Tafsir of Al-Isra 17:70

It is narrated from al-Dahhak that it is speech; from ‘Ata’ that it is the straightening of the stature and its uprightness; from Zayd ibn Aslam that it is sustenance and pleasures; from Yaman that it is the beauty of form; from Ibn Jarir that it is their authority over other creatures and their being subjugated to them; and from Muhammad ibn Ka‘b that it is by making Muhammad—may Allah bless him and grant him peace—one of them. It is also said: by Allah the Exalted creating their father Adam with His own hands. It is also said: by the management of their worldly livelihood and their Hereafter. It is also said: by [the gift of] writing. It is also said: by the beard for men and the braided lock for women. And it is said, and it is said; yet, in reality, all of this is by way of exemplification. Whoever claims that it is limited to one thing—like Ibn ‘Atiyyah, who said: "The honor lies only in the intellect and nothing else"—has claimed a mistake, intended an absurdity, and contradicted explicit reason and sound transmission. For this reason, Imam al-Shafi‘i used this verse as evidence for the non-impurity of the human being upon death.

(And We carried them on the land and the sea): On moist flanks and dry timber—meaning riding beasts and ships. This is from the usage "I carried him upon such and such," meaning: I gave him that which he rides and which bears him. Thus, the thing carried upon is implicit by the context of the situation. It is said: The meaning of carrying them on land and sea is making them stable/settled therein, in that He did not cause the earth to swallow them, nor did He drown them in water. The first interpretation is more appropriate to the concept of "honoring," for it does not apply to any animal other than them, unlike the second.

(And We provided them with the good things): That is, forms of blessings and varieties of enjoyments, from what is obtained through their own labor and through that which is not of their labor, including food, clothing, furnishings, acquisitions, and other things.

(And We preferred them): It is said: meaning by the aforementioned honoring [over many of those whom We have created with a great preference]. The meaning is that this is specific to them in relation to the "many"; thus, the "many" were not honored as they were honored. The Imam [al-Razi] scrutinized this point, noting that the Almighty first said: (And We have certainly honored the children of Adam), and then said: (And We preferred them), so there must be a distinction between "honoring" (takrim) and "preferring" (tafdil) so that redundancy does not arise.

The most plausible view in this regard is to say: The Almighty preferred the human over the rest of the animals through innate, natural, and essential qualities, such as intellect, speech, writing, beautiful form, and upright stature. Then, He—Exalted is He—exposed them, by means of intellect and understanding, to the acquisition of true beliefs and virtuous morals. The first is "honoring," and the second is "preferring." It is as if it were said: We preferred them by exposing them to the acquisition of that which leads to salvation and proximity, by means of what We honored them with as foundations for that. Therefore, they must be grateful and direct what was created for them toward that for which it was created; thus, they should unify Allah the Exalted, associate nothing with Him, and reject the state they are in of worshipping other than Him. Something similar can be said regarding what preceded, with slight variation.

Al-Tayyibi said: He has repeated in the verse what is appropriate for the pinnacle of praise by mentioning honor, preference, and the subjugation of things by way of progression. It is as if it were said: We have honored the children of Adam with the honor of their father—peace be upon him—then We subjugated things to them and provided them with good things, and then We preferred them with a preference—meaning a true preference. This is why He followed it with His saying: (And when We said to the angels, "Prostrate..."), etc. This is to clarify the honor of their father, while the verses between them are by way of digression and interpolation—up to the end of what he said. From this, the removal of redundancy is known, even if he did not intend it for that purpose. In this is the specification of "honoring," and likewise in what is said: that honoring is through the blessings by which the obligation of worship is validated, through which He exposed them to a lofty station.

The "many" refers to those other than the angels—peace be upon them—according to many, including al-Zamakhshari. He claimed that the verse is explicit in the preference of the angel over the human, and he attacked the Ahl al-Sunnah with an attack in which he was quite vitriolic.

The truth is that it is not fit to be used as evidence for the preference in question. In al-Kashshaf, it is mentioned that the apparent meaning of the context of the verse is an exhortation for man to be grateful and to not associate anything with Allah the Exalted. For He mentioned what is on land and sea of His—Exalted is He—good care for him, and He included within it that He—Glorified and Exalted is He—guided them to ships and their construction, and the benefits resulting from them, in His saying: (Your Lord is the One who drives the ship for you...) [the verses]. So He said: (And We have certainly honored the children of Adam)—meaning this species from among all other species—by the inventions He has specialized them with. He mentioned among them their being carried on land and sea, their being provided with good things, and their preference over many creatures. This preference does not intend greatness of rank or increase in proximity to Allah the Exalted, which is the point in dispute, because the ruling is for the species as such. Allah the Exalted mentioned reasons for that which encompass both the righteous and the wicked. So, whether the angels are included in this "many" or not, it does not indicate superiority in the aforementioned sense, so it is not fit for the argumentation of either of the two parties.

Furthermore, even assuming that the preference is in the sense under dispute, the verse does not indicate that the angel is better than the human except by way of mafhum (implication), and there is disagreement regarding its validity as a proof. Abu Hanifa—may Allah be pleased with him—does not hold to it. Moreover, it indicates that they were preferred over "many," and they were not preferred over the "opposite" (the remainder), which allows for the possibility of equality or the preference of the opposite; thus, it is not a textual proof for al-Zamakhshari’s position.

Al-Tayyibi considered "min" (in "min-man khalaqna") to be explanatory (bayaniyyah), as in your saying: "I have expended for him the vastness of my status," meaning: We preferred them over the many whom We created from among those who possess intellect, as is apparent from "min" (from). These are limited to angels, jinn, and humans. Since humans are excluded (for a thing is not preferred over itself), there remain angels and jinn. Thus, the meaning is to clarify the preference of humans over them all, which is what the context of praise requires, as the verse is driven by it. If it is taken as partitive (tab'idiyyah), then ("min-man khalaqna") is a substitute (badal), meaning: We preferred them over some of the creatures. The mention of "some" in this context indicates the magnification of the one preferred over, as established in His saying: (And We raised some of them in degrees). What kind of praise for the children of Adam, and confirmation of merit and honor, is there in the categorical division if they are only made preferred over jinn and devils? Furthermore, if the attribute of "many" is made to specify the exclusion of some, then the angels are more worthy than the jinn and devils, because they are the ones described by the "many," as is indicated by the many reports, such as the report of the atit (creaking) of the heavens, the report of the descent of raindrops, the report of how many angels enter the Frequented House (al-Bayt al-Ma‘mur) every day, and other than that. To this refers the statement of the author of al-Taqrib: "It is possible that 'many of those whom We created' is intended to mean the angels, for they are many of the created rational beings."

This has been challenged by stating that his carrying of "those whom We created" to encompass all rational beings is acceptable, for their preference over non-rational beings then comes by way of the mafhum al-muwafaqah (implication of agreement), so there is no need to commit to opposing the apparent meaning and considering their generalization. However, carrying "min" as explanatory is unacceptable; it is very far-fetched because the restriction of "many" is wasted upon it if one adopts the generalized or conventional inclusion. Moreover, its usage in partition is common wherever it occurs in the Revelation and the usage of the eloquent, and it is more arbitrary than carrying it to the final limit in His saying: "wiping your heads and your feet from it" (famsahu bi-ru'usikum wa-arjulikum minhu), according to what al-Zamakhshari mentioned regarding it. When it is contrasted with something else, it indicates scarcity in the other party, as in His saying: "Among them are those who are guided, and many of them are wicked," for it is explicit that it indicates that the majority are the wicked due to the contrast. As for when it is mentioned at the start, the majority might be the opposite, as in His saying: "We have preferred [them] over many of Our believing servants." Therefore, his statement that "the attribute of many if made specific..." is a statement that did not originate from a firm grounding. For this subtlety, the author of al-Taqrib said: "It is possible that it indicates that it is the weaker position."

Moreover, the issue of preference is a matter of disagreement among the Ahl al-Sunnah. Some of them have gone to the preference of the angels, and this is the school of Ibn Abbas—may Allah be pleased with both of them—and the choice of al-Zajjaj, according to what al-Wahidi narrated in al-Basit. Some of them distinguished, saying: "The messengers among the humans are superior absolutely, then the messengers among the angels over the rest of the humans and angels, then the generality of the angels over the generality of the humans." This is what is held by the companions of Imam Abu Hanifa—may Allah have mercy upon him—and many of the Shafi‘is and Ash‘aris. Some have generalized the preference of the perfected ones of the human species, whether they are prophets or saints. Some have preferred the Karubiyyin (the cherubim) among the angels absolutely, then the messengers among the humans, then the perfected ones among them, then the generality of the angels over the generality of the humans.

This is what Imam al-Razi holds, and to this points the speech of al-Ghazali in numerous places in his books. From this, it is known that the absolute statement that "the Ahl al-Sunnah prefer the human over the angel" is not as it should be. This issue, and the issue of the preference of the Imams, are not among those where one is labeled an innovator for holding one of the two sides, according to what is in al-Kashshaf, as it does not trace back to a foundation of belief and is not based on a definitive proof, provided one is safe from insult and what impairs the required reverence in both issues. However, it is famous in the issue of the preference of the Imams that saying the opposite of what the opinion of the Ahl al-Sunnah has settled upon is an innovation. Whoever is fair will say what is in al-Kashshaf. Therefore, al-Zamakhshari’s ranting against those who disagreed with him is pure ignorance if it did not reach that extremity; so how then, when he has reached the height of stupidity in it and the end of vulgarity? He shall see the consequence of that.