Tafsir of An-Nahl 16:77

"And to Allah" — exclusively, not to anyone else, whether independently or by way of partnership — "belongs the unseen of the heavens and the earth." This refers to all matters absent from the knowledge of created beings, such that they have no path to perceive them through the senses nor to comprehend them through reason. The attribution to the heavens and the earth signifies their attachment to them, either in terms of their occurrence therein, presently or eventually, or in terms of their being unseen by those who inhabit them. There is no need to assume an implicit addition here; the intent is to declare that this knowledge is exclusive to Him as a matter of "the unknown," rather than in terms of being created or owned, even though that is also true in the reality of the matter.

In this—as stated in Irshad al-'Aql as-Salim—there is an indication that His knowledge is huduri (presential/immediate) and that the "unseen" are manifest in themselves in relation to Him, Glory be to Him. That is why He did not say: "And to Allah is the knowledge of the unseen of the heavens and the earth." It has been said that the meaning of "the unseen of the heavens and the earth" is what is mentioned in His saying: "Indeed, Allah, with Him is the knowledge of the Hour and He sends down the rain" (31:34). It has also been said that it refers to the Day of Resurrection, but it is clear that interpreting it broadly is more appropriate.

"And the matter of the Hour"—which is the greatest of the unseen matters related to the heavens and the earth over which there is dispute, whether due to it being hidden from the inhabitants of the heavens and the earth or due to the manifestation of its signs within them when it occurs—"is not but as the glance of the eye," meaning its affair in terms of the speed of its arrival is like the blinking of the eye from the top of the eyelid to the bottom. In al-Bahr, it is noted that lamh is looking quickly; it is said "he glanced at it" (lamahu) if he looked at it quickly. "Or closer"—that is, the affair of the Hour is closer than that—meaning it occurs in a fraction of that time. Even though the return of the glance from the top of the eyelid to the bottom is a movement through space, it possesses a continuity of essence that corresponds to a duration of time which is itself divisible into parts—which are also durations of time—rather, it [the Hour] occurs in what is called an "instant," which is an indivisible portion of time, such as the moment of the beginning of movement.

Regarding the particle "or" (aw): al-Farra' said it carries the meaning of "rather" (bal). This was refuted in al-Bahr by the argument that bal is for idrab (reconsideration/correction), and that does not hold here in either of its two categories. As for ibtal (nullification), it leads to the conclusion that the previous statement is inaccurate, which would make the reporting of it a falsehood—and Allah is exalted above that. As for intiqal (transition), it necessitates a contradiction between the report that it is "like a glance of the eye" and that it is "closer," making it impossible for both to be true, which also necessitates a falsehood, which is impossible.

The response to this is to opt for the second interpretation: there is no contradiction between likening something in speed to the maximum extent known to people and the fact that, in reality, it is even closer. This is based on the idea that the purpose of the simile is to express its speed, not to define or limit the duration of its occurrence. Another response, which validates both parts of the argument, is that it was expressed according to the custom of the people; meaning, if you are asked about the Hour, the answer given is "it is like the glance of the eye," and then it is followed by the correction that it is even closer.

It has been said that aw is for takhyeer (choice/option). This was also refuted in al-Bahr on the grounds that choice is only used for prohibitions (e.g., "take a dinar or a dirham from my wealth") or in obligations. The response is that this is based on the school of Ibn Malik, who maintained that aw comes for choice and is not restricted to occurring after a command, but also occurs in declarations, and is frequent in similes to the extent that some have specified it for that. In Sharh al-Hadi, it is stated: "Know that choice and permission are specific to commands, as they have no meaning in declarations, just as doubt and ambiguity are specific to declarations." Yet, permission has come in contexts other than commands, such as His saying: "Like the likeness of the one who kindled a fire..." to the point of His saying: "...or a rainstorm from the sky," meaning: "whichever of these two you liken it to, you are correct," and similarly if you liken it to both. There are many such examples in poetry.

It has been said that the intent is to offer a choice to the addressee after the assumption of a request or question, so there is no need to rely on the previously mentioned basis. Others claimed that the choice is problematic for another reason: one of the two options—that it is either like the glance of the eye or closer—is not in accordance with reality, so how can Allah give a choice between what does not correspond? The answer is that the choice is meant in the simile itself, and there is no harm in the "likened-to" object not occurring in reality; in fact, its non-occurrence is sometimes considered eloquent.

Ibn ‘Atiyya said that it is for doubt, on its literal level, meaning: if it were possible for a human to perceive the matter of the Hour, it would be so fast that one would doubt whether it was like the glance of the eye or closer. This was critiqued in al-Bahr on the basis that "doubt" is remote because this is a report from Allah about the Hour, and doubt is impossible for Him. The author of the critique meant that this would have to be from the perspective of someone other than the speaker, and that is a far-fetched interpretation.

al-Zajjaj said it is for ambiguity (ibham). This was critiqued on the grounds that there is no benefit in making its speed ambiguous, as the benefit lies in the ambiguity of the time of its arrival. The response is that the meaning is that it is ambiguous to the one who witnesses its speed whether it is like the glance of the eye or less.

The view reported from Ibn Jurayj is that it means "rather" (bal), and many agree with this. The intent is to illustrate the speed of its arrival and its proximity by way of hyperbole, and such hyperbole is frequent in poetry.

It has also been said that the meaning is: "And the matter of the establishment of the Hour—the knowledge of which belongs exclusively to Him—which is the bringing to death of the living and the resurrection of the dead from the first and the last, and the changing of the forms of all beings (which those who deny it have rejected, placing it among the things that do not fall under the realm of possibility in terms of the speed and ease of its accomplishment)—shall be as the glance of the eye or even closer," according to the aforementioned opinions on aw.

"Indeed, Allah is over all things competent."

Among all things is that He brings it about in the fastest manner possible, so He is capable of that. On the second interpretation, it means: Among all things is the matter of its establishment, so He, Glory be to Him, is capable of it; thus, the clause serves as an explanation (ta'lil). In al-Kashf, it is mentioned that under the assumption that "the unseen" is general and encompasses everything hidden in the heavens and the earth, the saying "And the matter of the Hour" is derived from the first and serves as a preamble to it; meaning, He alone knows the unseen of the Hour and others, and He is the One who brings them about due to His knowledge and power, which is why He followed it with His saying, "Indeed, Allah..."

As for if "the unseen" is intended to refer specifically to the Hour, then it is clear. The situation is not hidden if the intent of "the unseen" is what is mentioned in the verse "Indeed, Allah, with Him is the knowledge of the Hour...", and according to the final opinion regarding "the unseen," the mention of the Hour is a case of using the noun in place of the pronoun to strengthen the content of the clause.