Tafsir of Ar-Ra'd 13:13

“And the thunder glorifies [Him] with His praise.”

Regarding "And the thunder glorifies": It is said: It is a name for the known sound, and the speech relies on an omitted addition, i.e., "the hearers of the thunder." Or, the attribution is metaphorical, of the type of attributing an action to its bearer and cause. The ba in His saying, Exalted is He, “with His praise” (bi-hamdihi), is for accompaniment (mulabasa), and the prepositional phrase is in the position of a state (hal), meaning: the hearers of that sound glorify [God] while accompanied by the praise of Allah the Exalted, so they exclaim: "Glory be to Allah and praise be to Allah."

It is also said: There is no omission or metaphor in the attribution; rather, the metaphor lies in the glorification (tasbih) and praise (tahmid), as the thunder’s pointing by its very existence to His transcendence of partners and inadequacy is likened to verbal glorification and transcendence, and its pointing to His bounty and mercy is likened to the praise of a praiser, due to both containing indications of the attributes of perfection. Others said: It is a figurative usage (majaz mursal) applied to its necessary consequence. Others said: "The Thunder" is the name of an angel, and thus the attribution of glorification and praise to it is literal.

It is stated in al-Kashf: The most likely [interpretation] in the verse is to adopt the metaphorical attribution so that the speech is consistent, for "the thunder" in common usage refers to the specific sound that is coupled with lightning and clouds in reports. The discourse is about displaying the signs that point to His overwhelming power and their creation, and the glorification of the Angel of Thunder does not conform to that. As for attributing the specific sound to the hearers’ [act of] glorification and praise, it is the most strongly consistent [view]. If it is taken as a literal attribution, the angle would be that it is an interjection indicating the admission of the angel tasked with the clouds—and all the other angels—to His complete power, Exalted is His power, in contrast to the denial of man. You know that the glorification of the angels, based on what was claimed to be the most likely view, remains like an interjection in the midst of the passage.

The view chosen by most traditionists is that the attribution is literal, based on the premise that "the thunder" is the name of the angel who drives the clouds. Ahmad, al-Tirmidhi (who graded it sahih), al-Nasa'i, and others recorded from Ibn Abbas, may Allah be pleased with both, that the Jews asked the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, saying: "Tell us what this thunder is?" He, peace and blessings be upon him, replied: "An angel from among the angels of Allah, tasked with the clouds, holding a fiery whip with which he restrains the clouds, driving them where Allah the Exalted commanded him." They said: "Then what is this sound we hear?" He, peace and blessings be upon him, said: "It is his voice." They said: "You have spoken the truth." The reports regarding this are numerous.

It was raised as an objection that if it were a proper noun for an angel, it would not be permissible to make it indefinite, yet it is indefinite in al-Baqarah. It was answered that it has two usages: the second of which is its usage for the sound itself, and the indefiniteness is based on this usage. Ibn Atiyyah said: It is said that the thunder is wind that beats between the clouds. This was narrated from Ibn Abbas, but Abu Hayyan commented on it, saying: "This, in my view, is not correct, for it is from the leanings of the naturalists and others."

The Imam said: The realized scholars among the sages state that these upper-atmospheric phenomena are only completed by celestial spiritual powers, and the clouds have a specific soul from among the celestial souls that manages them, and the same is said regarding the winds and other upper-atmospheric phenomena. This is the very thing we said: that thunder is the name of an angel from among the angels who glorifies Allah the Exalted. This [explanation] given by the exegetes in this wording is identical to what the realized sages have mentioned; how then is it appropriate for a rational person to deny it? Abu Hayyan also commented on this, stating that the Imam’s purpose was to align what the philosophers imagine with the methodologies of the Sharia, and that will never happen. He was truthful, may Allah have mercy upon him, regarding the invalidity of the application between what the Sharia brought and what the spiders of the philosophers' thoughts have spun. Yes, that is possible in the very least of those cases.

The famous view among the philosophers is that the wind becomes trapped inside the cloud and cold overcomes its exterior, so the outer surface freezes; then that wind tears it apart violently, and from this a violent movement is generated, which causes the roar. Lightning and thunder are nothing but what results from that movement and its heating. As for the clouds, they are rising vapors that have reached the cold layer of the air, but since the cold was not strong enough, they condensed to that degree of cold, gathered, and dripped; what drips is called rain. The first [view] was refuted on the basis that it contradicts reason from several aspects:

First: If the matter were as mentioned, it would be necessary that every time lightning occurs, thunder must also occur—being the sound resulting from the tearing of the clouds—yet it is known that powerful lightning often occurs without the occurrence of thunder.

Second: The heat resulting from the strength of the movement is countered by the watery nature that causes cold. Upon the occurrence of this powerful opposing factor, how could fire occur? Rather, it is said: Great fires are extinguished by pouring water on them, and the cloud is entirely water, so how could a weak fiery flame occur within it?

Third: It is part of your doctrine that pure fire has no color at all. Suppose that fire was produced due to the strength of the friction occurring within the parts of the cloud, but from where did that red color arise?

The second [view] was refuted by [the fact that] rains differ; sometimes the drops are large, sometimes small, sometimes close together, and other times far apart, in addition to other differences. This is while the nature of the Earth is one, and the nature of the sun that heats the vapors is one, which refuses that the matter be as they decreed. Moreover, experience indicates that supplication and prayer have a great effect on the gathering of clouds and the descent of rain, and this refuses that it be due to nature and inherent property. All of this is only by the bringing into existence of a Wise, Capable Creator who creates what He wills, how He wills.

Some realized scholars said: It is not far-fetched that there are customary causes in the formation of what was mentioned, as is the case in many of His, the Exalted’s, acts; that does not negate its attribution to the Wise, Capable Creator, Glorified be His majesty. Whoever is fair will not find denial of causes in their entirety to be of help, for some are as necessary knowledge. It is to this that I adhere, and some discussion on this subject has already preceded.

When the wind blew or the sound of thunder was heard, the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him—as Ibn Marduyah recorded from Abu Hurayrah—would change color until it was evident on his noble face. Then he would say to the thunder: "Glory be to Him Whom the thunder glorifies with His praise, and to Whom the wind glorifies. O Allah, make it a mercy and do not make it a punishment."

Ahmad, al-Bukhari in al-Adab al-Mufrad, al-Tirmidhi, al-Nasa'i, and others recorded from Ibn Umar that the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, when he heard the sound of thunder and lightning bolts, would say: "O Allah, do not kill us with Your anger, and do not destroy us with Your punishment, and grant us well-being before that."

Abu Dawud recorded in his Marasil from Ubaydullah ibn Abi Ja'far that a group heard thunder and proclaimed Allahu Akbar (God is Greatest). The Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, said: "When you hear the thunder, glorify [Him] (subhanallah) and do not proclaim Allahu Akbar." Ibn Abi Shaybah recorded from Ibn Abbas that he, peace and blessings be upon him, used to say when he heard the thunder: "Glory be to Allah and with His praise, Glory be to Allah the Almighty." Ibn Marduyah and Ibn Jarir recorded from Abu Hurayrah, saying: He, peace and blessings be upon him, when he heard the thunder, would say: "Glory be to Him whom the thunder glorifies with His praise."

“And the angels [glorify Him] out of fear of Him”—meaning: and the angels, peace be upon them, glorify Him out of awe of the Exalted and veneration of His Majesty, Glorified be His Majesty. It is said: the pronoun returns to the thunder, and by "the angels" is meant his assistants, whom Allah the Exalted placed under his hand, fearing and submissive to Him; but this is a weak view.

“And He sends the lightning bolts”—plural of sa'iqah (thunderbolt), which is like al-sa'iqah originally referring to a great crash, except that al-saq' is said regarding earthly bodies, and al-sa'q regarding celestial bodies. The intent here is the fire that descends from the clouds with a loud sound.

“And He strikes with them whom He wills”—striking him with them and destroying him. It is said: This fire, it is said, occurs from the friction of the cloud parts. [Evidence] was adduced from what Ibn al-Mundhir and Ibn Marduyah recorded from Ibn Abbas, saying: "The thunder is an angel named 'Thunder,' and this sound is his glorification. When his restraint intensifies, the clouds rub and collide out of fear of him, and the lightning bolts emerge from between them."

The philosophers said: The smoke trapped inside the cloud, when it descends and tears the cloud, sometimes ignites due to the strength of the heating resulting from the intense movement and violent friction. When it ignites, its light/subtle part extinguishes quickly, and that is lightning; its dense part does not extinguish until it reaches the Earth, and that is the lightning bolt (sa'iqah). When it reaches it, it sometimes becomes subtle, penetrating porous objects without burning them, but leaving a trace of blackness, and it melts the dense, consolidated objects it encounters—such as melting gold or silver inside a purse without burning it, except for what was burned by the melted material. It is reported by those of tawatur (successive transmission) that a lightning bolt struck the dome of the great Sheikh, Abu Abdullah ibn Khafif, may his secret be sanctified, in Shiraz some time ago, and it melted a lamp inside it without burning anything [else] in it. Sometimes it is very dense and thick, so it burns everything it strikes; it often strikes a mountain and crushes it to dust. It may strike the sea, plunging into it and burning the animals within it. Sometimes the body of the lightning bolt is very thin like a sword; when it reaches something, it cuts it in two, and the amount of clearance is only slight. It is told that a boy was sleeping in a desert, and a lightning bolt struck his legs, so his feet fell off, and no blood flowed due to the cauterization resulting from its heat.

This that they said regarding the cause of its formation is not far from what was narrated from Ibn Abbas, may Allah be pleased with both, regarding it. Its material, according to what some of them conveyed from Ibn Sina, is fiery bodies that heat has departed from, and they have become leveled due to the cold overcoming their essence. The Imam said in the commentary on al-Isharat: "Lightning bolts, according to what is conveyed from the Sheikh, resemble iron at times, copper at other times, and stone at other times," which is evident that its material is not [one thing] except that it differs. From here it is said: Its material is the vapors and smokes that resemble the materials of these objects. It is also said: It is a fire that exits from the mouth of the angel tasked with the clouds when his restraint intensifies. Ibn Abi Hatim and Abu al-Shaykh recorded from Abu Imran al-Jawni that he said: "There are seas of fire beneath the Throne from which lightning bolts arise." If what was narrated from the Scholar [Ibn Abbas] is authentic, then one does not deviate from it.

Sa'id ibn Mansur and Ibn al-Mundhir recorded from him, may Allah be pleased with both, that he said: "Whoever hears the sound of thunder and says: 'Glory be to Him Whom the thunder glorifies with His praise, and the angels out of fear of Him, and He is over all things capable,' and he is then struck by a lightning bolt, his blood-money is upon me." Ibn Abi Hatim and others recorded from Abu Ja'far that he said: "The lightning bolt strikes the believer and the disbeliever, but it does not strike one who is remembering [Allah]." In a marfu' report, there is that which supports this. It has destroyed Arbad as you know, and his maternal brother, Labid al-Amiri, pointed to this in his elegy: "I fear the fates for Arbad, and I do not fear the naw' of al-Simak or al-Asad. Lightning and thunderbolts deprived me of the Knight on the day of battle, the brave one." Regarding that story, according to what Ibn Jurayj and others said, the verse was revealed. From Mujahid: A Jew debated the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him; while he was [doing so], a lightning bolt descended and took the skull of his head, then [the verse] was revealed. It is also said: He, peace and blessings be upon him, sent to a tyrant of the Arabs to accept Islam, and he said: "Tell me about the God of Muhammad—is He made of pearls, gold, or copper?" Then a lightning bolt descended upon him and destroyed him, and [the verse] was revealed.

"From" (min) is the object of "strikes" (yusibu). The speech, according to what is in al-Bahr, is a case of operational application (i'mal), and the second [verb] has been made operative, since both "sends" (yursilu) and "strikes" (yusibu) demand "whom" (man). If the first had been made operative, the construction would be "And He sends the lightning bolts and strikes with them whom He wills," but it came according to the frequent [usage] in the tongue of the Arabs, which is preferred by the Basrans, namely, the application of the second.

Furthermore, after He mentioned His knowledge that penetrates everything, and the equality of the manifest and the hidden before Him, and what pointed to His overwhelming power and Oneness, He said, Glorified is He: “And they”—i.e., those who disbelieved and denied the Messenger, peace and blessings be upon him, and denied His signs—“dispute concerning Allah”—as they deny what the truthful one describes Him with of perfect knowledge, power, uniqueness in divinity, the resurrection of people, and their requital. The intent of disputing concerning Him, the Exalted, is disputing concerning His affair, Glorified be His majesty, and what was reported from Him.

"Dispute" (yujadiluna) is from jadal (with two fathas), meaning the most intense enmity. Its root is from jadal (with a sukun), which is twisting a rope and the like, because it is strengthened by it and its strands are tightened. al-Raghib said: Its origin is from jadaltu the rope, i.e., I tightened its twist, as if the disputants each twist the other away from his opinion. It is said: The origin of jidal is wrestling and throwing one’s opponent down onto the jadalah, which is the hard earth.

al-Zamakhshari adopted the interpretation of the verse as mentioned. He stated in al-Kashf: His speech contains an indication of a shift in person (iltifat), for His saying, Exalted is He, "Equal is he among you" and "It is He who shows you" contains a shift from the third person to the second person. If you wish, contemplate from His saying, "Those are the ones who disbelieved in their Lord" to His saying, Exalted is He, "The Most High, the Grand," then [it] shifted from the second person to the third person. How beautiful its placement is! As for the first, [it is due to] what it contains of the specification of the threat embedded in "Equal is he among you," which is why He followed it with His saying, "Indeed, Allah does not change the condition of a people" to "than Him," in which there is a threat that is not hidden to a person of insight, an incitement to seek salvation, and an increase in the scolding in His saying, "It is He who shows you."

The arrival of "Equal is he among you... It is He who shows you" after His saying, "Allah knows," in this manner without a conjunction, is because the first confirms His saying, "Allah knows," with the addition of the mentioned embedding to realize the knowledge; and the second confirms what was implied of the indication of power in His saying, "And everything before Him is by measure," while observing the pattern of enumeration in the style of "The Most Merciful, taught the Quran," which dazzles the intellects and makes the consideration of the aspect of the revelatory inimitability a great wonder.

As for the second [shift], it is due to what it contains of the indication that they, despite the clarity of the signs and their recitation to them, and the extreme warning and encouragement, did not care about them at all. It is as if he is complaining of their crime to the one who deserves to be addressed, or like one who mutters to himself: "I shall do such and such to them as requital for what they have committed," in order to see what he intends to inflict upon them. Upon this, His saying, Exalted is He, "And they" to the end is conjoined to His saying, "And those who disbelieved say, 'Why was [not] sent down...'" which is conjoined to "And they hasten you." The departure from the verbal to the nominal form, and the abandonment of observing consistency, is to indicate that after the signs, they only increased in stubbornness: “And as for those who disbelieved, it increased them in filth upon their filth.”

It is permissible to say that it is conjoined to "It is He who shows you," with the meaning: It is He who shows you these perfect signs pointing to power and mercy, while you dispute concerning Him, Exalted is He. This is closer in derivation, and the first is more abundant in benefit. The signs of deep investigation are apparent upon it. al-Tibi assumed that the most appropriate for the composition of the structure is that this be a consolation for His beloved, peace and blessings be upon him; for when He, the Exalted, censured the disbelievers of Quraysh for their stubbornness in requesting signs like the signs of Moses and Jesus, peace be upon both, and their denial that what the Messenger, peace and blessings be upon him, brought were signs, He consoled him with what was mentioned, as if He said: "Ease your soul, for you are not exclusive in that, for despite the appearance of clear signs and proofs of monotheism, they dispute concerning Allah the Exalted by taking partners and affirming children, and despite the comprehensiveness of His knowledge and the perfection of His power, they deny the Resurrection and the Gathering, and despite the subjugation of His authority and the severity of His power, they proceed in plotting and stubbornness; so do not let your soul fade away in sorrow for them." This should be pondered. It is not favored to conjoin it to "He sends the lightning bolts" due to the lack of cohesion.

It is permitted that the sentence be a state (hal) from the object of "He strikes" (yusibu), i.e., He strikes with them whom He wills while in the state of his disputing, or from the object of "wills" (yasha'u) according to what was said, and it is as you see. The occasion of revelation does not necessitate the state condition, as is not hidden.

“And He is”—Glorified and Exalted is He—“severe in [His] power”—meaning: in [His] counter-plotting (mumahalah), which is enmity (mukayadah), from mahala bi-fulan (light lam) when he plots against him and exposes him to destruction. From it is tamahala for such and such when he takes the trouble of using a stratagem and exerts himself in it. It is an infinitive (masdar) like qital.

It is said: It is a noun, not an infinitive, from mahl meaning strength. The saying of al-A'sha was interpreted upon this: "A branch of a lance that vibrates on a branch of glory, great in bounty, severe in power." And the saying of Abdul-Muttalib: "May their cross and their power not prevail against Your power." It is as if its origin is from mahl meaning drought. Both interpretations are narrated from Ibn Abbas. It is said: It is muf'al (a noun of action/place) from al-hawl meaning power. Ibn Qutaybah said: It is likewise from the well-known hilah (stratagem), and its mim is extra, like the mim in makan. al-Azhari deemed him mistaken, saying that if it were muf'al, it would be like marwad and mihwar. He excused himself for that by saying that it was altered against the standard rule. He supported the claim of the [letter's] addition with the reading of al-Dahhak and al-A'raj, "al-mahal" with a fatha on the mim, on the basis that it is muf'al from hala yahulu (he plotted) if he used a stratagem, because the root is the agreement of the two readings. It is also called for stratagem al-mahalah, from which is the proverb: "Man is incapable, not the stratagem."

Abu Zayd said: It is with the meaning of retribution (niqmah), and it is as if he took it from mahl meaning drought as well. Ibn Arafah said: It is dispute (jidal); it is said: "He did not deviate from his command," i.e., he disputed. It is said: It is with the meaning of grudge (hiqd), and it is narrated from Ikrimah, and they interpreted it as a metaphor.

It is permitted that al-mahal with a fatha be with the meaning of vertebrae (faqar), which is the spinal column and its support. He stated in al-Asas: "It is said: A horse of strong mahal, i.e., vertebrae; the singular is mahalah," and the mim is original. This would be a metaphor for strength and power, as it came in the sahih hadith: "Allah help the lion, and Moses is unique," for when a person’s mahal is strong, he is described with strength of power and the ability to perform what others are incapable of. Do you not see their saying: "The calamities broke his back" (faqarat-hu al-fawaqir)? This is a metaphor for weakening powers. With this interpretation, attributing corporeality to Him, the Exalted, is not necessary. The sentence is in the position of a state (hal) from the Exalted Name.