Tafsir of Ibraheem 14:24

(Have you not seen): The address is directed to the Master of those addressed [the Prophet Muhammad, may Allah bless him and grant him peace]. It is also said: it is for whoever is suitable to be addressed. The verb is suspended by what follows it in His saying: (how Allah set forth a parable), meaning: how He fashioned it and placed it in its proper, befitting position.

(A good word): In the accusative case as a substitute (badal) for (a parable). Dharaba (to set forth) is transitive to one object, as held by al-Hufi, al-Mahdawi, and Abu al-Baqa’. According to what has been said, it is a substitute of inclusion (badal al-ishtimal). If it were made a substitute of totality (badal kull min kull), it would not be far-fetched. It has been objected that there is no meaning to saying "Allah set forth a good word" unless "a parable" is added to it; for "a parable" is the intended object of the relation, so how could something else be substituted for it? It is not hidden that this is based on the apparent view of the grammarians: that the substitute is in the position of being discarded, which is not conceded.

His saying, the Almighty: (as a good tree): It is an adjective for (word) or the predicate of an omitted subject, meaning: "It is like a good tree." It is also permitted that (word) be in the accusative by an implied verb, and (set forth) is also transitive to one object, meaning: "He made a good word like a good tree," i.e., He decreed that it is its likeness. The sentence is an explanation for His saying: (Allah set forth a parable), just as you say: "You honored the Amir, Zayd; you clothed him in a garment and carried him on a horse." Abu Hayyan countered this by saying it involves a burdensome implication that has no necessity. Al-Samin answered him with what contains discussion. It is also permitted that the aforementioned dharaba be transitive to two objects, either because it is in the meaning of "to make/appoint" (ja'ala) or because it is infused with that meaning, and (word) is the first of its two objects, delayed from the second—which is (a parable)—so that it is not distant from its attribute, which is (as a tree).

It is said: It is no objection to this that the meaning is that He set forth a parable for a good word, not a "good word" as a parable; because the "parable" here is in the meaning of the "similitude" (mumathal bihi), and the estimation is "a thing possessing a parable," the first of which is (a parable). It was recited (word) in the nominative case as an initial (ibtida') because it is an indefinite noun described by an attribute, and the predicate is (as a tree). It is also permissible for it to be the predicate of an omitted subject, and (as a tree) is another attribute.

(Its root is firm): That is, striking its roots into the earth. Anas ibn Malik recited: (like a good tree, firm its root). The recitation of the majority is based on the root [of the phrase], and they mentioned that it is stronger in meaning. Ibn Jinni said: Because if you say "firm its root" (thabitun asluha), you have applied the adjective to the tree, and the firmness is not for it, but for the root. When an adjective is in meaning for something that is a cause of the described, it may be applied to it, but it is more specific to that which it belongs to in wording and meaning. Therefore, it is better to advance the "root" out of care for it. Hence they said: "Zayd, I hit him," advancing the object out of care for it, since the purpose is not to mention the agent, but to mention the object. Furthermore, they were not satisfied with that, as they removed it from being a mere addition (fadlah) and made it the master of the sentence in wording, so they raised it by the initial, and "I hit him" became a tail and an addition attached to it. Likewise, your saying: "I passed by a man whose father is standing" is stronger in meaning than saying "I passed by a man standing his father," because the one being informed about the standing is the father, not the man, along with what the advancement here contains of beautiful contrast and classification.

However, the recitation of Anas has a beautiful aspect: that (firm its root) is an attribute of the tree, and the root of the attribute is that it should be a singular noun, for when a sentence occurs as an attribute, its place is judged to be in the inflection of a singular; that has not reached the status of a sentence, unlike (its root is firm), for it is definitively a sentence. Some said: It is more eloquent, but did not mention the reason for that, so those who claimed it was the point alluded to [of beauty] were far from the truth. Ibn Tamjid said: It is like describing a thing twice: once by its form, and once by its meaning, along with the summary and detail it contains, as in: (Have We not expanded for you your breast?). When it was said: (like a good tree, firm), the mind spontaneously conceived from making "firm" an attribute of the tree in form that something of the tree is characterized by firmness. Then, when it was said: (its root), it was known explicitly that firmness is an attribute of the root of the tree. It is also said: its being more hyperbolic is because it makes the tree, through the firmness of its roots, firm in all its branches. So contemplate.

(And its branches): That is, its upper parts, from their saying "the branch of the mountain" when one ascends it; the highest part is called a branch (far') because of its branching out from the root. For this reason, it is singularized—otherwise, every tree has branches and twigs. It is permissible that it refers to the branches because it is genitive, and the addition, where there is no previous knowledge, implies totality, or because it is an infinitive according to the root, and its addition, as is well known, signifies generality; so it is as if it were said: (And its branches).

(In the sky): That is, in the direction of height.