Tafsir of Yunus 10:13

(And indeed, We destroyed the generations) such as the people of Nuh, ‘Ad, and Thamud. The term Qarn (generation) is the plural of Qarn (with a fathah on the qaf), referring to the people of every era. It is derived from iqtiran (coupling/association), as if the people of that era were coupled together in their deeds and circumstances. It is said that a Qarn is forty years, eighty years, or one hundred years, and it is also said to mean absolute time. The intended meaning here is the first. This is similar to his (peace and blessings be upon him) statement: "The best of generations is my generation, then those who follow them," and his statement: "When the generation you are in passes away and you are left in a generation, you are a stranger."

(Before you) meaning before your time. The address is directed at the people of Makkah, following the method of iltifat (shifting from one mode of address to another) to intensify the threat, having already reinforced it with the corroborative power of an oath. The prepositional phrase relates to "We destroyed." Abu al-Baqa’ rejected the possibility that it is a hal (state) for "the generations."

(When they did wrong) meaning when they committed wrong by denying the truth and persisting in deviation and misguidance. This temporal phrase relates to "We destroyed." To treat the lam as conditional, requiring an implied answer such as "We destroyed them" (based on what precedes it), is an unnecessary artifice.

His saying (Exalted is He): (And their messengers came to them) is a hal for the pronoun in "they did wrong," with an implied qad. His saying (Exalted is He): (with clear proofs) relates to "came to them," either in the sense that the ba is for transitivity, or it relates to an omitted element acting as a hal for "their messengers," indicating their excessive wrongdoing and ultimate stubbornness—meaning they did wrong by denying, even though their messengers had come to them with clear signs indicating their truthfulness, or they came to them while they were in a state where denial was no longer possible.

Abu al-Baqa’ and others permitted treating it as a conjunction to "they did wrong," in which case it holds no place in inflection, or it is in the genitive case for those who view the temporal phrase as added to the conjoined element. The order of mention does not necessarily mandate the order of occurrence, as in His saying: "And he raised his parents upon the throne, and they bowed to him in prostration." There is no need for this defense, as "wrongdoing" is not restricted to denial but is understood to cover all types of wrong, whereas denial is derived from His saying: (And they would not believe).

(In the most eloquent and emphatic manner) because the lam is for emphasizing the negation. On the first interpretation, this clause is a conjunction to "they did wrong," and it is not a "clarifying conjunction" ('atf tafsiri) in any sense—contrary to what the author of al-Kashf said, in opposition to al-Tayyibi—because the first is an informing of the occurrence of denial, while this is an informing of persistence in it. On the second interpretation, it is a conjunction to what preceded it. It is also said that it is a parenthetical clause for emphasis between the verb and what functions as its metaphorical verbal noun, namely His saying: (Thus), for the penalty referred to is an expression of its verbal noun; meaning: Just as this terrible penalty—the total extermination—is, (We recompense the criminal people).

This means every criminal group, thus including the generations. To make "Thus" refer to them is not appropriate for the context. It was recited as yajzi (He recompenses) with the ya of the third person, an iltifat from the first-person plural in "We destroyed." The gist of the meaning, upon the assumption of conjunction, is that the cause for their destruction was their denial of the messengers, and that it was not possible or upright for them to believe due to the corruption of their readiness and the abandonment of God (Exalted is He) toward them. The explanation of the gist is restricted to the first matter upon the assumption of a parenthetical clause.

Al-Zamakhshari mentioned, instead of the second matter, that God knew there was no benefit in granting them respite after the proof had been established against them by the sending of messengers (peace be upon them). He made it an explanation upon both interpretations, and therein is what requires Kashf (unveiling/explanation), so contemplate it. The attribution of the lack of belief to "abandonment" and its like is evident. The speech of the Qadi is also explicit in attributing it to God’s knowledge that they would die as disbelievers. It was objected that this contradicts the claim that "knowledge is subordinate to the known." Some scholars labored to reconcile it but brought nothing.

Some investigators said: The meaning of knowledge being subordinate to the known is that His eternal knowledge of the specific, emergent object is subordinate to its essence—meaning the specificity of the knowledge and its distinction from other knowledges is solely because it is knowledge of this essence. As for the existence of the essence and its actuality in the future, it is subordinate to His eternal knowledge, which is subordinate to its essence; meaning that when He knew it in eternity with this specificity, it necessitated that it would be realized and exist in the future with this specificity. Thus, the very fact of their dying as disbelievers and their lack of belief is subordinate to His eternal knowledge, and its occurrence is subordinate to it. This is free of doubt and is the path of the People of the Sunnah (may God have mercy on them), and through it many difficulties are resolved, so remember it.

Master Sheikh Ibrahim al-Kurani mentioned that the meaning of knowledge being subordinate to the known is that it relates to it, revealing it as it is. Based on this, he established that essences are fixed and not "created" in their subsistence. The assertion of the aforementioned subordination is something the Great Sheikh (sanctified be his secret) subscribed to, and Abd al-Karim al-Jili disputed this.

Sheikh Muhammad Umar al-Baghdadi (may mercy be upon him) said: Knowledge being subordinate to the known applies to the station of "Eternal Essences" (A'yan Qadimah) which gave the Truth detailed knowledge of them. As for the universal, categorical knowledge, the known is subordinate to the knowledge, because when the Truth (Exalted is He) manifested Himself from His Essence to His Essence through the Most Sacred Effulgence, the essences and their readiness came into being; they did not come into being from ignorance—God is far exalted above that. In this case, there is no disagreement between the Great Sheikh and al-Jili. Even if there remains a disagreement, the truth is with the Sheikh, for al-Jili, relative to him, is like one buzzing around the sanctuary. The proof is also with the Sheikh.

He (may God be pleased with him) extended the reach of the discussion by saying: "Knowledge is subordinate to the known, and the known is you, and you are He." The investigation is rugged in its path and difficult to ascend, and the completion of the discussion on this is sought in its proper place.

The benefit of the meaning of knowledge here, as was said, comes from the emphasis provided by the lam. In the verse is a severe threat and confirmed warning for the people of Makkah, because they and those destroyed ones share in what necessitates destruction. It is known from what has been established that the pronoun in "they were" refers to the generations, which is the apparent meaning. Muqatil permitted that the pronoun refers to the people of Makkah, but this contradicts the apparent meaning. Similarly, he permitted the meaning of "criminal people" to be the people of Makkah, by placing the explicit noun in the place of the pronoun of address, indicating that they are prominent in criminality. The mention of "people" is an indication that the punishment is one of extermination.

The comparison in this case is evident, for the meaning is: "We recompense you with a recompense like that of those before you." As for the first, it is on the style of "And thus We have made you a middle nation" and its likes, and it contains some distance. Indeed, the investigators said: His saying (Exalted is He) absolutely rejects that.