Tafsir of Al-Furqan 25:22

(The Day they see the angels) is a new beginning intended to clarify what they shall encounter when witnessing the angels—upon them be peace—after the gravity of their demand for them to be sent down has been established, and after showing that this demand is of the utmost hideousness. It is said "The Day they see" rather than "The Day the angels descend," to signal from the very beginning that their seeing them is not by way of fulfilling what they requested, but rather in a manner that never crossed their minds.

"The Day" is in the accusative case, acting as an adverb of time (dharf) for what is indicated by the words of the Exalted, "(There will be no glad tidings on that Day for the criminals)," for it carries the meaning of: "He shall not give glad tidings to the criminals on that day." The shift to the negation of the genus (the 'la' of absolute negation) is for the sake of hyperbole in denying glad tidings; it is as if it were said: "They shall not be given glad tidings on the day they see the angels." Some scholars proposed that it means "they are barred from glad tidings" or "they lose them," with the former being further removed from the possibility of imagining a mitigation of the affair. Others estimated it as "no glad tidings before the Day," making "the Day" an adverb for that. Abu al-Baqa’ permitted its connection to "they are being punished," assuming it as a predicate due to the indication provided by "no glad tidings," etc., or that it is an object for "I mention," estimated. Abu Hayyan said: This is closer.

The author of al-Fara’id said: It is possible for it to be in the accusative, governed by an implied "descends," because of their statement: "Why are the angels not sent down upon us?" It is as if it were said: "The angels descend on the day they see them." It cannot be said: "How can the time of seeing be the time of descending?" for we reply: The adverbial expression is broad enough to accommodate this. al-Tibi approved of this, saying: "It is a statement that cannot be surpassed, because if it is in the accusative governed by 'descends,' the speech coheres; for the words of the Exalted, 'The day they see...' is an explication of His saying, 'Why are the angels not sent down...' and His saying, 'And we approached...' is an explication of His saying, 'Or we see our Lord.'"

Most scholars do not allow it to be connected to the aforementioned "glad tidings" because it is a verbal noun (masdar), which does not govern an object if it is placed after it, and because it is negated by "la," and what comes after "la" does not govern what comes before it. "On that Day" is a confirmation of the first [adverb], or a substitute for it, or its predicate. "For the criminals" is an elucidation connected to an implied expression, as in "A watering for him," or it is a second predicate, or it is an adverb for what the prepositional phrase ("for") is connected to, or for "glad tidings" if it is considered tanween-marked and not constructed with "la" (for "la" would not govern, as if the noun of "la" were extended and resembled the genitive, it would be in the accusative).

In al-Bahr, it is considered possible that "glad tidings" (bushra) is constructed with "la," and it is also considered possible that it is intended to have tanween and be in the accusative, while being diptote (prevented from declension) due to the feminine ending. If it is constructed with "la," it is possible that the predicate is "on that day," and "for the criminals" is a predicate after a predicate, or an adjective for "glad tidings," or connected to what the predicate is connected to. It is also possible that "on that day" is an adjective for "glad tidings" and the predicate is "for the criminals." This brings up the disagreement between Sibawayh and al-Akhfash: is the predicate for "la" itself, or for the subject which is the combination of "la" and what is constructed with it? If it is intended to have tanween and is declinable, it is permissible for "on that day" to be governed by "glad tidings," or to be an adjective with the predicate being "for the criminals." It is also possible for "on that day" to be the predicate, and "for the criminals" to be an adjective, or "on that day" to be a predicate and "for the criminals" a further predicate—provided the noun is not constructed with the "la" by consensus.

al-Zamakhshari said: "On that Day" is a repetition, and this is not permissible, whether the repetition is intended for verbal emphasis or as a substitute, because "Day" is in the accusative governed by what preceded it—"I mention" or "they lose"—and what comes after the "la" that governs the noun cannot be governed by what precedes it. By his estimation, the governor is what precedes it. This is the end of his words. The weaknesses in the possibilities he mentioned are not hidden from you, nor are the objections to al-Zamakhshari, which were countered by noting that the negated sentence is governed by an implied "saying" which serves as a circumstantial state (hal) for "the angels"—which in turn is governed by "they see," and "they see" is governed by "Day" and what is in the scope of its first adverbial function, as it is governed by some of what is within its scope. Such a thing is not considered a violation, especially since the claim that "la" must always have the precedence—or that it does so when its noun is constructed with it—is not accepted by all grammarians, as its frequent usage caused it to depart from that initial rule. Consider this. This is what we have encountered from the predecessors regarding the parsing of the verse, along with the criticism and defense contained therein.

Some modernists said: It is permissible to connect "Day" to "great" (kabeer), or that its greatness is restricted to that day, not to negate its greatness in itself, but because its consequence becomes apparent on that day. Similar to this is the saying: "Zayd has great knowledge on the day the opponents debate." The sentence "There shall be no glad tidings on that Day for the criminals" would then be a new beginning to clarify that. This is as you see.

Regardless, the intended meaning of "that day," according to what is narrated from Ibn Abbas (may Allah be pleased with them both), is the Day of Death. Abu Hayyan said: The apparent meaning is the Day of Resurrection, due to the Exalted's words thereafter: "(And We shall turn to the deeds they have done)..." though there is room for debate here.

The negation of "glad tidings" is a metonymy for the affirmation of its opposite, just as the negation of love in such verses as: "(And Allah does not love the disbelievers)" is a metonymy for hatred and loathing. Thus, it indicates the affirmation of threat toward them in the most eloquent manner. The "criminals" are those who do not expect to meet the Exalted. The overt noun (al-mujrimoon) was placed in the stead of the pronoun to register them with criminality, given their state of disbelief and stubbornness, and to signal the cause of the ruling. Whoever considers the concept of implication (mafhum) in such contexts claims that the verse implies the absence of the ruling for others. The Exalted’s words regarding the believers: "(The angels descend upon them [saying]: 'Do not fear and do not grieve, and receive glad tidings...')" demonstrate the attainment of glad tidings for them. It is said that the intent is to include both the disobedient and the disbelievers who do not expect to meet Him, and the speech implies the negation of glad tidings for the disbelievers in the most perfect way, as it indicates that the obstacle to obtaining glad tidings is criminality, and there is no criminality greater than that of those who do not expect to meet Him, the Exalted, and who say what they say. Thus, they are more deserving of it. The Mu'tazilah base their argument on this verse regarding the negation of pardon and intercession for the disobedient, because it does not imply negation for all times, so it is possible that the disobedient are given glad tidings of what was mentioned at another time.

This was countered by the fact that the sentence before the negation, being nominal, implies continuity; therefore, after the entry of the negation, the intent is the negation of the continuity of glad tidings for the criminals—meaning that glad tidings may exist for them but will not continue—which is something no one would think to adopt. Thus, it is determined that the intent is the continuity of the negation, as in the Exalted’s words regarding their opposites: "(No fear shall be upon them, nor shall they grieve)." In that case, the statement "it does not imply negation for all times" cannot hold. Therefore, it is better that "the criminals" refers to those whose discourse we have heard.

"(And they will say)" is a conjunction to "they shall not be given glad tidings" or "they are barred from glad tidings," or similar, which is implied before "Day." It is also permitted that it be a conjunction to what preceded it based on what is understood from it, as if it were said: "They observe the horrors of the Resurrection and they say..." It is also possible that it is a conjunction to "they see," and the sentence "there shall be no glad tidings" is a state (hal) with an implied "saying," so the separation does not cause harm. The collective pronoun, as favored by Abu Hayyan, is because they are the ones spoken about; al-Tabarsi narrated this from Mujahid and Ibn Jurayj: "for those who do not expect [the meeting with Us]" i.e., and those disbelievers say: "Hiran mahjuran."

"Hiran mahjuran" is a phrase the Arabs would say upon meeting a vengeful enemy or when a horrendous calamity befalls them. They put it in the place of seeking refuge, as they ask Allah the Exalted to prevent the disliked from reaching them. It is as if the meaning is: "We ask Allah the Exalted to prevent that, a firm prevention, and to wall it off, a firm walling." al-Khalil said: In the Days of Ignorance, a man would see a person he feared might kill him during the sacred months and say: "Hijran mahjuran," meaning: "It is forbidden for you to attack me in this month." So he would not be the first to start with evil. Abu Ubaydah said: It is a charm used by the Arabs; whoever fears someone else in the sanctuary (Haram) or in a sacred month would say it upon meeting him if there was a feud between them. Abu Ali al-Farisi said: Among what the Arabs used—and then abandoned—is the saying "Hijran mahjuran." This was used by them for two meanings: One is that it be said at the time of deprivation; when a person was asked and said that, the solicitor knew he intended to deny him. From this is the saying of al-Mutalammis: "The farthest palm tree yearned for me, so I said to it, 'A forbidden barrier, oh those calamities.'" The other meaning is seeking refuge; if a person traveled and saw what he feared, he would say "Hijran mahjuran," i.e., "It is forbidden for you to attack me." Sibawayh mentioned "Hijr" as one of the verbal nouns in the accusative that are not inflected, and that the governor is necessarily implied. He said: "A man says to another: 'Will you do such and such?' and he says: 'Hijran.'" It is derived from "hajara" (he prevented) because the one seeking refuge is asking Allah the Exalted to prevent the disliked from reaching him. The origin of it is with a fathah on the ha, and it has been recited as such, as Abu al-Baqa’ said. But when they restricted its usage to seeking refuge or deprivation, it became like a transferred term; when its meaning changed, its pronunciation changed from its origin—which was the fathah—to a kasrah. The dammah has also appeared in it; this is the recitation of Abu Raja’, al-Hasan, and al-Dahhak. It is also said "Hijran" with an alif of feminine gender. Similar in the change from its origin is "Qa'adaka Allahu ta'ala," with the ayn sakin and the qaf with a fathah (a kasrah on the qaf was narrated from al-Mazini, though al-Azhari denied it) and "Qa'eedaka." It is in the accusative as a verbal noun, and the meaning is: "Allah the Exalted is your watcher and protector." Then it was transferred to an oath, so it is said: "Qa'adaka or Qa'eedaka Allahu ta'ala, do not do it." Its origin is "by the making-sit of Allah," i.e., His, the Exalted, keeping you. Likewise, "Umraka Allah" with a fathah on the ra and a fathah or dammah on the ayn. It is in the accusative as a verbal noun, then it was restricted to oaths. Its origin is "by your being-made-to-live by Allah," i.e., by your confirming His existence/survival. What was mentioned about it being necessarily in the accusative as a verbal noun with an implied verb is an objection against him in al-Durr al-Masun via the verse cited by al-Zamakhshari: "She said, and within her was alarm and dread: 'I seek refuge in my Lord from you, and a forbidden barrier,'" for it appears there in the nominative. He described it with "mahjuran" for emphasis, like "poet’s poem," "death’s dying," and "night’s nocturnal." He mentioned that the passive participle (maf'ul) here is for ascription, i.e., "possessor of a barrier," and it is like the active participle (fa'il) in that regard. It is also said that it is based on metaphorical ascription, but that is not strong. The meaning is that they ask for the descent of the angels—upon them be peace—and when they see them, they hate meeting them with the most intense hatred, and are terrified of them with severe terror, and they say what they used to say upon the occurrence of a hideous calamity and the descent of a terrible disaster. It is also said: The pronoun in "they say" refers to the angels; this is narrated from Abu Sa'id al-Khudri, al-Dahhak, Qatadah, Atiyyah, and Mujahid, as in al-Durr al-Manthur. They said: "The angels say to the disbelievers: 'Hijran mahjuran,' meaning: 'forbidden and prohibited for you are glad tidings,' i.e., Allah the Exalted has made them forbidden to you."

In some narrations, they ask for glad tidings from the angels—upon them be peace—and they say that to them. Some said: They mean "forbidden and prohibited for you is Paradise." This is narrated in Majma' al-Bayan from Ibn Abbas (may Allah be pleased with them both). It is also said: "Forgiveness." In making "Hijran" in the accusative as the object of an implied "making," there is a discussion, as was hinted at. The apparent meaning, based on what was mentioned, is that the introduction of this word is for deprivation, which is the first of the two meanings mentioned by al-Farisi. "And they say," according to this view, is a conjunction to what the previous [sentence] was conjoined to, assuming the pronoun refers to the disbelievers. It is also said it is a conjunction to the implied sentence "they say" before "there shall be no glad tidings," which acts as a state.

al-Tibi said: It is a state (hal) from "the angels," implying "while they are saying," similar to their saying: "I stood and I strike his face." According to the first view, it is a conjunction to "they see."