Tafsir of Al-Baqarah 2:26

The detailing of what was indicated by His saying, "Indeed, Allah is not shy to..." etc., concerning the hesitation that occurred between verification and suspicion, or concerning the judgment resulting from the striking of an example, is done after verifying the truth of its issuance from Him, the Exalted. The fa (ف) is used to indicate that what follows is a consequence of what preceded it, as if it were said—as it was said—about the striking of it: "As for those who..." etc. The state of the believers is presented first due to their nobility.

As for "Amma" (أما), according to the verifiers, it is a particle that contains the meaning of a condition, which is why the fa is usually obligatory with it. It also serves to emphasize the judgment attached to it and to detail something general that preceded it—either explicitly, implicitly, or even if not explicitly preceded, it remains present in the mind, even if only by estimation. Since this is contrary to the apparent meaning in many cases of its use, Al-Radi and Al-Murtada among the verifiers considered it to be an "overwhelming majority" (aghlabiyyah) usage. Sibawayh explained "As for Zayd, he is going" (أما زيد فذاهب) as "Whatever happens, Zayd is going." The intended meaning is not that it is synonymous with those nouns and verbs—for there is no parallel to that—but rather that when it indicates emphasis and the necessity of occurrence in the future, the outcome of the meaning becomes that. Since it indicates conditionality, a condition is estimated that points to the necessity of occurrence, which is the existence of something in the world, for nothing is devoid of it. Thus, what it is attached to is verified.

Since the meaning is what Sibawayh mentioned, and "ma" (مهما) is the subject (mubtada')—and noun-hood is necessary for it—and "yakun" (يكن) is the conditional verb, and the fa is usually necessary following it, "Amma" (أما) stands in its place, making the fa mandatory. The adhesion of the noun is an act of placing the necessary element in the position of that which necessitates it, while preserving its effect in the sentence. Originally, the fa was meant to enter upon the sentence as mentioned because it is the "jazaa" (response/consequence), but they disliked placing it directly after the conditional particle, so they entered it upon the predicate and substituted the subject for the condition in wording. Sometimes it is placed before the fa, as Al-Radi mentioned, from the parts of the "jazaa" such as the direct object, the adverb, and the state, among others they have counted—with the issues that accompany them. The praise and blame present in initiating the two sentences with it are not hidden.

The "Mawsul" (relative pronoun, "those who") refers to the group of believers known, just as the coming "Mawsul" refers to the group of tyrannical disbelievers, not those who believe in the striking of the example and those who disbelieve in it, for that would render the meaning corrupt. The pronoun in "annahu" (أنه - that it is) refers to the example, and it is the nearest antecedent, or to the "striking" (darbihi) understood from "that He strikes" (أن يضرب). It is also said: it refers to the cessation of shyness which originated from what passed. Others said: it refers to the Quran.

"Al-Haqq" (the Truth) is the opposite of falsehood. Originally, it is the verbal noun of "haqqa, yahuqqu" (from the categories of daraba and qatala) when it is necessary or established. Al-Raghib said: Its origin is correspondence and agreement; it means that which is brought into existence according to wisdom, or that which is brought into existence in accordance with it, and belief that corresponds to reality. It is also said: it is the judgment that corresponds [to reality]. It is applied to statements, beliefs, religions, and sects in terms of their inclusion of that. In common usage, no distinction is made between it and "truthfulness" (sidq), except that it has become common for the "contract/belief" that corresponds to reality, while "truthfulness" is for the statement that does so. Sometimes, a distinction is made between them by stating that "correspondence" in "Al-Haqq" is considered from the perspective of reality, whereas in "Sidq," it is from the perspective of the judgment. Its definition here is either for the "claim-based restriction" (qasr iddi'a'i)—as one says "This is the truth"—or for the claim of unity, and the subject (muhkam 'alayh) is conceded to have that attribute.

"From their Lord" (من ربهم) is either a predicate after a predicate or a state (hal) from the pronoun in "Al-Haqq." "Min" (from) is for the beginning of the metaphorical terminus. The exposure to the title of "Lordship" (rububiyyah) is to indicate that they confess the truthfulness of the Quran and of the blessings with which Allah, the Exalted, has favored them—which are the reasons for the revelation of this Book. This is what is appropriate for His saying, the Exalted: "We have revealed unto Our servant..." As for the disbelievers who deny His majesty and take others as lords besides Him, "Allah," the Exalted Name, is appropriate for their situation. ("And Allah warns you of Himself"). It is said that in this, along with the addition to the pronoun, is honor and an indication that the striking of the example is a form of upbringing (tarbiyah) for them and a guidance to what will bring them to their appropriate perfection. The sentence occupies the place of the two objects of "they know" according to the majority, and the place of the first, while the second is omitted according to Al-Akhfash—meaning: "they know its truthfulness to be established."

He, the Exalted, did not say "But those who disbelieve do not know" to match the former, because there is an exaggeration in blaming them and an alert in the best way to the perfection of their ignorance, because questioning is either due to lack of knowledge or for denial, and both indicate ignorance with a clear indication. Whoever says to musk, "Where is the fragrance?" its sweet scent belies him. It is said: He, the Exalted, did not say there "But those who believe say..." etc., as an indication that the believers were content with submission and obedience without needing to speak, while the disbelievers, due to their corruption and obstinacy, cannot tolerate secrets, for it is like hiding embers in dry grass. It is also said: "they say" does not explicitly indicate knowledge, which is the intended meaning, and among the disbelievers are the ignorant and the obstinate. "Saying..." is more comprehensive.

"Madha" (ماذا) has six aspects in their usage. First, that "Ma" (ما) is interrogative in the nominative position as a subject, and "Dha" (ذا) is in the sense of "alladhi" (which), and its predicate is "arada" (intended). He predicated the "known" with the "indefinite" here, based on Sibawayh's school of thought regarding the permissibility of this in interrogative nouns and others, making the indefinite a predicate for the relative pronoun. Second, that "Madha" as a whole is an interrogative, an object for "arada." These two aspects are eloquent, considered by all interpreters and grammarians in the verse. The questioning carries the possibility of astonishment, exclusion, and mockery.

("...darkness, some of it above some").

Third, that "Ma" is interrogative and "Dha" is a conjunction, not demonstrative and not relative. Fourth, that they both be treated as a relative pronoun, as in the poem: "What (madha) you knew, I will guard against..." etc. Fifth, that they both be treated as an indefinite noun that is described. Sixth, that "Ma" is interrogative and "Dha" is a demonstrative pronoun, a predicate for it.

"Irada" (Will), as Al-Raghib said, is transferred from "rada, yarudu" when one seeks/seeks something. It is originally a power composed of desire, thought, and hope. It was made a name for the inclination of the soul toward a thing while judging that it ought to be done or not done. Then it is used sometimes for the beginning, which is the soul's inclination, and sometimes for the end, which is the judgment that it ought to be done, etc. The intention of meaning from the word is mere purpose, which is another usage, and we are not concerned with that.

There is a mutual generality between "Will" and "Desire," because "Will" may relate to itself, unlike "Desire," which only relates to pleasures. A human may "will" the bitter medicine but not "desire" it, and may "desire" the delicious food but not "will" it if he knows destruction is in it. Sometimes he may desire and will. Among the theologians—the People of Truth and others—there are schools of thought in interpreting it. Al-Kalbi, Al-Najjar, and others are of the view that His, the Exalted, will for His actions is that He does them knowing them and the benefit contained in them, and for the actions of others, that He commanded and requested them; therefore, sins are not from His will, may He be exalted. The saying "What Allah wills, happens, and what He does not will, does not happen" is a rebuttal to them. Al-Jahiz and some Mu'tazilah and philosophers are of the view that His, the Exalted, will is His knowledge of all existing things from eternity to eternity, and how the order of existence ought to be so that it is in the most perfect way. It is sufficient for it to emanate from Him so that what exists is in accordance with what is known, in the best order, without purpose or longing. They call this knowledge "care" (inayah). The Karramiyyah, Abu Ali, and Abu Hashim went to the view that it is an attribute additional to knowledge, but it is emergent, existing in His essence, may He be exalted, according to the Karramiyyah, and existing but not in a locus according to the latter two. The true doctrine is that it is essential, eternal, existential, additional to knowledge, distinct from it and from Power; it specifies one of the two sides of the possible to occur, and it is the same as "weighing" (tarjih), which is one of the attributes of actions. As Al-Baydawi—may Allah, the Exalted, forgive him—said, no one went to that [view].

In the word "hadha" (this), there is a belittlement of the referred-to object, like its usage in "Is this the one whom Allah has sent as a Messenger?" Sometimes it is for glorification, depending on the requirements of the context. "Mathalan" (as an example) is in the accusative as a "tamyeez" (specification/distinction) from the ratio of astonishment and similar things toward the referred-to object. Al-Radi mentioned—and he bears the responsibility for it—that the pronoun and the demonstrative noun, if they are ambiguous, the distinction (tamyeez) comes from them, and the actor (amil) is the two of them due to their completeness by themselves, as it is impossible to add them. And if they are known, the distinction is from the ratio. It is possible that it is a "state" (hal) from the name of Allah or from "this," meaning: as a representative or as represented by it or by the striking of it.

These are two sentences running in the course of clarification and interpretation of the two sentences that began with "As for...," since they contain the fact that both groups are described as being "many," and that the knowledge of it being the truth is of the guidance by which the believers increase in light upon light, and the ignorance of its position is of the misguidance by which the ignorant increase in stumbling in their darkness. These two [sentences] increase what was contained in the former in clarity. Or, they are a response to refute what they claim regarding the lack of benefit in striking examples with lowly things, by clarifying that it contains grand wisdom and a beautiful goal, which is its being a means to the guidance of those prepared for guidance and the misguidance of those immersed in deviation. Some have stated that they are a response to "what," and the two verbs were placed in the place of the verbal noun to indicate continuous renewal. The imperfect tense is often used for this, so the expression with it here is an indication that misguidance and guidance continue to renew as long as time renews. It is said: their placement in the place of the verb that occurred in the question is an exaggeration in pointing to their occurrence, for desiring them is different from their actual occurrence. [The author] abstained from ordering "misguidance" alongside "guidance" in the thread of "Will" to avoid the impression that they are equal in attachment, which is not the case, for the intent of striking the example is reminding and guidance, as indicated by His, the Exalted, saying: "And We strike these examples for the people that perhaps they might reflect." As for misguidance, it is incidental, resulting from evil choice. "Misguidance" was mentioned before "guidance" in the order—despite mercy preceding anger and its precedence in rank and honor—because their statement stems from misguidance, and the fact that what is in the Quran is a cause for it is more in need of clarification, as its causality for guidance is extremely apparent; thus, prioritizing its clarification is more appropriate. Describing both groups as "many" is in view of themselves, otherwise the guided are few compared to the people of misguidance. It is far-fetched to carry the "many" of the guided to mean "many in qualities," by making the many subtle characteristics equivalent to many noble individuals, as it is said: "I have not seen the likes of men vary, in the eyes of the glorious, until a thousand were counted as one."

Especially when the literal "many" is mentioned with it. Furthermore, some allowed that His, the Exalted, saying: "He misleads many thereby..." etc., be in the position of an adjective for "example," so it would be from the speech of the disbelievers. Perhaps it is in the style of "walking along" (mumashah) with the believers, since they do not acknowledge that Allah misleads many and guides many through this example. Stranger than this is Ibn Atiyyah's permission that "He misleads many thereby" be from the speech of the disbelievers, and what follows it be from the speech of Allah, the Exalted; this is a confusion in the structure and a turning away from the apparent meaning without evidence. The attribution of misguidance to Him, the Exalted, is real, and its aspect has preceded, so there is no attention to what is in Al-Kashshaf, for it is a Mu'tazilite agitation.

The pronoun in "thereby" (bihi) refers to the example or the striking of it in both instances. It is said in the first that it refers to denial and in the second to affirmation, and the power of the speech points to that, though its weakness is not hidden. Zayd bin Ali recited "yudallu" and "yuhda" in both places here and later on as passive verbs. Ibn Abi Abla recited all three in the passive.

"The disobedient" (al-fasiqin) — may Allah, the Exalted, humble them — is in the accusative. "And He misleads thereby only the disobedient" is a tail-piece or an interpolation at the end of the speech, based on the opinion of those who allowed it. It is also said it is a "state" (hal). Al-Sialikuti prohibited coupling it to what precedes it, saying: because it is not correct for it to be a response and a clarification, while some allowed it as a completion to the answer and an extra specification for those intended for misguidance by clarifying their ugly qualities that lead to it. It is an indication that this is not an "initiatory misguidance" but rather a firming up of what they were upon of types of misguidance and an increase therein.

"Fasiqin" is the plural of "fasiq," which comes from "fisq." Legally, it is the exit of rational beings from obedience; thus it includes disbelief and anything below it of major or minor sins. In custom and usage, it is restricted to the commission of major sins, so it is not applied to the commission of other things except rarely, and with a qualifier. It is from their saying "fasaqa al-rutab" (the date exited its skin). Ibn al-A'rabi said: "Fisq" was not heard as a description of a human in the speech of the Arabs. Perhaps he meant in the speech of the Days of Ignorance (Jahiliyyah), as Ibn al-Anbari explicitly stated. Otherwise, Ru'bah—who is an Islamic poet whose speech is used as evidence—has said: "They go in the Najd and the Ghawr, deviating and wandering away from their path."

Moreover, it can be said that "fisq" did not exit in the verse from the [original] placement, because it was placed for the exit of bodies and the emergence of objects from those who are not rational, and the verse contains the exit of camels, which are not rational. The intent of "fasiqin" here is those who have exited the boundaries of faith. Restricting the misguidance to them, ordered upon the quality of "fisq" and the ugly things attributed to them, is to signify that this is what prepared them for misguidance and led them to it. For their disbelief, their turning away from the truth, and their insistence on falsehood diverted their gaze from reflection and contemplation until their ignorance became firmly rooted and their misguidance increased, so they denied and said what they said. "Al-Fasiqin" is in the accusative as the object of "misleads" or as an exception, with the object [of the exception] being omitted—meaning: "none of them except the disobedient," and it is not a "tafrigh" (emptying/exception from non-negated sentence) as in the verse: "Salim survived with difficulty, and none survived except the hilt of a sword and a garment." Abu al-Baqa prohibited that, but perhaps he is refuted by the verse.