Al-Isra: (71) The Day We will call every...

(The Day We will call every people with their Imam) This is a commencement to clarify the disparity of the conditions of the children of Adam in the Hereafter, following the clarification of their condition in this world. "The Day" (yawma) is an object of an omitted verb; meaning: "Mention the Day We will call..." Ibn Atiyyah and others permitted it to be an adverbial qualifier (zarf) for the verb indicated by "(they will not be wronged)," but it was not made an adverb for it based on the principle that what follows the fa (in "they will not be wronged") cannot act upon what precedes it, even if it were an adverb. He also permitted it to be a subject (mubtada), and it is indeclinable because it is annexed to an indeclinable (sentence). The predicate is the sentence "(So whoever is given...)," and an element is estimated for the purpose of connection within it. This is flawed, as the classification into declinable and indeclinable applies to nouns, not verbs, and what is within the scope here is a present-tense verb. Furthermore, the indeclinability of adverbial nouns annexed to a sentence is one of its two pillars according to the Kufan school, whereas the Basrans do not permit this; and even so, it is a forced explanation.

He also permitted it to be an adverb for "We have favored them" (faddalnahum). He said: The favoring of humans over all other animals on the Day of Resurrection is clear. Some grammarians held this view, except that he said: "We favored them through reward." The flaw here is that such favoring of humans on that day—when the disbelievers among them are more abject than anything—only holds if it is said that it is sufficient in favoring a genus to favor some of its members. Do you not see the correctness of saying "Men are better than women," even though there are women who are superior to some men by many degrees? Furthermore, if favoring through reward is intended, the exclusion of the angels is not valid, because the human genus is rewarded, whereas the angels (peace be upon them) are not rewarded, as is established in its place. Moreover, the Jinn share in this reward, for their believers are rewarded just as humans are rewarded, according to some. It is said that their reward is inferior to theirs because they do not see Allah the Exalted in Paradise, according to those who hold that Allah the Exalted is seen therein; thus, humans are favored over them in reward from this perspective. It is also said that it is an adverb for "they read" or what is indicated by it. The flaw here is that they do not read their book at the moment of the calling. The response is that the meaning of the "Day they are called" is a long time, namely the Last Day in which what will happen will happen, and there remains, in making it an adverb for the aforementioned, the dispute regarding the fa.

Al-Farra' said: It is an adverb for an omitted "We will return you" (nu'idukum). It is also said it is an adverb for "they respond," and it is said it is a substitute for "(the day He calls you)." It is also said that the operator is what is indicated by His saying, the Sublime, "(When is it?)," and these are opinions of extreme weakness. The closest and strongest of the opinions is what we mentioned first. The "Imam" is the one who is followed and emulated, whether rational or otherwise. The prepositional phrase is connected to "We will call," meaning: We will call every group of the children of Adam—upon whom We have done in this world what We have done of honoring and what is conjoined with it—by whom they entrusted themselves to, whether a Prophet, a leader in religion, a book, or a creed. It is said: "O followers of such-and-such," "O people of such-and-such religion," or "such-and-such book."

Ibn Marduyah narrated from Ali (may Allah honor his face) who said: The Messenger of Allah (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) said regarding this verse: "Every people will be called by the Imam of their time, the Book of their Lord, and the Sunnah of their Prophet." Ibn Abi Shaybah, Ibn al-Mundhir, and others narrated from Ibn Abbas that he said: "An Imam of guidance or an Imam of misguidance." Ibn Jarir narrated through the path of al-Awfi from him (may Allah be pleased with him) that he said: "With their Imam, meaning their book of deeds; it is said: 'O people of the book of good, O people of the book of evil.'" This was also narrated from Abu al-Aliyah, al-Rabi, and al-Hasan. It was recited as "with their book" (bi-kitabihim). Perhaps the reason it is called their "Imam" is that they are followers of what it judges, of Paradise or Hell. Al-Dahhak and Ibn Zayd said: It is the book that was revealed to them. Ibn Abi Hatim, Ibn Marduyah, and al-Khatib in his History narrated from Anas that he said: "It is their Prophet who was sent to them."

Ibn Atiyyah, like others, chose the generality of the "Imam" to encompass what was mentioned in the reports. It is said: It refers to the powers that impel them toward their beliefs and deeds, such as the theoretical, practical, irascible, and appetitive powers—whether that appetite is for money, lands, status, or leadership—and because their followers follow them, they are called an "Imam." This, despite not being transmitted, is very far-fetched, so its proponent should not be followed, even if he were an Imam.

In al-Kashshaf, it is mentioned that among the innovated interpretations is that "Imam" is the plural of "mother" (umm), like "rag" (khuff) and "rags" (khifaf), and that people will be called on the Day of Resurrection by their mothers. The wisdom in calling them by their mothers rather than their fathers is to observe the right of Jesus (peace be upon him) and the honor of al-Hasan and al-Husayn, and that children born out of wedlock are not exposed. I wish I knew which is more innovated: the correctness of his interpretation or the splendor of his wisdom! This is reported from Muhammad ibn Ka’b.

The reason for its rejection, as stated in al-Kashf, is first: that "Imam" as a plural for "mother" is not common; what is known is "mothers" (ummahat). Second: the observation of the right of Jesus (peace be upon him) in his distinction of being called by his mother—for his creation without a father is an honor for him, not a deficiency to be remedied by the fact that people are his equals in being attributed to their mothers. Furthermore, manifesting the honor of the two grandsons (al-Hasan and al-Husayn) without this is more perfect, for their father is better than their mother, even though the People of the House are like a circular ring. As for the exposure of children born out of wedlock, there is no exposure except for the mothers, and this occurs whether others are called by their mothers or their fathers; they have no sin in that such that exposure would result. The mention of the non-commonality of the aforementioned plural is valid. As for the attack on the wisdom, it has been countered: the essence of it is that if all people were called by their fathers and Jesus (peace be upon him) were called by his mother, it might suggest his deficiency; thus, his exaltation was observed, and everyone was called by their mothers. Similarly, the exaltation of the two grandsons was observed because therein is a clarification of their lineage from the Messenger of Allah (may Allah bless him and grant him peace). If they were attributed to their father (may Allah honor his face), this would not be understood, even if he is who he is (may Allah be pleased with him). In that also is a covering for the creation so that children born out of wedlock are not exposed; for if people were called by their fathers and they were called by their mothers, it would be known that they have no lineage to the fathers being called, and there is humiliation for them in that. If they were called by fathers they were not known by in this world, even if they were not legally attributed to them, it would be the same. Based on this, what is in al-Kashf falls away. In my view, the one who says this would hardly say it without holding onto a report, because it is contrary to what comes to mind according to their varying levels, and its wisdom is hardly free from weakness. "The perfumer cannot fix what time has corrupted." Perhaps the report, if it is not authentic and is contradicted by what we presented, is not far from his (peace be upon him) saying: "You will be called on the Day of Resurrection by your names and the names of your fathers, so make your names good." And Allah the Exalted knows best.

The mention of the prepositional phrase being connected to what is before it is the manifest view held by the majority. It is permitted that it be connected to an omitted state (hal), meaning: "accompanied by their Imam." As for the caller, it is either Allah the Mighty and Majestic or the Angel, which is what the reports suggest; thus, attributing the action to Him, the Exalted, is metaphorical. Mujahid recited "He calls" (yad’u) with a ya at the end of the letters, meaning Allah the Exalted or the Angel calls. Al-Hasan, in one narration, read "He is called" (yud’a) in the passive voice, with "every" (kull) raised as the deputy of the subject. In another narration, he read "He calls" (yad’u) with a damma on the ya and a fatha on the ayn followed by a waw, and "every" (kull) is raised. This is explained in two ways. The first is that the waw is not a plural pronoun nor a sign of it; rather, it is a letter from the word itself, and it was an alif, and the origin is "is called" (yud’a), as in the other reading. The alif was changed into a waw according to the dialect of one who says af’u for af’a (a type of snake). This dialect is specific to pausing, according to the famous view; thus, the connection here is treated as the pause. It is reported from Sibawayh that turning the alif at the end into a waw is a dialect universally. The second is that the waw is a pronoun or a sign, as in "angels succeed one another among you," and the nun is omitted, as in his (peace be upon him) saying: "Do not believe until you love one another," and "As you are, so will you be ruled" in one view, and likewise in the saying of the poet: "I pass the night traveling, and you pass it rubbing your face with amber and the pure musk." It is as if, because it is an inflection sign, it was treated like the vowel in manifesting it at times and estimating it at others. There is no difference in it being an inflection sign whether the waw is a pronoun or a plural sign, according to the correct view. The manifest view is that its omission in such a case is anomalous, and if there is no necessity, this derivation in the verse is not sound. Regarding the guidance for the raising of "every" (kull) in this reading, the arguments for the nominative in its like are well-known in grammar books.

(So whoever is given) on that day from among those called (his book) his record of deeds (and Allah the Exalted knows the truth of it) (in his right hand) as an explanation of the gravity of the book given and an honoring of its possessor, and a glad tiding to him from the beginning of what is contained within its folds. (Then those) is an allusion to "whoever" in view of its meaning, as if it were alluded to by that that they are a party gathered for a momentous affair. It is said that there is an indication that their reading of their books is in a manner of gathering, not in a manner of isolation as in the case of the giving. Most reports are manifest that the state of reading is like the state of giving. Yes, it has come from the hadith of Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her) that the servant is given his book in his right hand, so he reads his sins, and people read his good deeds, then he turns the page, so Allah the Exalted turns his good deeds, and people read them, and they say: "There was no sin for this servant." It is possible that everyone who is given his book in his right hand, after reading it alone, comes to his companions and says: "Read my book," and they gather around him and read it, and he also reads it with them for enjoyment. However, we have not found a report for this, and despite that, it does not provide benefit for what the proponent intended. In appending the demonstrative pronoun with the sign of distance is an indication of the elevation of the degrees of those alluded to; meaning those distinguished by that honor, which is not felt by the mere giving of the book in the right hand, (read their book) even if they were not readers in the world, (which they were given) in the right hand, so that they may remember their deeds and grasp their details to be held accountable for them. It is said they read it in exultation at what is inscribed therein of good deeds that entail various honors. The manifest noun in place of the pronoun is for extra concern. (And they will not be wronged) meaning they will not be diminished of the rewards of their deeds inscribed in their books, but rather they will be given them multiplied, (not even a fatil) meaning the amount of a fatil, which is the skin in the cleft of a date stone; it is named as such because it is in the shape of something twisted (maftul). It is said it is what you twist between your fingers of thread or dirt, and it is used as a parable for something insignificant.

Furthermore, what readily comes to mind is that the actor of the giving is the angels (peace be upon them); they give it to the fortunate one after he is called, his book is in his right hand, he reads it, is subjected to an easy reckoning, and returns to his family joyfully. However, al-Uqayli narrated from Anas from the Prophet (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) that he said: "The books are all under the Throne. When the Day of Resurrection comes, Allah the Exalted sends a wind, so it flies them to the right and left hands, and the first line in it is: 'Read your book; sufficient is yourself against you this day as accountant.'" This is manifest that the actor of the giving is not the angel, except that the report needs investigation, as I am not certain of its authenticity. Yes, it came in a hadith narrated by Imam Ahmad from Aisha the truthful (may Allah be pleased with her) that she said: "I said: O Messenger of Allah, does the beloved remember his beloved on the Day of Resurrection?" He said: "As for three occasions, no..." until he said: "and at the flying of the books." This is supported in its manifest meaning by the previous report. And Allah the Exalted knows best.

It has come in some reports that the first to be given his book in his right hand from this nation is Abu Salamah Abdullah ibn Abd al-Asad, and the first to be given his book in his left hand is his brother al-Aswad—may Allah the Exalted blacken his face—after he extends his right hand to take it with, but an angel pulls it away. The reason for that is mentioned in the chronicles.