The Generous

CARRIED ON THIS PAGE: SEVEN ayat. Carried before: 27:40, 82:6, 96:3 and 49:13.

ADDED: 23:116 and 44:49, THE TWO DEFINITE OCCURRENCES THE PAGE HAD LEFT OFF, and 89:17. All three are appended, the four existing sub-items keep their positions, none of the three is carried at any other Name so no reciprocal links were needed, and the distinct verse count in Notes on This Edition moves from 405 to 408.

NAMED HERE BUT NOT CARRIED ON THIS PAGE: 14:18, 51:42, 26:58, 44:26, 27:29, 44:17, 69:40, 81:19, 12:31, 56:77, 17:23, 26:7, 31:10, 56:44, 2:201 and 4:31, all carried at NO Name; 89:15, carried at Name 21 and Name 85.

CORRECTED ON THE RECORD, THE COUNT, AND THE ENTRY HAD NONE: counted by hand from the Tanzil text with strip, k-r-m gives FORTY-SEVEN words. The sweep for k then r then m returns 144 words in 56 forms and most of them are not this root — k-th-r alone accounts for fifty (corrected in build 166), and k-f-r, dh-k-r, sh-k-r, k-b-r, m-k-r and k-r-h take most of the rest; two more, at 14:18 and 51:42, are the particle ka- prefixed to ramād and ramīm. Every return was read by hand.

THE FINDING: of the twenty-seven adjectival forms — karīm, karīman and al-karīm — ONLY TWO ARE SAID OF ALLAH, 27:40 and 82:6, and the page had both. But THE DEFINITE AL-KARĪM STANDS THREE TIMES AND ONLY ONE OF THE THREE IS OF ALLAH. At 23:116 al-karīmi is genitive and agrees with al-ʻarshi, so it describes the Throne (in the reading printed: al-Qurṭubī records Ibn Muḥayṣin’s al-karīmu, of Allah; build 166). At 44:49 it is said to a man being dragged into the Fire — Ibn Kathīr calls it mockery and reproach and gives Ibn ʻAbbās, you are neither ʻazīz nor karīm, and Qatādah reports that it answers Abū Jahl’s boast that there is none in it mightier or more karīm than he. The Name-form is given back to a man who claimed it, at the moment the claim fails. Both are now carried.

FOUND ALSO: at 56:44 karīm is NEGATED, of the shade in Hell, and aṭ-Ṭabarī explains the idiom in his own words, which Ibn Kathīr gives as his — the Arabs follow whatever they deny a quality of praise with a denial of karam (corrected in build 166: the kit carries no al-Farrāʼ at 56:44). And the definite elative al-Akram occurs once, 96:3, and IS of Allah, which is the opposite of what Name 37 found for the elative of k-b-r; the note now says so.

FOUND, AND IT IS THE LARGEST THING ON THIS ROOT: 89:15 to 89:17 uses k-r-m three times and turns it round. A man reads a widening of provision as akramani and its narrowing as humiliation; the answer is kallā, and then the same verb in the second person, you do not honor the orphan. Name 21 carries 89:15 to 89:16 and quotes the answer in its note, but 89:17 was carried at NO Name. It is now carried here.

CORRECTED, THE ROOT FIELDS: glossBasis was desc and senseNote was null; the gloss said nobility and generosity together, which is a summary rather than a lexicon. IBN FĀRIS WAS READ IN HIS OWN TEXT at the aggregator’s sister entry, and he gives the root TWO chapters, the second of which has nothing to do with giving: al-karm is THE NECKLACE, and the grapevine is named from it because it is a gathering of clusters with the grapes strung along it. Within the first chapter he narrows to one act — karam of character is the passing over of the offender’s offence — and cites Ibn Qutaybah that al-karīm is aṣ-ṣafūḥ, and that Allah is al-Karīm who pardons the sins of His believing servants. The entry had asserted that He forgives the large offence; the lexicon proves it and the assertion is now sourced. Ar-Rāghib divides divine from human use — of Allah the word names open bestowal, of a man deeds that must appear before he may be called karīm — and he settles a question Name 41 left open by saying that al-ikrām at 55:27 comprises both senses at once. CORRECTED, THE ḤADĪTH, AND THIS IS A SILENT SPLICE: the printed Arabic of Abū Dāwūd 1488 joined two non-contiguous stretches of the source across the phrase tabāraka wa-taʻālā, which the source has and the page had dropped. Letter-only containment failed on the whole string and passed on each half. The phrase is restored, the English is extended to match, and the quotation is now contiguous.

CORRECTED, A CLAIM THAT WAS SIMPLY FALSE: the ref and the note both said that the Darussalam grading of at-Tirmidhī 3556 is ḍaʻīf, and gave that as the reason for resting the wording on Abū Dāwūd. Darussalam grade 3556 ḤASAN, and Aḥmad Shākir and al-Albānī grade it ṢAḤĪḤ. The stated reason for an editorial choice was wrong; the choice stands on the true ground instead, which is that 3556 does not carry this wording — it reads inna llāha for inna rabbakum and ar-rajul for ʻabdihi. Nor does Ibn Mājah 3865 carry it: it reads an yarfaʻa ilayhi yadayhi fa-yaruddahumā and adds aw qāla khāʼibatayn. The claim that at-Tirmidhī carries the same text was wrong too.

CORRECTED, THE GRADES: Abū Dāwūd 1488 recorded ONE of THREE verdicts and the omitted one disagrees — Darussalam grade it ḥasan where al-Albānī and Muḥammad Muḥyī ad-Dīn ʻAbd al-Ḥamīd say ṣaḥīḥ. Ibn Mājah 3865 was given as ḥasan, which is Darussalam alone and drops two ṣaḥīḥ verdicts. ADDED, A SECOND ḤADĪTH: al-Bukhārī 3382, where the definite al-Karīm stands FOUR TIMES IN ONE SENTENCE AND EVERY ONE IS OF A HUMAN BEING — the transmitted counterpart of the Qurʼanic count. ADDED, A DUʻĀʼ: the page had only the Qurʼanic 2:201 and no transmitted supplication naming the Name. At-Tirmidhī 3513 addresses Allah as ʻafuwwun karīm, and the word karīm is in at-Tirmidhī’s recension and NOT in Ibn Mājah 3850’s, so the only transmitted supplication that names this Name rests on that recension alone. It pairs the Name with pardoning, which is where Ibn Fāris puts the root.

CORRECTED, THE HOUSE FORMS: the ref carried Sunan Abī Dāwūd 1488, Sunan Ibn Mājah 3865 and Jāmiʻ at-Tirmidhī 3556; all three are now house forms. MEDS 42, POEMS 42 and CH 42 read and left unchanged.

OPEN: al-Bukhārī 6183 and Muslim 2247b, do not call the grapevine al-karm, for the karm is the heart of the believer — 2247c has the Muslim man, corrected in build 166 — were read and not carried; az-Zamakhsharī reads that report as a way of establishing 49:13, which is on this page, and it would suit a later pass.

OPEN: 17:62, where Iblīs uses this root of Ādam — this one whom You have honored above me — is the root in the mouth of the refuser and is carried at Name 72.

OPEN, FOR THE AUTHOR: the English of this Name is The Generous, while Ibn Fāris and the lexicons put nobility first and pardoning second, and the book renders akramakum at 49:13 as most noble; the English is left alone.

COHERENCE, AND THERE WERE TWO FAULTS AT NAMES 70 AND 82: both cite at-Tirmidhī 3513 and Ibn Mājah 3850 together with a grade saying DARUSSALAM ṢAḤĪḤ AT BOTH NUMBERS. DARUSSALAM GRADE BOTH ḌAʻĪF, and that grade was false at two Names. Both also PRINT THE IBN MĀJAH WORDING, without karīm, under a citation led by at-Tirmidhī, which the house rule forbids: a pair is cited only when both carry the printed wording. Each Name now cites the one number that carries its own text — Ibn Mājah 3850 at 70 and 82, at-Tirmidhī 3513 here — and each grade gathers every verdict the dataset gives. SHARED_LOCI gains the reciprocal dua links between 42, 70 and 82. Name 21 keeps 89:15 to 89:16 unchanged, but its Study Note listed 89:17 among verses carried at NO Name and Name 3's listed 23:116 the same way; both claims were made stale by these appends and both are corrected. Three pre-existing hygiene faults at the coherence Names are cleared while they are open: Muslim 2739 at Name 70 and an-Nasāʼī 5534 at Name 82 had no grade, and al-Bukhārī 4750 at Name 82 carried Arabic punctuation in its ar, now stripped with the letters asserted unchanged and contained in the source.

OPEN, AND FOUND WHILE DOING THAT: the printed Arabic of Muslim 2739 at Name 70 does NOT verify by letter-only containment against Muslim 2739 in the dataset. It was not edited here, because it is not this Name's material and a repair needs the whole entry read; it is recorded so that Name 70's pass begins there.

AUDIT AFTER NAME 65: the Qurʼan link for 49:13 to Name 31 was of the kind the reader shows as Also at, which says the same text is printed there, and that page prints different Arabic; it is now shown as Another portion at. AFTER THE CHAT-END AUDIT OF 81–85: the grade field of Abū Dāwūd 1488 now gives every grader in the dataset’s rows, each attributed to its record (the grade survey). AFTER THE CHAT-END AUDIT OF 1–99: the capitalised runs in the desc and the ref are set in lower case, the words unchanged. the link to Names 70 and 82 was read on all three pages and stands: one supplication of ʻĀʼishah in two transmissions, the wording with karīm here and without it there.

IN BUILD 166, FROM THE PHASE 2 READING: the ref and the 82:6 note give al-mutajāwiz ʻanka to al-Qurṭubī and al-Baghawī, whose own gloss it is, and the note gives Ibn Kathīr’s Ibn ʻAbbās, that ignorance deceived the man; the ref gives the 56:44 idiom to aṭ-Ṭabarī, in whose words the kit has it; the ref names s-k-r and n-k-r among the look-alikes, the entrance at 4:31 among the created things, which stands on the named line, and Ibn Mājah 3861’s list beside at-Tirmidhī 3507; the 23:116 note gives the reading of Ibn Muḥayṣin and keeps the count to the reading printed; the 89:17 note carries 89:15 at Names 21 and 85; the Abū Dāwūd 1488 note gives the route the parallels share and no longer narrates its editing.

AFTER NAME 70: Muslim 2739 at Name 70 now verifies as one contiguous run, and the OPEN item on it is closed there. The lexica in print stay to be read, and the title waits on the author (A54).

BY THE AUTHOR’S DECISIONS OF 2026-09-25, IN BUILD 182: 49:13 takes Name 31’s English but for most noble, this Name’s own word, which Name 31 now gives too, and All-Aware, Name 31’s own (A23, A42); MEDS 42 gives 27:40 in the page’s English, being Free of need, Generous, without a because the verse does not state; the title The Generous is kept (A54).

IN BUILD 207, FROM THE READING OF THE GRADES: Muḥammad Fuʼād ʻAbd al-Bāqī is no longer named as a grader on this page: the row the ḥadīth dataset gives in his name is al-Albānī’s ruling as it is printed with ʻAbd al-Bāqī’s edition of Ibn Mājah, read at Shamela through its page reader, not in print, and the edition gives no verdict of its own beyond quoting az-Zawāʼid; al-Albānī’s grade stands where it stood, and earlier records keep their words.