Tafsir of Al-Baqarah 2:260

(And when Abraham said): This is an exposition regarding the strengthening of the believers, following the previous exposition. Because it differs from what preceded it—as we shall point out, God willing—the style has been altered. The temporal noun (idha - when) is governed by an implied verb, explicitly stated in the verse: (And remember when He made you successors). The obligation to remember the time is an obligation to remember what occurred within it by way of demonstration. Alternatively, it is governed by the forthcoming verb "said" (qala). The verification of this has already been presented.

(My Lord): A word of entreaty, the mention of which is initiated before the supplication as an exaggeration in preparing for the response.

(Show me): Derived from visual sight, which is transitive to two objects via the hamza of transfer; thus, the "ba" (in "bika") is its first object, and the verse: (How You give life to the dead) is in the place of its second object, which is suspended from it. Most grammarians hold this view. It was objected that visual sight does not allow for suspension, but it was answered that this was only mentioned by some grammarians, and Ibn Hisham refuted it, stating that suspension of it has been heard. In Sharh al-Tawdih, it is permitted that it be intellectual (knowing). Among people, there are those who do not consider "ma" (in "how") to be an instance of suspension at all, but rather interpret the phrase "how..." as a source (masdar) that functions as the object, as Ibn Malik stated regarding the verse: (And it became clear to you how We dealt with them).

Furthermore, the interrogation with "how" is only a question about something whose existence is already established for both the questioner and the questioned. The interrogation here is about the modality of the giving of life, which is established in the mind of the questioner. That is, "Make me see the manner of Your giving life to the dead." Abraham (peace be upon him) only asked this to transition from the rank of "knowledge of certainty" ('ilm al-yaqin) to the "eye of certainty" ('ayn al-yaqin). It is said in a report: "The report is not like the direct witnessing." This occurred when he saw a carcass being torn apart by the beasts of the land, the sea, and the air; this was stated by al-Hasan, al-Dahhak, and Qatadah, and it is narrated from the Household of the Prophet. It is narrated from Ibn Abbas, al-Suddi, and Sa'id ibn Jubayr that an angel gave him glad tidings that God had taken him as an intimate friend (khalil) and that He would answer his supplication and give life to the dead through his prayer, so he asked for this for that reason. It is narrated from Muhammad ibn Ishaq ibn Yasar that the cause of the question was the dispute with Nimrod regarding the resurrection, as Nimrod retorted to him when Abraham claimed that pardoning is a form of giving life, and threatened to kill him if he did not show him God bringing the dead to life. He then supplicated.

(He said): An resumption based on the question, and the pronoun refers to the Lord.

(Do you not believe?): A conjunction with an implied meaning—that is, "Do you not know and do you not believe that I am capable of giving life however I will, that you ask Me about it?" Or "that I have taken you as an intimate friend?" Or "that the tyrant will not kill you?"

(He said): That is, Abraham. (Yes): I have believed in that, (but) I asked (so that my heart may be at peace): That is, that it may find rest (my heart): by the association of concrete entities with belief and conviction that You are capable of that. Or "so that my heart may be at peace" regarding the intimate friendship, or that the tyrant will not kill me. On any interpretation, no deficiency returns to Abraham from this question, and it does not contradict the station of prophethood in the slightest. People are keen on questioning this verse, and what has been mentioned is the famous interpretation.

I am pleased with what some investigators have refined in this station, elaborating in defense of the Khalil (Abraham), peace be upon him. It is that the question was not due to doubt in a religious matter—God forbid—but rather a question about the manner of the resurrection so that he might possess knowledge of it. For the manner of the resurrection, it is not a condition of faith to have comprehensive knowledge of its form. Thus, the Khalil (peace be upon him) sought knowledge of that which faith is not dependent upon knowing. This is evidenced by the question arriving in the form of "how," the subject of which is questioning the condition. An analogy to this is someone saying, "How does Zayd rule over the people?" He does not doubt that Zayd rules over them, but he is asking about the manner of his rule, the existence of which is known. If he were asking about the reality of it, he would have said, "Does Zayd rule over the people?"

Since delusion might toy with some thoughts, attributing to Abraham—far be it from him—a doubt from this verse, the Prophet (peace be upon him) cut off the root of this delusion by saying, by way of humility: "We have more right to doubt than Abraham." That is, we did not doubt, and therefore Abraham is even more entitled not to doubt. It is also said that speech with the superlative (af'al) here is for the purpose of negating the meaning from both the Beloved and the Khalil (peace be upon them); that is, there is no doubt among us at all. From this category is: (Are they better or the people of Tubba?), meaning there is no goodness in either group.

The confirmation ("Yes") arrived afterward because that form, even if it is used ostensibly for questioning the manner (as you know), may also be used for expressing incapacity. For example, if a claimant asserts that he can carry a heavy weight, and you are certain of his inability to do so, you say: "Show me how you carry this," intending that he is unable to carry it. The Almighty, knowing the Khalil was innocent of hovering around the sanctuary of that meaning, intended to make him speak in the response with words that would repel that linguistic possibility in the first expression, so that his faith might be pure through an expression that stipulates it, which everyone who hears it understands with an understanding that no doubt enters. The meaning of "peace" at that time is the stillness of the heart from wandering among the possible modalities of the resurrection through the emergence of the witnessed representation. The non-attainment of this peace beforehand does not contradict the attainment of belief in the power to give life in the most perfect manner. I do not see that the witnessing of the modality added anything to the faith required of him, peace be upon him; it only yielded a matter that is not obligatory to believe in.

From this, you learn that Ali (may God honor his countenance) did not establish for himself a rank in faith higher than that of the Khalil by saying: "If the veil were lifted for me, I would not increase in certainty," as the ignorant among the Shi'a have thought, and many of our companions who have not grasped what we have refined have struggled to repel what might be imagined from the words of the Khalil and the Prince regarding the superiority of the latter over the former. Some repel it by saying that certainty can be subject to denial, as per the verse: (And they denied them, while their souls were certain of them), whereas peace (tranquility) is not subject to that. This was attributed to the Proof of Islam, al-Ghazali, but there is some reservation about it in the heart. Others have posited in their defense that the station of prophethood is different from the station of the Siddiqiyya (truthfulness). Thus, the station of prophethood has a peace and a lack of peace according to its nature, and the station of Siddiqiyya has a peace and a lack of peace according to its nature as well.

The peace of the station of prophethood belonged to the Seal of Prophets (peace be upon him), as he unveiled it with the saying of the Almighty: (Do you not see your Lord, how He extended the shadow), according to what the people of taste know from the verse. The readiness of Abraham and Moses (peace be upon them) was directed toward seeking that peace, as they demonstrated regarding themselves with "My Lord, show me how You give life to the dead" and "My Lord, show me (so that) I may look at You." The peace of the station of Siddiqiyya belonged to the Siddiqs (most truthful ones) of the nation of Muhammad (peace be upon him), as the Imam of the Siddiqs (may God honor his countenance) showed regarding himself by saying: "If the veil were lifted..." The readiness of the Siddiqs of all the other prophets was directed toward seeking that peace. Thus, the superiority of Muhammad (peace be upon him) over all his brothers among the prophets is established, and the superiority of the Siddiqs (of this nation) over all the Siddiqs of their nations is established. It is not established for his Siddiqs—due to their finding of their peace—to have superiority over the prophets at the time of their (the prophets') loss of their own peace, because the peace they lacked is not the same as the peace the Siddiqs found. They only lacked the peace appropriate to the station of prophethood, and the Siddiqs did not find that kind of peace; they only found a peace appropriate to the station of Siddiqs. If the prophets were satisfied with the like of it, it would have been attained for them, but it is many degrees below that.

The Greatest Siddiq (may God be pleased with him) acknowledged this deficiency when it reached him from the Messenger of God (peace be upon him) that he said: "I have moments of inadvertence (sahw)," and he said: "I wish I were the inadvertence of Muhammad (peace be upon him)," as he knew that what passed from the Messenger of God (peace be upon him) from his noble self as inadvertence was above the highest alertness of the Siddiq. For the good deeds of the righteous are the sins of those brought near, and the good deeds of those brought near are the sins of the prophets. This is better than what preceded.

Some of the Sufis, like the ignorant of the Shi'a, have committed themselves to the apparent meaning of both statements and claimed that the saints of this nation and its Siddiqs are of a higher rank than the prophets, even if they attained the station of Siddiqiyya, arguing based on what is narrated from the Lordly Imam, my master and support, Abd al-Qadir al-Jilani (may his secret be sanctified), that he said: "O assembly of prophets, the difference between us and you is in titles, and we have been given what you were not given." And by some expressions of the Great Shaykh (may his secret be sanctified) that state this. You know that committing to this and saying it is a breach of the consensus of the Muslims and contradicts the definitive proofs regarding the superiority of the prophets over all other creatures combined. It is close to being disbelief, or rather, it has been said to be so. As for what is narrated from Shaykh Abd al-Qadir (may his secret be sanctified), it is something whose transmission from him in any reliable book is not established. What is attributed to the Great Shaykh (may his secret be sanctified) is contradicted by other expressions of his, such as his saying—which you know is his own biography, counting himself among the greatest Siddiqs, or rather the Seal of Special Sainthood—"The Muhammadan station opened for me a pinhole's worth of the station of prophethood as a manifestation, not as an entry, so I almost burned." Even if we assume the admission of what was narrated from whom it was narrated, and the argument that there is no strong opposition, we can say: that statement was issued by the speaker during his annihilation in the Muhammadan Reality and the Ahmadi Essence; thus, the tongue then was its tongue, and the saying was its saying. It did not issue from him during the witnessing of his self and stopping at his own rank. This is other than what the Shi'a went to, and it is far removed from it by many stages. Perhaps the occasion will lead to verifying it more perfectly than this, God willing, for the treasuries of thought—all praise is to God—are full, and for every station, there is a saying.

Al-Zamakhshari mentioned that the intended meaning of "peace" here is the knowledge that has no room for doubt, which is the knowledge of necessity, as opposed to the knowledge of inference, where such doubt is possible. This was objected to on the grounds that knowledge dependent on a cause cannot be imagined to have doubt as long as its cause is mentioned in the mind of the knower. Rather, what is said to be subject to doubt absolutely is belief, even if it is correct and its cause remains in the memory. By this, correct belief is ranked lower than knowledge. It was answered that this is based on defining knowledge as a quality that necessitates a distinction not admitting of the opposite in any way, as mentioned by Ibn al-Hajib in his Mukhtasar, and it has been critiqued as it has been critiqued, so reflect upon it. The "lam" in "li-yatma'inna" is the "lam" of purpose (causality), and the verb is in the accusative case after it by the implication of "an" (to), and it is not indeclinable as al-Samin slipped into thinking. The object of the "lam" is omitted, as we have pointed out—the omission of that from which the correction is made. It is said that the object is "show me," but I do not see that as anything. The past tense of the verb is "itma'anna," on the scale of "iqsha'arra." It is disputed whether it is inverted or not. Sibawayh's school holds that it is inverted from "it'amana," where the "ta" is the radical (fa), the hamza is its middle (ayn), and the mim is its final (lam); so the final (which is the mim) was moved before the middle (which is the hamza), so its scale is "ifla'ala." Al-Jurmi's school holds that it is not inverted, as if saying "it'amana" and "itma'anna" are two independent lexical roots. Its source (masdar) is tuma'nina, with a sukūn on the mim and a fatha on the hamza. It is also said: tuma'nina with a lightened hamza, which is a regular analogy for the Kufans, but it is contrary to the analogy of sources for everyone else, as the analogy for itma'anna would be itmi'nan.

(He said): That is, the Lord. (So take): The "fa" is for the response of an omitted condition, i.e., "If you wish that, then take..." (four of the birds): The famous view is that it is a collective noun like rakb (riders) and safar (travelers). It is said: rather, it is the plural of ta'ir (bird), like tajir (merchant) and tujjar (merchants), and Abu al-Hasan held this. It is also said: it is a lightened form of tayr with a shadda. Abu al-Baqa said: it is originally the verbal noun of tara, yatiru (to fly), then this genus was named by it. The "ta" (femininity marker) was appended to its number because it is considered masculine, and a collective noun for that which does not have intellect is both masculine and feminine. The prepositional phrase is connected to an omitted element that functions as an adjective for the preceding noun, or it is connected to "take."

It is narrated from Ibn Abbas (may God be pleased with both of them) that they were the peacock, the peacock-pheasant, the rooster, and the dove. From Mujahid: instead of the peacock-pheasant, a crow; in another report, instead of the dove, a duck; and in another, an eagle. The specification of birds for this is because they are closest to man in terms of seeking livelihood and shelter. For this reason, it occurs in the Hadith: "If you relied upon God Almighty with true reliance, He would provide for you just as He provides for the birds; they go out hungry in the morning and return with full bellies." Also, because they are more encompassing of animal characteristics, and because of the ease of performing the required division and separation, and because of the abundance of parts such as feathers, so in bringing them to life there is a greater manifestation of power. And because of the characteristic of flying in the sky, and since the concern of Abraham (peace be upon him) was a tendency toward the high direction and reaching the Kingdom (Malakut), his miracle was appropriate to his concern.

(Then incline them): Hamza and Ya'qub read it with a kasra on the sad, while the others read it with a damma, along with the lightening—from sara, yasuru and yasiru, two dialects meaning "to cut" or "to incline," because it is shared between them, as Abu Ali mentioned. Al-Farra said: The damma is shared between the two meanings, and the kasra is for "to cut" only. It is said the kasra is for "to cut" and the damma is for "to incline." From al-Farra: sarahunna is an inversion of sarahunna (he cut them from something). The correct view is that it is Arabic; from Ikrimah that it is Nabataean, from Qatadah that it is Abyssinian, and from Wahb that it is Roman. If the meaning is "incline them," then the verse "to you" is connected to it. If the meaning is "cut them," then it is connected to "take," considering its implication of the meaning of cutting. Abu al-Baqa chose for it to be a state (hal) from the implied object, meaning: "Cut them as being brought close and inclined to you."

Ibn Hisham, following others, claimed that it is not correct to connect the prepositional phrase to surhunna absolutely unless a genitive is implied (i.e., "to yourself"), arguing that a non-cognitive verb operating on an attached pronoun cannot be transitive to a detached pronoun. This was refuted by saying that this is only prevented when it is transitive by itself, whereas that which is transitive by a preposition is permissible, as the scholars of Arabic have stated. Ibn Abbas (may God be pleased with both of them) read fassirhunna with a shadda on the ra, with damma or kasra on the sad, from sarra if he gathered them; the ra is either damma for follow-through, fatha for lightening, or kasra to avoid the meeting of two vowelless letters. From him also: fassirhunna from tasriya, with fatha on the sad and kasra on the shadda-ra, and its origin is tasrara, so one of the letters of gemination was replaced with a ya. It is originally from "I kept the sheep," i.e., I did not milk them for days until the milk gathered in their udders. Then it was used in the mere sense of gathering, i.e., "Gather them and draw them to yourself so that you may contemplate them and know their condition in detail, until you know after the resurrection that not one part of their parts moved from its first position at all."

(Then place): That is, cast or set after slaughtering them and mixing their flesh, feathers, and blood, as Qatadah said, (on every mountain): that you are able to place upon. He did not specify that for him, as is narrated from Mujahid and al-Dahhak. It is narrated from Ibn Abbas, al-Hasan, and Qatadah that the mountains were four, from Ibn Jurayj and al-Suddi that they were seven, and from Abu Abdullah (may God be pleased with him) that they were ten.

(from them a part): That is, a piece or portion, a quarter, a seventh, a tenth, or other than that. It is read juz'an with two dammas, and jaz'an by dropping the hamza for lightening, then shadda at the stop, then treating the connection like the stop. It is an object for "place," and the prepositional phrase "from them" preceding it is connected to the verb. It is also permissible for "on every mountain" to be a second object for "place" if it is in the sense of "set," and "from them" is a state for "a part," because it is originally an adjective for the indefinite that preceded it.

(Then call them): That is, summon them. Ibn al-Mundhir excerpted from al-Hasan that he said: He (peace be upon him) called out, "O torn bones, scattered flesh, and severed veins, gather! God Almighty returns your spirits into you." The bone leaped to the bone, the feather flew to the feather, and the blood flowed to the blood until every bird returned with its blood, flesh, and feathers. Then God Almighty revealed to Abraham: "You asked Me how I give life to the dead, and I created the earth and placed in it four spirits: the North wind, the East wind, the South wind, and the West wind. When the Day of Resurrection comes, a blower will blow in the Trumpet, and those who are on the earth among the slain and the dead will gather, just as the four birds gathered from the four mountains." Then he read: (Your creation and your resurrection will not be but as that of a single soul). From Mujahid: he called them by the name of the God of Abraham: "Come!"

It was problematized that the invocation of inanimate objects is inconceivable. It was answered that it is of the category of the invocation of creation. It is said: there is an ellipsis in the verse, as if it were said: "Cut them, then place on every mountain a part of each one of them, then God Almighty will give them life, and when He gives them life, call them, (they will come to you in haste)." So the calling only occurred after the giving of life. It is not hidden that the traditions, along with what is in them of artificiality, do not support this.

Greater than this in corruption is what was said: he placed on every mountain of them a live bird, then called them, and they came; for that is something that invalidates the benefit of the request and contradicts the authentic reports, for most of them clearly state that he called them dead with scattered parts. In some of them, their heads were in his hand, and when he called them, every part of them came to its owner until they became carcasses, then they approached their heads, and every carcass joined its head, so each one of them returned to what it was upon of form. "In haste" (sa'yan) is a state for the subject of "they come to you," i.e., "hastening and speeding," or "possessing haste by flying or walking." It is said: the application of "haste" (sa'y) to flying is metaphorical. It is permissible that it be in the accusative as a verbal noun, like "I sat sitting." From the strange things is what is narrated from al-Nadr ibn Shumayl: I asked al-Khalil ibn Ahmad about the verse "they will come to you in haste": "Is it said of a bird that when it flies it 'haste-d' (sa'a)?" He said: "No." I said: "Then what is its meaning?" He said: "Its meaning is: they will come to you while you are hastening." This is from the artificiality that is not needed in the slightest.

The Almighty only confined the narrative to the narration of His commands—Exalted be His Majesty—without referring to the compliance of His Khalil (peace be upon him) or what resulted from it of the traces of His power, of which you have learned a small amount, to indicate that the result of those matters from those majestic commands and the impossibility of their non-occurrence is so clear and apparent that there is no need to mention it at all. Some claimed that the Khalil (peace be upon him) did not do anything of what the apparent speech necessitated, and that the commands in it are like them in your saying to someone who does not know the composition of ink, for example: "Take such-and-such, grind them, cast such-and-such upon them, and place that in the sun for a period of days, then use it and you will find it good ink." So it does not necessitate compliance if the purpose is merely teaching. The witnessing here is intellectual (knowing), as narrated from Sharh al-Tawdih, and Abraham obtained complete knowledge just by the description of the modality, and his heart was at peace and his core settled. For this reason, God Almighty did not mention what resulted from these commands of those matters, did not refer to the compliance, and did not care to signal it with a "said" or a state. Abu Muslim inclined to this opinion, so he denied the story also and said: When Abraham (peace be upon him) requested the giving of life to the dead from his Lord Almighty and He showed him a sensory example, the matter was made easy for him. The intended meaning of "incline them" is "tame them" and "accustom them to answering," i.e., accustom the four birds so that if you call them, they answer you while alive. The purpose of it is to mention a sensory example of the return of spirits to bodies by way of ease.

It is not hidden that this is contrary to the consensus of the Muslims and a kind of delirium that people of religion do not rely upon, and a turning away from what the apparent meaning of the verse—supported by authentic reports and weightier traditions—necessitates to what ears reject and no summoner invites to. The truth is to follow the community, and the hand of God is with them.

In the verse is evidence for those who hold that the resurrection of the dead on the Day of Judgment is by gathering the scattered parts and sending the spirit into them after their assembly, and it is not of the category of restoring the purely non-existent, because the Almighty clarified the modality by separation, then gathering, and restoring the spirit. Nothing was non-existent there except the formal part and the assembly-form, not the material parts. Some also argued with it that the body-structure is not a condition for life, because He Almighty made each of those parts and portions alive and capable of haste and running. The Judge (al-Qadi) said: The verse indicated that the structure is necessary, as he made the cutting necessitate the invalidation of life. It was answered that the occurrence of the association does not indicate the necessity of the association, and the disconnection in some states indicates that the association, where it occurred, was not obligatory. Since the verse indicated the obtaining of the understanding of the call for those parts, it was definitive evidence that the structure is not a condition for life, though there is contemplation in this.

It is famous that it is an argument against those who hold that faith does not increase or decrease, and it is apparent that it increases in quality, even if it does not increase in quantity. But what the accountable person is tasked with is the certitude attained by reflection and inference—some call it "knowledge of certainty"—not the certitude that is by witnessing, called "the eye of certainty," for in tasking [man] with that is hardship in religion. You know that there is hesitation in the verse's indication of the increase and decrease of faith based on the aspect we indicated as our choice, as is not hidden. In it also is evidence for the merit of the Khalil (peace be upon him), the blessing of supplication in prayer, and good manners in questioning, as He Almighty showed him what he asked for on the spot in the easiest of manners. He also showed Uzair (peace be upon him) what He showed him after he had caused him to die for a hundred years.

(And know that God is Almighty): Prevailing over His command, (Wise): Possessing profound wisdom in His actions. Thus, the building of His actions upon habitual causes is not due to His inability to break habits, but because it contains wisdom and benefits. It is narrated that when God Almighty fulfilled for Abraham (peace be upon him) what he asked, He said to him: "O Abraham, We have shown you how We give life to the dead; so show Us how you put the living to death," signaling what He would command him to do of sacrificing his son (peace be upon him). It is of the category of being at ease with the Khalil, and the circle of intimate friendship is wide, but the guardians of the traditionists have not mentioned this report, and it has no narration in the books of hadith at all.

(And when Abraham said, My Lord, show me how You give life to the dead): i.e., the dead hearts by the disease of ignorance. (He said: Do you not believe?): i.e., do you not know that with a knowledge of certainty? (He said: Yes): I know that, (but) for visual witnessing, there is a subtle meaning for which the Khalil asked for witnessing, which is what is signaled by His saying: (So that my heart may be at peace), which is Your throne. (He said: Take four of the birds): an allusion to the birds of the inner self that are in the cage of the body, which are four from the birds of the Unseen: the Intellect, the Heart, the Soul (Nafs), and the Spirit (Ruh). (Incline them to yourself): that is, draw them close and slaughter them. So slaughter the bird of the Intellect with the knife of love at the door of the Kingdom (Malakut), slaughter the bird of the Heart with the knife of longing at the door of the Omnipotence (Jabarut), slaughter the bird of the Soul with the knife of passion in the fields of Oneness, and slaughter the bird of the Spirit with the knife of incapacity in the wilderness of the Might of the Lordly secrets.

(Then place on every mountain of them a part): So place the Intellect on the mountain of Greatness until the lights of the dominion of Lordship accumulate upon it, so it becomes described by them to know Me by Me after its annihilation in Me. Place the Heart on the mountain of Pride until I clothe it in the splendor of My holiness, so it wanders in the wilderness of contemplation, described by the pure light of love. Place the Soul on the mountain of Might until I clothe it in the light of Greatness, so it becomes tranquil upon the flow of My Lordship over it, so it does not dispute with Me in servitude and does not seek the attributes of Lordship. Place the Spirit on the mountain of Eternal Beauty until I clothe it in the light of light, the might of might, and the holiness of holiness, so it is at ease in intoxication, tranquil in sobriety, passionate in expansion, and firm in the manifestations.

(Then call them): And summon them with the voice of the secret of passion, (they will come to you in haste): to the pure servitude with the beauty of Oneness. (And know that God is Almighty): He makes you mighty by your recognition of these meanings and your awareness of His ancient attributes, (Wise): in His appearance with the wonders of manifestation for the secrets of your inner self.

It may be said: He signaled by the four birds the four powers that prevent the servant from the station of witnessing and the observation of real life. It occurred in a trace that they were a peacock, a rooster, a crow, and a dove. Perhaps the peacock is an allusion to pride, the rooster to lust, the crow to greed, and the dove to love of the world because of its affinity for the nest and the tower. In another trace, instead of the dove, a duck, and in another, an eagle. Perhaps the first is an allusion to the prevailing gluttony, and the second to long expectations. The meaning of (Incline them to yourself) at that time is: gather them and incline them to yourself by controlling them and preventing them from going out to seek their pleasures and yearning for their familiarities. In the trace, it is that he (peace be upon him) was ordered to slaughter them, pluck their feathers, mix their flesh and blood by pounding, and keep their heads with him, meaning: prevent them from their actions, remove their forms from the soul, and suppress their impulses, natures, and habits by discipline, and their origins remain in him. Then he was ordered to place on every mountain of the mountains that were in his presence—which are the four elements that are the pillars of his body—a part of them. It is as if he (peace be upon him) was ordered to suppress them and put them to death so that only their origins remained, which are implanted in existence and the materials prepared in the natures of the elements that are in him. In a report, the mountains were seven, so based on this, it alludes to the seven members that are parts of the body. In another, they were ten, and upon it, there may be an allusion to the outer and inner senses. He Almighty signaled by the command to call that if those attributes were alive with their (original) life, they would be unyielding, wild, and refusing to accept the command; but if they were put to death, they would be alive with the real life bestowed after annihilation and effacement, which is the life of the servant. Upon that, they would be obedient and submissive; whenever they were called, they would come in haste and comply willingly. That is the great success.