Tafsir of Ta-Ha 20:66

(He said: "Nay, cast you [first]") This is a resumption of the narrative, as if it were said, "What did he say, peace be upon him?" So it was said: He said: "Nay, cast you [first]," to demonstrate a lack of concern regarding their magic, and to grant what they suggested by their initial inclination to start, as they directed the arrangement toward a more eloquent mode. For the apparent sense would have been for them to say: "Either we cast, or you cast." Rather, [the intent was] for them to bring forth what they possessed, exhaust their efforts, and deplete the utmost of their capabilities, so that Allah—exalted be His command—might then manifest His sovereignty, casting the truth against falsehood to shatter it.

It is said that in this there is also a reciprocation of etiquette with etiquette. Some have found this command problematic, fearing it might necessitate the permissibility of magic, and thus they interpreted it as a form of threatening against magic, as one might say to a disobedient servant, "Do as you wish." Abu Hayyan said: "It is coupled with an implied condition, meaning: 'Cast if you are truthful.'" The objection to this is that he, peace be upon him, knew they were not truthful, so the estimation is of no avail without considering another angle.

You know that there is no need for this, and there is no problem, for this is like the command to mention a doubt so that it may be clarified. The assertion that presenting a doubt before the proof is impermissible is invalid, for it is possible one might not be free to grasp the proof afterward, leaving it as something unheeded.

(Then, lo! their ropes and their rods, it was imagined to him by their magic that they were moving.) The fa (then) is fasiha (eloquent), expressing their haste to cast, as in His saying: "Then We said: Strike the sea with your staff, and it parted." That is, they cast, and then their ropes, etc. It is, in reality, a conjunction of the clause of suddenness to the omitted clause. Idha (lo!) is for suddenness; according to the Kufans, it is a particle, which is a weak position according to Abu Hayyan. According to al-Rayyash, it is an adverb of time, and it is also that in his view. According to al-Mubarrad, it is an adverb of place, which is the apparent view of Sibawayh and the preferred view of Abu Hayyan. The operator for it here is "Cast" according to Abu al-Baqa, but it is countered that the fa prevents operation. In al-Bahr, it is operated by the predicate of the nominal sentence (their ropes and their rods), provided we do not make the sentence "it was imagined" the predicate. If we make it the predicate, and consider the clause as a state, the matter is clear. This is analogous to: "I went out, and lo, the lion was crouching," or "crouching" [as an accusative state]. For it to function as a predicate, it and what follows in the nominative suffices as a sentence, so one says: "I went out, and lo, the lion [is there]." Al-Akhfash stated in al-Awsat that a verbal sentence accompanied by qad may follow it, so one says: "I went out, and lo, Zayd has struck Amr."

In al-Kashshaf, the investigation into it is that idha is the one signifying time, seeking an operator for itself, and a sentence appended to it; it is specified in some places that its operator is a specific verb, which is the verb of suddenness, and the sentence is primary only. Thus, the estimation of the verse is: "Musa encountered the time of the imagining of the moving of their ropes and rods." This is an illustration, and the meaning is the sudden encounter of their ropes and rods being imagined to him as moving. That is all. There is in this some contradiction to what we previously stated, but the matter of the conjunction is more appropriate, as is not hidden. By saying "This is an illustration," he meant that it is a depiction of the syntax, and that idha is temporal, upon which the verb of suddenness is applied metaphorically because it occupies the place of the verb and the object, and because the sudden encounter of time includes the sudden encounter of what is in it in a more eloquent way. As for what was said—that he intended a figurative illustration—it requires exertion to achieve it.

The pronoun "to him" appears to be for Musa, peace be upon him; in fact, it is as if it were certain. This was of the nature of simiya (sorcery/illusionism), which is a science by which one is able to manifest mental images; however, it is usually conditional upon there being material in the external world in some form, and this is according to what Sheikh Muhammad Umar al-Baghdadi mentioned in his marginal notes on the treatise of Sheikh Abd al-Ghani al-Nabulsi on the unity of existence, by way of names and other things.

The scholar al-Baydawi mentioned in some of his treatises that the essence of simiya is the creation of imaginary forms that have no existence in the senses; it is applied to the bringing about of those forms in their images in the senses. They are images in the substance of the air, and they are quick to vanish due to the quick change of its substance. The word simiya is an arabized form of shim-yeh, meaning the name of Allah the Exalted. The quick vanishing he mentioned is not universally accepted. In my view, it is a portion of the science of magic, and al-Baydawi defined it as a science from which is derived a psychological faculty by which one is empowered to perform strange acts through subtle causes. Then he said: "Magic is in part real and in part unreal; it is called 'taking hold of the eyes' (deception), and the sorcerers of Pharaoh brought both."

It is famously held that these sorcerers placed mercury in the ropes and rods, so when the sun's heat touched them, they shook and vibrated, and it was imagined to him, peace be upon him, that they were moving and walking like a thing containing life. It is narrated that he, peace be upon him, saw them as if they were snakes, covering a mile by a mile. It is said they dug the earth, placed fire in it, and put those ropes and rods on top of it; when the heat of the fire touched them, they moved and walked. There is doubt in the heart regarding the validity of both accounts.

The apparent sense is that the imagination for Musa, peace be upon him, truly occurred through their magic; this is narrated from Wahb.

It is said it did not occur, and the meaning of the verse is that he, peace be upon him, witnessed something that, were it not for his knowledge that it had no reality, he would have thought it was moving. Thus it would be an illustration; however, this is very contrary to the apparent meaning.

Al-Hasan and Isa read 'isiyuhum (rods) with a damma on the ayn, a sukoon on the sad, and a shortening of the ya with the nominative, and it is a plural as in the famous reading. Al-Zuhri, al-Hasan, Isa, Abu Haywa, Qatada, al-Jahdari, Rawh, Ibn Dhakwan, and others read tukhayyala (it was imagined) with a ta on the beginning, in the passive voice, and in it is the pronoun of the ropes and rods, and "that they were moving" is a substitute of inclusion for that pronoun. It does not harm the substitution that it is a connector, as it is not dropped from all angles.

Abu al-Samal read takhayyala with a fatha on the ta, meaning "they imagined." In it is also the pronoun of what was mentioned, and "that they were moving" is a substitute for it. Ibn Atiyya said: It is an object for its sake (cause). Abu al-Qasim bin Habara al-Hudhali al-Andalusi said in the book al-Kamil regarding Abu al-Samal that it was read tukhayyala with the ta from above, with a damma and a kasra on the ya, and the pronoun in it is the subject, and "that they were moving" is in the accusative as the direct object. Ibn Atiyya attributed this reading to al-Hasan and Isa al-Thaqafi. Whoever constructs tukhayyala as passive, the one who caused it to be imagined to them is Allah the Exalted, for trial and testing.

Al-Hasan bin Yumn narrated from Abu Haywa nukhayyalu with a nun and a kasra on the ya; the subject is His pronoun, Exalted is He, and "that they were moving" is the direct object.