Tafsir of Hud 11:34

"And my counsel will not benefit you"

"Nush" (counsel) is the striving to utter a word or perform an act in which there is benefit; it is a comprehensive term. It is said: it is to inform of the locations of error so that they may be avoided, and the locations of righteousness so that they may be followed. It is derived from their saying, "I have offered him sincere love" (nasahtu lahu al-wudd), meaning I have purified it; and the nasih of honey is its pure part. Or it is from their saying, "I have mended the skin" (nasahtu al-jild), meaning I have sewn it; the nasih is the tailor, and the nasah is the thread. Isa ibn Umar al-Thaqafi recited "nusi" with a fathah on the nun, making it an infinitive (masdar). According to the recitation of the majority, as Abu Hayyan stated, it is possible for it to be an infinitive, like "shukr" (gratitude), or a noun.

"If I intend to counsel you"

This is a conditional clause whose response (jawab) is omitted due to the indication provided by what preceded it. It is not the response to the preceding [clause] because, according to the correct view held by the Basrans, the response cannot precede the condition. The meaning is: "If you intend for me to counsel you, my counsel will not benefit you." The entire sentence is evidence for the response of His saying, the Almighty: "If Allah intends to lead you astray." The estimated structure is: "If Allah intends to lead you astray, then if I intend to counsel you, my counsel will not benefit you." They classified this verse under the category of one condition intervening upon another.

In the Sharh al-Tashil by Ibn Aqil, it is stated that if two conditions occur successively—for example, saying, "If you come to me, if I promise you, I will do good to you"—the response belongs to the first, and it suffices for the omission of the second response. Ibn Malik claimed that the second condition acts as a qualifier for the first, like a state (hal); it is as if it were said in the example: "If you come to me in the state of my promising you, I will do good to you." The correct position on the issue is that the response belongs to the first, and the response to the second is omitted due to the indication provided by the second condition and its response. Thus, when you say: "If you enter the house, if you speak to Zayd, if he comes to you, you are free," then "you are free" is the response to "If you enter," and it—along with its response—is evidence for the response to "If you speak," and "If you speak" along with its response is evidence for the response to "If he comes." The evidence for the response is a response in meaning, and the response is delayed; thus, the third condition is advanced, and likewise the second. It is as if it were said: "If he comes, then if you speak, then if you enter, you are free." Consequently, he does not become free unless it occurs in this order: coming, then speaking, then entering. This is the school of al-Shafi’i—may Allah have mercy on him. Al-Jassas mentioned that there is a disagreement on this between Muhammad [al-Shaybani] and Abu Yusuf—may Allah the Almighty have mercy on them—and it is not solely the school of Imam al-Shafi’i. Some jurists said the response belongs to the last, and the last condition and its response are the response to the second, and the second condition and its response are the response to the first. According to this, he would not be free unless it occurred in this order: entering, then speaking, then coming. Some said: If they are gathered, freedom is obtained without sequence. This is if the succession is without a conjunction; if it is conjoined with "or" (aw), the response is for one of them without specification, such as: "If you come to me or if you honor Zayd, I will do good to you." If it is with "and" (waw), the response is for both. If it is with "fa" (so/then), the response is for the second, and it—with its response—is the response to the first, so the "fa" departs from being a conjunction. Ibn Hisham argued that considering the verse as falling under that category is questionable. He said: "Because there are not two successive conditions followed by a response, as in the examples you heard, and as in the poet's saying: 'If you seek our aid, if you are terrified, you will find among us strongholds of glory adorned by generosity,' for no response is mentioned therein; rather, what preceded the two conditions is the response in meaning to the first. Therefore, it should be estimated alongside it, and the origin would be: 'If I intend to counsel you, then my counsel will not benefit you if Allah intends to lead you astray.' As for estimating the response after both of them and then estimating the first to be advanced alongside the first condition, there is no justification for it." End quote.

A treatise was written on this issue, as al-Jalal al-Suyuti said, and he included it in his marginalia on al-Mughni—it is a good one. It is not hidden from you that what is estimated is of the same strength as what is mentioned, and it is frequent in the succession of two conditions without a conjunction that the response is delayed in usage, so it is estimated accordingly, and its rule applies.

The speech, according to the foregoing, contains two different conditions: one is the response to the other. The one that is later in mention has been made to precede in meaning, as is the custom in the issue. According to al-Zamakhshari, as it is said, it is one single qualified condition, where he made "will not benefit you" the evidence for the response to "if Allah intends," and made "If I intend to counsel you" a qualifier for that, analogous to "If I do good to you, if it is possible for me." So contemplate this.

The speech relates to their saying: "You have argued with us and argued much." It emanated from him, peace be upon him, to demonstrate the inability to divert them from the error they were upon using arguments and clear signs, due to the extremity of their persistence in obstinacy, and to signal that what preceded from him was only by way of counsel to them and compassion for them, and that he did not spare any effort in guiding them to the truth and to its clear path. However, that does not benefit them when He, the Almighty, intends to lead them astray. The qualification of the lack of benefit of counsel with His intention—despite that [the lack of benefit] being inevitable—is to signal that this counsel is accompanied by the intention and concern for it, and to establish the contrast between it and what occurred in parallel to it: His, the Almighty’s, intention to lead them astray. He limited [the speech] to the mere intention of leading astray rather than the leading astray itself—for He did not say "If Allah leads you astray"—as an exaggeration in demonstrating the dominance of His side, the Exalted is His Majesty; for this indicates that his counsel, accompanied by his concern for it, would not avail them anything even upon the mere intention of Allah to lead them astray, so how then [would it be] upon its realization and His creation of it in them? The addition of "kan" (was/is) is to signal the precedence of His, the Almighty’s, intention in time, as it precedes in rank, and to signify its renewal and continuity. He preceded this speech with what relates to their saying: "Bring us what you promise us" from His saying: "Allah will bring it to you only if He wills," as a response to them from the beginning and as a record against them of the arrival of the punishment, along with the connection of the response to the question. Our master, the Shaykh al-Islam, said this.

Furthermore, if "If I intend" is kept for the future, it does not contradict that he counseled them in the past time. It is said: it is to keep pace with them to establish the argument, because they claimed that what he did was not counsel, for had it been counsel, it would have been accepted from him. The "lam" in "lakum" (for you) is not for reinforcement, as might be imagined, because the verb is transitive in itself, as in the saying: "I counseled the sons of Awf, but they did not accept my messenger, and my messages did not succeed with them." This is because, in al-Sihah, the form with "lam" is more eloquent.

The verse contains proof that the intention of Allah, the Almighty, is of that which can be rightly linked to leading astray, and that going against His will, the Almighty, is impossible; otherwise, the conditional statement indicating the necessity of the response to the condition would not be true. The Mu'tazila fell into a dilemma over this and differed in interpreting it. It was said: "yughwiyakum" (leads you astray) means "destroys you" (yuhlikukum), from [the verb] ghawa (to be ruined) applied to a young camel when it suffers indigestion from drinking too much milk and dies. Al-Farra' and others narrated that "ghawiy" comes in the sense of destruction, though Makki denied it. It was also said: "leading astray" is a metaphor for His punishment, i.e., "If Allah intends the punishment of your leading others astray and your misguiding them."

It was also said: The people of Noah believed that Allah, the Almighty, intended to lead them astray, so he, peace be upon him, uttered that by way of astonishment and denial, i.e., "My counsel will not benefit you if the matter is as you claim." It was said: He called the abandonment of forcing them—letting them be and their own affairs—"leading astray" metaphorically. It was also said: The "in" (if) is negative, i.e., "Allah did not intend to lead you astray," and the negation of that is proof for the negation of the leading astray, and "my counsel will not benefit you" is his, peace be upon him, informing them and consoling himself regarding them because he saw their persistence and continuation in disbelief. It is not hidden what lies in that [interpretation] of opposing the apparent meaning known in usage, and committing to what should not be committed in the speech of the King, the Exalted.

Some people objected to the inference [that the condition proves the intention], arguing that a conditional statement does not indicate the occurrence of the condition nor its permissibility, so it is not complete and does not require interpretation or debate. This was countered by the fact that the context rejects that, due to the lack of benefit in merely positing it. If they intend to return it to a hypothetical syllogism (qiyas istithna'i), then if the premise is affirmed, it is what is sought, or if the consequent is affirmed, then it is contrary to reality because the benefit is not obtained. In sum, the verse is very clear regarding what the People of the Sunnah have held, and Allah, the Almighty, is the Granter of success.

"He is your Lord" i.e., your Creator and the Possessor of your affairs.

"And to Him you will be returned" 34.

"So He will reward you for your deeds without fail."