Tafsir of Al-Baqarah 2:32

(They said: "Exalted are You! We have no knowledge except what You have taught us.")

This is an inception (isti’naf) occurring in the place of a response, as if it were said: "What did they say at that moment? Did they absolve themselves of the responsibility for what they were tasked with, or not?" Thus, it is said: "(They said)..." etc. Many have mentioned that when sentences beginning with "they said" are sequentially arranged in meaning, the most correct approach is not to insert the conjunction [wa], as the sequential meaning is sufficient. This occurs frequently in Surah Ash-Shu'ara; indeed, the Qur'an is filled with it.

Regarding "Subhanaka" (Exalted are You): It is said to be a verbal noun (masdar) whose verb is sabbaḥa (in the light form), meaning "to declare free of imperfection." It is almost never used except in the genitive case, either annexed to the object or the subject, and it is in the accusative case due to an implicitly understood verb that is mandatory to omit. The saying "Subḥanahu, then subḥanan..." and our previous citation of "the sabbah of Al-Judi and Al-Jamad" is anomalous, like the verse: Exalted are You, O Allah, Possessor of [all] glorification.

Its occurrence as a vocative is something Al-Kisa’i claimed, but he has no proof for it. A group has held that it is a proper noun for tasbih—in the sense of declaring perfection—and not a masdar of the verb sabbaḥa, meaning "he said: Subḥan Allah," so as to avoid a circular argument. Furthermore, the denotation of the former is a word, whereas the denotation of the latter is a meaning. They argued for this using the line: I said, when his pride came to me: Exalted is the One from Alqamah Al-Fakhir. For if it were not a proper noun, it would have been required to be declinable (sarf), because the alif and nun in non-adjectives only prevent declension when they are part of a proper name. This was answered by stating that in Subḥana, the annexed noun (mudaf ilayh) is omitted—i.e., Subḥana Allah—and it is intended as a proper noun, yet the annexed noun was kept in its state to observe its most common usage, which is the absence of nunation (tanwin).

It is also said that "min" is extra and the annexation to what follows it is for the sake of mockery and derision. Strange is the statement of some that the meaning of "Subhanaka" is "an act of declaring You free of imperfection after another," as they say in the talbiyah: "a response after a response." Apparent in this view is the necessity for it to be a dual, its singular being subḥan, and that it would not be in the accusative but in the nominative, and that the nun would not have been dropped for the sake of annexation, but rather its fatha would be maintained. Subḥana Allah for those who say this!

The purpose of this reply is to acknowledge inability regarding the matter of vicegerency and a shortcoming in knowing the names in the most eloquent manner. It is as if they said: "We have no knowledge except what You have taught us; You did not teach us the names, so how could we know them?" This implies that their question was merely for inquiry, as they had no knowledge except by way of instruction. Included in this is their knowledge of the wisdom of the vicegerency mentioned earlier; this, too, was by way of instruction. Thus, the question resulting from it is a question of an inquirer, not an objector. It is also an expression of praise for Him, Exalted is He, for what He bestowed upon them, alongside the utmost humility, observance of etiquette, and the abandonment of any claim. For all these reasons, they did not say, "We have no knowledge of the names," despite it being what the outward context might suggest.

Whoever claims there is a lack of infallibility ('ismah) considers this repentance. The fairness of the matter is that it resembles repentance, but not for a sin that violates infallibility; rather, it is for leaving what is more appropriate (tark al-awla) in relation to their lofty stature and high status. For what befits their state, under all circumstances, is to refrain from inquiry and wait, anticipating the revelation of the true reality.

As for "Ma" (what), the majority consider it a relative pronoun whose referent ('a'id) is omitted. It is either in the nominative case as a substitute (badal) or the accusative case as an exception (istithna'). Ibn Atiyyah reports from Al-Zahrawi that it is in the accusative case governed by "taught us" ('allamtana). He forces an explanation to justify this by stating that the exception is disconnected (munqati'), so "illa" means "but," and "ma" is conditional (shartiyyah), with the answer to the condition being omitted—as if they denied all other knowledge, then qualified it by saying: "Whatever You teach us in the future, we will know it." This is more eloquent in abandoning any claim, as is not hidden.

"Indeed, it is You who are the All-Knowing, the All-Wise." This is a concluding clause (tadhil) that confirms the content of the preceding sentence. Having denied knowledge for themselves, they affirmed it for Allah, Exalted is He, in His most perfect attributes. They followed it with the description of "Wisdom" once what became clear to them was made clear. The root of wisdom (hikmah) is "prevention" (man'); hence, the hakamah (bit) of an animal is so called because it prevents it from veering off course. Knowledge is also called hikmah because it prevents one from committing falsehood. It is also used for the perfection of an act because it prevents paths of corruption and objection—and this is what is intended here, to avoid redundancy. Thus, the meaning of Al-Hakim is "Possessor of Wisdom."

It is also said: "The One who makes things perfect (Al-Muhkam) in His creations." In Al-Bahr, it is said: "On the first interpretation, it is an attribute of the Essence; on the second, it is an attribute of action." It is well known that if Al-'Alim (All-Knowing) is intended, it is among the attributes of the Essence, or if [it refers to] the Doer who has no objection to Him, it is among the attributes of action. So understand this. He placed the description of "Knowledge" before "Wisdom" because of the relevance to the preceding "Inform me" and "We have no knowledge." Also, because wisdom is not distant from knowledge, and so that the end of their statement would be different from what might be imagined from its beginning.

"Anta" (You): It is possible that it is a pronoun of separation (fasl) having no grammatical place, according to the well-known view, serving to emphasize the judgment and the limitation (qasr) derived from the definiteness of the predicate. It is also said: It is an emphasis to establish the subject, and that which is permissible for the follower is permissible for the followed. It is also said: It is a subject whose predicate is what follows it. "Al-Hakim" (the All-Wise) is either a predicate after a predicate or an adjective for it. Its related component is omitted to signify generality. Some have specified them, saying: "The All-Knowing of what You have commanded and prohibited; the All-Wise in what You have decreed and ordained." Generality, however, is more appropriate.