Yusuf: (2) Indeed, We have sent it down as an Arabic Qur’an...

His statement—Exalted is He—(Indeed, We have sent it down as an Arabic Qur’an) is a description of it in consideration of its additional honor. The pronoun of the third person refers to the Book mentioned previously. If the intended meaning is the entire Qur'an, as is the apparent and contextually appropriate interpretation, then that is clear. If, however, the intended meaning is this specific Surah, then naming it "Qur’an" is because it is a generic name that applies to both the large and the small; just as it is applied to the whole, it is applied to a part. Yes, it has become prevalent (ghalab) for the whole when used indefinitely, due to its mental association; whether this prevalence has reached the extent of a proper noun (alamiyyah) or not is a matter of disagreement. Al-Baydawi—may his secret be sanctified—leaned toward the first, so the Alif and Lam (the definite article) are necessitated for it, yet the original meaning was not abandoned. It occurred in the books of Usul (legal theory) that it was sometimes coined specifically for the whole, and other times for that which encompasses both the whole and the part—meaning the speech transmitted in the Mushaf via tawatur (successive narration). This was criticized on the grounds that "prevalence" (ghalab) does not have a second act of coining; rather, it is a specification of some individuals of the thing coined. Hence, it requires the Lam or a genitive construction (idafah) to be known, unless one claims it has a "presumptive coining." Thus it is said. Among those who explicitly stated that determination by prevalence is a category alongside determination by coining is Allamah al-Zarqani and others. However, al-Humsi critiqued this, saying: "The indication of proper nouns by prevalence upon the determination of their referent by coining—even if it is not the first coining—is a matter for reflection."

Al-Zajjaj and Ibn al-Anbari stated that the pronoun refers to the "narrative of Yusuf," even if it is not mentioned in the noble text. It is also said: It refers to the "sending down" (inzal) understood from the verb, and it is in the accusative as an absolute object (maf’ul mutlaq), while "Qur'an" is the direct object (maf’ul bihi). Both these views are weak, as is not hidden. The accusative of "Qur’an" as a state (hal)—disregarding what follows it and disregarding its interpretation as a derivative—is a state that prepares for (tawti’ah) the subsequent state, which is "Arabic." If it is interpreted as a derivative, i.e., "recited," then it is not a preparatory state. "Arabic" is either its adjective—according to the opinion of those who permit the modification of an adjective—or it is a state from the implicit pronoun within it, according to those who hold that the verbal noun carries the pronoun when interpreted as a passive participle, for example. It is said: "Qur’an" is a substitute (badal) for the pronoun, and "Arabic" is its adjective; the apparent work of Abu Hayyan necessitates his preference for this.

The meaning of it being "Arabic" is that it is attributed to the Arabs in consideration of the fact that it was revealed in their language, and it is an ancient language. Ibn 'Asakir recorded in his History from Ibn 'Abbas that Adam—peace be upon him—had Arabic as his language in Paradise; when he ate from the tree, it was stripped from him, so he spoke Syriac. When he repented, God Almighty restored it to him. 'Abd al-Malik ibn Habib said: The first tongue with which Adam—peace be upon him—descended from Paradise was Arabic, until time passed and the era grew long; it was altered and became Syriac. It is attributed to the land of Syria, which is the land of Al-Jazirah, where Noah—peace be upon him—and his people were before the Flood. It resembled the Arabic tongue, except that it was distorted. It was also the tongue of everyone on the Ark, except for one man called Jurhum, for his tongue was the original Arabic. When they exited the Ark, Iram ibn Sam married some of his daughters, and the Arabic tongue became established in his descendants: 'Aws (the father of 'Ad), 'Abil, and Jair (the father of Thamud and Jadis). 'Ad was named after Jurhum because he was their maternal grandfather. The Syriac tongue remained in the descendants of Arfakhshad ibn Sam until it reached Qahtan from his offspring, who were in Yemen. The sons of Ishmael—peace be upon him—descended there, so the sons of Qahtan learned the Arabic tongue from them.

Ibn Dihyah said: The Arabs are of three divisions:

1. The ‘Aribah (the pure Arabs), who are the untainted ones. They are nine tribes from the descendants of Iram ibn Sam ibn Noah: 'Ad, Thamud, Umaym, 'Abil, Tasm, Jadis, 'Imliq, Jurhum, and Wabar. From them, Ishmael—peace be upon him—learned Arabic.
2. The Muta‘arribah, of whom he said in al-Sihah: They are those who are not pure, and they are the sons of Qahtan.
3. The Musta‘ribah (Arabized), who are also not pure; they are the sons of Ishmael, the descendants of Ma'd ibn 'Adnan ibn Udd.

Ibn Durayd said in al-Jamharah: The ‘Aribah Arabs are seven tribes: 'Ad, Thamud, 'Imliq, Tasm, Jadis, Umaym, and Jasim. Most of them have become extinct, except for scattered remnants of the tribes. The first whose tongue shifted from Syriac to Arabic was Ya'rub ibn Qahtan, and this is what al-Jawhari intended by his saying: "He is the first to speak in Arabic." Some offered as evidence for this the report recorded by Ibn 'Asakir in his History with a chain he narrated from Anas ibn Malik—suspended (mawquf)—though I do not consider it authentic, in which the confusion of tongues at Babel is mentioned, and that he was the first to speak Arabic.

Al-Hakim recorded in al-Mustadrak (and authenticated it), as did al-Bayhaqi in Shu'ab al-Iman, via Sufyan al-Thawri from Ja'far ibn Muhammad from his father from Jabir—may God be pleased with them—that the Messenger of God (peace and blessings of God be upon him) recited this verse: "Indeed, We have sent it down as an Arabic Qur’an..." etc., then said: "Ishmael—peace be upon him—was inspired with this Arabic tongue." Al-Shirazi said in Kitab al-Alqab: Ahmad ibn Isma'il al-Madani informed us, Muhammad ibn Ahmad ibn Ishaq al-Mashi informed us, Muhammad ibn Jabir narrated to us, Abu Yusuf ibn al-Sikkit narrated to us, he said: Al-Athram narrated to me from Abu 'Ubaydah, Musma' ibn 'Abd al-Malik narrated to us from Muhammad ibn 'Ali ibn al-Husayn from his fathers—may God be pleased with them all—from the Prophet (peace and blessings of God be upon him), who said: "The first whose tongue was loosened with clear Arabic was Ishmael—peace be upon him—when he was fourteen years old." It is also narrated from Ibn 'Abbas that Ishmael—peace be upon him—was the first to speak in pure Arabic. By this, according to what the Hafiz said, is meant the Arabic of Quraysh, in which the Qur’an was revealed; otherwise, the Arabic language in an absolute sense existed before Ishmael—peace be upon him—and it was the language of Himyar and Qahtan.

Muhammad ibn Salam said: Yunus informed me from Abu 'Amr ibn al-'Ala', who said: "All Arabs are descendants of Ishmael except Himyar and the remnants of Jurhum; he lived near them and intermarried with them." Ibn Kathir mentioned that among the Arabs are those who are not from his descendants, such as 'Ad, Thamud, Tasm, Jadis, Umaym, Jurhum, and the 'Amaliq, as well as other nations known only to God Almighty; they existed before the Friend of God (Abraham)—peace be upon him—and in his time. As for the Arabs of the Hijaz, they were his descendants. Regarding the Arabs of Yemen—who are Himyar—the famous position, as Ibn Makula said, is that they are from Qahtan (whose name is Mahzam), who is the son of Hud. It is said he is his brother, or his descendant. It is also said that Qahtan is Hud. Ibn Ishaq and others narrated that he is from the descendants of Ishmael. The majority hold that the Qahtanite Arabs of Yemen and others are not from his descendants—peace be upon him—and that the Arabic language in an absolute sense existed before him. It was one of the languages that Adam—peace be upon him—was taught, and he spoke it as well as others. It is said he spoke most often in Syriac. Some claimed it was the first of all languages, and that every language other than it originated after it, either through divine instruction or refinement. They offered as evidence for its precedence in existence that the Qur'an is the speech of God Almighty, and it is Arabic, and it possesses what it possesses; it is the most excellent of languages. Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah even narrated from Imam Abu Yusuf—may he have mercy on him—that it is disliked to speak other than Arabic for one who is proficient in it without a need. After it in excellence, as it is said, is the Dari Persian language, to the extent that it is narrated from Imam Abu Hanifah—may God be pleased with him—that it is permissible to recite the Qur'an in it, whether that which is praise (like al-Ikhlas) or otherwise, and whether the person is incapable of Arabic or not. It is narrated from his two companions (Abu Yusuf and Muhammad) that it is permissible to recite in prayer in a language other than Arabic for one who cannot recite in Arabic. In al-Nihayah and al-Dirayah, it is mentioned that the people of Persia wrote to Salman the Persian, asking him to write the Fatiha for them in Persian. He wrote it, and they used to recite what he wrote in prayer until their tongues became fluent. This was presented to the Prophet (peace and blessings of God be upon him) and he did not deny it. Yes, the correct view is that the Imam retracted this.

In al-Nafhah al-Qudsiyyah fi Ahkam Qira'at al-Qur'an wa Kitabatihi bil-Farisiyyah by al-Shurunbulali, the summary is: The prohibition of writing the Qur’an in Persian, unless one writes it in Arabic and then writes the interpretation of every letter and its translation; the prohibition of touching it for the impure is by consensus, just like the recitation; the invalidity of prayer by opening it with Persian; the invalidity of the prayer by reciting it in Persian if it is praise and one restricts oneself to it while capable of Arabic; it does not constitute corruption (fasad) if what is read is dhikr (remembrance of God), but it is corrupt if it is not dhikr merely by its recitation. One does not exit the state of being "unlettered" (ummi) while knowing only Persian. Prayer is valid without recitation due to inability to speak Arabic, according to the correct view of the Imam and his two companions. He spoke at length on this. In Mi'raj al-Dirayah: "Whoever intentionally recites the Qur’an or writes it in Persian is either a madman or a zindiq (heretic); the madman is treated, and the zindiq is executed." This is also narrated from Abu Bakr Muhammad ibn al-Fadl al-Bukhari. Nevertheless, the excellence of Persian is not denied; in the Hadith: "The tongue of the people of Paradise is Arabic and Dari Persian." This is famous, but al-Dhahabi mentioned in his History from Sufyan, who said: "It reached us that people will speak on the Day of Resurrection in Syriac; when they enter Paradise, they will speak in Arabic."

Al-Tabarani, al-Hakim, al-Bayhaqi, and others recorded from Ibn 'Abbas, who said: The Messenger of God (peace and blessings of God be upon him) said: "Love the Arabs for three [reasons]: because I am an Arab, the Qur'an is Arabic, and the speech of the people of Paradise is Arabic." Abu al-Shaykh and Ibn Mardawayh recorded from Abu Hurayrah something that supports this. It is not hidden from the expert in the merits of speech that Arabic speech contains subtle meanings and minute mysteries that no other tongue can independently convey. Persian follows it in this regard. If this is the criterion for excellence, then no two should dispute the superiority of Arabic, then Persian, among the languages that have reached us. If it is something else, then the apparent meaning is that it exists in the Arabic language which He—Exalted is He—chose for the revelation of the Qur’an and no other. There was allotted to our Prophet (peace and blessings of God be upon him) of this tongue what was not allotted to any of the eloquent Arabs. Ibn 'Asakir recorded in his History from 'Umar ibn al-Khattab—may God be pleased with him—that he said: "O Messenger of God, why are you the most eloquent among us, yet you did not emerge from among us?" He said: "The language of Ishmael had become archaic, so Gabriel—peace be upon him—brought it, and he taught it to me, so I memorized it." Al-Bayhaqi recorded via Yunus from Muhammad ibn Ibrahim ibn al-Harith al-Taymi from his father, in a lengthy Hadith, that a man said: "O Messenger of God, how eloquent you are; we have not seen anyone more eloquent than you." He said: "It is my right, for the Qur’an was revealed to me in a clear Arabic tongue."

Furthermore, it is permitted that "Arabic" (‘Arabi) is attributed to ‘Arabah, which is the region where Ishmael—peace be upon him—dwelt. The poet said: "And ‘Arabah is a land whose sanctity is not violated by anyone except the sharp-witted and the courageous." The intended meaning is the language of the people of this region. A group, including al-Shafi'i—may God be pleased with him—Ibn Jarir, Abu 'Ubaydah, and the Qadi Abu Bakr, argued from the description of the Qur'an as being "Arabic" that it contains no non-Arabic words (mu'arrab). Al-Shafi'i strongly denied the claim that such things occur in it, as did Abu 'Ubaydah, for he said: "Whoever claims there is anything other than Arabic in it has committed a grave statement." Ibn Jarir explained the reports from Ibn 'Abbas and others regarding the interpretation of words in it as being Persian, Ethiopian, or Nabataean, by stating that this is something in which the inheritance of languages coincided. Others said: Rather, the Arabs in whose language the Qur'an was revealed had some interaction with the people of other tongues during their travels, so words from their languages attached themselves, some of which were changed by subtracting from their letters, and they used them in their poetry and dialogues until they followed the path of eloquent Arabic and statements were made with them; and upon this limit, the Qur'an was revealed using them. Others said: All those words are purely Arabic, but the language of the Arabs is very vast, and it is not unlikely that it remained hidden from the great, elevated scholars. The meaning of Fatir and Fatih remained hidden even from Ibn 'Abbas. From this, al-Shafi'i said in al-Risalah: "None encompasses the language except a Prophet."

A group maintained the occurrence of non-Arabic words in it, answering the verse by saying that the few words not of Arabic origin do not negate its "Arabic" nature; just as a Persian poem does not lose its being Persian because of an Arabic word. Many have said: The intended meaning is that it is Arabic in style. They argued from the agreement of grammarians that diptotes (words with diptote declension, like Ibrahim) are prohibited from declension due to being proper nouns and foreign. The reply was that proper nouns are not the place of disagreement; the disagreement is in other categories. It was answered that if there is agreement on the occurrence of proper nouns, there is no obstacle to the occurrence of common nouns. This was criticized. Al-Jalal al-Suyuti preferred the opinion of its occurrence, arguing from what is authentic from Abu Maysarah, the great follower (tabi'i), that he said: "In the Qur'an is [something] from every language." Similar things were narrated from Sa'id ibn Jubayr and Wahb ibn Munabbih. It was mentioned that the wisdom behind the occurrence of those words in it is that it encompasses the sciences of the first and the last and the news of everything, so it must contain an indication of the types of languages to complete its encompassing of everything. Thus, from every language, the sweetest, lightest, and most used by the Arabs were chosen for it. Furthermore, since the Prophet (peace and blessings of God be upon him) was sent to every nation, it was appropriate that his book, with which he was sent, should contain something from the tongue of every people. Ibn al-Naqib pointed to the first aspect.

Abu 'Abdullah al-Qasim ibn Salam said, after narrating the opinion of the occurrence from the jurists and the denial from the scholars of the Arabic language: "The correct view is to confirm both statements. It is that these letters have foreign origins, as the jurists said, but they reached the Arabs, who Arabized them with their tongues and transformed them from the Persian words into their own words, so they became Arabic. Then the Qur'an was revealed, and these letters had become mixed with the speech of the Arabs. So, whoever says they are Arabic is truthful, and whoever says they are foreign is truthful." Al-Jawaliqi, Ibn al-Jazari, and others leaned toward this opinion. What relates to this topic will also come—if God Almighty wills—in Surah Ibrahim—peace be upon him—so let it be noted and reflected upon.

Al-Jubba'i argued from the verse that the Qur'an is created, based on four aspects:

1. Describing it with "sending down," and the eternal cannot be described as such.
2. Describing it as being "Arabic," and the eternal cannot be Arabic or Persian.
3. That His statement—Exalted is He—(Indeed, We have sent it down as an Arabic Qur’an) indicates that He—Exalted is He—is capable of sending it down not in Arabic, and this is apparent evidence of its temporality.
4. That His statement—Majestic is His affair—(These are the verses of the Book) indicates that it is composed of verses and words, and everything composed is created, by necessity, because the second part is not present at the time the first part exists.

The Ash'arites answered all of this by stating that the limit of what follows from this is that what is composed of letters and words is created, and this is something that is not disputed. That which we claim is eternal is something else that we call al-kalam al-nafsi (the internal speech), which is not characterized by sending down, nor by being Arabic, nor other than it, nor by being composed of letters, nor otherwise. You have already received in the introductions what benefits you here, so do not be neglectful.

(So that you might understand) i.e., in order that you may comprehend its meanings and encompass what is within it of wonders, or that you might employ your intellects in it, so you may know that it is outside the capacity of human beings and contains what testifies that it is revealed from the Creator of powers and abilities. This is an explanation of the wisdom of sending it down with that attribute. Many have explicitly stated that la'alla (so that) is used in the meaning of the lam of causality (lam al-ta'lil) by way of derivative metaphor. His objective from that is apparent. Treating it as "hope" from the perspective of the addressed, even if permissible, does not suit the context.

Al-Jubba'i claimed that the meaning is: "He sent it down so that you may understand its meanings regarding religious matters, so you may recognize the proofs indicating His Oneness and what He has obligated you with." In this is evidence that God—Exalted is He—intended for everyone faith and righteous deeds, for those who achieved that and those who did not. In it is also evidence that it is far removed from being a basis for his argument regarding what he mentioned, as is not hidden.