Tafsir of An-Nahl 16:48

"Have they not considered"—The interrogative particle (al-hamzah) is for denunciation (inkār), and the conjunction (waw) connects it to an implied phrase necessitated by the context. The "considering" (ru'yah) is visual, leading to reflection, and the pronoun refers to those who plotted the evil deeds. That is: have these plotters not looked and considered, turning their attention "to what Allah has created". It has also been said that the pronoun refers to mankind in general, including those plotters and others, with the denunciation directed at them. Al-Sulami, al-A'raj, and the brothers read it as a-lam taraw (with the ta of address), following the style of the Almighty’s saying, "Since your Lord..." just as the majority read it with the ya (as yaraw), following the style of the Almighty’s saying, "Do those who plotted evil deeds feel secure...?"

Al-Khafaji and others mentioned that the reading with ta is an instance of shifting pronouns (iltifāt), or implies "Say," or that the address is general to all creation. The word mā (what) is an indefinite relative pronoun (mawsūlah mubhamah), and the Almighty’s statement "of things" (min shay’in) acts as an elucidation for it. However, it is an elucidation based on its attribute, which is the Almighty’s statement "their shadows turn" (yatafayya’u ẓilāluhu). In reality, it is this that clarifies, and the described object (shay’) serves as a preamble for it; otherwise, what clarification would it provide in itself?

Al-tafayyu’ is the form tafa''ul from fā’a-yafī’u-fay’an, meaning to return. Fā’a is intransitive; when made transitive, it takes the hamzah or doubling (shaddah), as in afā’ahu Allāhu ta’ālā or fayya’ahu, so it becomes tafayya’a. Tafayyu’ is intransitive. Abu Tammam used it transitively in a poem praising Khalid ibn Yazid al-Shaybani: "I sought the spring of his spring... and he extended the shadows of his long-stretching shade." That usage requires authentication from the speech of the Arabs.

Al-ẓilāl (shadows) is the plural of ẓill, which, according to some, is what exists in the early morning—that which the sun has not yet touched. Al-fay’ is what exists in the late afternoon—that from which the sun has turned away. They cite as evidence the words of Humayd ibn Thawr, describing a sarhah tree (using it as a metaphor for a woman): "She can neither endure the shade (ẓill) from the coolness of the morning, nor taste the afternoon shade (fay’) from the coolness of the evening." Tha'lab reported from Ru'bah: "Whatever the sun has been upon and then moved away from is fay’ and ẓill, and whatever the sun has not been upon is ẓill." Thus, ẓill is more general than fay’. It is said that they are synonyms, both used for what exists before the meridian and after it. Abu Zayd cited the words of al-Nabigha al-Ja'di: "May the peace of God go forth upon them, and the shade of the Gardens possessing the shadows." The most well-known view is that fay’ occurs only after the meridian. Hence, al-Azhari said: "The tafayyu’ of the shadows is their return after the sun has passed its zenith." Abu Hayyan said: "The consideration spans from the beginning of the day to its end."

Attributing the shadows to the singular pronoun (ẓilāluhu) is because its referent, though singular in wording, is plural in meaning. Instances of this are too numerous to count. The meaning is: Have they not considered the things whose shadows return and shift "to the right and to the left"? This refers to solid objects—mountains, trees, etc.—whether inanimate or human, according to some commentators. Others restrict it to inanimate objects whose shadows show no effect other than the tafayyu’ caused by the sun, as will be explained—excluding animals whose shadows move as they move. Both views operate under the assumption that min is for clarification, as you have heard.

Some investigators argue for generality, making min "initial" (ibtidā’iyyah), connected to "created." Thus, "what Allah has created of things" refers to the world of bodies, as opposed to the world of the Spirit and the Command, which was not created "from a thing" but came into existence by His command "Be," as He, the Exalted, said: "Verily, His is the creation and the command." It is clear how far-fetched this is. Furthermore, it is objected that the heavens and the jinn belong to the world of bodies/creation, yet they have no shadow, and the implication of the generality of "what" (mā) is that none of them should be devoid of it, unlike when min is for clarification and yatafayya’u is an attribute of shay’ restricted to it. It was countered that the sentence yatafayya’u in that case is not an attribute of shay’, because the intention is to establish this for what He created of things, not for it (the word shay’). It is not an attribute of shay’ due to the discrepancy between them in terms of definiteness and indefiniteness; rather, it is a new sentence (musta’nafah) to establish that it has shifting shadows, and the generality of mā does not necessitate that the meaning be that every single one has this attribute. This was challenged by arguing that if it is intended that it does not appear to necessitate generality, that is denied; and if it is intended that it is merely possible, that is not a valid refutation, as it is based on the obvious and immediate meaning.

"To the right and the left," as it is said, are the two sides of the object—a metaphor taken from the right and left of a human, or a figurative expression using the specific to denote the general. That is: have they not considered the things that have shifting shadows on the sides of each one, returning from side to side with the rising and setting of the sun, or with the variation of their eastern and western points—for they have easts and wests according to their daily paths—while those shadows are "prostrating to Allah"? That is, submissive to Him, the Exalted, following His will in terms of extension, contraction, and otherwise, not resisting Him, the Exalted, in what He has subjected them to. This is what is meant by their prostration. It is sometimes interpreted as "clinging to the ground," that is, being in a state of adhering to the earth in the posture of one prostrating.

The Almighty’s statement "while they are humble" (48) is a state (ḥāl) from the pronoun in ẓilāluhu (its shadows) which returns to shay’. The plural is used in consideration of the meaning, and it is valid for the state to come from the possessive noun (mudāf ilayhi) because it is like a part of it. The use of the form specific to rational beings is because "humility" (dukhūr) is a characteristic of them, as it implies debasement and abasement. Dhu al-Rumma said: "Nothing remained except one who is humble in a place of confinement, and one imprisoned in other than your land, in a hole." Thus, the speech is either metaphorical, or because there are rational beings among the group, so it takes the dominant form. The reason for the expression hum (they) is known from what was mentioned. It is also permissible to consider its aspect first and treat what follows as being in conformity with it—i.e., while the possessors of those shadows are debased and submissive to His command. Describing them as dākhirūn (humble) makes describing their shadows as such redundant. It is also permitted that sujjadan and the sentence "while they are humble" be two states from the pronoun, meaning: the shadows of those celestial bodies return while those bodies are submissive to Him, the Exalted, and humble. Describing them with both makes describing the shadows with them redundant.

"Prostration" also means submission, whether by nature, by compulsion, or by will. Thus, the possibility that "what He created" includes both rational and non-rational beings is not invalidated; for how could sujjadan be a state from its pronoun when the prostration of rational beings is not the same as the prostration of others?

The sum of what we have indicated is that this belongs to the generality of metaphor. The matter, under the assumption that "what He created" refers to inanimate objects, is apparent. Some claimed that prostration here is literal in every respect—falling upon the ground with the intent of worship. This would necessitate life and knowledge to intend worship, which is worthless, as is clear. Furthermore, if we say in this view that the waw is for the state (ḥāliyyah), as indicated, then the two states are synonymous, and the plurality of states is permissible according to the majority. Those who do not allow it consider the second as an appositive of comprehension (badal ishtimāl) or an appositive of the whole (badal kull min kull), as al-Sameen explained in detail. If we say it is a conjunction (‘āṭifah), then the states are not synonymous but are conjoined. Abu al-Baqa said: "Sujjadan is a state from ẓilāl (shadows), and wa-hum dākhirūn is a state from the pronoun in sujjadan." It is also permitted that it be a second state conjoined [to the first]. This contains the claim of "intertwining" (tadākhul), which is possible if sujjadan is a state of the pronoun in ẓilāluhu. The first view is the choice of al-Zamakhshari, who argued in al-Kashshāf, saying: "The submission of the shadow and the owner of the shadow is sought. Do you not see the Almighty’s saying: 'And their shadows in the morning and the afternoon'?" Making them both states from the pronoun in ẓilāluhu is restrictive. In it, there is a beautiful completion: when he described the shadows as prostrating, he described their owners as being in a state of dukhūr (humility), which is more emphatic because it is a forced submission along with the quality of the one submissive. He did not make it a state of the pronoun returning to the relative noun in "what Allah has created," since the meaning concerns portraying the prostration of the shadow and its owner, and their coexistence in existence, not the coincidence of creation and humility. The factor governing the second state is yatafayya’u, as Ibn Malik said regarding the Almighty’s statement: "Rather, the religion of Abraham, the upright" (ḥanīfan). From this, one knows what is in Abu al-Baqa's parsing. Yes, there is some verbal distance in this view, but the matter is trivial. As for making "while they are humble" a state from the pronoun in yaraw (they see), it is not valid in any way, as is clear.

Furthermore, the Imam (al-Razi) mentioned two views regarding the "right" and "left" other than what was mentioned previously. The first is that they mean the East and the West, comparing them to the right and left of a human, for the daily motion begins from the East, which is one side—the right—and the other side is the left. Thus, the shadows at the beginning of the day start from the East, falling on the western quadrant of the earth, and at the meridian, they start from the West, falling on the eastern quadrant. The second is the right and left of the land; this is because for a land whose latitude is less than the amount of the total declination—which is roughly 24 degrees—in the summer the sun is on the right of that land, so the shadows fall on its left, and in winter, the opposite occurs. It is clear that the second is specific to a particular latitude, whereas the speech is obviously general. It is also said that "right" and "left" mean the right of one facing South, and his left. ‘An (from), as al-Hufi said, is connected to yatafayya’u. Abu al-Baqa said: "It is connected to an implied word occurring as a state." It is also said it is a noun meaning "side," so it is in the accusative case as an adverbial of place.

They have a long discussion regarding the singular "right" and the plural "left"—a non-standard plural. Some said that when the Arabs mention two forms of plural, they express one of them in the singular, like the Almighty’s saying: "He created the darkness and the light" or "Allah has set a seal upon their hearts and upon their hearing." Some said: if we interpret the right as the East, the point that is the sunrise is one specific point, so the "right" is singular. As for the "lefts" (shamā’il), they refer to the deflections occurring in those shadows after they fall on the ground, which are numerous, hence they are expressed in the plural. Some said the "right" is singular in wording but plural in meaning, so it matches the "lefts" in terms of meaning. Al-Farra’ said: it is possible that it is both singular and plural; if singular, it refers to one of the shadow-casters, and if plural, it refers to all of them, because "what Allah created" is a singular term with a plural meaning. Al-Kirmani said: it is possible that "lefts" is meant to include the left, the front, and the back, because the shadow shifts from all directions, so he started with the right because the start of the tafayyu’ is from there, or out of honor for mentioning it, then he collected the rest into the word "left" due to the opposition between left and right, and treated the back and front as the "left" due to their difference from the right. This is close to the first view, but it was countered that it involves collecting the word in terms of its reality and its metaphor, and there is debate about its correctness.

It is said the right means the right of one standing facing the East, and it is called the South, and the left is his left. So it is as if it were said: "His shadows shift from the South to the North and from the North to the South." Since most of the inhabited world is northern, and its shadows likewise, he pluralized the "left" and did not pluralize the "right." This is as you see. Abu Hayyan reported from his teacher, Abu al-Hasan Ali ibn al-Sa'igh, that he singularized and pluralized based on the two ends, because the morning shadow shrinks until only a little remains, so it is as if it were in one direction, while in the evening it is the opposite, dominating all directions. Thus, the two ends were observed. As for the wording, he pluralized the second to match sujjadan (prostrating) which is adjacent to it on the left, just as he singularized the first to match the pronoun ẓilāluhu (its shadows) adjacent to it on the right. It is clear that there is a fine observation of the root and the branch in the alternation. Thus, in the verse, there is a correspondence of wording to meaning and observation of both together, and that is the peak of inimitability.

Another aspect occurs to me regarding the singular and plural, based on the fact that "right" means the East and "left" means the West: when the first direction is the sunrise of light and the second is its sunset and the manifestation of darkness, he singularized what denotes the first direction, just as he singularized "the light" throughout the Quran, and pluralized what denotes the second, just as he pluralized "the darkness" likewise. The singularization of light and the pluralization of darkness have been discussed.

It may be said that the shadows were pluralized while what precedes and follows them are singular because a shadow is a darkness resulting from the obstruction of an opaque object, for instance, of the sun, so that its light does not fall on what it faces. Thus, "shadows" were pluralized just as "darknesses" were. It does not invalidate this that "easts" were pluralized in the Quran, like "wests," for often a matter is committed to for a point in one context and not for another.

Another point: since the "right" refers to the direction of the East, which is the beginning of the shadow, it has a suitability to the unification of the True Beginning, which is Allah the Exalted. The direction of the West does not have this, nor is it suitable to observe this in the "left," as the saying "Both His hands are right" guides you. It also helps to observe the "origination" by attributing creation to Him, the Exalted.

Another point: the shadow coming from the direction of the East has no legal obligation attached to it, while that coming from the West does. The time for the noon prayer (ẓuhr) begins with the first occurrence of it from that direction by the sun passing the meridian; the time for the afternoon prayer (‘aṣr) begins when it becomes equal to the object or twice its length after the meridian shadow, if it is as in inclined horizons; and the time for the sunset prayer (maghrib) is by it covering the earth at sunset. How subtle is the occurrence of sujjadan after shamā’il in this view!

There is another point that is more consistent with the chapter of ishārah (allusion), which will come later, if the Opener (Allah) wills. The path of the mind is expansive, so reflect; perhaps what I have mentioned will not satisfy you.

The Imam has explained that the variation of the shadows is evidence that they are submissive to Allah, yielding to His predestination and management, the Exalted. He then said: If it is said, "Why is it not permissible to say their variation is caused by the variation of the sun?" We say: We have proven that a body cannot be moving by itself, so its movement must come from another, and it must ultimately trace back to the Necessary Existent, glorified be His majesty. Thus, the matter of the variation of the shadows returns to Him, the Exalted, under this assumption.

You know that there should be no doubt that the apparent cause of the shadows is the sun and the like, and the opacity of the object. Yes, there is disagreement over whether this is truly traced back to Him, the Exalted, initially or via an intermediary. The school of the Salaf is not hidden from you; we have pointed to it more than once, so remember it if it is not on your mind. Furthermore, it is apparent that the intended meaning of the shadows is those spread out, called "level." It is permissible for it to mean what includes inverted shadows, for they also shift from the right and left. So know that and do not be negligent.

Abu 'Amr, 'Isa, and Ya'qub read tatafayya’u with a ta for the feminine. The rules for the feminine and masculine in a verb attributed to the plural mentioned are apparent. 'Isa read ẓulaluhu, which is the plural of ẓullah (canopy/shade) like ḥullah and ḥulal. The author of al-Lawā’iḥ said: ẓullah with a damma is a cloud, and with a kasra is the fay’ (afternoon shade). The first is a physical body and the second is an attribute. 'Isa held that tafayyu’, which is the returning of physical bodies, is more appropriate. As for the common reading, it is by metaphor. This suggests the view of reading based on opinion. Some people interpreted the shadows in the common reading as the "persons/objects" so that they would be like 'Isa’s reading, and they cited for the usage of ẓilāl (shadows) for that the words of ‘Abdah: "When we camped, we erected the shade of the tents, and the pots boiled for the people with the flesh." For only the tents are erected, not the shadow which is the fay’. And the words of another: "The shadows of the objects follow in the evening." For he intended the shadows of the persons. Al-Raghib countered this by saying there is no argument in what was mentioned, for his saying "We raised the shade of the tents" means we raised the tents, and by them we raised their shadow, so it is as if he raised the shadow. As for "the shadows of the objects," the shadows in it are general and the fay’ is specific, and the annexation (iḍāfah) is the annexation of a thing to its genus. Some said: the intention of ẓullah in 'Isa’s reading is the shadow that resembles a canopy, and it is intended as something in the form of a structure in its benefit. It is also said that the speech in that reading is based on an implied noun, i.e., "shadows of canopies," and interpreting the canopy as that which is in the form of a structure, and what is intended by shadow then is the inverted shadow.