Tafsir of Al-Baqarah 2:70

(They said, "Call upon your Lord for us to make clear to us what it is.") This is a repetition of the question regarding the state and the attribute, not because the first answer was incongruent or the question remained in its original state, but rather to request an uncovering beyond what was already obtained, and to demonstrate that complete clarification had not yet been achieved.

(Indeed, the cow has become ambiguous to us) is a justification for His saying, "Call," just as in His saying, "Pray for them; indeed, your prayer is a comfort for them." It is an apology for repeating the question—meaning, "The cows described with what was mentioned are many, so they became indistinguishable to us." Ambiguity is well-known regarding cows; in the Hadith, it is said: "Trials like the faces of cows," meaning they resemble one another.

Yahya, Ikrimah, and al-Baqir read it as al-baqar, and al-baqar is the name for a group of cows, while al-baqarah is a collective noun whose singular is distinguished by the ta (marbuta). It is permissible to treat it as masculine or feminine, like nakhl munqa‘ir (fallen palm trees) and al-nakhl basiqat (tall palm trees). Its plural is abaqir, and it is also said: bayqur, with the plural baqir. In al-Bahr, it is stated that this animal was named so because it yabquru the earth, meaning it splits it for plowing.

Al-Hasan read tashabaha with a damma on the ha, making it a present-tense verb with the ta elided, its past tense being tashabaha. It contains a pronoun referring back to the cow as a feminine noun. Al-A‘raj did the same, except he stressed the shin; the original was tatashabahu, then they were assimilated. It was also read as tashabbaha with a stressed shin, in the form of a feminine present-tense verb. Similarly, yushabbihu with a ya and stress is the present-tense form. Ibn Mas‘ud read yushabihu with a ya and stress, treating it as a present tense from tafa‘ala, but assimilating the ta into the shin. Other readings include mushtabih, mutashabbih, and yatashabahu. Al-A‘mash read mutashabih and mutashabihah. It was also read as tashabah-tibal. In Ubayy’s codex, it is with stress. A difficulty is raised that the ta is not assimilated except in the present tense, and there is no past-tense verb in the af‘al measure on the pattern of tafa‘ala with a stressed fa. This is countered by the argument that its origin was "the cow resembled" (al-baqarah tashabahat), where the first ta is from "cow" and the second from the verb; when two identical letters meet, assimilation occurs, like "the tree leaned" (al-shajaratu tamayalat). However, making the resemblance reside in the cow is weak, and the easiest path is to say that this reading is not established; to validate it in a sound way is a task as difficult as shearing a thorn tree (khart al-qatad). It is also problematic that it is tashaba without feminine marking, as its sign should have been present, unless it is said to be like the poet's saying: "And no land produced its growth." Ibn Kaysan permits this in wide usage.

(And indeed we, if Allah wills, will be guided)—that is, to the specific cow we were commanded to slaughter, or to the matter of the killer that was hidden, or to the wisdom for which we were commanded. Ibn Jarir extracted from Ibn Abbas—in a marfu’ and mu’dal manner—and Sa‘id from Ikrimah—in a marfu’ and mursal manner—and Ibn Abi Hatim from Abu Hurayrah—in a marfu’ and mawsul manner—that the Prophet, may Allah bless him, said: "Had they not made the exception, it would never have been made clear to them for all eternity."

The verse is used as evidence that events occur by the will of Allah, for in what He recounted, the existence of guidance—which is among the events—was made contingent upon the attachment of the will, which is the same as the intent. Whatever Allah has told in His Book without disapproval is an argument, as is known in its proper place. This is built upon the view that the "will" (mashiyyah) and "intent" (iradah) are synonyms, though there is disagreement on this, and whether the fact that what was mentioned is by the will necessitates that all events are by it is a matter of debate.

It is also used as an argument that a command may proceed from someone other than the one who wills, and that it is not the will itself, as the Mu‘tazilah claim. For when Allah commanded them to slaughter, He willed their guidance in this incident; therefore, His saying "If Allah wills," which denotes doubt and lack of certainty regarding the guidance, would have no benefit—unlike if we said that He may command what He does not will. The claim that they might have believed something contrary to reality due to being dissociated from the command is refuted by the text, although it is countered that the argument only holds if "guided" means guidance to what is intended by the command. If, however, it means "if Allah wills that we be guided in some matter, we will be guided," then it does not hold, though this is contrary to the apparent meaning—just as saying that the required result—the slaughter—must be willed, yet guidance does not necessarily follow from that, as there may be other wisdom for that intent. But this is far-fetched.

The Mu‘tazilah and the Karramiyyah argue from the verse for the temporal origination of His intent, based on it being the same as the will, as the word "if" (in) denotes the fulfillment of a condition in the future, and the occurring guidance was attached to it. The response is that the contingency is with respect to the attachment (ta‘alluq); thus, what is required is the origination of the attachment, not necessarily the origination of the attribute itself. The condition was placed between the noun of inna and its predicate so that the ends of the verses would conform. The predicate of inna came as a noun because it is more indicative of permanence and that the guidance is obtained by them, and for the sake of emphasizing this, the speech was confirmed.