Tafsir of Hud 11:7

"(And He it is Who created the heavens and the earth in six days)" – This is a confirmation of Tawhid (monotheism), because the One whose knowledge and power encompass everything is the only God worthy of worship, unlike those who neither know nor have the power to cause harm or benefit. It is also an affirmation of the promise and the warning mentioned previously, for the All-Knowing and All-Powerful Creator is to be hoped for and feared.

It has been suggested that the verse serves as a confirmation of His, the Exalted's, saying: (He knows what they conceal and what they reveal), and that what follows is a confirmation of His saying: (And He is over everything All-Powerful). However, there is a remoteness in this view. It is as if the meaning of "He created the heavens and the earth, etc." implies the creation of them and what they contain, or that the heavens are used metaphorically for the celestial bodies (thereby including them and their inhabitants) and the earth is used metaphorically for the terrestrial bodies (thereby including them and their inhabitants) without needing to estimate a hidden object. This estimation was necessitated by the demands of the context; otherwise, their creation in that duration does not negate the creation of other things during the same time.

"The day" here means time in the absolute sense, not the conventional solar day, as the latter is inconceivable when there was no sun and no earth. It has been said that it refers to the duration of the cycle of the Muhaddad (the outermost sphere) known as the 'Arsh (the Throne) through one complete revolution; this is the view of the Great Sheikh (Ibn Arabi), may his soul be sanctified, and his position on this matter is already known from what has preceded. Others have offered different interpretations.

The fact that He did not create them all at once, as you know, is evidence—as stated by more than one scholar—of His being, the Exalted, All-Powerful and Free-Willed, in addition to the lesson it provides for observers and the exhortation to deliberation in matters. The reasoning for specifying this particular number rather than more (like seven) or less (like five) for creation has been discussed previously, and perhaps we shall investigate this in another place. The plural form is preferred for the heavens due to their variation in origin and essence, unlike the earth, although it is said that the earth is like the heaven in being seven layers, with a distance between each, and that it contains creatures. This is how His, the Exalted's, saying: (And of the earth the like of them) has been interpreted. The majority, however, hold that the earth is a single sphere divided into seven climes, and they have interpreted the verse accordingly.

"(And His Throne was upon the water)" – This is a conjunction to the sentence "created" with its hidden pronoun, or it is a hal (state) of the pronoun, assuming the presence of the word "qad" (already), as is the standard rule for past-tense circumstantial clauses requiring an explicit or implied "qad." The past tense implied by "was" relates to the ruling, not to the speech itself; that is, His Throne was upon the water before He created them (the heavens and the earth). This is what the words of Mujahid necessitate, and Al-Qadi al-Baydawi explicitly stated this, then added: "There was no barrier between them," meaning the Throne and the water, not that it was placed upon the surface of the water. This has been used as evidence for the possibility of a vacuum and that water was the first created substance in this world after the Throne.

Similar statements were made by the learned scholar Abu as-Su'ud, the Mufti of the Ottoman lands, but he said: "There is nothing beneath it—meaning the Throne—other than it (the water), whether there was a gap between them or it was placed upon its surface, as mentioned in the report. Thus, there is no proof in it for the possibility of a vacuum." How could there be? If it were evidence, it would prove its existence, not merely its possibility, nor that water was the first thing created in the world after the Throne. It only indicates that their creation was prior to the creation of the heavens and the earth, without addressing the relationship between them. The disagreement between Al-Qadi and the Mufti is evident, and the majority hold that the truth is with the Mufti, as you will know, if Allah the Exalted wills.

Some supported Al-Qadi, arguing that if it were placed upon the surface of the water, it would necessitate one of six things before the completion of the world's creation: either the water departing from its natural place, the Throne departing from its natural place, the rarefaction of the water, its growth, the rarefaction of the Throne, or its growth. And when the world was created, one of five things: either the Throne moving in a straight line to its natural place, the condensation of the water, its withering, the condensation of the Throne, or its withering. These things are false, as is clear to anyone trained in philosophy.

(Regarding the argument for the possibility of a vacuum), the "possibility" in Al-Qadi's words is interpreted as waqi'i (potential) possibility, or it is meant as essential possibility, and by "vacuum," it refers to the vacuum within our world, for that is what is disputed. It is as if it were said: "It is used as evidence that a vacuum in our world is possible by essential possibility." The direction of this argument is that a vacuum existed before our world, and the occurrence of something at any point in time is proof of its essential possibility at all times, for the establishment of possibility for a possible thing is necessary. Therefore, that which is possible at one time is possible at another, as established by the commentator of Hikmat al-'Ayn.

The logic for water being the first thing created after the Throne is that every simple body has a natural place, and place is a requirement of the body's existence. For when the Agent creates a body, He necessarily creates it in a place, as they have explicitly stated. The place for light bodies is above, and for heavy bodies is below, according to the degree of weight and lightness, and their determination is by the Greatest Sphere. Thus, the existence of water inside the Throne depends on the existence of its place, which depends on the existence of the Throne; therefore, it is later in terms of origination. The speculative nature of this view is obvious, and one could at least say: Why is it not permitted that Allah the Exalted created the Throne and the water simultaneously? Moreover, there are some reports that are explicit that the water was created before the Throne.

(Here follow extensive discussions on the philosophical implications, the nature of vacuum, the views of the ancients vs. moderns, and various Hadith reports regarding the Throne and Water).

Ultimately, there is no doubt that the word "water" refers to one of the elements, and the "Throne" to the body described in the reports with qualities that dazzle the mind. The testimony of the aforementioned report—while being a testimony of negation—is countered by testimonies of affirmation and is not definitive regarding the intended meaning, as you have learned. The fact that the Throne was upon the water encompasses both possibilities: that it was placed upon its surface touching it, or that it was above it without anything touching it. Restricting it to the second possibility lacks definitive proof and is not free from debate. Furthermore, the verse cannot serve as proof that water was the first thing created after the Throne. Whoever returns to the reliable reports will see that some, such as the report of Abu Razin—which At-Tirmidhi deemed hasan—are explicit that water was before the Throne. The most that can be said in this regard is that the truth is with the Sheikh al-Islam (Ibn Taymiyyah), and the defense of Al-Qadi—though defended by a supporter of the religion—is a defense that strays from the clear path. Therefore, do not pay heed, may Allah guide you, to those who have spoken at length on this without substance, bringing forth speech that does not resemble the speech of the wise, claiming it to be philosophy when it is far removed from it.

As for His saying: (That He may test you...), the "lam" is for causal explanation, metaphorically related to "He created," meaning: He created the heavens and the earth and what they contain—among which are you—and arranged within them what you need for the foundations of your existence and the causes of your livelihood. He deposited within them wonders of craftsmanship and lessons that you may use as evidence for your religious objectives, so that He may treat you as one who tests you, (...which of you is best in deed), so that He may reward you according to your deeds.

It is said that the testing is an original act of examination, and the speech is intended as a parable and metaphor. It is not correct to intend the literal meaning, for that only applies to one who does not know the consequences of things. Others say it is a metonymy for "knowledge" due to the necessary connection between knowledge and testing, though this requires the forced interpretation that it is meant to manifest the attachment of His eternal knowledge. The former interpretation, however, is not forced, and while eloquent, it strikes at the core of the matter.

"Deed" refers to what includes the work of the body. This is supported by what was narrated from Ibn Umar (may Allah be pleased with them both): The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) recited this verse, and I said: "What is the meaning of this, O Messenger of Allah?" He replied: "That He may test you, meaning: which of you is best in intellect." Then he said: "And the best of you in intellect are those most cautious of Allah’s prohibitions and most diligent in performing obedience to Allah." However, the Hafiz al-Suyuti mentioned that its chain of narration is weak.

(And if you say, "Indeed, you will be resurrected after death," those who disbelieve will surely say, "This is not but obvious magic.")

It is as if it is "like it" in deception and falsity; the structure is from the tashbih baligh (eloquent simile), and the reference is to the aforementioned statement. It is also permitted that the reference is to the Quran, as if it were said: "If you were to recite to them from the Quran what contains the proof of resurrection, they would say: 'This recitation is magic.'" The intention is to deny resurrection by way of suggestive metonymy, because denying resurrection is a denial of the Quran. Others say the reference is to the resurrection itself, but this is challenged because the term "magic" does not fit, for magic is applied to something existing in appearance but having no foundation in reality, whereas resurrection, in their view, is non-existent. However, this is debatable, as they might have meant by "magic" that which is false and has no foundation or reality, given its prevalence among them to such an extent that it became like a proper name for it.