Tafsir of Maryam 19:77

Maryam: (77) "Have you seen him who disbelieved..."

"Have you seen him who disbelieved in Our verses?" that is, in Our verses, among which are the verses of resurrection. Al-Bukhari, Muslim, al-Tirmidhi, al-Tabarani, Ibn Hibban, and others reported from Khabbab ibn al-Aratt that he said: "I was a blacksmith, and al-As ibn Wa'il owed me a debt. I went to him to demand payment, and he said: 'No, by God, I will not pay you until you disbelieve in Muhammad (may God bless him and grant him peace).' I said: 'No, by God, I will not disbelieve in Muhammad (may God bless him and grant him peace) until you die and are then resurrected.' He said: 'If I die and am then resurrected, I will come to you while I have wealth and children, and then I will pay you.' So God Almighty revealed: 'Have you seen...' up to the end of the verse."

In another narration, Khabbab said to him: "No, by God, I will not disbelieve in Muhammad (may God bless him and grant him peace), neither while alive, nor dead, nor when I am resurrected." Al-As said: "If I am resurrected, I will come to you..." etc. In another narration, a man from the companions of the Prophet (may God bless him and grant him peace) came to him demanding a debt he owed him, and he said: "Do you not claim that there is gold, silver, silk, and all kinds of fruits in Paradise?" They replied: "Yes." He said: "Your appointed time is the Hereafter. By God, I will surely be given wealth and children, and I will surely be given the like of your Book which you have brought." Thus, it was revealed.

It is also said that it was revealed concerning al-Walid ibn al-Mughirah, for he had statements similar to this. Abu Muslim said: "It is general to everyone who possesses this attribute." The first [account] is what is established in the books of the Sahih.

The interrogative particle (Hamzah) is for expressing astonishment at the state of that disbeliever, signaling that it is of such strangeness and heinousness that it must be witnessed, and astonishment must be derived from it. The Fa (conjunction) is for connecting to a suppressed [verb] necessitated by the context; that is, "Have you looked and seen him who disbelieved in Our dazzling verses, which every person who considers them is obliged to believe in?"

"And said" — mocking them, prefacing his speech with a wicked oath — "By God, I will surely be given [wealth and children]." It has been suggested that this refers to being given in this world, as narrated by al-Tabarsi from some, but the authentic reports reject this unless "being given" is interpreted, as some have said, as an ongoing bestowal that continues into the Hereafter; meaning, "I will surely be given a continuous bestowal of wealth and children."

The intent is "look at him and be astonished at his marvelous state and his heinous audacity." It is also said that "seeing" (ra'ayta) is a metaphor for "informing" (akhbirni), by mentioning the cause and desiring the effect, and the interrogation is a metaphor for the command to do so, because the goal of your statement "What did you do? Inform me" is a performative utterance (insha') used metaphorically for another performative utterance, and the Fa remains in its original role.

The meaning is: "Inform me of the story of this disbeliever following the talk of those who said: 'Which of the two parties is better in position?'" (19:73). It is also said: "Following the talk of the one who said: 'When he dies...' etc." (19:66). What we have presented regarding the meaning of the verse is the most evident.

The scholar Abu al-Su'ud chose [this view], and he critiqued the second [view] by saying: "You are aware that the well-known usage of 'Have you seen' (ara'ayta) is in the sense of 'inform me' via interrogation, proceeding on its original path or directed toward meanings that suit it, not via the command to inform someone else; and the intent of 'inform me' here is something that can hardly be correct, as is not hidden."

It is said: The intent is "I will be given in this world," but the reason for the revelation rejects this. The scholar said: "Unless it is interpreted as an ongoing bestowal into the Hereafter, then it would correspond to that."

Hamza, al-Kisa'i, al-A'mash, Talha, Ibn Abi Layla, and Ibn Isa al-Asbahani read "wuld" with a damma on the Waw and a sukun on the Lam. It is said: It is the plural of walad (child), like asad (lion) and usud (lions), and they cited his poem: "I have indeed seen groups who have accumulated wealth and children (wuld)." It is also said: It is a dialect variant for walad, like 'arab and 'urb, and they cited his poem: "Would that so-and-so were in his mother's womb, and would that so-and-so were the child (wuld) of a donkey." The truth is that it has appeared in the speech of the Arabs as both singular and plural, and both are correct here. Abdullah and Yahya ibn Ya'mar read "wild" with a kasra on the Waw and a sukun on the Lam, and it is in the same sense.