Tafsir of Ar-Ra'd 13:30

"Likewise, We have sent you..."

(Likewise): That is, in like manner to that great mission which is accompanied by a dazzling miracle.

It is permissible for this to mean: "Like the sending of the messengers before you." (We have sent you to an ummah); thus, the sending of the Prophet—may Allah bless him and grant him peace—is compared to the sending of those before him, even if they were not explicitly mentioned, due to the indication of His saying: (Verily, there have passed before it many nations), to whom messengers were sent. This has been narrated from Al-Hasan.

It is also said: The kaf (in kadhalika) relates to the meaning in His saying: (Say: "Indeed, Allah leaves astray whom He wills..."), meaning: "Just as We executed that, We sent you." A similar view is reported from Al-Hufi. Ibn Atiyyah said: "What appears to be the case is that the meaning is: just as We established the practice among previous nations that We lead astray and guide by revelation, not by demanded signs, so too have We acted with this nation, and We have sent you to them with revelation, not with demanded signs, so that We leave astray whom We will and guide whom We turn [in repentance]."

Abu al-Baqa' said: "The estimate is: 'The matter is such,' and the best is what we have previously presented and what is narrated from Al-Hasan." The word (fi) is in the sense of ila (to), as in His saying: (They returned their hands to their mouths). It is also said that it is upon its literal meaning, containing an indication that he is from among them and grew up among them; it is not in the sense of ila because there is no need to explain to whom he was sent. In this there is a manifest reflection, and it is related to the aforementioned verb.

The statement of Az-Zamakhshari in interpreting the verse means: "We sent a mission that has a status and excellence over [all other] missions." Then he explained how He sent him by saying: (To an ummah before which many nations have passed), meaning: "We sent you to an ummah that has been preceded by many nations, so it is the last of the nations, and you are the Seal of the Prophets." He did not mean by this that it does not relate to what was mentioned, but rather that since the referred-to [entity] was vague, and what followed it was a matter of exaltation, its clarification was by connecting it to that action until the vagueness was removed.

It is permissible for "likewise" to refer to [the sending], so one estimates "We sent you" a second time, and his saying "i.e., We sent you to an ummah" is an exposition of what was omitted, not an explanation of the essence of the verse, and this is what Allamah At-Tibi favored. Connection to the aforementioned is the apparent meaning, and the sentence (have passed) is in the position of an adjective for "ummah." The benefit of this description—it is said—is what Az-Zamakhshari pointed to. This was objected to on the grounds that it does not necessarily follow from the passing of many nations before that there is no ummah to be sent to after, such that it necessitates that he—may Allah bless him and grant him peace—is the Seal of the Prophets. Ash-Shihab researched this, saying that the intent behind his mission—may Allah bless him and grant him peace—being "wondrous" is that his message is greater than every message, and thus it is comprehensive of everything needed; therefore, there is no abrogation, for abrogation is only for the sake of completion, and the complete [message] is in the ultimate state of perfection, not needing completion, as He said: (Today I have perfected for you your religion).

By my life, the objection is strong and the research is extremely weak, for it does not follow from his mission being "wondrous" what he claimed. And even if we conceded that, it does not necessitate that he—may Allah bless him and grant him peace—is the Seal, as his being sent confirms his complete religion, just as many of the Prophets of the Children of Israel were sent to confirm the religion of Musa—peace be upon him—which does not contradict the aforementioned comprehensiveness of his message—may Allah bless him and grant him peace—and the necessity of the absence of abrogation because of that, as is not hidden. Perhaps for this reason, some chose what was narrated from Al-Hasan and said, while drawing attention to the benefit of the description: "Meaning, like the sending of the messengers before you, We have sent you to nations that were preceded by nations to whom they were sent, so your being sent to them is not a novelty."

(To recite): To read (to them that which We have revealed to you), meaning: the Book of great status. This description is signaled by the mention of the described [subject] not following the described, and the attribution of the action in its relative clause to the pronoun of majesty, and likewise the delivery to the highly esteemed addressee, as evidenced by what preceded it. The precedence of the prepositional phrase over the direct object is of the type of "the vague followed by the clear," as in His saying: (And We removed from you your burden). In this, there is what is not hidden of the soul's anticipation for what is to come and its favorable acceptance when it arrives. The plural pronoun for the "ummah" considers its meaning, just as the pronoun in (have passed) considered its literal wording.

(While they disbelieve in the Most Merciful): That is, in the One of abundant mercy, whose grace has surrounded them and whose mercy has encompassed all things; yet they did not thank His blessings—Glory be to Him—especially what He bestowed upon them by sending you to them and revealing the Quran, which is the axis of religious and worldly benefits for them. Rather, they met His mercy and favors with disbelief, whereas the requirement of reason is the opposite. The apparent [meaning] was "in Me," yet it turned to the apparent [Name]. This Name, which indicates exaggeration in mercy, was preferred to point out that the sending arises from it, as He said: (And We have not sent you except as a mercy to the worlds). The plural pronoun refers to the "ummah" as well. The sentence is in the position of a state (hal) from the doer of (We sent), not from the pronoun in (to them), because the sending is not for the purpose of recitation to them while they are in a state of disbelief. Some permitted that—the recitation to them while in disbelief—so that they might realize its inimitability and therefore believe in it due to their knowledge of the arts of rhetoric, and it does not contradict its recitation to them after their conversion to Islam.

It is permissible for the sentence to be a new beginning (musta'nafah), with the pronoun being as you have known. It is said: It refers to those who said: (Why is not a sign sent down to him from his Lord?). It is also said: It refers back to "ummah" and "nations," and the verse is a consolation for him—may Allah bless him and grant him peace. From Qatadah, Ibn Jurayj, and Muqatil, it is reported that the verse was revealed regarding the polytheists of Makkah when they saw the Treaty of Hudaybiyyah, in which Ali—may Allah honor his face—had written: "In the name of Allah, the Most Merciful, the Ever-Merciful." Suhayl ibn Amr said: "We do not know the Most Merciful except Musaylimah." It is also said: Abu Jahl heard the saying of the Messenger of Allah—may Allah bless him and grant him peace—"O Allah, O Most Merciful," and he said: "Muhammad forbids us from worshipping the gods, yet he calls upon two gods," so it was revealed. From Ibn Abbas—may Allah be pleased with them both—it is reported that when it was said to the disbelievers of Quraysh: (Prostrate to the Most Merciful), they said: "And what is the Most Merciful?" So it was revealed. All of this is weakened because it is not appropriate, as it would imply they disbelieve in this Name and its application to Him—Subhanahu wa Ta'ala—while the manifest [meaning] is that they disbelieved in what it signifies.

(Say: "He is..."): When they disbelieved in Him—Subhanahu—and did not declare His oneness, (my Lord), my Creator, the one who manages my affairs and conveys me to the ranks of perfection. The inclusion of this before His saying: (There is no god but Him), meaning: no one is worthy of worship except Him, is an alert that the worthiness of worship is dependent upon Lordship. The sentence is included within the scope of the command to say, and it is a predicate after a predicate according to some. Others said: After He criticized the disbelievers for their condition and their reversal of the requirement of reason, He commanded His Prophet—peace be upon him—to alert them to his own particularity and his duty of gratitude and the destination of his affairs, as a rebuke to them, so He said: "Say: He is my Lord who sent me to you and supported me with what He supported me, and I have no lord other than Him. (Upon Him...), not upon anyone other than Him, (I have relied) in all my affairs, especially in victory over you, (and to Him...), exclusively, (is my return)."

That is, my return, so He will aid me against your persistence and your fighting. His saying—Glory be to Him—(There is no god but Him) is a parenthetical clause with which He emphasized the exclusivity of reliance upon Him—Subhanahu—and the delegation of affairs, now and in the future, to Him. Similar to it is His saying: (Follow that which is revealed to you from your Lord; there is no god but Him, and turn away from the polytheists). To the opinion of it being a parenthetical clause went the author of Al-Kashf, and he interpreted the words of Al-Kashshaf accordingly. When he mentioned after (He is my Lord), the One, the Exalted above partners, he said: "He made it the benefit of the parenthetical clause with 'there is no god but Him,' meaning: 'This One of abundant mercy, and there is no god but Him; thus, He is also of severe retribution, just as He is of abundant mercy; He will have mercy on me and take retribution on my behalf against you.'" It is also a preparation for His saying: (Upon Him I have relied). He did not make it a predicate after a predicate, as the intent is not to inform that He—Subhanahu—is unique in divinity, but the intent is that the One unique in it is my Lord, and the parenthetical clause conveys that.

As for the understanding from his [Az-Zamakhshari's] words that it is a state (hal), and therefore treated as a description, then no—unless it is made an emphasizing state, and it does not differ from a parenthetical clause in much difference, but the first is more filled with benefit. It is not hidden that there is obscurity in directing the words of Al-Kashshaf with that, and there is reflection in the claim that the intent is that the one unique in divinity is my Lord, rather than informing that He—Subhanahu—is unique in it, as has been said. Perhaps its foundation is that what he established is more consistent with the purpose that his words indicate should be considered as the direction of the verse, and it contains an emphasis on His description—Subhanahu—with uniqueness that is not hidden.

Yes, it is said that the opinion of the parenthetical clause has a face, and that it is then not far to say: After He mentioned the sending of the Prophet—may Allah bless him and grant him peace—to them, and that their condition is that they disbelieve in the One of abundant mercy and do not counter His mercy with gratitude so as to believe in Him and declare His oneness, He commanded him to inform [them] of the exclusivity of his reliance and dependence upon that One of abundant mercy, and his turning in all his affairs to Him, hinting that their insistence on disbelief will not harm him in the least, and that he—may Allah bless him and grant him peace—has a praiseworthy outcome, and that He—Subhanahu—will support him against them. In that, there is a ridiculing of their opinion in insisting on disbelief and an urging for them to follow him. However, He—His Glory—commanded him first to say: (He is my Lord) as a preamble to that, and "There is no god but Him" was brought as a parenthetical clause for emphasis. What the nature inclines toward after reflection and observation of the style is the opinion of the parenthetical clause.

It is not hidden that the sentence (and to Him is my return), meaning "to Him is my return in all my affairs," is contrary to the apparent meaning, and that, accordingly, it is like an emphasis for what precedes it. The Sheikh of Islam said in his interpretation: "That is, to Him is my repentance, like His saying: (And ask forgiveness for your sin)." The Prophet—peace be upon him—was commanded with that to clarify the excellence of repentance and its rank with Allah—Ta'ala—and that it is the attribute of the Prophets, and to incite the disbelievers to return from what they are upon in the most eloquent and gentlest way; for since he—may Allah bless him and grant him peace—was commanded with it while he is free from the blemish of committing what necessitates it—even if small—then their repentance, while they are devoted to various kinds of disbelief and sins, is something that is absolutely inevitable. In this, there is that this is only suitable as an incentive for quitting sin in the most eloquent and gentlest way if the speech were with those other than the disbelievers who think they are doing good. Perhaps that is apparent to the fair-minded.

Allamah Al-Baydawi said regarding this: "That is, to Him is my return and your return." It is as if he also intended: "So He will have mercy on me and take retribution on you," and retribution from the Most Merciful is more severe, as it is said: "I seek refuge in Allah Ta'ala from the anger of the Forbearing." This was countered by the fact that it is only complete if the omitted genitive is the first-person pronoun with another with it, i.e., "our return," for then it would be "my return and your return," as an elaboration of that. No one would say this with his saying "with a kasrah on the ba", as it necessitates that the omitted [letter] is the ya, even though that pronoun does not suit what precedes it. Perhaps the Allamah considered that the verse contains sufficiency—as has been said—meaning "my return and your return," or that the speech implies it by necessity, and this is better according to what has been said, so reflect.