Tafsir of Hud 11:28

(He said): This is a connective, explanatory opening. (O my people, have you considered): That is, inform me. There is an implication here of the frailty of their aforementioned opinion. (if I am upon a clear evidence): A manifest proof from my Lord, (and a witness witnesses for me) regarding the veracity of my claim, (and He has given me mercy from Himself): This refers to prophethood, according to what has been narrated from Ibn Abbas (may Allah be pleased with them both). It is permitted that this [mercy] is the evidence itself, brought forth to indicate that, despite being a proof from Allah Almighty, it is also a great mercy and favor from Him, Exalted is He.

The reason for the singular pronoun in His saying, (but it has been obscured from you)—that is, hidden from you—is clear if we refer to the "evidence." If "mercy" is intended by it, and "evidence" refers to the proof indicating its validity, the singular pronoun is used to intend both, or because the pronoun refers to the evidence and it suffices, since the obscuring of the evidence necessitates the obscuring of what is claimed by it. The phrase "(and He has given me mercy)" is, in this case, parenthetical. Or, it is because the pronoun refers to the mercy, and there is an ellipsis in the speech; that is: "The mercy was obscured after the evidence and what indicates it were obscured," and it was omitted for brevity. It is said: it is considered in the meaning without an implied omission, or it is to imply "it was obscured" [a verb] not mentioned after the word "evidence," and it was omitted for brevity; this involves the implication of a sentence before the proof.

The majority of the seven [reciters] read (fa-‘ummiyat) with a fat-ha on the ‘ayn and a sukūn on the mīm, in the passive voice. It is derived from al-‘amā (blindness), the opposite of sight. The intended meaning here is concealment, metaphorically. It is said: "a blind proof," just as it is said "a sighted [proof]" for one that is clear. In the speech, there is a dependent metaphor, as the concealment of the proof is likened to blindness in that both prevent the attainment of intended goals. Then he did what is not hidden from you. It is permitted that there is a representational metaphor, where he who is not guided by the proof due to its concealment from him is likened to one who traverses a desert whose paths he does not know, following a blind guide. It is also said that the speech is based on inversion (qalb), and the origin is "so you were blinded to it" (fa-‘amītum ‘anhā), just as the Arabs say, "I entered the cap into my head." From this is the poet's saying: You see the bull in it entering its head into the shade. And His saying, Exalted is He: (So do not think that Allah will fail His promise to His messengers). Abu Hayyan countered this by stating that inversion (qalb), according to our scholars, is absolutely impermissible except in cases of necessity, and the poet's saying is not of that type, but rather from the category of expansion in the preposition. Likewise, the verse is not an example of it either, because akhlafa (to fail) takes two objects, and the participle derived from it does the same. You may attribute it to whichever you wish. Furthermore, had it been an inversion as mentioned, the preposition would have been ‘an (from) rather than ‘alā (upon). Do you not see that you say, "I was blinded to (‘amītu ‘an) such and such," and you do not say, "I was blinded upon (‘amītu ‘alā) such and such"?

Al-A'mash narrated from Wathab: wa-‘umiyat with a light wāw. Ubayy, al-Sulami, al-Hasan, and others read fa-‘ammāhā ‘alaykum (He obscured it from you), implying the action is from Allah Almighty. It was also read with the explicit mention [of Allah]. The apparent meaning of this aligns with the Sunnis, who hold that both good and evil are from Him. For this reason, al-Zamakhshari interpreted it [otherwise] to preserve his creed.

(Shall we force it upon you?): That is, shall we compel you to be guided by it? This is the answer to "have you considered," and it occupies the place of the conditional response.

In al-Bahr, it is stated that it is in the position of the second object, while its first object is the "evidence," which is implied, and the conditional response is omitted—indicated by "have you considered"—meaning: "If I am upon [evidence]... then inform me." Since two pronouns and two accusative objects have met, and the more definite one—the pronoun of the addressee—has been placed before the pronoun of the third person, it is permissible in the second case to connect or detach [the pronoun]. Thus, in other than the Quran, it is permissible to say: anulzimukum iyyāhā (shall we force it upon you). This is the view held by Ibn Malik in al-Tashīl, and some have agreed with him. Ibn Abi al-Rabi' said: Connection is mandatory in such a case, and he supports it with what Sibawayh said in al-Kitāb: "When the two objects to which the verb of the subject extends are an addressee and a third person, and you begin with the addressee before the third person, the marker for the third person is the marker that does not take the place of iyyāhu, and that is like a‘ṭaytuka (I gave it to you). Allah the Almighty says: (anulzimukumūhā), so this is like that, as you began with the addressee before the third person." End quote. If the third person were placed first, separation would be mandatory according to the correct view, so one would say: anulzimuhā iyyākum.

Some have permitted contraction and cited the saying of Uthman (may Allah be pleased with him): arāhanīhi (he showed it to me), and he did not say: arāhum iyyāya. The full discussion on this is in its proper place. The wāw was brought to complete the plural mīm. It is narrated from Abu 'Amr that he vocalized the first mīm with sukūn for lightness, and the like is permissible according to al-Farra'. Al-Zajjaj said: The Basran grammarians agreed that it is not permissible to silence the vowel of declension except in the necessity of poetry, such as His saying, Exalted is He: fa-al-yawma ashrabu ghayra mustaḥqibi ithman..., and his saying: And a crier informs us of the death of a master / whose loss makes the fingertips cut. As for what was narrated from Abu 'Amr regarding the sukūn, the narrator did not record it accurately from him. Sibawayh narrated from him that he used to lighten the vowel and snatch it, and this is the truth. Al-Zamakhshari mentioned something similar and said: Explicit sukūn is a grammatical error according to al-Khalil, Sibawayh, and the skilled Basrans. In the reading of Ubayy: (anulzimukumūhā) from our own side. It is narrated from Ibn Abbas (may Allah be pleased with them both) that he recited min shaṭri qulūbinā, meaning from their direction and aspect. In al-Bahr, it is mentioned that this is by way of interpretation, not that it is Quran, due to its contradiction of the mushaf's script.

(And you are averse to it) That is, you do not choose it nor do you reflect upon it. The sentence is in the position of a state (ḥāl). Al-Samīn said: It is either from the subject or from one of the two objects. It was chosen that it is in the position of a state from the pronoun of the addressees, and the prepositional phrase was advanced in observance of the rhyme scheme.

The essence of the response: "Inform me, if I am upon a clear proof regarding the validity of my claim, yet it is obscured from you and not accepted by you—is it possible for us to compel you to accept it while you are turning away from it, not reflecting upon it?" That is, this cannot be. Shaykh al-Islam established this, then said: "Its outward meaning suggests it was uttered by him (peace be upon him) by way of expressing despair regarding compelling them and ceasing from debating them, like his saying: (and my advice will not profit you), etc. However, it is interpreted as meaning that his intention (peace be upon him) was to turn them away from their aversion to it and urge them to reflect upon it, by shifting the denial derived from the interrogative particle to the act of compulsion while they are averse, not to compulsion in an absolute sense."

Our master Sa'di Jalabi said: The intention of compulsion here is coercion by killing and the like, not mandatory obligation, because it is already happening; so understand this. It is permitted that "evidence" refers to the proof of the intellect, which is the anchor of virtue, according to which individual humans are distinguished from one another, to which dignity before Allah the Almighty is attached, and [by which one is] chosen for the message. "Being upon it" means holding fast to it and being steadfast upon it. Its "obscurity" to the disbelievers—if the pronoun refers to the evidence—is their failure to perceive the state of the Prophet (peace be upon him) in being upon it. The "mercy" is the prophethood, the exclusivity of which they denied for him (peace be upon him) while he was among them. The meaning would be: "You claimed that the era of prophethood is not attained except by one who possesses a virtue over the rest of the people that entails his exclusivity to it rather than them. Inform me, if I have distinguished myself over you by an increase in merit and the acquisition of a virtue from my Lord, and He has given me, by virtue of that, a prophethood from Himself, and that evidence was obscured from you, and you did not find it, nor attain it, nor know of my possession of it and my being upon it until now, to the point where you claimed that I am like you while it is true in itself—shall we compel you to accept my prophethood which follows from them, while you are averse to that?"

Then it is said: "The interrogation is for the purpose of urging them to acknowledge," and this is more appropriate to the context of the debate. In that case, his speech (peace be upon him) would be a response to their suspicion—which they inserted into the midst of their speech—regarding his being a human whose ultimate status is to be like them, without any virtue over them, and it would be a severance of the roots of their frail opinions. End quote.

In this [interpretation], the claim that the meaning of "shall we compel you to it" is "shall we compel you to accept my prophethood which follows from them" is not apparent. Furthermore, the matter of "following" involves scrutiny, as is not hidden. Perhaps the introduction of the condition he brought is by way of "going along with them," and attributing the compulsion to the pronoun of the group is either for glorification or for considering those who follow him (peace be upon him) along with him in that.