اُردو نعت میں’’ حسنِ کُن‘‘ کا اختصاص
ڈاکٹر عارف حسین عارفؔ
نعت، کمالاتِ نبویﷺ کی تفسیر ہے۔یہ محض حضورﷺ کی منظوم توصیف کا نام ہی نہیں بلکہ حضور نبی کریمﷺ کے حقیقی کمالات کی ایسی پیشکش کا نام ہے جس سے ایمان میں تازگی اور بالیدگی اُسی وقت پیدا ہوتی ہے جب مدّاح کا دل رسول اللہﷺ کی محبت کے حقیقی جذبات سے سرشار ہو۔جذبۂ نعت دل میں محبتِ رسولﷺ کی شمع فروزاں کر دیتا ہے۔ اس سے جمالیاتی سرور کی تعبیر بھی حاصل ہوتی ہے۔ نعت توصیفِ مصطفیٰؐ کا وہ مستحسن انداز ہے جس میں الفاظ، زبان سے نہیں پلکوں سے ترتیب دیے جاتے ہیں۔ بقول راجا رشید محمود:
’’نعت سنتِ کبریا ہے ۔ قلم و زبان کا اس راہ پر قدم رکھناتلوار پر چلنا ہے ۔ اس فرض سے وہی شخص بطریقِ احسن عہدہ برآ ہو سکتا ہے جس کی نگاہ علم کے تمام شعبوں پر ہو، جو شریعت پر پوری طرح عامل ہو۔ جو رحمتِ عالمﷺ سے سچی محبت رکھتا ہو۔ جس شخص کوممدوحِ کبریا کی رفعتِ شان کا ادراک و احساس نہ ہو وہ نعت کیا لکھے گا،کیا سمجھے گا۔‘‘
نعت(ن ع ت) با لفتح(مؤنث)عربی زبان کا ایک مادہ ہے۔جو عام طور پر وصف کے مفہوم میں مستعمل ہے ۔ نعت کے معنی وصف کے ہیں۔ وصف میں جو کچھ کہا جائے اُ سے بھی نعت ہی سے تعبیر کیا جاتا ہے۔ وصف بیان کرنے والے کو ’ناعت‘ کہتے ہیں اور اس کی جمع’ نعات‘ ہے ۔ مضامین نعت کے مآخذ قرآن اور حدیث ہیں۔ قرآنِ مجید جس طرح اللہ تعالیٰ کی کتاب ہے اسی طرح وہ اسلامی ادب کی بھی پہلی کتاب ہے۔ اس میں رسولﷺ کے اوصافِ حمیدہ ملتے ہیں۔عربی کی مشہور لغت ’’المنجد‘‘ میں نعت کا مفہوم یوں بیان کیا گیا ہے:
’’نعتاً، تعریف کرنا،بیان کرنا، اچھی صفات دکھانا، اَنعَت،...
The world Semitic religions like Judaism, Christianity and Islam have given comprehensive regulations and code of life. Therefore; there has been a complete system and directions about “ḥalal” and “ḥaram” (kosher non-kosher) means legal and illegal (treif’ in Jewish law). As Islam gives clear cut directives in beliefs, worships, ethics, economy and ways of life to guide the men in life; similarly the Judaism has also given clear regulations in these fields to guide its followers. Islam has taught its followers to eat and drink ‘ḥalal’ (Tayyib), so Judaism has also stressed on eating only ‘kosher’ (food that can be consumed according to Jewish law). For example in animals; meat of cow, bull, sheep and goat etc are legitimizing for eating in both the religions. Similarly the meat of pig is not allowed for men. Many things are similar in both these religions regarding dietary law. This article describes about ‘ḥalal’ and ‘kosher’ things in detail and tells what the similarities and dissimilarities regarding dietary laws are found in their religious literatures.
This dissertation is a comparative study in the literature of resistance between the two famous writers: (Ghassan Kanafani and Kreshan Chandar) in Arabic and Urdu languages respectively. It is obvious that the similarity between the global literatures is a well-known phenomenon and we find this similarity clearly in the literature of Arabic writer Ghassan Kanafani and Urdu writer Kreshan Chandar, because Ghassan Kanafani tasted the bitterness of immigration and asylum after the occupation of Palestine by the Jews with the help of British conspiracy. Similarly, Kreshan Chandar grew up in the affected areas of the occupied Kashmir, and he also tasted the bitterness of immigration and asylum after the liberation of the Indian subcontinent from British colonial rule in 1947and he saw injustice closely. This dissertation contains on preface and four chapters: 1- Preface includes the concept of comparative literature, concept of resistance and concept ofliteratureofresistance. 2- Chapter 1 includes the brief history of Kashmir and Palestine. 3- Chapter 2 Ghassan Kanafani, his life briefly and his literature of resistance. 4- Chapter 3The life of KershanChandarbrieflyand his literature of resistance. 5- Chapter 4 comparative study of the resistive literature of the two writers with similarities and differences. Themajor findings of the researchare: 1- Both writers have agreed to urge women and laboring classes to resist injustice andoppression,theyalso urging them to renounce optimism and despair. 2- Both refused defeat, and confirmed to resist all kinds of the problems and hurdles. They alsoresisted blind imitation of foreign culture. 3- Both haveagreedthat before making anyrevolution revival of peoples and nations must be done. 4- Both have tried through their stories to reflect the images of their communities and the realities of theirenvironment without anyfear. I have also highlighted the differences between the two writers as below:1- Kanafani stresses upon resistance of death, Zionist occupation, incapable leaders, migration, weak national identity, and wrong direction in the bios, he also realized that dignity, greatness and lost cannot be restored by the tears in the history of nations. 2- Kreshan Chandar violates the idea of war, and wants to change the outdated system, hated colonialism, feudal lords and capitalists in general, he also strongly resists the exploitation of religion for personal purposes, splitting countries on the basis of religion sectarian violence, injustice with woman, religious education, counter extremism in all formsand forced marriage We hope that this study will be a useful addition in the field of comparative literature, and has opened up new opportunities for the students of Arabic language and researchers in the field of comparative literature in general, and literature of resistance especially, In Sha’ALLAH.