Tafsir of Al-Baqarah 2:67

(And when Moses said to his people, "Indeed, Allah commands you to slaughter a cow") This is an exposition of one type of their misdeeds, without an enumeration of blessings. The conjunction is valid because the previous mention of blessings already included the mention of misdeeds, such as opposing the prophets, denying them, and so forth.

It may be said that it follows the same pattern as what preceded it, for the slaughter is a worldly blessing—as it resolves the dispute between the two factions—and an otherworldly one, as it is a miracle for Moses (peace be upon him). It seems that the Master Imam al-Razi overlooked this, as he stated: "When He, the Exalted, enumerated the facets of His favor upon them at first, He concluded that by explaining some of the rigors He imposed upon them, and made this verse point to a second type." This is not far-fetched. The beginning of the story is His saying, "And when you killed a soul and disputed over it," etc.

The manifest way would have been to say: "Moses said, when a person was killed and there was a dispute over his killer, 'Indeed, Allah commands you to slaughter a cow that is such and such, and that you strike that corpse with a part of it, and the killer will be made known, so it will be thus and thus.'" However, He broke some of it apart and brought it forward because it is independent as a type of their misdeeds which He intended to reproach them for, namely: mocking the command, being excessive in questioning, and failing to hasten to compliance. Had it been arranged in order, it would have been a single story, and the dual nature of the reproach would have vanished. Similar dismantling of structure and order has occurred in other stories; it is among the "accepted inversions" because it contains subtle points and benefits.

It is said: It is possible that the order of its revelation to Moses (peace be upon him) was in accordance with its recitation, such that Allah—the Exalted—commanded them to slaughter a cow, then the killing occurred, and then they were commanded to strike it with a part of it. But the famous view is the opposite. The story is that two brothers among the Children of Israel intended to kill a cousin of theirs (their father's brother) to inherit his wealth, so they killed him and threw him at the door of their residence. Then they came demanding his blood. Allah commanded the slaughter of a cow and striking the corpse with a part of it so that he might live and identify his killer. It is said: The killer was the brother of the slain; it is said: his nephew, for he had no other heir, and when the slain man lived a long life, the nephew killed him to inherit from him. It is said: He was under a man known as 'Ammi, who had a cousin with no equal among the Children of Israel in beauty and splendor, so his relative killed him to marry her, and what happened, happened.

The majority read ya'murukum (commands you) with a damma on the ra. From Abu 'Amr, it is read with sukoon (vowellessness), ikhtilas (quick vowel), and changing the hamza into an alif. The phrase an tadhbahu (that you slaughter) is in the position of the second object of "commands," on the basis of an omitted preposition (i.e., bi-an tadhbahu - that you slaughter).

"They said, 'Do you take us in mockery?'" This is a resumption that acts as an answer to where the discourse is tending, as if it were said: "What did they do? Did they hasten to comply or not?" So they were answered with this. "Taking" here is like "making" or "rendering," and it takes two objects whose original state was subject and predicate. Huzuan (mockery) is the second object. Since it is a verbal noun, it does not technically fit as a second object (because it is the predicate in reality), and it is a concrete noun here, so it is estimated that it means "mocked" (mahzu' bihi), as in His saying: "Lawful to you is the game of the sea" (i.e., that which is hunted), or the noun is treated as the meaning itself for the sake of hyperbole, like rajul 'adl (a man of justice).

They said this either after Moses (peace be upon him) commanded them to slaughter a cow without mentioning the reviving of the dead by striking it, or after he commanded them and mentioned the details to them, out of rejecting what he said and holding it in contempt, as indicated by the interrogation. For the meaning is: "Are you mocking us? For your answer does not match our question, and is not fitting; what is the relation between what we are in and what you are commanding?" This does not negate their submission to him, as that was after knowing that it was serious and a definitive decree.

Hence, some said: Their answering their prophet in this manner when he informed them of Allah's command to slaughter a cow is evidence of their poor belief in their prophet and their denial of him. If they had known that this was a true report from Allah, they would not have asked this question, nor would they have given this answer. Thus, they disbelieved in Moses (peace be upon him). Some people said: They were believers and verified it, but this transpired according to their nature of coarseness, callousness, and disobedience. The excuse for them is that when they asked Moses (peace be upon him) to designate the killer and he said what he said, and they saw the gap between the question and the answer, they imagined he was joking with them or thought it was a form of mockery, so they answered as they did. It is also said: They asked by way of seeking guidance, not by way of denial and obstinacy.

'Asim and Ibn Muhaysin read yattakhidhuna with a ya (he takes us), implying the subject is Allah. Hamza and Isma'il from Nafi' read huz'an with sukoon; Hafs from 'Asim read it with a damma, turning the hamza into a waw; the others read it with a damma and the hamza. All are dialects of it.

"He said, 'I seek refuge in Allah from being among the ignorant.'" That is, from being counted among their number. Ignorance, as al-Raghib said, has many meanings: lack of knowledge; believing a thing to be the opposite of what it is; and doing a thing contrary to how it ought to be done, whether one believes it correctly or incorrectly. This last one is what is intended here. He (peace be upon him) denied it of himself to negate the implication of what he was accused of, namely mockery, by way of metonymy. He expressed it in the form of a metaphor, considering it abhorrent, for mockery in the position of guidance borders on disbelief or what leads to it, whereas its occurrence in the position of contempt and derision—like "So give them tidings of a painful punishment"—is permissible and common. There is a difference between the two positions.

Some mentioned that seeking refuge in Allah from this is a matter of etiquette and humility before Him—the Exalted—as in His saying: "And say, 'My Lord, I seek refuge in You from the incitements of the devils,'" because the prophets are infallible against such things. The first view is better, and it is the known way of introducing seeking refuge in the midst of speech. The difference between mockery and jesting is clear, so it does not negate its occasional occurrence from the prophets (peace be upon them), as is not hidden.