Tafsir of Al-Baqarah 2:28

"How can you disbelieve in Allah" — This is a turning (iltifat) toward addressing them directly after enumerating their ugly deeds, which demand His—Exalted is He—increased wrath upon them. Denial, when directed at the one addressed, is more eloquent and deterrent than when directed at an absent party, for it is possible the message may not reach the latter.

"How" (kayfa) is a noun that is either:

1. An adverbial (zarf), attributed to Sibawayh, in which case it is always in the accusative state.
2. Not an adverbial, attributed to al-Akhfash, in which case it is in the nominative state with an initial noun (mubtada') and in the accusative with others.

Ibn Malik claimed that no one holds it to be an adverbial, as it is neither time nor place. However, because it is explained by your saying "in any condition," the name of the adverbial is applied to it metaphorically, and Ibn Hisham deemed this sound. The entry of the genitive preposition (jarr) upon it is anomalous. It is used mostly for inquiry; the conditional (shart) use is rare, and the jussive (jazm) is unheard of, though the Kufans, Qutrub, and others permitted it by analogy.

It is replaced or answered—when accompanied by a verb that does not require an object—in the accusative, or in the nominative if it is an initial noun, and in the accusative if it is a modifier (nasikh). Ibn Muhib claimed it comes as a conjunction, but that is nothing. Here, it is for inquiry, combined with denial and astonishment at their disbelief, by denying the condition that is specifically associated with it: knowledge of the Creator. Ignorance of Him is a reflection of this, for one sees it divided into two types: the obstinate disbeliever and the ignorant disbeliever. Thus, the meaning is: "Are you disbelieving in the state of knowledge, or in the state of ignorance?" while you are aware of this narrative—a narrative that necessitates knowledge of a Creator described with attributes of perfection and transcendent of deficiency. This is a powerful deterrent against disbelief, and the occurrence of the act from one capable of it, despite a powerful deterrent, is a occasion for astonishment and rebuke.

It implies that their disbelief is out of obstinacy, which is more eloquent in condemnation. It also contains exaggeration not found in simply saying "You disbelieve," because the denial, which is a negation, has been directed at the condition from which they cannot be separated; negating the condition necessitates the negation of its possessor by way of demonstration. If you wish, you may generalize the condition and deny that there is any state in which their disbelief exists, even though every existent must exist in some state, which necessitates denying the existence of disbelief by that same path.

It does not hold that inquiry is impossible for the Subtle, the All-Aware—mighty is His affair—because:

1. If it is in the sense of requesting information, we do not concede its impossibility, for it may be to alert and rebuke the addressee, and it does not require ignorance on the part of the inquirer.
2. The combination of denial and astonishment with it—both of which are metaphorical meanings of the interrogative—does not entail combining reality and metaphor if the inquiry is the literal meaning of the form, nor combining two metaphorical meanings if it is itself metaphorical, because the understanding comes by way of implication and necessity, not from the core of the center. Or, it is a metaphor upon a metaphor due to the fame of the interrogative in the sense of inquiry, such that it is as if it were its reality.
3. If it is in the sense of an interrogative, we say there is no defect in its issuance from One who knows what is being inquired about, because, as stated in al-Itqan, it is a request for understanding—either the understanding of the inquirer, which is impossible for Him—Exalted is He—or the occurrence of the understanding in one who does not understand, whomever that may be, and there is no impossibility in that coming from Him—Exalted is He. Likewise, there is no impossibility in the occurrence of astonishment from Him—Exalted is He. Rather, they have said: when astonishment comes from Allah—Mighty and Majestic is He—no dilemma arises, for it is directed toward the addressee, or its ultimate goal is intended, or it returns to the school of the predecessors (Salaf).

He—Exalted is He—brought "you disbelieve" (takfurun) and did not bring the past tense, even if the disbelief had already occurred from them, because it is the continuous and the present tense that indicates persistence. This is also so that the speech does not contain a rebuke for those from whom disbelief occurred but who then believed, like the majority of the Companions—may Allah be pleased with them.

"And you were dead, and He brought you to life; then He will cause you to die, then He will bring you to life, then to Him you will be returned."

Everything before "then" is a circumstantial clause (hal) describing the pronoun in "you disbelieve," with the implied meaning of "already" (qad) inevitably—contrary to those who were mistaken about this. The meaning is: "How can you disbelieve," while He has already created you? He expressed creation in this way. Since it is ingrained in the dispositions and created in the intellects that there is no creator except Allah, it is a circumstance that demands that disbelief not coexist with it. The sentences that follow are independent, having no connection to the circumstantial clause; hence, it differed from what preceded it in particle and form.

You may also consider all the sentences included within the circumstantial clause, which is, in reality, knowledge of the narrative. It is as if it were said: "How can you disbelieve while you are aware of this narrative, its beginning and its end?" It does not matter that it contains the past and the future, as neither can properly function as a circumstantial clause. This view was favored by a group of scholars.

Life is a power that follows specific moderation, from which all other powers emanate. It is said to be the sensory power. A paralyzed limb is alive; otherwise, decay would quickly overtake it. Lack of feeling in reality does not prove the lack of the power, as it is possible for the effect to be missing due to an obstacle. It is as if they intended by this the power of touch, for the distinctness of life from other senses is manifest, as it is specific to one member over another, and it is missing in some types of animals, and because it would entail a plurality of life by type in one person if it were said that life is the sum of each of them, and their synthesis in the external if their sum is intended. It is applied metaphorically to the vegetative power, as it is one of its pioneers and prerequisites, and to those human virtues like intellect, knowledge, and faith, insofar as they are its perfection and ultimate end. Death is the opposite of it at every level, and all are in the Book of Allah—Exalted is He.

His life—He is glorified and exalted—is the validity of His being described with knowledge and power, or a meaning subsisting in His essence that necessitates that. How far is dust from the Lord of lords!

Furthermore, regarding what is intended by this noble verse, people have various opinions:

1. Reported from Ibn Abbas, Ibn Mas'ud, and Mujahid—may Allah be pleased with them—is that the first death is the preceding non-existence, the first life is the creation, the second death is the one known in the worldly abode, and the second life is the resurrection for the Day of Judgment. Some scholars chose this and claimed that His saying "and you were dead" and attributing the final cause of death to Himself—Exalted is He—strengthens this.
2. Others chose that their being dead is from the time of their settlement as sperm in the wombs until the completion of the subsequent stages; the first life is the blowing of the soul after those stages; the causing of death is the known one; and the life thereafter is the resurrection on the day the Trumpet is blown. This is perhaps closer than the first. The application of "the dead" to those bodies is metaphorical if death is interpreted as the absence of life from one who was characterized by it, and it is literal if it is interpreted as the absence of life from that which is its nature to have it, as Salikuti said. It is understood from the speech of some that it is in the sense of "like the dead" according to the second interpretation. If it is interpreted as the absence of life absolutely, it is literal, which is the most famous view.
3. The most far-fetched of the sayings, in my opinion, is carrying the first death to the known one after the expiration of the term, and the first life to that which occurs for the questioning in the grave. Thus, the past would be placed in the position of the future because of the certainty of its occurrence. There is no evidence in the verse for the chosen view regarding the denial of the punishment of the grave, for the limit of what is in it is the lack of mention of the life that validates it. We do not use this aspect of it as evidence for it; we have—praise be to Allah—various proofs for that matter. Likewise, there is no evidence for the anthropomorphists (Mujassima) who say that He—Exalted is He—is in a place in "then to Him you will be returned," because the return is the gathering at the Place of Assembly where none but He governs the judgment, and the command that day is with Allah. Beyond this is speech that is not hidden from the gnostics.

In His saying "you will be returned" (turja'un) in the passive voice rather than "He will return you" (yarji'ukum), it is appropriate for the context to observe the harmony of the verse endings, alongside the thematic harmony for what preceded. Hence, it is said that the reading of the majority is more eloquent than the reading of Ya'qub, Mujahid, and a group: "you will return" (tarji'un) in the active voice.

It does not hold that if the verse were an address to the disbelievers and the sense of knowledge was kept in mind, the address to them with what comes after "then" and "then" would be prevented because they do not know that. Their capacity for knowledge, due to the clarity of the proofs—both cosmic and self-contained—and the brightness of their lights, both rational and transmitted, is treated as equivalent to knowledge in removing the excuse. Through this, what was said—that they are doubtful about attributing the aforementioned to Him, so how can that address be realized—is also refuted.

It is possible, as has been said, that the address in the verse is to both the believer and the disbeliever. For when He—Exalted is He—explained the proofs of monotheism from His saying—Exalted is He—"O mankind" to "do not make," and the proofs of prophethood from "And if you are" to "if you are," and threatened with "if you do not," and promised with "give glad tidings to those who believe," etc., He confirmed this by enumerating the general blessings from His saying "And you were dead" to "they are therein eternal," and the specific ones from "O Children of Israel" to "whatever we abrogate." He deemed the occurrence of disbelief, with those blessings present, as ugly, as a rebuke to the disbeliever and a confirmation for the believer. He considered causing death a blessing, for it is a bridge to eternal life and the meeting of the lover with the Beloved. It may also be said that what is enumerated for them is the meaning extracted from the narrative as a whole.

From the symbolic interpretation: Ibn 'Ata said: "And you were dead" in the outward, "and He brought you to life" by the unveiling of secrets, "then He will cause you to die" from the attributes of servitude, "then He will bring you to life" with the attributes of lordship. Faris said: "And you were dead" by your witnesses, "and He brought you to life" by His witnesses, "then He will cause you to die" from your witness, "then He will bring you to life" by the standing of the Truth, "then to Him you will be returned" from all that you possess, so you shall be His.