Tafsir of An-Nahl 16:25

(ليحملوا) [“That they may bear”] is connected to (قالوا) [“They said”], as is apparent. That is, they said that [“It is but myths of the ancients”] so that they would bear.

(أوزارهم) [“Their burdens”]: meaning their own specific consequences, which are the consequences of their misguidance. It is the plural of wizr (burden), and it is also used for a heavy weight, by analogy to the weight of a mountain. Both are used to express sin, as in this verse and the saying of the Almighty: “That they may bear their burdens...”

(كاملة) [“In full”]: nothing is diminished from them, and they are not expiated by something like a calamity that befalls them in this world, or an accepted act of obedience therein, as the burdens of the believers are expiated by such means. The Imam said: The meaning of this is that nothing of their punishment is lightened; rather, it reaches them in its entirety. This is evidence that the Almighty may indeed remit some punishment from the believers, for if this meaning applied to everyone, there would be no benefit in specifying these disbelievers. Bearing these burdens is a metaphor for the punishment thereof.

Ibn Jarir recorded from Zayd ibn Aslam that he received word that the disbeliever’s deed will be personified in the form of the ugliest face God created and the foulest in odor. It will sit by his side; whenever he is terrified by something, it increases him in terror, and whenever he fears something, it increases his fear. He will say, “Wretched companion you are! Who are you?” It will reply, “Do you not recognize me?” He will say, “No.” It will say, “I am your deed. You were ugly, so you see me as ugly; you were foul, so you see me as foul. Stoop down so I may mount you, for you have long mounted me in pursuit of dinars.” This is the meaning of the Almighty’s saying: (ليحملوا أوزارهم كاملة) [“That they may bear their burdens in full”].

(يوم القيامة) [“On the Day of Resurrection”] is an adverbial modifier for (ليحملوا) [“to bear”].

(ومن أوزار الذين يضلونهم) [“And some of the burdens of those whom they misguide”]: meaning some of the burdens of those who went astray through their misguidance. This is based on the meaning of “a portion of their burdens.” Thus, min (from/some) is partitive, as its opposition to the Almighty’s saying (كاملة) [“in full”] confirms this. What is intended by this portion is the share of causation; the misguider and the misguided are partners—the one misleads, and the other obeys, so they both bear the burden. The misguided person has other burdens [of his own] besides these, and those [others] are not borne [by the misguider].

Al-Akhfash said that min is redundant (extra), meaning “the burdens of those whom they misguide,” implying they will be punished with a punishment equal to the punishment of everyone who followed them. Abu al-Baqa’ also inclined toward the view of redundancy. The partitive interpretation was objected to on the grounds that it necessitates that the misguider does not bear all the burdens of the misguided, which contradicts the transmitted tradition: “Whoever institutes an evil sunnah bears its burden and the burden of those who act upon it, without that diminishing anything from their [the followers’] burdens.” The response to this is that the transmitted tradition indicates partitivity, not that there is any contradiction between them, as is not hidden. Due to the illusion of this contradiction, al-Wahidi said that min is for al-jins (specification/kind), meaning “that they may bear from the kind of burdens of the followers.” Abu Hayyan refuted this by stating that the min used for defining the kind cannot be interpreted as mentioned; rather, it is interpreted by our saying: “the burdens which are the burdens of those they misguide,” which leads in meaning to the opinion of al-Akhfash, even if they differ in the interpretation.

The lam in (ليحملوا) [“to bear”] is for al-‘aqibah (the outcome/consequence), because the bearing is a result that follows their action, not a motive or an intent for them. It is reported from Abu ‘Atiyyah that it may be a lam of causation, connected to an implied verb rather than “they said”—i.e., “This [behavior] occurred so that they would bear...” and the debate regarding the attribution of God’s actions to purposes then ensues, and you know there is a difference of opinion on that. In al-Bahr, it was suggested that it is the lam of command (jussive), meaning that this bearing is mandatory for them, in which case the speech concludes at His saying: (أساطير الأولين) [“myths of the ancients”]. The apparent meaning is the outcome (al-‘aqibah). The future tense in (يضلونهم) [“they misguide them”] is used to indicate the continuity of the misguidance, or it is from the perspective of the time they spoke, not the time of bearing.

(بغير علم) [“Without knowledge”]: This is a state (hal) of the object. It is as if it were said: “They misguide those who do not know that they are misguided upon falsehood.” This contains a warning that their schemes do not deceive a person of intellect, and that only ignorant, foolish people follow them. It also contains further disparagement and blame for them, for it was upon them to guide the ignorant, not to misguide them.

It is said that it is a state of the subject: “They misguide [others] while not knowing that what they are calling to is the path of misguidance.” Another interpretation is that the meaning is: “they misguide while ignorant of what they deserve of severe punishment for that misguidance.” This interpretation of it as a state of the subject was cited by al-Wahidi. Some have claimed this is the [only] correct interpretation, and not as a state of the object, arguing that the tailing-off with the Almighty’s saying (ألا ساء ما يزرون) [“How evil is that which they bear!”] and His saying (من حيث لا يشعرون) [“from where they do not perceive”] supports it. This is not strong, and what was mentioned is a presumption by this supporter that if it were made a state of the object, it would have no connection to what the speech was directed toward regarding the state of the misguiders, but you have already been guided to its connection.

Abu Hayyan favored [the interpretation of it as a state of the subject] because the one being spoken of is the subject of the misguidance; therefore, regarding it as the one in this state is more appropriate. The rebuttal to this, along with what is known from what was mentioned, is that proximity contradicts it, so it does not serve as a criterion for preference.

It is said that it is a state of the pronoun in the subject of (قالوا) [“they said”], meaning: they said that while not knowing that they would bear the burdens of misguidance and misleading others on the Day of Resurrection. This is supported by the Almighty’s saying: (وأتاهم العذاب من حيث لا يشعرون) [“And the punishment came upon them from where they did not perceive”], in that the bearing of what was mentioned of the burdens of misguidance and misleading is of the nature of the punishment coming from where they do not perceive. This is refuted by the fact that the aforementioned bearing, as the verse explicitly states, is only on the Day of Resurrection, whereas the aforementioned punishment is worldly punishment, as you will hear if God Almighty wills. It was permitted that it be a state of both the subject and the object, as Ibn Jinni said regarding the verse: “Then she brought him to her people, carrying him,” though this is contrary to the apparent meaning.

The verse is used as evidence that the follower (the muqallid) is obligated to search and distinguish between the seeker of truth and the falsifier, and is not excused by ignorance. This is apparent based on the interpretation we put forward, except for the interpretation of (ألا ساء ما يزرون).

(ألا ساء ما يزرون): Meaning, how evil is the thing they bear and commit in terms of sin, which is their aforementioned deed.