Tafsir of Al-Baqarah 2:65

(And you have already known those who transgressed among you in the matter of the Sabbath) The lam (in la-qad) is in response to an implied oath. ‘Alimtum (you knew) here is equivalent to ‘araftum (you recognized/identified), which is why it takes a direct object. The apparent meaning is that they knew the specific identities of the transgressors. Some have estimated an implied noun here—meaning: the transgression of those...—while others say it refers to their rulings.

(Among you) is in the position of a state (hal). (The Sabbath) is the name for the well-known day, derived from as-sabt, which means "to cut off," because the creation of everything and its working was cut off on that day. It is also said to be derived from as-subut, meaning rest and tranquility. The intent here is the day itself, and the speech contains an elliptical noun, meaning: "in the ruling of the Sabbath." For the transgression and violation did not occur within the day itself, but rather regarding its ruling, based on the report that Moses, peace be upon him, intended to establish a day exclusively for obedience, which was Friday. They disagreed with him, saying: "Let us make it the Sabbath, for Allah the Exalted did not create anything on that day." So Allah inspired him to "leave them to what they have chosen." Then He tested them in it; He ordered them to refrain from work and forbade them from fishing on that day.

When the time of David, peace be upon him, arrived, they transgressed. This was because they lived in a village on the coast called Aila, and when the Sabbath arrived, every fish in the sea would appear there, raising its snout, but when it passed, they would disperse. They dug basins and channeled canals toward them; the fish would enter on the Sabbath with the waves and could not exit due to the depth and the scarcity of water, so they would catch them on Sunday. It is narrated that they did this for a time without any punishment descending upon them, so they rejoiced and said, "Work on the Sabbath has been permitted for us." Thus, they fished openly and sold them in the markets. According to this view, it is correct to treat "the day" as an adverb for the transgression, and there is no need to estimate an implied noun.

It is also said that "the Sabbath" here refers to the verbal noun of "the Jews’ Sabbath-keeping" (i.e., their veneration of the day), not the day itself. In this case, there is no need to estimate an implied noun, as the meaning boils down to them transgressing in their veneration and violating the sanctity required of them. Some have mentioned that the Arabs' naming of the days with these well-known names occurred after Jesus, peace be upon him, and that their names before that were different—those found in the verse: I hope to live, and my day is Awwal, or Ahwan, or Jabbar, or the following Dabar; if it escapes me, then Mu'nis, or ‘Aruba, or Shibar.

This verse is used as evidence for the prohibition of stratagems (hiyal) in matters that were not legislated, such as usury. Imam Malik took this view, and such acts are not permissible for him under any circumstances. Al-Kawashi said: Most scholars permitted them as long as they did not involve nullifying a right or establishing a falsehood. They responded to the use of this verse as evidence by saying that this was not a stratagem, but rather the very thing forbidden, because they were forbidden from taking [the fish]. The weakness of this response is clear, and its verification is found in the books of jurisprudence.

So We said to them: "Be you monkeys, disgraced." Qiradah (monkeys) is the plural of qird, which is well-known. Fi‘alah is a standard plural form for fa‘ul nouns, and rarely for fi‘l. Al-Khusu' denotes humility and ignominy. It is both transitive and intransitive; from this is their saying to a dog, "Ikhsa' (be driven away/be silent in humiliation)." It is said that khusu' and khasa' are the verbal nouns of khasa’a the dog (to drive it away). Some mentioned "expulsion" when interpreting khusu', as in "distancing," and it is said that this is to satisfy the word's meaning, not to explain the intended goal—otherwise, khasi’ would mean "the driver away." The verification is that it is considered in the concept, but in the sense of the passive participle. Thus, the khasi’ is the debased, distanced, and expelled one.

The apparent meaning of the Quran is that they were transformed into monkeys in reality, and that is the position of the majority of exegetes, which is the correct one. More than one of them mentioned that after they were transformed, they did not eat, drink, procreate, or live for more than three days. Muqatil claimed they lived for seven days and died on the eighth. Abu Bakr ibn al-‘Arabi chose the view that they lived and that the monkeys existing today are from their offspring, but this is refuted by what Muslim narrated from Ibn Mas‘ud, may Allah be pleased with him, that the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him, said to someone who asked him about monkeys and swine—are they from those who were transformed?—"Verily, Allah the Exalted does not destroy a people, or punish a people, and then grant them offspring. Indeed, monkeys and swine existed before that."

Ibn Jarir narrated from Mujahid that their forms were not transformed, but their hearts were transformed; they would not accept admonition and would not retain warnings. Thus, the purpose of the verse would be to liken them to monkeys, similar to his saying: If you do not love and do not know what passion is, then be a stone from the dry rock, a boulder.

On the first view, kunu (be) is not a true command, because their becoming what was mentioned does not involve acquisition on their part, for they were not capable of changing their own natures; rather, the intent is the speed of creation, that they became such as He willed without refusal or delay. On the second view, the command is a metaphor for abandonment, leaving, and forsaking, as in his saying, peace be upon him: "Do what you wish." The scholar (Al-Allamah) has established this in his interpretation of the verse: "...so that they may disbelieve in what We have given them, and so that they may enjoy themselves."

The two accusative nouns (qiradah and khasi’in) are predicates of the defective verb (kunu). It is permissible for khasi’in to be a state (hal) of the subject, and it is permissible for it to be an adjective for qiradah. The intent is to describe them as debased before Allah the Exalted, to dispel the notion that their transformation and the hastening of their punishment in this world was for the sake of removing their sins or raising their ranks.

An objection was raised: if it were an adjective for them, it should have been khasi’ah, because the plural with waw and nun is not permitted for non-rational beings. It was answered that this is by likening them to rational beings, as in sajidin (prostrating), or because they were rational beings, or because the transformation was only of the outer form while their essential reality remained intact, as it is narrated that one of them would be approached by a relative who had forbidden them [from sinning], and he would say to him: "Did I not forbid you?" He would reply: "Yes," and then tears would flow down his cheeks.

The verse did not mention any of them being transformed into swine. It is narrated from Qatada that the youth became monkeys and the elders became swine, and none were saved except those who had forbidden [the evil], while the rest perished. It was recited (qiradah) with a fatha on the qaf and a kasra on the ra', and (khasi’in) without a hamza.