Al-Isra: (88) Say, "If humankind and the jinn gathered..."

(Say, "If humankind and the jinn gathered")—meaning, if they agreed—(to bring the like of this Quran)—which is described by those majestic qualities of eloquence, excellence of structure, and perfection of meaning that the intellects cannot fully grasp. The two heavy burdens (humankind and jinn) are specified because it is they, and not others, who deny that it is from Allah the Exalted; the challenge was directed at them. Even though the Prophet (peace be upon him) was sent to the angels just as he was sent to them, the challenge was not directed to the angels because they are not capable of opposing it—for the angels (peace be upon them), even assuming they were to attempt it (which they would not, as they are infallible and only do what they are commanded), are as incapable as others.

(They would not bring its like)—meaning, the like of this Quran. The explicit noun was used instead of a pronoun referring back to the "like" mentioned, to avoid the misconception that it has a specific, defined likeness, and to indicate that the intent is the negation of bringing anything similar to it in terms of the aforementioned magnificent qualities. This challenge includes the pure-blooded Arabs, the masters of eloquence and rhetoric. It is said: The intent is to render humankind incapable, and the jinn are mentioned to emphasize this incapacity; for if they fail to bring its like while the jinn—who are capable of extraordinary feats—are with them, they are even more incapable of bringing its like on their own. This, however, is not the primary point. It is also said: It is permissible that "the jinn" includes the angels (peace be upon them), as the word "jinn" has been used to refer to angels, as in the saying of the Almighty: "...and they have set up a lineage between Him and the jinn [angels]". Yet, it is more commonly used for beings other than angels, and it is not hidden that this is contrary to the apparent meaning. Some have claimed that since the angels were intermediaries in its revelation, they should not be included, as "they would not bring its like" would not be appropriate in that context. The answer to this is that the intent is not to negate the bringing of its like from Allah the Exalted, but rather to negate it by those to whom the action is attributed.

The sentence (they would not bring) is the response to the oath implied by the lam (in la-in), and it stands in the place of the apodosis (jaza') of the conditional. Were it not for this lam, "they would not bring" would be the apodosis of the conditional, even if it were in the indicative mood, based on the view that if the conditional verb is in the past tense, the apodosis may be in the indicative, as in the saying of Zuhayr: "If a friend comes to him on a day of famine, he says: neither my wealth is absent nor is it forbidden." This is because if the conditional particle does not affect the conditional clause, despite its proximity, it is permissible for it not to affect the apodosis, despite its distance. This view is contrary to the school of Sibawayh, the Kufans, and Al-Mubarrad, as detailed in its proper place. According to the Basrans, it is not permissible to make the mentioned clause the apodosis of the condition when this lam is present, contrary to Al-Farra'. As for the saying of Al-A'sha: "If we are destined for a battle..." the lam there is not the lam of the oath (al-muwatti'ah), but rather, as some say, it is an augmentative lam; so understand this.

Since the intent behind "gathering to bring the like of the Quran" is the absolute agreement to do so—whether the attempt at opposition is made by each one individually or by the group collectively through the joining of thoughts and the cooperation of perspectives—the Almighty said: (And if some of them were to others a helper)—meaning, an assistant in achieving what they strive for in bringing its like. The sentence is a coordination to an omitted one: that is, "they would not bring its like even if some of them were not, for others, a helper, and even if they were..." It is in the position of a state (hal), similar to the omitted sentence. The meaning is: they will not bring its like under any assumed circumstance, even in this condition—which is the most favorable condition—let alone in any other.

In this is a refutation of the Jews or the Quraish in their claim that they could bring its like. It has been narrated that a group of the former said, "Inform us, O Muhammad, regarding this truth you have brought; is it truly from Allah the Exalted? For we do not see it as consistent as the Torah." The Prophet (peace be upon him) said to them, "By Allah, you certainly know it is from Allah the Exalted." They replied, "We will bring you the like of what you bring," so Allah the Exalted revealed this verse. In another narration, a group of Quraish said to him (peace be upon him), "Bring us a different sign than this Quran, for we are able to bring its like," so this was revealed. Perhaps their intent with this "different sign" refers to what is contained in the subsequent verses: "(And they said, 'We will not believe in you...')." In that case, it is said that this verse, along with the other verses, serves as a refutation of everything they meant by that statement, although it begins by refuting their claim, "We are able..." due to the importance of that claim, as it was the root of their request for a different sign.

In Irshad al-'Aql al-Salim, it is stated that this verse puts an end to their empty greed regarding the desire to replace some of its verses with others. There is no basis for saying that this verse serves as a confirmation of the preceding one—His saying: "(Then you will not find for yourself any agent against Us)"—as some have claimed. This is not because bringing its like is harder than restoring the original itself (for denying something does not confirm it by denying what is below it, but rather by denying what is above it), because there is no doubt that restoring it without the permission of Allah the Exalted is more difficult than the aforementioned bringing of its like. Rather, the reason is that the oath-containing sentence is not addressed to the Prophet (peace be upon him), but to the arrogant ones before him (peace be upon him). From this, one knows the error in the statement of some regarding the manner of confirmation: that the inability of the two heavy burdens to restore it after it is taken away is equivalent to their inability to bring its like. For to restore it in its original form is impossible, as they cannot reach Allah the Exalted; therefore, nothing remains but to restore it by its like, so He explicitly denied that to confirm it through reason and lack of utility.

Furthermore, the author of Al-Kashshaf used the inimitability of the Quran to prove its created nature, arguing that if it were eternal, it would not be "under one's power" (maqdur), and thus could not be a miracle, like an impossibility. This was countered in Al-Kashf by the argument that there is no dispute regarding the created nature of the structure (of the words), even if the Sunnis avoid calling it "created" to prevent misunderstanding; this structure is the miracle. The dispute concerns what is expressed by this miraculous phrasing, which is called the "Self-Speech" (al-kalam al-nafsi), so the argument does not benefit him. Ibn al-Munir mentioned something similar.

The author of Al-Taqrib said: The reply is to reject the necessity (of the implication), for the condition of something being "under one's power" is possibility, which is present, not temporal origination (huduth). Moreover, the miracle is the utterance (the words), and one does not say it is eternal. The eternal is the Self-Speech, and it is not called a miracle. Also, even if we grant that humans cannot bring the original, why can they not bring its like? The scholar Al-Tayyibi chose this latter response. We have already mentioned in the introductions of this discourse what will benefit you in this station, so reflect; and Allah the Exalted is the Guardian of bounty and the One who guides the understanding.