Tafsir of Yunus 10:34

(Say: Is there of your partners any who originates creation then brings it back?) This is another argument for the validity of monotheism and the invalidity of polytheism. It is not connected by a conjunction, signaling its independence in establishing the intended objective. The question is intended for rebuke and binding argumentation. Allah, Glorified be He, treated resurrection—due to the brilliance of the proofs established for it—as equivalent to the initial creation in binding them, and He did not concern Himself with their denial of it, because they are stubborn regarding it; and one who is stubborn is not to be heeded. Therefore, it cannot be said: "Such an argument only works against one who acknowledges that among the properties of Divinity is initiating creation and then bringing it back, so that by negating it from the partners, the negation of their divinity is necessitated," while they do not acknowledge this. The verse contains an indication that resurrection is a manifest and apparent matter, having reached such a degree of clarity and distinctness that it is valid to establish another claim within it. Al-Tayyibi categorized this as the art of inclusion (idmaj), like the saying of Ibn Nubata: "I must have from ignorance in his union, so who will give me a friend with whom I can deposit [my] forbearance?" for he incorporated pride into the love poem by stating he is forbearing, and the pride is a complaint against [his] brethren.

(Say: Allah originates creation, then He brings it back.) It is said: This is a command to the Prophet (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) to clarify to them who does that—meaning, tell them: Allah, Glorified be He, is the One who does both, and no one else, whoever it may be. It is not that he (upon him be peace and prayer) is to stand in for them in providing the answer, as more than one has stated, because the speech he is commanded to utter is different from the answer requested of them, even if it necessitates it; for the one asked about is not "who originates creation and then brings it back," as in His saying, Glorified be He: (Say: Who is the Lord of the heavens and the earth? Say: Allah), such that the command to speak would be the very answer requested of them, and he (upon him be peace and prayer) would be standing in for them in that. Rather, it is [the inquiry into] the existence of anyone among their partners who originates and brings back. Thus, the answer requested of them is [the negation], not otherwise. Indeed, he (upon him be peace and prayer) was commanded to include it in his statement as a signal of its certainty and inevitability, and to intimate that they would not dare to explicitly state it for fear of rebuke and being silenced, rather than out of stubbornness and contention. This is the end [of the matter].

It may be said: The intent of His saying, Glorified be He: (Is there of your partners...) etc., is: Is the Originator and Restorer Allah or the partners? And the intent of His saying, Glorified be He: (Allah...) etc., is: Allah originates and brings back, and no one from the partners does so. In this case, the question and answer are orderly, and the exclusivity is understood by the implication of the context. For if you say: "Who gives away thousands? Zayd or ‘Amr?" and the answer is: "Zayd gives away thousands," it implies exclusivity without doubt. By what has been mentioned, one knows the [flaw] in the preceding discourse in refuting what the group said, and likewise in refuting what Al-Qutb said—that this does not serve as an answer to that question because the question is about the partners and this speech is about Allah the Exalted. Rather, it is a deduction regarding His divinity (the Exalted) and that He is the One who deserves worship by virtue of His being the Originator and Restorer, following the deduction regarding the negation of the partners' divinity. So reflect on this. The repetition of the entire sentence in the answer without omitting the predicate, as in the previous answer, is for the sake of greater emphasis and verification.

(Then how are you deluded?) Al-Ifk is diversion and turning away from a thing. It is said: Afakahu ‘an al-shay’ ya’fikuhu ifkan if one turns him away from it. From this is the saying of ‘Urwah ibn Udhaynah: "If you are turned away (ma’fukan) from the best of deeds, then there are others who have been turned away." It may be specific, as in the Qamus, to turning away from [proper] judgment; and perhaps that is more appropriate for this context. That is: How are you turned from the truth to falsehood? The discussion regarding it is the same as what preceded in (Then how are you diverted?).