Tafsir of An-Nahl 16:5

(And the cattle), which are the eight pairs consisting of camels, cattle, sheep, and goats.

Al-Raghib said: "The term an'am (cattle) is not used unless camels are included," and some have specifically restricted it to this here. This [claim] is of no weight.

The accusative case [of al-an'am] is due to its being the object of an implied verb, which the Almighty’s saying, (He created it), explains. This is more preferred than the nominative in such a position, because the verbal sentence precedes it. It has also been recited in the variant readings [in the nominative]. It may also be parsed as a conjunction [following] al-insan (man) and what follows it, after clarifying that for which he was created. What follows thereafter is an elaboration of that.

As for His saying, the Almighty: (for you), it is either connected to khalaqaha (He created it).

His saying, the Almighty: (In them there is), is a fronted predicate, and His saying, the Majestic and Exalted: (warmth), is a delayed subject. The sentence [as a whole] is a circumstantial state (hal) of the object. Or, the first prepositional phrase is the predicate for the mentioned subject, and the second is connected to what is contained within it of the meaning of "stability" (istaqrar). It is said: [the sentence] is a circumstantial state of the pronoun hidden within it, which refers back to the subject. It is also said: [it is] a circumstantial state of dif' (warmth), for had it been delayed, it would have been an adjective.

Abu al-Baqa’ allowed that the second [phrase] could be the predicate and the first be in the position of a circumstantial state from its subject. Abu Hayyan countered this by stating that it is not permissible, because when the governing agent of a circumstantial state is a [nominal] meaning, it is not permissible to front it before the entire sentence. Thus, one may not say, Qa’iman fi ad-dari Zayd (Standing in the house is Zayd). If the circumstantial state follows the sentence, it is permissible without disagreement; if it falls in the middle, Al-Akhfash permits it, while the majority prohibit it.

Abu al-Baqa’ also permitted that dif' be in the nominative case due to lakum (for you) or fiha (in them), and the entire sentence [would then be] a circumstantial state of the accusative pronoun. Abu Hayyan also countered this, saying that this is not counted among the category of a "sentence," but rather as a "singular" [term].

It is reported that they permitted lakum to be connected to khalaqaha, and the sentence fiha dif' to be an inauguration (isti’naf) for the mention of the benefits of cattle. [The author] regarded it as most likely that the sentence (For you in them is warmth) is an inauguration. Then he said: "What supports the inauguration here is the inauguration in its parallel," namely His saying: (And for you in them is beauty). The Almighty thus paired the essential benefit with the non-essential benefit.

The author of Al-Qutb inclined toward this, choosing the view that the speech has concluded at khalaqaha [due to the conjunction]. The author of Al-Kashf differed, saying: "His saying, the Almighty: (He created them for you)—based on Al-Zamakhshari’s interpretation of it as: 'He did not create them except for you and for your interests, O human species'—bears a trace of the second meaning in His saying, the Almighty: (Then behold, he is a manifest adversary), due to the indication toward it in the mentioned 'turning' (iltifat). As for the restriction indicated by the words 'He did not create them except for you,' it is [derived] from the lam (the 'l' in lakum) which signifies exclusivity, especially since it is varied by what adds further distinction and exclusivity. This is better than making (For you in them is warmth) a counterpart to (For you in them is beauty), because [the former] provides the second meaning and is more eloquent. Moreover, it makes (in them is warmth) an elaboration of the first, and 'for you' is repeated in the second due to the long interval and [to provide] further chiding."

The truth is that the claim of the priority of connecting lakum to what precedes it is [also] supported by the evidence, as is not hidden.

Al-dif’ is a noun for that with which one finds warmth. The Arabs say: dafi’a yawmuna fahuwa dafi’ (our day is warm), when heat is obtained in it. And dafi’a ar-rajulu dafa’an (the man becomes warm). A man is daf’an and a woman is daf’a. Al-dif’ is pluralized as adfa’. The intended meaning is that which encompasses both clothing and the dwelling made from their fur and wool. Ibn Abbas interpreted it, according to what Ibn Jarir and others reported from him, as "garments." Abd al-Razzaq and others also reported from him, may the Almighty be pleased with him, that it is the offspring of every beast. Al-Umawi attributed this to the language of some Arabs. The apparent [meaning] is the first.

Al-Zuhri and Abu Ja’far recited it as duff with a damma on the fa’, a shadda (gemination), and tanwin. The Bahr justifies this by stating that the movement was transferred from the hamza to the fa’, and [the hamza] was deleted. Then the fa’ was geminated to treat the connector like the state of a pause, as it is permissible to geminate [letters] in a pause. Zayd ibn Ali, may the Almighty be pleased with them both, recited it as duf by transferring the movement and deleting [the hamza] without gemination. In Al-Lawamih, it is reported that Al-Zuhri recited it as duf with a damma on the fa’ without a hamza, being moved by its own movement. Some replace this hamza with gemination of the fa’, which is one of the two modes of Hamzah ibn Habib when pausing. It was objected that gemination during a pause is an independent linguistic convention even if there is no deletion of a letter from the word being paused upon. This was defended by stating that this only occurs when pausing on the last letter of a word; but if one pauses on the penultimate letter, such as qadin, then [it does not apply].

(And benefits): These are their milk, riding them, plowing with them, drawing water with them, and so forth. He expressed them with this [term] to encompass everything, while it is also the most appropriate for the context of expressing gratitude for blessings. He placed "warmth" first out of regard for the style of progressing to the higher [level].

(And from them you eat): Meaning: you eat what is edible from them, such as meat, fat, and the like. Min (from) is for partiality (tab'idiyyah). Eating is either in its immediate sense or in the sense of consumption, which includes drinking, thus incorporating milk into the count. It is also allowed that min be [signifying] the beginning (ibtida’iyyah), or that it is partial in a metaphorical sense, or causative—meaning: you eat what is obtained by their cause. For grains and edible fruits are acquired by hiring out camels, for instance, and by their offspring, milk, and hides. The first is more apparent, and it includes what is obtained from hiring them out, [an act of] leasing which leads to many interests in terms of benefits.

As for the change in the sublime order [of the sentence], it is said that it is to indicate that they do not remain upon being eaten, as is the case [for the items] before and after it; for warmth, the benefits we indicated, and beauty are obtained from them while they remain in their state. That is why they were made locations for them, unlike eating. The fronting of the prepositional phrase signifies restriction, in the sense that eating from them is the customary [source] relied upon for sustenance among all other animals. Thus, eating chicken, duck, and hunting on land and sea does not refute this, for that falls under the category of indulging [in luxuries]. Similarly, eating horse meat is not refuted by those who permit it, for it is also not among the customary relied-upon [sources]. In short, the restriction is relative. By this, eating bread, vegetables, and the like is also not refuted. Added to this [reason for] fronting is the regard for the end-rhymes of the verses. Making it [the fronting] for that [reason] alone, as in Al-Kashf, is a shortcoming. Abu Hayyan denies that fronting is absolutely for restriction, so its aspect here is reduced to the aforementioned [rhythmic] regard.