Tafsir of Hud 11:44

(And it was said, "O Earth, swallow" – that is, absorb.) It is a metaphor taken from the swallowing of an animal, implying that the action was not like the usual gradual recession of water. Assigning the term "swallowing" specifically to what is eaten is the view famous among linguists. Al-Layth said: "It is said, 'He swallowed the water' if he drank it," which suggests it is not exclusive to food. Some have mentioned that this is figurative. Ibn al-Mundhir and others narrated from Wahb ibn Munabbih that "swallowing" in the sense of ingesting is an Ethiopian term, and Abu al-Shaykh narrated from Ja’far ibn Muhammad, from his father, that it is a Hindi term for "drinking."

"Your water" – that is, the floodwater upon your surface. It is referred to as "water" here, whereas it was previously referred to as "the command of Allah," because this context is one of reduction and diminution, not one of grandeur and terror.

"And O sky, cease" – that is, desist from sending down rain. It is said, "The sky has ceased" (aqla’at) when its rain stops, and "The fever has ceased" (aqla’at) when it abates. It is apparent that the rain did not cease until the sky was addressed as it was. As for whether the gushing of water was continuous until the earth was addressed, I have not seen anything decisive; the verse is not an explicit proof for either scenario.

"And the water subsided" – that is, decreased. It is said, "It subsided" (ghada) if it diminished; all its meanings return to this. Al-Jawhari's statement—"The water subsided (ghada) if it became little and drained, and 'the water was made to subside' (ghiyda) means it was made to do so"—does not contradict this, for scarcity is the essence of diminution. Interpreting this as "diminished" is narrated from Mujahid.

"And the matter was decreed" – that is, what Allah had promised Nuh (peace be upon him) regarding the destruction of the disbelievers among his people and his salvation with his believing family was fulfilled. It is also possible that the meaning is "the matter was completed."

"And it rested" – that is, it settled. It is said, "He settled (istawa) on the couch" if he rested upon it.

"Upon Al-Judi" – with a shadda on the ya, though Al-A’mash and Ibn Abi ‘Ablah read it with a light ya; they are two dialects, as Ibn Atiyyah said. It is a mountain in Mosul, or in the Levant, or in Amil (with a madda and a damma on the mim).

It is mentioned in some reports that the mountains at that time stood tall, while this mountain lowered itself for the sake of Allah—glory be to Him—so He honored it by having the Ark rest upon it. Whoever humbles himself for Allah, Allah will exalt. Its resting there was on the day of Ashura. Ahmad and others narrated from Abu Hurairah that the Prophet (peace be upon him) passed by some Jews who were fasting on Ashura. He asked, "What is this fast?" They said, "This is the day on which Allah saved Musa (peace be upon him) and the Children of Israel from drowning, and Pharaoh was drowned therein; it is the day the Ark rested on Al-Judi, so Nuh and Musa (peace be upon them) fasted it in gratitude to Allah." The Prophet (peace be upon him) said, "I am more entitled to Musa (peace be upon him) and more entitled to fast this day," so he fasted and commanded his companions to fast. Al-Asbahani narrated in Al-Targhib from him (may Allah be pleased with him) that it is also the day on which ‘Isa (peace be upon him) was born, and that fasting it is equivalent to a blameless year. Nuh (peace be upon him) boarded, as narrated from Qatadah, on the tenth of Rajab.

Ibn Jarir narrated from ‘Abd al-‘Aziz ibn ‘Abd al-Ghafur, from his father, in a marfu’ report, that he (peace be upon him) boarded on the first day of Rajab and fasted, along with those with him. The Ark sailed with them for six months, ending in Muharram, and it rested on Al-Judi on the day of Ashura. So Nuh (peace be upon him) fasted and ordered all the wild animals and cattle with him to fast in gratitude to Allah.

In some reports, it is stated that it circled the entire earth but did not enter the Sanctuary (Haram), though it circled it seven times; that the Black Stone was hidden in Mount Abu Qubays; and that the House (Ka'bah) was raised to the heavens. In a report from Ibn ‘Asakir via Mujahid, it is said that nothing of the water entered the Sanctuary, and the apparent implication of this is that there was no hiding of the stone nor any raising of the House. In my view, the report affirming both is hardly authentic; and even if it were, the secret of raising the House without the stone, and hiding the stone without the House, is not apparent to me. Indeed, I have hesitation regarding the raising of the House at all, although I am one who does not hesitate to say that Allah is capable of all things.

"And it was said, 'Away with the wrongdoing people'" – that is, destruction for them. The "lam" is connected to the verbal noun (bu’dan). It has been said that it is connected to "it was said," meaning "it was said for their sake: 'Away'." However, this is contrary to the apparent meaning. Addressing the description of "wrongdoing" serves to signal the cause for the destruction and to remind one of what preceded in His saying: "And do not address Me concerning those who have done wrong."

It is not hidden that this verse implies the general destruction of the disbelievers. Other verses and many reports testify to this; indeed, there are reports that, despite their weaknesses, are explicit in the general destruction of everyone on earth except those in the Ark. Ubayd ibn ‘Umayr said that among those who drowned was a woman with her infant. She placed him on her chest, but when the water reached her, she placed him on her shoulder; when it reached her, she placed him on her hands. Allah—glory be to Him—said: "If I were to have mercy on anyone on earth, I would have had mercy on her, but My decree has passed."

Some claimed that no one among the disbelievers was saved except ‘Uj ibn ‘Uuq, who was so tall the water reached only his knees; he was saved because Nuh (peace be upon him) needed timber and ‘Uj transported it to him from the Levant. The apparent text of the Qamus suggests his salvation, as it mentions ‘Uj ibn ‘Uuq as a man born in the time of Adam who lived until the time of Musa (peace be upon him). But the truth is that no disbeliever was saved at all, and the story of ‘Uj is narrated by Hayyan ibn Bayyan, so do not incline toward accepting it.

There is no problem with the drowning of children who have no sin, for it is merely a cause of death for them. What is the harm in causing the death of those who have no sin? Allah—glory be to Him—constantly causes countless beings to die. He is the true Owner and Absolute Disposer; He does what He wills and judges as He desires. There is no need for a response such as that narrated by Ishaq ibn Bishr and Ibn ‘Asakir from ‘Abdullah ibn Ziyad ibn Sam’an, from a group of men he named, that Allah made their men barren for forty years before the Flood, so they did not procreate, until the young reached puberty and the argument was established against them, after which He sent the Flood. Such an argument remains weak despite its complexity, and it conflicts with the aforementioned report regarding the destruction of animals that were not on the Ark. It is narrated from Ja’far al-Sadiq (may Allah be pleased with him) that when Nuh (peace be upon him) carried those he carried on the Ark, the beasts and wild animals saw the punishment and began to lick his feet, saying: "Carry us with you," but he said: "I have only been commanded to carry a pair of every kind," and he did not carry them.

Likewise, there is no need for the response that Allah destroyed those children because He—Glory be to Him—knew what they would have done, as is said regarding the entry of the children of disbelievers into Hell on the Day of Resurrection according to those who hold that view. In short, the death of living beings by any cause, suddenly or gradually, is something in which there is no harm, and He is not questioned about what He does.

Know that this verse has reached the farthest limits of inimitability; it humbled the eloquent ones of the Arabs and captured their forelocks. It gathered beauties that language can barely contain. It is said that the disbelievers of Quraysh intended to challenge the Quran, so they secluded themselves for forty days with the finest bread, meat, and wine so that their minds would be clear. When they began their attempt and heard this verse, they said to one another: "This speech does not resemble the speech of created beings," so they abandoned their endeavor and dispersed.

It is also narrated that Ibn al-Muqaffa’—who, as the Qamus states, was eloquent—attempted to challenge the Quran. He composed verses, divided them into chapters, and called them surahs. One day, he passed by a boy reciting this verse in a school; he returned, erased what he had written, and said: "I bear witness that this can never be challenged, and it is not the speech of humans."

It is clear that this does not imply that other verses of the Great Quran are not inimitable. The threshold of inimitability is the level that humans are incapable of matching. It consists of two things: first, the highest peak of eloquence—which is the absolute limit—and second, what is near to that peak, the high levels that human faculties also fall short of. The meaning of the inimitability of all the verses of the Glorious Book is that human faculties fall short of producing their like, whether they belong to the first or second category. Their variation in eloquence does not harm this, and this is what the scholars of this craft have stated.

A Persian poet said regarding this: In expression and in eloquence, how can speech be the same? Even if the speaker is like Hafiz or Al-Asma’i, In the speech of the Eternal, there is no equality, For it is a divine revelation; how can one compare it?

"It was said: 'O Earth, swallow.'" Some of the masters and perfectionists have detailed the merits of this verse and left behind what words can hardly describe. There is no harm in mentioning some of what they recorded to benefit the ignorant and remind the heedful.

The scholar Al-Sakkaki mentioned that one should examine it from four perspectives: from the perspective of Bayan (clarity/eloquence) and Ma’ani (semantics)—which are the foundations of rhetoric—and from the perspectives of moral eloquence and verbal eloquence.

As for the perspective of Bayan—the metaphors, metonymy, and the conditions and implications related to them—it is that when He, Exalted be His Power, wanted to clarify the meaning: "We willed to return what had burst from the earth to its depths, and it returned; to cut off the flood of the sky, and it was cut off; to subside the water that descended from the sky, and it subsided; to decree the matter of Nuh (peace be upon him), and it was decreed; to settle the Ark on Al-Judi, and it settled; and we left the wrongdoers drowned," He based the speech on comparing the intended meaning to an commanded entity that cannot disobey due to the awe of the Commander, and comparing the creation of the intention to a decisive, effective command. This illustrates His supreme power, and that these great cosmic bodies—the heavens and the earth—are subject to His will, whether in bringing into existence or causing to cease, as if they were rational beings that know Him truly, are fully aware of the necessity of submitting to His command, and are forced to exert their utmost to achieve His will. His awe became great in their souls, and as His indication appeared to them, the intended object was brought forth.

He then built the arrangement of speech upon this entire comparison, saying: "It was said" as a metaphor for "His will," from the category of mentioning the effect and intending the cause, because the will is the cause of the statement occurring. The constraint for this metaphor is the address of an inanimate object: "O Earth" and "O Sky," as it is correct to intend the occurrence of something related to the inanimate object, even if speech itself cannot be directed at it. He then said: "O Earth" and "O Sky," addressing them by way of metaphor for the resemblance mentioned. It is apparent that he intended a metaphor bi-al-kinayah (by metonymy), where the object (the sky and earth) is mentioned but the intended meaning is a commanded entity that cannot disobey, through the constraint of attributing the address and the vocative particle to them.

Others have said that it is a tasrihiyyah (explicit) metaphor in the vocative particle based on comparing the connection of His will to the object with the connection of a call and address to the one addressed. This is not strong, as this comparison is not initially aesthetic, but secondary to the first comparison.

Furthermore, he used "swallowing" as a metaphor for the water receding into the earth—a metaphor for the power of attraction in food—because of the resemblance between them (going into a hidden place). In Al-Kashshaf, it is suggested that "swallowing" is a metaphor for the earth soaking up the water, which is better, as "soaking up" indicates the attraction of the earth's parts to what is upon it, just as swallowing relates to an animal.

He then used "water" as a metaphor for "food" (as a metaphor bi-al-kinayah), comparing water to food because the earth is strengthened by water for the growth of plants and trees, just as an eater is strengthened by food. The constraint for this metaphor is the word "swallow," as it is placed for use with food, not water.

... [The text continues into a dense technical analysis of rhetorical tropes, the arrangement of the sentences, and the theological implications of the Flood, concluding with a tribute to the miraculous nature of the Quranic verse.]