Tafsir of An-Nahl 16:12

(And He has subjected for you the night and the day): They succeed one another as a replacement for your sleep, your rest, and your striving in your interests—such as undertaking labor, tending to crops, and the like. (And the sun and the moon): They persist in their orbits and their illumination, primarily and secondarily, performing what they are charged with regarding the cultivation of trees and crops, the ripening of fruits, their coloration, and other effects resulting from them by the permission of Allah—according to what the predecessors say regarding causes and effects. The intent behind subjecting these to the addressed is not to enable them to utilize them however they wish, as in His saying: (Exalted is He who has subjected this to us) and the like; rather, it is His—Glory be to Him—managing them according to the benefits and interests that result from them, as if this were a subjection for them and an utilization from them according to their will, as some researchers have stated.

Others said: The essence of "subjection" (taskhir) is driving by force. But it is not correct to intend this, because force and subjugation are inconceivable regarding inanimate objects that lack perception, such as the sun and the moon. Their lack of perception is even more apparent in things like the night and the day. Therefore, it is a metaphor here for preparation and readiness for the desired utility. In this, there is an allusion to the difficulty of attaining these benefits for the addressed.

The Imam mentioned regarding the meaning of "subjection" something similar to what was mentioned first, then he stated another perspective, saying: It does not hold true except according to the school of the astronomers. They say: The natural movement of the sun and the moon is the movement from the west to the east. So, Allah—the Exalted—subjected these planets by means of the movement of the Great Sphere from the east to the west, so this movement was compelled; hence, the word taskhir was used for it. He also mentioned that the occurrence of night and day is not due to anything other than the movement of the Great Sphere, not the movement of the sun. As for its movement, it is the cause of the occurrence of the year; therefore, the mention of night and day did not make the mention of the sun redundant. [End quote].

One cannot object to him by saying that what he mentioned regarding the occurrence of night and day does not apply to the equatorial region, because night and day do not occur there except by the setting and rising of the sun, and there it does not set or rise by the movement of the Great Sphere, but rather by its own specific movement. Thus, the year was a day and a night because the mention of the equator is uninhabited, and likewise what is near it; so it does not enter into the scope of the bestowal of favor in his statement according to those who adhere to the laws of Sharia, among others—so let this be considered.

Regarding whether the sun and the moon are entities that lack perception, there is a disagreement among scholars. Some went to the view that they are sentient beings, which is what the apparent meanings require, and to this, the Sufis and the philosophers have leaned. I have not perceived a disagreement that the night and the day are entities that lack perception. Yes, I saw in Al-Bahja Al-Qadiriyya from the Lordly Pole, Sheikh Abd al-Qadir al-Jilani—may his secret be sanctified—that a month or a week comes to him in a form, and it informs him of the events that will happen in it. Perhaps this is like the manifestation of the Quran on the Day of Resurrection in the form of a pale man, saying to the one who used to memorize it, "I am the one who kept you awake in the dark nights and made you thirsty in the heat of the day," or the manifestation of Death in the form of a mottled ram and its slaughtering between Paradise and Hell on the Day of Resurrection, as has come in the reports. You must believe in what has come from the Truthful, the Believed—may Allah bless him and grant him peace—while you remain free to choose regarding faith in others.

The choice of the past tense, it is said, is to indicate that this subjection is a single, continuous affair, even if its effects are renewed. (And the stars are subjected by His command): A subject and a predicate, meaning all the stars—the zodiacal and others—in their movements, their positions (both those that change and those that do not), and all their conditions, are subjected to what they were created for by the creation of Allah and His management, which proceeds according to His will. The "command" (amr) is one. It is also permitted that it is one of the "commands," and it is intended as the creative command for those who do not hold that the stars have perception. The meaning is that they are subjected to what they were created for by His power—the Exalted—and His bringing into existence. It is said: Since the return of the benefits of the stars to them in appearance is not on the same level as the aforementioned "two days" and "two luminaries," their subjection was not attributed to them with a particle of specialization (idafa); rather, it was mentioned in a way that indicates they are under His sovereignty—Mighty and Majestic—without indicating anything else for them. Therefore, he shifted from the verbal sentence, which indicates occurrence, to the nominal one, which implies permanence and continuity.

Ibn Amir recited ash-shamsu wal-qamaru (the sun and the moon) with the nominative case as well; thus, the subject is "the sun," and the remainder are conjoined to it, and "subjected" (musakkharat) is the predicate for all of them. This recitation does not accommodate what was said regarding the reason for not attributing their subjection to them with a particle of specialization, as is not hidden. And the consideration that the manifestation of benefits is not at the level of the previous ones, viewing the whole, is as you see.

Some people said regarding this: The intent behind the subjection of the night and the day for them is their benefit from them, in that they are times for striving in interests and for rest, and in that the manifestations resulting from them are the benefits they are charged with, such as the righteousness of the created things—of which what was detailed and summarized, for example, the sun and the moon within them, is a part. This leads ultimately to the benefit of that, which is the meaning of subjecting it to them. Thus, the subjection of the night and the day for them contains the subjection of these to them; so, as he mentioned it first, he was dispensed from stating it clearly a second time. Instead, he stated clearly what is greater in status, which is that those matters have always been and continue to be forced under His power, yielding to His will and His decree, whether you exist or do not exist—so let this be reflected upon.

The majority recited wan-nujuma musakkharatin with the accusative case in both, as well as in what preceded. This is parsed as wan-nujuma being the first object of a deleted verb implied by the mentioned verb, and musakkharatin being its second object; meaning: "And He made the stars subjected." It is also permissible to make ja'ala (He made) have the meaning of "He created," which takes only one object, so musakkharatin is a circumstantial qualifier (hal). Abu Hayyan favored the idea that an-nujumu is conjoined to what preceded it without ellipsis, and musakkharatin is in that case a circumstantial qualifier for all of them, on the basis that taskhir (subjection) is a metaphor for benefit; meaning: He benefited you with them while they were subjected to what they were created for, which is a path to your benefit. Otherwise, carrying it to the literal sense indicates that the subjection is in the state of being subjected by His command—but it is not so, because of the delay of the first. It is also said for that reason: The intent is that they are continuous in their subjection by His creative command, because the act of bringing into existence does not indicate continuity. Some eminent contemporaries permitted it to be a reinforcing circumstantial qualifier, with "by His command" being connected to "subjected" (sakhara), and the speech being of the category of tanazu' (contention/competing governing). Accepting that is left to you. It is also said: It is a mim-prefixed verbal noun like masrah, in the accusative as an absolute object (maf'ul mutlaq) for the sakhara mentioned first, and He subjected them as subjected things (musakkharatin), along the lines of "I struck him a striking of blows," and the plural indicates the difference of types.

In providing the subjection of what was mentioned, there is an allusion to an answer to what might be said: "The influencer in the creation of vegetation is the movements of the planets and their positions." For if that is conceded, there is no doubt that they are possible in their essence and attributes, occurring in some of the possible ways. Thus, there must be a Creator, by necessity of the need of the possible for an assigner in its existence, lest it result—from occurring in some ways while another is possible—a preference without a preferring agent; for obligation contradicts preference. He is the Necessary Being, to ward off circular reasoning or infinite regress. This is what some eminent scholars have said. It was objected to by Mawla al-Imadi, saying that it is based on thinking that what was mentioned are proofs of the Maker—Exalted be He—and His power and will, and it is not so; for this is something the opponent does not dispute and does not stutter in accepting. The Almighty said: (And if you asked them, "Who created the heavens and earth and subjected the sun and the moon?" they would surely say, "Allah." So how are they deluded?) and He said—Glorified is He: (And if you asked them, "Who sends down rain from the sky and gives life thereby to the earth after its lifelessness?" they would surely say, "Allah")—the verse. Rather, these are proofs of Monotheism, in that the one whose affair is this, it is not imagined that anything could share with Him in anything, let alone for inanimate objects to share with Him in Divinity. [End quote].

This was countered by saying that the fact that what was mentioned are proofs of Monotheism does not prevent it from containing an allusion to an answer to what might be said. What harm is there in driving something for one matter while alluding to another? By my life, this objection has a validity regarding the saying of the one who said, "In that there is an allusion to an answer to what might be said, etc.," since the group did not settle [the matter] and inserted "might be" into the middle. But the speaker has speech that clearly indicates that he considered the mentioned proofs as proofs for the existence of the Maker—exalted is His status—as well, and the Imam preceded him in that.

(Indeed in that): i.e., the subjection related to what was mentioned, (are signs): dazzling and numerous, as the situation requires, (for a people who use reason).

And since these celestial effects are multiple, and the indication of what is in them of immense power, knowledge, and wisdom regarding the Oneness is more apparent, he pluralized "signs" and attached them to mere reason without reflection and contemplation, as if they are, due to their increased clarity, perceived by the intuition of the intellect, unlike the terrestrial effects in that regard—so they said. This is apparent on the assumption that the reasoning is for the Oneness and not for Existence as well. As for when the reasoning is for that [Existence], there is a debate in the claim of the aforementioned clarity, because the discussion on that leads to the invalidation of infinite regress; so how can the indication be apparent without needing thought? It was answered by saying that reasoning by circularity or infinite regress is only after reflecting on the beginning of their affair and what arose from the difference of their conditions. So understand. It is also permitted that the intent is "for a people who reason that," and what is referred to is the ultimate end of the wonders of the subtleties deposited in the celestial bodies, indicated by the subjection, which only skilled people set out to know—those who have the ultimate perception among the masters of the science of wisdom. In that case, he ended the verse with His saying here: (who use reason) to indicate that this requires more reflection than others. The first is more appropriate, as is not hidden.