Tafsir of Al-Baqarah 2:120

“Never will the Jews or the Christians be pleased with you until you follow their religion.” This is a clarification of the intensity of the stubbornness of these two groups, following the preceding statement of what they and the polytheists share. The conjunction between the two is omitted to emphasize the negation and to signify that the pleasure of each one is distinct from the pleasure of the other. The address is to the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace; it contains an incomparable level of exaggeration in making him despair of their conversion to Islam. For if they were not satisfied with him, peace be upon him—even if he were to let them do whatever they pleased—but rather hoped for something that scarcely enters the realm of possibility, which is that he follow the religion that he was sent to abrogate, then how could their following his religion, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, be imagined? This exaggeration was necessary due to his intense concern, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, for their faith, as it is narrated that he used to treat every group with kindness in the hope that they would accept Islam, so this was revealed.

Milla (religion) is, in its origin, a noun derived from amla ltu al-kitaba (I dictated the book), as Al-Raghib stated. From this, one says tariq mul (a path that is trodden/dictated/followed), as Al-Azhari conveyed. It was then transferred to refer to the foundations of the laws, on the basis that the Prophet dictates them, and the Prophets, peace be upon them, do not differ regarding them. It may be applied to falsehood, as in “one religion of disbelief,” and it is not attributed to Him—the Exalted—so one does not say “the religion of Allah.” Nor is it attributed to individual members of the community. Din (religion/faith) is synonymous with it in truth, but it differs in that it relates to the acceptance of the commanded, for it is originally obedience and submission, and because of the unity of what they both denote; hence, Allah the Exalted said: “A straight religion, the religion of Abraham.” Din is sometimes used for the branches metaphorically and is attributed to Allah the Exalted, to individuals, and to specific sects, with regard to its origin—provided that the difference in perspective is sufficient for the validity of the attribution. It is also applied to falsehood. As for Shari‘a, it is originally the watering place; it was made a name for the particular rulings related to livelihood and the Hereafter, whether they were explicitly stated by the Lawgiver or not, provided they return to Him. Abrogation and alteration occur within it, and it is applied to general principles metaphorically, as stated by some researchers.

The word Milla was put in the singular, even though there are two religions, for the sake of brevity, or because disbelief unites them, making it one religion. Furthermore, this is not an initiation of speech from Him—the Exalted—regarding their lack of pleasure, but rather it is a narration of the meaning of words they said, in the form of speech, so that His saying—the Exalted—“Say, ‘Indeed, the guidance of Allah is the [only] guidance’” would correspond to it. For it is by way of a response to their statement. Perhaps they only said that because of their belief that their religion was the truth and everything else was false, so they were answered with the qasr qalbi (restriction of the heart); meaning: the religion of Allah the Exalted is the truth, and your religion is the falsehood. “The guidance of Allah” the Exalted—which is Islam—is the guidance, and what they call to is not guidance but rather whims, in the most eloquent manner, by attributing the guidance to Him—the Exalted—and emphasizing it with “inna”, and repeating “the guidance” in the predicate in the manner of “my poetry is my poetry,” making it the essence of the nominal “guidance,” employing the dameer al-fasl (separating pronoun), and making the predicate definite. It is possible they said this among themselves, and the command for this speech to them does not have to be a response to that very wording, but a response and rebuttal to what its content necessitates or what follows from the invitation to Judaism or Christianity, and that being guided lies within them. It has been said: It is valid that it serves to make them despair of what they wish for and crave, and it is not a direct response.

“And if you were to follow their whims”—that is, their deviant opinions that stray from the truth, emanating from them by following the desires of their own selves—and this is what was expressed earlier as “the religion.” The apparent structure would have been “if you were to follow it,” but the arrangement was changed, and the noun was placed in the position of the pronoun without using the word itself, as a signal that they have altered what Allah—the Exalted—legislated, a change by which they took it out of its intended place. In the plural form, there is a reference to the abundance of disagreement among them, and that some of them declare others to be disbelievers.

“After what has come to you of knowledge”—that is, the known, which is the revelation or the religion, because it is the thing that is described as “coming” rather than the knowledge itself. You may interpret “coming” as “attaining,” and thus “knowledge” remains in its literal sense. “You have no protector or helper from Allah.” This is the response to the oath signified by the lam of initiation. If the condition were answered by it here, the fa would have been necessary. It is said that it is a response to it, and it requires estimating the oath after the condition, and interpreting the nominal sentence as a future verbal sentence—meaning: “there will not be for you”—but this is forced, as no grammarian has said that the oath is estimated after the condition when the lam of initiation is present, and there is no evidence for interpreting the nominal as a verbal sentence. It is also said that it is a response to both matters: the oath signified by the lam and the conditional in for one of them in wording and the other in meaning, but this is as you see. The address is also to the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, and the condition is restricted by what it is restricted with to signify that following their whims is impossible, because it is contrary to what he knows to be true; so if its occurrence were to be supposed, just as the impossible is supposed, he would have no protector or helper to repel the punishment from him. There is also in this an indescribable level of exaggeration in causing despair. It has been said: The address there and here, even if it is ostensibly to the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, its intent is his nation, and you know from what we have mentioned that there is no need to commit to that.