The Qur’anic root B GH Ḍ
Aversion, intense hatred, and their relationship to enmity
Qur’anic and lexical forms
بَغْضَاء
(baghḍāʾ)
Intense hatred; the sole Qur’anic form, five occurrences
بُغْض
(bughḍ)
Aversion and hatred; this form is not Qur’anic
بِغْضَة
(bighḍah)
Lexical and poetic form; not Qur’anic
بَغَاضَة
(baghāḍah)
Lexical verbal noun; not Qur’anic
أَبْغَضَ
(abghaḍa)
Form IV: hated; not Qur’anic
بَغُضَ
(baghuḍa)
Became hateful; not Qur’anic
بَغِيض
(baghīḍ)
Hated; sometimes hating; not Qur’anic
بَغَّضَ
(baghghaḍa)
Form II: made hateful; not Qur’anic
تَبَاغَضَ
(tabāghaḍa)
Reciprocal hatred; not Qur’anic
مُبَاغَضَة
(mubāghaḍah)
Reciprocal hatred; not Qur’anic
The Arabic root B GH Ḍ denotes aversion or hatred toward someone or something and stands opposite love. Loving something involves attraction and desire; having bughḍ toward it involves aversion and an inclination to turn away or keep one’s distance.
This aversion may remain within a person or become apparent in speech and conduct. Sometimes it grows strong enough to draw the relationship between two people or groups into hostility and discord.
The root occurs five times in the Qur’an, always as بَغْضَاء. In established Arabic usage this form often emphasizes intense hatred. One occurrence describes hatred whose traces have appeared in people’s speech. The other four place baghḍāʾ alongside ʿadāwah, describing relations between people or groups.
Quranic Arabic Corpus: five occurrences of baghḍāʾ
This pairing matters. Baghḍāʾ emphasizes aversion and hatred, while ʿadāwah describes an antagonistic relationship and opposition that may appear in conduct toward another. This is a tendency rather than an absolute boundary: hatred can appear in words and deeds, and enmity may arise from inward hatred.
Understanding the root’s Qur’anic uses requires distinguishing the feeling itself, its disclosure, the formation of enmity, and the ethical assessment of its cause and object.
1. The lexical core in Arabic
In Maqāyīs al-Lughah, Ibn Fāris identifies one basic sense for B GH Ḍ:
«خِلَافُ الْحُبِّ»
khilāfu al-ḥubbi
That is, the opposite of love.
Ibn Fāris, Maqāyīs al-Lughah, B GH Ḍ
He illustrates the family with أَبْغَضَ, expressing hatred or aversion toward someone or something.
Al-Rāghib al-Iṣfahānī gives a more detailed explanation in Al-Mufradāt:
«الْبُغْضُ نِفَارُ النَّفْسِ عَنِ الشَّيْءِ الَّذِي تَرْغَبُ عَنْهُ»
al-bughḍu nifāru al-nafsi ʿani al-shayʾi alladhī targhabu ʿanhu
Bughḍ is the soul’s aversion and turning away from something it does not desire.
By contrast, al-Rāghib describes love as the soul’s attraction toward something it desires.
This explanation identifies two opposite directions: attraction and closeness in love, and aversion and distance in hatred.
This opposition does not mean that love and hatred exhaust every possible response to something. One may love someone in one respect and dislike another characteristic or action of that person. Nor does the absence of love itself establish hatred: a person may feel neither attraction nor aversion toward a subject.
Bughḍ therefore means more than an absence of love; it involves a negative, averse orientation toward its object.
The stronger sense of baghḍāʾ
Dictionaries including Lisān al-ʿArab, Al-Ṣiḥāḥ, and Al-Miṣbāḥ al-Munīr record بُغْض, بِغْضَة, بَغَاضَة, and بَغْضَاء.
Baghḍāʾ is explained as follows:
«الْبَغْضَاءُ شِدَّةُ الْبُغْضِ»
al-baghḍāʾu shiddatu al-bughḍi
That is, baghḍāʾ is intense hatred.
Al-Mufradāt, Al-Ṣiḥāḥ, and Al-Miṣbāḥ: aversion and intense hatred
It should therefore not be reduced to mild dislike or passing displeasure. In established usage it can denote strong aversion affecting how a person sees another and relates to them.
Intensity alone, however, does not determine the resulting conduct. Hatred may remain hidden, appear in speech, lead to avoidance or separation, or under some conditions turn into active hostility.
These outcomes relate to hatred, but they are not all fixed components of the word’s meaning.
2. Linguistic forms and early Arabic witnesses
أَبْغَضَ, Form IV, means to hate or feel aversion toward someone or something. In أَبْغَضْتُهُ, the subject feels hatred toward the object.
بَغُضَ also describes someone or something becoming hateful or objectionable. Thus بَغُضَ الرَّجُلُ means that the man became an object of hatred.
بَغِيض can describe a person who is hated. Some lexical accounts also record its use for someone who hates another. The sentence must establish the direction of the relationship.
بَغَّضَ, Form II, means to produce aversion or make someone or something hateful to another.
تَبَاغَضَ expresses reciprocal hatred: two people or groups feel aversion toward one another.
مُبَاغَضَة likewise describes a reciprocal relationship marked by hatred and discord.
These forms show that the root can describe both one person’s feeling toward another and a mutual condition between two parties.
These derivatives do not all occur in the Qur’an. Only baghḍāʾ occurs there. Its Qur’anic definition should therefore begin with its actual uses rather than importing every feature of other derivatives.
The first poetic witness
A poem attributed to Sāʿidah ibn Juʾayyah al-Hudhalī contains the following:
وَمِنَ الْعَوَادِي أَنْ تفتك بِبِغْضَةٍ
وَتَقَاذُفٍ مِنْهَا وَأَنَّكَ تَرْقُبُ
wa-mina al-ʿawādī an tafutka (vocalization uncertain) bi-bighḍatin / wa-taqādhufin minhā wa-annaka tarqubu
An approximate rendering based on the explanation of bi-ghḍah as hostile people is: “Among the obstacles and troubles are being beset by people who hate you, her drawing away, and waiting expectantly.” The transmitted wording and analysis of تفتك differ; this is an approximate rendering rather than a definitive translation of every part of the line.
The commentaries give two possible accounts of بِبِغْضَةٍ.
Al-Sukkarī explains it as a group of people who hate you. On this account, bi-ghḍah functions collectively for people bearing hatred.
Ibn Sīdah also considers, on syntactic grounds, whether bi-ghḍah denotes hatred itself: taqādhuf and annaka tarqubu are coordinated with it. He does not accept that possibility without reservation, however, pointing to the established poetic convention of not complaining of a beloved’s hatred.
The disagreement shows that even an early poetic witness may require investigation of its construction and reference.
Al-Muḥkam, Lisān, and Tāj: Sāʿidah’s witness and its variants
Sāʿidah is a Hudhalī poet described in literary sources both as pre-Islamic and as a mukhaḍram, a poet spanning the pre-Islamic and Islamic periods. The date of this particular line is uncertain. It is useful evidence for early usage, but should not be dated before the Qur’an without further evidence.
The second witness: hatred and the danger of enmity
Maʿqil ibn Khuwaylid al-Hudhalī says:
أَبَا مَعْقِلٍ لَا تُوطِئَنَّكَ بَغَاضَتِي
رُؤُوسَ الْأَفَاعِي فِي مَرَاصِدِهَا الْعُرْمِ
abā maʿqilin lā tūṭiʾannaka baghāḍatī / ruʾūsa al-afāʿī fī marāṣidihā al-ʿurmi
“O Abū Maʿqil, do not let your hatred of me lead you to tread on the heads of mottled vipers lying in wait.”
The Dīwān glosses بَغَاضَتِي as “hatred of me.” In this warning, the context points to the addressee’s hatred toward the poet, rather than necessarily the poet’s hatred toward the addressee.
Dīwān al-Hudhaliyyīn: Maʿqil’s witness and the addressee’s hatred
The poet describes a relationship in which hatred can lead to dangerous, ill-considered action. The image of treading on the heads of lurking vipers conveys the danger a person may incur through enmity.
The witness shows that hatred in Arabic is more than a passing feeling of displeasure. It can affect a relationship deeply enough to shape people’s decisions and conduct.
Nevertheless, taking risks or causing injury is not part of the definition of hatred itself. Here the poet describes a possible consequence.
Maʿqil is also classified as a mukhaḍram in literary sources. The language’s antiquity can be investigated, but the particular verse should not be called necessarily pre-Qur’anic without independent historical evidence.
Together with the dictionaries, these two witnesses show the family’s use for both the feeling of hatred and a relationship tinged with enmity.
3. Qur’anic uses of the root
Hatred appearing through speech: Āl ʿImrān 3:118
Verse text:
يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا لَا تَتَّخِذُوا بِطَانَةً مِنْ دُونِكُمْ لَا يَأْلُونَكُمْ خَبَالًا وَدُّوا مَا عَنِتُّمْ قَدْ بَدَتِ الْبَغْضَاءُ مِنْ أَفْوَاهِهِمْ وَمَا تُخْفِي صُدُورُهُمْ أَكْبَرُ ۚ قَدْ بَيَّنَّا لَكُمُ الْآيَاتِ إِنْ كُنْتُمْ تَعْقِلُونَ
yā ayyuhā alladhīna āmanū lā tattakhidhū biṭānatan min dūnikum lā yaʾlūnakum khabālan waddū mā ʿanittum qad badati al-baghḍāʾu min afwāhihim wa-mā tukhfī ṣudūruhum akbaru qad bayyannā lakumu al-āyāti in kuntum taʿqilūna
Translation:
“O you who believe, do not take outsiders to your community into your inner confidence. They spare no effort to undermine you and wish you hardship. Hatred has already appeared through their speech, and what their breasts conceal is greater. We have made the signs clear to you, if you exercise understanding.”
This is the only Qur’anic occurrence of B GH Ḍ in which baghḍāʾ is not directly paired with ʿadāwah.
The key expression is:
«قَدْ بَدَتِ الْبَغْضَاءُ مِنْ أَفْوَاهِهِمْ»
qad badati al-baghḍāʾu min afwāhihim
“Hatred has become apparent through their speech.”
بَدَتْ belongs to B D W and describes something becoming apparent. الْبَغْضَاءُ is its subject, while مِنْ أَفْوَاهِهِمْ specifies the means through which it appears.
The construction shows that hatred is not itself a bodily object one can observe, but its traces may appear through a person’s speech.
A person may avoid expressing hatred and even try to hide it. Yet their choice of words, manner of speaking, and statements about another may reveal inward aversion and hostility.
In this verse such a condition has become apparent through people’s speech.
The continuation matters:
«وَمَا تُخْفِي صُدُورُهُمْ أَكْبَرُ»
wa-mā tukhfī ṣudūruhum akbaru
“And what their breasts conceal is greater.”
What remains hidden in their breasts is described as greater than what their words have revealed.
The verse thus distinguishes two levels: the hatred already apparent and what remains concealed within.
This distinction shows that hatred need not remain wholly inward. It can develop within and then become evident in speech without others knowing its full extent or intensity.
Hatred and the question of trust
The opening mentions بِطَانَة: people admitted to a person’s or community’s private and confidential affairs.
The warning concerns entrusting such a position to people who do not desist from causing harm, wish others hardship, and have already displayed traces of hatred.
The criticism is therefore not expressed solely in terms of membership in a different group. The sentence also identifies harmful conduct and characteristics.
The following verse, Āl ʿImrān 3:119, contrasts the addressees’ love with the other party’s conduct. It describes their profession of belief when meeting the believers and their intense anger when alone.
This connection matters for understanding baghḍāʾ. A relationship may appear friendly or involve professed sympathy while concealing hatred and enmity.
This use does not establish that every difference of belief or absence of love signals hidden hostility. The verse itself supplies specific conduct and indications for identifying those it warns against.
Hatred following neglect of a covenant: Al-Māʾidah 5:14
Verse text:
وَمِنَ الَّذِينَ قَالُوا إِنَّا نَصَارَىٰ أَخَذْنَا مِيثَاقَهُمْ فَنَسُوا حَظًّا مِمَّا ذُكِّرُوا بِهِ فَأَغْرَيْنَا بَيْنَهُمُ الْعَدَاوَةَ وَالْبَغْضَاءَ إِلَىٰ يَوْمِ الْقِيَامَةِ ۚ وَسَوْفَ يُنَبِّئُهُمُ اللَّهُ بِمَا كَانُوا يَصْنَعُونَ
wa-mina alladhīna qālū innā naṣārā akhadhnā mīthāqahum fa-nasū ḥaẓẓan mimmā dhukkirū bihi fa-aghraynā baynahumu al-ʿadāwata wa-al-baghḍāʾa ilā yawmi al-qiyāmati wa-sawfa yunabbiʾuhumu Allāhu bi-mā kānū yaṣnaʿūna
Translation:
“And from those who said, ‘We are Christians,’ We took their covenant. Then they forgot a portion of what they had been reminded of. So We stirred up enmity and hatred among them until the Day of Resurrection. The God will inform them of what they used to do.”
Here baghḍāʾ appears alongside ʿadāwah.
The conjunction wa joins the two words. Both describe a condition arising between people or groups.
فَأَغْرَيْنَا belongs to the GH R W / GH R Y family and here expresses stirring up or setting against one another. The website’s root index and the Quranic Arabic Corpus list this use under GH R W.
Hatred is therefore not limited here to one individual’s feeling toward another. The verse describes hatred and enmity spreading between parties within a collective relationship.
Its connection with the preceding clause matters. The Qur’an first mentions a covenant and the forgetting of part of the reminder, and then speaks of enmity and hatred.
The verse is not simply about differences existing between groups; it places them in the context of conduct toward a covenant and reminder.
Early commentaries record two views about the reference of بَيْنَهُمُ. Some understand internal divisions among groups identifying themselves as Christians. Others, considering the wider context, also understand enmity between Jews and Christians.
Within the immediate sentence, reference back to the group named in this verse is more direct. Investigating the historical and social extent of the divisions is a separate question.
Al-Ṭabarī: two views on the reference of baynahum
What matters for the root’s meaning is the emergence of hatred within a collective relationship.
Divine action must also be distinguished from human responsibility. The verse attributes enmity and hatred to The God’s action, but first describes the group’s treatment of the covenant and reminder, and ends by announcing accountability for their deeds.
This attribution does not release people from responsibility for discord and enmity or make hatred desirable and beyond repair.
Hatred in relation to corruption and war: Al-Māʾidah 5:64
Verse text:
وَقَالَتِ الْيَهُودُ يَدُ اللَّهِ مَغْلُولَةٌ ۚ غُلَّتْ أَيْدِيهِمْ وَلُعِنُوا بِمَا قَالُوا ۘ بَلْ يَدَاهُ مَبْسُوطَتَانِ يُنْفِقُ كَيْفَ يَشَاءُ ۚ وَلَيَزِيدَنَّ كَثِيرًا مِنْهُمْ مَا أُنْزِلَ إِلَيْكَ مِنْ رَبِّكَ طُغْيَانًا وَكُفْرًا ۚ وَأَلْقَيْنَا بَيْنَهُمُ الْعَدَاوَةَ وَالْبَغْضَاءَ إِلَىٰ يَوْمِ الْقِيَامَةِ ۚ كُلَّمَا أَوْقَدُوا نَارًا لِلْحَرْبِ أَطْفَأَهَا اللَّهُ ۚ وَيَسْعَوْنَ فِي الْأَرْضِ فَسَادًا ۚ وَاللَّهُ لَا يُحِبُّ الْمُفْسِدِينَ
wa-qālati al-yahūdu yadu Allāhi maghlūlatun ghullat aydīhim wa-luʿinū bi-mā qālū bal yadāhu mabsūṭatāni yunfiqu kayfa yashāʾu wa-la-yazīdanna kathīran minhum mā unzila ilayka min rabbika ṭughyānan wa-kufran wa-alqaynā baynahumu al-ʿadāwata wa-al-baghḍāʾa ilā yawmi al-qiyāmati kullamā awqadū nāran li-al-ḥarbi aṭfaʾahā Allāhu wa-yasʿawna fī al-arḍi fasādan wa-Allāhu lā yuḥibbu al-mufsidīna
Translation:
“And the Jews said, ‘The God’s hand is bound.’ Bound be their own hands, and they were accursed for what they said. Rather, both His hands are outspread; He gives as He wills. What has been sent down to you from your Lord will increase many of them in transgression and disbelief. We cast enmity and hatred among them until the Day of Resurrection. Whenever they kindle a fire for war, The God extinguishes it. They strive to spread corruption in the earth, and The God does not love those who spread corruption.”
الْعَدَاوَةَ وَالْبَغْضَاءَ again appear together, but their accompanying verb differs from Al-Māʾidah 5:14.
Al-Māʾidah 5:14 had فَأَغْرَيْنَا; here the verb is وَأَلْقَيْنَا.
The first verb presents enmity and hatred as being stirred up; the second presents them as being cast among the group under discussion.
This verbal difference does not establish two wholly separate kinds of hatred. Both verses concern discord and hatred between parties.
The verse continues with the kindling of war and efforts to spread corruption.
This setting illuminates the relationship between hatred and harmful social conduct. Hatred need not remain inward: when it enters collective relationships and decisions, it can contribute to conflict, enmity, and violence.
Baghḍāʾ does not itself mean war. War is expressed separately in the same verse by نَارًا لِلْحَرْبِ.
Another significant expression is كَثِيرًا مِنْهُمْ, “many of them,” in the earlier part of the verse. It distinguishes all members of a group from many within it.
The verse therefore should not be taken to mean that every Jewish individual possesses identical hatred and enmity simply by religious affiliation. It criticizes particular statements and actions; the scope of each assertion must be assessed from its wording.
Hatred as a consequence of intoxicants and gambling: Al-Māʾidah 5:91
Verse text:
إِنَّمَا يُرِيدُ الشَّيْطَانُ أَنْ يُوقِعَ بَيْنَكُمُ الْعَدَاوَةَ وَالْبَغْضَاءَ فِي الْخَمْرِ وَالْمَيْسِرِ وَيَصُدَّكُمْ عَنْ ذِكْرِ اللَّهِ وَعَنِ الصَّلَاةِ ۖ فَهَلْ أَنْتُمْ مُنْتَهُونَ
innamā yurīdu al-shayṭānu an yūqiʿa baynakumu al-ʿadāwata wa-al-baghḍāʾa fī al-khamri wa-al-maysiri wa-yaṣuddakum ʿan dhikri Allāhi wa-ʿani al-ṣalāti fa-hal antum muntahūna
Translation:
“Satan only seeks to bring enmity and hatred among you through intoxicants and gambling, and to turn you away from remembrance of The God and from ṣalāt. Will you then desist?”
This verse is significant for understanding hatred’s social consequences.
Earlier occurrences concerned hatred between groups with histories of division and covenant-breaking. Here the believers themselves are addressed and warned about conduct that can produce enmity and hatred among them.
Khamr concerns intoxication and the impairment of discernment; maysir denotes gambling and transactions based on winning and losing.
The two are placed together, and the verse identifies the formation of enmity and hatred among people as one of their consequences.
For example, gambling losses, a sense of being deceived, destructive rivalry, or disputes over money can turn a friendly relationship into hostility.
Similarly, loss of judgment through intoxication can contribute to hurtful speech, ill-considered conduct, and violent encounters.
These examples help explain the verse’s social connection, but are not the only possible causes or forms of hatred.
The verb يُوقِعَ emphasizes bringing something about or introducing it between people.
Hatred is thus presented as something that can emerge through conduct and social relations.
This also shows that hatred is not confined to differences between religions or sects. Harmful conduct can produce hatred and enmity even among members of a single community of faith.
Another point is the pairing of two consequences: creating enmity and hatred among people, and turning them away from remembrance of The God and ṣalāt.
The verse therefore addresses both relations among people and their relationship to responsibility and divine remembrance.
Baghḍāʾ here does not mean abandoning ṣalāt. Each consequence is expressed by its own separate phrase.
4. Hatred in Abraham’s declaration and the possibility of changed relations
Al-Mumtaḥanah 60:4
Verse text:
قَدْ كَانَتْ لَكُمْ أُسْوَةٌ حَسَنَةٌ فِي إِبْرَاهِيمَ وَالَّذِينَ مَعَهُ إِذْ قَالُوا لِقَوْمِهِمْ إِنَّا بُرَآءُ مِنْكُمْ وَمِمَّا تَعْبُدُونَ مِنْ دُونِ اللَّهِ كَفَرْنَا بِكُمْ وَبَدَا بَيْنَنَا وَبَيْنَكُمُ الْعَدَاوَةُ وَالْبَغْضَاءُ أَبَدًا حَتَّىٰ تُؤْمِنُوا بِاللَّهِ وَحْدَهُ إِلَّا قَوْلَ إِبْرَاهِيمَ لِأَبِيهِ لَأَسْتَغْفِرَنَّ لَكَ وَمَا أَمْلِكُ لَكَ مِنَ اللَّهِ مِنْ شَيْءٍ ۖ رَبَّنَا عَلَيْكَ تَوَكَّلْنَا وَإِلَيْكَ أَنَبْنَا وَإِلَيْكَ الْمَصِيرُ
qad kānat lakum uswatun ḥasanatun fī Ibrāhīma wa-alladhīna maʿahu idh qālū li-qawmihim innā buraʾāʾu minkum wa-mimmā taʿbudūna min dūni Allāhi kafarnā bikum wa-badā baynanā wa-baynakumu al-ʿadāwatu wa-al-baghḍāʾu abadan ḥattā tuʾminū bi-Allāhi waḥdahu illā qawla Ibrāhīma li-abīhi la-astaghfiranna laka wa-mā amliku laka mina Allāhi min shayʾin rabbanā ʿalayka tawakkalnā wa-ilayka anabnā wa-ilayka al-maṣīru
Translation:
“You have had a good example in Abraham and those with him, when they said to their people, ‘We disavow you and what you worship apart from The God. We reject you, and enmity and hatred have appeared between us and you, continually, until you believe in The God alone’—except for Abraham’s saying to his father, ‘I will certainly seek forgiveness for you, though I have no power to secure anything for you against The God.’ Our Lord, in You we trust, to You we turn, and to You is the final return.”
Unlike the other four occurrences, this verse places baghḍāʾ in the speech of Abraham and his companions.
They disavow their people and the objects worshipped apart from The God, then declare that enmity and hatred have appeared between the two sides.
Hatred is not merely hidden in the heart here; it is explicitly announced.
Lexically, the use shows that hatred can form part of an open and serious separation between two parties.
Rejecting objects of worship and disavowing people
Two expressions stand together: مِنْكُمْ and مِمَّا تَعْبُدُونَ مِنْ دُونِ اللَّهِ.
The text therefore does not only reject objects of worship: Abraham and his companions also disavow the people themselves.
An explanation of the verse should preserve this explicit statement.
At the same time, disavowal and enmity in this context should not become a general instruction to oppress, humiliate, or deprive every person of different belief, without examining the other verses.
The verse connects the separation principally with worship of others besides The God and adherence to that worship. The social relationship between the two parties has also ruptured.
Both the explicit separation and the limits of what the verse actually states should be preserved, without adding ethical or legal consequences it does not express.
The meaning of abadan ḥattā
The expression أَبَدًا حَتَّىٰ تُؤْمِنُوا بِاللَّهِ وَحْدَهُ matters.
Abadan emphasizes continuance, but ḥattā follows it and names a condition that can bring that continuance to an end.
The sentence therefore cannot be translated as unconditional, unchangeable enmity forever.
Belief in The God alone is expressly named as the boundary ending this condition.
Al-Ṭabarī: continuance bounded by belief in The God alone
That qualification does not reduce the verse to a superficial difference or mere dislike of another belief. It speaks of real enmity and hatred in a particular confrontation.
Connection with Al-Mumtaḥanah 60:7
Al-Mumtaḥanah 60:7 raises the possibility of affection arising between the believers and people toward whom they had previously been hostile.
This shows that enmity is not an unchangeable destiny for human relationships.
People who once opposed one another may come to affection and closeness as circumstances and relationships change.
Al-Mumtaḥanah 60:8 also states that The God does not forbid kindness and justice toward people who have not fought the believers over religion or expelled them from their homes.
Al-Mumtaḥanah 60:9 concerns those involved in fighting and expelling people from their homes.
These verses should be read alongside Al-Mumtaḥanah 60:4. Abraham’s separation from his people and declaration of hatred neither license accusing all people of different belief of enmity nor justify abandoning the justice and kindness the Qur’an permits in such relations.
For root study, the conclusion is clear: hatred may develop and appear within a real relationship, but the word itself does not denote an eternal, unchangeable state.
6. Hatred, human responsibility, and repairing relationships
The Qur’anic uses show that hatred can arise through different kinds of conduct.
In Al-Māʾidah 5:14, forgetting part of the covenant and reminder forms the setting for division and hatred.
In Al-Māʾidah 5:64, hatred appears in a context of corruption and war.
In Al-Māʾidah 5:91, intoxicants and gambling are identified as settings in which enmity and hatred arise among people.
In Āl ʿImrān 3:118, hatred appears in a relationship where one side desires the other’s suffering and harm.
In Al-Mumtaḥanah 60:4, hatred accompanies an explicit religious and social separation.
These varied uses show that baghḍāʾ is not the name of one specific action or type of disagreement. Their common element is intense hatred and aversion existing or developing between people or groups.
Ethical assessment also requires distinguishing a feeling’s emergence from the conduct resulting from it.
A person may feel aversion in response to oppression, betrayal, or serious injury. The feeling itself is not identical to an act of injustice or aggression.
When hatred leads someone to oppress another, lie, disregard rights, or accuse someone of wrongdoing without grounds, it goes beyond an inward feeling and becomes conduct for which the person is responsible.
Al-Māʾidah 5:8 accordingly requires justice despite hatred of a group.
Al-Mumtaḥanah 60:7, meanwhile, raises the possibility of former enmity becoming affection.
Read alongside the occurrences of baghḍāʾ, these verses show that hatred neither supplies a standing license for injustice nor fixes the destiny of human relationships.
Moreover, Al-Māʾidah 5:91 identifies producing hatred as one of Satan’s purposes. Hatred within a community can therefore result from its members’ own harmful conduct.
Not all hatred can be attributed to differences of belief, nor can every hostile relationship be considered inherent and unchangeable.
Assessing hatred requires understanding its cause, object, and consequences.
7. Translation proposals for Forqan
For بُغْض, Persian equivalents include “aversion,” “hatred,” and, where appropriate, “strong dislike.”
For أَبْغَضَ, “felt aversion toward someone or something” and “hated” are suitable.
For بَغِيض, the direction of the relationship determines whether “hated” or, where the person bears hatred, “hating” is appropriate.
For تَبَاغَضَ, suitable renderings include “came to hate one another” or “showed mutual hatred and aversion.”
For the Qur’anic بَغْضَاء, the principal equivalent is “intense hatred.” “Strong aversion” may also fit some sentences.
The adjective “intense” need not be added every time if “hatred” naturally conveys the necessary strength.
Specific Qur’anic proposals follow:
Āl ʿImrān 3:118
«قَدْ بَدَتِ الْبَغْضَاءُ مِنْ أَفْوَاهِهِمْ»
qad badati al-baghḍāʾu min afwāhihim
“Hatred has already become apparent through their speech.”
The emphasis is on hatred appearing through speech; adding “active hostility” to the translation is unnecessary.
Al-Māʾidah 5:14
«فَأَغْرَيْنَا بَيْنَهُمُ الْعَدَاوَةَ وَالْبَغْضَاءَ»
fa-aghraynā baynahumu al-ʿadāwata wa-al-baghḍāʾa
“So We stirred up enmity and hatred among them.”
This preserves the distinction between the two nouns and their relationship with aghraynā.
Al-Māʾidah 5:64
«وَأَلْقَيْنَا بَيْنَهُمُ الْعَدَاوَةَ وَالْبَغْضَاءَ»
wa-alqaynā baynahumu al-ʿadāwata wa-al-baghḍāʾa
“And We cast enmity and hatred among them.”
“Cast” renders alqaynā, preserving its distinction from aghraynā in Al-Māʾidah 5:14.
Al-Māʾidah 5:91
«أَنْ يُوقِعَ بَيْنَكُمُ الْعَدَاوَةَ وَالْبَغْضَاءَ»
an yūqiʿa baynakumu al-ʿadāwata wa-al-baghḍāʾa
“To bring about enmity and hatred among you.”
Yūqiʿa emphasizes bringing this condition into existence among the addressees.
Al-Mumtaḥanah 60:4
«وَبَدَا بَيْنَنَا وَبَيْنَكُمُ الْعَدَاوَةُ وَالْبَغْضَاءُ»
wa-badā baynanā wa-baynakumu al-ʿadāwatu wa-al-baghḍāʾu
“And enmity and hatred have appeared between us and you.”
This preserves badā: the verse describes a condition between two parties becoming apparent.
In these five occurrences, baghḍāʾ should not be translated as “rage,” “punishment,” “difference of belief,” “severing relations,” “war,” or “disbelief.” Each may connect with hatred in a particular context, but none is its direct meaning.
Nor should al-ʿadāwah wa-al-baghḍāʾ always be reduced to “enmity,” since that removes the two distinct words and their defensible difference from the translation.
8. Conclusion
B GH Ḍ in Arabic denotes aversion and hatred toward someone or something, opposite love. Love involves attraction and desire; hatred involves turning away and not wanting closeness to its object.
Within the family, baghḍāʾ emphasizes intense hatred. This may remain inward or appear in speech, conduct, and social relations.
The root occurs five times in the Qur’an, always as baghḍāʾ.
In Āl ʿImrān 3:118, hatred appears through the speech of people with harmful intentions toward the addressees.
In Al-Māʾidah 5:14 and Al-Māʾidah 5:64, hatred accompanies enmity in a setting of collective division and discord.
In Al-Māʾidah 5:91, conduct involving intoxicants and gambling provides a setting for enmity and hatred to arise among people.
In Al-Mumtaḥanah 60:4, hatred appears in Abraham’s and his companions’ declaration of separation from their people and their objects of worship.
The repeated pairing of ʿadāwah and baghḍāʾ places them in a shared semantic field without making them identical. Enmity emphasizes antagonistic relations and conduct, while baghḍāʾ emphasizes hatred and aversion. Both can coexist in one person or relationship.
The root itself does not determine whether a particular hatred is ethically justified. Its object, origin, and resulting conduct require separate assessment.
Nor is hatred necessarily unchangeable. The same surah that records hatred in Abraham’s declaration raises the possibility of affection arising between former enemies.
Final root definition: B GH Ḍ denotes aversion or hatred toward someone or something, opposite attraction and love. Baghḍāʾ expresses the intensity of this aversion, which may exist inwardly, appear in words and conduct, and affect relations among people or groups.
The family’s defining feature is hatred and turning away, rather than necessarily violence, war, disbelief, or oppression. Where such consequences occur in a verse, they must be identified from its sentence and context rather than inferred from the root alone.