Formulas ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 900 ]]
|-
| [[ Prayer(s) (Ṣalāt) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 901 ]]
|-
| [[ Pre-1800 Preoccupations of Qur"anic Studies ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 902 ]]
|-
| [[ Pre-Islamic Arabia and the Qur"an ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 903 ]]
|-
| [[ Preservation (ḥifẓ) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 904 ]]
|-
| [[ Preserved Tablet ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 905 ]]
|-
| [[ Preserved Tablet (al-lawḥ al-maḥfūẓ) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 906 ]]
|-
| [[ Pride ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 907 ]]
|-
| [[ Printing of the Qur"an ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 908 ]]
|-
| [[ Prisoners ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 909 ]]
|-
| [[ Prisonors of War ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 910 ]]
|-
| [[ Profane and Sacred ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 911 ]]
|-
| [[ Prohibited Degrees ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 912 ]]
|-
| [[ Promises and Threats (waʿd wal-waʿīd, mīʿād, mawʿūd) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 913 ]]
|-
| [[ Proof ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 914 ]]
|-
| [[ Proof (burhān, ḥujja, sulṭān) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 915 ]]
|-
| [[ Property ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 916 ]]
|-
| [[ Prophethood (nubuwwa) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 917 ]]
|-
| [[ Prophets and Prophethood ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 918 ]]
|-
| [[ Protection ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 919 ]]
|-
| [[ Provocation ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 920 ]]
|-
| [[ Psalms ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 921 ]]
|-
| [[ Punishment Stories ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 922 ]]
|-
| [[ Purification (tazkiya) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 923 ]]
|-
| [[ Q ]] || [[ ]] || [[ ]]
|-
| [[ Qārūn (Korah) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 925 ]]
|-
| [[ Qaynuqa'(Banu) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 926 ]]
|-
| [[ Qibla ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 927 ]]
|-
| [[ Qibla ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 928 ]]
|-
| [[ Quakes and Disasters (zalāzil, maṣāʾib) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 929 ]]
|-
| [[ [[ Qurʾān]] || [[Коран]] || [[ ]]
|-
| [[ Qurʾānic Rulings (aḥkām al-Qurʾān) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 931 ]]
|-
| [[ Quray.a(Banu al-) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 932 ]]
|-
| [[ Quraysh ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 933 ]]
|-
| [[ Quraysh ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 934 ]]
|-
| [[ R ]] || [[ ]] || [[ ]]
|-
| [[ Rabb ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 936 ]]
|-
| [[ Rabbis (aḥbār) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 937 ]]
|-
| [[ Races ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 938 ]]
|-
| [[ Raḥmān (al-) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 939 ]]
|-
| [[ Rain (maṭar, ghayth) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 940 ]]
|-
| [[ Rama.an ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 941 ]]
|-
| [[ Ramaḍān ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 942 ]]
|-
| [[ Ranks and Orders ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 943 ]]
|-
| [[ Raqim ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 944 ]]
|-
| [[ Rare Words of the Qurʾān (gharīb al-Qurʾān) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 945 ]]
|-
| [[ Rass ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 946 ]]
|-
| [[ Reading and Recitation (qirāʾa, talā, tilāwa, rattil, tartīl, yatlū(n)) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 947 ]]
|-
| [[ Readings of the Qur"an ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 948 ]]
|-
| [[ Rebellion ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 949 ]]
|-
| [[ Recitation of the Qur"an ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 950 ]]
|-
| [[ Reciters of the Qur"an ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 951 ]]
|-
| [[ Reflection and Deliberation ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 952 ]]
|-
| [[ Religion ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 953 ]]
|-
| [[ Religion (dīn) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 954 ]]
|-
| [[ Religious Pluralism and the Qur"an ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 955 ]]
|-
| [[ Remembrance ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 956 ]]
|-
| [[ Remembrance of Allah (dhikr) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 957 ]]
|-
| [[ Remnant ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 958 ]]
|-
| [[ Repentance (tawba, ināba, ikhbāt) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 959 ]]
|-
| [[ Repentance and Penance ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 960 ]]
|-
| [[ Respite (amhala, ajal) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 961 ]]
|-
| [[ Responsibility ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 962 ]]
|-
| [[ Resurrection ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 963 ]]
|-
| [[ Resurrection (qiyāma) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 964 ]]
|-
| [[ Retaliation ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 965 ]]
|-
| [[ Retaliation (iʿtidāʾ bil-mithl, qiṣāṣ, ʿadl) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 966 ]]
|-
| [[ Retreat and Seclusion (iʿtikāf) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 967 ]]
|-
| [[ Revelation and Inspiration ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 968 ]]
|-
| [[ Revision and Alteration ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 969 ]]
|-
| [[ Reward and Punishment ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 970 ]]
|-
| [[ Rhetoric and the Qur"an ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 971 ]]
|-
| [[ Rhymed Prose ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 972 ]]
|-
| [[ Ritual and the Qur"an ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 973 ]]
|-
| [[ Ritual Purity ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 974 ]]
|-
| [[ Rod ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 975 ]]
|-
| [[ S ]] || [[ ]] || [[ ]]
|-
| [[ Sabbath ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 977 ]]
|-
| [[ Sabians ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 978 ]]
|-
| [[ Sacred Precincts ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 979 ]]
|-
| [[ Sacrifice ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 980 ]]
|-
| [[ Saint ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 981 ]]
|-
| [[ Salih ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 982 ]]
|-
| [[ Salvation ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 983 ]]
|-
| [[ Samaritans ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 984 ]]
|-
| [[ Samson ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 985 ]]
|-
| [[ Samuel ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 986 ]]
|-
| [[ Sand ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 987 ]]
|-
| [[ Satanic Verses ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 988 ]]
|-
| [[ Saul ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 989 ]]
|-
| [[ Scholar ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 990 ]]
|-
| [[ Science and the Qur"an ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 991 ]]
|-
| [[ Scripture and the Qur"an ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 992 ]]
|-
| [[ Scrolls ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 993 ]]
|-
| [[ Seasons ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 994 ]]
|-
| [[ Secrets ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 995 ]]
|-
| [[ Seeing and Hearing ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 996 ]]
|-
| [[ Servants ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 997 ]]
|-
| [[ Sex and Sexuality ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 998 ]]
|-
| [[ Sheba ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 999 ]]
|-
| [[ Sheets ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1000 ]]
|-
| [[ Shekhinah ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1001 ]]
|-
| [[ Shi'a ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1002 ]]
|-
| [[ Shiffin, Battle of ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1003 ]]
|-
| [[ Shi'ism and the Qur"an ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1004 ]]
|-
| [[ Ships ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1005 ]]
|-
| [[ Shu'ayb ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1006 ]]
|-
| [[ Signs ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1007 ]]
|-
| [[ Silk ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1008 ]]
|-
| [[ Simile ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1009 ]]
|-
| [[ Sin, Major and Minor ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1010 ]]
|-
| [[ Sinai ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1011 ]]
|-
| [[ Sira and the Qur"an ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1012 ]]
|-
| [[ Sirius ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1013 ]]
|-
| [[ Sister ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1014 ]]
|-
| [[ Slaughter ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1015 ]]
|-
| [[ Slaves and Slavery ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1016 ]]
|-
| [[ Sleep ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1017 ]]
|-
| [[ Smell ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1018 ]]
|-
| [[ Smoke ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1019 ]]
|-
| [[ Social Sciences and the Qur"an ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1020 ]]
|-
| [[ Solomon ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1021 ]]
|-
| [[ Soothsayer ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1022 ]]
|-
| [[ Soul ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1023 ]]
|-
| [[ South Arabia, Religions in Pre-Islamic ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1024 ]]
|-
| [[ South Asian Literatures and the Qur"an ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1025 ]]
|-
| [[ Southeast Asian Qur"anic Literature ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1026 ]]
|-
| [[ Sovereignty ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1027 ]]
|-
| [[ Spatial Relations ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1028 ]]
|-
| [[ Speech ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1029 ]]
|-
| [[ Speech of Allah (kalām, kalimat Allāh) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1030 ]]
|-
| [[ Spending (infāq) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1031 ]]
|-
| [[ Spider ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1032 ]]
|-
| [[ Spirit ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1033 ]]
|-
| [[ Spirit (rūḥ) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1034 ]]
|-
| [[ Spiritual Beings ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1035 ]]
|-
| [[ Sports ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1036 ]]
|-
| [[ Springs and Fountains ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1037 ]]
|-
| [[ Spying (tajassus) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1038 ]]
|-
| [[ Squandering (isrāf, tabdhīr) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1039 ]]
|-
| [[ Stars and Planets (nujūm, kawākib) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1040 ]]
|-
| [[ Station of Ibrāhīm ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1041 ]]
|-
| [[ Stone ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1042 ]]
|-
| [[ Stones ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1043 ]]
|-
| [[ Stoning ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1044 ]]
|-
| [[ Strangers and Foreigners ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1045 ]]
|-
| [[ Subservience (taskhīr) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1046 ]]
|-
| [[ Success (falāḥ, fawz) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1047 ]]
|-
| [[ Succor (naṣr, ʿawn, ghawth) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1048 ]]
|-
| [[ Suffering ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1049 ]]
|-
| [[ Sufism and the Qur"an ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1050 ]]
|-
| [[ Suicide ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1051 ]]
|-
| [[ Suicide (qatala nafsahu) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1052 ]]
|-
| [[ Sulaymān, upon him peace (Solomon) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1053 ]]
|-
| [[ Sun ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1054 ]]
|-
| [[ Sun (shams) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1055 ]]
|-
| [[ Sunna ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1056 ]]
|-
| [[ Supererogatory Prayers and Deeds (nafl, nāfila, nawāfil) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1057 ]]
|-
| [[ Supplication and Answer (duʿāʾ, istijāba) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1058 ]]
|-
| [[ Sūra ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1059 ]]
|-
| [[ Sura (s) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1060 ]]
|-
| [[ Suspicion ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1061 ]]
|-
| [[ Suspicion (sūʾ al-ẓann) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1062 ]]
|-
| [[ Sustenance ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1063 ]]
|-
| [[ Sustenance (rizq, ṭaʿām, qūt) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1064 ]]
|-
| [[ Symbolic Imagery ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1065 ]]
|-
| [[ Syria ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1066 ]]
|-
| [[ Syro-Palestine (al-Shām) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1067 ]]
|-
| [[ T ]] || [[ ]] || [[ ]]
|-
| [[ Table ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1069 ]]
|-
| [[ Table Spread (al-Māʾida) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1070 ]]
|-
| [[ Talent ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1071 ]]
|-
| [[ Ṭālūt (Saul) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1072 ]]
|-
| [[ Tampering (taḥrīf) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1073 ]]
|-
| [[ Taqwā ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1074 ]]
|-
| [[ Tawḥīd (tawḥīd, tabattul, ḥanīf, ḥunafāʾ) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1075 ]]
|-
| [[ Taxation ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1076 ]]
|-
| [[ Teaching ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1077 ]]
|-
| [[ Teaching and Preaching the Qur"an ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1078 ]]
|-
| [[ Teeth ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1079 ]]
|-
| [[ Temporary Marriage ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1080 ]]
|-
| [[ Ten Nights of Dhūl-Ḥijja ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1081 ]]
|-
| [[ Tents and Tent Pegs ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1082 ]]
|-
| [[ Textual Criticism of the Qur"an ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1083 ]]
|-
| [[ Thamūd ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1084 ]]
|-
| [[ The Name, the Naming, the Named (ism, tasmiya, musamma) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1086 ]]
|-
| [[ The Qurʾān and History (taʾrīkh) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1087 ]]
|-
| [[ The Qurʾān and the Order of Nature ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1088 ]]
|-
| [[ Theft ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1089 ]]
|-
| [[ Theft and Robbery (sariqa, ghaṣb) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1090 ]]
|-
| [[ Theology and the Qur"an ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1091 ]]
|-
| [[ Theophany ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1092 ]]
|-
| [[ Thing (shayʾ) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1093 ]]
|-
| [[ Throne of Allah (ʿarsh) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1094 ]]
|-
| [[ Throne of God ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1095 ]]
|-
| [[ Thunder and Lightning (al-raʿd, barq) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1096 ]]
|-
| [[ Time ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1097 ]]
|-
| [[ Time (waqt, ʿaṣr…) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1098 ]]
|-
| [[ Tolerance and Coercion ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1099 ]]
|-
| [[ Tongue (lisān) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1100 ]]
|-
| [[ Tools for the Scholarly Study of the Qur"an ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1101 ]]
|-
| [[ Torah ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1102 ]]
|-
| [[ Trade and Commerce ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1104 ]]
|-
| [[ Tradition and Custom ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1105 ]]
|-
| [[ Traditional Disciplines of Qur"anic Studies ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1106 ]]
|-
| [[ Tranquility and trembling (sakīna, wajal) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1107 ]]
|-
| [[ Transcendence and Anthropomorphism (tanzīh, taqdīs, tashbīh, tajsīm) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1108 ]]
|-
| [[ Transgression (fujūr) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1109 ]]
|-
| [[ Transitoriness ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1110 ]]
|-
| [[ Translations of the Qur"an ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1111 ]]
|-
| [[ Travel, Traveler (siyāḥa, musāfir, ḍaraba fīl-arḍ) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1112 ]]
|-
| [[ Tree (s) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1113 ]]
|-
| [[ Tree(s) (shajar) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1114 ]]
|-
| [[ Trial ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1115 ]]
|-
| [[ Trials and Strife (balāʾ, ibtilāʾ, fitna) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1116 ]]
|-
| [[ Tribe(s) and Confederates (qabāʾil, aḥzāb) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1117 ]]
|-
| [[ Tribes and Clans ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1118 ]]
|-
| [[ Trinity ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1119 ]]
|-
| [[ Trinity (qawluhum thalātha) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1120 ]]
|-
| [[ Trips and Voyages ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1121 ]]
|-
| [[ Troops ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1122 ]]
|-
| [[ Troops (jund, junūd, ribbiyyūnrubbiyyūn) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1123 ]]
|-
| [[ Trumpet (ṣūr) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1124 ]]
|-
| [[ Trust and Patience ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1125 ]]
|-
| [[ Trust in Allah (tawakkul) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1126 ]]
|-
| [[ Trust(s) (amānāt) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1127 ]]
|-
| [[ Truth ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1128 ]]
|-
| [[ Truth (ḥaqq) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1129 ]]
|-
| [[ Truthfulness (ṣidq) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1130 ]]
|-
| [[ Tubbaʿ ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1131 ]]
|-
| [[ Tubba' ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1132 ]]
|-
| [[ Ṭūr ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1133 ]]
|-
| [[ Turkish Literature and the Qur"an ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1134 ]]
|-
| [[ Tuwa ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1135 ]]
|-
| [[ Two Sons of Ādam ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1136 ]]
|-
| [[ U ]] || [[ ]] || [[ ]]
|-
| [[ Uḥud ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1138 ]]
|-
| [[ Ummi ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1139 ]]
|-
| [[ Umra ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1140 ]]
|-
| [[ Uncertainty ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1141 ]]
|-
| [[ Understanding (fahm…) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1142 ]]
|-
| [[ Unity of the Text of the Qur"an ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1143 ]]
|-
| [[ Unlettered (ummī, ummiyyūn) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1144 ]]
|-
| [[ Usury ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1145 ]]
|-
| [[ Usury (ribā) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1146 ]]
|-
| [[ 'Uthman ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1147 ]]
|-
| [[ Uzayr ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1148 ]]
|-
| [[ V ]] || [[ ]] || [[ ]]
|-
| [[ Vehicles ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1150 ]]
|-
| [[ Veil ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1151 ]]
|-
| [[ Veil (khimār, jilbāb, ḥijāb) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1152 ]]
|-
| [[ Vengeance ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1153 ]]
|-
| [[ Verse (āya) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1154 ]]
|-
| [[ Verse (s) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1155 ]]
|-
| [[ Victory (fawz) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1156 ]]
|-
| [[ Vigil prayer(s) (tahajjud) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1157 ]]
|-
| [[ Vows (nadhr) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1158 ]]
|-
| [[ W ]] || [[ ]] || [[ ]]
|-
| [[ Waiting Period (ʿidda) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1160 ]]
|-
| [[ War (ḥarb) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1161 ]]
|-
| [[ Water (māʾ) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1162 ]]
|-
| [[ Way of Allāh (Sunnat Allāh) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1163 ]]
|-
| [[ Wealth and Prosperity (khayr, ghinā, naʿīm, naʿmāʾ) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1164 ]]
|-
| [[ Weapons (asliḥa) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1165 ]]
|-
| [[ Weights and Measures (mawāzin, makāyil) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1166 ]]
|-
| [[ Whisperings (waswasa) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1167 ]]
|-
| [[ Widows (arāmil) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1168 ]]
|-
| [[ Will, Want and Volition (irāda) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1169 ]]
|-
| [[ Wills, Bequests, Directives and Divine Stipulations (waṣiyya) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1170 ]]
|-
| [[ Winds (rīḥ, riyāḥ) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1171 ]]
|-
| [[ Wisdom (ḥikma, fiqh) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1172 ]]
|-
| [[ Witness of Faith, Witnessing and Witnesses (shahida, shahāda; shuhūd) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1173 ]]
|-
| [[ Wives of the Prophet ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1174 ]]
|-
| [[ Womb (raḥim, riḥm, pl ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1175 ]]
|-
| [[ Women (nisāʾ) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1176 ]]
|-
| [[ Wonderment (ʿajab) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1177 ]]
|-
| [[ World (dunyā, ʿālam, ʿālamīn) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1178 ]]
|-
| [[ Worship (ʿibāda, nusuk, tabtīl) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1179 ]]
|-
| [[ Y ]] || [[ ]] || [[ ]]
|-
| [[ Yaḥyā, upon him peace (John) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1181 ]]
|-
| [[ Yāʾjūj and Maʾjūj (Gog and Magog) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1182 ]]
|-
| [[ Yaʿqūb (Isrāʾīl), upon him peace (Jacob, Israel) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1183 ]]
|-
| [[ Yasaʿ, upon him peace ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1184 ]]
|-
| [[ Yathrib ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1185 ]]
|-
| [[ Year (ʿām) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1186 ]]
|-
| [[ Yūnus, upon him peace (Jonah) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1187 ]]
|-
| [[ Yūsuf, upon him peace (Joseph) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1188 ]]
|-
| [[ Z ]] || [[ ]] || [[ ]]
|-
| [[ Zabūr ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1190 ]]
|-
| [[ Zakariyyā, upon him peace (Zachariah) ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1191 ]]
|-
| [[ Zakāt ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1192 ]]
|-
| [[ Zaqqūm ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1193 ]]
|-
| [[ Zayd ibn Ḥārithaha ]] || [[ А ]] || [[ 1194 ]]
|-
|}

Академия Корана:Encyclopaedia of the Qurʾān/(Al-) Ukhdūd

2017-01-02T21:34:53Z

Maqivi: Новая страница: «{{ПереводЭК|(Al-) Ukhdūd|Christian Julien Robin}} Substantive (or proper name) found in the qurʾānic expression aṣḥāb al-ukhdūd (q 85:4): [They…»

{{ПереводЭК|(Al-) Ukhdūd|Christian Julien Robin}}
Substantive (or proper name) found in the qurʾānic expression aṣḥāb al-ukhdūd (q 85:4):

[They] were destroyed, the men of the furnace (aṣḥāb al-ukhdūd), a fire (q.v.) abundantly fed, while they were sitting by it, and they were witnesses of what they did to believers (see belief and unbelief), and they ill-treated them for no other reason than that they believed in God (q 85:4-9).

Islamic tradition is almost unanimous in identifying these aṣḥāb al-ukhdūd with those involved in the persecution at Najrān (q.v.; a large oasis in southern Saudi Arabia, on the border with Yemen [q.v.]), in November 523 c.e. (regarding this event and the sources dealing with it, see Beaucamp et al., La persécution), but quite often without specifying whether they mean the Jewish persecutors (directed by the king Zurʿa dhū-Nuwās Yūsuf, the Yūsuf Asʾar Yathʾar of Ḥimyarite inscriptions; see jews and judaism) or their Christian victims (see christians and christianity). For Wahb b. Munabbih (d. ca. 114/732; Tījān), Ibn Ḥabīb (d. 245/860; Muḥabbar) or Nashwān al-Ḥimyarī (d. 573/1178; Mulūk Ḥimyar), they are the persecutors, since these authors call the king Yūsuf ṣāḥib al-ukhdūd, but others remain rather vague (Ibn Isḥāq, Sīra, followed by Ṭabarī, Taʾrīkh; Nashwān al-Ḥimyarī, Shams al-ʿulūm, ad h̲-d-d, etc.)

As a consequence of this identification, tradition interprets al-Ukhdūd as a place name of the Najrān oasis (Bakrī, Muʿjam mā staʿjama, i, 121, ad «al-Ukhdūd»; al-Ḥasan al-Hamdānī, Ṣifat jazīrat al-ʿArab, specifies that «the ancient city is the site of ‘al-Ukhdūd’»). In pre-Islamic sources (principally the inscriptions of south Arabia, but also external sources such as Christian hagiographies relating to the persecution, written in Greek and Syriac), however, no evidence is available for such a place name; in inscriptions, the oasis and main city are first of all called Rgmtm (res 3943/3; Maʿīn 9/5; M 247/2; in Hebrew Raʿmā, in Greek Ragma, in Gen 10:7 = I Chron 1:9, and Ezek 27:22), then, after the start of the Christian era, Ngrn (in Arabic Najrān; see arabic script). There is good reason to believe that the name «al-Ukhdūd» bestowed upon the ruins of Najrān (already indicated in the tenth century c.e. by al-Hamdānī and still used nowadays, see Philby, Arabian highlands) postdates Islam and is derived from an interpretation of q 85.

Other observations have led the majority of contemporary scholars to doubt the identification of the aṣḥāb al-ukhdūd with those responsible for, or the victims of, the Najrān persecution. While the Qurʾān speaks of a ditch filled with fire (for R. Blachère, a furnace), since the meanings given to the Arabic ukhdūd (pl. akhādīd) are «ditch, cavity, pit» (for references in Yemeni dialects, see Serjeant, Ukhdūd), scholars note that, according to Christian hagiographies, those executed were not thrown into a furnace but put to the sword. Besides, the text of the Qurʾān, which gives no indication of location or time, at no point suggests that the «believers» were Christians (see people of the ditch).

For al-Ṭabarī (d. 310/923), followed by some Islamicists, most recently Régis Blachère, the Qurʾān is alluding to the «fiery furnace» (Daniel 3:6, 11, 15, 17, 20, 21, 23 and 26) into which the three young men are thrown. Other scholars, such as Rudi Paret, following Hubert Grimme and Joseph Horovitz, prefer an eschatological interpretation (see eschatology): the aṣḥāb al-ukhdūd will be the wicked cast into hell (see hell and hellfire) at the time of the last judgment (q.v.) because of their crimes against believers, even if it is very unusual to use the term «ditch» to describe hell (see reward and punishment).

This last objection has disappeared following the publication of texts from Qumrān, in which Sheol is constantly referred to by the Hebrew šaḥat, «ditch». Marc Philonenko, who stresses this point, equally notes the expressions bny h-šḥt, «sons of the ditch», and ʾnšy h-šḥt, «men of the ditch», to denote the wicked, the damned or rather those who suffer punishment (see chastisement and punishment; good and evil) on judgment day. The qurʾānic expression aṣḥāb al-ukhdūd could be an exact equivalent of the expressions from Qumrān.

== Bibliography ==
;Primary:
* al-Bakrī, al-Wazīr Abū ʿUbayd ʿAbdallāh b. ʿAbd al-ʿAzīz al-Andalusī, Muʿjam mā staʿjama, ed. M. al-Saqqā, 4 vols. in 2, Cairo 1945, repr. Beirut 19033
* R. Blachère, Le Coran. Traduction selon un essai de reclassement des sourates, 3 vols., Paris 1947-51, ii, 119-20, no. 43
* al-Hamdānī, Abū Muḥammad al-Ḥasan b. Aḥmad b. Yaʿqūb, Ṣifat jazīrat al-ʿArab, 2 vols., ed. D.H. Müller, al-Hamdānī's Geographie der arabischen Halbinsel, Leiden 1884-91, repr. Leiden 1968, 169f.
* Ibn Ḥabīb, Abū Jaʿfar Muḥammad, Muḥabbar, ed. I. Lichtenstädter, Hyderabad 1942, repr. Beirut n.d., 367-8
* Ibn Isḥāq, Sīra, 24-5
* Ibn Isḥāq-Guillaume, 15-16
* Nashwān b. Saʿīd al-Ḥimyarī, Mulūk Ḥimyar wa-aqyāl al-Yaman, ed. ʿA. al-Jarāfī, Cairo 1378/1958-9, 148 (poem with commentary)
* id., Shams al-ʿulūm. Die auf Südarabien bezüglichen Angaben Našwān’s im Šams al-ʿulūm, Leiden/London 1916, 31-2
* Ṭabarī, Taʾrīkh, ed. de Goeje et al., i, 919/922-5
* trans. C.E. Bosworth, The history of al-Ṭabarī. v. The Sāsānids, the Byzantines, the Lakhmids, and Yemen, Albany 1999, 191, 198—202
* Thaʿlabī, Qiṣaṣ
* trans. W.M. Brinner, ʿArāʾis al-majālis fī qiṣaṣ al-anbiyāʾ or «Lives of the prophets», Leiden 2002, 728-32
* Wahb b. Munabbih, Kitāb al-Tījān fī mulūk Ḥimyar, Ṣanʿāʾ 1347/1928-9, 323—501
;Secondary:
* J. Beaucamp, F. Briquel-Chatonnet and Ch. Robin, La persécution des chrétiens de Nagrān et la chronologie ḥimyarite, in Aram 11/12 (1999—2000), 15-83
* H. Grimme, Mohammed, 2 vols., Münster 1892-5, ii, 77 n. 4
* Horovitz, ku , 12
* R. Paret, Aṣḥāb al-Uk̲h̲dūd, in ei 2 , i, 692 (complete bibliography)
* H. Philby, Arabian highlands, New York 19762, esp. chap. 14, Ukhdud, 254-5 (map of the Najrān wādī and al-Ukhdūd area); 266-7 (sketch of the site between)
* M. Philonenko, Une expression qoumrânienne dans le Coran, in Atti del Terzo Congresso di Studi Arabi e Islamici (Ravello, 1-6 September 1966), Napoli 1967, 553-6 (complete bibliography)
* R. Serjeant, Uk̲h̲dūd, in bsoas 22 (1959), 572-3.
* Sigla: M: Iscrizioni sudarabiche. i. Iscrizioni minee, Naples 1974
* Maʿīn 9: Ch. Robin and G. Gnoli, Inventaire des Inscriptions sud arabiques, iii, Paris/Rome 1998
* RES: Répertoire d'épigraphie sémitique

Академия Корана:Encyclopaedia of the Qurʾān/Mysterious Letters

2017-01-01T20:51:03Z

Maqivi: Новая страница: «{{ПереводЭК|Mysterious Letters|Keith Massey}} The alphabetic characters of the Arabic language (q.v.) that appear in non-verbal combinations at the begin…»

{{ПереводЭК|Mysterious Letters|Keith Massey}}
The alphabetic characters of the Arabic language (q.v.) that appear in non-verbal combinations at the beginning of certain sūras (q.v.) of the Qurʾān, just after the basmala (q.v.). The gift of «letters» came to the Arabian peninsula by way of a slow evolution of orthographies (see arabic script; calligraphy; orality and writing in arabia). While the whole story is quite complex, the cursive consonantal alphabet of twenty-eight letters in which the Qurʾān was recorded was derived from a form of the Nabatean script, which in turn had descended from Syriac/Aramaic forms (see syriac and the qurʾān). It ultimately sprang from the same common ancestor whose innovation around 1500 b.c.e. gave rise to the Hebrew alphabet and the south Arabian alphabets that first recorded the exploits of the kings of Sabaʾ (see sheba) and Ḥadramawt (see pre-islamic arabia and the qurʾān; kings and rulers). Indeed, with the exception of the far-eastern symbols and syllabaries still in use in China and Japan, every language on the earth is written today with forms that are related in some way to this alphabetic family.

One could hardly say too much regarding the impact of the Qurʾān culturally and literarily on the Arab peoples (see arabs; language and style of the qurʾān). The Qurʾān is considered the epitome of the Arabic language, and the works of the classical grammarians and exegetes (see exegesis of the qurʾān: classical and medieval) who examined the inimitability (q.v.; iʿjāz) of the Qurʾān laid the groundwork for the rules of Arabic grammar (see grammar and the qurʾān). Eventually the Qurʾān was credited with a stabilization of speech (q.v.) and orthography (q.v.) that enabled increased expression, and a consequent advancement of learning (see knowledge and learning). But it must be remembered that a substantial portion of the works of the early grammarians was devoted to attempting to explain those qurʾānic passages that fall outside of the purview of the normative «rules» of Arabic grammar. At an even more basic level, qurʾānic orthography is itself archaic (cf. Nöldeke, gq, iii, 26 f.), and, in fact, can not be said to have become «standard». One mystery in the Qurʾān that endures is the existence of seemingly inexplicable combinations of letters that appear at the beginning of twenty-nine of the sūras. They are referred to as «the isolated/disconnected letters» (al-ḥurūf al-muqaṭṭaʿa) or «the opening letters» (ḥurūf al-fawātiḥ). These «mystery letters» themselves and the sūras they precede are given here for reference: alr, q 10, 11, 12, 14, 15; alm, q 2, 3, 29, 30, 31, 32; almr, q 13; almṣ, q 7; ḥm, q 40, 41, 43, 44, 45, 46; ḥmʿsq, q 42; ṣ, q 38; ṭs, q 27; ṭsm, q 26, 28; ṭh, q 20; q, q 50; khyʿṣ, q 19; n, q 68; ys, q 36.

Before presenting contemporary and traditional explanations of these letters, mention must be made of the orthography of the mysterious letters in the context of the Arabic script, particularly that of the seventh century. There are eighteen Arabic graphemes (alif, bāʾ, jīm, dāl, rāʾ, sīn, ṣād, ṭāʾ, ʿayn, fāʾ, qāf, kāf, lām, mīm, nūn, hāʾ, wāw, yāʾ), fifteen in the non-final position (identical bāʾ/nūn/yāʾ and fāʾ/qāf), expressing a total of twenty-eight sounds (for further details, see arabic script). In the earliest Arabic script, there were no dots to indicate the difference between letters that were represented by the same grapheme, but had different sounds: a bāʾ («b») and a tāʾ («t»), without the presence of, respectively, the single dot below or the double dots above the hooked form of the letter, become indistinguishable. The fourteen letters that compose the mysterious letters represent every consonantal form in Arabic as exemplified in this early script (in which wāw, fāʾ and qāf were the same grapheme, as were dāl, dhāl and kāf). Thus, the mysterious letters comprise — comprehensively — the graphemes of the Arabic script of the seventh century: the five that represent only one letter (alif, lām, mīm, nūn, hāʾ), as well as the other nine (yāʾ, ḥāʾ, rāʾ, sīn, ṣād, ṭāʾ, ʿayn, qāf, kāf). It is not unreasonable to assume, therefore, that these mysterious letters were intended to represent the Arabic alphabet (see Welch, al-Ḳurʾān, 414), shedding new light on passages such as q 16:103, which state that the revelation of the Qurʾān is «clear Arabic tongue/speech» (lisānun ʿarabiyyūn mubīnun). But this theory does little to explain the reason for the placement of the letters at the head of their respective sūras (see also unity of the text of the qurʾān). While Muslim scholars have developed a variety of explanations for these letters, a number of Western scholars have also set themselves the task of explaining both the meaning of the letters themselves, as well as the reason for their placement at the beginnings of these particular sūras.

== Traditional explanations ==
To the faithful Muslim, these letters are part of the divine revelation of the Qurʾān itself (see revelation and inspiration). In the recitation of the Qurʾān (q.v.), these «openers» or «beginnings» of the sūras (fawātiḥ al-suwar; awāʾil al-suwar) are recited as letters of the alphabet (i.e. q 2:1 is read «alif lām mīm»). A variety of explanations for the letters has been proffered in the classical commentaries: these letters are the names of the sūras or markers for the separation of the sūras, names of God or abbreviations of his names (i.e. alr standing for al-raḥmān, alm for al-raḥīm or Allāh laṭīf majīd ["God, gentle, glorious], etc.; cf. Welch, al-Ḳurʾān, 412; Robinson, Discovering, 320 n. 10; see god and his attributes), oaths (q.v.) by which God proclaimed. Traditional sources also suggest that the letters are mystical signs with symbolic meaning (see ṣūfism and the qurʾān) based upon the numerical values assigned to the letters (see numbers and enumeration; numerology), or, alternatively, suggest that the letters were a means of attracting the attention of the Prophet or his audience (cf. Suyūṭī, Itqān, iii, 21-30).

One theory that has gained interest and adherents among Muslims in more recent times concerns the claimed existence of multiple patterns of the number «nineteen» hidden in the text of the Qurʾān (cf. Khalifa, Quran). This is said to be an experientially provable sign of the inimitability of the Qurʾān, the inexpressible and unrepeatable quality of the Qurʾān’s style. Some of these findings, while interesting, seem somewhat contrived, e.g. the assertion that «nineteen» can be found in the mysterious letters because twenty-nine sūras (by one calculation) in the Qurʾān begin with them, fourteen different letters from the alphabet are used (again, depending on whether one counts the single letters ṣād, qāf and nūn which occur before three sūras) and there are fourteen different combinations of these disconnected letters in the beginning of the sūras. The sum of these numbers is fifty-seven (29 + 14 + 14 = 57). Fifty-seven is a multiple of nineteen (3 × 19 = 57).

Although, as can be seen from the preceding paragraphs, Qurʾān commentators have put forth many explanations for these mysterious letters (one of the most popular and enduring — although lacking any consensus — being that these mysterious letters are contractions of words or phrases; see Watt-Bell, Introduction, 64), most classical and contemporary Muslim scholars maintain that the full signification of these letters is known only to God (Welch, al-Ḳurʾān, 412).

== Contemporary theories in western scholarship ==
Non-Muslim theories have varied widely, but tend to fall in two categories: abbreviationist and redactional. (Other recent, but less tenable, proposals include the theories that they are mystical symbols used as battle cries, or that they are mnemonic devices which summarize the contents of the sūras; Robinson, Discovering, 320 n. 10; Watt-Bell, Introduction, 64). Proponents of abbreviationist positions have tended to view the mysterious letters as independent of the original qurʾānic text. In this category may be listed Hans Bauer (Anordnung), who proposed that the letters stood for various catchwords, and Eduard Goosens, who has argued that the letters are contractions of earlier, now defunct, titles of the sūras. James Bellamy (Mysterious letters) proposed an abbreviation theory that is less arbitrary than the others: following the suggestions of classical qurʾānic commentators that the majority of the mysterious letters are abbreviations for al-raḥmān and/or al-raḥīm, Bellamy posits that most of the mysterious letters stand for these names of God in the basmala and that all of the other mysterious letters (with some emendations, which he elaborates upon in a later article; see his Proposed emendations, 572-3) are abbreviations for the basmala. In his view, these abbreviations were introduced (in the Meccan period, by the Prophet’s scribes) at the beginning of 29 sūras instead of the basmala, and that later scribes did not understand the abbreviation and inserted the basmala in addition to the mysterious letters. Welch (al-Ḳurʾān, 413), however, argues that Bellamy’s theory is not entirely consistent with the textual evidence concerning the chronology of the Qurʾān which would suggest that the letters are more likely from the Medinan period (see chronology and the qurʾān), and does not explain the relationship of the letters to their immediate contexts (i.e. why are they placed at these twenty nine sūras, and not others?).

The other category of theories, the redactional, examines the mysterious letters as a means for ordering the qurʾānic text (see form and structure of the qurʾān), and tends to see these opening letters as part of the original corpus (see muṣḥaf). Although, as mentioned above, Bauer (Anordnung) believed the letters to be abbreviations of catchwords, he provided statistical support for the theory that the letters influenced the final arrangement of the Qurʾān (cf. Welch, 413-4 for a discussion of Loth and Schwally’s contribution to the development of this theory). Bell saw both the mysterious letters and the basmala as part of the original corpus, albeit revised: he argued that they were early Medinan revisions adapting the sūras for inclusion in the written scripture (Welch, al-Ḳurʾān, 414; Watt-Bell, Introduction, 63-4, 138, 143). The current form of this redactional theory centers on the observation that the qurʾānic sūras are not strictly arranged from longest to shortest, even with the exclusion of the opening sūra (Sūrat al-Fātiḥa; see fātiḥa) and the two concluding sūras. It has been proposed that exceptions were made to the «decreasing-length» ordering for groups of sūras beginning with the same mysterious letters. In a recent study, however, Neal Robinson (Discovering, 260-70) has clearly demonstrated some problems with this theory: 1) there are some exceptions to the «decreasing-length» rule that cannot be accounted for even by the intervening sūras that begin with the mysterious letters and 2) not all the sūras that begin with the same letters are arranged together. While not entirely discounting the value of the sūra length and the presence of the letters in ordering the sūras, Robinson suggests that other factors (such as the repetition of key words or phrases in consecutive sūras) were taken into account by the redactors of the qurʾānic corpus.

But proponents of this theory have not only attempted to explain the discrepancies of the «decreasing-length» ordering of the sūras. They have also tried to explain what the individual letters stand for. In his ground-breaking study, Theodor Nöldeke (gq, 215 f.) argued that the letters were abbreviations standing for the names of people whom Zayd b. Thābit had consulted for the readings of the sūras (see readings of the qurʾān; reciters of the qurʾān). He later believed that they were merely mystical and meaningless symbols attempting to imitate the heavenly book (q.v.; see also book) the Prophet would have beheld (for further discussion of this change in Nöldeke’s thinking, which was effected by Loth’s argument of a Jewish Kabbalistic influence on Muḥammad in the late Meccan and early Medinan periods, see Welch, al-Ḳurʾān, 412; see also jews and judaism). Hartwig Hirschfeld expanded on Nöldeke’s initial theory and attempted to identify the sources themselves, suggesting that the letters stood for the following individuals: m = Mughīra; ṣ = Ḥafṣa; r[z] = al-Zubayr; k = Abū Bakr; h = Abū Hurayra; n = ʿUthmān; ṭ = Ṭalḥa; s = Saʿd (b. Abī Waqqās]; ḥ = Ḥudhayfa; ʿ = ʿUmar/ʿAlī/Ibn ʿAbbās/ʿĀʾisha; q = al-Qāsim b. Rabīʿa. The principal weakness of the Nöldeke/Hirschfeld theory, as with all the theories put forth on the issue, is that it does not — indeed, cannot — prove its case. The ability to produce identifications of the letters, whether they are names or whole words, does not prove that the identifications are correct. The catalogue of various identifications stands as a tribute to the imagination of the researchers rather than as a secure solution.

My own work on this issue has surfaced a previously undetected and potentially important detail about the mysterious letters. I observed that the patterns themselves produce a set ranking within the letters. Comparing the eleven different multiple-letter combinations in which thirteen different letters appear reveals that the order of the letters is not random or arbitrary. One would not expect this to happen if the letters stood for sentences or words; such a system would not have been likely able to prevent violations in a ranking. Thus, for example, the mīm never appears before the sīn, which in turn never appears before the ʿayn; the lām never appears before the alif, etc. (for a more detailed discussion of this «ranking» of the letters, see Massey, New investigation, 498-9). For this observation to hold true, however, some explanation is needed in the matter of q 42, which begins with the pattern ḥmʿsq. At first glance, it seems that this violates the order (insofar as the mīm appears before the sīn). But the verse divisions have generally separated this cluster into ḥm and then ʿsq. In this case there are actually two separate patterns here. Another possibility is that, given the location of the sūra in the middle of six other sūras with the ḥm pattern, the ḥm has been added later by analogy.

Quite significantly, the set ranking I have observed goes well beyond the statistical possibility of a random production. Calculating the odds for such patterns if only two letters are used shows that there are about even odds of a random selection succeeding in having an inviolate pattern (156 possible patterns with seventy-eight [1/2] of them not violating any given pattern). When the pattern length is extended to three, however, the chance of randomness quickly diminishes (1716 possible patterns with only 286 of them [1/6] not violating any given pattern). In the case of the mysterious letters there are four cases of two letter patterns, four cases of three, four cases of four and one case of five. In this particular case, statistical analysis argues strongly against randomness. If the letters are not random, one can rule out the possibility that they are words or sentences. While such structures would have semantic intentionality, they would not prevent the violation of an ordered list of letters. Also ruled out is the theory that the letters are nothing other than the imitation of celestial characters or nonsense letters. This observation, I would argue, lends strong support to the Nöldeke/ Hirschfeld theory. If the letters are an ordered list, the best candidate for referents is the names of people who, for some reason, are being ranked by the person who has put down the letters.

The letters, then, constitute a form of critical textual apparatus (see textual criticism of the qurʾān). According to reliable accounts from the early history of Islam, when Zayd b. Thābit, at the order of ʿUthmān (q.v.), compiled the Qurʾān (see muṣḥaf; collection of the qurʾān; codification of the qurʾān), he used several sources. For those sūras that had either more than one source (or perhaps whose reading is supported by more than one source over and against other variant readings which he chose to reject), he acknowledged those sources by listing one-letter abbreviations of them, in his own perceived rank of importance and reliability. He was never inconsistent in his own ranking of the sources, hence the order we can now find among the mysterious letters was produced. Whether or not Hirschfeld has correctly identified the letters with the names for which they stand can simply never be known. He has astutely produced parallels for the letters from strong candidates of the period, but he may or may not be right. The names may all be scribes who never showed up in the tradition or any early literature. But the discovery of the ranking of these letters tips the scales in the direction of an ordered list of names. If this is a catalogue of sources the ʿUthmānic Qurʾān has carefully built into it an early attempt to assure the readers of the credibility of the text from which they were reading. It is possible, as some have suggested, that the letters that appear alone (ṣād, qāf, nūn) may not have the same purpose as the collections themselves. Nūn in particular has the story of Jonah (q.v.) and the great fish (nūn) as a cogent explanation of this letter.

== Conclusion ==
Adequate explanation both for the meaning of the «mysterious letters» and why they occur before the 29 sūras in which they appear has yet to appear. Although a number of reasonable theories of the significance of these mysterious collections of letters has been proposed — abbreviations for the basmala, or for some of the divine names, or for various individuals (possibly reciters of the Qurʾān) — none is definitive. The inconsistencies with the observation that they appear largely before sūras that interfere with the «decreasing sūra-length» organization of the Qurʾān have yet to be explained satisfactorily. Finally, further study is needed about the fact that they represent, comprehensively, the graphemes of the earliest Arabic script.

== Bibliography ==
;Primary:
* Suyūṭī, Itqān
;Secondary:
* H. Bauer, Über die Anordnung der Suren und über die geheimisvollen Buchstaben im Qoran, in zdmg 75 (1921), 1-20
* J. Bellamy, The mysterious letters of the Koran.
* Old abbreviations of the basmalah, in jaos 93 (1973), 267-85
* id., Some proposed emendations to the text of the Koran, in jaos 113 (1993), 562-73
* E. Goosens, Ursprung und Beduetung der koranischen Siglen, in Der Islam 13 (1923), 191—226
* H. Hirschfeld, New researches into the composition of the Qoran, London 1902
* A. Jeffery, The mystic letters of the Koran, in mw 14 (1924), 247-60
* A. Jones, The mystical letters of the Qurʾān, in si 16 (1962), 5-11
* R. Khalifa, Qurʾān. The final testament, Fremont, CA 1992
* K. Massey, Mystery letters of the Qurʾān, in Arabica 43 (1996), 497—501
* Nöldeke, gq
* N. Robinson, Discovering the Qurʾān. A contemporary approach to a veiled text, London 1996
* Watt-Bell, Introduction
* A. Welch, al-Ḳurʾān. 4d. The mysterious letters, in ei2, v, 412-4

Академия Корана:Encyclopaedia of the Qurʾān/Islam

2017-01-01T20:37:54Z

Maqivi: Новая страница: «{{ПереводЭК|Islam|M. Arkoun}} The infinitive of the fourth form of the Arabic triliteral root s-l-m meaning «to submit», «to surrender», it also desi…»

{{ПереводЭК|Islam|M. Arkoun}}
The infinitive of the fourth form of the Arabic triliteral root s-l-m meaning «to submit», «to surrender», it also designates the monotheistic faith (q.v.) and practice observed by the followers of Muḥammad and exhorted by the Qurʾān.

== Preliminary considerations ==
To restrict the notion of islām to that which emerges for the first time within the qurʾānic pronouncements, it is necessary to be clear about the problems that this limitation implies. It is misleading to gather and analyse all the verses that contain the forms islām or muslim(ūn) in an effort to arrive at an «objective» definition then deemed adequate to convey a qurʾānic Islam which can impose itself upon believers and researchers as the ultimate and obligatory referent. Particularly is this so if that definition is used to measure and to judge the changes and additions introduced over time in diverse historical and socio-cultural contexts. W.C. Smith(Meaning and end) already lamented the insufficiency of this exercise using the lens of a historian of religions who was interested in the identification of the origin and durable spiritual level which constitute the specific valence of each religion. Smith used this identification to distinguish the changing functions — positive and negative — assigned by the social actors to that which they universally call their religion. About twenty-five years ago, a student of Smith’s explored, in a finely detailed study, the semantic shifts which the term islām has undergone over many centuries of exegetical amplification (J. Smith, Historical and semantic). This work complements the earlier investigations of Lidzbarski (Salām und islām), Künstlinger (‘Islām,’ ‘muslim,’ ‘aslama’ im Kurān), Ringgren(Islam, ʿaslama and Muslim), Robson (‘Islam’ as a term), Izutsu (Ethico-religious concepts in the Qurʾān), and W.C. Smith himself (Historical development).

Using careful philological analysis it should be possible to follow already at the qurʾānic stage the progressive elaboration of the notion of islām according to the chronological order of the verses in their original contexts (see chronology and the qurʾān; form and structure of the qurʾān). Yet in the absence of complete accord about the chronological classifications proposed for the sūras and a fortiori for the verses, one may not employ this perspective except for the rare cases where there are relatively reliable and coherent indices upon which to base such judgments. One knows how the collective concurrent memories were construed during the first Islamic centuries and how this mythological and ideological appropriation informed what was to become the paradigm of the earthly history and the salvation history of the Muslim community (umma, see community and society in the qurʾān; history and the qurʾān). This historical-mythical paradigm still operates at the beginning of the twenty-first century with an ideological force that is sustained by the modern media. The historian needs, therefore, to employ strategies of intervention in order to disentangle the mythical, ideological and historical strands in the documentation ascribed to the period of the emergence and formation of that which continues to be universally and indiscriminately termed «Islam».

It is not clear whether academic historians see anything more than the satisfaction of a scientific curiosity when they put themselves to the task of defining the distinctive traits of islām within the strict limits of the qurʾānic corpus (see contemporary critical practices and the qurʾān). Against this attitude, there is that of traditionalist Muslim theologians who use the foundational text to shore up the doctrinal constructions necessary to reinforce the orthodoxy demanded of the believers (see theology and the qurʾān; exegesis of the qurʾān: classical and medieval; exegesis of the qurʾān: early modern and contemporary). There is, however, a third position which seeks to open a new space of intelligibility within the reality of lived religion by circumventing the epistemological postulations implicit in the two preceding approaches. In the case of Islam, as in Catholic and Protestant theology, the «scientific» and the confessional perspectives are no longer adequate for defining the problematics and the themes favorable to an interactive research (cf. Le dictionnaire de théologie). From this third perspective, it suffices to establish that what can be called the qurʾānic stage, the instantiation of a new religion, is a complex historical process engaging simultaneously social, political (see politics and the qurʾān), cultural, and normative factors. These are entangled with ritual, customs, ethics, familial structures (see family; tribes and clans; kinship), competing structures of the imagination and the collective interactive memory of such entities as Jews, Christians, Sabians (q.v.), polytheists (frequently termed «pagans»), and all cultural groups of the ancient Near East (see jews and judaism; christians and christianity; polytheism and atheism; belief and unbelief; pre-islamic arabia and the qurʾān). All these modes and manifestations of the historical existence of such social groups in Arabia are not only present in the qurʾānic discourse but transformed. They have been sublimated, uprooted from their local conditions to constitute an «existential paradigm» of the human condition. Divested of its particularity, this qurʾānic paradigm is capable of producing and informing individual and collective existence within the most diverse cultural and historical contexts. As with the biblical discourse of the Hebrew Bible and the New Testament, the qurʾānic discourse generates the results obtained by combining mechanisms for precise linguistic articulation of the meaning with the diverse effects of changing historical situations. In both textual corpora the narrative, rhetorical, stylistic and literary processes are so complex and highly elaborated that recent methods of discourse analysis have yet to prove sufficient for the task of clarifying their interaction. These approaches — to say nothing of the classical theories of the inimitability (q.v.; iʿjāz) of the Qurʾān — have yet to explain adequately the genesis, the effects and the place of the Qurʾān within linguistic and semiotic usages (see semiotics and nature in the qurʾān; language of the qurʾān).

The term «paradigm» is an appropriate designation for its qurʾānic manifestation because this manifestation became inscribed in a long history where the homologous paradigms of Judaism, Christianity, Zoroastrianism (see magians), and Manichaeism had already assumed a place within the cultural and religious space of the Mediterranean. The term «existential paradigm» is more natural and workable than that of «religion», for it frees the intellectual task from the conceptual constraint imposed by those systems of belief and nonbelief which shape in a subtle fashion, often unconsciously, the interpretation of the facts within each living religious tradition. Further, this terminology allows the inclusion within the arena of critical assessment of all the inherited systems, paradigms or models of historical action produced by modern reason in its struggle to liberate itself from the oppressive dogmatics of traditional institutional religions. To follow the developments within the qurʾānic discourse of the social and linguistic construction of the categories of «believers» and «nonbelievers», as these relate to what would be called «Islam», is to establish the historicity of the new religion. It is to do this on the basis of the first pronouncements of that which the believing tradition would theorize under the name of «Word of God» (q.v.), revealed through Muḥammad b. ʿAbdallāh, imposing himself progressively by his action and by the qurʾānic discourse, as the Prophet (al-nabī, see prophets and prophethood) and messenger (q.v.; rasūl) of God. That is to say that the initial choice of the historical method to define Islam on strictly qurʾānic grounds is not innocent. It proceeds from a methodological and epistemological premise characteristic of modern reason and introduces a break with the axial vision, insisting that the entire qurʾānic discourse instilled the properly believing attitude in the heart (q.v.) of the first listeners. For all subsequent generations this Qurʾān-centric understanding of «Islam» creates the drama of the decision — to accept or reject the covenant of divine alliance (mīthāq, see contracts and alliances) — on which would depend the realization of the entire individual existence of the Muslim person. Without having the benefit, as did western Christianity, of new possibilities for the emancipation of the human condition such as those opened by the existential paradigm constructed by modernity or by a more efficacious alternative than that presented by the traditional religions, Muslims continue to live the drama of that decision within a deadly violence where, additionally, the «unthinkable and unthought» of the two opposing paradigms are interpreted as mutually exclusive.

The theologies, the philosophies, and the still hesitant and partial problematics of the social sciences have begun to take charge of the historical drama of the human condition despite being complicated by the alternative opened by modernity: the choice is no longer simply between passing earthly existence in absolute fidelity to the debt of signification forged within the eternal covenant contracted with a living, merciful God and savior (or a wise founder like Buddha), or the radical refusal of that pact. It is not only between the fallibility of reason and the solitude of a destiny beyond the horizon of hope. Within the thought world of modernity, for many people God has become a useless hypothesis. This version of modernity insists that humans take responsibility for their destiny and substitutes an image of progress by science for the image of eternal salvation guaranteed by a loving and compassionate God.

== Qurʾānic Islam ==
In a book issued in 1972 (The spiritual background of early Islam. Studies in early Arab concepts), M. M. Bravmann brought together fourteen articles which he had published between 1945 and 1971. With regard to the domain of Islamic studies, this work, as well as that cited earlier, is very representative of the epistemological attitude that governed historical writing in Europe and North America from the nineteenth century until the 1970s. The author does his utmost to rediscover the conceptual contents of the Qurʾān, namely terms like islām, īmān (see faith), dīn (see religion), dunyā (see world), sunna (q.v.), sīra (see sīra and the qurʾān), ʿilm (see knowledge and learning), bayʿa (see oaths and pledges), etc., in the period of emerging Islam. Investigation of the etymologies of a semantically rich vocabulary is very useful as long as one does not content oneself with deceptive substrata. The danger of such research lies in the tendency to rest content with partial or fossilized meanings that are only poorly related to the living continuation of a no-longer extant language and society. This type of erudition has made progress, however, as can be illustrated with reference to the rich works of M.J. Kister and his followers on the transition from « jāhiliyya (see age of ignorance) to Islām». In this latter body of work one finds an orientation towards a social, political and cultural history that could finally make a historical-anthropological reading of the Qurʾān possible. (See also my remarks on the recent work of J. Chabbi, Le seigneur des tribus. L’islam de Mahomet, Paris 1997 in the article contemporary critical practices and the qurʾān.) Aiming at such an objective is, in itself, a sign of immense progress toward a critical approach that can explain not only a nascent religion and its generative terminology but also the moment and the paradigm of human creativity in its struggle for conceptual emancipation.

Confining oneself to an examination of the occurrences of the word islām or muslim within the strict limits of the qurʾānic corpus avoids neither the fallibility of that exercise itself nor the methodological quandaries inherent in every quest for origins. This is even more the case when the mind remains focused on a definition of the religion that emerged subsequent to the qurʾānic corpus and its society and in which the paradigms forged within the anthropological scope were redefined. I have explained that the «closed official corpus» of the canonical codex (muṣḥaf, q.v.) poses methodological problems that are different from those linked to qurʾānic discourse at the time of its first oral enunciation (see collection of the qurʾān; codices of the qurʾān; orality). Because it has never respected this differentiation, the philological exploitation of the «closed official corpus» concurs, though with greater care for chronological constraints, with the cognitive attitude of traditional Muslim exegesis (tafsīr al-Qurʾān bi-l-Qurʾān).

M. M. Bravmann, for example, assures us that the word islām has meant confronting death (see death and the dead), sacrificing one’s life for a higher goal and thus, by extension, defending one’s honor (q.v.), and giving oneself unconditionally to God (see path or way; jihād). These two motivations cannot be treated on the same level but must be interrelated. More complexly, then, the term means dying for the honor(ʿirḍ) of the clan because the mechanical solidarity in a command group appears in the Qurʾān both as a springboard from which to substitute the attachment to the clan with the quest for God and as an obstacle to this substitution.

q 49:14 and 17 unveil this deceptive use of a semantic equation with the confrontation of death by opposing the word islām, which is stigmatized as an outward, tactical and revocable adherence to the noble cause of God and his messenger, to the word īmān, which signifies a sincere and definitive conversion of the heart to a cause that is differentiated from that of the clan (see belief and unbelief; hypocrites and hypocrisy). This is why the expression «he submitted his face (q.v.) to God» (aslama wajhahu lillāhi) recurs often as a summons to give one’s self only to God. The verb «to submit» (aslama) occurs twenty-two times; muslim, pl. muslimūn a total of forty-two times, including one instance of the dual and two attestations of the feminine plural, muslimāt, to designate female «Muslims»; islām appears seven times. The contrast with the attestations of the various derivatives of the root letters ʾ-m-n, signifying «belief, faith», is striking: īmān (seventeen times), āmanū (258), muʾminūn (166, of which nineteen are the feminine plural, muʾmināt). Islam as the sacrifice of one’s life is still demanded, as those who avoid going into combat are denounced according to a code of honor that opposes courage (q.v.), valiancy and the wish to die as a hero (see martyr) to cowardice, treason, and fleeing from battle (qaʿada, see war; expeditions and battles; virtues and vices).

One will note that these clear-cut definitions of islām and īmān, as well as of the conditions of the endeavor (jihād) for God, appear in two late sūras: in q 49, which is classified as the 106th in the chronological order of revelation, and q 9, classified as the 113th. The interrelation of the two concepts during the whole period of the revelation depended on the changing contexts and protagonists in Mecca (q.v.) and Medina (q.v.). In Mecca, where Muḥammad faced opposition from the polytheists, defined as those who «associated» anything with the one God (mushrikūn), it was necessary to stress the belief in a single God; facing the Jewish adversaries in Medina (al-rabbāniyyūn), however, it was important to construct a founding story for the new religious community in order to insert it into the biblical series of revelations (see scripture and the qurʾān) that were made to Abraham (q.v.), to Moses (q.v.), and to Jesus (q.v.) son of Mary (q.v.; see also opposition to muḥammad). It is in this Islamic re-appropriation of these great religious figures that the emerging religion takes on the dimension of a religious space for a community that has slowly become differentiated from other rival communities engaged in a mimetic combat over the control of the same symbolic capital. For the mushrikūn, this symbolic capital is centered on the Meccan pantheon while for Jews and Christians it is focused on the previous biblical revelations. In order to reshape the figure of Abraham, the Qurʾān uses the term millat Ibrāhīm rather than the word islām, whose signification is still in the course of construction. Milla refers to a group whose members necessarily share the same beliefs. This term will later be reused to designate the various confessional communities in the Ottoman Empire. In q 3:67, Abraham is linked to the pure religion, Ḥanīfism (see ḥanīf), that is devoid of any deviation: «Abraham was neither a Jew nor a Christian, but a ḥanīf muslim». Within this context in which a corrected and redressed version (quite different from the «altered» versions of the Christians and the Jews) of the history of the « People of the Book» (q.v.; see also book) is constructed, the word muslim cannot be translated simply as «Muslim» in the now common meaning of the word, since it does not yet have a social and doctrinal basis. Its meaning in this passage is indeed a reference to that internal submission of faith which is contracted in the alliance (mīthāq) with God. In the frequently cited verses «religion, in the eye of God, is Islam» (q 3:19); or «The will to profess a religion other than Islam will not be accepted» (q 3:85), it is necessary to preserve the original, fundamental meaning of islām as an internalized religious attitude that is well symbolized by the conduct of the qurʾānic Abraham. To consecrate at this stage the equivalence of the Abrahamic islām with that which the sciences and institutions termed Islamic would later construe, is to relegate to the «unthinkable» all of the problems associated with the passage from the human experience of the divine («l’expérience humaine du divin», title of a work of M. Meslin) to the institutionalized, ritualized, religious orthodoxy of the «managers of the sacred» (gestionnaires du sacré). In order to avoid this long leap within the ideological instrumentalization of the religious reality, it is preferable to speak of the religion emerging at the level of the qurʾānic discourse in its initial mode of enunciation.

There is no room here to evaluate the role of the normative pronouncements which, already in the qurʾānic discourse, engage the experience of the divine with the trajectory of ritualization, of the sacralizing institution (see ritual and the qurʾān). Rather, I signal the importance of analyzing the process by which, at the level of the «closed official corpus», that institutionalization comes to function as the conceptualization of Islam that is exploited by the jurists (see law and the qurʾān), the theolgians, the exegetes, the mystics (see ṣūfism and the qurʾān) and all varieties of social actors.

It is worth remembering that, at the stage of its oral enunciation, the qurʾānic discourse attaches more importance to recitations of the foundation of a new collective memory, one that is prepared to receive a system of beliefs and of non-beliefs that is both similar to and differentiated from those of competing communities, than to the doctrinal development of orthodoxy. This was done by later generations. The literary composition of these stories has exerted a decisive semantic influence on Arabic vocabulary (see arabic language; grammar and the qurʾān). In its enhanced contents the language was fortified to support the new system of values and recast as a language that bears an earthly history which is entirely inscribed within the horizon of a history of salvation (q.v.) already familiar to the People of the Book. One should also bear in mind that these founding stories, as well as the indeterminate state of the conceptual tools within the qurʾānic stage, make possible many starting points for symbolic, semantic, conceptual and, finally, existential codes. It is necessary to verify, therefore, the degree of spiritual, ethical, social, juridical and political relevance for this coding that future actors will «choose», or which will be imposed upon diverse groups who constitute themselves as «interpretive communities». This type of investigation has been neither conceived nor adopted by the historians, the exegetes or the contemporary theologians of critical modernity. One can, a fortiori, absolve the medieval jurists of blame for not integrating this task, which was unthinkable to them, into their claim to root (taʾṣīl) legal qualifications (aḥkām) in the Word of God, which would transform profane and contingent behavior into the categories of licit or illicit works compatible with the notion of a final judgment (see last judgment; good deeds; evil deeds; lawful and unlawful; record of human actions). Now, however, there is enough of the conceptual diversity necessary for the radicalization of a critique of Islamic reason that can be undertaken within a broader and more historically, sociologically and anthropologically sensitive perspective.

== Bibliography ==
* M. Arkoun, Lectures du Coran, Paris 1982
* id., Pour une critique de la raison islamique, Paris 1984
* id., Rethinking Islam. Common questions, uncommon answers, trans. and ed. R.D. Lee, Boulder 1994
* H. Berg (ed.), Islamic origins reconsidered, special issue of Method and theory in the study of religion 9 (1997)
* F. Bowie, The anthropology of religion, Oxford 2000
* M.M. Bravmann, The spiritual background of early Islam. Studies in early Arab concepts, Leiden 1972
* J. Chabbi, Le seigneur des tribus. L’Islam de Mahomet, Paris 1997
* J. van Ess, tg
* id., Verbal inspiration? Language and revelation in classical Islamic theology, in Wild, Text, 180-1
* P. Gisel, La théologie face aux sciences religieuses, Geneva 1999
* id. and P. Evrard (eds.), La théologie en postmodernité, Geneva 1996
* Graham, Beyond
* G.R. Hawting, The idea of idolatry and the emergence of Islam. From polemic to history, Cambridge 1999
* id. and Shareef (eds.), Approaches
* T. Izutsu, Ethico-religious concepts in the Qurʾān, Montreal 1966
* M.J. Kister, Society and religion from Jahiliyya to Islam, Brookfield, VT 1990
* D. Künstlinger, ‘Islām,’ ‘muslim,’ ‘aslama’ im Kurān, in Rocznik Orjentalistyczny 11 (1935), 128-37
* M. Lecker, Muslims, Jews and pagans. Studies on early Islamic Medina, Leiden 1995
* M. Lidzbarski, Salām und islām, in zs 1 (1922), 85-96
* H. Ringgren, Islam, ʿaslama and Muslim, Uppsala 1949
* Rippin, Approaches
* id. (ed.), The Qurʾān. Formative interpretation, Brookfield, VT 1999
* N. Robinson, Discovering the Qurʾān. A contemporary approach to a veiled text, London 1996
* J. Robson, ‘Islam’ as a term, in mw 44 (1954), 101-9
* M. Shaḥrūr, al-Kitāb wa-l-Qurʾān, Damascus 1990
* J. Smith, An historical and semantic study of the term ‘islām’ as seen in a sequence of Qurʾān commentaries, Missoula, MT 1975
* W.C. Smith, The historical development in Islam of the concept of Islam as an historical development, in B. Lewis and P.M. Holt (eds.), Historians of the Middle East, London 1962
* id., Meaning and end of religion, New York 1963
* C. Versteegh, Arabic grammar and Qurʾānic exegesis in early Islam, Leiden 1993
* Wansbrough, qs
* A.T. Welch, al-Ḳurʾān, in ei2, v, 400-29
* Wild, Text

Академия Корана:Encyclopaedia of the Qurʾān/Egypt

2017-01-01T20:27:38Z

Maqivi: Новая страница: «{{ПереводЭК|Egypt|Isaac Hasson}} Country in the north-east corner of Africa. Egypt or its capital, Miṣr, occurs by name five times in the Qurʾān, onc…»

{{ПереводЭК|Egypt|Isaac Hasson}}
Country in the north-east corner of Africa. Egypt or its capital, Miṣr, occurs by name five times in the Qurʾān, once in oblique form according to most readings (qirāʾāt, see readings of the qurʾān). The word Miṣr is mentioned in q 2:61, 10:87, 12:21, 12:99 and 43:51. Egypt also appears in the Qurʾān as the kingdom of Pharaohs (q 43:51; see pharaoh); the country where Joseph (q.v.; Yūsuf) became viceroy, like his patron (al- ʿazīz, q 12:78, 88), after having been a slave and then coming to prominence through his patron’s wife (q 12); the arena of the struggle of Moses (q.v.; Mūsā) and Aaron (q.v.; Hārūn) for their people, the Children of Israel (q.v.; Banū Isrāʾīl, especially sūras 2, 4, 7, 10, 20, 26, 27 and 28); and the refuge given to Jesus (q.v.) and his mother (q 23:50; see mary). There is a controversy about the reading of the word Miṣr (q 2:61), and its significance. Most of the sources prefer the reading miṣran, «some country», whereas the rest read Miṣra, the surname of Egypt (al-Sijistānī, Maṣāḥif, 57; al-Farrāʾ, Maʿānī, i, 42-3).

It seems that, originally, Miṣr referred to the main city (q.v., al- madīna) of Egypt or a particular city(madīna bi-ʿaynihā) in that country (Lisān al-ʿArab, v, 176). Exegetes confirm this identification on the basis of some references in the Qurʾān (q 7:123; 12:30; 28:15, 18, 20; Nasafī, Tafsīr, ii, 70, 219; iii, 229).

The origin of the name Miṣr is also dealt with by exegetes who generally attribute the name to its builder, Miṣr the son of Nūḥ (Lisān al-ʿArab, v, 176; see noah) or the grandson of Ḥām b. Nūḥ (Ibn al-Faqīh, Buldān, 115). His father’s name is given in some sources as Miṣrayim, like the name of one of Ḥām’s sons in Genesis 8:6, which is the Hebrew form of the word for Egypt. It is a dual form and therein is most likely a hint to the fact that ancient Egypt was regarded as two lands: Upper Egypt and Lower Egypt. The form Miṣr as used in Arabic after its conquest by the Muslims in 18-20/639-41 represents perhaps Lower Egypt only but was later applied to the entire country.

== Egypt in qurʾānic exegesis and in sīra and ḥadīth literature ==
Even though Egypt is only cited by name five times, it is nonetheless the most frequently mentioned city or country in the Qurʾān (as is the case in the Bible). Some claim that the Qurʾān mentions Miṣr explicitly and indirectly 28 times in all (Ibn Ẓahīra, Faḍāʾil, 71; see geography).

Exegetes suggest taking some words or expressions as allusions to Egypt or to a specific part of the country: «the land» (al-arḍ, q 7:127, 129; 12:56, 80; 28:4, 6, 19), the Nile (al-yamm, q 7:136; 20:39, 78, 97; 28:7, 40; 51:40), Alexandria (iram dhāt al-ʿimād, q 89:7; cf. Ibn Ẓahīra, Faḍāʾil, 73), «a height, where there was a hollow and a spring» (rabwatin dhāti qarārin wa-maʿīn, q 23:50; cf. Ṭabarī, Taʾrīkh, i, 597; Ibn Ẓahīra, Faḍāʾil, 71; see wells and springs). Other interpretations for this last expression — Jerusalem (q.v.), al- Ramla or Damascus — are suggested as well (ʿAbd al-Razzāq, Tafsīr, ii, 45-6; Nasafī, Tafsīr, iii, 121).

The Qurʾān does not mention Hagar (Hājar) and her Egyptian origin (see abraham). It also does not mention either the relations between Muḥammad (q.v.) and al-Muqawqis, the ruler of Egypt, or with Mary the Copt (Māriya al-Qibṭiyya; see wives of the prophet), the Prophet’s concubine and mother of his son Ibrāhīm, who died in 8/630 (al-Zubayr b. Bakkār, Muntakhab, 55-62). But exegetes, ḥadīth and sīra traditionists and the so-called tales of the prophets (qiṣaṣ al-anbiyāʾ) provide a substantial addition to fill this gap. In the subsequent literature, Egypt became «the holy, good and blessed land» (al-arḍ al-muqaddasa al-ṭayyiba al-mubāraka, cf. Ibn Ẓahīra, Faḍāʾil, 6). See also exegesis of the qurʾān; ḥadīth and the qurʾān; sīra and the qurʾān; prophets and prophethood. The wealth (q.v.) of Egypt and its economic and political importance prompted an abundance of traditions in praise of the country (see politics and the qurʾān). Most of these traditions were attributed to the Prophet, his Companions (see companions of the prophet) or the Bible (q.v.) and eventually became incorporated into the exegesis of the relevant qurʾānic verses. See also scripture and the qurʾān .

== Bibliography ==
* ʿAbd al-Razzāq, Tafsīr, Beirut 1999
* Farrāʾ, Maʿānī, Cairo 1980
* Ibn al-Faqīh, Kitāb al-Buldān, ed. Y. al-Hādī, Beirut 1966
* Ibn Ẓahīra, Jamāl al-Dīn Muḥammad b. Muḥammad Abū Ḥāmid, al-Faḍāʾil al-bāhira fī maḥāsin Miṣr wa-l-Qāhira, ed. M. al-Saqqā and K. al-Muhandis, Cairo 1969
* Lisān al-ʿArab
* Nasafī, Tafsīr, Beirut n.d.
* al-Sijistānī, Ibn Abī Dāwūd, Kitāb al-Maṣāḥif, Cairo n.d.
* Ṭabarī, Taʾrīkh
* al-Zubayr b. Bakkār, Abū ʿAlī al-Qurashī, Muntakhab min Kitāb Azwāj al-nabī, ed. S. al-Shihābī, Beirut 1983

Академия Корана:Encyclopaedia of the Qurʾān/Dreams and Sleep

2017-01-01T20:21:43Z

Maqivi: Новая страница: «{{ПереводЭК|Dreams and Sleep|Leah Kinberg}} Visions (q.v.) seen while asleep which convey a message or meaning of some import. Four different terms denot…»

{{ПереводЭК|Dreams and Sleep|Leah Kinberg}}
Visions (q.v.) seen while asleep which convey a message or meaning of some import. Four different terms denote dreams in the Qurʾān. The word ruʾyā appears six times (q 12:5, 43, 100; 17:60; 37:105; 48:27); the word manām appears four times, twice meaning sleep (q.v.; q 30:23; 39:42) and twice meaning dream (q 8:43; 37:102); bushrā, which means good tidings (see good news), is interpreted once to mean a dream (q 10:64). All three words signify good dreams. For bad dreams the Qurʾān uses ḥulm. This word occurs twice, both times in the expression aḍghāth aḥlām, meaning «confused dreams» (q 12:44; 21:5). Of the ten references, six deal with biblical figures: four with Joseph (q.v.; q 12:5, 43, 44, 100) and two with Abraham (q.v.; q 37:102, 105); the other references deal with matters relating to central Islamic issues.

In their remarks on verses that mention dreams, most qurʾānic commentators ad-duce ḥadīth sayings of the kind found in the canonical ḥadīth collections (see ḥadīth and the qurʾān). These sayings deal with the authority (q.v.) of dreams and their usage as a means of legitimization. (For a characterization of the nature of dreams in the ḥadīth collections, see Manām, Introduction, 36.) In citing these sayings, the exegetical works (tafsīr) associate the qurʾānic dreams with the general Islamic attitude toward dreams as expressed in the ḥadīth. The ḥadīth contributes to this association by referring to qurʾānic dreams and citing relevant qurʾānic verses in its dream chapters (for example Bukhārī, Ṣaḥīḥ, Bāb al-taʿbīr, Bāb ruʾyā al-ṣāliḥīn). The same occurs in other sources that dedicate special chapters to dreams, using qurʾānic dreams to support their interest in the topic of dreams (for example Abū l-Qāsim al-Qushayrī, Risāla; cf. the examination of bushrā below).

Some commentators suggest that qurʾānic dreams be classified according to their fulfillment and clarity. Al-Rāzī (d. 606/1210; Tafsīr, xxvi, 157), for example, mentions three classes: (1) dreams in which the message or description becomes reality, such as the message in Muḥammad’s dream in Ḥudaybiya (q.v.), foretelling the conquest of Mecca (q.v.; q 48:27); (2) dreams in which the message is fulfilled in the opposite way, e.g. Abraham’s dream, where the message was to sacrifice a son but the reality was the sacrifice of a lamb (q 37:102-5; see isaac; ishmael); (3) dreams that need interpretation to be understood, exemplified by the four dreams in Sūrat Yūsuf (q 12).

The remainder of this article is devoted to an examination of qurʾānic verses that allude to dreams (with a translation of the verses), a summary of the relevant tafsīr sections as well as an analysis of their applicability to the ḥadīth.

== Abraham’s dream ==
q 37:102-5 reads: «And when [his son] was old enough to walk with him, he said, ‘My son, I see in a dream (manām) that I shall sacrifice (q.v.) you; consider, what do you think?’ He said, ‘My father, do as you are commanded; you shall find me, God willing, one of the steadfast.’ When they had surrendered, and he flung him upon his brow, we called unto him, ‘Abraham, you have confirmed the vision (ruʾyā)’…» Exegetical commentaries on these verses add details to complete the account and raise a few questions about the content and process of Abraham’s dream. Through such details and questions, the status of dreams in Islamic thought, not necessarily in the Qurʾān, was articulated.

Several commentators mention that when Abraham was informed about the future birth of his child, he took an oath (see oaths) that he would sacrifice the child to God. In a dream he was reminded of that oath (Muqātil, Tafsīr, iii, 615; Rāzī, Tafsīr, xxvi, 153; Qurṭubī, Jāmiʿ, xv, 102; Suyūṭī, Durr, v, 307). Exegesis (see exegesis of the qurʾān: classical and medieval) further reports that Abraham saw the dream three nights in a row. In the morning after the first night, Abraham thought about the dream and wondered whether it was from God or from Satan (see devil). The next night he had the same dream and then he knew that the message was from God. By the third night, Abraham was ready to sacrifice his son (Rāzī, Tafsīr, xxvi, 153; Baghawī, Maʿālim, iv, 569; Qurṭubī, Jāmiʿ, xv, 101-2; Suyūṭī, Durr, v, 308). Abraham’s hesitation is understood to be in disagreement with the ḥadīth that states that prophets' dreams (ruʾyā) are equal to revelation (waḥy, Suyūṭī, Durr, v, 305; cf. Joseph’s dream below). If dreams have the authority of revelation, Abraham should not have hesitated. Furthermore, the Qurʾān narrates that Abraham consulted his son about the sacrifice (fa-nẓur mādhā tarā). This, in the eyes of some commentators, constitutes a contradiction: If dreams are authoritative, as indicated by the ḥadīth, why did this dream not elicit Abraham’s immediate trust and certitude (see trust and patience)? On the other hand, if the dream does not supply decisive proof of its reliability, which may explain the hesitation, how did it happen that Abraham decided to sacrifice his son after all? Al-Rāzī's (d. 606/1210) (Tafsīr, xxvi, 153) answer to both questions is that Abraham hesitated with regard to the dream (ruʾyā) but was reassured by a clear revelation (al-waḥy al-ṣarīkh).

Attention should be given to the terminology used by al-Rāzī: Although the verse itself uses the word manām, the commentator refers to the word ruʾyā without indicating whether it was a synonym for manām or not. When dealing with ruʾyā, he also refers to waḥy. The difference between the two may be associated with the ḥadīth that defines dreams as part of prophecy (see Abū Hājir Zaghlūl, Mawsūʿa, v, 156; Kinberg, Literal dreams, 283-4, and n. 12; Qurṭubī, ad Joseph’s dream, below). Al-Rāzī, when explaining how Abraham made the decision, puts ruʾyā and waḥy in a hierarchy, in which the latter authorizes the former.

The tafsīr emphasizes that Abraham was so determined about what he was going to do that the efforts of Satan to change his mind were in vain (Baghawī, Maʿālim, iv, 570; Suyūṭī, Durr, v, 306-7). Abraham made all the preparations and when he was about to sacrifice his son, a voice was heard, complimenting him for trusting the dream (ruʾyā, q 37:105). This, according to al-Rāzī, indicates Abraham’s awareness of the fact that the message delivered in his dream was obligatory. This does not mean, however, that the command was actually carried out (Rāzī, Tafsīr, xxvi, 156). Following this argument, al-Rāzī classifies this dream among those in which the message is fulfilled in an opposite way (id., 157).

== Dreams related to Joseph ==
In Sūrat Yūsuf (q 12) there are four dreams that are symbolic and require interpretation. As such they fit the third category of dreams mentioned above. In the beginning of the sūra (q 12:3), Joseph tells his father that he dreamt he had seen eleven stars, the sun (q.v.) and the moon (q.v.), all bowing down before him (cf. Gen 37:4-6; see bowing and prostration). Later in the sūra we read about the dreams of the two men who met Joseph in prison. One saw himself pressing grapes, the other saw himself carrying bread (q.v.) on his head while birds were picking at it. Joseph interpreted the dreams to mean that the first man will pour wine for his king and the other will be crucified (q 35-41; cf. Gen 40:5-19; see crucifixion). Verse 12:43 tells of Pharaoh’s (q.v.) dream about the seven fat cows eating the seven lean ones and about the seven green and seven withered ears of corn. Pharaoh’s counselors could not interpret the dream and defined it as aḍghāth aḥlām, «confused dreams» (q 12:44). Joseph interprets the symbols as standing for seven good years that will be devoured by seven bad years (q 12:47-9). Toward the end of the sūra Joseph’s dream, mentioned at the outset of the sūra, is fulfilled with the arrival of his family to Egypt: «And he lifted his father and mother upon the throne and they fell down prostrate before him. ‘See, father,’ he said, ‘this is the interpretation of my vision of long ago; my Lord (q.v.) has made it true’» (q 12:100).

As in the case of Abraham’s dream, here too exegesis contributes to the understanding of the status of dreams in Islam. While dealing with the verse that cites Jacob’s (q.v.) advice to Joseph not to tell his dream to his brothers (q 12:5), most commentators focus on the prophetic nature of this dream and elaborate on the relationship between prophecy and dreams. Al-Wāḥidī (d. 468/1076; Wasīṭ, ii, 600), for example, explains that Joseph was a prophet and states that prophets' dreams (ruʾyā) are equal to revelation (waḥy, cf. Abraham’s dream above). Jacob knew that his sons, Joseph’s brothers, would understand the meaning of the dream and would try to do away with Joseph. Thus he advised him not to tell them his dream.

For the same verse, al-Qurṭubī (d. 671/1272) adduces some of the ḥadīth sayings that actually underscore the reliability of dreams such as the one which defines dreams as part of prophecy (the 26th, 40th, 44th, 46th, 49th, 50th part of prophecy, Jāmiʿ, ix, 122-4; cf. Abraham’s dream above; see revelation and inspiration; prophets and prophethood). He further examines the qualities of dreams as truth-holders (see truth), as prophecies that come true, and compares different kinds of dreams and different times of dreaming (Qurṭubī, Jāmiʿ, 125-9). He ends his commentary with the presentation of Joseph as a prophet and as the best dream-interpreter on earth (id., 129, ad v. 6). In his commentary on the verses dealing with Joseph’s interpretation of the dreams of the two men in prison (q 12:35-42), al-Qurṭubī raises a question concerning the actualization of dreams according to their interpretation: When the dreamer tells the truth, his dream will be fulfilled according to its interpretation. The process is different when the dreamer lies. In this case, only the interpretation of a prophet will be carried out. This is the way to understand Joseph’s words: «The matter is decided whereon you enquire» (q 12:41). Al-Qurṭubī explains that when Joseph interpreted the dream of the doomed man, the latter denied having the dream. To that Joseph answered, «Whether you saw it or not, ‘the matter is decided whereon you enquire’» (Qurṭubī, Jāmiʿ, ix, 193). The question of the fulfillment of dreams is raised again by al-Qurṭubī when dealing with the number of years that passed from the time Joseph had his dream as a boy until he met his family in Egypt as a hero (q 12:100). Forty years, as stated by al-Qurṭubī, is the longest time that can pass from the time the dream occurred until its actualization (id., 264 ad q 12:100).

Al-Qurṭubī's elaboration conveys the exegetical inclination to consider qurʾānic dreams an integral part of the literature of dream interpretation (taʿbīr). An examination of the taʿbīr literature shows that although it also manifests that it has been influenced by foreign cultures such as Babylonian (Bland, Muhammedan science, 119; Fahd, The dream, 351), Greek (Bland, Muhammedan science, 123-4; Fahd, The dream, 248; Somogyi, Interpretation, 2) and Jewish (Kister, Interpretation, 99-101). The literature on oneiromancy is, however, Islamic in nature: A basic requirement imposed on every Muslim dream-interpreter is a thorough knowledge of the tradition of qurʾānic commentary (tafsīr) from which many ways of interpretation derive (Bland, Muhammedan science, 132). Qurʾānic verses are also often cited in taʿbīr works and are frequently used as means of interpretation (id., 122; Kister, Interpretation, 90, 91; Somogyi, Interpretation, 15-8). Joseph appears in taʿbīr books in illustration of methods of interpretation (Bland, Muhammedan science, 125). Certain parts of the Qurʾān are considered protectors against bad dreams (id., 129-30) and verses heard or seen in dreams are interpreted according to the nature of the sūra in which they occur (id., 143).

More qurʾānic references to dreams deal with issues taken from the biography of Muḥammad (see sīra and the qurʾān) and contribute to the establishment of basic elements of Islamic belief related to good tidings about the next world (bushrā), the battle of Badr, the conquest of Mecca, the nocturnal journey of the Prophet (see ascension) and the accusation against Muḥammad of being inspired by aḍghāth aḥlām, «confused dreams» (see opposition to muḥammad).

== Bushrā ==
q 10:62-4 reads: «Surely God’s friends — no fear shall be on them, neither shall they sorrow. Those who believe, and are godfearing — for them is good tidings in the present life and in the world to come. There is no changing the words of God; that is the mighty triumph.» Several definitions of «good tidings» (bushrā) are adduced in the commentary on this verse, among which «dream» (ruʾyā) is one. Dreams are the good tidings in the present world; the gardens of Eden (jannāt Adan (see garden)) are the good tidings of the next world (Ṭabarsī, Majmaʿ, iii, 70). Apart from commentary, this verse is often adduced as an opening to examination of dreams. For example, al-Qushayrī begins the chapter about dreams in his Risāla with this verse in order to legitimize the interest Islam has in dreams (Qushayrī, Risāla, Bāb ruʾyā al-qawm, 304). Al-Qushayrī further develops the legitimization of dreams by adducing a set of prophetic sayings that denote the special value of this medium.

Similar traditions also appear in exegetical works. Al-Suyūṭī (d. 911/1505), in his commentary on this verse, cites a variety of sayings defining dreams as a part of prophecy that has ceased to exist (Durr, iii, 337-9; Ibn ʿAṭiyya, Muḥarrar, iii, 129). Kāshānī (d. after 1091/1680), on the same verse, quotes a few Shīʿite traditions to demonstrate the way in which the good tidings are delivered. Such is the one transmitted by ʿAyyāshī (d. early fourth/tenth) on the authority of Abū Jaʿfar al-Bāqir (the sixth Shīʿī Imām, d. 114/733): When a man is about to die, the angel of death comforts him by telling him that his hopes will be fulfilled and that none of his fears will materialize to hurt him. Then the angel (q.v.) opens a door facing the gardens of Eden and lets the man see his future abode (see garden); there he sees the Prophet and ʿAlī (see ʿalī b. abī ṭālib) and Ḥasan and Ḥusayn (Kāshānī, Ṣāfī, ii, 410; see family of the prophet; shīʿism and the qurʾān). Visions of paradise (q.v.) and descriptions of rewards in the next world are the most common motifs in the literature of dreams (see reward and punishment). By using these motifs, and by referring to ḥadīth sayings that legitimize the usage of dreams, commentators try to anchor dream literature in the Qurʾān.

== The battle of Badr ==
q 8:43 reads: «When God showed them to you [Muḥammad] in your dream (manām) as few; and had he shown them as many you would have lost heart, and quarrelled about the matter; but God saved [you]; he knows the thoughts in the breasts.» Some commentators report that before the battle of Badr (q.v.), Muḥammad had a dream in which he saw the enemy to be few in number. Upon divulging the dream, the people were encouraged and declared that their Prophet’s dream revealed the truth. In the battlefield, God, to fulfill Muḥammad’s dream, decreased the number of infidels in the eyes of the believers (Muqātil, Tafsīr, ii, 117; Abū l-Layth al-Samarqandī, Tafsīr, ii, 20; cf. Rāzī, Tafsīr, xv, 174). This verse should be read together with q 3:13 which states that the victory of the believers at Badr became possible through a divine sign (āya) which had caused a deceptive change in the number. Thus, if q 8:43 deals with a preliminary, revealing dream, q 3:13 describes some kind of apparition (q.v.) that took place on the battlefield in the fulfillment of the dream.

== The conquest of Mecca ==
q 48:27 reads: «God has indeed fulfilled the vision (ruʾyā). He vouchsafed to his messenger truly: ‘You shall enter the holy mosque (q.v.), if God wills, in security, your heads shaved, your hair cut short, not fearing.’ He knew what you knew not, and gave you a victory beforehand.» Of the three groups of dreams presented above, this verse is used to demonstrate the first kind, where the message or description is fulfilled and becomes a part of reality.

In explaining the background to the verse, commentators emphasize that the verse alludes to a dream which the Prophet had before he went to Ḥudaybiya. In the dream, he saw the believers entering the holy mosque. The believers were pleased to hear the dream, believing that they would enter Mecca (q.v.) that same year. When this did not happen, the so-called hypocrites (munāfiqūn, see hypocrites and hypocrisy) became doubtful. The verse was revealed to encourage believers and to certify the trustworthiness of the dream (see occasions of revelation), namely the future entrance into Mecca (Muqātil, Tafsīr, iv, 76; Ṭabarsī, Majmaʿ, iv, 78; Shawkānī, Tafsīr, v, 55; Rāzī, Tafsīr, xxviii, 104. See also Bukhārī, Ṣaḥīḥ, Bāb al-taʿbīr, Bāb ruʾyā al-ṣāliḥīn).

God’s promise to fulfill the dream («You shall enter the holy mosque») seems to contradict the addition «if God wills.» Exegesis suggests several ways to settle the contradiction, all of which convey a need, almost an obligation, to interpret the verse in a manner that does not contradict the idea of dreams as truth-holders or, as stated by al-Qurṭubī, as «means to deliver revelations to prophets» (Jāmiʿ, xvi, 290).

== The nocturnal journey of the Prophet ==
q 17:60 reads: «And when we said to you, ‘Surely your Lord encompasses humankind,’ and we made the vision (ruʾyā), that we showed you, an ordeal (fitna) for humankind and [also] the tree cursed in the Qurʾān; and we frighten them, but it only increases them in great insolence.» Exegetical literature offers various occasions to which the ruʾyā in this verse may refer: One is the ascension (q.v.; isrāʾ), mentioned in the first verse of the same sūra. In this case, ruʾyā (dream) might mean ruʾyat ʿayn, «physical seeing in wakefulness» and the cursed tree (al-shajara al-malʿūna) is the zaqūm (Ṭabarsī, Majmaʿ, iv (xv), 66; Suyūṭī, Durr, iv, 210; Shawkānī, Tafsīr, iii, 240; Ibn ʿAṭiyya, Muḥarrar, iii, 467, 468; see trees). The reference could also be to Muḥammad’s dream regarding the conquest of Mecca (q 48:27; Ṭabarsī, Majmaʿ, iv [xv], 66; Shawkānī, Tafsīr, iii, 240; Ālūsī, Rūḥ, viii, 107; Ibn ʿAṭiyya, Muḥarrar, iii, 468) or to the dream in which the Prophet saw monkeys climbing his pulpit (minbar), interpreted as being the Umayyad caliphs. According to the last interpretation, the cursed tree alludes to the Umayyad dynasty (Ṭabarsī, Majmaʿ, iv (xv), 66; Suyūṭī, Durr, iv, 211; Shawkānī, Tafsīr, iii, 240; Ālūsī, Rūḥ, viii, 107; Kāshānī, Ṣāfī, iii, 200; Ibn ʿAṭiyya, Muḥarrar, iii, 468).

Unlike the other references discussed above, the exegesis on this verse does not examine the dream as a medium which reveals a future event but rather raises a question as to the circumstances under which the dream could cause fitna, «ordeal, insolence, dissension (q.v.).» Performing the ascension(isrāʾ) through a dream would not cause fitna (Ibn ʿAṭiyya, Muḥarrar, iii, 468). Only physical ascension could be considered a miracle, the acceptance of which requires profound belief and as such puts people to the test. Following this line, attention should be given to the exceptional usage of ruʾyā in this verse. It means physical seeing rather than dreaming and indicates wakefulness rather than sleep (see seeing and hearing). If that ruʾyā refers to the dream Muḥammad had before the conquest of Mecca, fitna could be the outcome of the disappointment of the people who did not witness the immediate fulfillment of the dream (see «The conquest of Mecca» above).

== Aḍghāth aḥlām ==
Dreams of this category are defined as frightful nightmares, deceptive dreams or dreams with a meaning that cannot be interpreted (Qurṭubī, Jāmiʿ, xi, 270). In the case of Pharaoh, the counselors did not know how to interpret his dream and named it aḍghāth aḥlām (q 12:44). In q 21:5 the term refers to the Qurʾān brought by Muḥammad and was used by those who doubted his mission. Although not elaborated in the tafsīr, the difference between the term aḍghāth aḥlām and ruʿyā/ manām can be easily perceived. The latter are considered part of prophecy, of divine origin, revealing the future (see Bushrā above), they hold the truth (see Muḥammad’s dream before the conquest of Mecca, mentioned above) and have the authority to lead people and instruct them on how to act (see Abraham’s dream, and all the dreams in Sūrat Yūsuf, mentioned above). Aḍghāth aḥlām, on the other hand, are represented as misleading lies, stories inspired by demons and, as such, invalid. By comparing the negative features of aḍghāth aḥlām, the value and weight of ruʾyā and manām become prominent. This differentiation also appears in the ḥadīth literature, expressed in a widespread saying «ruʾyā is from God and ḥulm is from Satan» (al-ruʾyā min Allāh wa-l-ḥulm min al-shayṭān, for a reference to different versions of this ḥadīth, see Abū Hājir Zaghlūl, Mawsūʿa, v, 157).

== Conclusions ==
Of all the references to dreams examined above, only in Sūrat Yūsuf do we come across dream narratives (q.v.). In all other cases, the term «dream» is mentioned but nothing is said about the content of the dream, the reason for it or its background (asbāb al-nuzūl; see occasions of revelation); these are elaborated in the exegetical literature. This observation allows us to say that — except for the dreams in Sūrat Yūsuf — the Qurʾān does not contain narratives of dreams. The examination of dreams in the exegetical literature reflects the concerns of later times, when dreams had already gained a special status in Islam.

The legitimization of the usage of dreams, established in the ḥadīth, was set to justify the special role dreams began to play in the nascent Islamic community that had lost its Prophet. People’s search for the authority of dreams increased after the death of the Prophet, when prophecy came to an end (see Kinberg, Literal dreams, 283, and n. 12; also Von Grünebaum, Cultural function, 7). As part of prophecy, dreams were perceived as vehicles through which transcendental information could reach the believers. This created a special interest in dreams and, due to the trust people had in them, they began to function in a way similar to that of the ḥadīth, especially that of edifying ḥadīth (for further details see Kinberg, Literal dreams, 283-92 [Dreams as a functional parallel to ḥadīth]). The Qurʾān naturally was not in need of this kind of dream. The exegetical literature, nevertheless, tried to relate ḥadīth and Qurʾān.

The same can be said of the relationship between qurʾānic dreams and taʿbīr literature, the interpretation of dreams. Exegesis, whenever applicable, dealt with the way in which the interpretation of dreams operated and the circumstances under which they could be fulfilled. Taʿbīr books, which developed into a distinct genre (for details see Manām, Introduction, 43-6), referred to the Qurʾān and used its verses as a means of interpretation. Nonetheless, were it not for the contribution of tafsīr, no qurʾānic verse would have been associated with the taʿbīr literature.

== Bibliography ==
;Primary:
* Abū Hājir Zaghlūl (ed.), Mawsūʿat aṭrāf al-ḥadīth, Beirut 1989
* Abū l-Layth al-Samarqandī, Tafsīr
* Bukhārī, Ṣaḥīḥ
* Ālūsī, Rūḥ
* Baghawī, Maʿālim
* Ibn ʿAṭiyya, Muḥarrar
* Kāshānī, Ṣāfī
* Manām, see below Kinberg, Morality
* Muqātil, Tafsīr
* Qurṭubī, Jāmiʿ
* Qushayrī, Abū l-Qāsim, al-Risāla al-Qushayriyya, Beirut 1987
* Rāzī, Tafsīr
* Shawkānī, Tafsīr
* Suyūṭī, Durr
* Ṭabarsī, Majmaʿ
* Wāḥidī, Wasīṭ
;Secondary:
* N. Bland, On the Muhammedan science of taʿbīr or interpretation of dreams, in jras (1856), 118-79
* T. Fahd, Les procédés oniromantiques, in id., La divination arabe, Leiden 1966, 247—367
* id., The dream in medieval Islamic society, in G.E. von Grünebaum and R. Callois (eds.), The dream and human societies, Berkeley 1966, 351-63
* G.E. von Grünebaum, The cultural function of the dream as illustrated by classical Islam, in The dream and human societies, 3-21
* L. Kinberg, Literal dreams and prophetic ḥadīt̲ in classical Islam. A comparison of two ways of legitimation, in Der Islam (1993), 279—300
* id., Morality in the guise of dreams. Ibn Abī al-Dunyā's K. al-Manām (a critical edition with introduction), Leiden 1994 (= Manām), and see the bibliography there
* M.J. Kister, The interpretation of dreams. An unknown manuscript of Ibn Qutaybah’s ʿIbārat al-ruʾyā, in ios 4 (1974), 67-103
* J. de Somogyi, The interpretation of dreams in ad-Damīrī's Ḥayāt al-ḥayawān, in jras (1940), 1-20

Академия Корана:Encyclopaedia of the Qurʾān/Brother and Brotherhood

2017-01-01T19:26:08Z

Maqivi:

{{ПереводЭК|Brother and Brotherhood|Roy P. Mottahedeh}}
The term brother (akh) is used in the Qurʾān in several senses: in its strict biological sense; in several partly metaphorical senses, especially to indicate membership in a genealogical group; and, in a more extended metaphorical sense, to indicate membership in a group united by a shared belief. There are verses in the Qurʾān that indicate that the sense of community and mutual respect, concern and aid implied by brotherhood in this extended, metaphorical sense can unite not only Muslims but any humans who do virtuous acts in response to God’s expectations of them (see community and society in the qurʾān; gratitude and ingratitude).

Brother, in its literal sense, a male who shares one or both parents with another sibling, is the object of several verses with legal implications. A brother is within the closer degrees of kinship (q.v.) and therefore both forbidden to marry the daughter of his brother (q 4:23) and allowed to see his sisters dressed less formally than would be proper before men not in close kin relation or considered likely to see them as sexually desirable (q 24:31; compare q 33:55 on the Prophet’s wives; see wives of the prophet; sex and sexuality; social interactions). Since q 4:23 also forbids a «milk sister» to marry a biologically unrelated male suckled by the same mother, specialists in Islamic law have usually included the milk brother as well as the milk sister and milk mother in most of the legal rulings that regulate marriageability and acceptable private association. The brother also has a fixed position in entitlement to inheritance (q.v.; q 4:176 and q 4:11, in which «brothers» (ikhwa) is generally understood to mean both brothers and sisters; see sister). The brother is referred to as the archetype of the walī l-dam, the next of kin with the right to demand retaliation (q.v.) for a deliberately slain kinsman or to settle for blood money (q 2:178; see blood money; murder).

The most important «blood» brothers who figure in the Qurʾān are Cain and Abel, (who are referred to, but not mentioned by name; see cain and abel), the brothers of Joseph (q.v.; see also benjamin), and Moses (q.v.) and Aaron (Hārūn, see aaron). It is interesting that a figure so centrally important as Moses has a brother who is specifically called both a «prophet» (nabī, q 19:53) and a messenger (rasūl, q 20:47; see messenger) of the Lord and who could, like his brother, receive divine inspiration (waḥy, q 10:87; see revelation and inspiration) as well as miraculous signs (āyāt, q 23:45; 20:42; see signs). Moses, whose speech is hard to understand, has asked God to give him Aaron, his brother, as a «helper» (wazīr) from his family (q 20:29-30; 25:35; 28:35). Moreover, both Moses and Aaron are given sulṭān, a word usually understood to mean authority, power and authoritative proof (q 28:35; and 23:45, in which the phrase is sulṭān mubīn, «clear authority»).

The simultaneous appearance of two prophet brothers among one people raised, for later generations, questions about the nature of prophethood (see prophets and prophethood). The Qurʾān seems to contain a two-fold explanation of the need for both prophets: namely, the rebelliousness of the Israelites towards Moses and his resultant need of Aaron’s help, and the assistance Moses needs in circumventing his difficulty in speech. Thus when Moses orders them to enter the Holy Land and they refuse, Moses prays: «My Lord, I control only myself and my brother. Distinguish us (or „distance us“) from such perverse people» (q 5:25). Yet one might argue that God could have given Moses the gifts of speech and authority that would have freed him from the need of a prophet-brother.

A further problem is raised by Aaron's presence when the calf (see calf of gold ) was made to be an object of worship while Moses was absent and receiving the law on Mount Sinai (q.v.), especially as Moses had told Aaron, “Be my deputy among my people, act righteously and do not follow the path of the perverse” (q 7:142). That Moses on his return at least pretends to hold his brother responsible is shown by the words: “He [Moses] took his brother by the head, pulling him toward himself” (q 7:150). Hence Aaron says in explanation: “O son of my mother, the people have humiliated me [or, “thought me to be weak”] and almost killed me. So do not let my enemies gloat over me nor place me among the wrongdoers” (q 7:150). Moses then prays for both himself and his brother: “O Lord, forgive me and my brother and cause us to enter in your mercy” (q 7:151). Alongside all of these problems was the problem of the apparent sin of Moses in killing a man (q 20:40; 26:14; 26:19). These verses offered rich material for the speculation of later Muslim thinkers on the sinlessness, the degree of foreknowledge (or reasons for withholding foreknowledge) and the timing of divinely ordained persuasive miracles that God might grant his prophets (see impeccability and infallibility; miracle).

The commentators by and large avoid this discussion. Al-Ṭabarī (d. 310/923) explains that «From our mercy we gave [Moses] his brother Aaron as a prophet (nabī)» (q 19:53) means: «We supported and helped him [Moses] through his [Aaron’s] prophethood» (Tafsīr, xvi, 95). Al-Ṭabarī (Tafsīr, xvi, 160) also implies that Aaron’s station is in answer to Moses' prayers (which, perhaps, God anticipated) when Moses asks God to give him his brother Aaron as a vizier (wazīr) and says: «Let him share in my mission (amrī)» (q 20:32). Moses is saying, al-Ṭabarī explains, «Make him a prophet just as you made me a prophet». Al-Bayḍāwī (d. ca. 716/1316-7) seems to be explaining Aaron’s inability to stop the worship of the calf — and also, perhaps, to be justifying Aaron as a second prophet — when he says that Aaron was three years older than Moses and was «a mild-tempered and tractable person, better loved by the people of Israel» (Anwār, i, 345). Yet often, even when the verse refers to prophetic traits possessed by both brothers, the commentators remain principally interested in Moses. Thus, in discussing the «miraculous signs» mentioned in q 23:45, Tafsīr al-Jalālayn (450) only refers to the miracles of Moses since Aaron plays such a subordinate role in the narrative of their lives. Nevertheless, as al-Ṭūsī (d. 460/1067) explains (Tibyān, iv, 532), when Moses went up Mount Sinai he was able to order Aaron to be his deputy even though God had sent Aaron as a prophet with a mission (nabī mursal) because Moses had leadership (riyāsa) over Aaron as well as over all of the rest of the religious community (umma) to whom Moses brought revelation. Interestingly, the sulṭān given to Moses and Aaron is understood by several commentators to mean ḥujja, «argument (for a case)» (e.g. Ṭabarī, Tafsīr, xx, 76; see proof). Al-Bayḍāwī (d. ca. 716/1316-7) interprets sulṭān mubīn (q 23:45), in which mubīn would ordinarily be understood to mean «manifestly clear», as «a manifestly clear argument, compelling to the one who opposes it» and says that it may mean such miraculous signs as Moses' staff which turned into a snake (Anwār, ad loc.). Incidentally, the use of terms such as sulṭān and wazīr, later to become political terms frequently used in the Islamic world, caused the verses on Moses and Aaron to be examined in the light of this use (see authority). The example of Aaron as an «infallible» aide sent to help Moses was of importance to some Shīʿīs in understanding the role of ʿAlī (see ʿalī b. abī ṭālib) and other imāms (see shīʿism and the qurʾān; imām).

Very common in the Qurʾān is the largely metaphorical use of «brother» to mean members of a tribe or people (see tribes and clans) especially (though not exclusively) in connection with three of the so-called «Arabian» prophets sent by God to their people. Hūd (q.v.) is the «brother» of the ʿĀd (q.v.; q 7:65; 11:50; 26:124; 46:21), Ṣāliḥ (q.v.) is the brother of the Thamūd (q.v.; q 7:73; 11:61; 26:142; 27:45) and Shuʿayb (q.v.) is the brother of Midian (q.v.; q 7:85; 11:84; 29:36). Similarly, Noah (q.v.) is the brother of the «people» or «tribe» (qawm) of Noah (q 26:105-6). Lot (q.v.) is the brother of the qawm of Lot (q 26:160-1); and, correspondingly, «the brothers (ikhwān) of Lot» (meaning the people of Lot) are listed among those peoples who rejected messengers sent by God (q 50:13). Al-Rāghib al-Iṣfahānī (d. early 5th/11th cent.; Mufradāt, 68, under the heading « akh») says that brother is used in these verses to convey that the compassion that such a messenger has for his people is just as that which a brother has for his brother. In a parallel usage the kin of Mary (q.v.) address her as «sister of Aaron» (q 19:28).

There are a few verses that bridge or partially indicate the transference of «brother» from its literal or partly metaphorical use (as when it means kinsman) to its full metaphorical sense. A striking example of the use of the emotional closeness implied by brotherhood is the simile which warns the believers to avoid suspicion, spying and speaking ill of each other, for: «Would one of you like to eat the flesh of his dead brother? For you would have a horror of such things» (q 49:12). The believers are told if they «become mixed» with orphans (q.v.), «they become your brothers (ikhwānukum)» (q 2:220). Tafsīr al-Jalālayn (46) echoes many commentaries in saying that «brothers» here means «brothers in religion»; but, like many other commentaries, it implies that such acceptance means acceptance in a quasi-familial relationship, «For it is customary for a brother to mingle his expenses with his brothers, so you should act in this way [with such orphans]». Similarly, it is said of adoptive children that they should keep the names of their fathers «but if you do not know their fathers, then they are your brothers (ikhwānukum) in religion (dīn) and your friends/clients/protegés (mawālī)» (q 33:5; see clients and clientage).

While several verses attest that biological kinship, including brotherhood, is less important than spiritual kinship, the verse following the discussion of adoption shows that for legal purposes real brotherhood is still the measure relevant to inheritance and kindred matters: «Blood relatives are closer to each other in God’s book than to the believers and the emigrants. If (nevertheless) you act with goodness toward those affiliated with you (awliyāʾikum), that is set down in the Book (q.v.)» (q 33:6). This verse is said by virtually all the commentators to confirm the abrogation of the muʾākhāt, the adoption of each other as brothers by the Meccan Emigrants (muhājirūn) and certain members of the Helpers (anṣār), the sincere believers among the Medinans, at the time that the Prophet settled in Medina (see emigrants and helpers).

Nevertheless, in the larger scheme of things, the ties created by religion are more meaningful in the eyes of God and should be a more significant source of motivation. If your kin and your wealth are dearer to you than the Prophet, God and the struggle in his path (see path or way [of god]), «then lie in wait until God brings his command to pass» (q 9:24). «Those who believe in God and the last day (see last judgment) will not show love to those who oppose God and his Prophet whether they be fathers or sons or brothers or members of their clan (ʿashīra)» (q 58:22). This sūra belongs to the Medinan period and may refer to the attempts by the Prophet to make the sincere converts among the Medinans place their loyalty to Islam above their feelings of kinship to their relatives who were not real converts, the «hypocrites» (see hypocrites and hypocrisy).

Several verses affirm the brotherhood of the believers (see belief and unbelief). The Qurʾān reminds Muslims that before accepting Islam they were enemies, «then he unified your hearts so that through his bounty you became brothers (ikhwān)» (q 3:103). The believers must take care to preserve this condition for they «are but brothers (ikhwa); therefore, make peace between (any) two of your brothers» (q 49:10). Correspondingly, those who share in some form of sinful behavior can be considered members of a «brotherhood» so that «those who squander money [or are prodigal] are the brothers of the devils (shayāṭīn, see devil)» (q 17:27). Al-Ṭabarī (Tafsīr, xv, 74) adds: «In this way the Arabs (q.v.) speak of anyone who adheres to a habit of a people and follows their tradition: [he is] their brother».

Other verses show that the brotherhood of the believers entails a feeling of mutual affection and interdependence regardless of gender. Thus q 3:195 reads: «And their Lord answers them, ‘I do not/will not cause the action of anyone of you to be lost, whether male or female; you depend on/belong to/proceed from each other (baʿḍukum min baʿḍin).’» Similarly q 9:71 reads: «The believers, male and female, are friends/guardians of each other (baʿḍuhum awliyāʾ baʿḍin)». Indeed, q 59:9, which refers to the Emigrants from Mecca and the Helpers in Medina but may be generalized to indicate the degree to which all true believers prefer the interests of other believers to their own, reads: «They do not find envy in their hearts for that which has been given [to the emigrants] but prefer them to themselves even if there be poverty amongst themselves. Whoever guards himself from the avarice (q.v.) of his own soul, those are the truly fortunate». (See also the next verse, q 59:10 and compare q 64:16).

According to some modernists all humans are believers by nature, and only by willful commitment to evil leave that state. Some verses might be seen to support this view. There are those who associate others with God (mushrikūn, see idolatry and idolaters); «but» — adds a verse which need not be read as exclusively designating Muslims — «if they repent and establish worship (q.v.) and pay the alms-tax (zakāt, see almsgiving), they are your brothers (ikhwān) in religion» (q 9:11). And in a verse which seems from its context to be addressed to the righteous (al-muttaqīn), they are promised that in heaven (q.v.): «We shall root out whatever [remains] of hatred in their hearts; [they shall be] as brothers (ikhwān) on raised couches, face to face» (q 15:47). If this verse is addressed to the righteous, both Muslim and non-Muslim, it conceives of brotherhood as their universal reward and ideal condition in the future life.

Elaboration of the concept of brotherhood as a heightened form of religious identification became prominent in medieval Islam. Literary examples of this would include the writings of the Brotherhood of Purity (Ikhwān al-Ṣafāʾ) and of Ibn Abī l-Dunyā (d. 281/894), whose ideas on «brotherhood» in God are often quoted by al-Ghazālī (d. 505/1111) in book 15 of his Iḥyāʾ ʿulūm al-dīn. Historical formulations, especially those associated with Ṣūfism, are a prominent feature of religious life in virtually every Islamic century (see ṣūfism and the qurʾān).

== Bibliography ==
* Bayḍāwī, Anwār
* al-Ghazālī, Abū Ḥāmid Muḥammad, Iḥyāʾ ʿulūm al-dīn, 4 vols., Būlāq 1289/1872, ii, 138-97
* Ibn Abī l-Dunyā, Kitāb al-Ikhwān, ed. M. Ṭawliba, Cairo 1988 (rev. by M. ʿAr Khalaf)
* Jalālayn
* al-Rāghib al-Iṣfahānī, Mufradāt, Beirut 1412/1992
* Ṭabarī, Tafsīr
* Ṭūsī, Tibyān

Академия Корана:Encyclopaedia of the Qurʾān/Brother and Brotherhood

2017-01-01T19:23:27Z

Maqivi: Новая страница: «{{ПереводЭК|Brother and Brotherhood|Roy P. Mottahedeh}} The term brother (akh) is used in the Qurʾān in several senses: in its strict biological sense;…»

Академия Корана:Encyclopaedia of the Qurʾān/Aqṣā Mosque

2017-01-01T19:17:32Z

Maqivi: Новая страница: «{{ПереводЭК|Aqṣā Mosque|N.J. Johnson}} An early mosque located in Jerusalem on what is called in Islam «The Noble Sanctuary» (al-Ḥaram al-Sharīf,…»

{{ПереводЭК|Aqṣā Mosque|N.J. Johnson}}
An early mosque located in Jerusalem on what is called in Islam «The Noble Sanctuary» (al-Ḥaram al-Sharīf, see archaeology and the qurʾān). «The farthest place of prayer» (al-masjid al-aqṣā) is attested once in the Qurʾān, in q 17:1 (see ascension): «Glory be to he who transported his servant by night from the sacred place of prayer (al-masjid al-ḥarām) to the farthest place of prayer (al-masjid al-aqṣā).» Within Muḥammad’s life-time «the sacred place of prayer» (al-masjid, the place of prayer, mosque; al-ḥarām, the sacred) was recognized as the sacred mosque at Mecca (q.v.) while «the farthest (al-aqṣā) place of prayer» might have been in heaven, in Jerusalem (q.v.) or perhaps in a locale near Mecca. Only at a later, unknown time did the topographical attribution become the proper name of the Aqṣā Mosque. In the earliest associations of al-masjid al-aqṣā with Jerusalem, it is likely that the whole of the Ḥaram was thought to be a place of prayer.

There was no mosque on al-Ḥaram al-Sharīf before Muḥammad’s death; the Herodian platform was used then as a refuse dump and it is said that the second Caliph (q.v.), ʿUmar b. al-Khaṭṭāb, who accepted the surrender of Jerusalem in about 17/638, commenced clearing away the rubbish. No Muslim source records the Ḥaram’s first mosque but, in the reign of Caliph Muʿāwiya I (41/661-60/680), the Gallic pilgrim Arculf saw that the «Saracens» had a rough prayer house, unnamed, in its eastern part, built on what he understood to be the remains of the Jewish Temple. That mosque has been attributed to ʿUmar b. al-Khaṭṭāb.

The Aqṣā Mosque is situated in the southwest corner of the Ḥaram and during the repairs of 1938-42, five previous major (Aqṣā I—V), and several lesser, structural periods were identified. In period V (746-7/1345-751/1350), associated with the Mamlūk ʿIzz al-Dīn Aybak al-Miṣrī, the western vaulted aisles and the outer western porch bays were constructed. Period IV was the work of the Knights Templar who occupied the mosque (492/1099-582/1187), when some of the eastern aisles were demolished and replaced with vaulted galleries and the central porch bays built. Literary evidence credits two Umayyad caliphs, ʿAbd al-Malik (65/685-86/705) and al-Walīd I (86/705-96/715) and two ʿAbbāsids, al-Manṣūr (136/754-158/775) and al-Mahdī (158/775-169/785) with the building or restoration of the first three archaeologically distinguishable structures, which will now be discussed.

Al-Muqaddasī, who saw the Aqṣā Mosque in 374/985, Nāṣir-i Khusraw who saw it in 438-9/1047 and the eighth/fourteenth century author of Muthīr al-gharām quoted by al-Suyūṭī all say that ʿAbd al-Malik built the mosque. Remains of Aqṣā I were found in the mosque’s southern part and nineteen meters short of its present northern wall (Hamilton, Structural history, fig. 30). Archaeological evidence for Aqṣā II, which had a wide central nave, a dome before the miḥrāb (see art and architecture and the qurʾān) and the nineteen meter extension of its northern wall, included Greek graffiti found on and deemed to be contemporary with the nave timbers. On epigraphic grounds, these carpenters' notes have been given a date range from the end of the sixth century c.e. to the beginning of the second/eighth century.

For Aqṣā III the nave and aisles north of the dome were demolished and new columns installed. Al-Muqaddasī wrote of these «marbled» columns which, Hamilton determined, had been specially prepared for the mosque and which remained in place until the 1938-42 repairs, when they were transferred to the Ḥaram museum. The Muthīr, written at Jerusalem in 752/1351, states that the Aqṣā Mosque was rebuilt by al-Manṣūr after the earthquake of 130/747-8, and built again by al-Mahdī after a second earthquake; this second quake is unrecorded and is generally thought to duplicate the earlier one.

No contemporary Muslim reports of the building of the Aqṣā Mosque exist. Its most detailed, sometimes contradictory, descriptions are those of al-Muqaddasī, Nāṣir-i Khusraw and the author of the Muthīr al-gharām as repeated by al-Suyūṭī, while Hamilton’s study provides the most complete archaeological record. Greek papyri of ca. 90/708-96/714 found at the Egyptian village of Aphrodito mention workmen and materials having been requi- sitioned for construction of a mosque and palace at Jerusalem, but it cannot be determined if the reference is to a new mosque or to an ongoing project.

According to Creswell’s interpretation of all of the evidence, al-Walīd I built Aqṣā I, al-Mahdī Aqṣā II, and, after the 424/1033 earthquake, the Fāṭimid Caliph al-Ẓāhir constructed Aqṣā III. He believed that the Aphrodito papyri confirmed al-Walīd I as the mosque’s originator and inferred from al-Ẓāhir’s mosaic inscription (see below) that, in addition to his renovation of the dome and its supports, al-Ẓāhir rebuilt the nave and aisles. Stern understood the evidence to mean Aqṣā I and II were Umayyad and Aqṣā III ʿAbbāsid; furthermore, he believed that the Fāṭimid mosaics on the dome were modeled after those of the original Umayyad building, pointing out their resemblance to those found in the Dome of the Rock. In more recent evaluations of the literary and archaeological record summarized by Hamilton (Creswell and Allan, A short account, 79-82), Aqṣā I is credited to ʿAbd al-Malik, Aqṣā II to al-Walīd I and Aqṣā III to al-Manṣūr and al-Mahdī after the earthquake of 130/748-9. It is surmised that Aqṣā II was enlarged considerably because the original building was too small.

An extant mosaic inscription at the base of the dome recording al-Ẓāhir’s repairs of 426/1034-6 contains q 17:1 immediately following the basmala (q.v.). A second inscription of al-Ẓāhir, in the dome and now lost but recorded by ʿAlī al-Harawī in 568-9/1173, also contained q 17:1 immediately after the basmala . An inscription of part of q 17:1, dating from 583-4/1187, appears on the wall east of the miḥrāb, while the inscription of q 17:1-6 which is found at the eastern end of the transept is dated 731-2/1331.

== Bibliography ==
Primary:
* Adamnan, De locis sanctis, ed. D. Meehan, Dublin 1958
* H.I. Bell (ed.), Greek papyri in the British Museum. iv. The Aphrodito papyri, London 1910
* G. Le Strange (ed.), Description of the noble sanctuary at Jerusalem in 1470 a.d., by Kamāl (or Shams) ad-Dīn as-Suyūṭī, in jras 19 (1887), 247—305
* al-Maqdisī al-Shāfiʿī, Shihāb al-Dīn Abū Maḥmūd Aḥmad b. Muḥammad, Muthīr al-gharām, ed. Aḥmad al-Khuṭaymī, Beirut 1994
* al-Muqaddasī, Shams al-Dīn Abū ʿAbdallāh Muḥammad, Aḥsan al-taqāsīm fī maʿrifat al-aqālīm, ed. M.J. de Goeje, Leiden 1906
* Nāṣir-i Khusraw, Sefer Nameh. Relation du voyage en Syrie, en Palestine, en Égypte, en Arabie et en Perse, pendant les années de l’Hégire 437—444 (1035—1042), trans. C. Schefer, Paris 1881
;Secondary:
* H.I. Bell, The Aphrodito papyri, in The journal of Hellenic studies 28 (1908), 97-120
* R. Bell, Muhammad’s visions, in mw 24 (1934), 145-54
* M. van Berchem, Matériaux pour un corpus inscriptionum arabicarum, II part 2, nos. 275, 284 and p. 407, Cairo 1927
* A.A. Bevan, Mohammed’s ascension to heaven, in Zeitschrift für Alttestamentliche Wissenschaft 27 (1914), 51-61
* Brockelmann, gal
* H. Busse, Tempel, Grabeskirche und Ḥaram aš-šarīf. Drei Heiligtümer und ihre gegenseitigen Beziehungen in Legende und Wirklichkeit, in H. Busse and G. Kretschmar, Jerusalemer Heiligtumstraditionen in altkirchlicher und frühislamischer Zeit, Wiesbaden 1987, 1-27
* Creswell, ema
* id., A short account of early Muslim architecture, 1958, rev. and suppl. J.W. Allan, Aldershot 1989
* E.C. Dodd and S. Khairallah, The image of the word. A study of quranic verses in Islamic architecture, 2 vols., Beirut 1981
* M. Gil, A history of Palestine, 634—1099, trans. E. Broido, Cambridge 1992
* O. Grabar, al-Ḥaram al-Sharīf, in ei2, iii, 173-5
* id., al-Masdjid al-Akṣā, in ei2, vi, 707-8
* A. Guillaume, Where was al-Masŷid al-Aqṣà? in al-Andalus 18 (1953), 323-36
* R.W. Hamilton, The structural history of the Aqsa mosque. A record of archaeological gleanings from the repairs of 1938—1942, Oxford 1949
* id., Once again the Aqṣā, in J. Raby and J. Johns (eds.), Bayt al-Maqdis. ʿAbd al-Malik’s Jerusalem, Part One, Oxford 1992, 141-4
* M.J. Kister, You shall only set out for three mosques. A study of an early tradition, reprinted in M.J. Kister, Studies in jāhiliyya and early Islam, London 1980, 173-96 and extra notes 1-8
* G. Le Strange, Palestine under the Moslems, London 1890
* R. Paret, Die «ferne Gebetsstätte» in Sūre 17,1, in Der Islam 34 (1959), 150-2
* RCEA, VII, no. 2410, Cairo 1937
* M. Rosen-Ayalon, The early Islamic monuments of al-Ḥaram al-Sharīf, Jerusalem 1989
* H. Stern, Recherches sur la mosquée al-Aqṣā et sur ses mosaïques, in Ars orientalis 5 (1963), 27-47
* M. de Vogüé, Le temple de Jérusalem, Paris 1864
* J. Wilkinson, Jerusalem pilgrims before the Crusades, Warminster 1977
* C.W. Wilson, Ordinance survey of Jerusalem, 1865, facsimile Jerusalem 1980

Академия Корана:Encyclopaedia of the Qurʾān/Apologetics

2017-01-01T19:12:49Z

Maqivi: Новая страница: «{{ПереводЭК|Apologetics|David Thomas}} A systematic argumentative discourse in defense of a religion or doctrine. In the history of encounters between Mu…»

{{ПереводЭК|Apologetics|David Thomas}}
A systematic argumentative discourse in defense of a religion or doctrine. In the history of encounters between Muslims of differing opinions and between Muslims and members of other faiths, the Qurʾān has usually been central as a guide and source in debates and has often been a significant topic in these discussions.

Within the Qurʾān itself there are arguments defending both its proclamations and its own status. Its fundamental emphasis that God is one and distinct from all other beings is most emphatically asserted in q 112, which is generally thought to have been delivered in the context of debates with polytheists, Jews or Christians (e.g. Rāzī, Tafsīr, ad loc.). The Qurʾān argues generally against anyone who thinks of God as a creature (q 2:255; 43:81, etc.); against those, including the Jews and Christians, who implicate him in humanlike relationships (q 5:116; 6:100-1; 9:30; see anthropomorphism) or suggest he is Trinitarian (see trinity; cf. q 4:171; 5:73); and against the notion that anyone else is capable of creating anything without his aid (q 6:1). Likewise, Muḥammad’s activity as God’s messenger is distinguished from the actions of soothsayers and people possessed by the jinn (q.v.; q 52:29-31; 68:2), authenticated (q 53:10-1) and supported by God against opponents (q 108:3; see opposition to muḥammad) and defined as a continuation of the work of previous messengers (q 4:163; 33:40; 37:37; 61:6; see messenger; prophets and prophethood). With equal emphasis, the divine origin of the Qurʾān is defended against its detractors (q 46:7-8) by reference to its inimitability (q.v.; q 2:23-4; 10:38; 11:13-4; 17:88).

On the whole, the Qurʾān counsels against involvement in pointless disputes about matters of faith (q 4:140; 6:68-70). The appropriate course of action is to point out true belief politely and tactfully (q 16:125; 29:46). It does, however, explicitly sanction confronting those who deny the plainly revealed truth, as is indicated by the injunction given in q 3:61 that the opposing parties should meet and ritually invoke a curse (q.v.) on the liars among them. This verse is connected with the mutual cursing (mubāhala) that was arranged to decide the outcome of the meeting between Muḥammad and the Christians, who are said to have come from Najrān (q.v.) in 10/631 to put questions to him (Ibn Isḥāq-Guillaume, 277). It is the first intimation of the long history of debate between Muslims and Christians in which the Qurʾān was nearly always crucial.

Among some Muslims the status of the Qurʾān was a matter of dispute from an early date. In the second/eighth century, Muʿtazilī (see muʿtazilīs) theologians (mutakallimūn, sing. mutakallim) rejected the Qurʾān’s uncreatedness as part of their perception of the strict unity and uniqueness of God (see createdness of the qurʾān). At the same time scholars of a more independent frame of mind have openly rejected the notion that its miraculous nature could be readily proven (al-Qāḍī ʿAbd al-Jabbār, Tathbīt, 412-3). The fragmentary form in which their views have come down to us makes it difficult to appreciate the real intention behind them, but if the early third/ninth-century Muslim Abū ʿĪsā l-Warrāq, who will be discussed further below, is in any way typical of them, it appears that they were rebutting apologetic arguments based upon the Qurʾān’s literary qualities. Remarkably, he denigrates the notion that the Qurʾān represents an inimitable literary achievement. Among the points he makes is that the Qurʾān stands out only because literary ability was lacking at the time it appeared, that Muḥammad’s opponents were too occupied with resisting him to meet the challenge to produce passages comparable to the Qurʾān and, maybe most telling, that literary abilities can be acquired naturally and are not necessarily indications of divine endowments (al-Māturīdī, Tawḥīd, 191; see also D. Thomas, Anti-Christian polemic, 28). These particularly provocative criticisms presuppose a lively and developed debate about the claims made within the Qurʾān itself for its distinctiveness and suggest that the opposition to which the text itself attests was by no means silenced in every quarter by the defensive responses it contains.

If such radical criticisms were relatively rare among Muslims themselves and leveled by marginal figures, they persisted among Christians who expressed views about the Qurʾān throughout much of the shared history of the two faiths. The first major figure whose opinions are clearly known is John of Damascus (d. ca. 132/750) who accuses Muḥammad of writing a work on his own on the basis of what an Arian monk had told him about the Bible (q.v.; J.-P. Migne, Patrologia graeca, xciv, col. 765; see informants). Here there is a clear allusion to the story of the monk who recognized Muḥammad as a prophet, which the classical biographies of Muḥammad (see sīra and the qurʾān) relate (e.g. Ibn Isḥāq-Guillaume, 79-81). However, the Christian apologists identify him as a heretic who was consciously exploited by Muḥammad. The accusation that the Qurʾān springs from Muḥammad’s own authorship became commonplace in the Christian anti-Muslim polemic in the Middle Ages, when it was generally accepted unquestioningly that he was driven by selfish ambition in composing it (N. Daniel, Islam and the West, 47-99). Some modern scholars have substantially reversed this received verdict. Their views concerning the sincerity of Muḥammad’s sense of vocation may suggest that Muslims and Christians can move closer together with regard to their view of the status of the Qurʾān in the light of present-day understandings about the incidence of inspiration (see revelation and inspiration).

Undoubtedly, the Qurʾān has been the most important single influence upon Muslim thinking about other faiths. This is attributable to the explicit teachings it contains concerning the leading figures and beliefs of Judaism and Christianity, and even more importantly to the relationship it asserts both between itself and previous revelations and between the faith it proclaims and earlier beliefs. Among the most detailed, though nevertheless incomplete, teachings in the Qurʾān are the explanations about the person of Jesus (q.v.), the Messiah, and the community who claimed to follow him. Muslims who were involved in encounters with Christians in the early centuries of Islam often made these teachings the basis of arguments with which they attempted to show that Jesus was only human, that God was one and not triune, and that Christians had been misled in a number of their beliefs. One of the earliest surviving, though incomplete, examples of this demonstrative literature, perhaps dating from as early as 210/825, is the now incomplete Response to the Christians (al-Radd ʿalā l-naṣārā) of the Zaydī imām al-Qāsim b. Ibrāhīm (d. 246/ 860). This relatively short tract contains full and accurate information about Christian doctrines and beliefs. Nevertheless, its author remains loyal to what he understands to be the qurʾānic view of Christianity. Thus his main argument that Christianity is wrong about the divinity of Christ, which he adduces Gospel texts to support, is essentially a vindication of the teaching on this point given in the Qurʾān (see jews and judaism; christians and christianity; scripture and the qurʾān).

It might be assumed that polemical literature of this type runs the risk of failing to carry its arguments home to Christians for the reason that it was not addressing their understanding of the doctrines but rather the qurʾānic interpretation of them. Nevertheless, in numerous later instances it is still evident that Muslim authors were guided primarily by the teachings of the Qurʾān. Even when they took Christian doctrinal explanations into account, they still generally conformed to the tendency to follow the Qurʾān’s guidelines in their approach. The most striking exception to this general trend appears to be the independent thinker Abū ʿĪsā al-Warrāq, from the early third/ninth century, one of the most intense periods of intellectual encounter between Muslims and Christians. His long and concentrated refutation of the doctrines of the Trinity and Christ’s divine and human nature is based upon exhaustive research into the teachings of the major Christian denominations. It relies for its effect entirely upon stringent logical reasoning, which reveals the inconsistencies and contradictions in the doctrines he examines. Thus, his arguments stem from the structure of Christian thought itself. It is little wonder that within a few decades Christians recognized the cogency of his attack and saw the need to marshal responses. Nonetheless, the work tacitly acknowledges the pervasive influence of the Qurʾān, since its twin attacks are effectively amplifications of the qurʾānic denial of the Christian assertion of the Trinity (tathlīth, cf. q 4:171; 5:73) and the divine sonship of Jesus (q 9:30; 19:34-5). Therefore, despite its stance of rational impartiality, the attack is as much a defense of absolute unity (tawḥīd) as a refutation of Christian doctrines. In this respect it conforms to the typical model of Muslim anti-Christian polemic.

The general stance of Muslim polemicists may be linked to the attitude expressed in the Qurʾān itself that it was revealed to confirm the earlier revelations (q 3:3-4; 5:48; 6:92; 10:37; 46:12) and that it should be taken as the complete guide to the truth (q 9:33; 25:1). Believing that the Qurʾān was the source of the truth and that Islam was the authentic expression of this truth, polemicists viewed other religions as either incomplete or incorrect forms of Islam (q.v.; see also belief and unbelief). It followed that one main purpose of their arguments was to show where the inadequacies of the other faiths were to be found. Another was to establish the truth of Islam by demonstrating that other attempted versions of the truth did not have the inner consistency or comprehensiveness of their own. Some of the fullest examples of this approach are to be found in the theological compendiums of the two leading fourth/tenth century theologians, the Book of preparation (Kitāb al-Tamhīd) of the Ashʿarī theologian al-Bāqillānī (d. 403/1013) and the Only work necessary on the various aspects of [divine] unity and justice (al-Mughnī fī abwāb al-tawḥīd wa-l-ʿadl) of the Muʿtazilī al-Qāḍī ʿAbd al-Jabbār al-Ham ;nī (d. 415/1025). In both of these works a refutation of the main doctrines of other religions as understood by Islam follows the exposition of the corresponding Islamic doctrine. A refutation of the Christian doctrines of the Trinity and Incarnation follows the exposition of the Muslim doctrine of God’s unity. In the same way, Jews are criticized for their rejection of prophets who succeeded Moses and this is combined with an exposition of Muḥammad’s authenticity as a prophet. In such cases the refutations of the rival doctrines serve to adumbrate the soundness of the Islamic formulation. This is a large-scale expression of the way in which qurʾānically-inspired religious thinking in Islam gives arguments against the validity of other religions a character which is both instructive and apologetic. Again, this approach accords with the qurʾānic injunction to desist from unedifying discussions about matters of faith (q 4:140; 6:68-9) and to use the best means when arguing with the other so-called « People of the Book» (q.v.; q 29:46).

A last feature of Muslim apologetics worth noting is the manner in which the scattered remarks given in the Qurʾān regarding the concealment and corruption of earlier revelations (q 2:75, 140; 3:78; 4:46; 5:15, 41) are systematized into the general principle that the Torah (q.v.) and Gospels (q.v.) are unreliable. Some authors proceeded on the assumption that, while the actual text of the biblical books was more or less sound, the Jewish and Christian interpretations of them were confused. Among these were the aforementioned al-Qāsim b. Ibrāhīm, who adduces long quotations from the Gospels to support his argument that Jesus was only human. Another was the Christian convert to Islam ʿAlī b. Rabbān al-Ṭabarī(d. ca. 250/864), whose Book of religion and empire (Kitāb al-Dīn wa-l-dawla) contains about 150 verses translated from throughout the Bible together with ingenious and sometimes tortuous interpretations to show the ways in which they foretell the coming of Muḥammad and Islam. The author of The beautiful response (al-Radd al-jamīl), which has often been attributed to al-Ghazālī (d. 505/1111), also followed this course. Other scholars adopted the position that the texts themselves had been corrupted. They postulated that this came about when the early Christians attempted to reconstruct the original Gospels, which they had lost, or when the apostle Paul introduced extraneous material into the sacred text. The anti-Christian polemic of the famous littérateur al-Jāḥiẓ (d. 255/869) implies that the evangelists have lied (al-Radd ʿalā l-naṣārā, 24). Al-Qāḍī ʿAbd al-Jabbār argued at length that Paul corrupted the original purity of Jesus' message (Tathbīt dalāʾil al-nubuwwa). The Andalusian theologian and littérateur Ibn Ḥazm(d. 458/1065) composed one of the most searching critiques of the biblical texts (Milal). Al-Juwaynī (d. 478/1085) attempted to show that textual corruption had taken place (Shifāʾ al-ghalīl). Whether exposing misinterpretations or misrepresentations of the original texts, Muslim authors produced their arguments in conformity with the belief that the Qurʾān itself provided unimpeachable guidance.

A small but instructive indication of the trust placed in sacred text by Muslim polemicists is that for many of them a proof verse against the divinity of Jesus was John 20:17, where Jesus says to Mary Magdalene, «Do not touch me, for I have not yet ascended to my father, but go to my brethren and say to them, ‘I ascend to my father and your father, to my God and your God’». They could presumably feel confident in citing this because it was close enough to Jesus' words to the people of Israel in the Qurʾān, «It is God who is my lord and your lord. So worship him» (q 3:51), for them to consider it authentic. See debate and disputation .

== Bibliography ==
;Primary:
* ʿAbd al-Jabbār b. Aḥmad, al-Mughnī fī abwāb al-tawḥīd wa-l-ʿadl, various eds., Cairo 1958-65
* id., Tathbīt dalāʾil al-nubuwwa, ed. ʿA.-K. ʿUthmān, Beirut 1966
* Abū ʿĪsā al-Warrāq, Kitāb al-Radd ʿalā l-thalāth firaq min al-naṣārā, ed. and trans. D. Thomas, Anti-Christian polemic in early Islam. Abū ʿĪsā al-Warrāq’s «Against the Trinity», Cambridge 1992
* al-Bāqillānī, Kitāb al-Tamhīd, ed. R.J. McCarthy, Beirut 1957
* al-Ghazālī (attributed), al-Radd al-jamīl li-ilāhiyyat ʿĪsā bi-ṣarīḥ al-injīl, ed. and trans. R. Chidiac, Réfutation excellente de la divinité de Jésus Christ d’après les evangiles, Paris 1939
* al-Jāḥiẓ, al-Radd ʿalā l-naṣārā, in Thalāth rasāʾil li-Abī ʿUthmān ʿAmr b. Baḥr al-Jāḥiẓ, ed. J. Finkel, Cairo 1926
* al-Juwaynī, Shifāʾ al-ghalīl fī bayān mā waqaʿa fī l-tawrāh wa-l-injīl min al-tabdīl, ed. M. Allard, Textes apologétiques de Ǧuwaynī, Beirut 1968
* al-Māturīdī, Kitāb al-Tawḥīd, ed. F. Kholeif, Beirut 1970
* J.-P. Migne, Patrologia graeca, xciv, col. 765
* al-Qāsim b. Ibrāhīm, al-Radd ʿalā l-naṣārā, ed. and trans. I. di Matteo, Confutazione contro i Cristiani dello zaydita al-Qāsim b. Ibrāhīm, in rso 9 (1921-2), 301-64
* al-Ṭabarī, ʿAlī b. Rabbān, Kitāb al-Dīn wa-l-dawla, ed. A. Mingana, Manchester 1923
;Secondary:
* N. Daniel, Islam and the West. The making of an image, Oxford 1960, 19932
* D. Kerr, «He walked in the path of the prophets». Toward Christian theological recognition of the Prophet Muḥammad, in Y.Y. Haddad and W.Z. Haddad (eds.), Christian-Muslim encounters, Gainsville 1995
* H. Lazarus-Yafeh, Intertwined worlds. Medieval Islam and biblical criticism, Princeton 1992
* I. Shahīd, The martyrs of Najrān. New documents, Bruxelles 1971
* W.M. Watt, Muslim-Christian encounters. Perceptions and misperceptions, London 1991

Академия Корана:Encyclopaedia of the Qurʾān/Apocalypse

2017-01-01T19:06:52Z

Maqivi: Новая страница: «{{ПереводЭК|Apocalypse|Frederik Leemhuis}} Revelation of things to come, especially at the end of times, and a religiously-motivated form of eschatology…»

{{ПереводЭК|Apocalypse|Frederik Leemhuis}}
Revelation of things to come, especially at the end of times, and a religiously-motivated form of eschatology (q.v.) with an emphasis upon the cosmic events which will occur at the end of the world. Since most of the apocalyptic events mentioned in the Qurʾān are connected with the resurrection (q.v.) of the dead, they are called by Fakhr al-Dīn al-Rāzī (d. 606/1210) «the portents of the day of resurrection» (muqaddimāt yawm al-qiyāma, Tafsīr, ad q 39:68).

== In the Qurʾān ==
As a prophetic, revealed message, the Qurʾān is to a large extent apocalyptic yet there are parts of it that carry this theme in a more intense manner. For example, q 81 The Overthrowing (Sūrat al-Takwīr), q 82 The Cleaving (Sūrat al-Infiṭār) and q 99 The Earthquake (Sūrat al-Zilzāl) are accurately termed "apocalyptic sūras, " inasmuch as they are entirely devoted to the portrayal of the upset in the natural order of things that will occur at the end of times. A good example of this is q 81:1-14, which is considered one of the earliest passages with an apocalyptic theme to have been revealed: «When the sun will be darkened, when the stars will be thrown down, when the mountains will be set moving, when the ten-month pregnant camels will be neglected… then will a soul know what it has produced». Nevertheless, other parts of the Qurʾān are not necessarily less apocalyptic. In the earlier sūras in particular, the theme of the end of the world and its accompanying terrifying phenomena is often repeated. Although Muslim and non-Muslim qurʾānic scholarship — notwithstanding their interdependency — do not always agree on the order of the revelation of these segments of the qurʾānic text, there is a general consensus that the following apocalyptic passages: q 56:1-56; 75:7-15; 80:33-42; 81:1-14; 82; 83; 84; 89:21-30; 99; 101 are to be dated to the earlier period of revelation (see chronology and the qurʾān). Western scholarship, when using the classification of T. Nöldeke and R. Blachère, considers the most picturesque apocalyptic parts to be from the latter part of the first Meccan period and from the second Meccan period. In R. Bell’s schema, they are attributed to the «early Qurʾān period».

Images of the end of the world in these early sūras are often quite vivid and contain colorful descriptions of cosmic events. However, given the variety of images depicted in the various sūras, one cannot form an exact picture of the events which will occur at the end of times. As R. Paret states, on the last day «the earth begins to move violently. It staggers, quakes and is crushed and flattened. It brings forth what is inside of it and empties itself. Like a mirage the mountains assume variable forms. They collapse, are like teased wool and disintegrate into sand and dust. Heaven will be like molten metal and be rent asunder, split open and full of gaping holes. The sun will be coiled up. The moon will darken. The sun and moon will be brought together. The stars will go out and tumble down (or become dull), etc. It would be pointless to try to patch together a coherent and comprehensive account of the events on the last day from the different statements. The individual sūras must be taken separately, just as they originally were recited. Indeed, the images of the events on the last day are not intended to, as it were, depict objective reality or to foretell the future exactly in all its details. They have been designed and formulated with the intention to shock the audience, to foreshadow the terror that, at some time in the future, on the last day, will seize all of creation» (Mohammed, 64-5). In addition to these cosmic events, there are other signs which will signal the end, e.g. the breaking loose of Gog and Magog (q.v.; q 18:94, 21:96). God will bring forth from the earth a beast that will speak (q 27:82) and the trumpet or horn (ṣūr, e.g. q 27:87; 36:51; 39:68; 69:13; 78:18; nāqūr, q 74:8) will be blown to summon every creature.

Interestingly, the early apocalyptic passages do not explicitly mention the end of the world, refer directly to the resurrection of the dead or give much detail about the day of judgment (see last judgment). Much is implicit, although the final result is clear: the unbelievers (or ungrateful, kuffār) and the evildoers (alladhīna ajramū) will receive their punishment in hell(al-jahīm or al-jahannam) and the reward of the believers (alladhīna āmanū) who do righteous deeds(ʿamilū al-ṣāliḥāt) will be paradise (al-janna, see hell; paradise; garden; belief and unbelief; reward and punishment). The fact that much is implicit in these early apocalyptic passages suggests that in the Mecca of the early qurʾānic revelations at least part of Muḥammad’s audience must have been familiar with some of this apocalyptic imagery. Scholars have noted that it calls to mind many parallels with Jewish and Christian, canonical and apocryphal apocalyptic literature, although Arabian features, such as the neglect of ten-month pregnant camels (q 81:4) are unique to the Qurʾān.

Some of the expressions used to indicate apocalyptic phenomena occur only once in the Qurʾān, e.g. «when the earth shall be rocked and the mountains crumbled» (idhā rujjati l-arḍu rajjan wa-bussati l-jibālu bassan, q 56:4-5). One conspicuous characteristic of the descriptions of the apocalyptic events is that there is no mention of who or what brings them about (ʿĀ. ʿAbd al-Raḥmān, Tafsīr, i, 80). Often the meaning of the apocalyptic terms is not straightforward, as in the case of «the great catastrophe» (al-ṭāmma al-kubrā, q 79:34) and «the blast» (al-ṣākhkha, q 80:33) and traditional exegesis does not offer much more than to say that they are names for the day of resurrection (e.g. Ṭabarī, Tafsīr). The same is said about «the calamity» (al-qāriʿa, q 101:1-3) but this term is also used to denote the catastrophe that overtakes unbelieving communities in the punishment stories (q.v.; q 13:31; 69:4). Likewise, the root r-j-f — basically «to tremble» — is used both in apocalyptic passages and in punishment stories (q.v.; q 7:78, 91, 155; 29:37; 73:14; 79:6). The apocalyptic passages in combination with the announcement of the final judgment belong to the earliest themes of the qurʾānic message. As in Christianity and Judaism, the theme of punishment has raised the question of compatibility with the idea of a good creator God (see Watt-Bell, Introduction, 158-62; R. Paret, Mohammed und der Koran, 62-71).

Just as the identity of the author and the precise nature of the events of the last day are ambiguous, so too is the time when it will occur. Not even the Prophet himself was able to tell when the apocalyptic end of the world and the subsequent resurrection and judgment will come (q 79:43), but that they are sure to happen and nearly at hand is stated more than once (e.g. q 51:5-6; 52:7; 53:57; 78:40). According to q 47:18, its tokens or portents (ashrāṭ) have already come, but the hour itself will arrive suddenly.

== In exegesis and ḥadīth ==
The fact that the Qurʾān mentions that even the Prophet cannot foretell the coming of the hour is probably one of the reasons why the exegetical works generally do not elaborate on the apocalyptic phenomena or try to determine when the end of the world will come. Referring to q 3:7 and q 7:187, al-Ṭabarī (d. 310/923), for instance, mentions in his introduction that God has reserved the knowledge and the interpretation of the future apocalyptic events for himself (Tafsīr, i, 74).

Nevertheless, one can find some additional and traditionally accepted details in the exegetical works. For instance, it is commonly stated that an angel (q.v.), Israfel (Isrāfīl) or Gabriel (Jibrīl; see gabriel), will blow the trumpet and that he is also the «caller» (al-munādī) of q 50:41. The commentaries elaborate upon the two blasts of the trumpet of q 39:68. At the first blast everybody will die except for a few chosen by God (the archangels and/or the martyrs, cf. q 3:169) and the resurrection of the dead will occur forty years later at the second blast (Muqātil, Tafsīr; Ṭabarī, Tafsīr; Qurṭubī, Jāmiʿ; Bayḍāwī, Anwār ad loc.). In an apparent attempt to harmonize q 39:68 and q 27:87 (cf. Rāzī, Tafsīr, ad q 39:68), Abū l-Layth al-Samarqandī (d. ca. 375/985), in his commentary mentions a variant given on the authority of the Prophet: The first blast of the trumpet or horn — which has a circumference as great as the distance between heaven and earth — frightens all of creation. At the second blast, the inhabitants of heaven and earth die. At the time of the third blast, all the souls or spirits (arwāḥ) are gathered in the horn and then blown into their respective bodies for the resurrection (Tafsīr, ad q 39:68). The famous commentator al-Ṭabarī (d. 310/923) mentions the tradition of the Companion Abū Hurayra about the three blasts (Tafsīr, ad q 27:87 and 39:68), without any further comments and al-Qurṭubī (d. 671/1272), after having mentioned the three, explicitly states that there will only be two blasts (Jāmiʿ, ad q 27:87). Ibn Kathīr (d. 774/1373) in his commentary on q 27:87 and 39:68 also mentions three blasts (Tafsīr, ad loc.). Another accepted detail of the end of times is that Jesus (q.v.) will defeat the Antichrist (al-dajjāl, see antichrist). Ibn Kathīr, in keeping with his penchant for providing very detailed information on the events at the end of times, says (quoting, among other sources, the ḥadīth contained in the Saḥīḥ [Fitan, 117] of Muslim, d. 261/875) that the period of peace after this defeat will extend seven years. Usually in connection with the «near place» (makān qarīb) of q 50:41, «the rock of Jerusalem» (ṣakhr bayt al-maqdis) is identified as the place where the trumpet shall sound. Often this is rationalized on the grounds that it is the place on earth nearest to heaven (e.g. Muqātil, Tafsīr; Ṭabarī, Tafsīr; Abū l-Layth al-Samarqandī, Tafsīr; Māwardī, Nukat; Zamakhsharī, Kashshāf; Qurṭubī, Jāmiʿ; Ibn Kathīr, Tafsīr; al-Maḥallī and al-Suyūṭī, Jalālayn ad loc.). Muqātil (d. 150/767) suggests that the end of times will not witness the end of the earth, but rather the world «will become empty with nothing in it. It will be laid out new and white, as if it were silver or as if it were unwrought. It will have rays like the rays of the sun. There will be no sin committed on it and no blood shed» (Tafsīr, ad q 99:2).

The ḥadīth literature — such as the chapter of Muslim’s Ṣaḥīḥ entitled Kitāb al-Fitan wa-ashrāṭ al-sāʿa, which contains 143 ḥadīth on the subject — gives much more detailed and precise accounts of the apocalyptic events than is found in the Qurʾān and the commentaries (see ḥadīth and the qurʾān). In Western qurʾānic scholarship the study of the apocalypse in the Qurʾān and its commentaries is somewhat underdeveloped, especially when compared with the recent upsurge of attention given to Jewish and Christian apocalyptic literature.

== Bibliography ==
;Primary:
* ʿAbd al-Raḥmān, Tafsīr, Cairo 19662
* Abū l-Layth al-Samarqandī, Tafsīr, Beirut 1413/1993
* Bayḍāwī, Anwār
* Ibn Kathīr, Tafsīr
* Jalālayn
* Māwardī, Nukat
* Muqātil, Tafsīr
* Muslim, Saḥīḥ
* Qurṭubī, Jāmiʿ
* Ṭabarī, Tafsīr
* Zamakhsharī, Kashshāf
;Secondary:
* R. Blachère, Le Coran, Paris 1966, 19806, 32-7
* M. Cook, Muhammad, Oxford 1983
* R. Paret, Mohammed und der Koran. Geschichte und Verkündigung des arabischen Propheten, Stuttgart 1957, 62-71
* U. Rubin, Apocalypse and authority in Islamic tradition. The emergence of the twelve leaders, in al-Qanṭara 18 (1997), 1-42
* P. Ryan, The descending scroll. A study of the notion of revelation as apocalypse in the Bible and in the Qurʾān, in Ghana Bulletin of Theology 4 (1975), 24-39
* Watt-Bell, Introduction, 1970, 1977, 158-62
* V.P. Zimbaro, Encyclopedia of apocalyptic literature, Santa Barbara 1996, 12-4, 134

Академия Корана:Encyclopaedia of the Qurʾān/Antichrist

2017-01-01T17:51:17Z

Maqivi: Новая страница: «{{ПереводЭК|Antichrist|Neal Robinson}} In the Islamic tradition, an evil figure who will lead people astray (q.v.) in the last days and whose advent will…»

{{ПереводЭК|Antichrist|Neal Robinson}}
In the Islamic tradition, an evil figure who will lead people astray (q.v.) in the last days and whose advent will be one of the signs of the approaching «hour.» The Antichrist (al-Dajjāl, al-Masīḥ al-Dajjāl) is not mentioned in the Qurʾān, but he figures in numerous ḥadīth that are cited by the classical commentators. Although many Jews expected an eschatological conflict between God’s agents and the forces of evil (see eschatology), the belief that those forces would be concentrated in a specific individual called the Antichrist seems first to have arisen in Christian circles shortly before the destruction of the temple in 70 c.e. During that period, there were rumors that the Roman emperor Nero (r. 54-68 c.e.) who had committed suicide in 68 c.e. was not dead but had escaped to the East and was about to return to recapture the Roman empire. As Nero was a notoriously cruel man who had instigated the persecution of Christians, it is possible that this rumor gave rise to the specifically Christian belief in the Antichrist (cf. Ascension of Isaiah 4:2; Sibylline oracles 4:121; Rv 13:3; 17:8).

== Etymology ==
It is likely that the Muslims learned about the Antichrist from Syriac-speaking Christians as the Arabic dajjāl almost certainly comes from the Syriac daggāl which means «a liar» or «lying» (see foreign vocabulary). Hence, al-dajjāl literally means «the liar» and al-masīḥ al-dajjāl «the lying Messiah.» However, medieval lexicographers attempted to derive dajjāl from an Arabic root (Lane, iii, 853). One fanciful suggestion is that it comes from the verb dajala, "to cover [a mangy camel] with tar, " because the dajjāl will in like manner cover the earth with his adherents. The claim that it comes from a homonym of the same verb meaning «to have one eye and one eyebrow» is equally implausible, for when dajala is used in this sense it is clearly denominal and means «to resemble the Antichrist.» A third suggestion is that dajjāl is derived from dajala meaning "to gild, " because the Antichrist will deceive humankind by covering up the truth, which has the merit of giving a sense not far removed from that of the original Syriac term.

== Jewish background ==
The English word «Antichrist» comes from the Greek antichristos, which is composed of two elements: the preposition anti, "in place of, " and the noun christos, «Messiah» or «anointed one.» However, as in other compound words of this sort, the prepositional element implies that the substitute is a counterfeit and that his relationship with the real person is antagonistic. Thus the Antichrist is not simply a substitute Messiah, he is a false Messiah, the opponent of the genuine one.

Although the Jews looked for the coming of a Messiah, there is no specific mention of an Antimessiah in the Hebrew Bible or intertestamental Jewish writings. Nevertheless, there are several Old Testament types which set a precedent for a belief in this figure: 1) Sea monster. Together with the ancient Babylonians and Canaanites, the Jews believed that before creating the world God had vanquished a sea monster (e.g. Isa 51:9; Ps 74:13f.). According to some authors, the monster still lies dormant (Amos 9:3; Job 7:12) and will eventually be slain in an eschatological struggle (Isa 27:1). 2) Angelic adversary. Probably through contact with the Persians, the Jews came to believe in Satan (Shayṭān, lit. the Adversary), a member of the heavenly court whose role is to accuse human beings (Jb 1:6; Zech 3:1). As the devil (q.v.), Satan was subsequently identified with the serpent who brought death into the world (Wisd of Solomon 2:24; cf. Gen 3:1-15) and Belial, who gains power over all human beings (Jub 1:20). According to some authors, Belial will be the eschatological enemy who will perform signs and wonders and deceive many before he is finally destroyed (Sibylline oracles 3:63-74). 3) Evil human ruler. From the sixth century b.c.e. onwards, when Jerusalem was conquered by Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon (r. ca. 605—561 b.c.e.), the Jews were increasingly oppressed by foreign rulers. Matters came to a head in 168 b.c.e., when the Hellenistic king of Syria, Antiochus IV (r. 175—164 b.c.e.), erected a statue of the Greek god Zeus in the Jewish temple in Jerusalem (1 Macc 1:54). The Book of Daniel refers to this as «the abomination of desolation» (Dan 8:13) and fictionally projects the incident into the future so that it marks the last of the seventy weeks of years before the restoration of God’s people (Dan 9:1-2, 20-7). 4) False prophet. The Book of Deuteronomy contrasts «the prophet like Moses (q.v.)» who must be obeyed (Deut 18:15-9) with the «false prophet» who will lead people astray by performing signs and wonders (Deut 13:2-6; 18:20). Originally, both descriptions were generic. By the time of the New Testament, however, some groups, including the Qumran sectaries, expected the advent of a specific prophetlike-Moses (1 qs 9:11). A corollary to this was the belief that one or more false prophets would be active in the last times.

== Christian background ==
The New Testament writers assume that Jesus (q.v.) is the Messiah and often refer to him as Christ Jesus or Jesus the Christ. However, they differ over the nature of the eschatological conflict in which he and the Christians will be involved. Features of all of the four types from the Old Testament are combined in the Johannine apocalypse, which purports to be a revelation of those things which must soon take place (Rev 1:1). It includes a vision of a sea monster (Rev 13:1-10) which is clearly an allegorical description of the Roman empire and the emperors who persecuted Christians. There is also a reference to Satan who will lead the whole world astray and who is identified with the devil and the serpent of old (Rev 12:9). Finally, there are three references to the «false prophet» (Rev 16:13; 19:20; 20:10).

Mark’s gospel, which portrays the eschatological conflict as having already begun during Jesus' ministry, depicts Jesus' adult life as coinciding with the fulfillment of time and the approach of God’s kingdom (Mark 1:15). Because of this, it portrays the eschatological conflict as having already begun during his ministry. Thus, the Markan Jesus quells a storm on the Sea of Galilee, addressing it as if it were a sea monster (Mark 4:39), and presents his healings and exorcisms as the binding of Satan (Mark 3:23-7). Nevertheless, Mark holds that there will be other developments in the future. When the disciples see "the abomination of desolation standing where he ought not to be, " they will know that the days of tribulation have arrived (Mark 13:14-20). The disciples are warned that in those days there will be «false Christs» (pseudochristoi) and «false prophets» who will perform signs and wonders and seek to lead people astray (Mark 13:21f.) before Jesus finally returns on the clouds as the Son of Man (Mark 13:26).

Although Mark does not use the term Antichrist, he probably has the Antichrist in mind when he employs the Danielic expression «the abomination of desolation.» In this context, the term can be understood as a reference to a human embodiment of evil who will make his stand in the Jerusalem temple as the eschatological adversary of God. In a similar vein, the author of 2 Thess insists that Jesus will not return until «the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of perdition who opposes and exalts himself against every so-called god or object of worship, so that he takes his seat in God’s temple proclaiming himself to be God» (2 Thess 2:3f.). He further states that Jesus will slay him by the breath of his mouth (2 Thess 2:8). Some scholars still defend the Pauline authorship of this letter, but it is probably a pseudonymous work written like Mark in the turbulent period immediately before the destruction of the temple in 70 c.e. At that time, as mentioned above, there were rumors that Nero was about to return and this may have catalyzed the Christian formulation of the figure of the Antichrist.

The only New Testament writer to employ the actual word antichristos is the author of the first and second letters of John, which were probably written some thirty years after the destruction of the Temple:

Children it is the last hour. You heard that the Antichrist is to come. Well now many Antichrists have come…. (1 John 2:18).

Who then is the liar? None other than the person who denies that Jesus is the Christ. Such is the Antichrist…. (1 John 2:22).

Every spirit which does not profess Jesus is not from God. It is rather of the Antichrist (1 John 4:3).

For many deceivers have gone out into the world, those who do not confess that Christ has come in the flesh. This is the Deceiver and the Antichrist. (2 John 7).

These passages are striking in the extent to which they demythologize the notion of the Antichrist. The recipients of the letters had been led to await his coming as that of a distinct eschatological figure, but the author urges them instead to recognize him in the false teachers who have broken with the community and who fail to acknowledge the full humanity of Jesus.

With some justification, the Fathers of the Church assumed that the Markan «abomination of desolation» and the Pauline «man of lawlessness» were alternative names for the Antichrist. Hence, they inferred that the Antichrist would come to the temple; that he would rule for three and a half years (Irenaeus, Against the heresies, 5:1-3; cf. Dan 7:25); and that Jesus, upon his own return, would dispatch him (e.g. Cyril of Jerusalem, Catechetical lectures, 15:12). Ephraem Syrus (ca. 306—373 c.e.) added the interesting detail that the Antichrist will come from Khurāsān (Sermo II de fine extremo). Some of these features recur in the Islamic tradition. Moreover, in the Peshitta — the standard Syriac translation of the New Testament — the Greek words for «the liar» and «the Antichrist» (in 1 Jn 2:22) are rendered as daggālā and mashīḥā daggālā respectively, furnishing a precedent for the two ways of rendering «the Antichrist» in Arabic.

== The Antichrist in Islamic tradition and qurʾānic exegesis ==
The Sunnī collections of ḥadīth contain numerous traditions about the Antichrist. When these are pieced together, the following picture is obtained. He was born to parents who waited thirty years to have a son. He is a thick-set man with a ruddy face and a mass of very curly hair. He is blind in his right eye, which swims in its orbit like a swollen grape. He also has the word «unbeliever» (kāfir) written on his forehead. He is currently chained up on an island in the East, where a Companion of the Prophet (see companions of the prophet) called « Tamīm al-Dārī» claimed to have seen him. The Prophet himself dreamed that he saw him circling the Kaʿba (q.v.) and he was shown him again on the night of his ascension (q.v.). The Antichrist will be released after a six or seven-year war between the Arabs and the Byzantines (q.v.) which will culminate in the capture of Constantinople. His coming will be one of the ten signs (q.v.) which will precede the last hour. The signs usually listed are smoke; the Antichrist; the beast; the rising of the sun from the West; the descent of Jesus; Gog and Magog (q.v.); a landslide in the East; a landslide in the West; a landslide in Arabia; and fire burning forth from the Yemen. However, some reports substitute a violent gale for the descent of Jesus and others make his descent the tenth and final sign. The Antichrist will come from the East via Khurāsān. He will ride a white donkey and will be followed by seventy thousand hooded Jews from Isfahan. He will not be able to enter Mecca or Medina. He will set out to attack the latter but, when he reaches the mountain of Uḥud (q.v.) outside of Medina, the angels will turn his face towards Syria. He will have two canals with him, one flowing with water and the other with fire. The people will believe in him because he will work miracles and will bring an abundant supply of water, bread and mutton. He will be at large for forty days or forty years. Jesus will descend in Damascus and will catch up with him at the port of Lydda in Palestine, where he will kill him with a lance. In addition, there are ḥadīth that the Prophet said that the person who most resembled the Antichrist was a pagan Arab called ʿAbd al-ʿUzza b. Qaṭan. It is also reported that he suspected a Medinese Jew named Ibn Ṣayyād (or Ibn Ṣāʿid) of being the Antichrist. Muḥammad is said to have loved the tribe of Banū Tamīm because they would put up the staunchest resistance to the Antichrist. He also prayed for refuge from the trial of the Antichrist and urged his Companions to do the same; and he promised that reciting the first (or last) ten verses of sūra 18 would offer protection against the Antichrist. Many of these details are also reported in Shīʿī ḥadīth but the Shīʿī belief is that the Antichrist will be dispatched by the Mahdī and not by Jesus (see shīʿism and the qurʾān).

The folkloric character of much of this material suggests that it may have originated with Muslim story-tellers long after the rise of Islam. However, there is little doubt that the Prophet and his Companions were concerned about the Antichrist. Proof that this must have been an interest of theirs may be gleaned particularly from the authentic ring of the extensive traditions about Ibn Ṣayyād, a Jew who apparently indulged in merkavah mysticism. Moreover, the difficulty of reconciling these traditions with some of the other reports tells against their having been invented.

The classical commentators make reference to the Antichrist principally in the following contexts: 1) Traditional accounts of the Prophet’s description of the Antichrist are mentioned in their commentaries on the allusion to Muḥammad’s night journey in q 17:1. 2) Traditions that indicate that Jesus is alive and will return to kill the Antichrist are cited as evidence that the phrase «before his death» in q 4:159 means before Jesus' death. 3) They use the same traditions in connection with q 3:55 as evidence that this verse refers to Jesus' rapture rather than his death. 4) Traditions which list all the signs that will precede the final hour are contained in their comments on the references to Gog and Magog in q 18:94 and q 21:96, to the beast in q 27:82, and to smoke in q 44:10. 5) They cite the same traditions in connection with the references to the hour in q 7:187 and q 79:42. 6) They cite these same traditions of the signs preceding the final hour together with those which relate that Jesus will kill the Antichrist as evidence that q 43:61 alludes to Jesus' final descent. 7) In their introduction to sūra 18, they cite traditions, as mentioned above, about the merits of reciting its first (or last) ten verses. See also apocalypse; resurrection.

== Bibliography ==
;Primary:
* R.H. Charles, The apocrypha and pseudepigrapha of the Old Testament in English, 2 vols., Oxford 1913
* S. Cyril, Archbishop of Jerusalem, The catechetical lectures, Oxford 1839
* Irenaeus, Against the heresies, ed. D.J. Unger, New York 1992
* A. Roberts and J. Donaldson (eds.), The ante-Nicene Christian library, vol. ix (Irenaeus, ii, etc.) Edinburgh 1868
* J. Robson, Mishkāt al-maṣābīḥ. English translation with explanatory notes, repr. Lahore 1990 (most of the relevant ḥadīth are in iii.xvi.1, viii.i, x.vii.1, and xxvi.iii-vii)
* G. Vermes, The Dead Sea scrolls in English, Harmondsworth 1975
;Secondary:
* W. Bousset, The Antichrist legend, London 1896
* R. Brown, The epistles of John, London 1983
* D.J. Halperin, The Ibn Ṣayyād traditions and the legend of al-Dajjāl, in jaos 16 (1976), 213-25
* N. Robinson, Christ in Islam and Christianity. The representation of Jesus in the Qurʾān and the classical Muslim commentaries, London 1991

Академия Корана:Encyclopaedia of the Qurʾān/Anthropomorphism

2017-01-01T16:52:21Z

Maqivi: Новая страница: «{{ПереводЭК|Anthropomorphism|Richard C. Martin}} Ascribing human attributes to God. Tashbīh, the term most commonly rendered in English as «anthropomor…»

{{ПереводЭК|Anthropomorphism|Richard C. Martin}}
Ascribing human attributes to God. Tashbīh, the term most commonly rendered in English as «anthropomorphism», does not appear in the Qurʾān with that meaning. The second form of the root sh-b-h appears only once, in the passive voice, in reference to Jesus' death: «They did not kill him nor did they crucify him, but it appeared to [Jesus' followers that they had]» (q 4:157). The sixth form occurs nine times, predominantly denoting «likeness», as in q 2:70: «To us all cows look alike». The form tashābaha also connotes ascribing associates to God (q 13:16). It also appears in q 3:7, which distinguishes between the ambiguous verses of the Qurʾān (mutashābihāt) and the clear verses (muḥkamāt, see ambiguous).

Another expression of anthropomorphism was found in the ontological claim by some Muslims that God has a physical body (jism). Corporealism (tajsīm) was not based on any occurrence of the term with that sense in the Qurʾān but rather on literal understandings of qurʾānic descriptions of God as having a physical body and also on the ground that God exists and only that which has physical extension can exist. Nonetheless, references in the Qurʾān gave rise to the image of God having a human form. Often cited were such passages as the Throne Verse (q 2:255; cf. 20:5; see throne of god) which suggests that God is seated on a throne in heaven and the passages that suggest God has hands (e.g. q 3:73; 5:64; 48:10) and eyes (e.g. q 20:39; 52:48; 54:14). Quite early on, those who accepted literal meanings of passages in the Qurʾān that likened God to humans were labeled by their opponents as anthropomorphists (mushabbihūn).

== The background of Islamic anthropomorphism ==
The topic of likening God or gods to humans was already well-known in the Middle East prior to the rise of Islam, both in Christianity and in Judaism. It had been discussed much earlier by the Greeks . The poet Xenophanes (fl. ca. 570—470 b.c.e.), in his criticism of the anthropomorphism of Homer and Hesiod (fl. ca. 700 b.c.e.), claimed that God could in no way be like human beings. This led, as H. Wolfson has argued (Philo, i, 125), to a struggle between the popular conception of Olympic deities in human form on the one side and the abstract philosophical conceptions on the other. The latter came to be expressed through allegorical interpretations of the human representations of the gods, a solution not unlike the one argued by Muʿtazilite theologians in Islamic discussions of the question. In certain passages the Hebrew Bible portrays God in human terms, with hands (e.g. Isa 41:13) and feet (Zech 14:4) and so on; but Hebrew scripture in other passages distances God from human likeness (Isa 40:25, 46:5; Ps 89:7). As with the Greeks, opposition to anthropomorphic understandings of God in the Hebrew Bible was strongest among philosophers like Philo (d. ca. 50) and later Talmudic scholars. Among the Church Fathers, it was the less educated monks who asserted the anthropomorphic conceptions of God. Clement of Alexandria (d. ca. 215) and Origen (d. ca. 254), under the influence of Philo and perhaps the Greek philosophers, rejected anthropomorphism on theological grounds.

The formation of the discourse on anthropomorphism and corporealism in the first three centuries of Islam in many ways resembles the earlier discussions among the Christians, Jews and pagan Greeks. It was Plotinus (d. ca. 270) who said in the Enneads, «The One is, in truth, beyond all statement; whatever you say would limit it…» (5, iii, 1215). In the early second/eighth century, the church father John of Damascus (d. 749), under the employ of the Umayyad chancery, included in his De fide orthodoxa a chapter on the human need to conceive of God metaphorically in human terms (A.J. Wensinck, Muslim creed, 68). Although some Neoplatonic and Christian influence on Muslim thinking in this regard is possible, the earliest statements of the problem in Islam are clearly linked to disputes about how to interpret passages in the Qurʾān that ascribe, or seem to ascribe, human attributes to God. Moreover, since the great majority of Muslim speculative theologians (mutakallimūn) denied anthropomorphism, the textual record of this dispute is accordingly biased against those who held that God may be described literally in human terms. The critique of anthropomorphism among those who denied the anthropomorphic doctrine of God was expressed by the term taʿṭīl (divesting God of all human attributes). In point of fact, most of the speculative theologians and their opponents who disputed this doctrine found ways to hedge extreme positions of totally affirming or totally denying the human attributes of God. Tashbīh and taʿṭīl became terms of opprobrium used ascriptively, rather than descriptively, as accusations against theological opponents.

== Anthropomorphism in early and medieval Islam ==
The context of the earliest expressions of anthropomorphic views of God is difficult to establish with precision. Although it is possible to speak in general terms of the way theological movements, such as Ashʿarī or Muʿtazilīs (q.v.) or the Ḥanbalī scholars of ḥadīth (muḥaddithūn), approached the problem of anthropomorphism, it is more accurate to analyze how individual theologians stated the problem and often that must be based on textual evidence as scant as one or more brief quotations preserved in later sources.

Muslim heresiographical sources locate the first arguments in favor of the position that God lacks human attributes, that is, denying anthropomorphic views of God, in the tumultuous final decade of the civil war during the second quarter of the second/eighth century that brought the Umayyad Arab kingdom down and ushered in the ʿAbbāsid age. Two rather shadowy figures among the earliest theologians were said to have advanced arguments against anthropomorphism: Jaʿd b. Dirham, who was put to death for his heterodox religious views around the year 126/744, and Jahm b. Ṣafwān, who also was executed in 128/745 for his religious teachings. The theological views of Jahm are better attested by later heresiographers. According to the heresiographer al-Shahrastānī (d. 548/1153), Jahm said it is not possible to describe the Creator by an attribute by which his creatures are described because this would entail likening God to his creatures (Milal, i, 86). Abū l-Ḥasan al-Ashʿarī (d. 324/936) quotes Jahm and some of the Zaydī Shīʿīs as saying that God cannot be described as a thing (shayʾ) because a created thing has a likeness to other created things (Maqālāt, 181). Al-Ashʿarī quotes an argument from Jahm that identifies him also as an anti-corporealist: God cannot be a thing because a thing, according to Jahm, is an existent body and God cannot be so described (Maqālāt, 494). Modern scholars have suspected that Jahm was influenced by the Neoplatonic doctrine of the unique Transcendent One (R.M. Frank, Neoplatonism, 399—402; B. Abrahamov, Anthropomorphism, 12). One can infer from the later association of the attack against anthropomorphism with such heterodox figures as Jaʿd and Jahm that in the emerging orthodoxy of the late Umayyad period anthropomorphic conceptions of God must have been well established. Denying that God had human attributes entailed more than mere theological conflict. R. Strothmann has pointed out that third/ninth-century Muʿtazilīs in Baghdad accused the pro-ʿUthmān party, known as the «rising generation» (nābita) among the speculative theologians, of professing anthropomorphic views of God. Political conflict played a role that one can identify in these early theological conflicts but not always describe in much depth or detail.

Those often accused of anthropomorphism, the collectors and teachers of the prophetic ḥadīth, were known as the «adherents of ḥadīth» (aṣḥāb al-ḥadīth, ahl al-ḥadīth). The extreme literalists were often referred to contemptuously by Muʿtazilī and Ashʿarī theologians as ḥashwiyya (derived from ḥashwa, forcemeat) because they accepted anthropomorphic descriptions of God in the Qurʾān «without [asking] how» (bi-lā kayf). The defense of their views regarding anthropomorphism is often traced to Aḥmad b. Ḥanbal (d. 241/855) whose statements on anthropomorphism were described in the next generation by al-Ashʿarī (d. 324/935) in his Maqālāt (pp. 290-7). There al-Ashʿarī reports that the «adherents of the ḥadīth and sunna (q.v.)» — referring in this context to the followers of Ibn Ḥanbal — confess «without [asking] how, that God is on his throne, just as He said [in the Qurʾān] — ‘The Beneficent One, who is seated on his throne’ [ q 20:5] — and that he has two hands» (Maqālāt, 290). Although Ibn Ḥanbal and the adherents of ḥadīth generally rejected the Muʿtazilī doctrine of purifying God of all human attributes, he is also counted among those who rejected the doctrine of anthropomorphism. Indeed, the Ḥanbalī method of dealing with troublesome theological claims by not attempting to explain them rationally often led to the stance of affirming neither of two conflicting views. Al-Shahrastānī tells us that Aḥmad b. Ḥanbal and other adherents of ḥadīth took a more moderate position, affirming their belief in everything revealed in the Qurʾān and authentic ḥadīth while at the same time asserting that God is not like any of his creatures (Milal, i, 104). Some of the early Imāmī (Twelver) Shīʿīs — referred to by Muʿtazilīs, Ashʿarīs and others as «turncoats» (rāfiḍa) — on the other side, asserted both corporealism, i.e. God has a physical body, and anthropomorphism, i.e. God’s body is like a human body. The later Imāmī Shīʿīs who studied theology (kalām) with Muʿtazilī teachers did not affirm anthropomorphism (al-Ashʿarī, Maqālāt, 34-5). Another early Muslim sect accused of anthropomorphism and corporealism was the Karrāmiyya, a group that began in Khurāsān in the first half of the third/ninth century and continued to attract followers until the Mongol devastation of the seventh/thirteenth century.

Beyond the ascription of anthropomorphism to these sects, certain individuals among the early theologians were also accused of holding and defending such views. Opposing such views were the majority of the theologians of the Muʿtazilī, Ashʿarī and Māturīdī schools. Also, the second/eighth-century Qurʾān exegete, Muqātil b. Sulaymān, was accused by later Muslims of holding anthropomorphic views of God, but the recent publication of his qurʾānic commentary (tafsīr) indicates that he understood some of the seemingly anthropomorphic passages in the Qurʾān figuratively (B. Abrahamov, Anthropomorphism, 4-6).

The problems of anthropomorphism and corporealism lay at the heart of the disputes about God in Islamic theology. For some, such as the more extreme Imāmī Shīʿīs, anthropomorphic and corporealistic notions of God were necessary ontologically; for they believed that God could not be said to exist unless he had physical extension in space and time. Yet, as the Muʿtazilites and other theologians argued, a God limited by a body could not be omnipresent. For the extremists among the Sunnī adherents of ḥadīth, asserting anthropomorphic views of God seems to have been more a matter of fideism based on scriptural literalism (tamthīl). Such crude literalism could be attacked by reference to the Qurʾān itself. q 42:11, for example, says of God: «nothing is like him» (laysa ka-mithlihi shayʾun). For the theologians who attacked anthropomorphism, the discourse became more abstract and specialized over the problem of divine attributes. The Muʿtazilī and Ashʿarī theologians generally disagreed with each other as to why anthropomorphism was a matter of theological error. Inasmuch as they denied that it was possible for God to possess human or any attributes, the majority of the Muʿtazilīs adopted a doctrine of God via negativa. Al-Ashʿarī described the Muʿtazilī view in the third/ninth century as God «is not comparable with humans and does not resemble creatures in any respect» (Maqālāt, 155). The Muʿtazilīs also advanced the concept of tanzīh, the declaration that God is free of any impurities such as the ascription of human attributes to him. Al-Ashʿarī himself, following scholars of ḥadīth (muḥaddithūn) like Aḥmad b. Ḥanbal, argued that what the Qurʾān states about God — such as passages referring to God’s eyes, feet, hands, face and seated body — should be accepted as true «without [asking] how», thus neither affirming the anthropomorphic or non-anthropomorphic interpretations (B. Abrahamov, Anthropomorphism, 6).

Anthropomorphic passages in the Qurʾān basically posed a problem in hermeneutics, for the question that remained for all but the most crude literalists (mumaththilūn) was how these qurʾānic passages could be interpreted without violating the divine nature. The Muʿtazilīs took the position that God’s word, i.e. the Qurʾān, must be rational and therefore the rational, i.e. true, meaning of the anthropomorphic and ambiguous(mutashābihāt) passages must be determined allegorically or figuratively. This is the hermeneutical principle behind allegorical interpretation (taʾwīl). Eventually Ashʿarī and Shīʿī exegetes came to prefer allegorical over literal methods of interpreting the Qurʾān (S. Wasserstrom, Between Muslim and Jew, 136-53). Like Ibn Ḥanbal, al-Ashʿarī also claimed that the anthropomorphic passages in the Qurʾān must be accepted «without asking how». Yet, in the Book of the sparkle (Kitāb al-Lumaʿ, 9) he offers a rationale for rejecting the claim that God is like his creatures: If he were like them in any or all respects, he would be, like creatures, temporally produced in those respects and it is impossible to say this about the eternal, uncreated God (Lumaʿ, 9).

In contemporary Islamic theology, the position usually found is the Ashʿarite melding of literalist and rationalist treatments of the anthropomorphic passages in the Qurʾān. Among many modernist thinkers, the more stringent Muʿtazilī denial of anthropomorphism is even argued, though it is seldom identified as such.

== See also ==
* god and his attributes;
* exegesis of the qurʾān: classical and medieval.

== Bibliography ==
;Primary:
* al-Ashʿarī, Abū l-Ḥasan, Maqālāt al-islāmiyyīn, ed. H. Ritter, Wiesbaden 1963
* al-Qāsim b. Ibrāhīm, Kitāb al-Mustarshid, ed. and trans. B. Abrahamov, Anthropomorphism and the interpretation of the Qurʾān in the theology of al-Qāsim ibn Ibrāhīm, Leiden 1996
* al-Shahrastānī, al-Milal wa-l-niḥal, ed. M.S. Kīlānī, 2 vols., Beirut 1406/1986
* G. Turnbull (comp.), The essence of Plotinus, New York 1934
Secondary:
* van Ess, tg, ii, 206-15
* R. Frank, The Neoplatonism of Ǧahm ibn Ṣafwān, in Le muséon 78 (1965), 395—424
* W. Kadi, The earliest «Nābita» and the paradigmatic «Nawābit», in si 78 (1993), 27-61
* R. Strothmann, Tashbīh, in ei1, iv, 685-7
* S. Wasserstrom, Between Muslim and Jew. The problem of symbiosis under early Islam, New York 1995
* A.J. Wensinck, The Muslim creed. Its genesis and historical development, London 1965
* H. Wolfson, Philo. Foundations of religion and philosophy in Judaism, Christianity and Islam, 2 vols., Cambridge, Mass. 1947

Академия Корана:Encyclopaedia of the Qurʾān/Anthropology of the Qurʾān

2017-01-01T14:05:32Z

Maqivi: Новая страница: «{{ПереводЭК|Anthropology of the Qurʾān|Mona Helen}} Anthropology is a term that is used to refer to the study of several aspects of human life. A Qurʾ…»

{{ПереводЭК|Anthropology of the Qurʾān|Mona Helen}}
Anthropology is a term that is used to refer to the study of several aspects of human life. A Qurʾanic anthropology is not found as one coherent and systematically organised system of thought, located in one sura, but can be constructed from relevant terms and expressions found throughout the text, as elements in different, yet interdependent, modes of discourse, such as homiletics, polemics, and narrative. Concepts, expressions, and notions relevant for a Qurʾanic anthropology are closely interconnected with Qurʾanic theology. Topics such as the characteristics and conditions of human existence, as well as the ultimate meaning and purpose of human life, pertain to ontology, i.e. the philosophical study of being and existence. In a religious discourse, human ontology is expressed through symbolic and metaphorical language, often found in the context of creation stories (myths), soteriology, or eschatology.

Qurʾanic notions about humans’ nature, existence, and purpose not only pertain to metaphysics; they are also related to the practical organisation of the family and guidelines for conduct in daily life. On the one hand, the Qurʾanic text necessarily reflects existing cultural norms and practices at the time of Muḥammad, discernible in ideas about social structures, authority, and hierarchies. On the other, the Qurʾan also contains a vision of ideal social structures and relationships, and corresponding guidelines for ethics. There are sometimes conflicts between existing norms and practices and Qurʾanic ethics, but mostly we see attempts to regulate and improve traditions rather than radical breaks when it comes to social relations. An inherent anthropology of the Qurʾan thus needs to be approached from various perspectives and identified based on religious concepts and social regulations, by making use of both explicit statements and implicit assumptions about human nature, in addition to the various metaphors that are employed.

The concept of the covenant is a fundamental part of Qurʾānic notions about human nature and existence, as well as of social structures and community. The interdependent relationship between the religious and the social aspects of human life can be seen through the concepts of the contract (ʿahd) and covenant(mīthāq), terms which are used interchangeably in the Qurʾān. The various contexts in which they are used reveal a dual meaning, as they refer both to the relationship between humans and God and to the structuring of social relations (Lumbard, Covenant, 3). The religious and the social are both frames within which human life and purpose is located, structured, and interpreted in the Qurʾān. Whereas most verses use ʿahd to refer to the covenant between God and humans (Q 2:100; 9:75; 16:91; 33:15, 23; 48:10), other verses use the same term when referring to pacts made between humans (for example, Q 8:65; 9:1, 4, 7 all supposedly refer to pacts made between the early Muslim community and other Arab groups at the time of Muḥammad). In the case of Q 2:177, we find a general reference to fulfilling a covenant included in a list of ideal virtues and actions, one which consists of both social ethics (such as caring for the weak and poor) and religious duties (prayer). The term mīthāq is similarly used to denote a reciprocal agreement between two parties, either God and humans (Q 2:63, 83, 84, 93; 4:21, 154; 33:7; 5:14, 17, 70), or between humans (such as a marriage contract, cf. Q 4:21). According to the majority of Muslim exegetes (Lumbard, Covenant, 5), Q 7:172 alludes to an idea of a pre-temporal, eternal covenant that applies to all humans. The content of the original covenant is referred to in Q 2:83, in a passage that criticises the majority of the Jews for turning away from it: wa-idh akhadhnā mīthāqa banī isrāʿīla: lā taʿbudūna illā l-lāha wa-bi-l-wālidayini iḥsānan wa-dhī l-qurbā wa-l-yatāmā wa-l-masākīni wa-qūlū lil-nāsi ḥusnan wa aqīmū l-ṣalāta wa-ātū l-zakāta («and when we made a covenant with the Children of Israel: do not worship [anyone/-thing] but God and be good to your parents and relatives and the orphans and the poor, and speak well to people and perform prayers and give alms»). In addition, each human, as an individual, must re-confirm and keep the covenant, although they need constant reminders to do so because humans are liable to forget. This point is emphasised in a story in which Adam — here serving as a representative for all humanity and as an exemplar of human behaviour — forgot the covenant, although he was able to mend his relationship with God through regret and penitence (cf. Q 20:115-21).

== Creation and human ontology ==
God is the absolute sovereign, whose actions and will, in the Qurʾanic worldview, permeate and determine every aspect of the universe. The place and purpose of humans in relation to God is expressed through metaphors from the domain of human experience of the relationship between a master and a servant (ʿabd). God is a master who provides for, protects, and ensures the well-being of his servants, who gives them clear guidance, is just, and does not treat his servants unfairly (cf. Q 41:46). In return, his servants should be thankful towards their master and not arrogant. In cases of transgression, and thus breaking the covenant, the master has the power and right to punish his servants.

One of God’s divine attributes is «the Wise and the All-Knowing» (al-ḥakīm wa-l-ʿālīm), and knowledge is recurrently emphasised as something that separates God from other beings, such as angels (cf. Q 2:30: qāla innī aʿlamu mā lā taʿlamūna, «he [God] said: I know what you [the angels] do not know»). He is capable (qadara) of everything, sees everything, and is the ultimate cause of existence. Furthermore, His will to provide for humans, to purify them, to choose some of them for special tasks or to create, and so forth, is supreme (cf. Q 12:76). Thus, according to the Qurʾān, God, as the ultimate source of knowledge, power, and existence, is the pinnacle of the hierarchy of being. The natural and ideal human position is, in contrast, to be submissive (muslim) and obedient(qānit), determined to stay within the prescribed boundaries, so that they can live a good life according to the will of God. God’s existence is evident from the signs seen in nature (āyāt), and the proper and natural reaction to these should be thankfulness (shukr) and mindfulness (taqwā) (Izutsu, Ethico-religious concepts, 200). These signs in nature also cause a natural response of wonder and awe that, in turn, leads to faith. There are also verses indicating that such signs are to be found within humans themselves, as Q 41:53 speaks of the signs within people (fī anfusihim) and Q 51:20-1 mentions signs on the earth and in your souls (fī l-arḍi āyātun …wa-fī anfusikum).

The specific responsibility of man is to govern creation on God’s behalf, as vicegerent (khalifa; cf. Q 2:30). The narrative sequence in Q 2 that deals with the Creation and the Fall of Adam, as well as God’s forgiveness for Adam’s and his wife’s disobedience, also contains an interesting dialogue between God and the angels (Q 2:30-4). In this, the angels protest God’s decision to make humans vicegerents on earth, suggesting that humans will only cause bloodshed and corruption (Q 2:30) and indicating that they [the angels] would be a better choice. However, the narrative emphasises God’s knowledge and supreme power, while it is also suggested that humans have capabilities and a potential that the angels do not: the ability to learn and act independently.

Mythologies of creation are important resources for gaining access to ideas about ontology in general, and human ontology in particular. The Qurʾānic creation stories, cosmogonies, and anthropogonies are not organised in one extensive and coherent narrative within one particular sūra; instead, we find shorter passages, containing some minor variations, scattered across different sūras. There are, for instance, different opinions about the material from which the first humans were created — was it clay or dust? Yet there are also commonalities between the different stories, discernible in the use of metaphors, concepts, and symbolism. Viewed in the light of metaphor theory (Lakoff and Johnson, Metaphors), the source domains for concepts and expressions used in the narration of creation are handicrafts (on a small scale, in the case of anthropogony), building construction (when the topic is cosmogony, cf. Q 20:53; 21:32), or furnishing a house (Q 2:22; 20:53; 71:19). Research has shown that the human mind needs to use structures from experiential domains in order to structure and thus comprehend abstract domains, thoughts, and ideas. Some of the terms and concepts employed in the narrative creation of the cosmos seem to allude to ideal human virtues and to aspects of human nature (i.e. existence and the human condition), and these may be explained by reference to metaphor theory. This applies to the use of cosmic symbols of perfection such as in Q 50:6, where perfection is conceptualised in terms of wholeness: a-fa-lam yanẓurū ilā l-samāʾ fawqahum kayfa banaynāhā wa-zayyannāhā wa-mā lahā min furūjin («and did they not look to the sky above them, how we built it and adorned it, and no cracks were in it»). This verse displays the idea of perfection (the sky as created by God) in terms of wholeness, with no rifts or cracks; in the context of handicrafts, a rift or an uneven surface may cause problems by making the product unsuitable for its intended purpose. Transferred to the target domain of humans, ethics, and ontology, wholeness is the ideal state.

Obedience (the active participle of q-n-t) also applies to the laws of nature; everything in nature obeys God (Q 2:116 and 30:26), and obedience is a virtue that is often ascribed to the ideal believer (Q 2:238; 3:17; 66:5), and is used to describe the qualities of ideal figures such as Ibrahim/Abraham (Q 16:120) and Maryam/Mary (Q 66:12). Another example is Q 41:11, in which the sky and the earth, personified and referred to as subjects, both willingly submit to God, thus alluding to the ideal believers’ submission to God’s will.

Here it appears as the creation of the sky, from smoke, a pre-existing, chaotic mass, also includes the notion of willing submission as part of the sky coming into existence. The creation of the cosmos thus alludes to both the creation of the first humans and the original covenant, and to the true believer, who is transformed through the act of voluntarily submitting to the will of God. The conceptualisation of the laws of nature and the links to the «natural» state (the fiṭra; cf. Q 20:30) serve to support the idea of an original religion that is being restored through the Qurʾan and the prophecy of Muḥammad.

The most frequent word used to denote the act of creation in the Qurʾan is khalaqa (active participle khaliq), and «Creator» is one of God’s epithets. It is a term that is used, in a general sense, as the equivalent of «to construct» or «to make». If we turn to the semantics of this term, the lexicographical literature attests to two different aspects. The word khalq, as used in its pre-Islamic Arab contexts, has semantic aspects such as «to smooth or polish something» or «to make it equal» (Arnaldez, Khalḳ). The Lisan attests to a usage of khalq to refer to the decision of how to cut leather and how much of it to cut in order to make whatever is required (Lisan, 1243ff.). As such, it is connected to the idea of determining what is required to create something.

Faṭara is another term employed in the context of creation, as this has a semantic meaning related to «splitting» or «tearing». In most cases, the verb is used to denote an act of creation by God, either of humans (Q 6:79; 11:51; 17:51; 20:72; 36:22; 43:27) or the universe. Several verses refer to God as al-fāṭir (Q 12:10; 14:10; 39:46; 42:11; 35:1 sūrat al-fāṭir, 6:14), and a recurring epithet is fāṭir al-samāwāti wa-l-arḍi («Creator of the heavens and the earth»). In some cases, faṭara is used to indicate breaking or tearing in other thematic contexts; for example, Q 19:90 describes the potential dramatic cosmic effect that disbelief may have of splitting the earth and tearing the heavens apart, while, according to Q 42:5, the heavens are almost torn apart by the angels praising God and asking for forgiveness for humans. The term fiṭra is used to denote the original nature (or literally: «initial cleaving») of humans (Q 30:30), a state that is connected to creation and the pre-temporal covenant of which humans need constant reminders because of the weakness of human nature and their predisposition to forget. Another of God’s epithets indicating that creation is conceptualised as a splitting or cleaving is found in Q 6:95, 96, where God is referred to as fāliq. In Q 21:30 there is a reference to the creation of the cosmos as the splitting of an original, single unit into heaven and earth. This idea, of an original unity that was split, is also seen in some of the verses that allude to anthropogonic scenarios, such as Q 4:1 (yā ayyuhā l-nāsu ttaqū rabbakum alladhī khalaqakum min nafsin wāḥidatin, «O mankind, be mindful of your Lord who created you from one single soul»). The sight of heaven being cleft asunder is one of the signs of the end of times seen in the eschatological scenario of Q 77:9 [8-10]. Creation is also, in several instances, conceptualised through terms that have splitting or cleaving as a semantic aspect. However, the idea of perfection is, in all these cosmogonic scenarios, conceptualised as wholeness, as being without rifts.

== Anthropogony ==
The Qurʾānic anthropogonies reveal aspects of how human nature and the condition and ultimate purpose of human existence are perceived. References to the creation of the first human beings are, like the cosmogonies, found in several sūras, as scattered and relatively short narrative sections, such as Q 3:52; 30:20; 40:67; 45:11 (verses that indicate humans are created from dust, turāb); Q 23:12; and 6:2; 15:26; 32:7; 37:11; 55:14 (humans are created from clay, ṣalṣāl); see also Q 3:59; 6:2; 32:9; 40:67; 64:3; 82:7. While there are some variations in these stories in some points of detail, they generally correspond regarding the basic narrative structure and the central points in the story.

In Q 38:71-2 the creation of humans is presented in three steps or stages; Q 71:14 explicitly refers to these as aṭwār. First, the decision to create was made. The next step was the moulding of some particular, though not always specified, matter. Finally, the blowing of God’s rūḥ, the life-giving breath or spirit, into the moulded matter gave life to the creation (cf. Q 15:29; 32:9; 38:72). The term used to denote the giving of the specific human shape is ṣawwara (Q 40:64; 95:4), its verbal-noun (maṣdar) form being taṣwīr, meaning «to shape something», or «to provide something with a particular form». In some cases, the providing of a shape is presented as a second step in the process (cf. Q 7:11, wa-laqad khalaqnākum thumma ṣawwarnākum, «and we did create you, then we shaped you»). The notion of «giving shape» also occurs in the thematic context of human procreation, where the shaping of a human being refers to the development of a child in the womb (Q 3:6: huwa lladhī yuṣawwirukum fī l-arḥāmi kayfa yashāʾu, «He is the one who shapes you in the wombs as He wills»). The term ṣawwara also occurs in contexts of general anthropogony, for example in Q 40:64, where the topic is the human condition and God’s mercy towards humankind: «and He shaped you, formed you well» (wa-ṣawwarakum, fa-aḥsana ṣuwarakum). An identical phrase is found in Q 64:3 in a thematic context of cosmology and anthropology. The emphasis on the human shape as «the best shape» can be taken as a reference to what is regarded as the ultimate purpose of human life; in this respect, the «best shape» can be understood as that which makes the human body fit for its intended purpose, which is to worship God and be his servant (ʿabd). Little is said in the Qurʾān about why God created humans, apart from Q 51:56, where it is stated out that God created humans and jinns in order for them to serve him.

The Qurʾanic anthropogony is structured by metaphors from the field of handicrafts. Q 55:14 illustrates this clearly, as the creation of humans from clay and the forming of their human shape is likened to the work of a potter (Q 55:14: khalaqa l-insān min ṣalṣālin ka-l-fakhkhār, «He created the human from clay, like pottery»). Humans are made of «dead material», i.e. from substances that are of the earth, to which humans are thus ontologically linked. This is in contrast to the angels, who are made of light, and the jinn, who are made of fire (cf. Q 55:15). The idea that the substance from which one was created corresponds to a position in a hierarchy is put into the mouth of Iblis (the Devil), who states that, as he was created from fire, he is more worthy than man, who was created from dust (Q 7:12: qāla anā khayrun minhu khalaqtanī min nārin wa-khalaqtahumin ṭīnin, «he [Iblis] said: I am better than him [Adam]; You created me from fire, and You created him from clay»). This difference in status is often taken as part of the reason why Iblis refused to prostrate himself before Adam (a recurring theme in the Qurʾan, found in many verses: Q 2:34; 7:11; 15:29ff.; 17:61; 18:50; 20:116; 38:72ff.).

The relationship between males and females in the anthropogonies of Qurʾan has been a recurrent theme in Muslim feminist scholarship, which itself has been concerned with the ontological implications for the status of women (see Wadud, Qurʾan and woman). A feminist argument about an original gender equity in the Qurʾan has sought support from Q 4:1, according to which the male and the female were created from one nafs (soul, self). The idea expressed here is apparently that the two sexes were created from some other, third being. This echoes the aforementioned reference to the creation of the cosmos (or heaven and earth) as occurring through the splitting of an original unit; in Q 21:30 it is explicitly said that the two (heaven and earth) were generated from an original, third entity that consisted of both («Are the disbelievers not aware that the heavens and the earth used to be joined together and that We ripped them apart?»).

If we turn to the two identical references to the creation of humans in Q 7:189 and 39:6, we see that the course of action is explained slightly differently. Here, it is stated that first there was one person or soul(nafs waḥida), and then (thumma) a second person (zawj) was created from the first (minha): khalaqtum min nafsin wāḥidatin thumma jaʿala minhā zawjahā («he created them from one soul/being, then he made from it [the soul/being] its partner»). A third way of expressing the creation of humans indicates even more strongly that the male was created first, while the female was made later, from the male. Q 30:21 seems to express the idea that wives were created from the males: wa-min ayatihi an khalaqa lakum min anfusukum azwajan (an identical phrase is found in Q 42:11). The apparent idea of one original unity, as expressed in Q 4:1, is apparently in opposition to other verses, which seem to present a more conventional narrative of a sequential anthropogony, in accordance with the biblical tradition.

== The Fall and its consequences ==
It has been pointed out by several scholars, and particularly stressed in feminist writings, that the Qurʾanic version of the Fall does not lay the blame for it on the woman, but rather holds the pair equally responsible for their expulsion from the Garden. Grammatically, this is reflected in the use of the dual pronoun when Adam and his spouse are referred to, including the key event of Satan’s temptation, to which they were both exposed (Wadud, Qurʾan and woman). There is one exception to this, found in Q 20:115-21, where the singular is used when referring to the Fall: wa-laqad ʿahidnā ila adama min qablu fa-nasiya («and We did make a covenant with Adam before, but he forgot»). Thus, the forgetting of the covenant(ʿahd), the original agreement between God and the first humans, is here linked to Adam. The Fall, however, broke this covenant. Although Adam and his wife asked for forgiveness (Q 7:23) and received it (Q 2:37ff.), humans still live under the constant temptation and threat from their own nature (nafs) and from Iblis, whose own fall caused another rupture in the original harmony of creation. There are different terms employed in the Qurʾan to signify outer forces working to distract humans, and lead them astray from God. Apart from the fall-scenarios where Iblis embodies disobedience and rebellion against God, the forces that work in opposition to God are attributed to either al-shayṭan (Satan, see for instance Q 2:36; 3: 155; 4:60; 4:120; 7:22), or the plural: shayaṭin (see 2:14; 6:71, 121; 7:27).

In contrast to the story in the Bible, the Qurʾan tells us that Adam and his wife were forgiven (Q 20:121-2); their plea for forgiveness is mentioned in Q 2:37-8 and 7:23. This may be taken to indicate a new stage in the cycle of covenants between God and humans, as Q 2:38 mentions that guidance (hudan) will come from God in the future, and that those who follow it have nothing to fear. Thus, according to this mythological model, sincere regret and penance will be accepted by God, and humans’ acceptance of God’s guidance will save them on judgement day. However, the story also serves as a paradigmatic model for the Qurʾanic view of human nature: all humans share the flaws of Adam, as they are prone to temptation, to disobey God’s will, and to act on impulses coming either from themselves or from an outer, negative force. Iblis was punished for his arrogance and his unwillingness to obey God, while Adam and his wife were punished for their disobedience and their violation of the boundaries set by God. Thus, the first humans’ disobedience and their fall appears as an echo of Iblis’ own disobedience and fall, and both events had consequences for the lives of humans in very fundamental ways.

One consequence of the Fall is that humans suffer from damaged relationships between themselves, as seen in Q 2:36 («some of you will be the enemies of others», baʿḍukum li-baʿḍin ʿaduwwun). Another result of this event is the exposure of the human body and the accompanying shame (sawʾa) because of it. This is referred to in three verses that serve to establish the meaning of nudity, as well as the function of clothing, in symbolic terms. According to Q 7:20, Satan’s intention was to «uncover their shame, which was hidden from them», i.e. from the first humans. When they ate the fruit, their shame, or «that of their shame that was hidden from them» (Q 7:22), became manifest, and «their shame» has usually been interpreted as referring to their private parts. Thus, eating from the tree caused the first humans to become self-conscious and aware of their own nudity. The naked body is associated with shame, and thus with the work of Satan. Clothing, in contrast, is presented as God-given, a blessing, and a necessity for humans. The function of clothing is also stressed in Q 16:81, where it is ascribed the function of protection (cf. «shirts to protect you» in Q 20:121). In Q 7:26, the religious meaning of clothing is explained and elaborated to an audience indicated by the epithet «O, children of Adam!» This verse speaks of clothing as God-given, and refers to it both in a material sense (as a covering for the body) and in a metaphorical sense, by referring to wa-libasu l-taqwa («the garment of God-consciousness») as the better garment (dhalika khayrun). Thus, it appears to elaborate an ethico-religious concept of an ideal state of mind (taqwa) by using clothing as a metaphor.

== Ethics, boundaries, and control ==
A general feature of Qurʾanic human ontology is that human drives are perceived as a constant threat, as they make humans liable to transgress the set boundaries of conduct. Thus, control is required. Boundaries and control are key concepts in understanding human life, and this has implications both on an individual level (and the relation between humans and God) and for inter-human relations, on the level of community. Several verses of the Qurʾan prescribe modification and restriction of bodily practices, and these apply to both ritual contexts and social interaction for the believers. The general command «do not exceed the bounds in your religion» (la taghlu fi dinikum) is found in two identical phrases, one in Q 4:171, the other in Q 5:77. The expression «the boundaries of God», ḥudūd Allāh, and the injunction not to trespass them is generally linked to contexts that deal with regulations of marriage or familial relations (cf. Kimber, Boundaries). Thus, it indicates that such was a main area of concern for the early Muslim community, and these boundaries remain a crucial factor in Muslim identity. To stay within the social boundaries of marriage and the boundaries of one’s own property, which includes ma malakat aymanuhum (lit. «what the right hand possesses», a phrase that refers to slaves), is a social consequence of this view. Through the phrase ma malakat aymanuhum, seemingly used to signify lawful property and such, the boundaries for licit sex are expressed by a bodily metaphor that associates different value with the right and with the left side. The right side is the better one. In eschatological scenarios, the phrase «those on the right» is used to signify the believers, in contrast to the unbelievers, who are «those on the left» (cf. Q 56:27, 90; 74:39). Several passages explicitly state that one’s lusts or sexual inclinations must be restricted to one’s wives and those included in the category ma malakat aymanuhum (for example Q 4:3, 25; 23:5; 70:29).

Human drives and lust do, however, pose a threat to the integrity of the ethical standard of the believers; hence, they require regulation and restriction. In other words, the necessity of staying within the boundaries set by God is a fundamental principle on which the basic structures of the Qurʾanic discourse on sexuality and sexual behaviour are based. As is commonly recognised, the Qurʾan does not condemn sexuality as a cause of evil, neither is sexuality regarded as an obstacle to spiritual development. Sexual activity itself is not condemned or disapproved of, and restrictions are applied only to ensure that one stays safely within the divinely-authorised boundaries. Consequently, meanings such as «to exceed», «to transgress», and similar occur frequently as semantic aspects of the terms employed to denote unacceptable conduct. The verb bahga has the general meaning of transgressing limits (Lane, Lexicon, 231), and is one of the terms used to denote sexually excessive behaviour (Q 2:173; 6:145; 16:115).

As for human drives, the term nafs is generally used to signify these (Q 53:23, the nafs’ desires [the wrong things, in contrast to those acceptable to God]). The nafs is perceived as an internal cause of actions that might lead people astray, and thus represents an inner enemy from which humans need protection. Generally, the nafs is perceived as a force that may motivate or even drive people to do bad things. For example, in Q 5:30 the nafs is identified as that which made one of Adam’s sons consider it fair to kill his brother. In some cases, the working of this force is described as «a voice from within» that whispers to humans (cf. Q 50:16). Moreover, the nafs is said to be capricious (cf. Q 79:40), which adds an unpredictable dimension to the constant threat that it poses for the ethical and religious integrity of humans. Yet, the nafs is also understood as a creative impulse; in Q 81:14, it produces (good and evil), and in Q 82:5, it brings forth (qaddamat) and leaves behind (akhkharat). Unwanted actions may be caused by influence from external forces such as temptation (fitna), while the internal drives of lust and craving (ibtagha) correspond to those external forces.

In parallel to the whispering of the nafs, the whisper is often associated with Satan, who is described as the one who whispers in the chests of humans (cf. Q 114:5), or he who addresses humans through whispers (cf. Q 20:120: fa-waswasa ilayhi l-shayṭānu qāla: yā ādamu, «and Satan whispered to him, O Adam»). However, as a consequence of the Fall, Iblīs is also presented as an external «enemy» or threat, posing a constant and ubiquitous temptation towards humans, as elaborated in Q 7:17: thumma atiyannahum min bayna aydīhim wa-min khalfihim wa-ʿan aymānihim wa-ʿan shamāʾilihim («then I will come to them from before them and from behind them, and from their right and from their left»). Thus, human existence is shown as constantly threatened by both internal and external forces.

A frequently recurring phrase that relates to the idea of boundaries and control, is «to govern one’s chastity», or, if we follow the literal meaning of furuj, «to govern one’s cleft», which is a metaphor for private parts (cf. Q 23:5; 24:30-1; 33:35 and 70:29). The use of this phrase indicates that control and chastity are seen as ideal behaviour for the believers, and is either presupposed as a quality (as in Q 33:35) or explicitly prescribed (like in Q 24:30-1 and 33:35). These virtues are equally applied to both male and female, something explicitly expressed and even emphasised by the repetition of the same virtues in both masculine and feminine forms (cf. Q 33:35).

== Purity ==
Purity as conceptualised in the Qurʾān is expressed mainly through words from two different roots, ṭ-h-r and z-k-w, of which the latter is the most frequently seen. In the lexicographical literature, the meaning of ṭahāra or ṭuhr relates to the opposite of dirt or filth, and thus it is explained by references to cleanliness in a material or physical sense (Ibn Manẓūr, Lisān, 2712; Lane, Lexicon, 1886). In the lexicographical literature, the term zakkā (a frequent form of z-k-w in the Qurʾān) is considered a loan from Syriac, where the term dakkā was used to signify cleanliness in a metaphorical sense, and the notion of separating, or purging, something. However, in Syriac it also has meanings such as to grow, flourish, and thrive, in addition to the meaning of purification.

The notion of purity is invoked in several different thematic contexts in the Qurʾan. Much attention, both in the traditional fiqh-literature and in Western research, has been paid to Q 5:6, where the ritual ablution is prescribed, and the details of its performance are described (see Katz, Cleanliness; Lowry, Ritual purity). Considering the usage of concepts and notions of purity as such, it appears that most of the occurrences are not directly related to a ritual context. In most cases when purity-terms are used in the Qurʾan they seem to refer to purity in a more abstract, spiritual sense, often dealing with changes or transformations in humans in some way (Farstad, And God loves those who purify). In that respect, the language of purity may also be related to human ontology and soteriology, as well as social structures, as understood in the Qurʾanic text.

Purification is a necessary condition for being in God’s presence, and so in some cases it refers to a condition attainable by the believer himself. This applies to the prescribed rituals of ablution, relating to what Izutsu has termed the ethical dimension of the God-man relation in the Qurʾan, to which the ritual obligations belong (Izutsu, Ethico-religious concepts). The notions of purity and purification, however, exceed the boundaries of this theme as understood by Izutsu. «To purify» (expressed by both ṭahhara and zakka) refers to an overall idea of «to act in accordance with what is considered good», or «keeping within the prescribed limits».

Transformation may be caused by reciting the Qurʾan (Q 2:129, 151; 3:164; 62:2) or connected to a place of worship, with «the house» conventionally taken to mean the Kaʿba in Mecca (Q 2:125; 22:26). In several cases it is used to signify a virtue, a characteristic for the believers, or to signify development and spiritual growth, or simply as means of demarcation between believers and unbelievers (cf. Q 5:41). The notion of purity is connected to the semantic field of growth and fertility (denoted by the root f-l-ḥ) in various ways. Prosperity functions, on the one hand, as a sign, or as a consequence, of self-induced purification (see, for example, Q 87:14 and 91:7). On the other hand, it is also presented as something actively bestowed upon the believer by God; this is according to Q 2:174 and 3:77, both of which refer to an eschatological scenario where the ultimate goal (or future hope) for the believers is to be purified by God. In these verses it seems that God’s purification of the believers is used as metonymies for recognition, benevolence, and mercy.

The notion of purity may also be connected to the conception of the human body. The first two verses of Q 80 indicate that bodily defects or malfunctions can be conceptualised as impurity. These verses refer to a meeting between a blind man and (probably) Muḥammad: «He frowned and turned away, when the blind man came to him» (Q 80:1-2). The following verse, containing the word yazakka (referring to the blind man), is translated in various ways; it could be taken as spiritual growth, as bodily purification, or as cleansing, which may reflect earlier notions of blindness as a punishment from God. Given a cultural model that attributes illness or bodily defects to impurity, it is possible to establish a conceptual link between moral or religious purity and health, or bodily perfection. The conceptualisation of purification (yazakka) in this context might, therefore, be conceived as entailing both moral/religious (to purify from bad deeds or «sin») and physical aspects (to be healed). It could also be possible that this verse refers to the blind man’s need for sympathy, based on the other occurrences of the motif of blindness in the Qurʾan (Rippin, Metaphor). This is supported by the fact that there is another occurrence of yazakka in the same sura (Q 80:7), one closely connected to istaghna, «arrogance», or considering oneself self-sufficient, which is the polar opposite of the humble submission and thankfulness expected from the ideal believer. Although purity denoted the ideal state of the believer, the believer should not attribute their purity (or prosperity) to themselves (see Q 4:49 and 53:32). Thus, restrictions for human action are expressed through references to purity. The language of purity also concerns the boundaries of the religious individual, in addition to the symbolic borders of the religious community (see Katz, Cleanliness).

== Soteriology ==
Viewed from the perspective of soteriology, the Qurʾanic statements of human nature, destiny, and future condition are linked to the concept of the original, primordial covenant between God and humans, established in and through creation (cf. Q 2:83). The pre-temporal covenant is universal and an obligation for all humanity, and thus all humans will be held accountable on judgement day. One aspect of the Qurʾanic self-image is the notion of the Qurʾan as a warning and a reminder of the coming event, the final judgement where people’s actions will be revealed and will decide their fate. The final event of destruction, preceding the inevitable judgement, is an oft-recurring theme (see, for example, Q 56 and 81). These ideas have implications for Qurʾanic anthropology.

The human relationship to the primordial covenant is also linked to the idea of an original, or natural, disposition. Revelation is the ultimate truth and the message to which humans should respond in order to fulfil their potential and live according to their intended purpose. To turn away from the covenant is to deny one’s primordial, original disposition. To oppose the validity of the revelation as mediated by the prophets, and Muḥammad particularly, whose message was to restore the original faith of Abraham, is presented as a degeneration. In some verses, we find references to those who turn away from the divine message as «monkeys» or other kinds of non-human creatures: Q 7:166 «then become miserable monkeys» (see also Q 2:65 and 5:60). These verses conceptualise human transgression, and turning away from the original covenant, as an act that brings them closer to animals. Q 8:55 states: «The most miserable of living creatures are those who do not believe». In most cases, however, the ones who do not keep the covenant, and disobey God and his messenger, are referred to as being cursed (cf. Q 13:25) or condemned, and left to the eternal fire (Q 2:167; 3:192, 131; 9:63; 43:74-8; 72:32; 74:26-30).

There is an inherent tension between the idea of predestination and the responsibility of humans in the Qurʾanic text. God’s absolute and sovereign power is strongly and repeatedly underscored, both in homiletic parts and in narratives. Q 14:4 is a verse that is often referred to as an indication of fatalism, as carries a strong sense of determinism (it reads «God misguides whomever He wills, and guides whom He wills»). Q 24:35 expresses a similar tendency towards determinism, and uses metaphors of light and darkness in that regard («God guides whomever he wants to his light»). There are, however, several verses that indicate that choices are made by people themselves (whether to believe or not, for instance), and so they do have some control over their own destiny in the Hereafter (cf. Q 18:29; 25:57; 73:19; 80:11-2). In many cases, verses about the final reckoning on judgement day contain the simple logic of «getting what you deserve» (see Q 52:13-9), i.e. a good act is rewarded, while a bad act is punished, an idea that corresponds to the concept of the covenant and the human obligation to accept and follow it (Q 99:6-7). Moreover, we also find the idea that the demands made upon humans are not unreasonable; according to Q 2:286, God has not laid a burden upon anyone that is heavier than they can carry.

In several cases, mention of God’s power is linked to his mercy. Mercy is a recurring theme, one expressed in various ways, some of which have implications for the relationship between God and humans and for the understanding of human existence. The message from the prophets and from Muḥammad is referred to as a mercy to humans (see Q 21:107). God’s creation is also referred to as a mercy to mankind, as God has given humans everything they need to live, from his bounty (see Q 28:73; 40:61; see also 27:73; 10:60: God is «full of bounty for mankind»), and the proper response should be thankfulness and recognition of one’s dependence on Him. The concept of mercy is also connected to forgiveness; several verses refer to the mercy and compassion of God, and in some cases this is said to be limitless (Q 6:147). God’s patience with sinners is one aspect of mercy, as everyone is given a chance to change and to repent (cf. Q 18:58; 25:70), and God will even help people on judgement day (cf. Q 44:42). God’s patience with sinners is referred to in several verses: Q 7:183; 16:61; 14:42; 35:37; 45. There are verses that express that God forgives all sins (Q 33:71; 39:53), despite everyone’s flaws (13:6), but penitence must come first. Some verses express the idea that all sins may be forgiven (Q 2:160; 5:39; 9:104; 110:3). Even in references to the so-called ḥudud punishments, the verses end by pointing towards the possibility of penitence and forgiveness (Q 5:33-4, 38; 24:2-4). In some verses, the mercy and forgiveness of God are mentioned in connection with severe punishment (see Q 5:2; 15:49-50; 59:7). In other cases, there seems to be limits and conditions attached to forgiveness: Q 4:48 restricts forgiveness and says that it does not apply to those guilty of shirk, nor to those who have not accepted the faith before the moment of death (Q 47:34). The concept of love (ḥubb) may also fall into this context: it signifies the ideal relationship between God and humans, yet the love of God seems to have certain limitations and conditions. It is conditional on doing good (Q 2:195; 3:134; 5:13, 96), on being obedient to God and his messenger (3:31), and on purifying oneself (Q 2:222; 9:108).

== Social structure and hierarchies ==
The concepts of ʿahd and mithaq are also used to refer to social contracts, and to agreements between individuals or groups. The supposed cultural model for social structure in the Qurʾan is the pre-Islamic Arabic tribal structure, in which the individual required the protection of a group that was under male authority. The contract between the individual and the tribe implied receiving protection and sustenance in exchange for loyalty. On the group level, a contract with another, stronger group could be a way to seek strength and protection for the group, and to prevent war. Thus, on the one hand, the Qurʾanic view of social structures, including the place and space for the individual within them, is based on the contemporaneous Arab tribal structure and a corresponding ethical system where contracts, protection, and loyalty were crucial concepts. On the other hand, we also find a tendency towards promoting change and a critique of contemporary practices, some of which display a concern for the well-being of women, slaves, and children (see Giladi, Children). Examples include the: admonishment of the practice of burying baby girls (Q 81:8-9); prohibition of the practice of ẓihār (Q 58:2-3); safeguarding of women’s right to inheritance (cf. Q 4:11); prohibition of taking an unlimited number of wives (cf. Q 4:3); prohibition of prostitution or purchasing sex for money (Q 7:33; 16:90; 24:33), and the giving of freedom to a slave as a compensation for a crime (Q 5:89). The Qurʾanic notions about social structures, authority, and family relations etc., reflect a milieu where social hierarchies and male authority were considered natural, and so these notions are left unchallenged. For example, although we find verses aimed at regulating slavery, the practice itself as an institution is never disputed. The most privileged position in the social hierarchy, according to the Qurʾanic view, is that of the free and wealthy male believer.

The social hierarchy as understood in the Qurʾan is based on a set of factors that constitutes a network of possible positions that are structured and organised hierarchically. In this regard, several categories must be highlighted. Qurʾanic legislation is founded upon the notion of male authority in the family and in society. Gender is, however, not the only determining factor. Social status (including factors such as age, wealth, health, and marital status) and religious affiliation (the true believers rather than the unbelievers) are also of crucial importance as factors determining one’s place in the social hierarchy. At the top is the free and wealthy male believer; the free believing woman is the next ranked, above slaves, who may be in the free woman’s possession. However, slaves who believe are ranked higher than an unbelieving free person (cf. Q 2:221). The category ma malakat aymanuhum, «that which their right hands possess», is used to denote slaves, those who are dependent on someone else for their protection and livelihood. The slave is regarded as being the property of an owner, who needs to be free, but could be either male or female; there are verses that indicate that free females may also possess slaves (cf. Q 24:31, ma malakat aymanuhunna, which is the feminine plural form). Thus, the category is not just a signal of patriarchal notions of power and male authority; the position of owner is apparently determined by social status rather than by gender. According to Q 4:36, the owner should respect and pay regard to his slaves. Several verses in the same sura (see Q 4:2, 6, 8, 10) display a concern for the well-being and rights of orphans as well as of women (Q 4:4, 19). These verses exhibit a profound concern for the well-being and rights of those less privileged, albeit keeping the free, believing male in the empowered position. Regarding the Qurʾanic view on the relationship between men and women, the locus classicus is the much discussed Q 4:34. This verse has been extensively debated, both with regard to its first part and the semantic aspects of the term qawwamun («those responsible» or «those in charge») and whether the phrase bi-mā faḍḍala llāhu baʿḍuhum ʿalā baʿḍin («with what God has preferred some of them over others») should be taken to indicate that God prefers men over women, and, if so, what this implies for everyday life. The most problematic part of this verse, however, is the final part, where men are permitted to hit their wives (fa-ḍrabuhunna) if they fear disobedience and if prescribed sanctions, being admonished, or being ignored at bedtime, prove futile. This verse has troubled classical scholars of the Qurʾan as well as modern feminists (see Marin, Disciplining wives), and there have been many different attempts to explain the implications for the relationship between men and women.

Social hierarchies are given a divine justification: the phrase that God has preferred some over others is found in contexts that deal with gender (Q 2:228; 4:34) and wealth (Q 16:71). Wealth, progress, and prosperity are taken as indications of being blessed by God, as they result from God’s mercy (cf. Q 16:71). However, according to the Qurʾan, being empowered in such ways also entails obligations towards the community and those who are less privileged, and demands certain qualities or virtues. Q 102 contains strong warnings against greed, while other verses express condemnation of those who do not care for the poor and weak (Q 107:1-3). The incitement to fight for God’s cause (or «in the path of God», fi sabili llah) is frequently repeated in the Qurʾan. In Q 3:77 God’s cause is connected to fighting for the weak and the poor, thus indicating that the responsibility for those in need is a religious obligation. Other passages speak about fighting for the cause of God in religious terms, meaning fighting the unbelievers. In these verses, the concern is of a more social and political character; to fight the unbelievers is necessary because they constituted a threat, both religiously and politically, to the newly established Muslim community under the leadership of Muḥammad.

== Bibliography ==
* R. Arnaldez, Khalḳ, EI2
* Dirk J Bakker, Man in the Qurʾan, Amsterdam 1965
* Mona Helen Farstad, «And God loves those who purify themselves» (Q 9:108). Qurʾanic notions of purity and purification, in Hakan Rydving (ed.), Micro-level analysesof the Qurʾan (Uppsala 2014), 15-46
* Avner Giladi, Children, EQ
* Ibn Manẓur, Lisan al-ʿarab
* Izutsu, Concepts
* Izutsu, God
* Marion Holmes Katz, Cleanliness and ablution, EQ
* Richard Kimber, Boundaries and precepts, EQ
* George Lakoff and Mark Johnson, Metaphors we live by, Chicago 1980
* Lane
* Joseph E. Lowry, Ritual purity, EQ
* Joseph E.B Lumbard, Covenant and covenants in the Qurʾan, JQS 17/2 (2015), 1-23
* Manuela Marin, Disciplining wives. A historical reading of Qurʾan 4:34, SI 97 (2003), 5-40
* Andrew Rippin, Metaphor and the authority of the Qurʾan, in Khaleel Mohammed and Andrew Rippin (eds.), Coming to terms with the Qurʾan (North Haledon, NJ 2008), 47-62
* Barbara F. Stowasser, Women in the Qurʾan. Traditions and interpretation, New York 1994
* Amina Wadud, Qurʾan and woman. Rereading the sacred text from a woman’s perspective, New York 1999.

Академия Корана:Encyclopaedia of the Qurʾān/Anointing

2017-01-01T13:39:09Z

Maqivi: Новая страница: «{{ПереводЭК|Anointing|Andrew Rippin}} The ritual practice of touching objects or persons with scented oils. A practice common to various cultures of the…»

{{ПереводЭК|Anointing|Andrew Rippin}}
The ritual practice of touching objects or persons with scented oils. A practice common to various cultures of the ancient Near East, anointing is typically done on festive occasions and avoided during periods of fasting and mourning, although it is used in burials. It has also been a ritual act of the dedication of an individual to the deity. In the ancient Near East, kingship especially was conferred formally through anointing rather than through a crown or other fabricated symbols. The practice of anointing was then extended to the priesthood in the person of the high priest who adopted many of the roles of the king. It is in that context that the anointing of David (q.v.) in ancient Israel and the image of Jesus (q.v.) as the anointed one — in Greek, the « Christ», and Hebrew, the « Messiah» — were developed. The Christian usage carries a deeper sense than that of the simple act of being anointed. It conveys also the eschatological idea of the promised redeemer.

In Arabic, duhn can be used in the sense of anointing oil and that may be the meaning reflected in q 23:20, «a tree issuing from the Mount of Sinai that bears oil (duhn) and flavoring for foods». In the common use of the word duhn, however, there appears to be no particular religious significance. It is used in connection with the anointing of one’s moustache, face or hair with oil, perhaps specifically sesame oil, or an ointment. Zayt, another word for oil, perhaps specifically olive oil, has the sense of an oil for burning, certainly when used in q 24:35, «whose oil well-nigh would shine, even if no fire touched it».

It is in the word masīḥ in reference to Jesus, of course, that the prime interest in this concept arises. The word is used eleven times in the Qurʾān («the Messiah, Jesus, son of Mary (q.v.)» in q 3:45; 4:157; 4:171; «the Messiah, Mary’s son» in q 5:17, 72, 75; 9:31; «Messiah» in q 4:172; 5:17, 72; 9:30) and is a loanword from the Aramaic meshīḥā (see foreign vocabulary). The sense often attached to that word is «purified» or «filled with blessing», both fairly obvious attempts at isolating an appropriate meaning with little foundation in the language and mainly derived from exegesis (see q 19:31 in which Jesus says of himself, «He has made me blessed (mubārak) wherever I be»). The idea of connecting the word to «touching», a root sense in Arabic, also produced the idea that Jesus' touch could heal; thus it was suggested that Jesus had this power because he had been «touched» himself as had the earlier prophets (see prophets and prophethood). Al-Fīrūzābādī (Baṣāʾir, iv, 499—505) has been able to compile a list of forty-nine different meanings for the word masīḥ, indicating the extent to which the exegetes went in order to find an explanation for a word which would avoid the Christian connotations. In the use of al-masīḥ in reference to Jesus in the Qurʾān, there is little significance given to the sense of «anointing» as it had become connected to the Redeemer in Christianity, who is known as al-Masīḥ. The common statement that al-Masīḥ is understood as a proper name or perhaps a title of honor — in the same way that «Christ» frequently is understood in popular Christianity — would appear to be the best conclusion about its occurrence in q 3:45: «His name (ism) shall be the Messiah, Jesus, son of Mary», although the use of the proper article with a non-Arabic proper name is unknown in other instances.

The use of the word al-masīḥ in connection with the Antichrist (q.v.; see also apocalypse), the one-eyed al-Masīḥ al-Dajjāl, follows the Syriac usage and does not alter the fundamental observation that the ancient idea of «anointed» is very remote from any Muslim use of the term al-masīḥ.

== Bibliography ==
;Primary:
* Fīrūzābādī, Baṣāʾir, iv, 499—505
;Secondary:
* M. Hayek, L’origine des termes ʿIsā al-Masīh (Jésus-Christ) dans le Coran, in Orient syrien 7 (1992), 223-54, 365-82
* Horovitz, ku, 129-30
* Jeffery, For. vocab., 765-6
* H. Michaud, Jésus selon le Coran, Neuchatel 1960, 44-9
* G. Parrinder, Jesus in the Qurʾān, London 1965, 30-4
* A. Wensinck and C. Bosworth, al-Masīḥ, in ei1, vi, 726

Академия Корана:Encyclopaedia of the Qurʾān/Animal Life

2017-01-01T13:33:59Z

Maqivi: Новая страница: «{{ПереводЭК|Animal Life|Herbert Eisenstein}} The references to fauna in the Qurʾān. There are more than two hundred passages in the Qurʾān dealing wi…»

{{ПереводЭК|Animal Life|Herbert Eisenstein}}
The references to fauna in the Qurʾān. There are more than two hundred passages in the Qurʾān dealing with animals and six sūras bear the names of animals as titles (q 2 The Cow [Sūrat al-Baqara]; q 6 The Herding Animals [Sūrat al-Anʿām]; q 16 The Bee [Sūrat al-Naḥl]; q 27 The Ant [Sūrat al-Naml]; q 29 The Spider [Sūrat al-ʿAnkabūt]; q 105 The Elephant [Sūrat al-Fīl]). Nevertheless, animal life is not a predominant theme in the Qurʾān.

== Animal species ==
The common Arabic word for «animal» ḥayawān (lit. life) occurs only once in the Qurʾān (q 29:64) and actually does not refer to an animal, but rather to life in the next world. Arabic authors of the Middle Ages commonly classified animals into four basic categories on the basis of their habitat. They separated animals living on dry land from those living in the air, those living in dust and those living in water. We find no evidence of this classification in the Qurʾān, which only distinguishes between animals which creep on their belly, animals which walk on two legs and animals with four legs. Yet some other distinctions are also found, e.g. animals similar to men are of greater importance than others. Likewise, some kinds of animals, such as fish, are discussed less.

The qurʾānic term for animal in general and the land animal in particular is dābba with 18 occurrences (pl. dawābb), although this word is not typically used in this sense in medieval Arabic works on zoology. The most frequently-occurring animal name in the Qurʾān is anʿām, «gregarious or herding animals» (thirty-two occurrences) and there are three occurrences of its synonym bahīmat al-anʿām, referring to livestock and large domestic animals. The singular form naʿam only occurs once. The animals which live in herds include domestic animals as well as those driven to pasture, which represent the wealth of men. q 6:143-4 identifies them as sheep, goats, camels — more precisely dromedaries — and cattle. There is also a certain number of specific references to each of these species. General terms for camel (q.v.) such as ibil (twice), jamal/jimāla (twice) and nāqa (seven times) occur alongside more specific terms. ʿIshār (a she-camel ten months with young), ḍāmir (the lean one, meaning a riding camel), rikāb (a generic term for «riding animal», which in the Qurʾānic passage [ q 59:6] is clearly not referring to a horse but to a camel), budn (sacrificial camels) and hīm (camels crazed with thirst) occur only once. In addition, there are two terms which probably also mean «camel», ḥamūla and farsh (q 6:142), but the exact meaning and scope of these words was disputed. Ḥamūla was obviously connected with the root ḥ-m-l, bearing the basic sense of «to carry.» Thus, according to the interpretation preferred by the famous exegete al-Ṭabarī (d. 310/923) and most others who have commented on this passage, ḥamūla are mature camels capable of carrying a load while farsh are camels too young to support any weight. Some commentators have speculated that ḥamūla are camels and cows while farsh are sheep or that ḥamūla are camels and cows while farsh are everything else. Others reasoned that ḥamūla are camels, horses, asses and other animals and farsh are sheep (Tafsīr, viii, 62-4). There are nineteen occurrences of terms for «cattle» and «cow» (baqar/baqara/baqarāt, and ʿijl for calf), eight occurrences of terms for «sheep» (ḍaʾn, ghanam and naʿja/niʿāj, «female sheep»), but only one occurrence of maʿz (goat).

The word khayl for «horse» occurs five times in the Qurʾān and we find once the word muʿallaqa used metaphorically for a «disregarded woman» (q 4:129), a term with the original sense of a mare which is no longer ridden. The title and the first verse of sūras 79 (Those that Draw [al-nāziʿāt]) and 100 (The Runners [al-ʿādiyāt]) are probably further references to horses. The titles of sūras 37 (Those who Dress the Ranks [al-ṣāffāt]), 51 (Those that Scatter [al-dhāriyāt]) and 77 (Those that are Sent [al-mursalāt]) may also refer to them as well. We also find words denoting asses (ḥimār/ḥumur/ḥamīr, four occurrences) and mules (bighāl, a single occurrence). «Swine» (khinzīr/khanāzīr) and «dog» (kalb, see dog) each occur five times in the Qurʾān.

Wild animals are also mentioned. We find four references to «quarry» (ṣayd), i.e. an animal being hunted, and three references to «wolf» (dhiʾb). Furthermore, there is one occurrence of a general term for «beast of prey» (sabuʿ), one occurrence of «lion» (qaswara, a word for «lion» that is otherwise rarely encountered), three occurrences of «apes» (qirada) and one occurrence of «elephant» (fīl).

With regard to flying animals or birds, there are twenty-four occurrences of the general terms ṭayr and ṭāʾir (ṭayr is also used for «omen»). A term of particular interest is jawāriḥ which in qurʾānic usage means «hunting animals», while later Arabic authors use this term exclusively for «birds of prey.» There are only a few references to specific species of birds. We find one mention of «quail» (salwā), one of «hoopoe» (hudhud) and two of «raven» (ghurāb). Furthermore, mention is made of flocks of birds called abābīl, although the exact meaning of this word remains unclear. According to some commentators, there was a verse in the Qurʾān referring to the three pre-Islamic goddesses al-Lāt, al-ʿUzzā and Manāt, who were described as «cranes» (gharānīq, the qurʾānic usage of this word is connected to q 53:19-20). However, it should be noted the question of whether this verse ever existed has been hotly debated (see satanic verses).

Although the Arabic language has a great number of words for reptiles and crawling and flying insects, very few of them are to be found in the Qurʾān. Only «snake» (thuʿbān, ḥayya), «ant» (naml/namla, also dharra, «ant» being only one of several possible meanings of the last), «fly» (dhubāb), «gnat» (baʿūḍa), «lice» (qummal), «locusts» (jarād), «moths» (farāsh, also used for «butterflies»), «bees» (naḥl), «spider» (ʿankabūt) and «termite» (dābbat al-arḍ, with arḍ understood to be «wood» and not «earth» in this usage. This term is not to be confused with the dābba min al-arḍ — beast coming from the earth — of the Apocalypse, q.v.). We find ḥūt/ḥītān used for «fish» in general in the Qurʾān and there is one special fish (nūn, a whale?) which swallowed Jonah. Frogs (ḍafādiʿ) are also mentioned. Several passages also make reference to body parts of animals, such as wings, claws and trunks, as well as to products from animals, such as eggs, feathers, fat, milk, meat and skin, and even musk, pearls and coral.

== The creation of animals and their destiny ==
God cares for all his creatures and provides for them (q 11:6; 29:60; see creation). The Qurʾān asserts that God is the creator of every living creature (q 2:29). The beasts which God has dispersed in the heavens and the earth are given special mention in the Qurʾān as divine signs (q 2:164; 31:10; 42:29; 45:4; cf. also q 25:49). God created animals (dābba) from water (q 24:45), just as he created every living thing (shayʾ ḥayy, q 21:30). No further remarks about the origin of life are found in the Qurʾān. God created pairs of every living thing (q 43:12 and 51:49 refer to couples and hence to the different species of living beings), which should be interpreted as a reference to males and females. q 53:45 definitely makes a distinction between the two sexes. Herd animals close to man are explicitly emphasized (q 16:5; 36:71). Four of the animals usually driven to pasture — sheep, goats, camels and cattle (q 6:143-4; 39:6) — were said to have been created in pairs. Gregarious animals are of great importance. When Satan wanted to lead humankind astray, he planned to cut the ears of camels with the intention of changing an animal which God had created (q 4:119). Furthermore, God instructed Noah (q.v.) to take two examples of all the animal species onto his ark to save them from drowning (q 23:27). Just like men, animals (dābba) and birds form communities (umam, q 6:38, a reference to groups of animals of the same species living together), which will be assembled before God (q 42:29). The following passages seem to indicate that animals will be resurrected, although this is never explicitly stated.

God subjected his whole creation (q.v.), including animals, to men (q 22:65; 45:13) and also provided men with cattle (q 26:133). Therefore animals must have been created in order to serve men, especially the domestic animals and those driven to pasture. q 16:5-8 refers to these two main uses for animals, to carry loads and to warm and feed men. Furthermore, horses, mules, asses and camels are to be ridden (q 6:142; 22:27; 36:72; 40:79-80). Men regard horses as desirable property (q 3:14), but they are only appurtenances of the life of this world and should not be esteemed too highly. There are also passages in the Qurʾān referring to animal products like pure milk from the belly of animals (q 16:66; 23:21; 36:73), skins (q 16:80) and the healing power of honey (q 16:69). All of these benefits exemplify God’s concern for humanity. Animals are of still further use for men as adornments. q 16:8 refers explicitly to horses, mules and asses in this regard. q 35:12, in an apparent reference to pearls, speaks of the wearing of adornments coming from the depths of the sea (q 22:23; 35:33). Coral (q.v.) in particular is described as pleasing to look at (q 55:58; 56:23; 76:19). q 16:6 describes the pleasure one has in looking at cattle when they are brought home or driven out to pasture. Thus it seems to have also been God’s intention to create animals for the aesthetic enjoyment of man.

Naturally, all of the animals are at God’s disposal: «There is not a beast but he takes it by the forelock» (q 11:56). God sends down rain to revive dead land and slake the thirst of his creation (q 25:48-9; cf. 10:24; see agriculture and vegetation). By his order, flocks are led to pasture (q 20:54). The bee is following God’s command when it makes its home in the mountains, trees and manmade structures and eats from the various fruits (q 16:68-9). Animals benefit man in many ways and stand as proof of God’s benevolence toward man, who, according to the Islamic viewpoint, stands in the center of creation and dominates the universe, having precedence over all other creatures (cf. q 17:70). Even animal products coming out of the sea, such as pearls and corals, represent God’s mercy (q 55:22).

== Animals in Islamic law ==
The Qurʾān includes many regulations for the use of animals and animal products, as well as for hunting. The quintessence of these regulations is that animals are a benefit to humankind, either as food or as sacrifices. Man is allowed to kill animals to keep himself alive. He may eat animals on condition that they are lawful (ḥalāl) and that they fall into the category of «good things» (ṭayyibāt, cf. q 2:172; 7:157; 23:51). Furthermore, they must be slaughtered in accordance with the law, although the Qurʾān itself offers no information regarding the technical details of this operation (see consecration of animals).

The Qurʾān provides the basic outline of Islamic dietary law, emphasizing the unlawful over the lawful foods. A number of verses (q 2:173; 5:3, 145; 16:115; cf. 6:118-9, 121; 22:34) prohibit the consumption of carcasses, blood, and pork as well as any other meat over which any name other than God’s has been invoked. The Qurʾān explicitly mentions what is unlawful while everything else is assumed to be lawful and permitted (cf. q 5:1; 6:119) and even the forbidden foods are permitted in emergencies (q 2:173; 6:119; 16:115). The only foods explicitly characterized as lawful in the Qurʾān are animals taken from fresh or salt water (q 16:14; 35:12). The consumption of poultry and veal are mentioned in contexts that indicate that they specifically are not forbidden. Poultry will be the food of the blessed in paradise (q 56:21) and Abraham (q.v.) fed the flesh of a calf to his angelic guests (q 11:69). Dishes eaten by Jews and Christians are also permitted to Muslims except for those which are specifically forbidden (q.v.), such as pork.

Islamic dietary restrictions are portrayed as a relaxation of both the customs observed by the pagan Arabs (q 6:138) and the Jewish dietary law (q 6:146, 4:160), which is described as prohibiting the eating of animals having claws and certain kinds of fat from cattle and small livestock. The Jewish prohibitions had already been partially abrogated by Jesus (q.v.; q 3:50; see abrogation).

q 22:36 refers to sacrificial camels (budn) as signs (shaʿāʾir) of God (see signs). The sacrificial animals (hady) mentioned in q 5:2 and 5:97 should probably be identified as camels and sheep. The Qurʾān prohibits the bloodless sacrifices or consecrations practiced in pre-Islamic times in which animals were set free and allowed to go wherever their impulses led them (q 5:103). These animals are privileged creatures that were neither milked nor ridden. According to the most common interpretation of the relevant Arabic terms, the animals which could serve as a bloodless consecration in the past were a she-camel which has borne five young ones, the last one being male (baḥīra); a she-camel subject to the owner’s vow (sāʾiba); the only male descendant of a goat which had also given birth to three female kids (waṣīla); a camel having offspring old enough to be ridden; or a stallion which has sired ten foals (ḥāmī).

As for hunting, animals living within the sacred precincts (q.v.) around Mecca are taboo (q 5:1). The prescription declares that the hunting of land animals within this area is forbidden, while aquatic animals remain lawful (q 5:95). According to the Qurʾān, this prohibition is nothing less than a test God is imposing on man (q 5:1, 94-6). It is interesting to note that all of the qurʾānic references to punishment and compensations having to do with animals concern the pilgrimage (q.v.) to the Kaʿba (q.v.) in Mecca (5:94-5).

The qurʾānic dietary regulations are neither completely nor systematically presented. The rules concerning slaughtering and hunting are also not very detailed. This situation may be a reflection of a debate or dialogue over dietary regulations occurring between the Muslims and the Jews of Medina (q.v.; see also jews and judaism), since the rules offered by the Qurʾān appear to be answers to particular questions raised in that environment and do not constitute a full-fledged dietary code. Thus, many vital questions awaited the attention of later scholars for answers. In order to elaborate and systematize the isolated qurʾānic injunctions, the experts in Islamic law turned to the practice of the Prophet as documented in the ḥadīth. Initially, the passages concerning animals in the ḥadīth received little attention, but when the jurists tried to draw up a complete dietary code, emphasis was also placed on what the Prophet himself had said about animals. It was then that the relevant and appropriate passages became of interest and hence of real importance.

== Animals as signs of God’s omnipotence and warnings of punishment ==
Animals were created because of God’s benevolence and goodwill toward humankind. Moreover, their existence is proof of God’s omnipotence and wisdom. He is the one who has the power to create life and to destroy it (cf. q 3:27). The Qurʾān particularly emphasizes the marvelous flight of birds which are kept in the air by God (q 16:79; 67:19). There are also tales about the events of the past which illustrate God’s omnipotence and in which animals figure. Manna and quails were sent down to the Children of Israel (q.v.; q 2:57; 7:160; 20:80). The dog of the Seven Sleepers is mentioned (q 18:18; see men of the cave). There is also a similar story of a man who was brought back to life after one hundred years and instructed to look at his ass, among other things, so that he could appreciate how much time had passed (q 2:259). God brought to life four dead birds before the eyes of Abraham (q.v.; q 2:260). There has been only one living being who on one special occasion God permitted to create life and this was Jesus. He created figures like birds from clay and then breathed upon them, bringing them to life (q 3:49; 5:110). Therefore, Jesus is privileged. Although not a part of the New Testament, in the apocrypha we do find a story about the young Jesus creating twelve sparrows from clay on the Sabbath.

Here, one may see a relation between animals which are signs of God’s omnipotence and those which are symbols representing warnings and admonitions. Animals are frequently cited when humankind is commanded to fear God’s punishment. God may let the animals needed by men perish in order to call them to account for their misdeeds (q 16:61; 35:45; during the events of the Apocalypse (q.v.), even camels ten months with young will be untended, cf. q 81:4). On the other hand, animals are powerful signs to convert the infidels and make them observe God’s commands. In this connection, the unbeliever is instructed to examine a camel to realize God’s greatness (q 88:17) and we are warned that sinners «will not enter the Garden until a camel passes through the eye of a needle» (q 7:40; cf. Matt 19:24, Mark 10:25, and also Luke 18:25, not referring to sinners but to the rich).

As for the warnings, the Qurʾān cites instances in history in which animals play different roles (see also punishment stories; warning). The people of Thamūd (q.v.) were punished after they hamstrung a she-camel the prophet Ṣāliḥ (q.v.) had brought forth to demonstrate the power of God (q 7:73-9). In this case, an animal led to God’s intervention. There are many different occasions when God used animals as instruments to guide men toward the good or the bad. God sent plagues of locusts, lice and frogs to punish the sinful Egyptians who thought themselves mighty (q 7:133). God also dispatched the raven which showed Cain how to hide the corpse of his brother Abel (q 5:31; see cain and abel). As a punishment for impiety, God transformed human beings into swine and apes for worshipping evil (q 5:60) and some Jews were transformed into detestable apes as punishment for breaking the Sabbath (q 2:65; 7:166). In reference to more recent times, q 105 describes the military expedition of the Abyssinian general Abraha (q.v.) to Mecca (ca. 570 c.e.) on which occasion the Abyssinians were accompanied by at least one elephant. In their raid against the Meccans, the Muslims had horses at their disposal (q 8:60). Flocks of birds attacked and destroyed the army of the people of the elephant (q 105:3-4; see also abyssinia). In another passage speaking of the successes of the early Muslims, God reminds them that he alone is responsible: «You spurred neither horse nor camel» (q 59:6). Even Satan musters horses (q 17:64).

Many of the animals found in the Bible are also mentioned in the Qurʾān to show God’s authority, omnipotence and wisdom. The staff of Moses (q.v.) was turned into a snake as a divine sign. (The serpent is called thuʿbān in q 7:107; 26:32, but ḥayya in q 20:20. Minor differences in the versions of the story itself are neglected in this article.) Solomon (q.v.) understands the speech of an ant advising caution to his fellows (q 27:18.) The jinn (q.v.) learned that Solomon had died when a termite (dābbat al-arḍ) ate away the staff his body had been leaning on (q 34:14). A fish (a whale?, ḥūt, q 21:87-8; 37:142-5; 68:48-9; nūn, q 21:87-8) swallowed Jonah (q.v.) and then cast him in the desert.

In the Qurʾān, we find further references to legendary events dealing with animals. There are references to the cow being sacrificed by the Israelites by order of Moses (q 2:67-71). The intended breakfast of Moses on his journey with the wise man to reach the junction of the two seas is a fish (q 18:61-3; see khaḍir/khıḍr). Birds are gathered as troops by Solomon, in addition to men and jinn (q 27:17-20, followed by the story of the hoopoe). Birds are seen in a dream which Joseph (q.v.) interprets (q 12:36, 41). The dog of the Seven Sleepers is mentioned four times but is never named (q 18:18, 22). David (q.v.) and Solomon ruled in a case in which the sheep of one shepherd wandered into the field of someone else (q 21:78). David also settled a dispute between two brothers over the ownership of another sheep (q 38:23-4). In the narrative on Joseph, his brothers play on their father’s fear that Joseph would be eaten by a wolf by claiming that a wolf had killed him (q 12:13-7).

Nevertheless, God grants grace and possesses unlimited compassion, e.g. toward the Israelites who have taken as a god the golden calf (q 2:521-4, 92-3; 7:148, 152; 20:88; see calf of gold). Humankind should not forget about the goodness of God. They should turn to him, praise him, adore and worship him and confess their dependence on him (see adoration; bowing and prostration; worship). This is the reason that the Qurʾān offers a number of arguments derived from history and from nature (q 2:116, everything is submissive to God; 17:44; 24:41; 43:12; 59:24; 61:1; 62:1; 64:1, everyone in the heavens and on earth gives glory to God). The animals (every dābba, q 16:49; 22:18) worship God by prostrating themselves, including the birds, which do so while flying (q 24:41). The birds as well as mountains sing his praises (q 34:10; cf. 38:19).

== Animals as symbols and objects of comparisons ==
In certain cases, we find animals referred to in analogies. The flames of hell throw out sparks as large as castles the color of «yellow camels» (jimāla ṣufr, q 77:32-3). The word dharra means a «tiny particle», an «atom», a «grain» or an «ant.» God does not do an ant’s weight of wrong (q 4:40). Something as tiny as an ant does not escape God’s attention (q 10:61). Those who have done an ant’s weight of good or evil (q.v.) will see it on the day of judgment (q 99:7-8; see last judgment). Other small insects are symbols of the insignificant and trivial. The idols (see idols and images) people had formerly worshipped cannot create even a «fly» (dhubāb, q 22:73). God «does not disdain to coin a simile (q.v.) from a gnat» (baʿūḍa, q 2:26).

As for the comparison of men with animals or the metaphorical use of animals in the Qurʾān, it is worth noting that negativity and deprecation predominate. It is chiefly the sinners and infidels who are compared to animals. Those who have disbelieved and those who do not want to believe (q 8:55) and the metaphorically deaf and dumb who do not understand (q 8:22) are the worst of beasts (dawābb). In hell, the infidels will drink boiling water the way a camel crazy with thirst (hīm) drinks (q 56:55). Unbelievers are more misguided and heedless than cattle (anʿām) and are even further astray than cattle (q 7:179; 25:44). They even eat as cattle do, oblivious to anything else (q 47:12). The Jews, who do not understand or adhere to the laws of the Torah (q.v.), are like an ass carrying books (q 62:5). On the day of judgment, sinners will be like startled asses fleeing from a mighty lion (qaswara, q 74:50-1). Those who choose for themselves benefactors other than God are to be likened to the spider (q.v.) because it chooses for itself the frailest of houses (q 29:41). An unflattering comparison with animals also occurs in q 2:171: «A simile of those who disbelieved is like someone calling to goats, something which hears nothing but a calling and a shouting [without comprehension].» In q 7:176, one of the infidels is compared to a dog that lolls out its tongue «whether you attack him… or leave him alone.» If anyone associates anything with God, it is as if he fell down from heaven and the birds snatched him away or the wind swept him to a remote place (q 22:31). Furthermore, on the day of judgment, men will come forth from the tombs as if «they were locusts scattered abroad» (q 54:7) and people will be «like moths scattered» (q 101:4). Those who disbelieve and behave arrogantly will not enter the garden until «a camel passes through the eye of a needle» (q 7:40).

== The zoological elements of the Qurʾān ==
Very little zoological information is found in the Qurʾān. Zoological realities based on actual observation are not offered in the Qurʾān. The Qurʾān does not describe animals in any depth and only very few passages refer to animal behavior. Remarkably, where we do find zoological accounts is mainly in reference to insects. The spider chooses the frailest of houses (q 29:41). God commanded the bee, in the sūra named after the insect: «Take as houses the mountains, the trees and the arbors men erect. Then eat all of the fruits» (q 16:68-9). These verses show awareness of the natural environment spiders and bees inhabit. The mention of the termite (dābbat al-arḍ) gnawing Solomon’s staff displays knowledge of its eating habits (q 34:14). Locusts are described as «scattered abroad» (q 54:7).

The qurʾānic descriptions of animal behavior are very basic and for the most part are confined to commonly-known matters. The Qurʾān also draws upon popular pseudo-zoological lore, e.g. some animals are able to talk. Three animals speak in the presence of Solomon, who understands their language (q 27:16, 18, 22-6). As was mentioned above, Solomon understood the words of an ant advising the other ants to avoid being stepped on (q 27:18). Solomon was said to know the speech of birds as well (q 27:22-6). In fact, it is a hoopoe — an exotic looking bird indigenous to most of the old world — who informs Solomon about the Queen of Sheba, her magnificent trappings and her heathen ways (q 27:22-6; see also sheba; bilqīs). The bird then bore a letter from Solomon to the Queen. This story was a favorite of the commentators and was considerably elaborated in later literature. The fourth animal able to speak is the beast of the Apocalypse (dābba min al-arḍ, «the beast coming out of earth», q 27:82) which has not yet spoken, but eventually will. There is no information in the Qurʾān about what this beast will look like or what it will do. Nevertheless, later commentators, basing their accounts on the prophetic ḥadīth, are able to provide a fairly detailed description of it. Apart from the beast of the Apocalypse (q.v.) and the aforementioned birds (abābīl) which destroyed the army of the People of the Elephant (q.v.), no other mythical and theriomorphic beings are mentioned in the Qurʾān. While the Qurʾān does not personify animals, in a very few instances animals appear as primary actors. The most notable exceptions are King Solomon’s hoopoe (q 22:28), Cain’s raven (q 5:31) and the flocks of birds which stymied the People of the Elephant (q 105:3) and Solomon’s ant and termite. However, these animals always act to benefit men and none actually possesses any individuality. Consequently, we cannot say that the Qurʾān offers much information about animal behavior.

The Qurʾān, like Arabic zoological literature of later centuries, contains no reflections on animals for their own sake or in connection to purely zoological aims. Animals are only examined in respect to humankind. The description of animals in classical Arabic literature centers on a few important points. Only one of these is treated in the Qurʾān and these are the practical components of the legal regulations. The Qurʾān clearly did not provide a framework for the zoological research of later authors. This fact is indeed striking, since the Qurʾān contrasts with pre-Islamic poetry which is full of descriptions of the appearance and behavior of a great number of wild and domestic animals.

== Conclusion ==
Neither animals nor animal life are a principal theme in the Qurʾān. Though there are six sūras named after identifiable animals, animals are not described in any depth. They stand as signs of God’s omnipotence and sometimes play a role in his attempts to warn sinful peoples. The Qurʾān, like later Islamic writing on animals, deals with them in relation to man and not their life in their natural surroundings. Animals were created to serve humankind. Nevertheless, the Qurʾān does not provide much information on how people should treat animals. Observation of animals in their natural surroundings is not a qurʾānic topic. If it had been, it may have led to the development of scientific zoology. There are certain passages in the Qurʾān which would make us expect far-reaching reflections on animals. But even in these passages, many details remain unexamined or not described. Reflections on folk and animal lore are lacking as well. Also, the few animals who are mentioned in more than a few passages in the Qurʾān are neither really informative nor detailed. Furthermore, the presentation of animals sometimes seems inconsistent. For instance, cattle adore the Lord, but when mentioned in analogies their description is negative. Apart from the power of speaking, animals are not personified and they never bear personal names. Animals have no individual existence in the Qurʾān. What is more, the Qurʾān displays a decidedly urban attitude towards animals. This attitude is also prominent in later Arabic prose writings on animals. Within this literature as well, numerous accounts of animals are collected without any real scientific research.

The qurʾānic view of animals created the Islamic tendency toward anthropocentrism. According to this viewpoint, animals are beholden to humankind in principle and must be seen in relation to men. Therefore, the animal’s right to exist is based on its coexistence with men. As a consequence, pets were not considered fit companions for humans, and they were not portrayed as such in either the Qurʾān or in later Arabic literature.

== Bibliography ==
;Primary:
* Ṭabarī, Tafsīr, ed. A.S. ʿAlī
;Secondary:
* A. Abel, Dābba, in ei2, i, 71
* A.A. Ambros, Gestaltung und Funktionen der Biosphäre im Koran, in zdmg 140 (1990), 290—325.
* id., Mensch und Biosphäre im Koran, in B. Scholz (ed.), Der orientalische Mensch und seine Beziehungen zur Umwelt. Beiträge zum 2. Grazer Morgenländischen Symposion (2.-5. März 1989), Graz 1989, 51-7
* M. Bucaille, The Bible, the Qurʾān and science. The holy scriptures examined in the light of modern knowledge, Tripoli 1987, esp. 197—210
* J. Burton, Those are the high-flying cranes, in jss 15 (1970), 246-65
* H. Eisenstein, Bemerkungen zur dābbat al-arḍ in Koran 34, 13 (13), in wzkm 79 (1989), 131-7
* id., Einführung in die arabische Zoographie. Das tierkundliche Wissen in der arabisch-islamischen Literatur, Berlin 1991, esp. 12-21
* E. Gräf, Jagdbeute und Schlachttier im islamischen Recht. Eine Untersuchung zur Entwicklung der islamischen Jurisprudenz, Bonn 1959, 4-66
* I. Lichtenstädter, A note on the gharānīq and related Qurʾānic problems, in ios 5 (1975), 54-61
* T. O’Shaughnessy, Creation from nothing and the teaching of the Qurʾān, in zdmg 120 (1971), 274-80
* C. Pellat, L.P. Elwell-Sutton and P.N. Boratav, Ḥayawān, in ei2, iii, 304-15
* N. Robinson, Creating birds from clay. A miracle of Jesus in the Qurʾān and in classical Muslim exegesis, in mw 79 (1989), 1-13
* T. Sabbagh, La métaphore dans le Coran, Paris 1943, esp. 100-7

Академия Корана:Encyclopaedia of the Qurʾān/Anger

2017-01-01T13:27:47Z

Maqivi: Новая страница: «{{ПереводЭК|Anger|Shahzad Bashir}} A manifestation of God’s opprobrium mentioned numerous times in the Qurʾān in the context of his censure of unbeli…»

{{ПереводЭК|Anger|Shahzad Bashir}}
A manifestation of God’s opprobrium mentioned numerous times in the Qurʾān in the context of his censure of unbelievers, detractors of Muḥammad and those guilty of moral and material crimes and general wrongdoing. It is furthermore an emotion attributed to believers, Muḥammad’s enemies and prophets, for instance Moses (q.v.) and Jonah (q.v.).

God’s anger, paired occasionally with his curse (q.v.; q 4:93; 5:60; 24:9; 48:6), symbolizes his negative opinion of certain human behavior. Among past nations, the pre-Islamic prophet Hūd (q.v.) informed the people of ʿĀd (q.v.) of God’s anger against them (q 7:71), while the People of the Book (q.v.) incurred God’s anger by mistreating messengers sent to them (q 3:112). Jews (see jews and judaism) in particular are chastised for disobeying their prophets' monotheistic injunctions (q 2:61; 7:152; 20:86).

Polytheists, hypocrites and those who swear to falsehood knowingly are among those who provoke God’s wrath (q 48:6; 58:14; see belief and unbelief; hypocrites and hypocrisy). Their lasting abode is a blazing fire that wants to consume them in its fury (q 25:12). Jews and other People of the Book also continue to incur God’s wrath by aligning themselves with the unbelievers (q 5:59-60) and by «denying the revelation which God has sent down» (q 2:90). See also opposition to muḥammad.

Aside from the specifically named groups, those who are religiously and morally misdirected in a general sense are also subject to God’s anger (q 1:7; 3:162; 20:81; 47:28; 60:13). In addition, God’s wrath falls on those miscreants who spread discontent among the believers by attempting to dissuade them from their faith (q 42:16). The same fate is reserved for a believer who relinquishes his faith, unless under compulsion or torture (q 16:106), for someone who murders a believer (q 4:93) and for a believer who turns away from a righteous battle (q 8:16). A woman accused of adultery by her husband may, in the absence of any evidence in support of the adultery such as other witnesses, refute the charge by professing her innocence and swearing that God’s wrath be upon her if her accuser is telling the truth (q 24:9). See also apostasy; murder; adultery and fornication.

With respect to anger as a human emotion, the Qurʾān mentions Moses' outburst against his people for being led astray in worshipping a calf of gold (q.v.) during his absence (q 7:150, 154; 20:86). The prophet Jonah was angry at God in a moment of unjustified frustration, but eventually realized his error and was saved (q 21:87-8). When the time of fighting against those who oppose Muḥammad is over, the Qurʾān states that God improves the believers' hearts by removing their anger against their enemies and making them merciful (q 9:15). Suppression of anger is generally deemed a praiseworthy quality (q 3:134; 42:37). In contrast to the merciful believers, the unbelievers (q 22:15; 33:25; 48:29), the hypocrites (q 3:119) and those who criticize Muḥammad out of greed (q 9:58) are said to be seething in anger because of his success and God’s protection of him. See also punishment stories.

== Bibliography ==
* Nwyia, Exégèse, 74-99
* Watt-Bell, Introduction, 127-35

Академия Корана:Encyclopaedia of the Qurʾān/Angel

2017-01-01T11:57:29Z

Maqivi: Новая страница: «{{ПереводЭК|Angel|Gisela Webb}} Heavenly messenger. Like its Hebrew (malʾak) and Greek (angelos) counterparts, the Arabic term malak (pl. malāʾika) me…»

{{ПереводЭК|Angel|Gisela Webb}}
Heavenly messenger. Like its Hebrew (malʾak) and Greek (angelos) counterparts, the Arabic term malak (pl. malāʾika) means «messenger». The Qurʾān uses the term about ninety times, with some angels designated by name, Gabriel (Jibrīl, see gabriel) and Michael (Mikāʾīl, q 2:97-8; see michael) and others only by function, e.g. reciters, glorifiers, dividers, guardians, ascenders, warners, recorders. Reflection about the role of angels — as described in the Qurʾān and elaborated in ḥadīth and commentary — constitutes a fundamental aspect of Muslim theological contemplation and spirituality.

== Historical sources of discussion on the role of the angel ==
Belief in angels as a tenet of Islamic faith, as well as the theological and philosophical discussions that emerged in the Islamic world as to the nature and function of angels, must be understood within the larger context of three issues: 1) the qurʾānic worldview which affirms many elements of the monotheistic faiths of Judaism and Christianity including the concepts of the one transcendent God, revelation (q.v.), prophets (see prophets and prophethood), angels, an end time and divine justice (see apocalypse; last judgment); 2) the intellectual and cultural flowering that began under ʿAbbāsid rule in the second/eighth century which put Islamic scholars in contact with past and current intellectual traditions including those of Greek, Iranian and Indian origin and 3) the development and reciprocal influence of emerging discourses within the Islamic world particularly between philosophy (falsafa) and theology (kalām, see S.H. Nasr, al-Ḥikma, 139-43). Thus, for example, the most important of Muslim philosophers, Avicenna (Ibn Sīnā, d. 428/1037), integrated Aristotelian and neo-Platonic views on knowledge and experience into a fundamentally Islamic monotheistic revelatory worldview. In his treatment of angels, Avicenna shows how the angelic hierarchy affirmed in Muslim faith corresponds to the gradation of intelligences discerned by the philosophers, providing a philosophical grounding for the canonical imagery and function of angels and a religious grounding for the ontological and cosmological theories of the philosophers. Avicenna’s work in turn was read, critiqued and incorporated in the work of subsequent scholars and popular wisdom teachers, from al-Ghazālī (d. 505/1111) to Ibn al-ʿArabī (d. 638/1240). The most striking use of angelic imagery in Islamic philosophy and mysticism was that of Shihāb al-Dīn al-Suhrawardī (d. 578/1191), founder of Illuminationism (ishrāq), which is a form of mysticism deriving from Neoplatonism and the divine wisdom (al-ḥikma al-ilāhiyya) school of thought in Islam, which integrated qurʾānic, Platonic, Zoroastrian (with its vivid angelology), and Hermetic elements into a view of the universe the reality of which consists wholly of gradations of light (q.v.) with God as pure «Light of lights» (based on q 24:35, the Light Verse), source of all existents and all knowledge — the inner reality of a thing being its «angel». See G. Webb, The human-angelic relation for a summary of the intellectual currents important in the development of commentary and interpretation of angels in the Qurʾān.

== Qurʾānic thematic sources on the angels ==
The role of the angel in classical Islamic thought may be understood by looking at three major themes of the Qurʾān: creation (q.v.), revelation, and eschatology (q.v.) — and the elaboration thereof in ḥadīth — the sayings and stories attributed to Muḥammad — and commentary. The nature and function of angels is clearly meant to be understood in relation to the nature and function of other orders of reality, especially the divine and the human orders. Creation stories point to the theme of the relation between human beings and angels in terms of their differing natures and functions as well as to the theme of a pre-existent covenant (q.v.) between humankind and God. Qurʾānic materials on the «descent» (tanzīl) of the revelation to the Prophet Muḥammad and the «ascent» (miʿrāj, see ascension) of the Prophet become sources of reflection on the nature of prophecy and revelatory knowledge including the role of angels therein. Qurʾānic eschatological materials reveal the intermediary function of the angels, that is, the carrying out of the divine consequences of human accountability, but they also become sources in Islamic spirituality for psycho-spiritual interpretations of the tomb and the end time («the hour», al-sāʿa, or «the resurrection», al-qiyāma, see resurrection).

== Angels and the creation accounts ==
The qurʾānic accounts of creation provide models for the distinct nature of the human and angelic species, as well as for the distinction of types of knowledge in the human and angel. God asks the angels and Adam to name things; the angels could not and Adam could (q 2:31-3). Muslim commentators interpret this qurʾānic statement as a demonstration of a human capacity which the angels lacked, that of creative knowledge, the knowledge of the nature of things. By virtue of his knowledge of the names, Adam became master over created things. Some commentators see the story as implying that God had taught Adam all of the divine names reflected in creation; therefore the human being stands in the unique ontological position of — potentially — being a mirror of the totality of the names and qualities of God, which became a prominent theme in Ṣūfī (Islamic mystical; see ṣūfism and the qurʾān) thought (see al-Rūmī, Mathnawī, i, 1234; Ibn al-ʿArabī, The bezels of wisdom, ch. 1). The story is also seen as an affirmation of man’s vicegerency. God creates Adam as his vicegerent (khalīfa, see caliph) on earth (q 2:30) and ordered the angels to prostrate before him (q 2:34; see adoration; bowing and prostration); hence the view that the human being(insān) is superior to angels. The angels plead with God, «Why will you [create one] who will create mischief therein and shed blood while we celebrate thy praises?» to which God responds, «I know what you do not know». A traditional reading of the narrative is humankind’s superiority over the angels because, whereas the angels' nature is to worship God in perfect obedience (q.v.), human beings suffer moral choice, the struggle between good and evil, the tendency toward forgetfulness and heedlessness. Furthermore, man was burdened with the trust (amāna, q 33:72) which heaven and earth refused to undertake — the trust being interpreted variously as responsibility, free will or love. Only Satan does not prostrate himself before Adam; but as Satan in other accounts is described as «of the jinn» (q.v.) those who are made of fire, not clay (q.v.) as Adam or light as the angels (see adam and eve). Satan (Shayṭān) is less identified with the «fallen angel» and more with the force that strengthens the tendencies toward evil and forgetfulness in man which function in tension with the human qualities of goodness and knowledge of the real (see devil; antichrist).

The primordial time envisioned in the creation narratives, where «we were the companion of angels» as the mystic al-Rūmī (d. 672/1273) describes it in his Kullīyāt-i Shams yā Diwān-i kabīr becomes, particularly among Ṣūfī commentators, a source of reflection and of longing for that original time of unity between man and God, when human beings «knew their Lord». Commentators on the primordial experience in which the souls of all future humans are «pulled from the loins of Adam» and testify to God’s sovereignty (q 7:172), see these verses as describing an on-going possibility of such «intimate colloquy» (munājāt) between man and God. Al-Tustarī (d. 283/896) identifies the idea of (spiritual) genesis with the cognizing and re-cognizing of divine lordship. He describes the act of remembrance in prayer (dhikr) as the re-actualization of God’s presence in his innermost being, comparing this state of recollection to the constant celestial celebration of God’s commemoration (tasbīḥ) on the part of the angels, holding that this celebration is their mode of being, their very sustenance (rizq). Just as the angel’s very life (ḥayāt) is by virtue of the commemoration of God, so prayer is the vital part of man’s spiritual life, the provision for the spiritual self (nafs al-rūḥ).

== Angels and the revelatory experience ==
The role of angels is a prominent feature in the qurʾānic theme of the revelatory event itself and the prophetic function, for it is in passages dealing with the revelation of the Qurʾān that we see the close relationship between the holy spirit(rūḥ al-qudus) and angels (q 16:102). «Spirit» (q.v.) is the agency of revelation «that came upon the Prophet’s heart», and the spirit and the angels appear together in several sūras (q 70:4; 97:4; 16:2). As F. Rahman points out (Major themes, 97), the figure of Gabriel in the Qurʾān, who is mentioned as having brought down the Qurʾān, is never given the appellation of «angel» and is always differentiated from «the angels» as if to signify a different rank or even species, a supra-angelic function. The qurʾānic identification of Gabriel with the «bringing down» (nazzalahu) of the very word of God (q 2:97), along with ḥadīth, in which Gabriel is spoken of as an angel, albeit with a special function and rank, contributed to the theological, philosophical and mystical theories which identified these concepts with each other (Holy Spirit = Angel = Gabriel). Note, for example, the «annunciation of Mary (q.v.)» passages in q 3:42-8 and q 19:17. In the former, the angels are messengers announcing to Mary that «God has chosen you and purified you and chosen you above women of all nations». In the latter, the messenger is singular and has the appearance of a man: «Then we sent to her our spirit (rūḥanā, though some translations, e.g. A. Yūsuf ʿAlī, render the phrase „our angel“) and he appeared before her as a man». Other related passages, e.g. «We breathed into her of our spirit» (q 21:91) and «Into whose body we breathed of our spirit (q 66:12)» engender a close association between the concepts of spirit, angel and Gabriel. Rahman argues therefore that strictly speaking the Qurʾān seems to make a distinction between the angels and the agent of revelation sent to Muḥammad. Yet the spirit and angels are not wholly different, «the spirit» being the highest form of angelic nature and closest to God (e.g. q 81:19-21).

There is also a close connection between the qurʾānic «command» (amr), spirit and angels. «The command» in the qurʾānic phrase, «The spirit is by the command of my lord» (q 17:85), is identified with the Preserved Tablet (al-lawḥ al-maḥfūẓ, see preserved tablet), the source of all books — in fact, all reality — including the Qurʾān (q 85:22). It is from thence that the spirit is brought by the angels to the heart of the Prophet and, as the source of all books, ranks «higher» than the angels. These images and associations become food for speculative thought on the nature of «logos», the generation of the cosmos and such cosmogonic metaphysical conceptions as the world of archetypal realities (ʿālam al-mithāl). A common feature of both early and late speculation in Islamic thought — in consonance with numerous qurʾānic passages (e.g. q 2:97; 97:4) — is that the spirit exists as a power, faculty or agency which descends from «above» (nazzalahu), clearly emphasizing the dependency and origin of human knowledge — particularly prophetic and visionary — in God. This power, or faculty, of spirit/Gabriel is described as being located in the Prophet’s heart and Islamic mystical exegesis as early as the third/ninth century develops the notion of the heart (qalb, see heart) as the seat of spiritual vision and intuitive cognition.

Related to the conception of the descent of revelation on the Prophet’s heart — and closely related to the development of eschatological notions, are commentaries and literature about the qurʾānic reference to God sending Muḥammad on a night journey (asrā bi-ʿabdihi) in q 17:1, in which the Prophet travels from «the sacred mosque to the farthest mosque», from Mecca to Jerusalem (q.v.; see also aqṣā mosque) in the usual interpretation and then in a vertical journey to the divine throne («in order that we might show him some of our signs»). By the third/ninth century many of these narratives of the ascension(miʿrāj) had come into the form of ḥadīth, many of which are attributed to Ibn ʿAbbās, a contemporary of Muḥammad, but are more likely the work of the second/eighth-century Egyptian Ibn Wahb (d. 197/813) which in varying versions and degrees of detail describe the awakening of the Prophet by Gabriel followed by the preparation of Muḥammad for his ascent by two angels' washing his breast and filling it with faith and wisdom. Gabriel — in some versions accompanied by the angel Michael — then leads Muḥammad on a night journey from Mecca to Jerusalem, then through the heavens of the Ptolemaic universe to the gates of paradise and finally to the throne of God (q.v.). Muḥammad’s journey always includes the vision of hell and the appropriate punishment experienced by sinners who have committed various kinds of evils as well as a vision of the paradisiacal garden (see reward and punishment; paradise; hell; garden). The paradisiacal scene contains the traditional image of the lotus tree of the boundary (q 53:14) beyond which no human or angel may pass. There is a hierarchy of angels with varying functions, an allusion to q 25:25, which implies descending ranks of angels and q 35:1 whose discussion of the varying number of wings possessed by angels is usually interpreted as their functions, duties or errands. The angels of the heavenly spheres — the association made explicit by Avicenna — down through the sixth sphere are the guardians of the throne and singers of praise. Gabriel ranks above the guardians of the throne. Angels in the highest sphere under the throne are the cherubim whose light is so strong that no angel in the lower spheres may raise its eyes lest it be blinded. Gabriel, the guide of Muḥammad, acts as interpreter of the visions to which the Prophet is witness. Descriptions of the garden are based on the qurʾānic imagery of the fount of abundance (kawthar, q 108:1) and of peace (q 14:23). Angels in these traditions, which have been traced to the second/eighth-century Persian Maysara b. ʿAbd Rabbihi appear sometimes in human form, sometimes as huge and monstrous beings, always radiating dazzling light. At each stage of the journey, Muḥammad experiences fear of being blinded by the brilliant spectacle and Gabriel in many versions intercedes with God so that Muḥammad is granted new vision that allows him to look at the light that had heretofore blinded him. Gabriel furthermore acts as advisor and comforter. Although Gabriel acts as interpreter of the visions for the duration of the ascent, Muḥammad is left by the angel to accomplish the last stage alone.

The ascension(miʿrāj) literature developed alongside and fused with Muslim eschatological literature. What the angel reveals to Muḥammad in his journey becomes the prototype of the experience of the soul upon physical death and the angel functions both as part of the hierarchy of being and as revealer and interpreter of that hierarchy. Abū Yazīd al-Bisṭāmī (d. 261/874), who first formulated the Islamic notion of annihilation of the self in God (fanāʾ), appears also to have been the first to describe the inner transformative experience of the pious Muslim in terms of the ascension of the Prophet which thereafter becomes the prototype of the various stages and stations of the experience of the Ṣūfī in his experience of attaining the presence of God. Inasmuch as the qurʾānic verses on the nocturnal ascent (q 17:1), Muḥammad’s ecstatic vision of the two bows (q 53:1-18) and the descent of the Qurʾān (q 2:97) all became associated in tradition with an angelic event, the specific relation of the angel to the role of the Prophet — and angelic knowledge to human knowledge — becomes a source of speculation. In L. Massignon’s remarks on the «two bows verse» he states, "In Surah 53, the culminating point of ecstasy is clearly marked by the sentence of verses 8-9: ‘Then he went out, then he returned, near; it was a distance of two bow shots or a little closer (thumma danā fa-tadallā; fakāna qāba qawsayni aw adnā, The passion of al-Hallaj, trans. H. Mason, iii, 295-6). He points out that opinions have differed as to the subject of the sentence: some commentaries consider Gabriel as the one who draws near to Muḥammad who in turn sees him (e.g. Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya); some say it is God who draws near to Muḥammad (al-Ḥasan al-Baṣrī); some suggest Muḥammad as subject (Ibn ʿAbbās and al-Ḥallāj); others suggest two successive subjects, Muḥammad and Gabriel (Fakhr al-Dīn al-Rāzī); finally, others say it is a simultaneous mutual coming together of God and Muḥammad. However, in all cases Muḥammad’s experience is seen as an ecstatic vision of «divine nature by man’s spiritual nature, through the instrumentality of an illuminated angelic nature» (L. Massignon, The passion of al-Hallāj, iii, 298).

== Angels in eschatological literature ==
Parallel to the development of the literature on Muḥammad’s ascension are the traditions which discuss and interpret the process of death and the day of resurrection — eschatological themes — that is, themes referring to the «end time». Murata (Angels) and Smith and Haddad(Islamic understanding) detail the qurʾānic and subsequent interpretive traditions regarding angels in Islamic eschatology. Angels function in qurʾānic end-time — the cataclysmic end of the created order — sources in a number of ways. They usher in the day of resurrection: «The day when they see the angels. No good tidings that day for the sinners» (q 25:22). «The day when the heavens and the clouds are split asunder and the angels are sent down in a great descent» (q 25:25). They are gatherers of souls: «The angel of death, who has been charged with you, will gather you; then to your Lord you will be returned» (q 32:11; cf. 6:93). They guard over hell: «Believers, guard yourselves and your families against a fire whose fuel is men and stones, and over which are harsh, terrible angels» (q 66:6). They shall enter the eternal abode with those human souls who have shown devotion: «The angels shall enter unto them from every gate» (q 13:23). The « Mālik» (q 43:77) who rules over hell is traditionally thought to be an angel. Ḥadīth materials and traditional commentators give names to other angels whose functions are described in the Qurʾān: ʿIzrāʾīl is the angel of death that appears to the person at the cessation of life and Isrāfīl is the angel charged with the blowing of the trumpet at the arrival of «the hour» (al-sāʿa, q 39:68; 69:13). Though not mentioned in the Qurʾān or early ḥadith, the angel Riḍwān became an accepted figure in Arabic literature from the time of al-Maʿarrī onwards, perhaps in relation to the word (riḍwān, q 9:21) indicating God’s favor, or sanction.

There are a number of manuals and teaching stories describing end-time events which became particularly important in popular piety with regard to issues of death: al-Ghazālī's al-Durra al-fākhira (fifth/eleventh century), Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya’s Kitāb al-Rūḥ (an authoritative eighth/fourteenth century text on the life of the spirit after death), al-Suyūṭī's Bushra al-kaʾīb bi-liqāʾ al-ḥabīb (ninth/fifteenth century), the anonymous Kitāb Aḥwāl al-qiyāma (ed. M. Wolff; most likely an adaptation of al-Qāḍī's work, probably fifth/eleventh century, Daqāʾiq al-akhbār fī dhikr al-janna wa-l-nār). Contemporary manuals on death reflect these traditions, such as To die before death by the twentieth-century Sri Lankan Ṣūfī Shaykh, Bawa Muhaiyaddeen . It is clear that the theologians (mutakallimūn) and the Ṣūfī commentators were for the most part not interested — when it came to death themes — in determining a given sequence of events, but rather were concerned with using these traditions to illustrate specific points about the nature of God, the human being and ethics. Qurʾānic discussions on death and resurrection are aspects of the theme of the nature of divine justice; the symmetry of the heavens is a symmetry — a perfection — of justice and accountability for one’s deeds. There is ultimately no evasion from acknowledging the shape that one’s faith(dīn) and piety (taqwā) has taken during one’s life. The Durra and the Kitāb Aḥwāl develop the theme of the death visit of the recording angels, Nakīr and Munkar, who in some narratives allow the deceased a glimpse of the gates of Eden; who question the deceased on their recitation of the Qurʾān, prayers and right conduct; who remove the soul from the body with ease, shock or pain depending on the quality of faithfulness in life, the latter, an extension of q 79:1-5, «By the angels who tear out (the souls of the wicked)… by those who gently draw out (the souls of the blessed)…». The descriptions of the fate of the soul after death parallel the ascension imagery, the overarching theme being the soul’s immediate tasting of the fruits of its religious duties as it ascends on a journey with Gabriel or the angels, sometimes mentioned as two or four, acting as guides through the successive heavens.

Al-Ghazālī's Durra describes the cosmological stages of the journey of the faithful soul through the seven levels of the heavens, through oceans of fire, light, darkness, water, ice and hail, the length of which is a thousand years and, finally, through the covering affixed to the throne of mercy. The fate of the impious soul is described as an attempted journey by the soul in the company of the angel Daqyāʾīl, but he is thwarted in his attempt to lead the soul to the throne. The gates of heaven do not open up to the pair and Daqyāʾīl flings the soul back into the body — even as the corpse is being washed. Thus, the traditions of the soul’s peace or suffering at death as well as the discussions of the symmetry of the cosmological heavens as abodes for various categories of saints and sinners support qurʾānic and theological themes of divine justice and the variety of human responses to the call of faith. Al-Ghazālī also utilizes the figure of the angel Rūmān who visits each newly deceased person even prior to the questioning of Nakīr and Munkar and asks the deceased to write down the good and evil deeds he has done. The dead person protests that he or she has no pen, ink, or paper; Rūmān — or in some traditions, simply Munkar and Nakīr — orders the deceased to substitute his own finger, saliva and shroud. The tradition concludes with the deceased sealing the record and hanging it onto his neck until the day of resurrection, an allusion to q 17:13, «We have fastened the fate of every man on his neck».

Little is said in the Qurʾān about the state between death and resurrection, the time of angelic visitation and instruction immediately after death. The term partition (barzakh, q.v.) in the Qurʾān (q 23:100) simply refers to the inability of the departed to return to earth — to do or to undo how one has lived his or her faith. The partition or barrier comes to denote, however, the time between death and resurrection and the place or abode wherein the waiting occurs. The imagery of the partition in death and resurrection literature is a further affirmation of the qurʾānic themes of divine justice and human accountability. Moreover, the traditions regarding the barrier emphasize the themes of conscious awareness of the configuration of the life of faith or lived religion (dīn) during one’s earthly existence (al-dunyā) and the angel — mirroring the role of Gabriel in Muḥammad’s ascension — as constant companion, guide and cognitive intermediary in the death process. These traditions regarding the barrier echo qurʾānic end-time themes, focusing on that moment: «When the great cataclysm comes, that day when man will recall what he had been striving for» (q 79:34-5), «the hour» when every human being will be shaken into a unique and unprecedented self-awareness of his deeds in which «We have lifted your veil so your sight today is keen» (q 50:22). The eschatological themes of the transparency of the heart as an ultimate aim of the human being and the questioning of the soul «immediately» after death by the angels and by the guards of the gates of hell (q 39:71-4) — also identified with angels — signify key theological themes in Islam: while God is utterly transcendent, it is through the divine mercy and illumination that self-understanding takes place and this justice mandates that the human being experiences/knows the motivations and consequences of his deeds.

The mystical schools of thought in Islam in particular interpreted the qurʾānic day of resurrection (yawm al-qiyāma), «the day when the earth shall be transmuted into something else» (q 14:48), when «we shall create you in [forms] you do not know» (q 56:61) as referring not only to the end of the world and one’s physical existence but also to an interior state of transformation in this life. The annihilation of all things at the end time, is seen as a spiritual state of having overcome the struggle in the human heart against the lower self (nafs), the world (dunyā) and Satan — a «dying before death». As Böwering describes in The mystical vision of experience in classical Islam (149-58), this experience is one of reintegration into the lasting presence of the one God in which one is granted the encounter with God (liqāʾ al-ḥaqq), the abiding in the divine truth (al-baqāʾ maʿa al-ḥaqq) and the visual perception of God (al-naẓar ilā l-ḥaqq). The heart(qalb) becomes in mystical literature the seat of knowledge «through God’s knowledge» and the angel becomes identified as the purifier of the heart, the spiritual cleansing of which is seen as a prerequisite for clear understanding of God, self and the world. Furthermore, the qurʾānic «expansion» of Muḥammad’s breast: «Did we not expand your breast?» (q 94:1) is read as a widening or opening of Muḥammad to the infusion of divine gifts and is described as being initiated «through the light of the prophetic mission» (nūr al-risāla) and through the «light of Islam» (nūr al-islām). Thus, links are made in early Islamic mystical literature (e.g. Tustarī, Tafsīr, 123, in Böwering, Mystical vision) between the heart of Muḥammad — the essence or living reality of Muḥammad, which receives its pristine light from the divine substance, the light of prophecy — and the symbol of the angel as the agent of the initial expansion of Muḥammad’s breast and, by extension, the expansion (the opening and receptivity) of «whomsoever God desires to guide» to spiritual realities. The early Islamic mystics speak of the peak of mystical experience as a prefiguring of the final day of resurrection in which all humankind will be exposed before God in order to account for their deeds as well as a prefiguring of that final annihilation of the created order (q 28:88; 55:26-7). In the eschatological traditions, Isrāfīl (who is not named in the Qurʾān) is the angel who sounds the trumpet signaling the arrival of the hour, as stated above, and who reads from the Preserved Tablet (q.v.; al-lawḥ al-maḥfūẓ), the account of human creatures' deeds and motivations. In many traditions there is a second blast signaling the final cataclysm at which time all created order must lose itself, even the angels and archangels. We see, then, in classical mystical literature the development of the notion of the unveiling (kashf), that is, the revealing of one’s most secret motivations to oneself by the agency of the angel of God through the light of God himself and the notion of the ultimate goal and end of individual existence as the annihilation of the self (nafs), the realization that all perishes but the «face of God» (q 55:26-7).

== Bibliography ==
;Primary:
* ʿAbd al-Raḥīm b. Aḥmad al-Qāḍī, Daqāʾiq al-akhbār fī dhikr al-janna wa-l-nār, trans. ʿA. al-Raḥmān, Islamic book of the dead, Norwich 1977
* al-Ghazālī, Abū Ḥāmid Muḥammad, al-Durra al-fākhira, ed. M. Gautier, Leipzig 1877, trans. J. Smith, The precious pearl. A translation from the Arabic with notes of the Kitāb al-durra al-fākhira fī kashf ʿulūm al-ākhira, Missoula 1979
* Ibn al-ʿArabī, Fuṣūṣ al-ḥikam, ed. A.A. Affifi, Cairo 1946, trans. R.W.J. Austin, Bezels of wisdom, New York 1980
* id., al-Futūḥāt al-makkiyya, 4 vols., Cairo 1911
* Jalāl al-Dīn Rūmī, Mathnawī-yi maʿnawī, i, 1234
* id., Kullīyāt-i Shams yā Dīwān-i kabīr
* Muhaiyaddeen, M.R. Bawa, To die before death, Philadelphia 1997
* al-Qazwīnī, Zakariyya, Kitāb ʿAjāʾib al-makhlūqāt wa-gharīb al-mawjūdāt, ed. F. Wüstenfeld, Gottingen 1849
* al-Suhrawardī, Shihāb al-Dīn, Oeuvres philosophiques et mystiques. Opera metaphysica et mystica II, ed. H. Corbin, Teheran 1954
* id., Oeuvres philosophiques et mystiques. Opera metaphysica et mystica III, ed. S.H. Nasr and H. Corbin, Teheran 1970, 1976 (rev. ed.), trans. W. Thackston, The mystical and visionary treatises of Suhrawardi, London 1982
* al-Suyūṭī, Bushrā al-kaʾīb bi-liqāʾ al-ḥabīb, Cairo 1969
* M. Wolff (ed.), Kitāb Aḥwāl al-qiyāma, Leipzig 1872
;Secondary:
* M. Asin Palacios, La escatologia musulmana en la Divina Comedia, Madrid 1919
* G. Böwering, The mystical vision of existence in classical Islam, New York 1980
* W. Chittick, The Sufi path of knowledge, New York 1989
* id., The Sufi path of love, Albany 1983
* H. Corbin, Avicenna and the visionary recital, Irving 1980
* id., Creative imagination in the Sufism of Ibn ʿArabi, Princeton 1964
* id., The man of light in Iranian Sufism, Boulder 1978
* T. Izutsu, A comparative study of key philosophical concepts in Sufism and Taoism, Tokyo 1966
* A. Jeffery, Ibn ʿArabi’s shajarat al-kawn (trans. and comm.), in si 10-11 (1959), 43-77, 113-60
* L. Massignon, The passion of al-Hallaj, trans. H. Mason, 4 vols., Princeton 1982
* J. Morris, The spiritual ascension
* Ibn ʿArabī and the miʿrāj, in jaos 107 (1987), 629-52; 108 (1988), 63-77
* S. Murata, Angels, in S.H. Nasr (ed.), Islamic spirituality foundations, New York 1987, 324-44
* S. Murata and W. Chittick, The vision of Islam, New York 1994
* S.H. Nasr, al-Ḥikmat al-ilāhiyyah and kalām, in si 33 (1971), 130-43
* id., Three Muslim sages, Delmar 1976
* id., Shihāb al-Din Yaḥyā Suhrawardī's maqtūl, in M.M. Sharif (ed.), A history of Muslim philosophy, 2 vols., Wiesbaden 1963-6
* I. Netton, Muslim neoplatonists. An introduction to the thought of the Brethren of Purity, London 1982
* F. Peters, Origins of Islamic Platonism. The school tradition, in P. Morewedge (ed.), Islamic philosophical theology, Albany 1979
* F. Rahman, Prophecy in Islam, Chicago 1979
* id., Major themes in the Quran, Minneapolis 1980
* A. Schimmel, Mystical dimensions of Islam, Chapel Hill 1975
* J. Smith and Y. Haddad, The Islamic understanding of death and resurrection, Albany 1981
* G. Webb, The human-angelic relation in the philosophies of Suhrawardi and Ibn Arabi, Ph.D. diss., Temple 1989

Академия Корана:Encyclopaedia of the Qurʾān/Anatomy

2017-01-01T10:32:53Z

Maqivi: Новая страница: «{{ПереводЭК|Anatomy|Qamar-ul Huda}} References to the structure of the human body in the Qurʾān. The Qurʾān mentions body parts many times, but these…»

{{ПереводЭК|Anatomy|Qamar-ul Huda}}
References to the structure of the human body in the Qurʾān. The Qurʾān mentions body parts many times, but these are spread throughout the text and particular terms do not always convey the same meaning in different contexts. In some sections of the Qurʾān human anatomy is treated as a functional element, but most qurʾānic references to the human body are employed in metaphors (see metaphor) aimed at encouraging the pursuit of an ethical and pious life. Anatomy and body parts in the Qurʾān are cited in conjunction with the faith of believers to ensure that there is a complete understanding of the harmony between the workings of the body and the message of the Qurʾān. In the Qurʾān, human anatomy can be divided into two spheres. The first consists of the various physical elements, such as the flesh, fluids, eyes, ears, head, heart and backside. The second includes anatomical experience, such as speaking, weeping, eating, fasting, listening and dying, and what the body experiences in the light of religious faith.

While the Qurʾān does not have many references to the specific Arabic word for the human body, jism, one instance of its occurrence is when a prophet says to the Children of Israel (q.v.), «God chose [ Saul, q.v.] above you and increased him vastly in knowledge and body (jism)» (q 2:247). The Qurʾān mentions the body to support the validity of the Prophet Muḥammad’s mission as well as that of the previous prophets, despite their lack of supernatural qualities. q 21:8 affirms the ordinary humanity of prophets: «We did not endow them with a body (jasad) that could dispense with food and they were not immortal» as a defense against those who claimed that to be a messenger of God an individual should possess extraordinary human qualities. q 23:12-13 explains that the original composition of the body is from organic and inorganic substances: «We create man out of the essence of clay (q.v.) and then made a drop of sperm in firm keeping».

Human flesh (laḥm) is referred to both literally and metaphorically in the Qurʾān. q 23:14 describes the way that flesh protects the bones in the body: «Then we clothed the bones in flesh (laḥm)». The Qurʾān also characterizes activities such as gossiping, spreading rumors and second guessing one another as eating the flesh of an individual. q 49:12 states, «Would any of you like to eat the flesh (laḥm) of his dead brother?» which Fakhr al-Dīn al-Rāzī (d. 606/1210) interprets as cautioning the believers to be conscious of their conversations with one another. Al-Rāzī also felt this passage was urging believers to preserve their dignity by not involving themselves in rumors (Tafsīr, ad loc.).

The Arabic word for backside (dubur, pl. adbār) is commonly applied in the Qurʾān to describe the times when unbelievers turn away from God’s message, e.g. «When you invoke your Lord — and him alone — in the Qurʾān, they turn their backs (adbār), fleeing» (q 17:46) and «Those who turn their backs (adbār) in apostasy after the way of guidance was made clear to them are tempted by Satan» (q.v.; q 47:25). Here, turning the backside symbolizes rejecting truth and being led astray (q.v.). The ex- pression also may refer to cowardice and a lack of faithfulness: «If they do help them, they will turn their backs» (adbār, q 59:12). Other examples of the word include, «How will it be when the angels draw out their soul, striking their face and their backs (adbār)?» (q 47:27).

Additional qurʾānic references to turning the backside are not meant for unbelievers but are specifically directed at the believers who were preparing themselves to fight in a battle. q 8:15-16 states, «When you meet those who disbelieve, never turn your backsides (adbār) to them. Whoever on that day turns his backside (dubur) on them — except as a battle maneuver or to join another unit — will have earned the wrath of God». The combat theme is continued in passages such as «If the unbelievers had fought you, they would have turned their backsides (adbār)» (q 48:22) and «If you fight them, they will turn their backsides (adbār) to you» (q 3:111).

The references to blood in the Qurʾān range from the blood on the shirt of Joseph (q.v.) to the blood of useless animal sacrifices (see animal life; sacrifice). «They brought his shirt with false blood (dam) on it» (q 12:18) occurs in the situation where brothers of Joseph go to their father to explain his disappearance. The Qurʾān emphasizes that wasting blood, either in animal offerings or physical self-sacrificing, is not acceptable and does not bring one closer to God. In passages such as «Their flesh (luḥūm) and blood (dimāʾ) will never reach God, but your reverence will reach him» (q 22:37), the Qurʾān wants to make clear that blood is a precious element in the human body and should not be wasted out of negligence.

Blood and a blood clot (see blood and blood clot) also figure as important features in human creation (see biology as the creation and stages of life), e.g. «[Your lord] created man from a blood clot (ʿalaq)» (q 96:2), «Then we created a clot (ʿalaqa) from the drop» (q 23:14), «Then from a sperm-drop, then from a blood clot (ʿalaqa)» (q 40:67; 22:5) and «Then he was a blood clot (ʿalaqa)» (q 75:38). Al-Rāzī's commentary stresses both the divine origin of human life and the inconsequential material of this genesis (Tafsīr, ad loc.).

Blood as a source of impurity finds expression when the Qurʾān instructs male believers not to have intercourse when their spouses are menstruating (ḥāʾiḍ) or about to menstruate (see menstruation; purity and impurity). For example, q 2:222 states, «They will question you concerning the monthly cycle (maḥīḍ). Withdraw from women during the monthly cycle and do not approach them until they become ritually clean».

References to the eye and eyesight express not only physical vision but also spiritual enlightenment. «Did we not make two eyes(ʿaynayn) for him» (q 90:8) is an affirmation that human beings were created with the faculty of sight. «You will see their eyes(aʿyun) overflow with tears» (q 5:83) refers to an experience of spiritual sight. In various other verses, the Qurʾān asserts that eyes are meant both to see and understand, as in q 16:78: «He appointed for you hearing and sight (abṣār)».

Negative references to eyes and sight sustain this usage as a metaphor for those who are unable to distinguish right from wrong. q 6:46 warns, «If God seizes your hearing and sight (abṣār)». q 7:179", They have eyes(aʿyun), but do not see with them", expresses the strong disapproval of those whose eyes have been sealed. The possibility of divine retribution occurs in q 36:66: «We would have obliterated their eyes(aʿyun)», while q 3:13: «In that is a lesson for men possessed of eyes(abṣār)», continues the theme of spiritual insight. Yet the limits of this metaphor are indicated in verses such as «It is not the eyes(abṣār) that are blind» (q 22:46).

Literal and metaphoric usages also characterize the qurʾānic references to the head. Prior to performing the pilgrimage (q.v.), male pilgrims shave their head immediately before they don the customary garb. The prescriptive force of «You shall enter the holy mosque (al-masjid al-ḥarām), if God wills, in security, your heads (ruʾūs) shaved» (q 48:27) conveys this instruction. Additional reference to the ritual treatment of the head may be found in verses like «Wipe your heads (ruʾūs) and your feet» (q 5:6), which underscores the importance of purifying the body before praying or even entering a sacred space like a mosque. «Do not shave your heads (ruʾūs) until the offering reaches the place of sacrifice» (q 2:196) gives the pilgrim permission to shave his head at the conclusion of the pilgrimage. Metaphorical allusions to the head or to raising it occur in connection with the sinner who is incapable of understanding the message the Prophet brought because of his arrogance (q.v.). Al-Zamakhsharī (d. 538/1144) understood, «We have put shackles up to their chins, so that their heads are forced up» (q 36:8) as an allegory for the deliberate refusal of the truth (Kashshāf, ad loc.). For him, the rejection of the truth results in total chaos in the afterworld, as in «[They will be] running in confusion with their heads (ruʾūs) raised» (q 14:43). In the verses that have been interpreted both literally and metaphorically, the Qurʾān speaks about sinners whose heads will suffer from their punishment (see rewards and punishment), as in «Boiling water will be poured on their heads (ruʾūs)» (q 22:19). More particularly, the forehead is specified in «On the day they will be heated in the fire of hell (q.v.) and their forehead (jibāh), sides and back will be burnt» (q 9:35) to warn those who mispend their wealth.

Reference to the heart (qalb, pl. qulūb, see heart) functions repeatedly as a mark of distinction between believers and unbelievers (see belief and unbelief). “God has not assigned to any man two hearts (qalbayn) within his breast” (q 33:4) indicates the individual's free choice to believe or disbelieve. Heart terminology also captures images of divine immanence, as in “God knows what is in your hearts (qulūb)” (q 33:51) and “Know that God stands between a man and his heart(qalb)” (q 8:24). In passages like “There is no fault in you, if you make mistakes, but only in what your hearts (qulūb) did purposely” (q 33:5), the heart operates as a metaphor for the will. In others like “Those, in whose hearts he has inscribed faith and whom he has strengthened with a spirit from him (birūḥin minhu)” (q 58:22), the heart represents the imaged reception of divine guidance. For al-Zamakhsharī, the phrase “with a spirit from him” meant both illumination from the divine and the ways one becomes spiritually strengthened from that inspiration (Kashshāf, ad loc.). For him, the heart is integrally linked to being faithful as well as to remembering God, as in, “Those who believe, their hearts (qulūb) being at rest in remembrance of God” (q 13:28).

As an explanation for unbelief, the Qurʾān frequently uses the metaphor of the «sealed heart». For example one finds, «thus God seals the hearts (qulūb) of the unbelievers» (q 7:101), «God set a seal on their hearts (qulūb) and hearing» (q 2:7) and many similar phrases (e.g. q 6:46; 9:87, 93; 10:74; 16:108; 30:59; 40:35; 42:24; 45:43; 47:16; 63:3). Other similar images include q 6:25: «We laid veils upon their hearts (qulūb), but they failed to understand it», and q 3:167: «Saying with their mouths that which never was in their hearts (qulūb)», both of which depict hearts that were affected by the misguided actions performed by unbelievers (Zamakhsharī, Kashshāf, ad loc.).

Mentions of the mouth often focus on its ethical misuse. Sins of hatred and hypocrisy are cited in «Hatred has already shown itself from their mouths (afwāh)» (q 3:118), «Such men say, ‘We believe,’ with their mouths (afwāh)» (q 5:41) and «Saying with their mouths (afwāh) something which never was in their heart» (q 3:167). Additional misuses of the mouth are indicated in verses such as «You were speaking with your mouths (afwāh) regarding something of which you have no knowledge» (q 24:15) and «They desire to extinguish the light of God with their mouths (afwāh)» (q 9:32; 61:8). Less usual than references to the mouth are specific reference to the lips, as in «Have we not given him two eyes, and a tongue and two lips (shafatayn)?» (q 90:8-9).

From another angle, qurʾānic injunctions target the speaking voice, both in regard to its potential for misuse and in regard to the necessity for propriety and control. In describing the qualities of the unbelievers, q 47:30 mentions the way they are evasive and convoluted in their speech, when it states, «You shall certainly recognize them by their faulty speech (laḥn al-qawl)». To counteract these unacceptable forms of speech, the Qurʾān instructs the believers in their tone and in the times when they should reduce their speech. Examples are «Be modest in you gait and lower your voice (ṣawt)» (q 31:19) and «Believers raise not your voice (aṣwāt) above the voice (ṣawt) of the Prophet» (q 49:2-3). q 49:3 even refers to lowering one’s voice in the presence of the Prophet «Those who lower their voices (aṣwāt) in the presence of God’s messenger».

References to the tongue (lisān, pl. alsina) center on its use for speaking the truth and following the way of God, as in the previously mentioned «Have we not given him two eyes, a tongue (lisān) and two lips» (q 90:8-9) and «We appointed unto them a high tongue of truthfulness» (q 19:50). «Move not your tongue (lisān) with it to hasten it» (q 75:16) urges the believers to recite the revelation carefully and thoughtfully. The tongue also appeals to God for forgiveness and repents for its sins, as in «Appoint me a tongue of truthfulness among the others» (q 26:84).

By extension, the word «tongue» (lisān) is used to refer to language and human speech. Several passages proclaim that the Qurʾān was revealed in the Arabic language, for example «In a clear Arabic tongue (bi-lisānin ʿarabiyyin mubīnin)» (q 26:195), «We have made it easy in your tongue» (q 44:58) and «This is a book confirming in the Arabic tongue» (q 46:12). Another instance of this usage is «We never sent a messenger who did not speak the tongue (lisān) of his people so that he may explain to them» (q 14:4).

As with other parts of the body, the misuse of the tongue receives attention in the qurʾānic text. q 4:46 speaks of the Jews «twisting their tongues (alsina) and slandering religion». While «Their tongues (alsina) describe falsehood» (q 16:62) and the previously cited «They say with their tongues (alsina) something which is not in their hearts» (q 48:11) provide further reference to this, verses like «Do not utter the lies your tongues (alsina) make up: ‘This is lawful and that is forbidden,’ in order to attribute your own lying inventions to God» (q 16:116) connect with those that have an eschatological significance, such as, «The day when their tongues (alsina), their hands and their feet shall testify against them» (q 24:24).

Many qurʾānic passages forge a particular connection between the function of hearing and the reception of revelation. The verb «to hear» (samiʿa) corresponds to the active process of learning from what was heard. «He appointed for you hearing (samʿ), sight and a heart» (q 16:78) connects hearing to seeing and feeling, and «So that they may have hearts to understand and ears to hear with» (q 22:46) confirms the linkage with comprehension of the revelation. Some verses point to the believers' continuity with previous communities who heard the revelation, as in «You will hear from those who were given the book before you» (q 3:186). As with eyes and eyesight, the ears and the function of hearing are used to convey conceptions of God’s intimacy with his creation and the probative signs he provides for them. Examples include, «Surely I will be with you, hearing (asmaʿu) and seeing» (q 20:46) and «In that are signs for a people who listen (yasmaʿūna)» (q 10:67).

By the same token, the unbelievers are chastised for their refusals to hear or to let their ears comprehend. q 2:93 states, «They said, ‘We hear (samiʿnā) and we disobey’» and q 41:4 claims, «Most of them have turned away and do not hear (lā yasmaʿūna)». Additional instances are, «They have ears (ādhān), but they hear not with them (lā yasmaʿūna bihā)» (q 7:179), «If you call them to the guidance, they do not hear (lā yasmaʿū)» (q 7:198), «But the deaf do not hear (lā yasmaʿu) the call when they are warned» (q 21:45) and «When they hear (samiʿū) the reminder and say, ‘Surely he is possessed’» (q 68:51). The image of «sealing» and of possible divine intervention also finds a place in the qurʾānic references to ears and hearing, as with «God set a seal on their hearts and on their hearing» (khatama 'llāhu ʿalā qulūbihim wa-ʿalā samʿi-him, q 2:7) and «Had God willed, he would have taken away their hearing and sight (la-dhahaba bi-samʿihim wa-abṣārihim)» (q 2:20).

Both the generative organs of the human body and its other sexually provocative parts are ordinarily referred to indirectly in qurʾānic allusions to modesty. The preservation of modesty is mandated in «The believers have prospered… who guard their private parts (furūj)» (q 23:1-5). q 33:35 announces forgiveness and rewards for «men and women who guard their private parts (furūj)», while q 4:34 praises «women who guard the intimacy (ghayb) which God has guarded». References such as «Those who guard their private parts (furūj)» (q 70:29) have been understood to mean wearing clothing that does not reveal the body and restricting one’s sexual desires to one’s lawful mate. Similarly, mention of nudity (q.v.) in the Qurʾān has been understood both figuratively and spiritually. q 20:118 refers to the initial condition of Adam and Eve (q.v.): «There you will have no hunger and not be naked (lā taʿrā)», while q 20:121 «Then they ate from [the tree] and thereupon became conscious of their private parts (sawʾāt) and began to hide themselves with leaves» records one consequence of their fall from grace and innocence (see fall of man). In the verses concerning social and sexual legislation, the Qurʾān speaks of the circumstances under which the body may be partially or completely unclothed. q 24:58, for example, specifies", Before the prayer of the daybreak, when you lay aside your garments from the heat of the middle of the day and after the prayer of nightfall: the three occasions on which your nakedness (ʿawrāt) is likely to be bared.

== Bibliography ==
;Primary:
* Abū ʿUbayda, Majāz, ed. F. Sezgin, 2 vols., Cairo 1954-62
* Darwaza, Tafsīr;
* Ibn al-ʿArabī, Aḥkām, Cairo 19722
* Rāzī, Tafsīr, Cairo 1352/1933
* Zamakhsharī, Kashshāf, 4 vols., Beirut 1995
;Secondary:
* M.K. ʿAbd al-ʿAzīz, Iʿjāz al-Qurʾān fī ḥawāss al-insān. Dirāsa fī l-anf wa-l-udhun wa-l-ḥanjara fī ḍawʾ al-ṭibb wa-ʿulūm al-Qurʾān wa-l-ḥadīth, Cairo 1987
* V.A. Aʾzami, Bait-ul-hikmat kī tibbī khidmāt [in Urdu], New Delhi, 1989
* P. Biller and A.J. Minnis (eds.), Medieval theology and the natural body, Rochester 1997
* A.-K. Chéhadé, Ibn an-Nafis et la découverte de la circulation pulmonaire, Damascus 1955
* A. Cranny-Francis, The body in the text, Carlton South, Vic. 1995
* G. Flugel, Concordance of the Koran, Lahore 1978
* S.K. Hamarneh, Health sciences in early Islam, ed. M.A. Anees, San Antonio 1984
* H. Kassis, A concordance of the Qurʾān, California 1983
* D.P. MacDonald, Transgressive corporeality. The body, poststructuralism, and the theological imagination, Albany 1995
* F. Malti-Douglas, Woman’s body, woman’s word. Gender and discourse in Arabo-Islamic writing, Princeton 1991
* M.G. Muazzam, Ramadan fasting and medical science, Stockwell 1991
* J.B. Nelson, Body theology, Louisville 1992
* T. Persaud, Early history of human anatomy. From antiquity to the beginning of the modern era, Springfield 1984
* A.N. Qāsimī, Miftāḥ al-Qurʾān, trans. A. Shah, 2 vols., Lahore 1900
* F. Rahman, Health and medicine in the Islamic tradition. Change and identity, Chicago 1998
* C.J. Singer, Evolution of anatomy. A short history of anatomy from the Greeks to Harvey, New York 1957
* S. Tirmizi, Ilm-i tashrih-i badan men Musalmanon ka hissah [in Urdu], Tirmizi 1978

Академия Корана:Encyclopaedia of the Qurʾān/Amulets

2017-01-01T09:50:56Z

Maqivi: Новая страница: «{{ПереводЭК|Amulets|Kathleen Malone O'Connor}} Ornaments worn as charms against evil and sickness. Muslims have used amulets (ruqā, sing. ruqya) most of…»

{{ПереводЭК|Amulets|Kathleen Malone O'Connor}}
Ornaments worn as charms against evil and sickness. Muslims have used amulets (ruqā, sing. ruqya) most often to cure spiritual or psychological conditions, including madness, spirit possession and the evil eye.

The Qurʾān may be recited in the form of a spell (duʿāʾ) or worn in written form (ṭilasm) on the person or placed in the home. Among the Indonesian Gayo, spells, called doa, include the use of qurʾānic verses in Arabic for healing and other purposes accompanied by supplementary words in Gayo and visualizations (J.R. Bowen, Muslims through discourse, 77-105; J. Flueckiger, Vision, 271). Others employ a practice known as «erasure» (maḥw), whereby select verses, or the whole Qurʾān, are written out and water is poured over the paper. The water is then drunk (Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya, Ṭibb, 124; J. Robson, Magical uses, 40; A.O. El-Tom, Drinking the Koran, 414-8; J. Flueckiger, Vision, 258). Another way to tap the power of the Qurʾān has been to recite verses over water and to apply the water as an external wash (nushra, al-Suyūṭī, Ṭibb, 172; D. Owusu-Ansah, Talismanic tradition, 107-11). Other procedures include reciting the muʿawwidhatān, the last two sūras of the Qurʾān, and other verses and names of God, together with magical gestures such as spitting into the hands, blowing to the four winds and stroking the face or other parts of the body (Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya, Ṭibb, 11, 121-4, 139, 145-6; C. Padwick, Muslim devotions, 84-91, 104-7; J.C. Bürgel, Feather, 34-5). Ḥadīth mention written uses of the Qurʾān for healing, including talismans to be attached to clothing or animals or placed in the home (Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya, Ṭibb, 172-3; ʿAbdallāh and al-Ḥusayn b. Bisṭām, Ṭibb, 125; J. Robson, Magical uses, 42; C. Padwick, Muslim devotions, 87; J. Campo, Other side, 104-5). Amulets bearing qurʾānic verses, numbers and geometric symbols, such as magical squares, were often carried or worn on the person (E. Westermarck, Ritual and belief, 144-6; A.O. Owusu-Ansah, Talismanic tradition, 96-100 and appendix; J. Robson, Magical uses, 35-7; J. Flueckiger, Vision, 251-7; V. Hoffman, Sufism, 154-5).

The essential qurʾānic justification for the use of the Qurʾān in amulets to transmit the divine blessing(baraka) of the text is its God-given characterization as «a healing and a mercy» (shifāʾun wa-raḥmatun, q 17:82; D. Owusu-Ansah, Talismanic tradition, 122). The words of the Prophet Muḥammad as recorded in the ḥadīth have also been used as support for the practice. In its chapter on medicine (Kitāb al-Ṭibb), the famous collection that is the Ṣaḥīḥ of al-Bukhārī (d. 256/870) contains a number of ḥadīth on the proper use of amulets bearing verses from the Qurʾān. Those who employed amulets could cite a range of positive juristic opinions which argue that amulet use cannot be an act of unbelief (kufr), if the process brings benefit and the contents of the amulet are from the Qurʾān (D. Owusu-Ansah, Talismanic tradition, 25-40). Nevertheless, the use of amulets was surrounded by continual legal debate.

Medieval sources for the making of qurʾānic amulets drew on the books of magical healing, such as the so-called «books tested by experience» (mujarrabāt) of Aḥmad al-Dayrabī and Abū ʿAbdallāh Muḥammad b. Yūsuf al-Sanūsī (d. 892/1486) and the magical texts like the Sun of knowledge (Shams al-maʿārif) by al-Bunī (d. 622/ 1225), Strung pearls on the special properties of the Qurʾān (al-Durr al-naẓīm fī khawāṣṣ al-Qurʾān al-ʿaẓīm) by al-Yāfiʿī (d. 768/ 1367), and The brightest lights and the secret treasures (Shumūs al-anwār wa-kunūz al-asrār) by Ibn al-Ḥājj al-Ṭilimsānī (d. 737/1336). These works were complemented by the various ḥadīth collections and the medical corpus devoted to «prophetic medicine» (al-ṭibb al-nabawī), the medical practices ascribed to the Prophet. Some notable works on prophetic medicine include Sunnī works by Abū Nuʿaym al-Iṣbahānī (d. 430/ 1038), al-Dhahabī (d. 748/1348), Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya (d. 751/1350), and al-Suyūṭī (d. 911/1505). There is as well a Shīʿī text known as the Medicine of the imāms (Ṭibb al-aʾimma) by ʿAbdallāh b. Bisṭām and his brother al-Ḥusayn (fl. 300/913) which collects the reports of the medical practices of the Shīʿī imāms (see imām; shīʿism and the qurʾān).

This higher literature on religious healing generated a large body of popular literature on folk religious healing in the form of chapbooks for amulet usage, usually bearing the title «a collection of cures» (majmaʿ al-adwiya), in manuscript form and later in print. Among these are The gleanings of safety in medicine (Luqaṭ al-amān fī 'l-ṭibb) by Ibn al-Jawzī (d. 597/1200) and The benefits of medicine made easy (Kitāb Tashīl al-manāfiʿ fī l-ṭibb) by Ibrāhīm b. ʿAbd al-Raḥmān al-Azraq (d. 815/1412) . This testifies to the widespread popularity of employing amulets (F. Rahman, Health and medicine, 41-58). Such practical manuals become the guide for local handwritten copies used by adepts, e.g. the umbatri of the Sudanese Berti (A.O. El-Tom, Drinking the Koran, 416; see also D. Owusu-Ansah, Talismanic tradition, 44-91). Special editions of the Qurʾān were even published with marginal notation on the methods of divination and the apposite verses for magical spells or talismans. The talismanic manuals traditionally categorize the verses into various classes, e.g. verses for protection (āyāt al-ḥifẓ), for healing (āyāt al-shifāʾ), for victory (futūḥ al-Qurʾān). These verses, the divine names of God (al-asmāʾ al-ḥusnā) and qurʾānic formulae such as the basmala («In the name of God, the merciful and compassionate», see basmala) and the repetition of the formulae of taking refuge (istaʿādha) became the materia medica of the makers of amulets (K. Opitz, Medizin im Koran; J. Robson, Magical uses; B.A. Donaldson, Koran as magic; C. Padwick, Muslim devotions; A.O. El-Tom, Drinking the Koran).

The belief in and use of qurʾānic amulets continues as living practice within the framework of Islamic religious healing and is documented in anthropological studies throughout the contemporary Muslim world, particularly in the Middle East (C. Padwick, Muslim devotions, pp. xi-xiv, 289-97; P. Antes, Medicine, 187-91), Africa (A.O. El-Tom, Drinking the Koran), south Asia(J. Flueckiger, The vision), and southeast Asia (J.R. Bowen, Muslims through discourse). Men and women still have recourse to qurʾānic amulets and other forms of religious healing, often for the sake of children. The amulets are carried on the person and placed in the home, vehicle and place of business. The male practitioner is more likely to be able to consult the amulet chapbooks and texts on «Prophetic medicine» or to be trained by someone expert in the use of amulets, e.g. a local Ṣūfī adept or a religiously learned person in the urban neighborhood or rural village (A.O. El-Tom, Drinking the Koran, 415-7). Women, especially older women, can also occupy a visible position in public ritual as charismatic healers and as spirit mediums and by employing the techniques of dream interpretation, divining and other folk religious healing techniques, such as amulets (J. Flueckiger, The vision, 261-80). Contemporary religious healers operate as alternatives or complements to the practitioners of western medicine, in both Muslim countries and among the emigrant Muslim communities in the West (P. Antes, Medicine, 181-91). The widespread production and use of qurʾānic healing images highlight the strong creative interaction of authoritative sources, the Qurʾān and ḥadīth, and actual belief and practice in medieval and modern Islam.

== Bibliography ==
;Primary:
* al-Ḥusayn and ʿAbdallāh b. Bisṭām, Ṭibb al-aʾimma, Beirut 1994
* Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya, al-Ṭibb al-nabawī, Cairo 1978
* al-Suyūṭī, al-Ṭibb al-nabawī, Beirut 1986
;Secondary:
* P. Antes, Medicine and the living tradition of Islam, in L.E. Sullivan (ed.), Healing and restoring. Healing and medicine in the world’s religious traditions, New York 1989
* J.R. Bowen, Muslims through discourse. Religion and ritual in Gayo society, Princeton 1993
* J.C. Bürgel, The feather of Simurgh. The «licit magic» of the arts in medieval Islam, New York 1988
* J. Campo, The other side of paradise, Columbia, SC 1991
* B.A. Donaldson, The Koran as magic, in mw 27 (1937), 258-63
* A.O. El-Tom, Drinking the Koran
* The meaning of koranic verses in Berti erasure, in J.D.Y. Peel and C. Stuart (eds.), Popular Islam south of the Sahara, Manchester 1985
* J. Flueckiger, The vision was of written words
* Negotiating authority as a female Muslim healer in south India, in D. Shulman (ed.), Syllables of sky. Studies in south Indian civilization, Delhi 1995
* V. Hoffman, Sufism, mystics, and saints in modern Egypt, Columbia, SC 1995
* K. Opitz, Die Medizin im Koran, Stuttgart 1905
* D. Owusu-Ansah, Islamic talismanic tradition in nineteenth-century Asante, Lewiston 1991
* C. Padwick, Muslim devotions. A study of prayer-manuals in common use, London 1961
* F. Rahman, Health and medicine in the Islamic tradition, New York 1988
* J. Robson, The magical uses of the Koran, in Transactions 6 (1929-33), 53-60
* id., Islamic cures in popular Islam, in mw 24 (1934), 34-43
* E. Westermarck, Ritual and belief in Morocco, 2 vols., New York 1926, i, ch. 1

Академия Корана:Encyclopaedia of the Qurʾān/Ambiguous

2017-01-01T09:41:33Z

Maqivi: Новая страница: «{{ПереводЭК|Ambiguous|Leah Kinberg}} A concept in qurʾānic exegesis which bears upon the controversial issue of the amount of interpretive license whic…»

{{ПереводЭК|Ambiguous|Leah Kinberg}}
A concept in qurʾānic exegesis which bears upon the controversial issue of the amount of interpretive license which may be taken in commenting on God’s word. The root sh-b-h is attested several times in the Qurʾān. In reference to the Qurʾān or its verses, the active participle mutashābih (or mutashābihāt) appears twice with the sense of «ambiguous» or «similar».

q 3:7 states that the Qurʾān consists partly of muḥkam verses and partly of mutashābih: «It is he who sent down upon you the book (q.v.), wherein are verses clear (āyāt muḥkamāt baḥr, pl. biḥār, 97a) that are the essence of the book(umm al-kitāb), and others ambiguous (mutashābihāt)». Numerous commentators, while examining q 3:7, mention two other verses which seem to contradict it. They are q 39:23, which states that all the verses of the Qurʾān are mutashābih: «God has sent down the fairest discourse as a book consimilar (kitāban mutashābihan)» and q 11:1 in which all the verses of the Qurʾān are characterized as clear: «A book whose verses are set clear (uḥkimat āyātuhu)». Al-Zarkashī (d. 794/1392), on the authority of the commentator Ibn Ḥabīb al-Nīsābūrī (d. 406/1015), argues that these passages present three different statements on the nature of the Qurʾān: the Qurʾān as clear (muḥkam), as ambiguous (mutashābih) and as a combination of the two. He characterizes the verse that supports the idea of the compound nature, a Qurʾān made up of clear verses and ambiguous ones (q 3:7), as the «correct» one (ṣaḥīḥ, Burhān, ii, 68; cf. Suyūṭī, Itqān, iii, 30).

The relation between the two components of the Qurʾān is governed by the meaning ascribed to the word mutashābih, for which the exegetical literature offers a variety of definitions. The meaning of «similar» is used to document the miraculous nature of the Qurʾān. On the other hand, the term interpreted as «ambiguous» has wider implications and bears upon three central qurʾānic issues: 1. The juridical validity of the Qurʾān, where the ambiguous verses are contrasted with the clear ones. 2. The question of the validity of interpreting the Qurʾān, where the ambiguous verses are used to argue the cases for and against interpretation. 3. The inimitability (q.v.) of the Qurʾān (iʿjāz al-Qurʾān).

== Similar verses ==
Similarity between verses may manifest itself either in the wording (lafẓ) or in the meaning (maʿnā) of the verse. Accordingly, mutashābihāt are sometimes defined as verses in which the same words are used to mean different things (Ibn Qutayba, Taʾwīl, 74; Ṭabarī, Tafsīr, iii, 114, 116) or else as verses that use different words to express a similar sense (Ṭabarī, Tafsīr, iii, 115-6; see L. Kinberg, Muḥkamāt, 145). In a widely-repeated definition, wording and meaning appear together and the similar verses are presented as those that «resemble one another in rightness and truth (al-ḥaqq wa-l-ṣidq), i.e. meaning, and in beauty(al-ḥusn), i.e. wording» (Baghawī, Maʿālim, i, 426). Naturally, the resemblance of verses can occur only in cases of repetition. This explains why repetition is presented as one of the characteristic features of the mutashābih verses. The correlation between the repetition of the mutashābih verses and their resemblance is treated in one of the definitions adduced by al-Ṭabarī (d. 310/923) where mutashābih verses are those in which the words resemble one another when repeated in other qurʾānic chapters (Tafsīr, iii, 116).

== Similar verses and the inimitability of the Qurʾān ==
Each of the definitions dealing with the resemblance and the repetition of the mutashābih verses touches upon the inimitability of the Qurʾān. The relation between the inimitability (q.v.) of the Qurʾān and the mutashābih verses can be understood through the dichotomy of wording and meaning mentioned above. In his commentary on «It is he who sent down upon you the book, wherein are verses clear that are the essence of the book, and others ambiguous» (q 3:7), Fakhr al-Dīn al-Rāzī (d. 606/1210) combines the verse under discussion with two verses already mentioned, q 11:1 and q 39:23, as well as «If [the Qurʾān] had been from other than God, surely they would have found in it much inconsistency» (q 4:82; see difficult passages). Based on the four verses, he concludes that the mutashābih verses are those which repeat, resemble and confirm each other, and they prove the miraculous nature of the text. There are no contradictions in the Qurʾān. Rather, its verses confirm and reinforce one another. Simultaneously, the Qurʾān is also defined as consisting of muḥkam verses, namely, verses written in an inimitable way. Thus these two features, i.e. noncontradictory confirmed messages and an inimitable style of language which cannot be produced by mortals, attest to the divine source of the Qurʾān (Rāzī, Tafsīr, vii, 180).

Ibn al-Jawzī (d. 597/1200) offers a different explanation for the correlation between the inimitability of the Qurʾān and the mutashābih verses. Trying to find a reason for the existence of the mutashābih verses in the Qurʾān, he argues that stylistically the muḥkam and the mutashābih verses represent the two major forms of expression used in the Arabic language, the concise (mūjaz) and the allusive (majāz). God has included both styles in the Qurʾān to challenge mortals to choose either style should they attempt to produce a Qurʾān similar to that brought by Muḥammad. However, no one can ever meet this challenge and the Qurʾān therefore, with its two styles, the muḥkam and mutashābih, will forever remain inimitable (Zād, i, 350-1; cf. Ibn Qutayba, Taʾwīl, 86).

== Mutashābih meaning «ambiguous» ==
A common way to treat the terms muḥkam and mutashābih is to contrast the clarity of the first with the ambiguity of the other. As was mentioned, this contrast bears upon some of the most prominent qurʾānic issues: the abrogating and abrogated verses (al-nāsikh wa-l-mansūkh, see abrogation), the authority to interpret the Qurʾān and the inimitability of the Qurʾān.

== Ambiguous verses and the abrogating and abrogated verses ==
Among the definitions that contrast the muḥkam with the mutashābih, there is to be found the presentation of the muḥkam verses as abrogating ones (nāsikhāt) and the mutashābih as abrogated ones (mansūkhāt). A widely-cited definition represents the muḥkam as the abrogating verses, the verses that clarify what is allowed (ḥalāl), the verses that clarify what is prohibited (ḥarām), the verses that define the punishments (ḥudūd, see boundaries and precepts) for various offenses, the verses that define the duties (farāʾiḍ) and the verses that one should believe in and put into practice. Conversely, the mutashābih verses are the abrogated ones, the verses that cannot be understood without changing their word order (muqaddamuhu wamuʾakhkharuhu), the parables (amthāl), the oaths (q.v.; aqsām) and the verses in which one should believe, but not put into practice (Ibn ʿAbbās, Tafsīr, 124; Abū ʿUbayd, Nāsikh, 4; Ibn Abī Ḥātim, Tafsīr, ii, 592-3; Ṭabarī, Tafsīr, iii, 115; Baghawī, Maʿālim, i, 426; Ibn ʿAṭiyya, Muḥarrar, i, 400; Qurṭubī, Jāmiʿ, iv, 10; Ibn Kathīr, Tafsīr, i, 345; Suyūṭī, Durr, ii, 5; Shawkānī, Tafsīr, i, 314). The muḥkam are presented here as the verses that deal with essential matters whereas the mutashābih verses are held to deal with secondary matters. This is the way to understand the comparison made in the qurʾānic text itself. q 3:7 defines the muḥkam verses as «the essence of the book» and the mutashābih as the rest.

Another way to examine the juridical value of the terms is to consider them as two kinds of divine commandments (q.v.). In this case, the muḥkam verses contain the commands that are universal and never change, whereas the mutashābih verses contain the commands that are limited and do change. The muḥkam contain the basic commandments, shared by all religions, such as obeying God and avoiding injustice. The mutashābih verses, on the other hand, contain the practical aspects of these commandments and may vary from one religion to another, e.g. the number of required prayers and the regulations concerning almsgiving and marriage (Rāzī, Tafsīr, vii, 183; cf. Māwardī, Nukat, i, 380). In this interpretation, the distinction between abrogating and abrogated verses becomes meaningless because the chronological element is replaced by a question of universality. This means that the muḥkam verses are defined as those that are universal to all of the revealed religions and the mutashābih verses are those that contain what distinguishes Islam from the other revealed religions.

== Ambiguous verses and the authority to interpret the Qurʾān ==
Several commentators recognize three kinds of mutashābih verses: those that cannot be understood, those that can be examined and understood by everyone and those that only «the experts» (al-rāsikhūn fī l-ʿilm) can comprehend (e.g. Fīrūzābādī, Baṣāʾir, iii, 296). The muḥkam are defined as clear verses that require nothing to be understood whereas the comprehension of the mutashābih requires explanation (Ṭabarī, Tafsīr, iii, 116-7; ʿAbd al-Jabbār, Mutashābih, i, 13; Māwardī, Nukat, i, 369; Baghawī, Maʿālim, i, 428; Ibn ʿAṭiyya, Muḥarrar, i, 401; Rāzī, Tafsīr, vii, 184; Qurṭubī, Jāmiʿ, iv, 9; Suyūṭī, Itqān, iii, 3; Shawkānī, Tafsīr, i, 314). A different set of definitions represents the muḥkam as verses that contain or permit only one interpretation whereas the mutashābih are those that may be interpreted in more than one way (Ṭabarī, Tafsīr, iii, 115-6; al-Jaṣṣāṣ, Aḥkām, ii, 281; Māwardī, Nukat, i, 369; Wāḥidī, Wasīṭ, i, 413-4; Baghawī, Maʿālim, i, 427; Ṭabarsī, Majmaʿ, ii, 15; Qurṭubī, Jāmiʿ, iv, 10; Suyūṭī, Itqān, iii, 4; Shawkānī Tafsīr, i, 314). While there is no room to doubt the instructions supplied by the muḥkamāt, the ambiguity of the mutashābih verses may create a situation in which the believers become confused, not knowing which direction to choose. They may then tendentiously interpret these verses in favor of their own personal interests.

This raises the question as to whether any exegetical effort should be made to eliminate the vagueness of the mutashābih verses and two contradictory attitudes developed. Some scholars claimed that the mutashābih verses are meant to remain ambiguous and any attempt to interpret them might lead the believers astray. Only God knows their true meaning and this is the way it should stay. Others maintained that the mutashābih are meant to be illuminated. Not only does God know the meaning of these verses, but the scholars of the Qurʾān also know it. Their duty is to supply the interpretation of them and this may vary among the different scholars since the mutashābih verses may be interpreted in a variety of ways. These two opposing views on the validity of interpreting the mutashābih verses parallel those on the interpretation of the Qurʾān as a whole.

== Ambiguous verses as those that should not be interpreted ==
The basic argument against the interpretation of the mutashābih is that knowledge of these verses is limited to God (Ṭabarī, Tafsīr, iii, 116; Māwardī, Nukat, i, 369; Ibn ʿAṭiyya, Muḥarrar, i, 401; Qurṭubī, Jāmiʿ, iv, 9; Abū Ḥayyān, Baḥr, ii, 381; Ālūsī, Rūḥ, ii, 82). As such, they concern matters about which no mortal has clear knowledge. To show that the essence of the mutashābihāt cannot be grasped by human beings, several topics defined as mutashābih are mentioned: resurrection day (Māwardī, Nukat, i, 369; Baghawī, Maʿālim, i, 427; Rāzī, Tafsīr, vii, 184; Qurṭubī, Jāmiʿ, iv, 10; Abū Ḥayyān, Baḥr, ii, 381; Zarkashī, Burhān, ii, 70), the appearance of the Antichrist(al-Dajjāl) before the end of days, the return of Christ (Ṭabarī, Tafsīr, iii, 116) and the prophesied day the sun will rise in the west (Māwardī, Nukat, i, 369; Baghawī, Maʿālim, i, 427; Abū Ḥayyān, Baḥr, ii, 381), among others (see antichrist, apocalypse, resurrection, last judgment).

A different argument contends that the mutashābih are those verses whose meaning can be easily distorted (Ṭabarī, Tafsīr, iii, 116; Ibn ʿAṭiyya, Muḥarrar, i, 401; Qurṭubī, Jāmiʿ, iv, 9; Suyūṭī, Durr, ii, 5; Shawkānī, Tafsīr, i, 314). This should be understood in light of the second part of the key verse «As for those in whose hearts is swerving, they follow the ambiguous part, desiring dissension and desiring its interpretation» (q 3:7). The commentators who correlate the mutashābih and dissension (q.v.) adduce a number of qurʾānic verses in support of their position. One such example is presented by al-Suyūṭī (d. 911/1505) on the authority of Saʿīd b. Jubayr (d. 95/714): To justify their ideas, the early sect of the Khārijīs (q.v.) employed «Whoever fails to judge according to what God has sent down is a wrongdoer» (q 5:47) and «Then the unbelievers ascribe equals to their Lord» (q 6:1) to support their controversial doctrines. When the Khārijīs faced the injustice of a leader, they read these two verses together and, by assuming correlation between the two, they set forth the following argument: He who does not judge according to the principles of justice is an unbeliever. An unbeliever is a polytheist (mushrik) who ascribes equals to God. Thus a leader who acts in this manner can be deemed a polytheist (Durr, ii, 5). The technique used here joins two verses that were not necessarily meant to be combined and draws conclusions from this juxtaposition. By so doing, the Khārijīs were able to prove that their teachings — such as espousing that a caliph should be deprived of his position for acting improperly — are anchored in the Qurʾān and thus fully authorized.

Another example of the correlation between the mutashābih verses and dissension deals with the controversial issue of free will versus predestination (see freedom and predestination). The rivals are the rationalist Muʿtazilīs (q.v.) and the conservative Sunnīs. Both sides refer to the same verse, q 18:29 which states «Say, ‘The truth is from your Lord.’ So whoever wishes, let him believe and whoever wishes, let him disbelieve». The Muʿtazilīs define the verse as muḥkam, i.e. the kind of verse that should be followed since it favors the argument for free will. The Sunnīs, who do not accept the idea of free will, define this verse as mutashābih, i.e. the kind of verse that should not be followed. q 76:30 presents the opposite view: «You cannot will [anything] unless God wills it». The Muʿtazilīs define this verse as mutashābih since it contradicts their view, but the Sunnīs define it as muḥkam because it favors the idea of predestination. By shifting the terms, it became possible to endorse or refute an idea according to one’s needs (Rāzī, Tafsīr, vii, 182; Abū Ḥayyān, Baḥr, ii, 382). The same method was applied to other verses on topics such as the disagreements between the proponents of determinism (Jabriyya ajrama, 112b) and the proponents of indeterminism (Qadariyya), or the issue of whether believers will see God in the afterlife (Rāzī, Tafsīr, vii, 185; Abū Ḥayyān, Baḥr, ii, 382; cf. L. Kinberg, Muḥkamāt, 159).

The correlation between the mutashābih verses and dissension was also mentioned in the discussion of the reasons for the existence of the mutashābih in the Qurʾān: God revealed them to test the people. Those who do not follow the mutashābih will be rewarded as true believers, while those who follow them will go astray (Ibn al-Jawzī, Zād, i, 353). The same idea is mentioned along with the fact that the mutashābih can be easily distorted. Although established and profoundly elaborated, the negative approach to the interpretation of the mutashābih was not the only one adduced in the exegetical literature. No less detailed were the arguments favoring their interpretation (see exegesis of the qurʾān classical and medieval).

== Ambiguous verses as those that may be interpreted ==
The perception of the mutashābih as ambiguous verses was used to argue, as shown above, against their interpretation. The same perception, however, is also used to support and encourage their interpretation. Although contradictory, the two approaches had a common starting point: Ambiguous verses are dangerous in the sense that a wrong interpretation might mislead the believer. With this idea in mind, some scholars recommended avoiding any examination of these verses whereas others encouraged the interpretation of them, but prescribed caution with regard to the steps that need to be taken in this process. One precaution is to check the mutashābih against the muḥkam. This is expressed in a set of definitions which oppose the muḥkam and the mutashābih regarding the dependence of the latter. The muḥkam are defined as independent verses that need no explanation (Māwardī, Nukat, i, 369; Ibn al-Jawzī, Zād, i, 350; Abū Ḥayyān, Baḥr, ii, 381) nor reference to other verses to be understood (al-Naḥḥās, Iʿrāb, i, 355; Qurṭubī, Jāmiʿ, iv, 11; Shawkānī, Tafsīr, i, 314). Conversely, the mutashābih are dependent verses that cannot be understood without consulting or comparing them to other verses (Baghawī, Maʿālim, i, 427; Zarkashī, Burhān, ii, 68). The mutashābih’s dependence on the muḥkam derives from the clarity of the latter and the ambiguity of the former. The muḥkam, by interpreting the mutashābih, clears away any misunderstanding that might mislead the believer (Rāzī, Tafsīr, vii, 185). It thus can happen that when a believer consults a muḥkam to understand an ambiguous mutashābih, he finds his way to the true faith (Rāzī, Tafsīr, vii, 185; Ibn Kathīr, Tafsīr, i, 345). When a mutashābih is not interpreted in accordance with a muḥkam, those who rely on it will go astray (al-Jaṣṣāṣ, Aḥkām, ii, 281). In light of this argument, the muḥkam are regarded as «the essence of the book» (umm al-kitāb, q 3:7) or «a source to which other verses are referred for interpretation» (Suyūṭī, Itqān, iii, 9).

Thus the ambiguity of the mutashābih verses creates the need to scrutinize them. Had the Qurʾān consisted only of muḥkam verses, there would have been no need for the science of the interpretation of the Qurʾān to develop (Rāzī, Tafsīr, vii, 185-6). Had every verse been clear to everyone, the difference in people’s abilities would not come to the fore. The learned (ʿālim) and the ignorant (jāhil) would have been equal and intellectual endeavor would cease (Ibn Qutayba, Taʾwīl, 86; cf. Rāzī, Tafsīr, vii, 185). Behind this perception is the notion that the mutashābih are verses that make people think when they try to identify them and use their own judgment in interpreting them. Consequently, it can be said that they are presented as verses that stimulate people and put them on their guard. It seems that the mutashābih are perceived as the conscience of the believer and indicate the level of his religious knowledge. Due to their ambiguity, dealing with them requires a high degree of religious discernment. The more profound the person, the better his decisions and thus the more pleasant his condition in the next world. This issue is thoroughly discussed in the commentaries with regard to the status of «the experts in knowledge» (rāsikhūn fī l-ʿilm) mentioned in q 3:7.

== Ambiguous verses and the inimitability of the Qurʾān ==
As indicated above, the features of the mutashābih as «similar verses» are held to supply proof of the miraculous nature of the Qurʾān. Additional evidence of this was found in the features of the mutashābih in the sense of «ambiguous verses». This derives from two opposing attitudes toward the interpretation of these verses, opposition to interpreting the mutashābih and support for their interpretation.

Almost every commentator identifies the «mysterious letters» (fawātiḥ — or awāʾil al-suwar, see letters and mysterious letters) of the Qurʾān as mutashābih (e.g. Ṭabarī, Tafsīr, iii, 116-7). These are the letters that occur at the beginning of certain sūras and whose meaning is unclear. The significance of the mysterious letters, as well as the other mutashābih verses, is considered a divine secret known only to God himself. Both should be regarded as parts of the book that God has prevented his people from understanding. Their concealed meaning points to the divine source of the Qurʾān and thus attests to its miraculous nature (ʿAbd al-Jabbār, Mutashābih, i, 17).

The ambiguity of the mutashābih verses enables believers to interpret them in more than one way. This means that the Qurʾān accommodates more than one approach to a given issue and that different trends in Islam are likely to find their ideas reflected in the Qurʾān (ʿAbd al-Jabbār, Mutashābih, i, 26, 28. See also L. Kinberg, Muḥkamāt, 158, 168). This allows the holy text to serve as a source of answers and solutions to any problem at any time and represents one of the central aspects of the miraculous nature of the Qurʾān.

In examining the different attitudes toward the interpretation of the Qurʾān, H. Birkeland (Opposition, 9) states that the opposition to qurʾānic exegesis was never comprehensive and was aimed at the usage of human reasoning (raʾy). The validity of tafsīr bi-l-ʿilm, i.e. exegesis based on ḥadīth (the records of the pronouncements and actions of the prophet Muḥammad, see ḥadīth and the qurʾān) was, in H. Birkeland’s view, never disputed. Support for this theory can be found in the way the term mutashābih is treated in the exegetical literature as well as in its relation to the term muḥkam. The prohibition of interpreting the mutashābih verses may be understood as a reflection of the opposition to the use of human reason. At the same time, allowing the interpretation of these verses seems to be conditional upon the usage of ḥadīth as a means of interpretation. Indeed, Muslim scholars have traditionally not regarded the employment of ḥadīth to illuminate a qurʾānic verse as interpretation, but rather as a means of confirming the message included in the verse. Consequently, a verse in harmony with a reliable ḥadīth may be relied upon as a source of guidance. Such a verse would be defined as muḥkam. The mutashābih, on the other hand, can never be regarded as authoritative. Both the need of various streams in Islam to have their distinctive ideas anchored in the Qurʾān and the injunction to follow only the muḥkam verses may explain the variance in the identity of the verses which different groups view as muḥkam and mutashābih. As shown above, a verse defined by one scholar as mutashābih may be characterized as muḥkam by another. The flexible way in which the two terms were used enabled the commentators to adapt a verse to their needs by defining it as muḥkam. In so doing they were actually using their own independent reasoning presented as ḥadīth.

See also
* traditional disciplines of qurʾānic study.

== Bibliography ==
;Primary:
* ʿAbd al-Jabbār, Mutashābih
* Abū Ḥayyān, Baḥr
* Abū ʿUbayd, Nāsikh
* Ālūsī, Rūḥ
* Baghawī, Maʿālim
* Fīrūzābādī, Baṣāʾir
* Ibn ʿAbbās (attributed), Tafsīr Ibn ʿAbbās al-musammā Ṣaḥīfat ʿAlī ibn Abī Ṭālib ʿan Ibn ʿAbbās, Beirut 1991
* Ibn Abī Ḥātim al-Rāzī, Tafsīr al-Qurʾān al-ʿaẓīm, 10 vols., Riyadh 1997
* Ibn ʿAṭiyya, Muḥarrar
* Ibn al-Jawzī, Zād
* Ibn Kathīr, Tafsīr
* Ibn Qutayba, Taʾwīl
* al-Jaṣṣāṣ, Aḥkām
* al-Naḥḥās, Iʿrāb
* Qurṭubī, Jāmiʿ
* Rāzī, Tafsīr
* Shawkānī, Tafsīr
* Suyūṭī, Durr
* id., Itqān
* Ṭabarī, Tafsīr
* Ṭabarsī, Majmaʿ
* Wāḥidī, Wasīṭ
* Zarkashī, Burhān
;Secondary:
* M. Ben Milad, Ambiguïté et mathānī coraniques
* Pour une théorie générale de la polarité dans la culture arabe, in J. Berque and J.P. Charnay (eds.), L’ambivalence dans la culture arabe, Paris 1967, 366-81
* H. Birkeland, Old Muslim opposition against the interpretation of the Qurʾān, Oslo 1955
* A. von Denffer, ʿUlūm al-Qurʾān. An introduction to the sciences of the Qurʾān, n.p. 1983
* Y. Friedmann, Shaykh Aḥmad Sirhindī. An outline of his thought and a study of his image in the eyes of posterity, Montreal 1971
* L. Kinberg, Muḥkamāt and mutashābihāt (Koran 3/7)
* Implication of a koranic pair of terms in medieval exegesis, in Arabica 35 (1988), 143-72
* M. Lagarde, De l’ambiguité (mutashabih) dans le Coran, in qsa 3 (1985) 45-62
* J. McAuliffe, Text and textuality. q 3:7 as a point of intersection, in I. Boullata (ed.), Literary structures of religious meaning in the Qurʾān, London (2000, 56-76)
* Z. Muṣṭafā, Dirāsāt fī l-tafsīr, Cairo 1967-8
* S. Syamsuddin, Muḥkam and mutashābih. «An analytical study of al-Ṭabarī's and al-Zamakhsharī's interpretations of q 3:7,» in Journal of Qurʾānic Studies 1 (1999), 63-79
* G. Sale, The Korān, London 1900
* Ṣ. al-Sāliḥ, Mabāḥith fī ʿulūm al-Qurʾān, Beirut 1965
* K. Versteegh, A dissenting grammarian. Quṭrub on declension, in K. Koerner, H.J. Niederehe and K. Versteegh (eds.), The history of linguistics in the Near East, Amsterdam 1983, 403-29
* id., Arabic grammar and qurʾānic exegesis in early Islam, Leiden 1993
* S. Wild, The self-referentiality of the Qurʾān
* Sura 3,7 as an exegetical challenge, in J. McAuliffe et al. (eds.), With reverence for the word. Medieval scriptural exegesis in Judaism, Christianity and Islam, Oxford (forthcoming)

Академия Корана:Encyclopaedia of the Qurʾān/Almsgiving

2017-01-01T09:27:41Z

Maqivi:

{{ПереводЭК|Almsgiving|Azim Nanji}}
Charitable gifts to relieve the poor. In common with the teachings of most other faiths and more particularly the biblical traditions, the Qurʾān repeatedly emphasizes the moral value of giving. While the term «almsgiving» may suggest a somewhat simple and unfocused act of charity directed at the poor and needy, the Qurʾān articulates through a variety of terms, especially ṣadaqa and zakāt, a very textured and multivalent conception of giving which draws upon the ideals of compassion, social justice, sharing and strengthening the community. As this act aims at being both a social corrective and a spiritual benefit, it reflects the ethical and spiritual values which are associated with wealth, property, resources and voluntary effort in personal as well as communal contexts. It is in this broader sense that Muslims understand almsgiving and apply it in their daily life.

The perspective of the Qurʾān on sharing wealth and individual resources through acts of giving is rooted in specific essential ideals: 1. the absence of a dichotomy between spiritual and material endeavors in human life, i.e. acts sanctioned as a part of faith are also linked to the daily conditions of life in this world; 2. the nature, purpose and function of the Muslim community as «the best of communities created to do good and to struggle against evil» (q 3:110); 3. the trusteeship of wealth and property and hence accountability for the way in which they are expended. These ethical perspectives in the Qurʾān, among others, established the basis for what came to be understood as an Islamic form of giving and its moral significance. As the Muslim philosopher Fazlur Rahman (1919—1988) observed in addressing the key ethical concepts of the Qurʾān", Islam aims necessarily (and not just peripherally or indirectly) at the creation of a world order wherein the imperatives and principles will be embodied in such a way that the «earth shall be reformed» (Some key ethical concepts of the Qurʾān, 182-3). In an essay exploring the use of the qurʾānic term ḥaqq, «real» or «true», Clifford Geertz remarks that one finds the identification of the right with the real at all levels of Islamic practice (Local knowledge, 189). Other Western scholars of Islamic civilization, including Marshall Hodgson, have made the same point.

Inasmuch as true sovereignty, according to the Qurʾān, belongs only to God, the Prophet, his successors, the members of the community and even the state acted as the instruments by which these ideals were to be translated into practice. Individuals within that society, whom God endowed with a capacity to acknowledge and respond to him were seen as trustees through whom the moral and spiritual vision of the Qurʾān was fulfilled in personal and communal life. They were thus accountable for the way in which they used their resources and their wealth, and they earned religious merit by expending them in a socially beneficial way. While recognizing that individuals were endowed with different abilities, resources and property, the Qurʾān emphasizes the ideal of social solidarity and enjoins justice and generosity (q 16:90). In particular, it holds up as truly virtuous those who spend their resources to assist others (q 57:18) and condemns the hoarders of wealth (q 3:180).

The specific notions of setting aside a portion of one’s wealth for others or of recognizing the necessity and value of giving are articulated in the Qurʾān through a number of terms that are often used interchangeably. The most significant of these are ṣadaqa and zakāt. There are a number of other terms that signify «giving» in the Qurʾān. Forms of the verb nafaqa (expend) occur primarily with the sense of expending one’s wealth to please God (e.g. q 2:265). Khayr (charity) is another qurʾānic term which describes beneficent and voluntary acts of giving. Individuals are also urged to offer God «a beautiful loan» (qarḍ ḥasan), the benefit of which will be multiplied many times over by God’s bounty (q 2:245). Since God is deemed to be the ultimate giver, such offerings are interpreted merely as acts of returning to him what is ultimately his.

== Ṣadaqa ==
While the word ṣadaqa and its various forms came to be interpreted in later Muslim religious and legal texts to connote the restricted notion of voluntary — rather than obligatory — giving, ṣadaqa and zakāt are used interchangeably in a broader sense in the Qurʾān. In the Arabic lexicographical literature, the root ṣ-d-q sustains numerous meanings associated with ideas of righteousness and truth. Elsewhere in the Qurʾān, related words, such as al-ṣiddīq (truthful, q 12:46), which is used to describe the prophet Joseph (q.v.), or ṣadīq (trusted friend, q 24:61), reflect this notion of moral excellence. Modern critical scholarship has suggested that the word ṣadaqa is linked etymologically to the Hebrew sedāḳā (almsgiving), leading some experts to conclude that it is a loanword (see foreign vocabulary).

The application of the term in its various contexts in the Qurʾān develops some of the key themes of the ideal of giving. q 9:104-5 links God’s acceptance of repentance (see repentance and penance) with ṣadaqa, thus suggesting its value for the expiation of sins. This is further emphasized by the joining of fasting (q.v.) with ṣadaqa (q 2:196), as ways of fulfilling the obligations of a pilgrimage (ḥajj, see pilgrimage) not completed because of illness or other reasons. Giving also benefits the givers spiritually as part of their quest to seek the «face of God» (q.v.; q 2:272). Such a quest is pursued out of love for God (q 76:8) and may be public or private (q 2:274). According to the Qurʾān, those who give because they seek the face of God will be truly fulfilled (q 30:39). An interesting use of ṣadaqa occurs in what has come to be called in the exegetical literature (tafsīr), the «verse of the audience» (āyat al-najwā, q 58:12), which enjoins the offering of alms before an audience with the Prophet. This suggests that giving alms was viewed as both a way to expiate past sins and display respect, as well as a gesture of recognition of the values embodied by the Prophet, whose own acts of generosity were looked upon as a model for the rest of the followers of Islam.

According to the Qurʾān, words of kindness and compassion are better than ṣadaqa coupled with insult (q 2:263). The donation of alms need not be a gift of material value. It can also consist of voluntary effort (q 9:79) or merely a kind word (q 2:263). It is better to offer alms discreetly to those in need rather than for the purpose of public acknowledgement (q 2:271). The Qurʾān is critical of those who give in order to appear generous or who compromise the value of the act by ostentatious public behavior that serves only to render a normally charitable act purely self-serving (q 2:264).

It is clear from q 58:12 that the Qurʾān envisaged a broad framework both for those who might benefit from the more formalized practice that was evolving in the early Muslim community and for the fiscal support of the community’s needy. Almsgiving served to benefit the early Muslims who had migrated from Mecca with the Prophet (see emigrants and helpers). It was also used to encourage others to join the Muslim community and to support the Muslims in the conflict against Mecca. q 9:60 specifies the types of recipients who ought to benefit from it: those afflicted by poverty; those in need and incapable of assisting themselves; those who act, sometimes in a voluntary capacity, as stewards and custodians to ensure the collection and appropriate expenditure of funds; those whose hearts need to become favorably inclined towards Islam; captives who need to be ransomed; debtors; travelers; and finally those active for the sake of God. All of these categories came to be strictly defined in later legal and exegetical literature. q 2:273 suggests that the broader uses of ṣadaqa were not only to assist the poor but also others who during this period of transition were not visibly in need and who nonetheless either required assistance to enhance their livelihood or needed to be directed towards new occupations and economic opportunities. While one aspect of almsgiving in the Qurʾān was clearly projected towards charitable acts for the poor and the needy, the practice also encompassed the wider goal of applying the donations to improve the general condition and economic well-being of other recipients and constituencies in the growing community (umma).

== Zakāt ==
The word zakāt is etymologically linked to zakā (to be pure). The Qurʾān joins explicitly the word zakāt to other primary acts of belief: «Piety does not consist of merely turning your face to the east or to the west. Rather, the pious person is someone who believes in God, the last day, the angels, the book and the prophets and who out of his love gives his property to his relatives, orphans, the needy, travelers, supplicants and slaves; and who performs the required prayers and pays the zakāt» (q 2:177).

The verb zakā suggests the idea of growth to emphasize that the giving of one’s resources is simultaneously an act which entails the cleansing of oneself and one’s property and, through sharing, an enhancement of the capacity of others. More specifically, this kind of giving is considered in the Qurʾān to be analogous to a fertile garden whose yield is increased by abundant rain (q 2:265). It is this multiple connotation of zakāt that is reflected in subsequent interpretations and in the institutionalization of the principle in Muslim thought and practice. The centrality of zakāt is underscored by the many times it is coupled with the commandment of ritual worship. Right religion is summed up as serving God, sincere obedience (q.v.), virtue (q.v.), worship (q.v.) and paying the zakāt (q 98:5). Abraham (q.v.) and the other prophets, including Jesus (q.v.), enjoined their followers to pay the zakāt (q 19:31; 21:73).

Since one purpose of ritual action in religion in general is to establish and display communal solidarity, the performance of the duty of paying the zakāt acted as a visible symbol of individual commitment to the religious and social values of the growing Muslim community. This significance was further stressed by the incorporation of this duty as part of the observance of the two major Muslim holidays established by the Prophet, the Festival of Fast Breaking (ʿĪd al-Fiṭr) marking the end of Ramaḍān (q.v.) and the Festival of the Sacrifice (ʿĪd al-Aḍḥā), when Muslims celebrate the culmination of the pilgrimage. The acts of giving «purify» the individual’s wealth just as the fasting and the pilgrimage purify the individual. (See festivals and commemorative days.)

== The institutionalization of qurʾānic values ==
The Prophet’s own behavior was perceived as exemplary in the matter of almsgiving and his generous and selfless behavior was a model to be emulated. Reports about the Prophet’s almsgiving counteracted the excessive dogmatism about religious practice that was to emerge later. For instance, ṣadaqa in some reports means every good deed, even removing an obstacle from the road and planting a tree. Some of the Prophet’s statements emphasize that a poor man’s small offering is more meritorious than a rich person’s donation of a large sum.

The fact that the Prophet eventually organized the collection and distribution of alms suggests that the process was being cast into specific institutional forms even in his day. According to the Qurʾān, some of the Bedouin groups which had converted to Islam remonstrated about the paying of the obligatory alms tax (q 9:54-9). Al-Bukhārī (d. 256/870), the compiler of the most respected collection of Sunnī prophetic ḥadīth, cites a report in which the Prophet sends a representative to the Yemen to invite the local tribes to convert to Islam and pay the alms tax. Upon Muḥammad’s death, his close Companion Abū Bakr (q.v.; r. 11/632-13/63-4) assumed the leadership of the nascent community and a number of tribes refused to pay the alms tax because they felt that the death of the Prophet absolved them from the obligations contracted with him (see apostasy). Their actions were perceived as a rebellion against the new authority in Medina which suppressed the revolts and re-imposed the payment of the alms tax. Abū Bakr clearly regarded the payment of the alms tax to be obligatory and its imposition necessary in order to honor the Prophet’s practice and sustain the well-being of the community. Shīʿite sources attributed to ʿAlī and the early imāms, also emphasize the need to entrust zakāt to the rightful authorities since they held the custodial authority to disburse them appropriately.

As the community expanded, through conversion and conquest, Muslim rulers and scholars looked to these values of community maintenance for guidance. Though the world of Islam was to encompass in time considerable geographical and cultural diversity, a common pattern of thought developed and was articulated in theological and legal forms, translating such principles into social practice. The Muslim community was not perceived as a merely religious community in the strictest sense of the word, but also a political, moral and social order (see community and society in the qurʾān). It provided the context in which Muslim thinkers could develop formalized approaches to all spheres of human life, including the institutionalization of the procedures for the collection and distribution of what was offered as alms.

The juristic literature produced by succeeding generations of scholars further formalized the collection and disbursement of the alms tax. Writers attempted to justify the prevailing custom by linking it retrospectively to the practice of the Prophet and other early authorities. In these juristic elaborations, the distinction of zakāt as an obligatory contribution and ṣadaqa as supererogation finally solidifies. The obligatory alms tax was to be paid to the treasury (bayt al-māl), an institution which was developed more fully under the early caliphs.

Nevertheless, legal scholars attempted to elaborate and codify norms and statutes that gave concrete form to the qurʾānic prescriptions associated with almsgiving and their distribution. The work of the Ḥanafī jurist Abū Yūsuf (d. 192/808) on taxes, Kitāb al-Kharāj, which was written during the reign of the ʿAbbasid caliph Hārūn al-Rashīd (r. 170/786-193/809), is an instructive example of the collaboration between jurists and rulers to appropriate and extend such practices as almsgiving as part of the fiscal working of the state. A jurist such as al-Shāfiʿī (d. 204/820) was able to systematize and rationalize prevailing practice in his work. Generally, such works built upon the references to zakāt and ṣadaqa in the Qurʾān, detailing the payments based on the ownership of property, possessions and money, including income generated from farming. They prescribed when an amount was to be paid and to whom, as well as what minimum amounts were due in each category. It is interesting to note that the obligatory alms tax was also extended to include underground resources, such as minerals and treasure troves. The pattern that emerges in these juristic works illustrates clearly that the earlier practices of almsgiving were now developing into a more formalized obligation presented as a religious duty. It is important to note that many of the sources that exemplify the evolution of these practices continued to emphasize the moral agency of the act, linking its obligatory character to religious merit and reward. Moreover, they often identified ṣadaqa and zakāt as a means of seeking God’s pleasure and the reward of the afterlife (see reward and punishment).

In distinguishing between zakāt and ṣadaqa, jurists pointed out that zakāt had specific limits and usages attached to it while ṣadaqa was unlimited. The Shīʿī imām Jaʿfar al-Ṣādiq (d. 148/765) is said to have emphasized that ṣadaqa spent in the «way of God (see path or way [of god])» included a variety of good works and thus provided a broader context for the charitable use of collected funds. Moreover, there were no constraints in terms of recipients, which could include mosques, individuals in distress or needy individuals who were not impoverished. Jurists often cite the qurʾānic narrative of Joseph (q.v.) where his brothers, unaware of his true identity, ask him to help their family temporarily in distress (q 12:88).

Developments in legal theory also reflect the way different groups in Islam interpreted almsgiving. Shīʿite sources, citing ʿAlī b. Abī Ṭālib (q.v.) and the other early imāms (q.v.), also emphasize the need to pay the alms tax to the rightful authorities. Among the Shīʿīs, alms were to be entrusted to the imām or those designated by him and disbursed in accordance with qurʾānic values. Among Shīʿī groups such as the Twelvers, who believe that the imām is in a state of physical absence from the world (ghayba), alms are to be given to those considered his trusted worldly representatives. Their role is to ensure that alms reach the appropriate recipients. The Ismāʿīlīs interpret almsgiving as both a formal act and a significant spiritual deed whereby individuals employ their resources, talents and knowledge to assist the imām, the legatee of the Prophet, and the community at large.

The Ṣūfīs emphasize the mystical connotation of almsgiving. In certain circles, individuals were known to distribute their entire possessions as alms. Some groups sanctioned the acceptance of alms as a gift emanating directly from God. Other Ṣūfī groups practiced almsgiving both among themselves and throughout the general community. Most Sunnī jurists, fearing that an unjust ruler or authority might abuse such dues, recommend that individuals give the obligatory alms directly to the intended recipients. In some cases they even suggest that if individuals are constrained to give the alms to authorities whom they regard with suspicion, they should distribute the alms a second time directly.

This turn towards systematization and formalization did not preclude acts of voluntary almsgiving outside of what was deemed obligatory. Based again on qurʾānic precedents and prophetic practice, almsgiving was also translated into endowments created in perpetuity. The juristic tradition specified in most instances the ways such gifts were to be regulated. One narrative recounts how the Prophet wished to purchase land from a group for the building of a mosque. Rather than agreeing to sell the land, they gave it to the Prophet for «the sake of God.» These charitable trusts were used to endow mosques, schools, hospitals, water fountains and other useful public structures and they have played an important role throughout Islamic history. Notable Muslims, descendants of the Prophet and many women played noteworthy roles in generating such philanthropic works. These acts were not restricted to benefiting Muslims alone. The Prophet himself specified that non-Muslims could also be beneficiaries of charity and encouraged non-Muslims to establish charitable foundations for the benefit of their own coreligionists.

The qurʾānic obligations were elaborated and articulated parallel to other taxes imposed. Ibn Khaldūn (d. 808/1406) argues in his Muqaddima that in the early history of Islam only those dues stipulated by the law (sharīʿa), such as the alms tax, were levied and these, though they were assessed at a low rate, yielded large sums. In his view, however, as dynasties grew and the state’s economy became more complex, additional burdens in the form of taxes were imposed beyond the limits of equity. These non-qurʾānic taxes penalized enterprise and made people lose hope, thus generating less revenue and causing the economy to shrink. Simplistic as this may sound to modern ears, Ibn Khaldūn’s account does underscore the fact that the qurʾānic taxes, which possessed a spiritual and moral dimension, were eventually supplanted by heavier, secular taxes that undermined the spirit.

== Modern almsgiving ==
As modern Muslim nation-states sought to address questions of identity and development, almsgiving afforded them the opportunity to rethink the relevance of charitable practices. A majority of Muslims live in areas of the world which are considered to be less-developed. Hence, issues of social justice and the equitable distribution of resources figure prominently in discussions of the present-day significance of the qurʾānic injunctions. Some Muslim theorists have advocated the re-introduction of the obligatory alms tax as one element of a general tax policy to add the moral aspect of almsgiving to a modern economic policy.

In recent times, some Muslim states have adopted specific policies to incorporate the payment of the obligatory alms tax into their fiscal framework rather than leave it as a private and personal, voluntary contribution. Sudan and Pakistan are two examples. In Pakistan an alms tax fund was created in 1979 and distributed through a centralized agency for a variety of causes, including feeding the poor and providing scholarships for needy students. However, various Muslim groups, including the Shīʿīs, have objected to these practices on the basis that it is detrimental to traditional almsgiving and to the diversity of practice among Muslims. Many of the more wealthy Muslim countries practice a form of almsgiving by providing assistance to poorer Muslim countries and Islamic causes.

It is, however, within the framework of voluntary giving that the most innovative and sustainable adaptations of the qurʾānic spirit of almsgiving have occurred. Many Muslims, individually or as a community, have developed extensive networks to translate the Qurʾān’s philanthropic values into active vehicles of assistance to a wide variety of constituencies. In some cases, these efforts have taken the form of voluntary associations and charitable organizations to help the poor and the needy in many parts of the world. Historical insight into the way the qurʾānic ideals of almsgiving strengthened communities and ameliorated inequities might still serve to aid Muslims to move beyond mere rhetoric in their search for continuity.

== See also ==
* gift-giving.

== Bibliography ==
;Primary:
* Abū Yūsuf Yaʿqūb b. Ibrāhīm, Kitāb al-Kharāj, trans. E. Fagnan, Paris 1921
* Bukhārī Ṣaḥīḥ, trans. A. Houdas and W. Marçais, Les traditions islamiques, 4 vols., Paris 1903-14
* al-Ghazālī, Abū Ḥāmid Muḥammad, Iḥyāʾ ʿulūm al-dīn, N.A. Faris (trans. [partial]), The mysteries of almsgiving, Beirut 1966
* al-Māwardī, al-Aḥkām al-sulṭāniyya, Cairo 1966
* al-Nuʿmān, Abū Ḥanīfa (Qāḍī), Daʿāʾim al-Islām, ed. A.ʿA.A. Fyzee, 2 vols., Cairo 1969
* al-Shāfiʿī, al-Risāla, ed. A.M. Shākir, Cairo 1940, trans. M. Khadduri, al-Shāfiʿī's Risāla Treatise on the foundations of Islamic jurisprudence, Baltimore 1961
* Ṭabarī, Taʾrīkh, trans. W.M. Watt and M.V. McDonald, The history of al-Ṭabarī, Albany 1988-90, vi, vii
;Secondary:
* M. Ayoub, The Qurʾān and its interpreters, 2 vols., Albany 1984-92
* N. Calder, Zakāt in Imāmī Shīʿī jurisprudence from the tenth to the sixteenth centuries a.d., in bsoas 44 (1981), 468-80
* H. Dean and Z. Khan, Muslim perspectives on welfare, in Journal of social policy 26 (1997), 193—209
* J. Esposito (ed.), Oxford encyclopedia of the modern Islamic world, 4 vols., New York 1995
* C. Geertz, Local knowledge. Further essays in interpretive anthropology, New York 1983
* M. Hodgson, The venture of Islam, 3 vols., Chicago 1974
* A. Nanji, Ethics and taxation. The perspective of the Islamic tradition, in Journal of religious ethics 13 (1985), 161-78
* F.E. Peters, A reader on classical Islam, Princeton 1994
* A. Sachedina, The just ruler in Shīʿite Islam, New York 1988
* F. Rahman, Some key ethical concepts of the Qurʾān, in Journal of religous ethics 2 (1983), 170—185
* N.A. Stillman, Charity and social service in medieval Islam, in Societas 2 (1975), 105-15

Академия Корана:Encyclopaedia of the Qurʾān/Almsgiving

2017-01-01T09:26:35Z

Maqivi: Новая страница: «{{ПереводЭК|Almsgiving|Azim Nanji}} Ṣadaqa Zakāt The institutionalization of qurʾānic values Modern almsgiving Charitable gifts to…»

{{ПереводЭК|Almsgiving|Azim Nanji}}
Ṣadaqa
Zakāt
The institutionalization of qurʾānic values
Modern almsgiving

Charitable gifts to relieve the poor. In common with the teachings of most other faiths and more particularly the biblical traditions, the Qurʾān repeatedly emphasizes the moral value of giving. While the term «almsgiving» may suggest a somewhat simple and unfocused act of charity directed at the poor and needy, the Qurʾān articulates through a variety of terms, especially ṣadaqa and zakāt, a very textured and multivalent conception of giving which draws upon the ideals of compassion, social justice, sharing and strengthening the community. As this act aims at being both a social corrective and a spiritual benefit, it reflects the ethical and spiritual values which are associated with wealth, property, resources and voluntary effort in personal as well as communal contexts. It is in this broader sense that Muslims understand almsgiving and apply it in their daily life.

The perspective of the Qurʾān on sharing wealth and individual resources through acts of giving is rooted in specific essential ideals: 1. the absence of a dichotomy between spiritual and material endeavors in human life, i.e. acts sanctioned as a part of faith are also linked to the daily conditions of life in this world; 2. the nature, purpose and function of the Muslim community as «the best of communities created to do good and to struggle against evil» (q 3:110); 3. the trusteeship of wealth and property and hence accountability for the way in which they are expended. These ethical perspectives in the Qurʾān, among others, established the basis for what came to be understood as an Islamic form of giving and its moral significance. As the Muslim philosopher Fazlur Rahman (1919—1988) observed in addressing the key ethical concepts of the Qurʾān", Islam aims necessarily (and not just peripherally or indirectly) at the creation of a world order wherein the imperatives and principles will be embodied in such a way that the «earth shall be reformed» (Some key ethical concepts of the Qurʾān, 182-3). In an essay exploring the use of the qurʾānic term ḥaqq, «real» or «true», Clifford Geertz remarks that one finds the identification of the right with the real at all levels of Islamic practice (Local knowledge, 189). Other Western scholars of Islamic civilization, including Marshall Hodgson, have made the same point.

Inasmuch as true sovereignty, according to the Qurʾān, belongs only to God, the Prophet, his successors, the members of the community and even the state acted as the instruments by which these ideals were to be translated into practice. Individuals within that society, whom God endowed with a capacity to acknowledge and respond to him were seen as trustees through whom the moral and spiritual vision of the Qurʾān was fulfilled in personal and communal life. They were thus accountable for the way in which they used their resources and their wealth, and they earned religious merit by expending them in a socially beneficial way. While recognizing that individuals were endowed with different abilities, resources and property, the Qurʾān emphasizes the ideal of social solidarity and enjoins justice and generosity (q 16:90). In particular, it holds up as truly virtuous those who spend their resources to assist others (q 57:18) and condemns the hoarders of wealth (q 3:180).

The specific notions of setting aside a portion of one’s wealth for others or of recognizing the necessity and value of giving are articulated in the Qurʾān through a number of terms that are often used interchangeably. The most significant of these are ṣadaqa and zakāt. There are a number of other terms that signify «giving» in the Qurʾān. Forms of the verb nafaqa (expend) occur primarily with the sense of expending one’s wealth to please God (e.g. q 2:265). Khayr (charity) is another qurʾānic term which describes beneficent and voluntary acts of giving. Individuals are also urged to offer God «a beautiful loan» (qarḍ ḥasan), the benefit of which will be multiplied many times over by God’s bounty (q 2:245). Since God is deemed to be the ultimate giver, such offerings are interpreted merely as acts of returning to him what is ultimately his.

== Ṣadaqa ==
While the word ṣadaqa and its various forms came to be interpreted in later Muslim religious and legal texts to connote the restricted notion of voluntary — rather than obligatory — giving, ṣadaqa and zakāt are used interchangeably in a broader sense in the Qurʾān. In the Arabic lexicographical literature, the root ṣ-d-q sustains numerous meanings associated with ideas of righteousness and truth. Elsewhere in the Qurʾān, related words, such as al-ṣiddīq (truthful, q 12:46), which is used to describe the prophet Joseph (q.v.), or ṣadīq (trusted friend, q 24:61), reflect this notion of moral excellence. Modern critical scholarship has suggested that the word ṣadaqa is linked etymologically to the Hebrew sedāḳā (almsgiving), leading some experts to conclude that it is a loanword (see foreign vocabulary).

The application of the term in its various contexts in the Qurʾān develops some of the key themes of the ideal of giving. q 9:104-5 links God’s acceptance of repentance (see repentance and penance) with ṣadaqa, thus suggesting its value for the expiation of sins. This is further emphasized by the joining of fasting (q.v.) with ṣadaqa (q 2:196), as ways of fulfilling the obligations of a pilgrimage (ḥajj, see pilgrimage) not completed because of illness or other reasons. Giving also benefits the givers spiritually as part of their quest to seek the «face of God» (q.v.; q 2:272). Such a quest is pursued out of love for God (q 76:8) and may be public or private (q 2:274). According to the Qurʾān, those who give because they seek the face of God will be truly fulfilled (q 30:39). An interesting use of ṣadaqa occurs in what has come to be called in the exegetical literature (tafsīr), the «verse of the audience» (āyat al-najwā, q 58:12), which enjoins the offering of alms before an audience with the Prophet. This suggests that giving alms was viewed as both a way to expiate past sins and display respect, as well as a gesture of recognition of the values embodied by the Prophet, whose own acts of generosity were looked upon as a model for the rest of the followers of Islam.

According to the Qurʾān, words of kindness and compassion are better than ṣadaqa coupled with insult (q 2:263). The donation of alms need not be a gift of material value. It can also consist of voluntary effort (q 9:79) or merely a kind word (q 2:263). It is better to offer alms discreetly to those in need rather than for the purpose of public acknowledgement (q 2:271). The Qurʾān is critical of those who give in order to appear generous or who compromise the value of the act by ostentatious public behavior that serves only to render a normally charitable act purely self-serving (q 2:264).

It is clear from q 58:12 that the Qurʾān envisaged a broad framework both for those who might benefit from the more formalized practice that was evolving in the early Muslim community and for the fiscal support of the community’s needy. Almsgiving served to benefit the early Muslims who had migrated from Mecca with the Prophet (see emigrants and helpers). It was also used to encourage others to join the Muslim community and to support the Muslims in the conflict against Mecca. q 9:60 specifies the types of recipients who ought to benefit from it: those afflicted by poverty; those in need and incapable of assisting themselves; those who act, sometimes in a voluntary capacity, as stewards and custodians to ensure the collection and appropriate expenditure of funds; those whose hearts need to become favorably inclined towards Islam; captives who need to be ransomed; debtors; travelers; and finally those active for the sake of God. All of these categories came to be strictly defined in later legal and exegetical literature. q 2:273 suggests that the broader uses of ṣadaqa were not only to assist the poor but also others who during this period of transition were not visibly in need and who nonetheless either required assistance to enhance their livelihood or needed to be directed towards new occupations and economic opportunities. While one aspect of almsgiving in the Qurʾān was clearly projected towards charitable acts for the poor and the needy, the practice also encompassed the wider goal of applying the donations to improve the general condition and economic well-being of other recipients and constituencies in the growing community (umma).

== Zakāt ==
The word zakāt is etymologically linked to zakā (to be pure). The Qurʾān joins explicitly the word zakāt to other primary acts of belief: «Piety does not consist of merely turning your face to the east or to the west. Rather, the pious person is someone who believes in God, the last day, the angels, the book and the prophets and who out of his love gives his property to his relatives, orphans, the needy, travelers, supplicants and slaves; and who performs the required prayers and pays the zakāt» (q 2:177).

The verb zakā suggests the idea of growth to emphasize that the giving of one’s resources is simultaneously an act which entails the cleansing of oneself and one’s property and, through sharing, an enhancement of the capacity of others. More specifically, this kind of giving is considered in the Qurʾān to be analogous to a fertile garden whose yield is increased by abundant rain (q 2:265). It is this multiple connotation of zakāt that is reflected in subsequent interpretations and in the institutionalization of the principle in Muslim thought and practice. The centrality of zakāt is underscored by the many times it is coupled with the commandment of ritual worship. Right religion is summed up as serving God, sincere obedience (q.v.), virtue (q.v.), worship (q.v.) and paying the zakāt (q 98:5). Abraham (q.v.) and the other prophets, including Jesus (q.v.), enjoined their followers to pay the zakāt (q 19:31; 21:73).

Since one purpose of ritual action in religion in general is to establish and display communal solidarity, the performance of the duty of paying the zakāt acted as a visible symbol of individual commitment to the religious and social values of the growing Muslim community. This significance was further stressed by the incorporation of this duty as part of the observance of the two major Muslim holidays established by the Prophet, the Festival of Fast Breaking (ʿĪd al-Fiṭr) marking the end of Ramaḍān (q.v.) and the Festival of the Sacrifice (ʿĪd al-Aḍḥā), when Muslims celebrate the culmination of the pilgrimage. The acts of giving «purify» the individual’s wealth just as the fasting and the pilgrimage purify the individual. (See festivals and commemorative days.)
The institutionalization of qurʾānic values

The Prophet’s own behavior was perceived as exemplary in the matter of almsgiving and his generous and selfless behavior was a model to be emulated. Reports about the Prophet’s almsgiving counteracted the excessive dogmatism about religious practice that was to emerge later. For instance, ṣadaqa in some reports means every good deed, even removing an obstacle from the road and planting a tree. Some of the Prophet’s statements emphasize that a poor man’s small offering is more meritorious than a rich person’s donation of a large sum.

The fact that the Prophet eventually organized the collection and distribution of alms suggests that the process was being cast into specific institutional forms even in his day. According to the Qurʾān, some of the Bedouin groups which had converted to Islam remonstrated about the paying of the obligatory alms tax (q 9:54-9). Al-Bukhārī (d. 256/870), the compiler of the most respected collection of Sunnī prophetic ḥadīth, cites a report in which the Prophet sends a representative to the Yemen to invite the local tribes to convert to Islam and pay the alms tax. Upon Muḥammad’s death, his close Companion Abū Bakr (q.v.; r. 11/632-13/63-4) assumed the leadership of the nascent community and a number of tribes refused to pay the alms tax because they felt that the death of the Prophet absolved them from the obligations contracted with him (see apostasy). Their actions were perceived as a rebellion against the new authority in Medina which suppressed the revolts and re-imposed the payment of the alms tax. Abū Bakr clearly regarded the payment of the alms tax to be obligatory and its imposition necessary in order to honor the Prophet’s practice and sustain the well-being of the community. Shīʿite sources attributed to ʿAlī and the early imāms, also emphasize the need to entrust zakāt to the rightful authorities since they held the custodial authority to disburse them appropriately.

As the community expanded, through conversion and conquest, Muslim rulers and scholars looked to these values of community maintenance for guidance. Though the world of Islam was to encompass in time considerable geographical and cultural diversity, a common pattern of thought developed and was articulated in theological and legal forms, translating such principles into social practice. The Muslim community was not perceived as a merely religious community in the strictest sense of the word, but also a political, moral and social order (see community and society in the qurʾān). It provided the context in which Muslim thinkers could develop formalized approaches to all spheres of human life, including the institutionalization of the procedures for the collection and distribution of what was offered as alms.

The juristic literature produced by succeeding generations of scholars further formalized the collection and disbursement of the alms tax. Writers attempted to justify the prevailing custom by linking it retrospectively to the practice of the Prophet and other early authorities. In these juristic elaborations, the distinction of zakāt as an obligatory contribution and ṣadaqa as supererogation finally solidifies. The obligatory alms tax was to be paid to the treasury (bayt al-māl), an institution which was developed more fully under the early caliphs.

Nevertheless, legal scholars attempted to elaborate and codify norms and statutes that gave concrete form to the qurʾānic prescriptions associated with almsgiving and their distribution. The work of the Ḥanafī jurist Abū Yūsuf (d. 192/808) on taxes, Kitāb al-Kharāj, which was written during the reign of the ʿAbbasid caliph Hārūn al-Rashīd (r. 170/786-193/809), is an instructive example of the collaboration between jurists and rulers to appropriate and extend such practices as almsgiving as part of the fiscal working of the state. A jurist such as al-Shāfiʿī (d. 204/820) was able to systematize and rationalize prevailing practice in his work. Generally, such works built upon the references to zakāt and ṣadaqa in the Qurʾān, detailing the payments based on the ownership of property, possessions and money, including income generated from farming. They prescribed when an amount was to be paid and to whom, as well as what minimum amounts were due in each category. It is interesting to note that the obligatory alms tax was also extended to include underground resources, such as minerals and treasure troves. The pattern that emerges in these juristic works illustrates clearly that the earlier practices of almsgiving were now developing into a more formalized obligation presented as a religious duty. It is important to note that many of the sources that exemplify the evolution of these practices continued to emphasize the moral agency of the act, linking its obligatory character to religious merit and reward. Moreover, they often identified ṣadaqa and zakāt as a means of seeking God’s pleasure and the reward of the afterlife (see reward and punishment).

In distinguishing between zakāt and ṣadaqa, jurists pointed out that zakāt had specific limits and usages attached to it while ṣadaqa was unlimited. The Shīʿī imām Jaʿfar al-Ṣādiq (d. 148/765) is said to have emphasized that ṣadaqa spent in the «way of God (see path or way [of god])» included a variety of good works and thus provided a broader context for the charitable use of collected funds. Moreover, there were no constraints in terms of recipients, which could include mosques, individuals in distress or needy individuals who were not impoverished. Jurists often cite the qurʾānic narrative of Joseph (q.v.) where his brothers, unaware of his true identity, ask him to help their family temporarily in distress (q 12:88).

Developments in legal theory also reflect the way different groups in Islam interpreted almsgiving. Shīʿite sources, citing ʿAlī b. Abī Ṭālib (q.v.) and the other early imāms (q.v.), also emphasize the need to pay the alms tax to the rightful authorities. Among the Shīʿīs, alms were to be entrusted to the imām or those designated by him and disbursed in accordance with qurʾānic values. Among Shīʿī groups such as the Twelvers, who believe that the imām is in a state of physical absence from the world (ghayba), alms are to be given to those considered his trusted worldly representatives. Their role is to ensure that alms reach the appropriate recipients. The Ismāʿīlīs interpret almsgiving as both a formal act and a significant spiritual deed whereby individuals employ their resources, talents and knowledge to assist the imām, the legatee of the Prophet, and the community at large.

The Ṣūfīs emphasize the mystical connotation of almsgiving. In certain circles, individuals were known to distribute their entire possessions as alms. Some groups sanctioned the acceptance of alms as a gift emanating directly from God. Other Ṣūfī groups practiced almsgiving both among themselves and throughout the general community. Most Sunnī jurists, fearing that an unjust ruler or authority might abuse such dues, recommend that individuals give the obligatory alms directly to the intended recipients. In some cases they even suggest that if individuals are constrained to give the alms to authorities whom they regard with suspicion, they should distribute the alms a second time directly.

This turn towards systematization and formalization did not preclude acts of voluntary almsgiving outside of what was deemed obligatory. Based again on qurʾānic precedents and prophetic practice, almsgiving was also translated into endowments created in perpetuity. The juristic tradition specified in most instances the ways such gifts were to be regulated. One narrative recounts how the Prophet wished to purchase land from a group for the building of a mosque. Rather than agreeing to sell the land, they gave it to the Prophet for «the sake of God.» These charitable trusts were used to endow mosques, schools, hospitals, water fountains and other useful public structures and they have played an important role throughout Islamic history. Notable Muslims, descendants of the Prophet and many women played noteworthy roles in generating such philanthropic works. These acts were not restricted to benefiting Muslims alone. The Prophet himself specified that non-Muslims could also be beneficiaries of charity and encouraged non-Muslims to establish charitable foundations for the benefit of their own coreligionists.

The qurʾānic obligations were elaborated and articulated parallel to other taxes imposed. Ibn Khaldūn (d. 808/1406) argues in his Muqaddima that in the early history of Islam only those dues stipulated by the law (sharīʿa), such as the alms tax, were levied and these, though they were assessed at a low rate, yielded large sums. In his view, however, as dynasties grew and the state’s economy became more complex, additional burdens in the form of taxes were imposed beyond the limits of equity. These non-qurʾānic taxes penalized enterprise and made people lose hope, thus generating less revenue and causing the economy to shrink. Simplistic as this may sound to modern ears, Ibn Khaldūn’s account does underscore the fact that the qurʾānic taxes, which possessed a spiritual and moral dimension, were eventually supplanted by heavier, secular taxes that undermined the spirit.

== Modern almsgiving ==
As modern Muslim nation-states sought to address questions of identity and development, almsgiving afforded them the opportunity to rethink the relevance of charitable practices. A majority of Muslims live in areas of the world which are considered to be less-developed. Hence, issues of social justice and the equitable distribution of resources figure prominently in discussions of the present-day significance of the qurʾānic injunctions. Some Muslim theorists have advocated the re-introduction of the obligatory alms tax as one element of a general tax policy to add the moral aspect of almsgiving to a modern economic policy.

In recent times, some Muslim states have adopted specific policies to incorporate the payment of the obligatory alms tax into their fiscal framework rather than leave it as a private and personal, voluntary contribution. Sudan and Pakistan are two examples. In Pakistan an alms tax fund was created in 1979 and distributed through a centralized agency for a variety of causes, including feeding the poor and providing scholarships for needy students. However, various Muslim groups, including the Shīʿīs, have objected to these practices on the basis that it is detrimental to traditional almsgiving and to the diversity of practice among Muslims. Many of the more wealthy Muslim countries practice a form of almsgiving by providing assistance to poorer Muslim countries and Islamic causes.

It is, however, within the framework of voluntary giving that the most innovative and sustainable adaptations of the qurʾānic spirit of almsgiving have occurred. Many Muslims, individually or as a community, have developed extensive networks to translate the Qurʾān’s philanthropic values into active vehicles of assistance to a wide variety of constituencies. In some cases, these efforts have taken the form of voluntary associations and charitable organizations to help the poor and the needy in many parts of the world. Historical insight into the way the qurʾānic ideals of almsgiving strengthened communities and ameliorated inequities might still serve to aid Muslims to move beyond mere rhetoric in their search for continuity.

== See also ==
* gift-giving.

== Bibliography ==
;Primary:
* Abū Yūsuf Yaʿqūb b. Ibrāhīm, Kitāb al-Kharāj, trans. E. Fagnan, Paris 1921
* Bukhārī Ṣaḥīḥ, trans. A. Houdas and W. Marçais, Les traditions islamiques, 4 vols., Paris 1903-14
* al-Ghazālī, Abū Ḥāmid Muḥammad, Iḥyāʾ ʿulūm al-dīn, N.A. Faris (trans. [partial]), The mysteries of almsgiving, Beirut 1966
* al-Māwardī, al-Aḥkām al-sulṭāniyya, Cairo 1966
* al-Nuʿmān, Abū Ḥanīfa (Qāḍī), Daʿāʾim al-Islām, ed. A.ʿA.A. Fyzee, 2 vols., Cairo 1969
* al-Shāfiʿī, al-Risāla, ed. A.M. Shākir, Cairo 1940, trans. M. Khadduri, al-Shāfiʿī's Risāla Treatise on the foundations of Islamic jurisprudence, Baltimore 1961
* Ṭabarī, Taʾrīkh, trans. W.M. Watt and M.V. McDonald, The history of al-Ṭabarī, Albany 1988-90, vi, vii
;Secondary:
* M. Ayoub, The Qurʾān and its interpreters, 2 vols., Albany 1984-92
* N. Calder, Zakāt in Imāmī Shīʿī jurisprudence from the tenth to the sixteenth centuries a.d., in bsoas 44 (1981), 468-80
* H. Dean and Z. Khan, Muslim perspectives on welfare, in Journal of social policy 26 (1997), 193—209
* J. Esposito (ed.), Oxford encyclopedia of the modern Islamic world, 4 vols., New York 1995
* C. Geertz, Local knowledge. Further essays in interpretive anthropology, New York 1983
* M. Hodgson, The venture of Islam, 3 vols., Chicago 1974
* A. Nanji, Ethics and taxation. The perspective of the Islamic tradition, in Journal of religious ethics 13 (1985), 161-78
* F.E. Peters, A reader on classical Islam, Princeton 1994
* A. Sachedina, The just ruler in Shīʿite Islam, New York 1988
* F. Rahman, Some key ethical concepts of the Qurʾān, in Journal of religous ethics 2 (1983), 170—185
* N.A. Stillman, Charity and social service in medieval Islam, in Societas 2 (1975), 105-15

Академия Корана:Encyclopaedia of the Qurʾān/ʿAlī b. Abī Ṭālib

2017-01-01T09:14:10Z

Maqivi: Новая страница: «{{ПереводЭК|ʿAlī b. Abī Ṭālib|Ali S. Asani}} The cousin of the Prophet Muḥammad and husband of his daughter Fāṭima. ʿAlī b. Abī Ṭālib (d…»

{{ПереводЭК|ʿAlī b. Abī Ṭālib|Ali S. Asani}}
The cousin of the Prophet Muḥammad and husband of his daughter Fāṭima. ʿAlī b. Abī Ṭālib (d. 40/661) was among the first to embrace Islam and was renowned for his loyalty to the Prophet and his courageous role in a number of the military expeditions in the defense of the early Muslim community. Also known for his piety, his profound knowledge of the Qurʾān and the sunna (the exemplary practice of the Prophet; see sunna), he figures prominently in several esoteric traditions in Islam including Ṣūfism (see ṣūfism and the qurʾān).

Shīʿī Muslims — originally «the partisans of ʿAlī» (shīʿat ʿAlī, see shīʿa) — citing texts from the Qurʾān and the ḥadīth, maintain that on the Prophet’s death the temporal and spiritual leadership of the Muslim community should have devolved to ʿAlī, but instead was usurped by other close Companions of the Prophet (q.v.). According to Shīʿī doctrine, ʿAlī as the divinely-designated imām (q.v.) also bore the responsibility for preserving the divine message of the Qurʾān after its revelation. Upon his passing, his direct descendants inherited the imamate, although few of them were able to exercise the powers of their position due to persecution by the rival Sunnī rulers as well as the Sunnī religious establishment.

Early Shīʿī tradition claims that ʿAlī had in his possession an authentic version of the Qurʾān which was rejected by his political opponents among the powerful Meccan tribe of the Quraysh (q.v.). Instead the vulgate commissioned by his rival, the caliph ʿUthmān (q.v.), and purged of the verses naming ʿAlī and the other members of the Prophet’s family as the leaders of the community became canonical (see collection of the qurʾān). According to the lore of the Twelver (or Imāmī) Shīʿites, the succeeding imāms secretly passed down ʿAlī's copy of the Qurʾān, the contents of which will be revealed to the world by the messianic twelfth imām. Shīʿī views on the nature of ʿAlī's Qurʾān were gradually modified from the fourth/tenth century onwards, when the majority of Shīʿī scholars came to accept the accuracy of the official ʿUthmānic vulgate, disputing only the order of the chapters and verses. ʿAlī's Qurʾān, they believed, while not containing any additional revealed texts, presented the chapters and the verses in the original order of their revelation and held as well his personal notes. This original arrangement and ʿAlī's notes were what subsequent imāms passed on.

Nevertheless, ʿAlī in his capacity as the imām, was held to possess a special knowledge of the inner meaning of the Qurʾān and hence was in a position to engage in hermeneutic interpretation (taʾwīl) of the text (see exegesis of the qurʾān: classical and medieval). This divinely endowed knowledge which ʿAlī transmitted to his descendants provided the Shīʿī imāms with insight into the esoteric aspect (bāṭin) of the revelation, thus enabling him to guide the faithful to a truer and more comprehensive understanding of God’s guidance to humanity. The Shīʿī imām in the role of the supreme interpreter of God’s revelation is often referred to as the «speaking Qurʾān» (al-Qurʾān al-nāṭiq), while the text itself is called «the silent leader» (al-imām al-ṣāmit).

== See also ==
family of the prophet; shīʿism and the qurʾān.

== Bibliography ==
* M. Amir-Moezzi, The divine guide in early Shiʿism, trans. D. Streight, Albany 1994; J. Eliash, The Šīʿite Qurʾān
* A reconsideration of Goldziher’s interpretation, in Arabica 16 (1969), 15-24
* E. Kohlberg, Some notes on the Imamite attitude to the Qurʾān, in S. Stern, A. Hourani and V. Brown (eds.), Islamic philosophy and the classical traditions, Oxford 1972, 209-24

Академия Корана:Encyclopaedia of the Qurʾān/Alexander

2016-12-31T23:40:21Z

Maqivi: Новая страница: «{{ПереводЭК|Alexander|John Renard}} The Macedonian conqueror who lived from 356 until 323 b.c.e. Traditional and modern scholars have identified the figu…»

{{ПереводЭК|Alexander|John Renard}}
The Macedonian conqueror who lived from 356 until 323 b.c.e. Traditional and modern scholars have identified the figure the Qurʾān refers to as the Possessor of the Two Horns (Dhū l-Qarnayn, q 18:83, 86, 94) as Alexander the Great (al-Iskandar in Arabic). His «two horns» may be the east and the west, suggesting breadth of his dominion. Anomalously, some early scholars saw the epithet as reference to a pre-Islamic monarch of south Arabia or Persia. The famous mystic Ibn al-ʿArabī (d. 638/1240) interpreted the figure allegorically, identifying the «Possessor of the Two Horns» as the «heart» ruling the «earth» of the body through the «east» and «west» of its palpitations.

Alexander is the best known qurʾānic figure not actually named in the scripture. In the Islamic tradition, his major roles are those of sovereign, seeker, sage, prophet and «perfect person». By constructing an iron wall to contain Gog and Magog (q.v., q 18:93-9), Alexander joins the company of both David (q.v.), who could melt iron, and Solomon (q.v.), the only other «Muslim» to rule the globe and who built his temple with the help of the jinn (q.v.). In addition, Alexander defended the world against apocalyptic chaos (cf. q 21:96-7).

Alexander shares his mysterious notoriety with al-Khaḍir (see khaḍir/khiḍr), whom tradition identifies as Moses' unnamed guide on his search for the confluence of the two seas (q 18:60-82). Firdawsī's (d. 411/1020) Shāhnāme names al-Khaḍir as Alexander’s guide in his quest for the fountain (or spring) of life in the Land of Darkness. In fact, Alexander’s relationship to al-Khaḍir (also rendered Khiḍr) is strikingly similar to that of Moses to his unnamed guide in sūra 18. Alexander did not reach the fountain, because he became distracted, just as Moses failed in his quest because he asked too many questions. Alexander’s other guides in lore are the sage Luqmān (q.v.) and the prophet Elijah (q.v.). The legend that Aristotle tutored Alexander in dream-interpretation further enhanced his status as sage, a theme fully developed in Niẓāmī's (d. early seventh/thirteenth century) Persian romance Iskandarnāme.

Alexander’s place in the narratives (q.v.) on the prophets (qiṣaṣ al-) is significant. In commenting on q 18:83, al-Thaʿlabī (d. 427/1035) allots more space to the «Possessor of the Two Horns» than he accords to at least five other prophets. He says that most authorities identify him as Alexander, who, it is said, descended from Abraham (q.v.) on his father’s side. Restating the views recorded by many exegetes, al-Thaʿlabī observes that Alexander was called the «Possessor of the Two Horns» either because he ruled both Greece and Persia; or because, when the prophet summoned his people to belief in one God, they struck one side of his head and then the other in defiance; or because he had two attractive locks of hair that people called horns. Citing a report in which Muḥammad does not know whether the «Possessor of the Two Horns» was actually a prophet, al-Thaʿlabī notes that scholars disagree, some arguing that he was a prophet (nabī, see prophets and prophethood) but not a messenger (rasūl, see messenger). Al-Kisāʾī (fl. 597/1200) mentions the «Possessor of the Two Horns» only in Jacob’s (q.v.) prophecy of a great future king, not identified as Alexander. Alexander reaches the pinnacle of mystical and cosmic apotheosis as the «perfect person» (al-insān al-kāmil) in his legendary journey to Mount Qāf, which recalls Muḥammad’s ascension (q.v.) into heaven. Confronting his mortality, Alexander gains wisdom enough to spread God’s word and become a model of spiritual perfection.

== Bibliography ==
;Primary:
* Firdawsī, The book of kings (selections), trans. R. Levy, London 1967, 232-50
* Ibn al-ʿArabī, Tafsīr al-Qurʾān al-karīm, 2 vols., Beirut 1978, i, 773-4
* Ibn Kathīr, Tafsīr, iii, 163-7
* Kisāʾī, Qiṣaṣ, trans. W.M. Thackston, Tales of the prophets, Boston 1978, 166
* Niẓāmī, Kulliyāt-i khamsa, Tehran 1351/1972, 839—1338
* Qurṭubī, Jāmiʿ, xi, 45-54
* M. Southgate (trans.), Iskandarnāmah. A Persian medieval Alexander-romance, New York 1978
* Ṭabarī, Tafsīr, xvi, 8-12
* Thaʿlabī, Qiṣaṣ, 322-32
;Secondary:
* A. Abel, Dhū 'l-Qarnayn, prophète de l’universalité, in Annuaire de l’institut de philologie et d’histoire Or. et Slaves 11 (1951), 6-18
* P. Grillon, Le mythe d’Alexandre à travers le roman grec et la tradition islamique, in Revue historique et de civilization du Maghreb 3 (1967), 7-28
* W.L. Hanaway, Persian popular romances before the Safavid period, Ph.D. diss, Columbia 1970
* T. Nagel, Alexander der Grosse in der frühislamischen Volksliteratur, Waldorf-Hessen 1978