Tafsir of Al-Baqarah 2:140

"Or do you say that Abraham, Ishmael, Isaac, Jacob, and the Tribes were Jews or Christians?"

The word "or" (am) is either connected (muttasilah), acting as an equivalent to the hamza in "Do you argue with us" (atuhajjunana), falling under the scope of the command [to say]. The intent of the interrogation is to deny both matters simultaneously, meaning that each of the two is a denied affair. It is not fitting to establish arguments and illuminate proof for the validity of what you are upon while the situation is as mentioned, nor to cling to the tail of imitation and fabrication against the prophets, peace be upon them. The benefit of this style—despite knowledge being established of the validity of both matters—is to indicate that one of them is sufficient for condemnation; how much more so when they are combined? It is like saying to someone who has gone astray in judgment and speech: "Is it your judgment or your report [that is at fault]?" By this, the claim of Abu Hayyan is refuted, namely that connection necessitates the occurrence of one of the two sentences and a question regarding the determination of one, for that is not the case here, as both have occurred.

Alternatively, it is disconnected (munqati'ah), understood as "nay" (bal), with the hamza indicating a shift and transition from rebuking them for argumentation to rebuking them for fabricating against the prophets, peace be upon them. Those other than Ibn 'Amir, Hamzah, al-Kisa'i, and Hafs recited "Or do they say" (am yaquluna) with the ya [the third person]. In that case, the "or" (am) must be disconnected, because it contains a transition from the second person to the third. It is not appropriate in the connected case for the address to shift from one addressee to another, as it is in the disconnected case. The speech would then be an initiation not falling under the command, but rather coming from Allah, the Exalted, as a rebuke and denial of them. Abu Ja'far al-Tabari narrated from some grammarians the permissibility of the connected case, because when you say, "Do you stand, Zayd, or does 'Umar stand?", the connection is sound. Ibn 'Atiyyah countered that the example is not valid because the speaker is one and the addressee is one, whereas the speech in the verse is from two and the addressee is two. Unless one maintains that "or" (am) is equivalent to the hamza in a figurative sense, such that the meaning of "Say: Do you argue with us" implies: "Are they arguing, O Muhammad, or do they say?" It is not hidden that the opinion of disconnection, even if not mandatory, is at least more appropriate.

"Say: Are you more knowing, or is Allah?" Meaning: You are not more knowing regarding the condition of Abraham, peace be upon him, in matters of religion; rather, Allah, the Exalted, is more knowing of that. He, the Glorified, has reported the negation of Judaism and Christianity regarding him, and He argued for their negation concerning him by saying: "And the Torah and the Gospel were not revealed until after him." These others who are joined to him are his followers in religion and his companions, so their condition is his condition. Why, then, do you claim for him and for them that which Allah, the Exalted, has negated? That is nothing but extreme ignorance and pure obstinacy.

"And who is more unjust than one who conceals a testimony that he has from Allah?" This is a denial that anyone could be more unjust than one who conceals a testimony established with him, which has reached him from Allah—the testimony of Allah, the Exalted, to Abraham, peace be upon him, regarding his uprightness (hanifiyyah) and his innocence of Judaism and Christianity, just as was recited a moment ago. The two descriptions [unjust and concealing] are brought forth to provide the reason for the denial and to emphasize it; for the establishment of the testimony with him and its being from the side of the Exalted Lord, may His Majesty be glorified, are among the strongest incentives to uphold it and the severest deterrents against concealing it. The former is placed first, despite being later in existence, to observe the path of escalation. The meaning is: No one is more unjust than the People of the Book, as they concealed this testimony and established its opposite through the aforementioned fabrication. The sentence confirms what was denied regarding them in their claim of Judaism and Christianity. Attaching the superlative "most unjust" to the absolute concealment is to imply that the rank of one who denies it and testifies to the contrary is beyond the scope of explanation. Or [it means]: "No one is more unjust than us if we were to conceal this testimony and not uphold it in the place of argumentation." In that case, the sentence is an addendum confirming what was established in His saying: "Are you more knowing, or is Allah?" implying that they bear witness to what Allah has testified to and attest to what He has informed them of. Considering it as such makes it a completion of "Say: We believe," because that is in the sense of manifesting testimony. To consider it as a completion of "Say: Do you argue with us" because it is in the sense of concealing it, appears contrived. It is not hidden that the verse contains an insinuation regarding the extreme injustice of the People of the Book, in the manner pointed to. The generalization of the "testimony," when the intent is the specific testimony mentioned earlier, implies their concealment of Allah's testimony for His Prophet Muhammad, may the blessings and peace of Allah be upon him, in the Torah and the Gospel.

In Ray al-Zam'an, it is said that "unjust" (azlam) is connected, and the speech involves precedence and delay, as if it were said: "And who is more unjust before Allah than one who conceals a testimony he possesses?"—like saying: "Who is more unjust than Zayd among those who conceal testimony?" The meaning would be: If Abraham and his descendants were Jews or Christians, then Allah, the Exalted, had concealed this testimony, no one who conceals testimony would be more unjust than Him. But since that is impossible given His justice and His transcendence above what is not befitting, we know that the matter is not so. It is also said that "from" (min) is connected to "conceals" (katama), and the speech involves the omission of a genitive, i.e., "he conceals from the servants of Allah a testimony he has." Its meaning is that He, the Exalted, condemned them for preventing the testimony of truth from reaching the servants of Allah. The affectation and constraint in these two interpretations are not hidden, and the low quality of their meaning should lead one to absolve the Great Book of Allah from them. Moreover, if you look with the eye of fairness, you will see that the second of the first two interpretations is not free from remoteness, because the verse was preceded by the denial of what was attributed to Abraham, peace be upon him, and those mentioned with him. Therefore, it is fitting that the speech be addressed to the People of the Book, not the Messenger, may the blessings and peace of Allah be upon him, and his followers, for they acknowledge what Allah has informed them of and know it, so it cannot be assumed that they would conceal it. The addendum in which a departure from the apparent meaning is claimed is also [remote].

"And Allah is not unaware of what you do." This is a warning and a threat to the People of the Book. It means that Allah, the Exalted, does not leave your affair neglected; rather, He is the One who counts your deeds, surrounding everything you do or leave, and He will punish you for it with the severest punishment. This includes their concealment of His testimony and their fabrication against His prophets, peace be upon them. It is also recited as "what they do" (ya'malun) in the third person; the pronoun then refers either to those who concealed, considering the meaning, or to the People of the Book.