Tafsir of Ta-Ha 20:50

(He said, "Our Lord is He who gave everything its creation...")

(He said) — i.e., Moses, peace be upon him. He took sole responsibility for the answer because he was specifically singled out by the question.

(Our Lord) is the subject, and the saying of the Almighty: (He who gave everything its creation) is its predicate. It is also said that it is the predicate of an omitted subject, meaning: "He is our Lord," and the relative pronoun is an adjective for it. The apparent meaning is that he, peace be upon him, intended by the first-person pronoun himself and his brother, peace be upon them both.

Some researchers have said: He intended all created beings, confirming the Truth and repelling the accursed one, as is made clear by what is contained in the relative clause. (Everything) is the first object of (gave), and (its creation) is its second object; it is a verbal noun (masdar) with the meaning of a passive participle (maf'ul). The genitive pronoun refers back to "everything," and the generality derived from "every" is considered after referring it back to it, so that the well-known objection regarding such a structure does not arise. The apparent meaning is the generality of individuals—that is, He gave every thing, among all things, the affair that it requested via the tongue of its innate capacity (isti'dad), whether it be form, shape, benefit, harm, or other such things; or the affair befitting what is attached to it of properties and benefits that corresponds to it. Just as He gave the eye the configuration that corresponds to seeing, and the ear the shape that accords with hearing, and likewise the nose, the hand, the foot, and the tongue—each one of them is consistent with the benefit attached to it, never failing in its function. It is said: "Creation" remains in its sense as a verbal noun (masdar), meaning "bringing into existence," i.e., He gave every thing the bringing-into-existence for which it was prepared or which befits it—meaning that the Almighty brought every thing into existence according to its capacity or in the manner befitting it. This is as you see.

Some have interpreted the generality as a generality of species rather than individuals. It is said that this is to avoid a contradiction, as one might argue that some individuals are not perfect due to some incidental cause. The truth is that Allah, the Exalted, observed wisdom in what He created and commanded, out of grace and mercy, not by way of obligation; this is what the People of Sunnah and the Community have agreed upon, as reported by the author of Al-Mawaqif and 'Uyun al-Jawahir. Thus, every thing is perfect in its rank and good in its own essence. The Almighty has said: "The Almighty, the Merciful, who perfected everything He created." Making the generality in this verse a generality of species is something almost no one would say. The Exalted also said: "You see no discrepancy in the creation of the Most Merciful"—that is, in terms of its attribution to the Most Merciful and His creation of it according to the requirements of wisdom, grace, and mercy. Discrepancy between things only appears when some are compared to others. Therefore, turning away from the apparent generality of individuals to the generality of species for the mentioned reason arises from a lack of investigation.

It is said that the reason for this deviation is that (gave) is truly in the past tense. If "everything" were interpreted as the generality of individuals, it would entail that all of them have already existed and been given, whereas some—or rather, most—of them have not yet existed or been given. This is contrary to interpreting it as the generality of species, where there is no such difficulty, as all species have already existed and no new species is created thereafter, even if that were possible. There is an evident discussion here, so understand.

It is narrated from Ibn Abbas, Ibn Jubayr, and Al-Suddī that the meaning is: He gave every animal a mate of its own kind in creation and form. It is as if they considered "every" to imply multiplicity; otherwise, absolute generality is void, as is not hidden. In my view, this meaning is a branch of the previous meaning we mentioned, and perhaps the intent of those who said it was by way of example; otherwise, it is very far-fetched and would hardly be stated by those to whom it is attributed.

It is also said: (Its creation) is the first object, and the verbal noun is again meant in the sense of a passive participle, while the genitive pronoun refers to the relative pronoun, and (everything) is the second object. The meaning: He gave His creatures—glory be to Him—everything they need and from which they derive benefit. The second object was brought forward for the sake of emphasis, as the intent is to highlight it as a blessing. This view is attributed to Al-Juba'i, but the first is more apparent in wording and meaning.

Abdullah, a group of the companions of the Messenger of Allah (may Allah grant him peace and blessings), Abu Nahik, Ibn Abi Ishaq, Al-A'mash, Al-Hasan, Nusayr from Al-Kisa'i, and Ibn Nuh from Qutaybah and Salam read (His creation) in the form of the active past tense, on the basis that the sentence is an adjective for the genitive (mudaf ilayh) or the noun being possessed (mudaf), though this is anomalous. The second object is omitted for brevity due to the contextual indication: meaning, He gave every thing—He, the Exalted, created for it what is suitable for it or what it needs. Al-Zamakhshari placed this under the category of "He gives and withholds," meaning: everything He created, He did not deprive of His giving and bestowal. In Al-Kashshaf, it is asserted that this is more eloquent and apparent. It is said that the first is better in composition and consistent with the occasion; in my view, it is more in agreement with the first meaning of the first reading, and there is hesitation regarding what he mentioned in Al-Kashshaf.

(Then guided) — meaning He, the Exalted, guided and directed by that toward His existence. For whoever looks into these generated things and the subtle wisdom they contain knows that they have a Maker, Necessary of Existence, of great giving and generosity. The essence of the verse is: Our Lord is He who created every thing according to its capacity or in the manner befitting it, and made it a proof of Himself—glory be to His majesty. Although this making (the proof) is posterior to the creation in essence, and there is no temporal delay between them at all, the word "then" was used to denote a delay in rank, as is not hidden to the contemplative. In Irshad al-'Aql al-Salim, it is stated: "(Then guided) to the way of benefiting and deriving utility from what He gave, and He taught it how to attain its survival and perfection—whether by choice, as in animals, or by nature, as in inanimate objects and the natural forces of plants and animals."

Since the creation—which is the combination of parts and the leveling of bodies—precedes the guidance—which is the bringing into being of the moving and perceptive powers within those bodies—the word of delay was placed between them. It is not hidden from you that "creation" in language is more general than what he mentioned, that the moving and perceptive powers are included in the generality of (everything), whether it be the generality of individuals or species, and that some form of metaphor must be employed in (guided) according to his interpretation. It is said, according to the interpretation narrated from Ibn Abbas and those with him: Then He guided it to coming together through intimacy and marriage. And other things are said.

May Allah, the Exalted, grant success to this answer; how concise, how comprehensive, and how clear it is to one who has set his mind and looked with the eye of fairness, being a seeker of the Truth! From here it is said: It was apparent that he, peace be upon him, should have said: "Our Lord is the Lord of the worlds," but he followed the path of guidance and the wise style, and pointed to the contingency of all existing things and their need for Him—Exalted is He—and the difference in their ranks. He is the Powerful, the Wise, the Wealthy, and the Bestower in an absolute sense.

The verse is used as evidence that Pharaoh was knowledgeable of Allah, the Exalted, but he was stubborn; because the relative clause must be known, and whenever this clause was known to him, he was knowledgeable of Him—Exalted is He. This is the view of some regarding him, may the curse be upon him. They also used as evidence for this the saying of the Almighty: "You know that none has sent these down except the Lord of the heavens and the earth," and the saying: "And they rejected them, while their souls were certain thereof, out of injustice and arrogance," and His saying in Surah Al-Qasas: "And they thought that they would not be returned to Us," for it contains nothing but a denial of the Resurrection, not the Originator. Also, His saying in Ash-Shu'ara': "And what is the Lord of the Worlds?" up to His saying: "Indeed, your messenger who has been sent to you is mad," for he meant by that: I am asking him for an explanation of the quiddity (essence), while he is explaining the existence. This indicates that he was confessing to the principle of existence, and that his kingdom did not extend beyond the Copts and did not reach the Levant. Do you not see that when Moses, peace be upon him, fled to Midian, Shu'ayb said to him: "Fear not, you have escaped from the wrongdoing people"? How then could he believe that he was the God of the world? And he must have been sane, by necessity, for he was a subject of religious duty, and every sane person knows by necessity that he came into existence after non-existence. Whoever is thus is in need of a manager, so he must be a proponent of a manager. He asked here with "who" (man) seeking the manner, and in Ash-Shu'ara' with "what" (ma) seeking the essence.

The apparent meaning is that the question with "who" came first; thus, when Moses, peace be upon him, established the proof for existence, he left off disputing with him on this level, knowing its clarity, and began on a more difficult level, for the knowledge of His essence—Exalted is He—is not attainable by humans. The arguments and counter-arguments regarding these proofs are not hidden. Among the people, some said: He was ignorant of Allah, the Exalted, after their consensus that a sane person cannot believe himself to be the creator of the heavens, the earth, and what is within them. They differed on the nature of his ignorance: it is possible he was a materialist (Dahri), denying a Creator altogether—perhaps he said that the contingent does not need an agent for its existence and that the existence of the world is accidental, as is reported from Democritus and his followers. It is possible he was a philosopher who believed in the necessitated cause, or a worshiper of the stars, or a worshiper of idols, or among those who believe in incarnation and embodiment. As for his claiming divinity for himself, it is in the sense that those under his hand must obey him and submit to him, and not engage in obeying another. He is cited—for starting the debate and asking for the proof instead of resorting to silliness and agitation, despite being a tyrant of great severity—as evidence that agitation and silliness with one who calls to the Truth is extremely ugly. Thus, it is not appropriate for one who claims Islam and knowledge to accept for himself what Pharaoh did not accept for himself. Also, Moses's occupation with establishing the proof for the required point is evidence of the corruption of imitation in such matters, and the corruption of the claim of one who says: "Knowledge of Allah, the Exalted, is derived from the word of the Messenger." And the story of Pharaoh's speech and Moses's answer—peace be upon him—indicates that it is permissible to narrate the speech of the falsifier when accompanied by the answer, so that no doubt remains, and that it is the duty of the one who follows the Truth to listen to the doubt of the falsifier so that he may be able to occupy himself with resolving it.