ﲋ ﲌ ﲍ ﲎ ﲏ ﲐ ﲑ ﲒ ﲓ ﲔ ﲕ ﲖ ﲗ ﲘ ﲙ ﲚ ﲛ ﲜ ﲝ ﲞ ﲟ
Say, "Have you seen what Allah has sent down to you of provision of which you have made [some] lawful and [some] unlawful?" Say, "Has Allah permitted you [to do so], or do you invent [something] about Allah?"
Tafsir
Verse range: 10:59
Otherwise, not all provision is "sent down." Using "sent down" for what was mentioned is a figurative expression, applying the effect to the cause. It is also permissible to consider the attribution figurative, in that the "sending down" is attributed to the provision because its cause—such as rain—is sent down. It has been said that there is a conceptual metaphor here, but this is far-fetched. To construe "provision" as a metaphor for its cause, or to assume the word "cause," is not appropriate.
"(Ma)" is either:
"Then you made some of it unlawful and some lawful" (Meaning: you divided and partitioned it into unlawful and lawful, saying: "This is cattle and crops, forbidden," and "What is in the bellies of these cattle is exclusively for our males and forbidden to our wives," and other such claims.)
"Say: 'Has Allah permitted you [to do this], or do you invent [lies] against Allah?'" "Am" (or) and the hamza are balanced. The clause is in the position of the second object of araytum. The repetition of "Say" is for emphasis, and it does not prevent this [grammatical analysis]. The referent to the first object is implied. The meaning is: "Have you considered what Allah Almighty has sent down to you of provision, then you did with it what you did—which of the two matters is the case: is there permission from Allah Almighty in dividing it into two parts, or is it an invention from you?"
The original structure was: "Has Allah permitted you [to do this], or someone else?" But it shifted to what is in the Glorious Text to indicate that the established reality is the second option. They attributed this to Him, Glory be to Him, so they are inventing against Him—the Majestic and Glorious—not against anyone else; this is a severe rebuke, as is not hidden. Perhaps this is what was intended by the one who said the interrogation is for inquiry, and that its literal meaning was not intended—not for the sake of verifying the lack of permission or the certainty of the invention, but rather for confirmation, threatening, and binding them with the proof.
It is permissible that the interrogation is for the denial of permission, and that "Am" is munqati'ah (disconnected), meaning "nay," for the sake of contradiction. The purpose is to contradict that [permission] to confirm their invention. In this case, the clause is governed by the verb "Say" and is not related to araytum, which is satisfied by the first clause, as we have indicated.
Some have permitted "Am" to be muttasilah (connected) while being separated, based on the clause being related to the verb "Say," but they made it mandatory to be connected if it were related to araytum. Some have made the Glorious Name the subject of the clause serving as the predicate, for the sake of specification according to some, and to strengthen the judgment according to others. Using the noun instead of the pronoun in a context where a pronoun would suffice is to signify the utter ugliness of their invention. The prepositional phrase is placed first to indicate restriction absolutely, in one view; and for the sake of rhyme in the first perspective, and for restriction in the second perspective, in the latter.
The Mu'tazila cited this verse as evidence that what is forbidden is not "provision." They have no evidence in it according to what we have mentioned, because what is ordained for benefit is the lawful. Thus, what is mentioned here is a category of provision, which encompasses both the lawful and the unlawful. The disbelievers only erred in making some of the lawful things unlawful. Whoever considers the People of the Sunnah as peers to them in their view of provision—that it is absolutely divided into two parts—has committed a grave fabrication.
