Tafsir of Yunus 10:61

"And you are not in any sha'n": That is, in any affair of significance. It is derived from sha’n—with a hamza, like sa’ala—meaning to intend/purpose something. Its hamza may be changed into an alif. Originally, it is a verbal noun (masdar), but the object (maf’ul) is intended here.

"...nor do you recite from it...": The pronoun [in minhu] refers to the sha’n. Recitation is the greatest of his affairs—peace and blessings of Allah be upon him—and for this reason, it is singled out for mention. Alternatively, it refers to the Revelation (tanzil). The use of the pronoun before the mention [of the Quran] is to exalt the majesty of Allah, the Exalted.

The particle min is said to be tab’idiyya (partitive) based on the first two possibilities, and ibtida’iyya (initial/origin) based on the third. The min in His saying, "from any Quran," is redundant (za’ida) for the purpose of emphasizing the negation in all estimations; this is the view held by al-Qutb.

Al-Tayyibi said: The first min [in minhu], on the last possibility, is ibtida’iyya, and the second is redundant. On the first possibility, the first is tab’idiyya and the second is bayaniyya (explicative). On the second, the first is ibtida’iyya and the second is bayaniyya.

In Irshad al-'Aql al-Salim, it is stated that the first pronoun refers to the sha’n, and the prepositional phrase is an adjective for a deleted verbal noun—that is, a recitation occurring from the sha’n—or it refers to the Revelation, with min being ibtida’iyya and tab’idiyya (or referring to Allah, exalted be His Majesty). On the first interpretation, the second min is redundant, and on the second and third, it is bayaniyya or tab’idiyya. You know that the prepositional phrase may be related to [a verb] at His side, and insisting that it relates to a deleted word acting as an adjective for a verbal noun in all these possibilities is unnecessary. Yes, the requirement, according to the famous view, is that two particles of the same meaning should not relate to one referent.

Abu al-Baqa’ held that the first pronoun is for the sha’n, the first min is for causation (li-al-ajl), as in His saying, "Because of their sins (mimma khati’atihim) they were drowned," and the second min is redundant, with what follows it being the object of tatlu. This has merit.

What is astonishing is what some said: that the pronoun in minhu might refer to the sha’n, either on the assumption of talu while the recitation is part of your affairs, or by assuming a deleted genitive (mudaf), meaning: "nor do you recite because of the sha’n, such that a sha’n occurs to you, and you recite the Quran because of it." The haliyya (adverbial) interpretation is something that would not occur to anyone with the slightest taste for the Arabic language. We have not seen the view of assuming a mudaf in speech when it contains the min of causation or its like. What is found in the speech of more than one of the elite regarding such matters is an assumption of meaning, not an assumption of syntax. It is unlikely that this individual intended the latter, as is clear.

"This": Furthermore, the "Quran" is general, covering the recited [text] in whole or in part, and it is literal (haqiqa) in [applying to] the whole, as established in its place. The claim that it is figurative (majaz) in the part, by applying the whole and intending the part, is not to be heeded.

"And you do not do any work": That is, any work whatsoever. The first address [in the verse] is specific to the head of the human species and master of the addressees, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him. This is general, including all servants—the righteous and the wicked—not just the latter. In each of the two situations, what is appropriate has been observed; thus, in the place of specificity in the first, it is expressed as sha’n, because the work of the Great is great. In the second, it is expressed as ’amal (work), covering both the grand and the lowly. It is said: The first address is also general for the [entire] nation, as in His saying, "O Prophet, when you [plural] divorce women."

"Except that We are witnesses over you": This is an exception (istithna’) from the most general of the states of the addressees regarding the three actions—meaning: "You are not involved in any of them, in any state, without Us being watchers over it, informed of it, guarding it." This is what they said, and it is understood from this that the prepositional phrase relates to what follows it. Perhaps its precedence is for the sake of importance in frightening those intended from among the addressees; it is as if the pronoun of majesty was used for emphasis, and that the intent of being informed of them is being informed of their work.

"...when you are engaged in it": That is, when you embark upon it and involve yourself in it. The origin of ifada is rushing forth with abundance or power. Since the previous actions were intended to signify the continuous, permanent state that also includes the past time, the past tense form was preferred in the exception, and the particle idha (when) was used in the prepositional phrase, which gives the present tense the meaning of the past. So it is said. I have not seen anyone address the explanation of the reason for choosing negation with ma (which fixes the present tense to the present [state] according to the majority, in the absence of a contradictory context) in the first two clauses, and negation with la (which fixes the present tense to the future according to the majority, contrary to Ibn Malik) in the third clause. Perhaps that is among the effects of the specificity and generality of the address, so contemplate it, for it is very subtle.

"And there does not escape from your Lord": That is, there does not move far away or absent itself. From this, it is said: "The distant garden (al-rawd al-'azib)," and "far garden (rawd 'azib)" if it is distant from people. The expression implies a deleted mudaf, meaning: "And there does not escape from the knowledge of your Lord." Or it is a metonymy for that. In the mention of the title of Lordship (rububiyya) alongside the addition to his pronoun—peace and blessings of Allah be upon him—there is a sense of tenderness that is not hidden.

"From the weight of a grain of dust": Min is redundant for the sake of emphasizing the negation. Mithqal is a name for that which balances a thing and refers to its weight. In Islamic Law, it is twenty-four carats. Ibn Abi Hatim recorded this in his Tafsir from Abu Ja'far. The correct view is that it did not differ between the Age of Ignorance and Islam. Jalal al-Suyuti narrated from al-Rafi'i that he said: "The people of the first era agreed on the estimation by this weight—that a dirham is six daniqs, and every ten dirhams are seven mithqals. The mithqal did not change in the Age of Ignorance or in Islam."

The dharra is one of the dharr, which are small red ants. Tha'lab was asked about it and said: "One hundred ants weigh a grain; the dharra is one of them." It is also said: The dharra has no weight, and the intent is what is seen in the sunbeam entering through a window.

"...in the earth nor in the sky": That is, in the two directions of down and up, or in the circle of existence and possibility, because the common people do not know anything possible outside of these two, nor anything related to them. The speech also includes them [the earth and sky] themselves, as is clear. The precedence of the earth over the sky—even though the sky is placed before it in many places, and it also occurs in [Surah] Saba' in a similar verse—is because the speech is about the state of its inhabitants, and the intent is to establish proof of His knowledge—exalted is He—of their details. The sky is mentioned so that it is not imagined that the encompassment of His knowledge—glory be to Him—is restricted to one thing over another. The summary of the argument is that nothing escapes Him—exalted is He—and how could someone of such state not know the condition of the inhabitants of the earth and what they are upon with His Prophet, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him?

His saying—exalted is He—"nor smaller than that, nor larger, except that it is in a clear Book": This is an independent sentence, not connected to what preceded it. La is a negative for the genus (li-nafi al-jins), and asghar is its noun, in the accusative because of its resemblance to the mudaf (shabih bi-al-mudaf). Likewise [is] akbar, due to the estimation of its operation. The statement of al-Samin that they are indeclinable on fath is weak; it is the view of the Baghdadians, and it was claimed that it was a slip of the pen, late and unworthy of acceptance. Fi kitab relates to a deleted word acting as a predicate.

Hamzah, Ya'qub, Khalaf, and Sahl read it with the nominative case (raf') as an initiating subject and predicate. La may be nullified if it is repeated. As for their statement that the "resembling the mudaf" must be in the accusative, the intent is to prevent it from being indeclinable, not to prevent the nominative case and nullification, as some have imagined. It is permitted that this is based on making la operate like laysa. It is said: Asghar, in the first reading, is a conjunction to mithqal or dharra based on the word. It is given [the vowel] instead of the kasra because it is non-declinable (la yansarif) due to being an adjective and the weight of a verb. In the other reading, it is a conjunction to mithqal based on its position, because it is a subject. The min, as you know, is redundant.

This is problematized by saying that the estimation becomes: "And there does not escape from Him anything smaller than that, nor anything larger than it, except that it is in a Book," meaning it does escape from Him, and the meaning is incorrect. It is answered that this is on the assumption of a connected exception (istithna' muttasil). But on the assumption of a disconnected one (munqati'), the estimation becomes: "But there is nothing smaller nor larger, except that it is in a Book," which is an emphasis of His saying—exalted is He—"Nothing escapes Him," etc. Some answered, on the assumption of connection, that it is along the lines of, "They will not taste therein death, except the first death," or "And that you collect [in marriage] two sisters simultaneously, except what has already passed." The meaning is: Nothing is absent from His knowledge except what is in the Tablet, which is the locus of the forms of the known things of Allah—exalted is His Majesty—based on interpreting the "Clear Book" as that, or except what is in His knowledge, based on what is said: that the Book is knowledge. If that is counted as "escaping," then it is absent from His knowledge, but it is clear that it is certainly not escaping, so nothing definitely escapes His knowledge.

One of the researchers narrated in refuting the problem that "escaping" is an expression for absolute distance. Creations are two types: one which Allah created without an intermediary, like the earth, the sky, and the angels, peace be upon them; and one which He created via the first type, like events in the world. The chain of causality may be far from the rank of the existence of the Necessary Existent—exalted is He. Thus the meaning is: No atom in the earth or the sky is distant from the rank of His existence—exalted be He—except that it is in a Clear Book, in which He—exalted is He—has inscribed those known things. Thus, it is a disconnected exception from the most general states. Establishing "escaping" in the sense of distance from Him—exalted is He—within the chain of creation has no harm in it. It is a subtle interpretation, even if it differs from what they [the theologians] are upon in general.

Al-Kawashi said: The meaning of ya'zub is to become distinct and separate, meaning: Nothing of His creation originates from your Lord except that it is in the Tablet. Its summary is that everything is written in it. It was objected that his interpretation of "becomes distinct and separate" is unknown. It is said: The intent of "distance" from the Lord—exalted is He—is distance and departure from His Unseen (ghayb), meaning: Nothing departs from His Unseen except what was in the Tablet, so it escapes the Unseen and distances itself, as it is no longer Unseen when it becomes known to the angels, peace be upon them, and others. Thus, it signifies the encompassment of His knowledge—exalted is He—of the Unseen and the Witnessed.

From here, another angle for the precedence of the earth over the sky appears. It is said: Illa is a conjunction with the status of wa (and), as al-Farra' said regarding His saying: "The messengers do not fear in My presence, except [and] the one who has done evil," and al-Akhfash in His saying: "Lest the people have an argument against you, except [and] those who have done wrong among them," and a group in His saying: "Those who avoid major sins and immoralities, except [and] the minor ones." It is implied after it, and the speech has completed at His saying: "...nor larger." Then He begins with: "Except in a Book," meaning: "And it is in a Book." Makki narrated this from Abu Ali al-Hasan ibn Yahya al-Jurjani, then said: "It is a good view, were it not that all the Basrans do not know illa in the sense of wa." Fairness dictates that one should not interpret the speech of Allah the Exalted based on that, even if all creation—human and jinn—gathered on the arrival of illa in the sense of wa.

It is said: The exception is from a deleted word indicated by the previous speech, meaning: "And there is nothing, except it is in a Book," and its counterpart is, "We have not neglected in the Book anything." From the totality of that, the establishment of Allah's knowledge of every known thing is proven, and that everything is written in the Book. It is said that many styles of the speech of the Arabs testify to this. It is narrated from the author of the book Tabsirat al-Mutadhakkir that it is permitted for the exception to be connected to what is before His saying: "And there does not escape," and there is transposition in the verse, with its order being: "And you are not in a sha’n, and you do not recite from it any Quran, and you do not do any work, except that it is in a Clear Book, except [that] We are witnesses over you when you are engaged in it..." to "...nor larger." Its summary is: "And there is nothing except it is in the Preserved Tablet, and We observe it at every moment." Al-Bulqini examined this in his treatise titled al-Istighna’ bi-al-Fath al-Mubin regarding the exception in "nor larger, except in a Clear Book," arguing that, despite the effort involved, it necessitates the claim of a structure in the Glorious Speech that is not found in the speech of the Arabs—namely "except in a Clear Book, except We are witnesses over you"—and that is not like the verse: "The command of their Lord, except the youth, except [the] beauty." As is clear, you know that the least forced of the views is that of disconnection, and the most exalted in rank and subtle in secret is the view of connection, casting the speech in the form of "except what has already passed" and its many counterparts in prose and verse. There is no fault in it, except that the verse is more eloquent upon it—so let that be understood.