Tafsir of Yunus 10:104

Say to everyone who doubts your religion and disbelieves in you, "O mankind," the address is chosen using the noun of genus prefaced by the particle of attention (ya) to generalize the proclamation and to demonstrate the utmost concern for the matter conveyed to them.

"If you are in doubt concerning my religion"—the religion with which I worship Allah the Exalted and to which I invite you, for you have not known what it is nor its description, until you said it was a change of faith—"then I do not worship those whom you worship instead of Allah" at any time. "But I worship Allah who causes you to die," then acts upon you as He wills with various forms of torment.

The placement of this sentence, in consideration of its content, serves as a response through the interpretation of "informing"; otherwise, there is no syntactical sequence of a conditional clause here according to the apparent structure. The meaning is: "If you are in doubt about that, then I inform you that it is the dedication of worship to Him—the Exalted—and the rejection of the worship of whatever is besides Him, such as idols and other things you worship in your ignorance." It is common to make an "information" serve as the consequent (jaza') of a sentence’s implication, such as: "If you honored me today, then I honored you yesterday." On this pattern is His saying: "And whatever you have of favor, it is from Allah." For the persistence of favor is not the cause for its attainment from Allah the Exalted; rather, the matter is the opposite. It is only a cause for informing of its attainment from Him, as established by Ibn al-Hajib.

It may also mean: If you are in doubt about the soundness and correctness of my religion, I inform you that its essence is the worship of One who possesses this attribute, unlike what you worship, which is far removed from that state. So, present this to your intellects, set your thoughts to work upon it, and look with the eye of fairness so that you may know its correctness and truthfulness. Some have mentioned that under this interpretation, there is no need to make the consequent an "informing" or "announcement," but rather the consequent is considered to be the command to present what was mentioned to their intellects and to reflect upon it. However, it is more apparent to consider the "informing" as the consequent, as in the first meaning.

The description of their state as "doubt," despite them being certain of its invalidity, is to indicate that the most an intelligent person could potentially experience in this matter is doubt regarding its validity; as for being certain of its invalidity, there is no path to that. It is said: We do not concede that they were certain; rather, they were in doubt and turmoil upon witnessing the miracles, and "if" was used to indicate that it is something that should not exist, given the presence of that which removes it.

It is also permitted that the meaning is: If you are in doubt about my religion and what I am upon, or [expecting me] to abandon it and agree with you, then do not entertain the impossible in your minds, do not doubt my affair, cut off your hopes regarding me, and know that I do not worship those whom you worship besides Allah, nor do I choose misguidance over guidance, like His saying: "Say, 'O disbelievers, I do not worship what you worship.'" It is not hidden that the former is more fitting for the context. The deferral of "abandoning the worship of other than Allah" to after "His worship—the Exalted" follows the principle of "clearing" before "adorning," as in the Word of Oneness, and serves as a notification of opposition from the very beginning.

The specification of "causing to die" from among all other attributes of action, in relation to them, is for the purpose of intimidation, for there is nothing more severe to them than death. It is said: The meaning is "I worship Allah who created you, then causes you to die, then will resurrect you." In this is an allusion to the Resurrection, which they deny, and it is among the fundamental principles of religion. Then both ends were omitted, and the middle was kept to point to both, as they frequently appear together in the Quran.

"And I have been commanded to be among the believers"—meaning Allah the Exalted has obligated that upon me. Thus, the obligation of faith in Allah the Exalted is religious (shar'i), like all other obligations. Mawla Sadr al-Sharia mentioned that "religious" has two meanings: that which is dependent upon the Law (Shari'a), like the obligation of prayer and fasting; and that which the Law has brought, yet is not dependent upon the Law, like the obligation of faith in Allah the Exalted and the obligation of believing in the Prophet—may Allah bless him and grant him peace—for this does not depend on the Law. Therefore, it is not "religious" in the first sense. This is because the establishment of the Law is dependent upon the belief in the existence of the Creator—the Exalted—His knowledge, His power, and His speech, and upon the belief in the prophethood of the Prophet—peace be upon him—through the evidence of his miracles. If any of these rulings were dependent upon the Law, it would lead to a circular argument.

One might argue against the dependence of the Law on the obligation of faith and the like, whether "the Law" means the speech of Allah or the religion of the Prophet—may Allah bless him and grant him peace. The dependence of the belief in the establishment of the Prophet’s law upon the belief in Allah and His attributes, and upon the belief in the prophethood of the Prophet and the evidence of his miracles, does not entail that it is dependent on the "obligation" of belief or the knowledge of that obligation. At most, it is dependent upon the actual faith and belief itself, which does not prove that it is dependent upon the obligation of faith and belief. There is no contradiction in the dependence of the obligation of faith and the like upon the Law, as is the doctrine among them that there is no obligation except through divine hearing (sam').

The statement of al-Zamakhshari here—that he, peace be upon him, was commanded by both intellect and revelation—is not free from a Mu'tazilite taint, as is his habit in many places. As for those among our commentators who said: "It was obligated upon him by both intellect and hearing," they intended by "intellect" that which follows what was heard through the Law, so there is no independence [of the intellect].

The discourse regarding the omission of the preposition—meaning "commanded that I be"—and its omission from an and anna is consistent. Even if one ignores that, the omission after "command" is heard from the Arabs, such as his saying: "I commanded you [to do] good, so do what you were commanded, for I have left you a man of wealth and property." Some have included this sentence in the consequent [of the conditional], but that is not definitive.