Ar-Ra'd: (17) "He sent down from the sky..."
(He sent down from the sky): That is, from its direction, as is observed. It is said: from the sky itself, though this is not permissible in speech; evidence for this has been cited from reports whose authenticity God knows best. It is also said: He sent down from it—meaning (water)—that is, much of it or a type of it, which is rainwater, considering that its origins are from the sky, due to the influence of celestial bodies in the ascent of vapor. Thus, there is metaphorical usage in the preposition "min" (from).
(Then flowed): (By that)—meaning in its locations—(valleys). It does not mean all valleys, for rains do not encompass all lands. It is the plural of "wadi" (valley). Abu Ali al-Farisi said: It is not known that any other noun of the pattern fā‘il is pluralized as af‘ilah. It seems this occurred due to the alternation of fā‘il and fa‘īl for the same thing, like ‘ālim (knower) and ‘alīm (learned), shāhid (witness) and shahīd (martyr), nāsir (helper) and nasīr (helper). The pattern fā‘il is pluralized as af‘āl (like sāhib and ashāb), and fa‘īl is pluralized as af‘ilah (like jarīb and ajribah). When the aforementioned correspondence between fā‘il and fa‘īl occurred, fā‘il was naturally pluralized as the plural of fa‘īl, thus they say: wād and awdiyah. Conversely, fa‘īl is pluralized as the plural of fā‘il, such as yatīm and aytām, sharīf and ashrāf. End quote. Similar to this are nād and andiyah, and nāj and anjiyah. It is said there is no fourth example, though the Sharh al-Tashīl contains what contradicts this. The wādī is the place where water flows in abundance; it is from this that the space between two mountains is named. It is also applied to the water flowing within it, and it is an active participle from wadā (to flow). If the first meaning is intended, the attribution is metaphorical, or the speech is according to an implied addition—as the Imam said—meaning "the waters of the valleys." If the second is intended, it is a metaphorical meaning from the category of naming the container by what is contained, and the attribution is literal. The preference for the example of valleys over continuously flowing rivers is due to the clarity of the resemblance between their state and what is exemplified, as we shall indicate, God willing.
(According to its capacity): That is, according to the measure that God Almighty has determined and His wisdom, glory be to Him, has required for the benefit of people; or according to its varying measure, being little or much according to the variation of its receptacles in smallness and largeness. This is not because it fills them and conforms to them, but simply because its scarcity is due to its smallness—which entails fewer water sources—and its abundance is due to its largeness—which necessitates more sources. For the sources of a torrent flowing in a small valley are fewer than the sources of a torrent flowing in a large valley. This is if "valleys" refers to what flows within them. But if the literal meaning is intended, the meaning is that their waters flowed according to the capacity of those valleys, in the way you have known earlier. Or, the pronoun may refer to their waters by way of istikhdām (usage), and "capacity" is intended as mentioned in the first of the two meanings, as the Shaykh al-Islam said. The prepositional phrase, according to what is reported from al-Hawfi, is linked to "flowed." Abu al-Baqa’ said: It is in the position of an adjective for "valleys." It is also permitted that it be linked to "He sent down." Zayd ibn Ali, al-Ashhab al-‘Uqayli, and Abu ‘Amr (in one narration) read bi-qadrihā with a quiescent dāl, which is a dialectal variation.
(Then carried): That is, bore. The form ifta‘ala comes with the meaning of the simple form, like iqtadar and qadara. (The torrent): That is, the water flowing in those valleys. The definite article is used because it is known and mentioned by His saying: (valleys). It is not pluralized because, as al-Raghib said, it is a verbal noun in its origin. In al-Bahr, it is said that it was made definite because it intended what was understood from the verb. What the verb contains of the verbal noun, even if it is indefinite, when it returns in appearance, it is definite just as it would be if it were explicitly stated as an indefinite. Likewise, it is implied if it returns to what the verb indicates of the verbal noun, like "whoever lies, it is evil for him"—meaning the lying. If it had come here as an implied pronoun, it would have been permissible, referring to the verbal noun understood from "flowed." End quote. An objection was raised: how can it be permissible to mean by it what is understood from the verb, when that is an event, while the mentioned definite noun is an essence, as you have known? It was answered that it is by way of istikhdām. It was retorted that istikhdām is to mention a word with one meaning and return a pronoun to it with another meaning, whether literal or metaphorical. This is not the case here, because the first is a verbal noun—an event contained within the verb—and this is an apparent essence-noun described by that. So how can istikhdām be imagined in it? Indeed, what they mentioned is the general rule and is not exclusive to what was mentioned, for the pronoun has the status of a demonstrative noun, and likewise the apparent noun. End quote. Consider whether it is permissible to intend from "torrent" the verbal noun meaning, so that there is no need for the issue of istikhdām or not? On the basis of permissibility, the meaning is: the water sent down from the sky carried, because of the torrent, (foam). This is the scum that the valley casts up when its water surges and its waves churn, according to what Abu al-Hajjaj al-A‘lam said. It is the meaning of Ibn ‘Isa’s statement: it is the dregs of boiling and its filth. The poet said: "And what is the Euphrates when its surging waves toss its dregs upon the shore with foam." (Rising): That is, high and swelling above the water. Foam is described as such, it is said, as a clarification of what was intended by "carrying," as the carried object is not floating, like heavy trees. It was not refuted by saying "the torrent carried foam above it" to indicate that this "above-ness" is the requirement of the nature of foam, not from the side of the carrier, to verify the resemblance between it and what it is likened to, of the interior, whose nature is appearance in the beginning of thought without intrusion into the truth.
(And from that which they ignite): This begins a new sentence, as reported from Mujahid, conjoined to the first sentence for another example. That is: and from that which they perform the ignition (upon it). The plural pronoun refers to people; it is implied despite no prior mention due to its obviousness. Most of the seven, and Abu Ja‘far, al-A‘raj, and Shaybah read tūqidūna with the address pronoun 'ta'. The prepositional phrase is linked to what is before it, as is His saying: (in the fire) according to Abu al-Baqa’ and al-Hawfi. Abu Ali said: One may ignite upon something and it not be in the fire, as in His saying: "So kindle for me, O Haman, upon the clay." For the clay he was ordered to ignite upon is not in the fire, but rather its flame touches it. Makki and others said: (in the fire) is linked to a suppressed state from the relative pronoun, meaning "being or existing in it." They forbade its connection to "ignite," saying: because one does not ignite upon something unless it is in the fire, and connection to that entails the specification of one state from another. Abu Hayyan said: If we say "one does not ignite upon something unless it is in the fire," it is also permissible to connect it by way of emphasis, just as they said in His saying: "And no bird that flies with its two wings." It is said: the addition of this is to signal exaggeration in the working for the sake of melting and the occurrence of the foam. The relative pronoun refers to things like gold, silver, iron, copper, and lead. The failure to mention them by name and the shift to describing them by igniting upon them—which signals striking them with hammers, for that is for it—and by their being like base firewood, belittles them to manifest His pride, glory be to Him, according to what is said. This does not contradict that this is an example for the Truth, for the station of Pride requires belittling that, while pointing to it being desirable by His saying: (seeking ornament or equipment). Thus, each of the two stations fulfilled its right. So what was said—that carrying it on belittling is not appropriate for the station because the goal is to exemplify the Truth by them, and their belittlement is inappropriate—is fallacious. So ponder.
(Seeking) is in the accusative as an object, as is apparent. Al-Hawfi said: It is a verbal noun in the position of a state, meaning "seeking and desiring to take ornament," which is what one adorns and beautifies oneself with, such as jewelry made of gold and silver; and "taking equipment," which is what one enjoys, such as utensils and tools made of iron, lead, and other metals. (Foam): Filth (like it): That is, like what was mentioned of the water's foam in its being rising above it. (Foam) is raised as a subject whose predicate is (from that which you ignite). (Min) is for the beginning of the end-point, indicating its mere being a subject and arising from it. Abu Hayyan suggested that it is for partitiveness, because that foam is a part of what is ignited upon of those metals. Some investigators did not approve of this because, as he said, it impairs the exemplification. He did not address the extraction of that from the earth, as he addressed the title of sending down water from the sky, because that title has no place in the exemplification, as you will know, God willing, whereas the previous title has a role in it; rather, it impairs it. (Thus): That is, like that wondrous ضرب (striking/example) which contains delightful subtleties: (God strikes the Truth and the Falsehood). That is, the example of the Truth and the example of the Falsehood. The deletion is to indicate the perfection of the similarity between the exemplified and the example, as if the struck example is the Truth and Falsehood itself.
(As for the foam): From each of the torrent and what they ignite upon. It is singular and not dual, even though "foam" was mentioned twice, because they participate in the absolute foam; they are one considering the shared amount. (It goes away as scum): Being thrown away. It is said: "Jafā the water with the foam" if it casts it and throws it away. It is also said ajfa’a with the same meaning. Ibn al-Anbari said: jufā’an, meaning scattered, from "the wind jafa’at the clouds" if it cuts them and scatters them, and "jafa’tu the man" means I threw him down. It is said "the valley jafa’a and ajfa’a" if it dried up. It was also read as jufālan with a 'lam' instead of the 'hamza', which also means scattered, taken from "the wind jafalat the clouds" like jafa’at. This reading was attributed to Ru’bah. Ibn Abi Hatim said: One should not read according to his reading because he used to eat mice, meaning he was a rough Bedouin. It is also said: the reading of Bedouins in the Quran is not considered. The accusative is for the state. (And as for that which benefits people): That is, of the pure water clear of scum, and the pure metallic essence clear of filth, (it remains)—that is, stays—(in the earth). As for the water, some of it remains in its basins and some flows into the veins of the earth toward springs and the like. As for the metallic essence, some of it is crafted into types of jewelry, and from some, sorts of tools and implements are taken. Thus, one benefits from each of these in various ways for a long time. So the meaning of "remaining in the earth" is more general than remaining in the earth itself, including remaining in the hands of those who handle it therein. The change in the order of the laff (folding/grouping) occurring in the summary, which corresponds to the order occurring in the example, is said to be for observing the suitability between the states of going and remaining and their mention, for what is considered is the remaining of the remainder after the going of the goer, not before it. It is also said: the subtlety in presenting the foam before what benefits is that the foam is the apparent thing viewed first, and the rest is remaining and delayed in existence due to its continuity. The verse is of the collection and distribution, as is not hidden.
The summary of the speech in the two verses is that God Almighty has exemplified the Truth—which is the Great Quran, in its abundance in flowing from the Presence of Holiness upon hearts empty of it, varying in readiness, and in its flow upon them as observation and preservation, and upon tongues as discussion and recitation, while it is a support for their spiritual life and what follows it of noble traits and pleasing deeds—with water sent down from the sky, flowing in dry valleys whose custom it was not to flow, measured with a measure that wisdom required in reviving the earth and what is upon it, remaining in it according to what the benefits of people revolve around. And in its being an ornament by which souls adorn themselves and reach eternal joy, and equipment used in this life and the Hereafter, with gold, silver, and other metals from which various types of tools and implements are taken, and which remains benefiting for a long time. And He has exemplified the Falsehood, with which the disbelievers were afflicted due to the limitation of their vision, by what appears in them both without any intrusion into them and impairment of their purity, of the foam rising above them, which quickly vanishes.
It is authentically reported from Abu Musa al-Ash‘ari that he said: The Messenger of God, peace and blessings be upon him, said: "The example of the guidance and knowledge with which God Almighty has sent me is like abundant rain that struck the earth. Part of it was good soil that accepted the water and brought forth fodder and much grass. Part of it was barren that held the water, and God Almighty benefited people by it, so they drank from it, watered, and grazed. And another part of it was struck, which is only hollow plains that do not hold water and do not bring forth fodder. That is the example of one who understands the religion of God Almighty and benefits from what God Almighty has sent me with, so he learns and teaches. And the example of one who does not raise his head for that and does not accept the guidance of God with which I was sent." Ibn ‘Atiyyah said: The beginning of the verse is an alerting to the power of God Almighty and the establishing of proof against the disbelievers. When He finished that, He made it an example for the Truth and the Falsehood, Belief and Disbelief, Certainty and Doubt in the Law. It is as if he intended by mentioning Belief and what follows it, the explanation of what is intended by the Truth and the Falsehood. From Ibn Abbas: He made the foam an indication of doubt, and the pure of it an indication of certainty. (Thus): That is, like that wondrous striking (God strikes the examples).
In every chapter, manifesting the perfection of kindness and care in guidance, and in it is the exaltation of the status of this exemplification and an emphasis for His saying, Glory be to Him: (God strikes the Truth and the Falsehood), either considering the building of this on the first example or by making that an indication of them both.
