18.82. Waamma aldschidaru fakanalighulamayni yatiimayni fii almadiinati wakana tahtahukanzun lahuma wakana abuuhumasalihanfaarada rabbuka an yablugha aschuddahumawayastakhridscha kanzahuma rahmatan min rabbikawama faAAaltuhu AAan amriidhalika ta/wiilu malam tastiAA AAalayhi sabran
18.82. And as for the wall, it belonged to two orphan boys in the city, and there was beneath it a treasure belonging to them and their father had been righteous, and thy Lord intended that they should come to their full strength and should bring forth their treasure as a mercy from their Lord; and I did it not upon my own command. Such is the interpretation of that wherewith thou couldst not bear. (Pickthall)
18.82. Und was die Mauer angeht, so ist sie für zwei Waisenjungen in der Stadt, und unter ihr ist ein Schatz für sie beide, und ihr Vater ist rechtschaffen gewesen, da wollte dein Herr, daß sie beide ihre Reife erreichen sollten und ihren Schatz herausholen als Barmherzigkeit von deinem Herrn, und ich habe es nicht in meinem Auftrag getan. Dies ist die Deutung von dem, bei dem du nicht geduldig ausharren konntest." (Ahmad v. Denffer)
18.82. Was aber die Mauer angeht, so gehörte sie zwei Waisenjungen in der Stadt, und unter ihr befand sich ein für sie bestimmter Schatz. Ihr Vater war rechtschaffen, und da wollte dein Herr, daß sie (erst) ihre Vollreife erlangen und (dann) ihren Schatz hervorholen - aus Barmherzigkeit von deinem Herrn. Ich tat es ja nicht aus eigenem Ermessen. Das ist die Deutung dessen, was du nicht aushalten konntest." (Bubenheim)
18.82. Was aber die Mauer anbelangt, so gehörte sie zwei verwaisten Jungen in der Stadt. Unter ihr war ein Schatz für sie begraben, und ihr Vater war ein guter Mann gewesen. Gott wollte, dass sie zu Männern heranwachsen und diesen Schatz ausgraben. Das war alles Gottes Barmherzigkeit. Und ich habe es nicht aus eigenen Stücken getan. Das ist die Deutung dessen, wofür du keine Geduld aufbringen konntest." (Azhar)
18.82. Und hinsichtlich der Mauer: Sie gehörte zwei Waisenjungen in der Stadt. Und darunter lag ein Schatz, der für beide bestimmt war. Und ihr Vater war ein gottgefällig Guttuender. So wollte dein HERR, dass beide erwachsen werden und ihren Schatz ausgraben - aus Gnade von deinem HERRN. Und ich habe dies nicht aus eigenem Erwägen getan. Dies ist die Deutung dessen, wofür du keine Geduld aufbringen konntest. (Zaidan)
18.82. Und was die Mauer angeht, so gehörte sie zwei Waisenjungen in der Stadt. Und darunter befand sich ein Schatz, der ihnen gehörte. Und ihr Vater war rechtschaffen (gewesen). Da wollte dein Herr, daß sie volljährig werden und (daraufhin) ihren Schatz herausholen würden. (Das alles geschah) aus Barmherzigkeit von deinem Herrn. Ich habe es nicht von mir aus getan. Das ist die Deutung dessen, was du nicht durchzuhalten vermocht hast. (Paret)
18.82. Und was nun die Mauer anbelangt, so gehörte sie zwei Waisenknaben in der Stadt, und darunter lag ein Schatz für sie (verborgen), und ihr Vater war ein rechtschaffener Mann gewesen; so wünschte dein Herr, daß sie ihre Volljährigkeit erreichen und ihren Schatz heben mögen - als eine Barmherzigkeit deines Herrn; und ich tat es nicht aus eigenem Ermessen. Das ist die Bedeutung dessen, was du nicht in Geduld zu ertragen vermochtest." (Rasul)
Tafsir von Maududi für die Ayaat 77 bis 82
Then they travelled on until they reached a certain habitation and requested its inhabitants to give them some food but they declined to entertain them. There they saw a wall which was about to fall down. That person set it up again. Moses said, "Had you wanted, you could have demanded payment for your labour" . The other said, "That will do: we must now part company. Now I explain those things about which you could not keep patience. As regards the boat, it belonged to a few poor persons who toiled on the river. I intended to damage it because further on there was the territory of a king who forcibly seized every boat. As for the boy, his parents were true Believers and we feared lest he should trouble them with his rebellion and unbelief. Therefore we, wished that in his stead their Lord may grant them another child who may be more righteous and filial. As regards the wall, it belonged to two orphan boys, who reside in this city. A treasure for them lies buried under this wall. As their father was a righteous man, your Lord willed that when these children attain their maturity, they should dig out their treasure. All this has been done as a mercy from your Lord: I have not done anything of my own authority. This is the interpretation of those things about which you could not keep patience. ( 60 ) "
Desc No: 60 In connection with this story, a very hard problem arises to which an answer must be found: Two of the three things done by Hadrat Khidr are obviously against those commandments of the Law which have always been in force since the creation of man. No law allows anyone the right to damage the property of another and kill an innocent person. So much so that if a man were to know by inspiration that some usurper would illegally seize a certain boat, and that a certain boy would be involved in a rebellion and unbelief, even then no law, sent down by Allah, makes it lawful that one should bore a hole in the boat and kill the innocent boy by virtue of one's inspiration. If in answer to this, one were to say that Hadrat Khidr committed these two acts by the Commands of Allah, this does not solve the problem, for the question is not this, "By whose command did Hadrat Khidr commit these acts"? but it is this: "What was the nature of these commands"? This is important because Hadrat Khidr did these acts in accordance with Divine Command, for he himself says that these acts of his were not done by his own authority, but were moved by the mercy of Allah, and Allah Himself has testified this by saying: "We gave him a special knowledge from Ourselves". Thus it is beyond any doubt that these acts were done by the Command of Allah, but the question about the nature of the command remains there, for it is obvious that these commands were not legal because it is not allowed by any Divine Law, and the fundamental principles of the Qur'an also do not allow that a person should kill another person without any proof of his guilt. Therefore we shall have to admit that these commands belonged to one of those decrees of Allah in accordance with which one sick person recovers, while another dies: one becomes prosperous and the other is ruined. If the Commands given to Hadrat Khidr were of this nature, then one must come to the conclusion that Hadrat Khidr was an angel (or some other kind of Allah's creation) who is not bound by the Divine Law prescribed for human beings, for such commands as have no legal aspect, can be addressed to angels only. This is because the question of the lawful or the unlawful cannot arise about them: they obey the Commands of Allah without having any personal power. In contrast to them, a man shall be guilty of a sin whether he does any such thing inadvertently by intuition or by some inspiration, if his act goes against some Divine Commandment. This is because a man is bound to abide by Divine Commandments as a tnan, and there is no room whatsoever in the Divine Law that an act may become lawful for a man merely because he had received an instruction by inspiration and had been informed in a secret way of the wisdom of that unlawful act. The above-mentioned principle has been unanimously accepted by scholars of the Divine Law and the leaders of Sufism. `Allamah Alusi has cited in detail the sayings of 'Abdul Wahhab Shi`irani, Muhy-ud-Din ibn-`Arabi, Mujaddid Alf Thani, Shaikh 'Abdul-Qadir Jilani, Junaid Baghdadi, Sirri Saqti, Abul-Hussain An-nuri, Abu Said-al-Kharraz, Ahmad ud-Dainauri and Imam Ghazzali to this effect that it is not lawful even for a sufi to act in accordance with that inspiration of his own which goes against a fundamental of law. (Ruh-ul-Ma ani, Vol. XVI, pp. 16-18). That is why we have come to the conclusion that Hadrat Khidr must be an angel, or some other kind of Allah's creation, exempted from human law, for he could not be the only exception to the above-mentioned formula. Therefore we inevitably come to the conclusion that he was one of those Servants of Allah who act in accordance with the will of Allah and not in accordance with the Divine Law prescribed for human beings. We would have accepted the theory that Hadrat Khidr was a human being, if the Qur'an had plainly asserted that the "servant" to whom Prophet moscs was sent for training, was a tnan, but the Qur'an does not specifically say that he was a human being but says that he was "one of Our Servants", which does not show that he was necessarily a human being. Besides this, there is no Tradition which specifically says that Hadrat Khidr was a human being. In the authentic traditions related by Said bin Jubair, Ibn `Abbas, Ubayy bin Ka`ab from the Holy Prophet, the Arabic word, ,}i~ (rajul) has been used for Hadrat Khidr, which though generally used for human beings, is not exclusively used for human beings. In the Holy Qur'an itself, this word has been used for Jinns also (LXXIII 6). It is also obvious that when a jinn or an angel or an invisible being will come before a human being, he will surely come in human shape and, in that form; he will be called a bashar (man), just like the angel who came before Mary in the shape of a human being (XIX: 17). Thus the word rajul, used for Hadrat Khidr in the abovementioned Tradition by the Holy Prophet, does not necessarily mean that he was a human being. Therefore we are quite justified in the light of the above discussion to believe that Hadrat Khidr was one of the angels or some other kind of Allah's creation who is not bound by the Divine Law prescribed for human beings. Some of the former scholars of the Qur'an have also expressed the same opinion which . has been cited by lbn Kathir in his Commentary on the authority of Mawardi. "
18.83. They will ask thee of Dhul-Qarneyn. Say: I shall recite unto you a remembrance of him. (Pickthall)
18.83. Und sie fragen dich nach Dsu-l-Qarnain. Sag: Ich werde euch von ihm eine Erinnerung verlesen: (Ahmad v. Denffer)
18.83. Und sie fragen dich nach Du ´l-Qarnain. Sag: Ich werde euch über ihn eine Geschichte verlesen. (Bubenheim)
18.83. Sie fragen dich nach dem mit den zwei Hörnern. Sprich: "Ich werde euch etwas von seiner Geschichte erzählen." (Azhar)
18.83. Und sie fragen dich nach Dhul-qarnain. Sag: ‚Ich werde euch etwas über ihn vortragen.‘ (Zaidan)
18.83. Und man fragt dich nach dem mit den zwei Hörnern (Zuu l-Qarnain). Sag: Ich werde euch eine Geschichte (zikran) von ihm verlesen. (Paret)
18.83. Und sie fragen dich nach Thu-l-Qarnain. Sprich: "Ich will euch etwas darüber berichten." (Rasul)
Tafsir von Maududi für die Ayaat 83 bis 83
And O Muhammad, they ask you about Zul-Qarnain ( 61 ) : tell them, "I am going to recite to you an account of him" ( 62 )
Desc No: 61 It is quite obvious that the conjunction "wao " joins this story with the previous story of Khidr. Thus it is a self-evident proof that the previous two stories of the "Sleepers of the Cave" and "Moses and Khidr" were also related in answer to the queries of the disbelievers of Makkah who, in consultation with the people of the Book, had put these questions to Muammad (Allah's peace be upon him) as a test of his Prophethood.
Desc No: 62 The identification of Zul-Qarnain has been a controversial matter from the earliest times. in general the commentators have been of the opinion that he was Alexander the Great but the characteristics of Zul-Qarnain described in the Qur'an are not applicable to him. However, now the commentators are inclined to believe that Zul-Qarnain was Cyrus, an ancient king of Iran. We are also of the opinion that probably Zul-Qarnain was Cyrus, but the historical facts, which have come to light up to this time, are not sufficient to make any categorical assertion. Now let us consider the characteristics of Zul-Qarnain in the light of his story as given in the Quran: (1) The title Zul-Qarnain ("The Two-Hotned") should have been quite familiar to the Jews, for it was at their instigation that the disbelievers of Makkah put this question to the Holy Prophet. Therefore we must turn to the Jewish literature in order to learn who was the person known as "The Two-Horned" or which was the kingdom known as "The Two-Horned." (2) Zul-Qarnain must have been a great ruler and a great conqueror whose conquests might have spread from the East to the West and on the third side to the North or to the South. Before the revelation of the Qur'an there had been several persons, who were such great conquerors. So we must confine our research for the other characteristics of Zul-Qarnain to one of these persons. ' (3) This title should be applicable to such a ruler who might have constructed a strong wall across a mountain pass to protect his kingdom from the incursions of Gog and Magog. In order to investigate this thing, we will have to determine as to who were Gog and Magog. We will also have to find out when such a wall was built and by whom and to which territory it was adjacent. (4) Besides possessing the above-mentioned characteristics, he should also be a God-worshipper and a just ruler, for the Qur'an has brought into prominence these characteristics more than anything else. The first of these characteristics is easily applicable to Cyrus, for according to the Bible Prophet Daniel saw in his vision that the united kingdom of Media and Persia was like a two-horned ram before the rise of the Greeks. (Dan. 8: 3,"20). The Jews had a very high opinion of "The Two-horned" one, because it was his invasion which brought about the downfall of the kingdom of Babylon and the liberation of the Israelites (Please also refer to E.N. 8 of Chapter XVII). The second characteristic is applicable to him to a great extent but not completely. Though his conquests spread to Syria and Asia Minor in the West and to Bakhtar (Balkh) in the East, there is no trace of any of his great expeditions to the North or to the South, whereas the Qur'an makes an explicit mention of his third expedition. Nevertheless, this third expedition is not wholly out of question for history tells us that his kingdom extended to Caucasia in the North. As regards Gog and Magog, it has been nearly established that they were the wild tribes of Central Asia who were known by different names: Tartars, Mongols, Huns and Scythians, who 'had been making inroads on settled kingdoms and empires from very ancient times. It is also known that strong bulwarks had been built in southern regions of Caucasia, though it has not been as yet historically established that these were built by Cyrus. As regards the last characteristic, Cyrus is the only known conqueror among the ancient rulers, to whom this may be applicable, for even his enemies have been full of praise for him for his justice, and, Ezra, a book of the Bible, asserts that he was a God-worshipper and a God-fearing king who set free the Israelites because of his God-worship, and ordered that the Temple of Solomon should be rebuilt for the worship of Allah, Who has no partner. In the light of the above, we admit that of all the conquerors, who had passed away before the revelation of the Qur'an, Cyrus alone is the one to whom the characteristics of "Zul-Qarnain" are most applicable, but we need more evidence to determine specifically that Cyrus is definitely "Zul-Qarnain." Anyhow, there is no other conqueror to whom the characteristics stated in the Qur'an are as much applicable as to Cyrus. Historically it is enough to say that Cyrus was a Persian ruler, whose rise began about 549 B.C. In a few years, he conquered the kingdom of Media and Lydia and afterwards conquered Babylon in 539 B.C. After this no powerful kingdom was left to oppose him. His conquests extended to Sind and the territory known as Turkistan on one side, and to Egypt and Libya and to Thrace and Macedonia and to Caucasia and Khawarzam in the North. In fact, the whole civilized world was under his sway. "
18.86. Hatta idha balaghamaghriba alschschamsi wadschadaha taghrubu fii AAaynin hami-atinwawadschada AAindaha qawman qulna yadhaalqarnayni imma an tuAAadhdhiba wa-imma antattakhidha fiihim husnan
18.86. Till, when he reached the setting place of the sun, he found it setting in a muddy spring, and found a people thereabout: We said: O Dhul-Qarneyn! Either punish or show them kindness. (Pickthall)
18.86. Bis, als er den Ort des Untergehens der Sonne erreichte, er sie untergehen fand in einer schlammigen Quelle, und er fand bei ihr ein Volk. Wir sprachen: Dsu-l“Qarnain! Entweder du strafst sie, oder du unternimmst an ihnen Bestes! (Ahmad v. Denffer)
18.86. bis, als er den Ort des Sonnenuntergangs erreichte, er fand, daß sie in einer schlammigen Quelle unterging, und er fand bei ihr ein Volk. Wir sagten: "O Du ´1Qarnain, entweder strafst du (sie), oder du behandelst sie mit Güte." (Bubenheim)
18.86. Er erreichte einen Ort im Westen und sah, wie die Sonne an einer Stelle unterging, wo es eine heiße verschlammte Quelle gab. Dort gab es ein Volk von Ungläubigen. Wir sagten: "O Du, der du zwei Hörner hast! Entweder du bestrafst sie wegen Unglaubens, oder du lässt unter ihnen Güte walten." (Azhar)
18.86. Als er dann (den Ort) des Sonnenuntergangs erreichte, fand er sie so, dass sie in einer schlammigen Quelle untergehe, und er fand in ihrer Nähe Leute. WIR sagten: „Dhul-qarnain! Entweder peinigst du sie, oder du gewährst ihnen Gutes.“ (Zaidan)
18.86. Als er schließlich an den Ort gelangte, an dem die Sonne untergeht, fand er, daß sie in einer verschlammten Quelle untergeht. Und er fand bei ihr ein Volk vor. Wir sagten: "Du mit den zwei Hörnern! Entweder nimmst du eine Bestrafung vor, oder du läßt unter ihnen Güte walten (tattakhiza fiehim husnan)." (Paret)
18.86. bis er den Ort, an dem die Sonne untergeht, erreichte; er fand sie in einem Quell von schlammigem Wasser untergehen, und dort fand er ein Volk. Wir sprachen: "O Thu-l-Qarnain, entweder strafe sie oder behandle sie mit Güte." (Rasul)
18.88. But as for him who believeth and doeth right, good will be his reward, and We shall speak unto him a mild command. (Pickthall)
18.88. Und was den angeht, der glaubt und Rechtschaffenes tut, für den gibt es die Vergeltung des Besten, und wir werden ihm unsererseits Erleichterndes auftragen." (Ahmad v. Denffer)
18.88. Was aber jemanden angeht, der glaubt und rechtschaffen handelt, für den wird es als Lohn das Beste geben, und Wir werden ihm von unserem Befehl etwas sagen, was Erleichterung bringt." (Bubenheim)
18.88. Wer aber den rechten Glauben annimmt und gute Werke verrichtet, dem steht die beste Belohnung im Jenseits zu, und wir sind zu ihm im Dießeits gütig." (Azhar)
18.88. Doch hinsichtlich dessen, der den Iman verinnerlichte und gottgefällig Gutes tat, für den ist die gute Belohnung bestimmt, und wir werden ihm Leichtes gebieten.“ (Zaidan)
18.88. Wenn aber einer glaubt und tut, was recht ist, hat er (dereinst) als Lohn das (Aller) beste (al-husnaa) zu erwarten. Und wir werden ihm von uns aus freundlich zusprechen (? wa-sa-naquulu lahuu min amrinaa yusran)." (Paret)
18.88. Dem aber, der gläubig ist und Gutes tut, wird herrlicher Lohn zuteil werden; und wir werden zu ihm in angenehmer Weise über unsere Angelegenheiten sprechen." (Rasul)
Tafsir von Maududi für die Ayaat 84 bis 88
We had established his power on the Earth and had provided him with every kind of ways and means. At first, he made preparations for an expedition (to the West and marched on) till he reached the limit where the sun set, ( 63 ) and found it setting in black waters, ( 64 ) and there he saw a people. We said to him, "O Zul-Qarnain! you have the power to punish them and also the option to treat them generously". ( 65 ) He said, "We will punish that one of them who will commit iniquity: then he shall be returned to his Lord and He will inflict on him a grievous torment: And as for the one, who will believe and do righteous deeds, there is a generous recompense and We will prescribe for him easy tasks."
Desc No: 63 "The limit where the sun set" does not mean the "place" of the setting of the sun. According to Ibn Kathir, it means that he marched to the West conquering one country after the other till he reached the last boundary of the land, beyond which there was ocean.
Desc No: 64 "He found the sun setting in black muddy waters of the sea": if ZulQarnain was Cyrus, then that place would be the western limit of Asia Minor and the "black waters" would be the Aegean Sea. This interpretation is supported by the use of the word "`ain"instead of "bahr" in the Qur'an.
Desc No: 65 "We said to him" does not necessarily mean that Allah directly revealed to him these words, and that Z, ul-Qarnain was a Prophet or was the one who received inspiration from Allah, and the same is the reasonable conjecture. This concerns the time when Zul-Qarnain had taken possession of the land as a conqueror and the conquered people were utterly at your mercy. Then Allah posed a question before his conscience, as if to say, "Now is the time of your trial. These people are utterly at your mercy, and you have the option either to behave unjustly towards them or to treat them generously."