Tafsir of An-Nahl 16:2

"He sends down the angels"—it is said that this is an indication of the methods of the Messenger’s (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) knowledge regarding the arrival of that which he was promised and its approach, as an act of removing the improbability of this being exclusive to him, peace and blessings be upon him. It is stated in al-Kashshaf: The verification is that His saying, Glorified is He, "The command of Allah has come," is a warning and an awakening so that what follows it may be possible in a present soul that receives it; it is a preamble for what is to come regarding the proofs of monotheism. His saying, "He sends down the angels," and what follows, is a detail for what was summarized in His saying, Glorified and Exalted is He. He first awakened them, then censured them for the polytheism they were in, and then followed it with the proofs of hearing and reason. He prioritized the auditory (revelation) because its possessor is also the one who establishes the rational and refines it. Thus, the consideration is not toward the proof of hearing, but toward those who established it: the angels and the messengers, peace be upon them, for they are the ones who establish both affairs together—so understand this. Sibawayh derived from this that making "sends down" a state (hal) from the pronoun in "they associate" does not correspond to the context at all.

What he mentioned regarding the state is an indication of an objection against his teacher, the scholar al-Tayyibi, where he made that one of two possibilities in the sentence. The second of these is that it is a new statement (musta’naf), which is the apparent meaning. What he pointed to regarding the link, and claimed to be the verification, is not free from that which is contrary to the obvious. The expression in the future tense is to indicate that the sending down is a continuous habit for Him, Glorified is He. The intended meaning of "the angels," according to the majority, is Gabriel, peace be upon him; the singular is called by the plural, as al-Wahidi said, when he is a leader. According to others, it is he and those who are with him from the guardians of the revelation.

Ibn Kathir and Abu ‘Amr read it as yunazzilu (lightened from inzal), and Zayd bin ‘Ali (may Allah be pleased with them both), al-A‘mash, and Abu Bakr read it as yunazzalu (strengthened, in the passive voice), with "the angels" in the nominative as the deputy subject. Al-Jahdari read it likewise but lightened it. Abu al-‘Aliyah, al-A‘raj, and al-Mufaddal from ‘Asim read tanazzalu (with an open ta and strengthened za, active voice, with one of the two tas elided, its origin being tatanazzalu). Ibn Abi ‘Ablah read nunazzilu (with the nun of majesty and strengthening), and Qatadah with the nun and lightening. In these two readings, as in al-Bahr, there is a turning (iltifat).

"With the Spirit"—that is, the revelation, as narrated by Ibn Jarir and Ibn Abi Hatim from Ibn ‘Abbas. The Quran is included in this. It is narrated from al-Dahhak and al-Rabi‘ bin Anas that it is limited to that. As for what it was, the term "Spirit" is used for it by way of an explicit, realized metaphor (isti’ara musarrahah muhaqqaqah). The aspect of resemblance is that revelation revives hearts dead with the disease of ignorance and misguidance, or that the uprightness of religion is through it, just as the uprightness of the body is through the soul. This entails a metaphorical and imaginary comparison; it compares ignorance and misguidance to death, and its opposite to life, or it compares religion to a human being who has a body and a soul. This is like saying: "I saw an ocean from which people scoop, and a sun from which they seek refuge," for it contains a comparison of the praised one’s knowledge to the great water and the brilliant light, but it comes from the side; it is not like the views of al-maniyah, and it is nothing other than an explicit metaphor. Making this in al-Kashshaf a category of metonymic metaphor (isti’ara bil-kinayah) is not sound. The ba (in bil-ruh) is connected to the previous verb or to that which is a state of its object—that is, He sends down the angels while they are accompanied by the Spirit.

His saying, Glorified is He, "of His command," is an explanation of the "Spirit," which is intended as revelation. Al-amr (the command) in the sense of "the matter" (al-sha’n) is one of the matters, and this does not take the Spirit out of metaphor into simile, as was said regarding His saying: "until the white thread of dawn becomes distinct to you from the black thread." They said that there is a great distance between them because the dawn itself is the very thing likened to a thread, and the absolute "command" in the previous sense is not the thing being likened to. Therefore, the true Spirit was explained by it in His saying: "Say, 'The Spirit is from the command of my Lord,'" just as the metaphorical one is explained by it. If it were said, "He casts His command which is the Spirit," it would not depart from metaphor. Thus, the scale of "from His command" is not the scale of "from the dawn," and not every explanation prevents metaphor, as is imagined from the words of the researcher in Sharh al-Talkhis.

It is permitted that the preposition and noun be connected to an elided element that functions as a state (hal) from the "Spirit," in the sense of it being originating and starting from Him, or as an adjective for it according to the opinion of those who permit the elision of the relative pronoun with some of its connection—i.e., "with the Spirit which is from His command." Or it is connected to yunazzilu, and "from" is causal or explanatory, meaning He sends down the angels because of His command or for its sake. The "command" in this sense is one of the orders; according to the previous sense, it is said that it has two possibilities.

Some hold that the "Spirit" is Gabriel, peace be upon him, and supported this with His saying: "The Trustworthy Spirit has brought it down." They made the ba mean "with." From Ibn ‘Abbas (may Allah be pleased with them both), it is said that the "Spirit" is a creation from among the creations of Allah, like the images of the sons of Adam; no angel descends from heaven unless one of them is with him. This is also narrated from Ibn Jurayj, and some applied this to what is in the verse here. Ibn ‘Atiyah refuted this, saying that this is a weak statement for which no reliable chain of transmission has come, and it is added from it; rather, hardly anyone in the verse is prioritized over what is narrated from Mujahid that the meaning of "Spirit" is the souls of the creation—no angel descends unless one of those souls is with him.

"Upon whom He wills of His servants"—meaning that He sends them down upon them, not due to them possessing characteristics that qualify them for that. The verse is evidence that prophethood is a bestowal, as is the correct school of thought. It also refutes some of the Sufis who say that the creation has no need for sending messengers, peace be upon them. They said: "The messengers are other than Allah, and everything other than Him, Glorified is His Majesty, is a veil from Him. Thus, the messengers are a veil from Him, and everything that is a veil, the creation has no need for." This is manifest ignorance, and by my life, it is heresy and atheism; its corruption is like the heresy in its manifestation. It suffices in this to reject the major premise which says that everything other than Him, Glorified is He, etc., because the messengers are a means to Allah, and reaching Him, Mighty and Majestic is He, has no veil. Would any person of intellect accept that the deputy of the Sultan in his lands is a veil from him? Even if this speaker could reach Him, Glorified is He, without an intermediary through the power of his spiritual training, readiness, and capacity, what should the vast majority who cannot do what he did do?

Among those who are ranked in the sequence of these atheists are the Brahmins; they also denied prophethood, but they argued that the intellect is sufficient for what the legally responsible person should employ; he performs the good, avoids the ugly, and acts with caution in doubtful matters by action or abandonment. Therefore, the prophets, peace be upon them, either bring what agrees with the intellect—so there is no need for them—or what contradicts it—so they are not to be paid attention to. The answer to this is that this is built upon the statement of rational good and evil, and the pens have been lifted and the scrolls have dried, and the matter of refuting it is complete. Even if it were granted, we do not concede that the intellect is sufficient for everything that is necessary. We also do not concede that if they bring what agrees with the intellect, there is no need for them, for it is possible that they inform the responsible person of some of what is hidden from him of what he should do, or confirm its ruling with their ruling; two proofs are stronger than one. We also do not concede that if they bring what contradicts the intellect, they are not to be paid attention to, for it is possible they contradict it in matters hidden from it. Furthermore, that is a hypothetical impossibility, as people agree that the divine law does not bring what contradicts the intellect in the essence of the matter; it only brings what the intellect fails to perceive by itself, such as the obligation of fasting the last day of Ramadan and the prohibition of fasting the first day of Shawwal. The full discussion of this is requested from its place.

"That 'Fear Me'"—a substitute for "Spirit," on the condition that "that" (an) is the one whose nature is to govern the subjunctive mood of the imperfect verb, and it is connected to the command just as it is connected to it in their saying: "I wrote to him that [you] stand." There is no harm in that, as has been verified in its place—meaning He sends them down accompanied by the demand for warning from them. Ibn ‘Atiyah, Abu al-Baqa, and the author of al-Ghunyan permitted that "that" is explanatory, so it has no place in syntax. This is because of the meaning of speech in the sending down of the angels with revelation, as if it were said: "He says, through the agency of the angels to whom He wills of His servants, 'Warn...'" Al-Zamakhshari permitted that, and that "that" is the lightened form of the heavy one, and the sha’n (the state/matter) pronoun is in its place. He said: "The estimate is: that [it is the case] that you warn—meaning the matter is that I say to you: warn."

Abu Hayyan refuted him, saying that making it lightened while eliding its name (which is the pronoun of the state) and estimating a verb of speech so that the news would be a declarative sentence is a burden for which there is no need, given the ease of making it the binary an whose nature is to govern the subjunctive. There is a debate about this; it is in al-Kashshaf that the verification of connecting the command with this particle, whether it is the subjunctive or lightened one, and the elision of speech, has already passed. The discussion is only in the preference for the lightened one here and in [Surah] Yunus, and the subjunctive one in [Surah] Nuh, and the hope is for the scarcity of estimation. This is because the position of emphasis requires preferring the lightened one, and this is why it was made a substitute, and the replaced element is what you know the state of. Likewise in Yunus, its meaning is: "Be amazed at this verified matter, which is that the state is such." As for Nuh, it is an initial speech. Their making the benefit of the speech "that the demanded [imperative] not be a declarative [news]" is narrow-minded, because it is not accepted regarding the pronoun of the state, as it is unified with what is after it; it is like your saying: "My speech is: hit Zayd."

It was read "that they may warn." Warning (al-indhar) is notification, as has been said, except that it is specific to notifying of something feared—i.e., "know the feared thing." "That there is no god except Me"—the pronoun is for the state, and it is contrary to the apparent meaning. The benefit of starting the sentence with it is to announce from the beginning of the matter the grandeur of its content, along with what that contains of an increase in estimation in the mind. "That" and what is after it are in the place of the second object for "warn," without estimating a preposition for it, and the first object is elided. The intent is generality—that is, "inform the people that the serious matter is this." The aspect of announcing its content regarding the warned person is that it is not for his essence, but from the perspective of the warners being characterized by what contradicts it, which is polytheism. The realization of the feared thing, such as the mentioned characterization in action, is not a condition for the realization of the essence of warning. If you insist upon the condition, then the realization of the characterization in some of the individuals being warned, especially the majority in action, is sufficient.

Al-Raghib said: Warning is news that contains fear, just as tabshir (glad tidings) is news that contains joy. It is close to what has preceded, and its essence according to both expressions is fear. From here, some permitted interpreting it as such, and estimated the first object as specific, and "that" and what follows it as being in the place of the second object by estimating a preposition, i.e., "frighten the people of disbelief and sins that the serious matter is this." This is just as they permitted interpreting it as notification, making the first object general and not estimating a preposition for the second, mentioning that this is the origin of its meaning and that its being specific to notifying of the feared thing is incidental. If that origin is intended, its connection to what follows is clear to the extreme; if something else is intended, it requires guidance, and you have known it in the case where the first object is general. The matter in the case where it is specific after that is clearer than to be mentioned. Some scholars mentioned that what is established in the language is that nadhara with a thing is like fariha (to be happy) with it—meaning to fear it—and andharahu (to warn) is when he informs him of what he fears. It does not exist in the language with the meaning of "frightening." Its origin is notification with fear, so they used it with each of its two parts: notification and fear. In this, there is an oversight of what we pointed to, and it is as if for this reason it was said: "He did not bring anything worth counting."

"So fear Me"—Abu al-Su‘ud made this an address to those who are hasty, on the path of turning (iltifat). The fa (so) is eloquent—that is, if the matter is as mentioned, of the flow of His custom, Glorified is He, in sending down the angels upon whom He wills of His servants to be sent down upon them, and commanding those upon whom they are sent to warn the people that He, Glorified is He, has no partner in divinity, then "fear Me" regarding neglecting its content and engaging in what contradicts it and its branches, among which is haste and mockery. This, according to what the apparent meaning requires, is built upon what he inclined toward, of limiting the previous address to the disbelievers. Some made this address a return to the address of the Quraish, but it is derived from monotheism. The aspect of its derivation from it is that if He, Glorified and Exalted is He, were one, it is not imaginable for anyone to save anyone from His punishment if He willed that. It is not permitted to make it from the part of what is revealed in the sense of "inform them of my saying that the state is: there is no god but Me, so fear Me," or "frighten them with that," justifying it that if it were so, it would be said "that" with a kasra not with a fatha.

This was refuted by denying the necessity, for "that" (anna) is not after explicit speech or a power. They only mentioned that in explaining the meaning to visualize it. It was chosen that if warning is in the sense of frightening, then the apparent meaning is the inclusion of this command in that which is warned about, for it is that which is truly warned about and is the intended meaning in the mention. If it is in the sense of notification, then the intended meaning of the notification is the first sentence, and it is derived from it by way of iltifat. It is not without debate, so ponder this. What the heart inclines toward is that the whole is included within the scope of warning, and it comprises monotheism, which is the limit of the perfection of the theoretical faculty, and the command to piety, which is among the extreme limits of the perfection of the practical faculty. For human souls have a relationship to the world of the unseen, through which they are prepared to accept images and be adorned with knowledge and perceptions from that world, and a relationship to the world of testimony, through which they are prepared to act within the bodies of this world. Their readiness obtained for them from the first relationship is called the theoretical faculty, and their readiness from the second relationship is called the practical faculty. The most noble perfections of the theoretical faculty is to know that there is no god but Allah, and the most noble perfections of the practical faculty is to perform the deeds that protect against the disgrace of the Day of Resurrection.

His saying, Glorified is He, "There is no god but Me," was prioritized over His saying, Glorified is He, "So fear Me," as an indication that what is based on the theoretical faculty is higher in perfection than what is based on the practical faculty. Human perfection, from the perspective of these two faculties, is called psychological perfection, and it has other perfections which are its bodily perfections and animal faculties, and that has been detailed in its place.