Tafsir of Al-Furqan 25:43

This is an expression of astonishment for the Messenger of Allah (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) regarding the heinous nature of their condition, following the accounts of their repulsive words and deeds. It serves as a warning regarding their inevitable end and destination, and draws attention to the fact that their state is so strange that it necessitates observation and astonishment.

The visible interpretation is that "seen" (ara'ayta) is for visual perception, and "him who" (man) is its direct object—a relative pronoun, with the sentence following it being the conjunctive clause. "Taken" (ittakhadha) governs two objects: the first is "his desire" (hawahu) and the second is "his god" (ilahahu). The latter was placed before the former to emphasize it, in the sense that the matter of astonishment revolves around it, not because a god deserves veneration and precedence. As it is said: "Have you seen him who made his desire a god for himself by obeying it and basing his religion upon it, while turning away completely from listening to the overwhelming proof and observing the brilliant evidence?" This is in the sense of: "Look at him and be astonished by him."

Ibn al-Munir said: There is a subtle point in the placement of the second object here, which is the implication of exclusivity. Before the entry of "Have you seen" and "taken," the original construction was hawahu ilahuhu (his desire is his god), wherein hawahu is the subject (mubtada') and ilahuhu is the predicate (khabar). When it is said ilahahu hawahu, it constitutes the placing of the predicate before the subject, which conveys exclusivity. Thus, the meaning of the verse becomes: "Have you seen him who has not taken anything as his object of worship except his desire?" This is more eloquent in its condemnation and rebuke.

The author of al-Fara'id said: The placement of the second object before the first is possible where the predicate can be placed before the subject. When two definite nouns occur as subject and predicate, the one that is placed first is the subject. Whoever considers this instance analogous to saying "I knew Zayd as a traveler" (where munkhalan is the predicate) has overlooked this nuance. It is possible to say that the one placed first conveys fixedness, unlike the one placed last. Thus, the placement of ilahahu (his god) suggests that he is bound to have a god; it is like saying, "He took his son as his servant," which implies he has a son but does not imply he has a servant. This is the benefit of placing "his god" before "his desire."

Al-Tayyibi countered this, saying: There is no doubt that the rank of the subject is to be placed first, and that between two definite nouns, whichever is placed first is the subject. However, the master of rhetoric (the semanticist) does not divert his gaze from the fundamental meaning. If it is said, "Zayd is the lion," the lion is the mushabbah bihi (the object of comparison) by origin, and its rank is to be placed after the mushabbah (subject of comparison) without dispute. If you make it the subject in saying, "The lion is Zayd," you have removed it from its original position for the sake of hyperbole. By "the one placed first," we mean the one removed from its place, not the one firmly situated. Here, the "object of comparison" is "god" and the "subject of comparison" is "desire," because they lowered their desires in their obedience to the status of a god. Thus, the original object of comparison was placed first and positioned as the subject to signal that, in their view, desire is stronger than Allah (Exalted and Majestic is He) in the category of deserving worship, just as in the saying of the Almighty: "They said, 'Sale is only like usury.'" The author of al-Miftah alluded to this meaning in his book.

As for the example cited by the author of al-Fara'id—the statement "He took his son as his servant" means he made his son like a servant serving him in the household chores, and the statement "He took his servant as his son" means he made his servant like his son, honored and pampered. You know what is involved in the statement that "whichever of the two definite nouns is placed first is the subject"; the truth is that the matter revolves around the contextual indication (qarina), and the indication here is established by logic that "his god" is the predicate. Thus, there is no need to categorize this under "rhetorical placement."

Shaykh al-Islam said: Anyone who imagines that they are in the order [they appear] based on their equality in definiteness has neglected that the second object in this category is the one affected by the emergent condition. In this is a refutation of Abu Hayyan, who mandated that they follow the order [of the original subject-predicate structure].

It is reported from some Medinans that he read it as alihatan (a god), tanwined, in the plural, and viewed the order as inverted. The meaning is: he made every type of his desire a god. It is also mentioned that Ibn Hurmuz read it as ilahatan on the scale of fa'alah, also involving inversion, meaning: he made his desire his god, meaning ma'luhah (an object of worship), with the 'ha' for intensification, and that is why it is diptote. It is also said: Rather, al-ilahah is the sun, and it is said alahah with a damma on the hamza; it is indeclinable due to being a proper name and feminine. However, since it is a word that admits the definite article 'al' in some dialects, it became like that which has the 'lam', then it was removed; thus it became declinable, becoming like an indefinite noun after having been definite. This was stated by the author of al-Lawami', and it is as you see.

The verse was revealed, it is said, regarding al-Harith ibn Qays al-Sahmi; whenever he desired a stone, he would worship it. Ibn Abi Hatim and Ibn Marduwayh recorded from Ibn Abbas that he said: In the Era of Ignorance, a man would worship a white stone for a period of time, and if he found a better one, he would throw the first away and worship the other. So Allah (the Almighty) revealed: "Have you seen..." etc. Some claim, based on this and similar reports, that "his desire" means "the object of his desire," but this is not necessary, as is obvious.

Ibn al-Mundhir and Ibn Abi Hatim recorded from Ibn Abbas (may Allah be pleased with both) that he said regarding the verse: "Whenever he desired something, he pursued it, and whenever he coveted something, he obtained it; he is restrained from that by neither piety nor fear of Allah." Therefore, the verse encompasses anyone who worshipped other than Allah based on his desire, and anyone who obeys desire in all other sins. This is what is necessitated by the statement of al-Hasan. It was recorded from him by 'Abd ibn Humayd that it was said to him: "Is there polytheism among the people of the Qibla?" He said: "Yes, the hypocrite is a polytheist who prostrates to the sun and moon instead of Allah, and the hypocrite is a slave to his desire." Then he recited this verse. According to al-Hasan, the hypocrite is one who commits sins, as mentioned by more than one of the prominent scholars.

Al-Tabarani and Abu Nu'aym recorded in al-Hilya from Abu Umamah (may Allah be pleased with him) that he said: The Messenger of Allah (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) said: "There is no god under the shade of the sky worshipped other than Allah, greater in the sight of Allah (Exalted and Majestic is He), than a desire that is followed." Almost no one is safe from the generality of this verse except he who follows what Allah has chosen for His servants and what He (Glory be to Him) has legislated for them in everything he takes up or leaves. According to this, the disbeliever enters into what was mentioned primarily.