Al-Baqarah: (87) "And We did certainly give Musa the Book..."

(And We did certainly give Musa the Book) This marks the beginning of an exposition of another portion of their crimes. It is introduced with the assertive particle (oath-like structure) to demonstrate the perfection of the concern for it. Al-Ita' (giving) means to bestow. (The Book) is the Torah, according to the majority of scholars, and it is a second object for aatayna (We gave). According to al-Suhayli, it is the first object. The meaning of giving it to him is its revelation upon him. It is narrated from Ibn Abbas (may Allah be pleased with them both) that the Torah was revealed all at once, so Allah commanded Musa (peace be upon him) to carry it, but he could not bear it. Then, for every letter of it, He sent an angel, but they could not bear it either. So Allah lightened it for Musa (peace be upon him), and he carried it. It is also said: It is possible that aatayna, etc., means "We made him understand what it contained of boundaries, rulings, reports, stories, and other things therein." The speech is based on the omission of a genitive (mudaf), meaning "the knowledge of the Book" or "the understanding of it," but this is not the most apparent interpretation.

(And We followed up after him with the messengers) It is said qaffahu if he followed him, and qaffahu (with an alif) means he made him follow him from behind (from the qafa—the back of the head). The origin of this ya is a waw, because whenever it occurs in the fourth position, it is substituted, as you say ‘ariytu from al-‘arw, meaning: We sent them in his footsteps, like His saying, the Exalted: (Then We sent Our messengers in succession). Up until the time of ‘Isa (peace be upon him), they were four thousand—some say seventy thousand—and all of them were upon his (Musa's) law. Among them were Yusha‘ (Joshua), Shamwil (Samuel), Sham‘un (Simeon), Dawud (David), Sulayman (Solomon), Isha‘ya (Isaiah), Irmiya (Jeremiah), ‘Uzayr, Hizqil (Ezekiel), Ilyas (Elias), Al-Yasa‘ (Elisha), Yunus (Jonah), Zakariya (Zechariah), Yahya (John), and others, upon them be prayer and peace. Al-Hasan and Yahya ibn Ya‘mur read bil-rusli with a quiescent sin; this is the dialect of the people of Hijaz, while vocalizing it is the dialect of Tamim.

(And We gave ‘Isa ibn Maryam the clear proofs) That is, the manifest arguments indicating his prophethood; this includes every miracle he was given, which is the apparent meaning. It is also said: The Gospel. ‘Isa, in its original Hebrew, is Ayshu‘ with a hamza, pronounced with imalah (inclination) or with a kasra, and its meaning is "the master." It is also said: "The blessed one," and it was Arabized. The relational nouns derived from it are ‘Isi and ‘Isawi, and its plural is ‘Isun with a fatha on the sin, though it may be dammed. He is singled out from the messengers (peace be upon them) because he is distinct from them, being one of those of determination (ulu al-‘azm) and a possessor of a Book. It is also said: Because he was not a follower of the law of Musa (peace be upon him), as he abrogated much of his law.

He attributed him to his mother as a refutation of the Jews, since they claimed he had a father. Maryam in Hebrew means "the servant." The mother of ‘Isa was named this because her mother vowed her to the service of Bayt al-Maqdis (Jerusalem). It is also said: "The worshipper." In Arabic, it refers to a woman who enjoys conversing with men, similar to zayr for men, which is one who enjoys conversing with women. It is said: It does not befit Maryam to be Arabic [in this sense], because she was far removed from a love of conversing with men, unless it is said that she was named that ironically, just as a black person might be called Kafur (Camphor). Some investigators said: There is no obstacle to naming her that, based on the fact that it is a matter of custom for those women who serve, and in the Qamus, it is [defined as] the one who loves conversing with men without committing adultery; thus, there is no harm in the naming, as mentioned by Mawla ‘Isam. The best [view] in my opinion is that the naming occurred in Hebrew, not Arabic—in fact, this is almost certain, as is not hidden from the fair-minded.

(And We supported him with the Pure Spirit) That is, We strengthened him with Jibril (peace be upon him). Attributing "the Pure Spirit" (Ruh al-Qudus) to him is widespread. The Almighty said: (Say, the Pure Spirit brought it down). And the Prophet (peace be upon him) said to Hassan (may Allah be pleased with him): "Satirize them, and the Pure Spirit is with you." Another time he said to him: "And Jibril is with you." Hassan said: "And Jibril and the Pure Spirit are among us." Al-Qudus is purity and blessing, or sanctification; its meaning is purification. The genitive construction is that of a described noun added to its attribute to emphasize exclusivity; it is a conceptual genitive meaning "of" (li-al-lam). When a proper noun is added in such a way, it is interpreted as one of the two beings named by it. Mujahid and al-Rabi‘ said: Al-Qudus is among the names of Allah, like Al-Quddus. Some claim that the application of "Spirit" to Jibril is metaphorical, because it is wind moving in human orifices, and it is known that Jibril is not such; but it was applied to him by way of resemblance, in that the spirit is the cause of physical life, and Jibril is the cause of spiritual life through knowledge. It is as if this claim arose from the coarseness of the claimant’s own spirit and its lack of nourishment by any knowledge.

‘Isa (peace be upon him) was singled out with the mention of support by the "Pure Spirit" because the Almighty singled him out with it from the time of his youth until his adulthood, as the Almighty said: (And when I supported you with the Pure Spirit... you spoke to the people in the cradle and as a man). And because He protected him until the Devil could not approach him, and because twelve thousand Jews mobilized to kill him, so ‘Isa entered a house and He (the Almighty) raised him to a high place. It is said: The "Spirit" here is the Greatest Name of Allah, through which he used to revive the dead. This is narrated like the first one from Ibn Abbas (may Allah be pleased with them both). Ibn Zayd said: [It refers to] the Gospel, as mentioned in the case of the Quran in the saying of the Almighty: (And thus We have revealed to you a spirit of Our command); this is because it is a cause for eternal life and adornment with sciences and insights, which are the life of hearts and the regulation of livelihood, which is the cause of worldly life. It is also said: It is the spirit of ‘Isa (peace be upon him) himself, and it was described as such due to its purity from the touch of the Devil, or for his honor before the Almighty, and that is why He attributed it to Himself, or because he was not contained by loins nor wombs of the menstruating, but came from the blowing of Jibril (peace be upon him) into his mother’s garment, where the breath entered her body. Ibn Kathir read al-Quds with the dal quiescent wherever it occurs, and Abu Haywah read al-Quddus with a waw.

(Then is it that whenever there came to you a messenger with what your souls did not desire, you were arrogant?) The [interrogative] is causal, derived from His saying (And We did certainly give Musa the Book), such that the previous statement is not complete without it, like a condition without a response. The hamza was introduced between the cause and the effect to rebuke them for following up [that] with this, and to express wonder at their state, meaning: "We gave Musa the Book and blessed you with such and such so that you might give thanks by receiving it with acceptance, yet you inverted it by disbelieving." It is also possible that it is the beginning of a statement and the fa (then/so) is for conjunction with an implied [verb], as if it were said: "Did you do what you did, so that whenever a messenger came to you...?" The implied [verb] can be an expression of what occurred after the fa, making the conjunction explanatory, or it can be something else, such as "Did you disbelieve in the blessing and follow desire?"

(And a party you denied, and a party you kill) The apparent meaning is that it is a conjunction to (you were arrogant), and the fa is for causality if the denial and killing were based upon their arrogance, or for elaboration if they were two types of it. Al-Raghib permitted that it be a conjunction to (We supported him), with (Then is it that whenever...) and what follows being an interjection between them by way of denunciation. Fariqan (a party) is fronted in both places for emphasis and to stir the listener to hear what they did to them, not for restriction. There is an implied [word], meaning "a party of them." He began with denial because it is the first of the evils they commit, and because it is the common denominator between the denied [message] and the killed [messenger]. The killing is attributed to them, even though the killers were their ancestors, because they were pleased with it, and its disgrace adheres to them. He used the imperfect tense (taqtulun) to narrate the past state, bringing its image to mind due to its heinousness and greatness, or to conform with the imperfect verbs occurring in the verse endings, or to indicate that you are still involved in it now, for you are [always] conspiring to kill Muhammad (may Allah bless him and grant him peace), and were it not that I protect him, you would have killed him—which is why you bewitched him and fed him the poisoned sheep. Thus, the imperfect is for the present, and it is not contradicted by the fact that only some were killed. The intent of "killing" is the direct involvement in the causes leading to the loss of life, whether it resulted in death or not. It is also said: There is no need for generalization, because he (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) was killed in reality by the poison they served him, according to what happened in the Sahih in the wording: "This is the time I have found the severing of my aorta from that poison." The objection to this is that the actual killing did not occur from them at the time of the revelation of the verse, but rather the directing of the causes; therefore, generalization is necessary.