"And if there were a Quran" (meaning: any Quran, and the intent here is the linguistic meaning of the word [a recitation], which is the subject of anna). "By which the mountains were moved" is the predicate of the exalted command of Allah. The answer to the conditional law (if) is omitted because the speech flows toward it, as in the saying: "I swear, if something had come to us, your messenger would have been other than you, but we found no defense against you."
The purpose is either to declare the greatness of the Mighty Quran and the corruption of the disbelievers' opinion—since they did not value it properly, did not count it among the ayat (signs), and proposed others instead—or it is to declare their exaggeration in stubbornness and obstinacy, and their persistence in misguidance and corruption.
According to the first interpretation, the meaning is: If there were a book by the sending down or recitation of which the mountains were moved and shaken from their foundations—as was done with Mount Tur for Moses, peace be upon him—"or by which the earth were cut" (meaning: cleft asunder and made into rivers and springs, as was done with the rock when Moses, peace be upon him, struck it with his staff, or made into shattered pieces), "or by which the dead were spoken to" (meaning: one could speak to the dead through it by reviving them with its recitation so that they would speak thereafter, as occurred with the revival for Jesus, peace be upon him), then this Quran would indeed be that very thing. This is because it is the ultimate point in containing the wondrous effects of the power of Allah—may He be glorified and exalted—and His majesty, similar to His saying: "If We had sent down this Quran upon a mountain, you would have seen it humbled and split asunder from the fear of Allah." This was stated by some of the verifiers.
It is also said that the cause [of this statement] is that it [the Quran] is the ultimate in inimitability (i'jaz) and the zenith in admonition and warning. This is critiqued by the fact that i'jaz has no place in these effects, and admonition and warning are specific to the rational beings; furthermore, it has no relation to speaking to the dead. Considering the effusion of intellects upon them [the dead] interferes with the intended hyperbole. It was also discussed that the aforementioned [point]—the increased inclusion of the wondrous effects of Allah's power—is a matter that refers to majesty, which is also something from which the speaking to the dead does not follow. Rather, it might even be a preventative of that, because if it required the shaking of mountains and the cutting of the earth, then it would a fortiori require the death of the living rather than the reviving of the dead (from which speaking would follow). In this there is scrutiny.
The ba (in the three instances) is for causality. In the third instance, it is permissible that it be connected to what precedes it, and the placing of the prepositional phrase before the subject there is for the purpose of ambiguity followed by clarification, for the sake of increased emphasis, as has passed more than once. The aw (or) in both places is for "preventing the vacuum" [disjunctive] rather than combination. The masculine pronoun in "spoken to" (kullima) is to prioritize the masculine from among the "dead" over others.
Although their suggestion was related to the mere appearance of such wondrous actions at the hands of the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, and not their appearance by means of the Quran, this [construction] is based on their claim that it [the Quran] lacks miracles. Its appearance was tied to it [the Quran] as a hyperbole regarding the state of it containing them, and that it is worthy to be the source of every miracle, and to show the flimsiness of their opinion regarding its lofty status. It is as if it were said: "If the appearance of the likes of what they suggested were among the requirements of wisdom, its manifestation would be this Quran," which they did not count as a sign. The greatness of its honored status and the description of them as having flimsy intellects is not hidden. This is how some of the eminent scholars verified it, and it is of great beauty.
According to the second [interpretation]: "If there were a Quran by which these wondrous actions were performed, they would not believe in it," similar to His saying: "And even if We had sent down the angels to them and the dead had spoken to them," and so on. The speech, as the Shihab demonstrated, is, upon both interpretations, true by way of assumption, like his saying: "If the hoofed one had flown before it, it would have flown, but it did not fly." To make it, upon the first [interpretation], a parable like the verse mentioned there is, according to what he said, baseless. Al-Zamakhshari’s exemplification with it is to explain that the Quran requires the ultimate fear. The work of many verifiers is apparent in preferring the first interpretation.
In al-Kashf, it says: "If you were to reflect upon this noble surah with true reflection, you would find the structure of the speech therein [is built] upon the truth of the Glorious Book and its inclusion of what brings about the welfare of both abodes, and that the happy one, the truly happy one, is he who holds fast to its rope, and the wretched one, the truly wretched one, is he who turns away from it to his own desires." Since Allah the Exalted said first: "And that which has been revealed to you from your Lord is the truth," then He marveled at their denial of that by His saying, may He be glorified: "And those who disbelieve say: 'Why has a sign not been sent down upon him?'" Then Allah the Exalted said: "To Him is the true call," establishing its truth with evidence. Then He, majestic and exalted, said: "He sends down rain from the sky," which is a parable for the truth—which is the Quran—and for those who benefit from it, according to what the verifiers interpreted. Then Allah declared the result of all that with luminous proof in His saying, may He be glorified: "Is he who knows that what has been revealed to you from your Lord is the truth like one who is blind?"
Then He, may He be glorified, repeated His saying: "And those who disbelieve say," indicating their denial the moment it came to them, and that after their solid knowledge of its truth, they persisted in denial. Then He returned to stating the truth in what we are dealing with and exaggerated to the limit beyond which there is no further point, whether [the verse] is placed within the realm of the [disbelievers'] "saying" or whether it is the beginning of speech from Allah the Exalted as a conclusion—the latter being more eloquent—so that it is intended for its own sake in the aforementioned benefit. The whole is confirmed by what the saying of Allah the Exalted indicates: "And thus We have sent you," regarding the glorification of the Messenger, peace and blessings be upon him, and what was revealed to him, and the intensity of their denial and resolve, meaning: "There is nothing left but to rely [on Allah] and be patient in your struggle against them, for there is nothing beyond this Quran that I might bring so that you would submit." Then He exalted it and denounced their stubbornness by His saying, the Exalted: "And thus We have revealed it as an Arabic judgment." And He supported the truth of the Book concerning whom it was revealed to at the end of the surah by His saying, the Exalted: "Sufficient is Allah..." to His saying, the Exalted: "...the knowledge of the Book," alerting that with all the clarity of its matter in benefiting gnostic truths and faithful dispositions, the reality of what is in it is known only by Him who is unique in it and in its revelation, may He be blessed and exalted.
Regarding the cause of revelation—and you will soon know it, if Allah wills—is what supports the second [interpretation]. The apparent, according to what he verified and what we first pointed to, is that the verse in the first [interpretation] is related to His saying: "And those who disbelieve say: 'Why has a sign not been sent down upon him?'" And in the second [interpretation], it is related to His saying: "And they disbelieve in the Most Merciful," as a clarification of their resolve in their disbelief and their denial of the signs and the one who brought them—not the former, because the intention is far-fetched without necessity.
His saying, the Exalted: "But to Allah belongs the affair entirely," means to Him belongs the affair upon which the sphere of the universes revolves, in existence and non-existence; He does what He wills and judges what He desires according to what the profound wisdoms require. It is said: [it is] a disavowal (idrab) of what the conditional [structure] requires of the meaning of negation, not according to its literal wording, but regarding its implication. Its result is: "If a Quran had been [revealed] by which what was mentioned was done, it would be this Quran, but He, the Exalted, did not do that; rather, He did what is currently the case, because the affair belongs entirely to Him alone." Thus the disavowal is not directed at the fact that the affair belongs to Allah the Exalted, but at what that leads to, namely, that the situation is as it was because of what wisdom requires. It is also said: the essence of the disavowal is that the moving of the mountains with what was mentioned does not come by a Quran, but rather by something else that Allah the Exalted willed, for the affair belongs to Him entirely. Some assumed that it is best [to consider it] a conjunction to an implied [phrase], meaning: "You have no part in the affair, but the affair belongs to Allah entirely."
The meaning of His saying, the Exalted: "Have those who believed not yet despaired?"—[meaning] have they not yet known? This is a dialect of the Hawazin, as Qasim ibn Ma'n said. Ibn al-Kalbi said: It is a dialect of a tribe from the Nakha', and they cited for that the saying of Suhaym ibn Wathil al-Rabahi: "I say to them in the pass when they capture me: 'Have you not despaired [known] that I am the son of the knight of Zahdam?'" and the saying of Rabah ibn 'Adi: "Have the peoples not despaired [known] that I am his son, even if I were far from the land of the clan?" So the rejection by al-Farra' of this—and his claim that no one among the Arabs has been heard to say "I despaired" in the sense of "I knew"—is not in its proper place; one who has preserved [the knowledge] is an authority over one who has not.
The apparent is that the usage of "despair" in this sense is literal. It is said: [it is] metaphorical, because it includes knowledge; for one who despairs of a thing is one who knows that it will not happen. It was objected that despair then requires the acquisition of knowledge of non-existence, yet it is used in the sense of knowledge of existence. It was answered that since it included knowledge of non-existence, it included absolute knowledge, so it was used in that [sense]. Supporting the intention of "knowledge" here is the recitation of Ali, may Allah honor his face, Ibn Abbas, Ali ibn al-Husayn—may Allah be pleased with them—'Ikrimah, Ibn Abi Mulaykah, al-Jahdari, Abi Yazid al-Madani, and a group: "Have they not yet known" (a-fa-lam yatabayyan), from tabayyan-tu such-and-such, if you knew it. This is a recitation attributed to the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him; it is not contrary to the mus-haf (the text of the Quran), for they wrote "despair" (yay'as) without the form of the hamza. As for the saying of him who said that the scribe wrote it while he was drowsy and thus made the teeth of the sin [equal], that is the saying of an infidel, a son of an atheist, according to what is in al-Bahr. Based on this, the narration of that, as in al-Durr al-Manthur from Ibn Abbas—may Allah be pleased with them both—is not authentic. Some claimed that it is a "recitation of interpretation," but it is not so.
The fa (in afalam) is for conjunction to an implied [meaning]: "Have they been heedless of the fact that the entire affair belongs to Allah, so they did not know 'that if Allah willed'"—with the softening of an (that), making its subject the pronoun of the state, and the conditional sentence its predicate, and an and what follows it occupying the place of the two objects of "knowing"—"He would have guided all of mankind"? The rejection [in the question] is directed at both conjuncts. Or [it means]: "Have they known that the entire affair belongs to Allah, yet they did not know what that knowledge necessitates of what was mentioned?" In that case, it is directed at the consequence of the second conjunct from the first, meaning: the failure of the second knowledge to follow the first.
However it may be, the rejection is a rejection of the occurrence, not of the thing occurred. The pivot of the rejection is not only their lack of knowledge of the content of the conditional, but their lack of knowledge of the non-fulfillment of its protasis. It is as if it were said: "Did they not know that if Allah willed to guide them, He would have guided them, and that He, the Exalted, did not will that?" This is because it is narrated from Ibn Abbas—may Allah be pleased with them both—that when the disbelievers asked for the signs, the believers wished that Allah would manifest them so that they might unite in faith. This is according to the first interpretation.
As for the second interpretation, the disavowal is directed at what preceded of their proposal, while they are in [a state of] obstinacy as explained. The meaning is: "They shall not have that; rather, the affair belongs to Allah the Exalted; if He wills, He brings what they proposed, and if He, the Exalted, wills, He does not bring it, according to what His dazzling wisdom demands, without anyone having over Him—He is glorious—any rule or proposal."
"Despair" in the sense of "giving up hope" (qunut), as is common in its meaning, [means]: "Did those who believed not yet know their [the disbelievers'] state, so they did not give up hope of their faith, to the point that they wished for the appearance of their proposals?" Thus the rejection is directed at both conjuncts. Or [it means]: "Did they know that, yet did not give up hope of their faith?" Then it is directed at the occurrence of the second conjunct after the first, meaning: the failure of [the act of] despair to follow the knowledge mentioned. The rejection, upon these two interpretations, is a rejection of the thing occurred, not of the occurrence, for their non-despair of that is something that cannot be avoided.
His saying, the Exalted: "that if Allah willed," up to the end, is an object for a "knowledge" that is omitted, which has become its object, meaning: "Have they not despaired of the faith of the disbelievers, knowing that if Allah willed, He would have guided all of mankind, and that He did not will that?" It may also be that "knowledge" is in the position of a state (hal), meaning: "Knowing that, [yet they did not despair]," and the inclusion [of qunut in ya'as] is not considered because it is far-fetched. It is permissible that it be related to "believed" by implying the ba: "Have those who believed and trusted not despaired, [knowing] that if Allah willed He would have guided all of mankind?" [This is] in the sense of: "Have the believers in the content of this conditional, and in the non-fulfillment of it—which is understood from their stubbornness just as the word 'law' (if) implies—not despaired of the faith of these disbelievers?" The description mentioned is among the causes for the rejection of their despair. By what we have indicated, the objection is resolved—that the relation of faith to the content of the conditional and mentioning it specifically requires that it has a role in [the cause of] despair, whereas the affair is the opposite, because Allah's ability to guide all people requires hope for their faith, not despair of it. [This is resolved] by considering the knowledge of the non-fulfillment of the content as well.
Some of them said in response to that: the reason for specifying faith with that is that the faith of these resolute disbelievers is as if it were impossible, related to what will not happen, because it depends on the will of Allah to guide all people, and that is what will not happen by consensus. It is in the meaning of what was indicated.
Abu Hayyan mentioned another possibility in the verse, which is that the speech is completed at His saying, the Exalted: "Have those who believed not yet despaired?" and it is a statement of fact: the believers have already despaired of the faith of these stubborn ones. And "that if Allah willed," etc., is the answer to an omitted oath, meaning: "I swear, if Allah willed, He would have guided all of mankind." The presence of anna (that) with law (if) indicates the omission of the oath, as in his saying: "I swear by Allah that if I were free—but you are neither free nor a slave," and his saying: "I swear that if we had met, you and I, we would have had a dark day of evil." Sibawayh mentioned that anna comes after an oath, and Ibn 'Usfur made it a connector of the oath to the sentence sworn upon. That is the end [of his quote]. It contains a degree of affectation that is not hidden.
Among the people are those who made the disavowal absolute from what law contains of the meaning of negation, in the sense of: "Rather, Allah the Exalted is able to bring what they proposed, except that His will did not relate to that because He, the Exalted, knew that their stubbornness would not soften." It is not hidden that this is apparent upon the second interpretation. As for the first, it has been said that the will to glorify the status of the Quran does not contradict the refutation of the proposers. The side of refutation was supported by what Ibn Abi Shaybah, Ibn al-Mundhir, and others brought out from al-Sha'bi, who said: "Quraysh said to the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him: 'If you are a prophet as you claim, move these two mountains of Makkah, its Akhshabayn, away by a distance of four or five days' [travel], for it is narrow, so that we may farm and graze in it. And send back to us our fathers from the dead so they can speak to us and inform us that you are a prophet. Or carry us to al-Sham, or to Yemen, or to al-Hira, so that we may go and come in a night, as you claimed you did.' Then this verse was revealed." Ibn Jarir and Abu al-Shaykh brought out from Ibn Abbas that they said: "Move the mountains with the Quran, cut the earth with the Quran, bring out our dead with the Quran," then it was revealed. Upon this, there is no need for the apology regarding attributing the mentioned actions to the Quran, as was needed in the previous [discussions]. According to al-Sha'bi's report, "cutting the earth" is intended as cutting it by travel.
Supporting the interpretation that we offered first is what Abu Na'im brought out in al-Dala'il and others from the hadith of al-Zubayr ibn al-'Awwam that when "And warn your nearest kinsmen" was revealed, the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, shouted from [the hill of] Abu Qubays: "O family of 'Abd Manaf, I am a warner." Then Quraysh came to him, and he warned them and cautioned them. They said: "You claim that you are a prophet to whom it is revealed, and that Solomon was given the wind and the mountains, and Moses was given the sea, and Jesus used to revive the dead. So pray to Allah the Exalted that He move these mountains away from us and cause rivers to gush for us in the earth, so that we may make farms and sow and eat. Otherwise, pray to Allah the Exalted that He revive our dead so that we may speak to them and they speak to us. Otherwise, pray to Allah the Exalted that He turn this rock that is beneath you into gold, so that we may carve from it and it may suffice us from the journey of winter and summer; for you claim that you are like them."
The wording is not specific to the cause, and its generality encompasses every warning that came regarding the corrupt. The Imam answered that failure [of fulfillment] is one thing, and specifying the generalities is another. We do not say there is a contradiction, but we specify the generalities of the threat with the verses that indicate pardon. You know that the famous [view] in the response is that the verses of promise are absolute, and the verses of threat, even if they arrive in an absolute form, are [actually] restricted, the restriction of which was omitted for increased frightening. The source of both matters is the greatness of mercy and the ultimate nobility. The difference between promise and threat is more apparent than to be mentioned. Yes, the promise might be applied to what is in its essence a threat, for a subtle point. Let [the reader] reflect on what is here in the manner established.
From Ibn Abbas—may Allah be pleased with them both—it is that what is intended by "the calamity" (al-qari'ah) are the detachments (saraya) that the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, used to send; they were between raids, abductions, and intimidation by attacking them in their homes. So the striking and the settling [of the calamity] in that case are among their circumstances. Upon this, it was permitted that His saying, the Exalted: "or it settles," be an address to the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, intended to mean the settling of [the affair of] al-Hudaybiyyah, and what is intended by the promise of Allah is what He promised of the conquest of Makkah. Al-Tabari attributed this to Ibn Abbas, Mujahid, and Qatadah, and it was narrated from Muqatil and 'Ikrimah. Ibn 'Atiyyah held that what is intended by "those who disbelieve" are the disbelievers of Quraysh and the Arabs, and he interpreted "the calamity" as what descends upon them of the detachments of the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him. From al-Hasan and Ibn al-Sa'ib, it is that they are the disbelievers in general. They said: "That affair is ongoing for them until the Day of Resurrection." It does not hold, upon this [view], that "the calamity" means the detachments of the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him; rather, it means what was mentioned first. You know that if the genus of disbelievers is intended, it does not necessarily follow that what preceded [the calamity] settles upon all of them. Mujahid and Ibn Jubayr read "or it settles" (yahu) with ya (third person) referring to the Messenger, peace and blessings be upon him. They also read "from their homes" as plural.
