Qur’anic Root J W Z

1. Forms and derivatives

Principal Arabic forms include:

• جَازَ ـ يَجُوزُ: passed, crossed, went beyond a place or limit; in another use, became acceptable or permissible.
• جَوْز: passage; in another branch, the middle or central part of something.
• جَوَاز: passage or possibility of passing; in legal and general uses, permissibility or validity.
• جَاوَزَ ـ يُجَاوِزُ: passed a place or thing and left it behind.
• مُجَاوَزَة: passing and going beyond a point or boundary.
• تَجَاوَزَ ـ يَتَجَاوَزُ: passed something; with ʿan ethically, overlooked a fault or its prosecution.
• تَجَاوُز: passage and going beyond; contextually, overlooking or exceeding a permissible limit.
• أَجَازَ ـ يُجِيزُ: enabled someone to pass; permitted, approved, or brought something into effect.
• إِجَازَة: permission, approval, recognition of validity; in other uses, permission to pass or transmit.
• جَائِز: passing; generally, acceptable or permissible.
• جَائِزَة: a gift or something given; in familiar modern usage, a prize or reward.
• اِجْتَازَ ـ يَجْتَازُ: crossed a place or obstacle and left it behind.
• مَجَاز: a passageway; in rhetoric, using an expression beyond its direct meaning, with contextual evidence.
• مُجِيز: someone granting permission or approval, or enabling another to pass.

Not all these forms occur in the Qur’an.

Its five occurrences belong to two verb forms: jāwazahu in Al-Baqarah 2:249, jāwaznā in Al-Aʿrāf 7:138 and Yūnus 10:90, jāwazā in Al-Kahf 18:62, and natajāwazu in Al-Aḥqāf 46:16.

Jāwaza is Form III, tajāwaza Form VI. Their different Qur’anic settings accompany this difference: passage beyond a place versus overlooking misdeeds.

Jāʾiz, jawāz, ijāzah, majāz, and ijtiyāz do not occur in the Qur’an. They help explain the lexical family, but their technical and modern meanings must not be imposed upon Qur’anic usage.

2. Semantic core and early Arabic usage

Passing and leaving behind

Passing something and leaving it behind is one clear, fundamental meaning.

جُزْتُ الْمَوْضِعَ means passing a place. جَاوَزْتُ الْمَوْضِعَ can similarly express moving beyond the place and leaving it behind.

Early usage also records أَجَزْتُ الْمَوْضِعَ for crossing or traversing a place.

In Maqāyīs al-Lughah, Ibn Fāris gives two cores: cutting through or passing something, and the middle of something.

Ibn Fāris, Maqāyīs: two cores, cutting through and middle

Arabic lexical tradition thus does not necessarily define every derivative through one meaning.

Lisān al-ʿArab likewise examines jāza, jāwaza, and ajāza in uses concerning passage and leaving behind.

These uses distinguish movement within a place from passing beyond it. Someone may enter and move along a route; leaving a point behind makes mujāwazah more apparent.

Jāwaza often concerns more than starting to move: it includes reaching beyond the relevant boundary or point.

A witness from poetry attributed to the pre-Islamic period

The Muʿallaqah attributed to Imruʾ al-Qays contains:

فَلَمَّا أَجَزْنَا سَاحَةَ الْحَيِّ وَانْتَحَى
بِنَا بَطْنُ خَبْتٍ ذِي حِقَافٍ عَقَنْقَلِ

fa-lammā ajaznā sāḥata al-ḥayyi wa-intaḥā / binā baṭnu khabtin dhī ḥiqāfin ʿaqanqali

“When we had passed the tribe’s dwelling ground and turned toward a hollow among dense sand dunes…”

Ajaznā means passing the dwelling ground and leaving the tribal settlement behind.

Early commentaries explain it with qaṭaʿnā: traversing and leaving the place behind.

The verse varies between dhī ḥiqāfin and dhī qifāfin. The variant does not change ajaznā.

ʿUmdat al-Ḥuffāẓ: ajaznā and the ḥiqāf/qifāf readings

The family thus describes actual spatial passage in poetry attributed to the pre-Islamic period.

جَوْز: the middle of something

Another attested branch is jawz, middle or center.

Jawzu al-samāʾ means the middle of the sky; jawzu al-shayʾ, the middle part of something.

One reading of a famous Imruʾ al-Qays verse has:

فَقُلْتُ لَهُ لَمَّا تَمَطَّى بِجَوْزِهِ
وَأَرْدَفَ أَعْجَازًا وَنَاءَ بِكَلْكَلِ

fa-qultu lahu lammā tamaṭṭā bi-jawzihi / wa-ardafa aʿjāzan wa-nāʾa bi-kalkali

“When that night stretched its middle, brought on successive rear parts, and heaved its heavy chest in preparation to rise, I said to it…”

Night is pictured as a being whose body and middle have stretched out. The final phrase here follows the explanation transmitted in Al-Tabrīzī’s commentary of preparing to rise; other explanations relate this part to the night’s prolonged extension.

Transmitted Al-Tabrīzī and Al-Zawzanī commentaries: interpreting the verse ending

The verse is also transmitted with bi-ṣulbihi. Bi-jawzihi in one reading therefore does not establish that as the certain original wording.

Al-Tabrīzī: Al-Aṣmaʿī’s bi-jawzihi beside bi-ṣulbihi

Jawz as middle or center is nevertheless independently attested in dictionaries.

Some lexical explanations connect passage with reaching something’s middle. Ibn Fāris, however, distinguishes two cores. Semantic similarity alone cannot establish a shared historical origin.

جَوْزَاء and naming

Al-jawzāʾ is an Arabic name for a familiar celestial constellation.

Some sources explain it through its position across the sky’s middle; others through its central stars.

It helps explain the jawz, middle, branch but does not occur in the Qur’an.

Arabic also has jawz, walnut. Some dictionaries regard this as a Persian loanword. Identical written form does not establish a common historical origin with the verb of passing.

Al-Miṣbāḥ and lexical sources: walnut as a loanword

3. Qur’anic جَاوَزَ: crossing and leaving behind

Al-Baqarah 2:249: Saul and his companions crossing the river

Verse text:

فَلَمَّا فَصَلَ طَالُوتُ بِالْجُنُودِ قَالَ إِنَّ اللَّهَ مُبْتَلِيكُمْ بِنَهَرٍ فَمَنْ شَرِبَ مِنْهُ فَلَيْسَ مِنِّي وَمَنْ لَمْ يَطْعَمْهُ فَإِنَّهُ مِنِّي إِلَّا مَنِ اغْتَرَفَ غُرْفَةً بِيَدِهِ فَشَرِبُوا مِنْهُ إِلَّا قَلِيلًا مِنْهُمْ فَلَمَّا جَاوَزَهُ هُوَ وَالَّذِينَ آمَنُوا مَعَهُ قَالُوا لَا طَاقَةَ لَنَا الْيَوْمَ بِجَالُوتَ وَجُنُودِهِ قَالَ الَّذِينَ يَظُنُّونَ أَنَّهُمْ مُلَاقُو اللَّهِ كَمْ مِنْ فِئَةٍ قَلِيلَةٍ غَلَبَتْ فِئَةً كَثِيرَةً بِإِذْنِ اللَّهِ وَاللَّهُ مَعَ الصَّابِرِينَ

fa-lammā faṣala Ṭālūtu bi-al-junūdi qāla inna Allāha mubtalīkum bi-naharin fa-man shariba minhu fa-laysa minnī wa-man lam yaṭʿamhu fa-innahu minnī illā mani ightarafa ghurfatan bi-yadihi fa-sharibū minhu illā qalīlan minhum fa-lammā jāwazahu huwa wa-alladhīna āmanū maʿahu qālū lā ṭāqata lanā al-yawma bi-Jālūta wa-junūdihi qāla alladhīna yaẓunnūna annahum mulāqū Allāhi kam min fiʾatin qalīlatin ghalabat fiʾatan kathīratan bi-idhni Allāhi wa-Allāhu maʿa al-ṣābirīna

Proposed Persian translation, rendered here in English:

“When Saul departed with the troops, he said: God will test you with a river. Whoever drinks from it is not of me; whoever does not taste it is of me, except someone scooping one handful. They drank from it, apart from a few. When he and those believing with him had crossed it, they said: Today we have no strength against Goliath and his troops. Those believing they would meet God said: How many a small group has defeated a large group by God’s permission! God is with the steadfast.”

Jāwazahu concerns crossing the river and leaving it behind.

Its suffix hu refers to the river associated with the troops’ test.

Huwa wa-alladhīna āmanū maʿahu identifies the participants: Saul and those believing with him.

The verb concerns neither moving beside the river nor merely reaching it. The river has been passed.

It does not specify the method: a bridge, a shallow crossing, or another way cannot be inferred from the verb alone.

The passage focuses on testing, crossing, and the group continuing onward.

The test of drinking must also be distinguished from crossing. The former concerns how much they drank and Saul’s command; jāwazahu describes crossing the river.

Physical passage contrasts with the difficulty ahead. They have crossed the river, yet Goliath and his troops confront them with questions of ability and perseverance.

This reflection arises from context; the verb still means crossing the river.

Al-Aʿrāf 7:138: taking the Children of Israel across the sea

Verse text:

وَجَاوَزْنَا بِبَنِي إِسْرَائِيلَ الْبَحْرَ فَأَتَوْا عَلَىٰ قَوْمٍ يَعْكُفُونَ عَلَىٰ أَصْنَامٍ لَهُمْ قَالُوا يَا مُوسَى اجْعَلْ لَنَا إِلَٰهًا كَمَا لَهُمْ آلِهَةٌ قَالَ إِنَّكُمْ قَوْمٌ تَجْهَلُونَ

wa-jāwaznā bi-banī Isrāʾīla al-baḥra fa-ataw ʿalā qawmin yaʿkufūna ʿalā aṣnāmin lahum qālū yā Mūsā ijʿal lanā ilāhan ka-mā lahum ālihatun qāla innakum qawmun tajhalūna

Proposed Persian translation, rendered here in English:

“We took the Children of Israel across the sea. They came upon people devoted to their idols and said: Moses, make us a deity as they have deities. He said: You are indeed an ignorant people.”

Jāwaznā accompanies bi-banī Isrāʾīla and al-baḥra.

This construction matters: God takes the Children of Israel across, rather than traveling across the sea like a human traveler.

The bāʾ in bi-banī Isrāʾīla concerns taking them across and carrying them along. The construction thus expresses bringing across.

Al-baḥra identifies what they cross.

The crossing’s result is prominent. They have crossed and then encountered people devoted to idols.

The verb does not describe how the route opened or every detail of crossing. Al-Baqarah 2:50 and Al-Shuʿarāʾ 26:63 mention the divided water and the Children of Israel’s rescue.

Jāwaznā alone identifies neither the precise geographical crossing nor a particular sea’s name.

The latter part narrates the request that Moses provide another deity. This follows the crossing but must not be inserted into the root’s lexical definition.

Yūnus 10:90: the crossing and Pharaoh’s pursuit

Verse text:

وَجَاوَزْنَا بِبَنِي إِسْرَائِيلَ الْبَحْرَ فَأَتْبَعَهُمْ فِرْعَوْنُ وَجُنُودُهُ بَغْيًا وَعَدْوًا حَتَّىٰ إِذَا أَدْرَكَهُ الْغَرَقُ قَالَ آمَنْتُ أَنَّهُ لَا إِلَٰهَ إِلَّا الَّذِي آمَنَتْ بِهِ بَنُو إِسْرَائِيلَ وَأَنَا مِنَ الْمُسْلِمِينَ

wa-jāwaznā bi-banī Isrāʾīla al-baḥra fa-atbaʿahum Firʿawnu wa-junūduhu baghyan wa-ʿadwan ḥattā idhā adrakahū al-gharaqu qāla āmantu annahu lā ilāha illā alladhī āmanat bihi banū Isrāʾīla wa-anā mina al-muslimīna

Proposed Persian translation, rendered here in English:

“We took the Children of Israel across the sea. Pharaoh and his troops pursued them in rebellion and aggression, until drowning overtook him. He said: I believe there is no deity except the One in whom the Children of Israel believe, and I am among those submitting.”

The expression from Al-Aʿrāf 7:138 recurs: وَجَاوَزْنَا بِبَنِي إِسْرَائِيلَ الْبَحْرَ.

The verb likewise means taking the Children of Israel across the sea.

The continuation gives another perspective: Pharaoh and his troops pursue them after their crossing.

Fa-atbaʿahum from ت ب ع concerns following; jāwaznā describes taking across.

The verbs relate narratively but are not synonyms.

Baghyan wa-ʿadwan describes the pursuers’ motivation and aggressive conduct. It belongs to other roots, not ج و ز.

The Israelites’ crossing accompanies rescue; Pharaoh’s pursuit accompanies the danger of drowning.

Jāwaznā does not itself contain the whole narrative of rescue and destruction. The verb means taking across; context and related verses describe consequences.

Al-Kahf 18:62: passing the relevant place

Verse text:

فَلَمَّا جَاوَزَا قَالَ لِفَتَاهُ آتِنَا غَدَاءَنَا لَقَدْ لَقِينَا مِنْ سَفَرِنَا هَٰذَا نَصَبًا

fa-lammā jāwazā qāla li-fatāhu ātinā ghadāʾanā la-qad laqīnā min safarinā hādhā naṣaban

Proposed Persian translation, rendered here in English:

“When the two had passed on, he said to his young companion: Bring our midday meal; we have indeed suffered weariness from this journey.”

Jāwazā is a Form III perfect verb for two people.

Moses and his young companion are its subjects. The final dual alif indicates both have passed a point.

Unlike Al-Baqarah 2:249, this sentence states no object.

Al-Kahf 18:60 and Al-Kahf 18:61 discuss reaching the meeting of two seas and forgetting the fish. In Al-Kahf 18:63 the companion mentions the rock where they had rested.

Context therefore identifies a relevant place or earlier stopping point they have passed.

Jāwazā alone identifies neither the place’s name nor the obstacle’s nature.

“They crossed the sea” is inappropriate here: unlike Al-Aʿrāf 7:138 and Yūnus 10:90, this sentence does not make the sea the verb’s object.

“They passed on” is appropriate, with contextual explanation that they passed and left that place behind.

Moses subsequently mentions weariness from travel. It concerns the journey, not the root ج و ز itself.

The verb can thus omit an object when context identifies the relevant place.

4. تَجَاوَزَ: from physical passage to overlooking wrongdoing

Al-Aḥqāf 46:16: passing over people’s misdeeds

Verse text:

أُولَٰئِكَ الَّذِينَ نَتَقَبَّلُ عَنْهُمْ أَحْسَنَ مَا عَمِلُوا وَنَتَجَاوَزُ عَنْ سَيِّئَاتِهِمْ فِي أَصْحَابِ الْجَنَّةِ وَعْدَ الصِّدْقِ الَّذِي كَانُوا يُوعَدُونَ

ulāʾika alladhīna nataqabbalu ʿanhum aḥsana mā ʿamilū wa-natajāwazu ʿan sayyiʾātihim fī aṣḥābi al-jannati waʿda al-ṣidqi alladhī kānū yūʿadūna

Proposed Persian translation, rendered here in English:

“Those are the ones from whom We accept the best of what they did and whose misdeeds We pass over, among the Garden’s inhabitants—the true promise they were given.”

Natajāwazu is a Form VI imperfect from ج و ز.

Its agent is God, speaking in the first person plural.

ʿAn sayyiʾātihim specifies what is passed over: their misdeeds and wrong actions.

The difference from the preceding four uses is clear. There a person or group passes a river, sea, or point on a route; here the subject is overlooking wrongdoing.

Tajāwaza ʿan expresses forgiving someone’s fault and not holding them to account for it.

The role of عَنْ

The preposition ʿan matters in natajāwazu ʿan sayyiʾātihim.

Physical jāwaza can take a direct object, as in jāwazahu in Al-Baqarah 2:249.

Al-Aḥqāf 46:16 uses tajāwaza ʿan for overlooking something.

Dictionaries show the distinction: tajāwaza al-mawḍiʿa passes a place; tajāwaza ʿani al-dhanbi forgives a sin.

Al-Miṣbāḥ and Lisān: passing a place and overlooking wrongdoing with ʿan

Root and form alone therefore do not settle the meaning: the accompanying preposition also directs it.

“We pass over their misdeeds” is natural and precise. A purely spatial “we move across their misdeeds” might suggest the root image but conveys the established expression less fluently.

Accepting good deeds and passing over bad ones

The verse pairs two verbs:

نَتَقَبَّلُ عَنْهُمْ أَحْسَنَ مَا عَمِلُوا and نَتَجَاوَزُ عَنْ سَيِّئَاتِهِمْ.

It first mentions accepting the best of their deeds, then passing over their misdeeds.

These are not the same meaning.

Nataqabbalu from ق ب ل means accepting; natajāwazu from ج و ز here means refraining from calling misdeeds to account.

The verse promises more than accepting good deeds: it also describes a forgiving response to their faults.

The preceding Al-Aḥqāf 46:15 discusses kindness to parents, gratitude, righteous conduct, reform of descendants, repentance, and submission to God.

The promise continues a description of people who have turned to God seeking reform and acceptance.

Al-Ṭabarī: accepting good deeds and passing over wrongs in context

Its context prevents the expression from becoming an unconditional promise concerning every person and every deed.

Tajāwaza does not deny that wrongdoing occurred. Forgoing accountability differs from claiming that no fault happened.

This matters for divine forgiveness: the Qur’an can acknowledge misdeeds while promising to pass over them.

The verb alone does not settle forgiveness’s manner, effects on others’ rights, or every condition of final reckoning. Other verses require examination.

5. Questions of understanding and semantic development

Does تَجَاوُز always mean transgression and breaking rules?

Modern Persian and Arabic often use tajāwuz negatively: exceeding limits, violating another’s rights, violence, or aggression.

This does not exhaust the family’s range.

Tajāwaza can express passing and going beyond something. Whether this is right, wrongful, or forgiving depends on the object and construction.

Exceeding a rightful limit gives it a negative sense.

Natajāwazu ʿan sayyiʾātihim uses the same family for pardon and forgiveness.

Modern violations of rights or personal boundaries must not be transferred to this verse.

Conversely, this positive use does not make every exceeded limit positive or forgiving.

The word has no invariant ethical direction; construction and context determine it.

جَوَاز and permissibility

An established branch is jawāz, acceptability or permissibility.

Jāza al-ʿaqdu can mean a contract becoming valid and effective; ajāza al-amra concerns approving or carrying something into effect.

This can be related conceptually to passing an obstacle or a stage of acceptance, without proving the historical origin of legal terminology.

Later jurisprudence sometimes contrasts jāʾiz with obligatory, prohibited, or other classifications. The technical scheme is not the root’s direct Qur’anic meaning.

None of the five Qur’anic occurrences means technical legal permissibility.

Jāwaznā in Moses’ story therefore means taking the Children of Israel across, rather than declaring something permissible.

إِجَازَة: permission and approval

Ijāzah can mean permission, approval, and recognizing validity.

Later scholarly traditions use it for authorization to transmit, teach, or convey knowledge.

Modern Arabic also uses ijāzah for leave or holidays.

These established meanings do not make the Qur’anic root directly concern leave, scholarly certification, or administrative authorization.

The form ajāza does not occur in the Qur’an.

مَجَاز: from passageway to indirect linguistic use

Majāz also means a passageway or place of crossing.

Rhetoric later made it a term for using an expression beyond its direct meaning, with a contextual indication.

The image is comprehensible: as someone passes between places, figurative meaning moves between domains.

This does not make every Qur’anic jāwaza a technical rhetorical trope.

Metaphor, figurative usage, and exemplification require each verse’s own construction and evidence.

Majāz itself does not occur in the Qur’an.

جَائِزَة: a gift or reward

Jāʾizah can describe something given, including a gift or reward.

Some early uses connect it to provisions enabling travelers to complete a route.

The relationship to passage is understandable, but proves no certain historical order for all its senses.

Lexical sources: jāʾizah and a traveler’s supplies

Modern Persian chiefly uses jāʾizah for a prize for competition, excellence, or achievement.

It belongs to ج و ز but does not occur in the Qur’an and must not enter the definition of jāwaza or natajāwazu.

6. Comparing related roots

ج و ز (جَاوَزَ) and ع ب ر (عَبَرَ): crossing and passing

ʿAbara also concerns passing a place, particularly from one side of a route or obstacle to the other.

ʿUbūru al-nahr means crossing a river, the subject of jāwazahu in Al-Baqarah 2:249.

Their spatial uses overlap.

Jāwaza can emphasize leaving a place behind. This tendency must not become an absolute rule assigning only entry to ʿabara and only completion to jāwaza.

Context determines the relevant stage of movement.

ج و ز (جَاوَزَ) and ق ط ع (قَطَعَ): crossing and cutting through

Study of Q Ṭ ʿ

Qaṭaʿa can concern cutting, separating, ending, or traversing a route.

Dictionaries sometimes explain jāwaza al-mawḍiʿa through qaṭaʿahu.

Not every qaṭaʿa describes spatial passage: severing something, ending a relationship, and terminating an undertaking also belong to it.

The four spatial Qur’anic jāwaza occurrences share passage or leaving a place behind with some uses of qaṭaʿa.

ج و ز (جَاوَزَ) and م ر ر (مَرَّ): passing a point

Marra concerns passing. Someone can pass beside something without crossing it as an obstacle.

Jāwaza can also describe passing a place, but jāwaza al-nahra more clearly leaves a barrier or area behind.

The distinction is not absolute: both verbs can describe actual spatial passage.

ج و ز (تَجَاوَزَ) and ع ف و (عَفَا): overlooking and pardon

Study of ʿ F W

Qur’anic ʿafā concerns pardon and forgiveness; some lexical uses also concern erasing a trace.

Ethical tajāwaza ʿan likewise concerns overlooking a fault and forgoing its prosecution.

Natajāwazu ʿan sayyiʾātihim in Al-Aḥqāf 46:16 approaches this field.

Proximity does not make every branch identical.

ʿAfw has other Qur’anic uses, including relinquishing a claim. The sole ethical Qur’anic tajāwaza concerns passing over people’s misdeeds.

Their relationship establishes neither an invariant sequence nor one as always preceding the other.

ج و ز (تَجَاوَزَ) and غ ف ر (غَفَرَ): passing over wrongdoing and forgiveness

Study of GH F R

Ghafara concerns forgiveness in the Qur’an; covering and protecting belong to its lexical background.

Tajāwaza ʿan sayyiʾātihim likewise concerns a forgiving response to misdeeds.

The expressions overlap in forgiveness, with different lexical images.

Tajāwaza ʿan emphasizes passing over accountability; ghafara concerns forgiveness with a background of covering.

Different root images do not prove two obligatory, separate stages of divine forgiveness in each verse.

Context determines what follows from each choice of word.

ج و ز (تَجَاوَزَ) and ص ف ح (صَفَحَ): passing over and turning away from wrongdoing

Study of Ṣ F Ḥ

Ethical ṣafḥ concerns overlooking and pardon.

Lexical sources relate the family to turning away or setting something aside.

Tajāwaza ʿan and ṣafaḥa ʿan can overlap in overlooking.

They are nevertheless not wholly interchangeable in every context.

Al-Aḥqāf 46:16 selects natajāwazu. Explanation should begin from this construction, rather than substituting every neighboring word’s meaning.

ج و ز (تَجَاوَزَ) and ع د و (عَدَا): exceeding a limit and transgression

Study of ʿ D W

Some Qur’anic ʿadā derivatives concern aggression, enmity, and exceeding bounds.

This approaches negative Arabic tajāwaza al-ḥadda.

Qur’anic tajāwaza itself never means aggression against others. Its only occurrence, natajāwazu ʿan sayyiʾātihim, is forgiving.

Semantic proximity therefore does not turn this natajāwazu into aggression or assault.

ج و ز (جَاوَزَ) and ج ز ي (جَزَى): passage and recompense

Study of J Z Y

Jāwaza and jazā belong to different roots.

Jāwaza, ج و ز, concerns crossing and leaving behind.

Jazā, ج ز ي, concerns recompense, compensation, reward, or punishment.

Unvocalized forms can be confused, but the different second root consonant and verb structure must remain distinct.

Jāwazahu in Al-Baqarah 2:249 does not mean recompensing; natajāwazu in Al-Aḥqāf 46:16 is not formed from ج ز ي.

7. Translation proposals for Forqan

For jāwazahu in Al-Baqarah 2:249, “crossed it” or “passed beyond it” is appropriate. Its pronoun means the river; explanation can specify Saul and his companions’ crossing.

For وَجَاوَزْنَا بِبَنِي إِسْرَائِيلَ الْبَحْرَ in Al-Aʿrāf 7:138 and Yūnus 10:90, “We took the Children of Israel across the sea” preserves construction and meaning. “We crossed the sea with the Children of Israel” may imply God’s spatial accompaniment and does not suit this construction.

For jāwazā in Al-Kahf 18:62, “the two passed on” is direct. Contextual explanation may add that they passed the stopping place or relevant point. Its name must not enter the basic translation without explanation.

For natajāwazu ʿan sayyiʾātihim in Al-Aḥqāf 46:16, “We pass over their misdeeds” is natural and precise.

“We disregard their misdeeds” can partly convey overlooking, but may suggest that wrongdoing has no importance or reality. “Pass over” better preserves forgiveness and forgoing accountability.

For non-Qur’anic forms: jawāz can mean permissibility or possibility of passage; ijāzah permission and approval; ijtiyāz crossing; and literary majāz indirect usage of meaning.

These must not replace the Qur’anic verbs’ meanings. Each belongs to its own form and setting.

8. Conclusion

The family’s clear, common branch concerns passing, crossing, traversing a route, and leaving something behind. Brief root meaning: Passing and leaving behind; Qur’anic tajāwaza ʿan means passing over misdeeds and refraining from holding them to account.

Jawz, the middle, is also attested, along with permission, approval, permissibility, and giving. Without historical evidence, these cannot all be assigned one certain original image.

The Qur’an has five occurrences. Saul and his companions cross a river in Al-Baqarah 2:249; the Children of Israel are taken across the sea in Al-Aʿrāf 7:138 and Yūnus 10:90; Moses and his companion pass a point in Al-Kahf 18:62.

Al-Aḥqāf 46:16 uses natajāwazu ʿan sayyiʾātihim ethically: God passes over the misdeeds of those described in context.

Passing and leaving behind form the clear axis of Qur’anic use, but what is passed can be a physical place or an ethical matter such as holding a fault to account.

Four verses concern physical passage; one concerns passing over wrongdoing.

A fixed equivalent cannot convey every use precisely. Verb form, object, accompanying preposition, and context must be examined together.

Forqan renders spatial jāwaza as passing or taking across, and tajāwaza ʿan in Al-Aḥqāf 46:16 as passing over misdeeds. This preserves the family’s semantic relationship without erasing actual differences.