Tafsir of An-Nahl 16:9

Qasd is a verbal noun used in the sense of the active participle; it is said: sabil qasd and qasid, meaning straight, as if it is heading toward the destination the traveler intends, never deviating from it. It is like the expressions: "a flowing river" and "a traveling road."

"Upon" (Ala) denotes obligation metaphorically, and the speech implies the deletion of a possessive noun—that is, it is incumbent upon Him, the Exalted, and determined as a mandatory matter due to the precedence of the promise. Another view is that it refers to the guidance of the straight path that leads whoever follows it to the Truth, which is Monotheism (Tawhid), by setting up proofs, sending Messengers (peace be upon them), and revealing Books to invite people to it.

Alternatively, qasd is a verbal noun meaning "making straight and rectifying." In this case, "upon" remains in its aforementioned state, but there is no need to assume a deleted noun. It means: upon Him, the Sublime, is the rectification of the path and its making straight—that is, making it such that the traveler reaches the Truth, similar to the smallness of a gnat or the greatness of an elephant. Its reality returns to what was mentioned: setting up proofs, sending Messengers, and revealing Books.

It is also permitted that qasd is in the sense of the "intended" (the straight), as in the first interpretation, and "upon" is not for obligation or necessity. The meaning would be: the intention for the path and its straightness leads to Him, the Exalted, and it is a path passing by Him. This contains a metaphor where that which points to Allah, the Mighty and Majestic, is likened to a straight path that functions in this way. Ibn Atiyyah mentioned something similar, and it is as you see.

The definite article (al-) in "the path" is for the genus according to many; thus, it includes both the straight and the non-straight. Adding the "straightness" (as a description) to it is an addition of a general category to a specific one, or the addition of an adjective to a noun, which is contrary to the apparent meaning as stated. Others say: al- is for a specific reference (covenant), and what is meant is the path of the Divine Law (Sharia).

His saying, "...and among them is ja'ir (deviating)," means one that turns away from the main road, veering from the Truth, not leading its traveler to it. This is apparent in the intent of the genus, for "partitive" sense only holds if this is the case; for the ja'ir (deviating path), upon the intent of specific reference, is not part of "the path" but its counterpart. Whoever intends that refers the pronoun back to the absolute [path] that is implied within that restricted [part], or to the previously mentioned [path] by assuming a deleted noun—i.e., "and of its kind is a deviating one."

Ibn Atiyyah said: "It is possible that it refers back to the path of the Sharia, and what is meant by this portion are the sects of misguidance within the nation of Muhammad (may Allah bless him and grant him peace), which deviate from the straight path." Some claimed the pronoun refers to the creatures—i.e., "and among the creatures are those who deviate from the Truth." This is supported by the recitation of Isa, and narrated from Ibn Mas’ud: "And among you" (wa-minkum). Ibn al-Anbari extracted it in the Masahif (codices) from Ali (may Allah honor his countenance), but with a fa instead of a wa (and), though that is not the preferred reading. The feminine gender is used because the word "path" (sabil) can be treated as both feminine and masculine.

The prepositional phrase is said to be a predicate in advance, and ja'ir is a deferred subject. It is also said: it is in the nominative case by virtue of being an initial (subject), either regarding its content or by estimating a described noun—i.e., "part of the path" or "some of the path is deviating." The sentence, according to what some investigators chose, is parenthetical, brought to explain the need for the declaration or the rectification through setting up proofs, sending [messengers], and revealing [books]—the matters mentioned previously—and to show the majesty of the value of this blessing. This is the guidance interpreted as "pointing toward what leads to the desired goal," not the guidance that necessitates reaching it; for that is not upon Allah, the Sublime, at all. Rather, it would be a defect in His wisdom, as indicated by His saying: "And if He had willed, He would have guided you all."

That is, its meaning is: if He had willed to guide you to what was mentioned of Monotheism—a guidance that necessitates reaching it—He would have done so. But He did not will it, because His will follows wisdom, and there is no wisdom in that [absolute] willing, because the axis upon which the sphere of accountability revolves is choice, upon which deeds are predicated, and through which the reward is connected. The particle ajma'in (all) qualifies the negated [object], not the negation itself; thus, the intended meaning is the negation of universality, not the universality of negation.

Some mentioned that the apparent way would have been to say: "And upon Allah is the straight path and the deviating one," or "And upon Him is its deviating one," but the wording deviated from this to what is in the noble arrangement because misguidance is not attributed to Him, the Exalted, out of reverence. It is like His saying: "Those on whom You have bestowed Your favor, not of those who have earned Your anger."

Al-Zamakhshari claimed that the difference between the styles of the two sentences is to signify what is permissible to attribute to Allah, the Exalted, from the two paths and what is not. He meant to signal what his brethren, the Mu'tazila, adopted regarding the impermissibility of attributing misguidance to Him, the Sublime, because He is not its creator. They made the divergence in the verse an argument for them.

Some of the group replied that what is meant "upon Allah," according to His bounty and generosity, is the declaration of the true religion and the correct way; as for the declaration of the method of seduction and misguidance, it is not upon Him, the Sublime. This was criticized by saying that just as the declaration of guidance and its path is mandatory, so is its opposite, and sending Messengers and revealing Books is for nothing but that.

Ibn al-Munir said: The difference between the two styles is because the context of the speech is to establish an argument against the creation, that He, the Exalted, clarified the straight path and the deviating one, guided a people who chose guidance, and led astray others who chose misguidance. He established that every action that occurs, transpires at the hands of the servant; thus, it has a perspective in that it is existent and created by Allah, and is attributed to Him, the Sublime, in this regard. And it has another perspective in that it is associated with the servant's choice and facilitated for him, thus attributed to the servant. Since these two aspects are established in every action, it was fitting, in establishing the argument against the servants, to attribute guidance to Allah regarding His creation of it, and to attribute misguidance to the servant regarding his choice of it. In sum, He mentioned for each of the two actions a relationship different from the one mentioned for the other, so that it fits the establishment of the argument. "Indeed, to Allah belongs the conclusive argument."

Some investigators denied that there is a change of style for a sought-after reason based on the assumption that such [change] only occurs when the apparent meaning necessitates a specific structure, but one deviates from it for a more important point. It is not the intention of declaring the straight path to merely inform that it is straight so that its attribution [to Him] that it is deviating would be valid, thereby needing an excuse for not doing so. Even if that were intended, no point for changing the style would be found, and this has been explained in countless places. Rather, the intent is setting up proofs for guidance to it. There is no possibility of attributing such a thing to Allah, the Exalted, regarding the deviating path by saying "and its deviating one," so that such attribution could be diverted from Him to other than Him for a point, nor would any person imagine this such that the situation would require dispelling it by saying "not its deviating one" and then changing the structure of the arrangement for a stronger motive. He mentioned that the sentence is parenthetical as we quoted previously, and it is speech upon which the traits of investigation shine.

However, one could say: Why is it not permitted that the intention behind the declaration of the straight path and the declaration of the deviating path is to set up the proofs indicating the truthfulness of the first—so that one may be guided to it—and the falsehood of the second—so that one may beware and not rely upon it? This is not merely the "informing" that he mentioned and its attribution to Him, the Exalted. Rather, some said: The truth is that the meaning is: upon Allah, the Exalted, is the declaration of the path of guidance so that they may be guided to it, and the declaration of other than it so that they may beware of it, but He sufficed with one of them due to the other's necessity to it.

In al-Kashf, it is stated that the divergence of the two styles is also clear according to the principle of the Ahl al-Sunnah, as no one denies that the first is the intended [goal] in itself. Therefore, the declaration of the path of misguidance, in summary, to the extent that the straight path is distinguished from it within the declaration of the straight path, is necessary. Its detailed declaration is not something that must occur, nor did the promise proceed according to it according to the school of the people of truth. So let one reflect.

Finally, the verse proclaims the contrary to what the Mu'tazila, including al-Zajjaj, claimed regarding the lack of necessity of His will being attached to a thing and its existence. They resorted to insisting on interpreting it as "coercive." Abu Ali, from among them, said: "The meaning is: if He had willed, He would have guided you to the reward or to Paradise without entitlement." All of this is contrary to the apparent meaning, as is not hidden.