Tafsir of Al-Anbiya' 21:98

His saying: "Indeed, you and that which you worship besides Allah are fuel for Hell" is an address to the disbelievers of Mecca, declaring the final outcome of their affairs. Although this was known from what preceded in a general sense, it is stated here as an intensification of the warning and to remove any excuse.

"That" (mā) refers to their idols. It is expressed with the word used for inanimate objects (mā) because, according to the well-known rule, idols are things that do not possess intellect. Thus, the objection that ‘Īsā, ‘Uzayr, and the angels—peace be upon them—are also worshipped besides Allah, and yet this ruling does not include them, is invalid. It is famously reported that ‘Abd Allāh ibn al-Ziba‘rā al-Qurashī raised this objection before his conversion to Islam, saying to the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ), "O boy, how ignorant you are of the language of your people! I said, 'What you worship,' using mā for that which does not possess intellect, and I did not say, 'Whom you worship' (man)."

Ibn Hajar commented in Takhrij Ahadith al-Kashshaf that this story is very famous on the tongues of many non-Arab scholars and in their books, but it has no basis. It is not found in any book of Hadith, neither with a chain of transmission (musnad) nor without one, and its fabrication is evident. It is astonishing that some scholars of Hadith have narrated it.

The difficulty regarding what we have said is posed by what Abu Dawud reported in his Nasikh, along with Ibn al-Mundhir, Ibn Marduwayh, and al-Tabarani from Ibn ‘Abbās, who said: "When 'Indeed, you and that which you worship...' was revealed, it burdened the people of Mecca. They said, 'Do you insult our gods?' Ibn al-Ziba‘rā said, 'I will debate Muhammad for you; call him for me.' He was called, and he said, 'O Muhammad, is this specific to our gods or for everyone who is worshipped besides Allah?' He (ﷺ) said, 'Rather, for everyone who is worshipped besides Allah.' Ibn al-Ziba‘rā said, 'I have debated you, by the Lord of this structure'—meaning the Ka‘bah—'do you not claim, O Muhammad, that ‘Īsā is a righteous servant, that ‘Uzayr is a righteous servant, and that the angels are righteous?' He (ﷺ) said, 'Yes.' He said, 'Then the Christians worship ‘Īsā, the Jews worship ‘Uzayr, and the Banū Mulayh worship the angels.' The people of Mecca clamored and rejoiced, and then was revealed: 'Indeed, those for whom the best [reward] has preceded from Us...' and 'When the son of Mary is presented as an example, your people laugh aloud at it...'"

Other reports support this, and the apparent meaning is that "that" (mā) here includes both the rational and the non-rational. The answer to this is that the inclusion of the rational, which the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) asserted, was by way of the implication of the text (dalālat al-naṣṣ), based on the common factor of being worshipped besides Allah. When the Prophet (ﷺ) pointed to the generality of the verse via this implication, Ibn al-Ziba‘rā objected as he did, mistakenly thinking he had reached his goal. Then Allah, Exalted be He, provided the answer Himself by saying, "Indeed, those for whom the best [reward] has preceded from Us..."

The essence of the matter is the specification (takhṣīṣ) of the generality understood from the implication of the text, excluding the righteous who were promised the best reward. Thus, the devils who were worshipped besides Allah remain within the scope of the ruling by virtue of the implication of the text. After this specification, the text denotes—by both its phrasing and its implication—the judgment of idols and devils, and the objection is dispelled.

Some say that mā encompasses both the rational and the non-rational, which is the school of the majority of linguistic scholars, as mentioned by the second Allamah in al-Talwih. Evidence for this includes the text, the absolute usage, and the meaning. As for the text, Allah says: "And [by] what created the male and the female," "And the heaven and what built it," and "Nor are you worshippers of what I worship." As for the absolute usage, it is in two ways: First, mā is used in the sense of "that which" (alladhī) by agreement of linguists, and alladhī can be applied to the rational, as evidenced by their saying "He who came is Zayd" (alladhī jā’a Zayd); mā is the same. Second, it is correct to say "What slaves I have in my house are free" (mā fī dārī min al-‘abīd aḥrār). As for the meaning, it is in two ways: First, the idolaters of Quraysh, as reported through several paths from Ibn ‘Abbās, objected upon hearing this verse by citing ‘Īsā, ‘Uzayr, and the angels. They were masters of Arabic eloquence, and if they had not understood the generality from the word mā, they would not have objected. Second, if mā were restricted to the non-rational, there would have been no need for the words "besides Allah." Since it was general enough to potentially include the Creator, the qualification "besides Allah" was necessary. Thus, the verse includes the worship of those noble ones (peace be upon them), and the answer provided by Allah is an answer by way of specification. This provides an argument for Al-Shafi‘i in his position regarding the permissibility of specifying a general term (‘āmm) with a subsequent independent statement, contrary to the Hanafis.

It is replied that the aforementioned texts and usages only show the possibility of applying mā to those who possess intellect; it does not necessitate that it is apparent (ẓāhir) in that sense, or that it is general. Rather, it is apparent in the sense of the non-rational, especially here, as the address is to idol worshippers. Since it is apparent for the non-rational, it must be applied to it. As for the first point regarding the meaning, it is not definitive that the objectors objected because they understood the generality from the word mā itself, for it is possible they understood it from the implication of the text as previously mentioned. As for the second point regarding the lack of need for the phrase "besides Allah," it is only valid if there were no benefit in it, whereas its benefit—along with emphasis—is to disparage their state.

Even if we concede that mā is literal for the rational, we do not concede that the explanation of the specification was not contemporaneous with the verse, for rational evidence is sufficient for specification, contrary to a small group of theologians. Reason has shown the impossibility of punishing someone for a crime committed by another, unless that person consented to the crime. No rational person would entertain the thought that ‘Īsā, ‘Uzayr, or the angels consented to the worship of those who worshipped them. Since such rational evidence exists, we do not concede the lack of contemporaneity with the verse. As for the words of Allah, "Indeed, those for whom the best reward has preceded from Us," it was revealed as confirmation by adding the legal evidence to the rational evidence, even though the basis was already known. To say that it is the sole source of clarification is incorrect. The fact that the Prophet (ﷺ) did not mention the rational evidence was not because it did not exist, but because when he saw them not paying attention to it and turning away, objecting as they did despite the obviousness, he awaited the confirmation of textual evidence, or perhaps the revelation preceded his alerting them to it.

It is said: They were being difficult with a type of metaphor, so what refuted it was revealed. It is also said: This is a statement of fact (khabar) that contains no legal obligation (taklīf), and the disagreement regarding the permissibility of delaying the clarification is specific to that which contains legal obligation; there is room for debate here.

Allamah Ibn al-Kamal said: "There is no dispute between us and Al-Shafi‘i regarding restricting a general term to a portion of what it covers through a subsequent independent statement; the dispute is only whether this is 'specification' (takhṣīṣ), rendering the general term speculative (ẓannī) regarding the remainder, or 'abrogation' (naskh), so that it remains as it was. Therefore, there is no basis for using the verse 'Indeed, you and that which you worship besides Allah' as an argument, because what is proven by it—on the assumption of completion—is the restriction of the general term by a subsequent statement, and the dispute is about what lies beyond that. The evidence is insufficient to clarify it."

There is also no basis for the answer that "what you worship" does not include ‘Īsā, ‘Uzayr, and the angels—not because mā is for the non-rational, which is against the opinion of the majority, but because they were not worshipped in reality. As the Prophet (ﷺ) explained, when Ibn al-Ziba‘rā said, "Did not the Jews worship ‘Uzayr, the Christians worship the Messiah, and the Banū Mulayh worship the angels?" he (ﷺ) replied, "Rather, they worshipped the devils who commanded them to do so." His saying "Indeed, those for whom..." is to dispel the illusion of inclusion, and they have a view that considers the apparent meaning.

His answer (ﷺ) is narrated by Ibn Marduwayh and al-Wahidi from Ibn ‘Abbās (may Allah be pleased with both), which includes: "...so Allah revealed 'Indeed, those for whom the best reward has preceded...'" In accordance with this is the answer of the angels (peace be upon them) in the verse: "And [mention] the Day when He will gather them all and then say to the angels, 'Did these people worship you?' They will say, 'Exalted are You! You are our ally, not them. Rather, they used to worship the jinn.'"

The reconciliation between this report and the previous one is that after the Prophet (ﷺ) mentioned to Ibn al-Ziba‘rā that the verse is general for everyone who is worshipped besides Allah by way of the implication of the text, and Ibn al-Ziba‘rā asked, "Did not the Jews... etc.," the Prophet mentioned that it does not include those noble ones (peace be upon them) because they did not share in being worshipped besides Allah, as they did not command it, nor were they pleased with what the disbelievers were doing. Perhaps there is a hidden allusion here to the rational evidence for their non-accountability. Then the verse was revealed as confirmation of their non-inclusion. However, it is not hidden that if this report is authentic, it necessitates that idols also not be worshipped, because they did not command them to worship. Thus, mā would not be absolute for them, but rather for the devils, on the grounds that they are the ones who commanded and were pleased, making them their true objects of worship. Hence Ibrahim (peace be upon him) said: "O my father, do not worship Satan," even though he was apparently worshipping idols.

The reason for applying it to them, on the basis that they are not rational beings, is that they were treated as inanimate objects due to their disbelief. In the Prophet’s saying, "that which commanded them" (allatī amarat-hum), rather than "those who commanded them" (alladhīna amaru-hum), there is an indication of this. Furthermore, the non-inclusion of the idols in the verse here is far-fetched. Perhaps this report is not established.

Our Master Abu al-Su‘ud has a discussion based on the report that the Prophet (ﷺ) rebuffed Ibn al-Ziba‘rā, saying: "How ignorant you are of the language of your people..." You have already learned what the Hafiz Ibn Hajar said about this. He and his likes are the ones to be relied upon in such matters. Therefore, one should not be deceived by its mention in Ahkam al-Amidi, Sharh al-Mawaqif, Fusul al-Bada’i‘ by Al-Fanawi, and countless other works.

The ḥaṣab (fuel) is that with which fire is stoked and stirred, from the word ḥaṣaba, meaning to pelt with ḥaṣbā’ (small stones). It is lexically general and used specifically. It is reported from Ibn ‘Abbās that it is firewood in the Zanj language. ‘Alī, Ubayy, ‘Ā’ishah, Ibn al-Zubayr, and Zayd ibn ‘Alī (may Allah be pleased with them) read it as ḥaṭab (firewood) with a ṭā’. Ibn Abī al-Samayqi‘, Ibn Abī ‘Ablah, Mahbūb, and Abu Hatim from Ibn Bashir read ḥaṣb with the ṣād silenced. It is also narrated from Ibn ‘Abbās (may Allah be pleased with them) and is a verbal noun used as a description for emphasis. In another report from him, he read ḥaḍab with a dotted ḍād and a fatḥah, and it is also reported from him that it was silenced. Kathir ‘Azzah also read it this way. The meaning of all is one, which is the meaning of ḥaṣab with the ṣād.

"You are its entry" (98) This is a grammatical resumption confirming what preceded it, or a substitution for it. The sentence is substituted from the noun, and it is not harmed that it is in the position of a consequence. Abu al-Baqa’ allowed for the sentence to be a state (ḥāl) from "Hell," which is as you see. The lām is a substitute for ‘alā (on/upon) to indicate exclusivity, and that their entry is for its sake. This is based on the premise that the root of "entry" (wurūd) usually takes ‘alā, as indicated in the Qamus by interpreting it as overlooking water; this is frequent in usage. Otherwise, it has been said that it is transitive by itself, as in His saying: "their entry to it." Thus, the lām is for reinforcement, because the object is placed before the verb, and the operator is secondary. It is also said that the lām means "to," as in His saying: "that your Lord has inspired to it." This is not the case.