Tafsir of Ash-Shu`ara' 26:46

That is, they fell prostrate immediately upon witnessing that, without hesitation or delay, because they knew that such a thing was beyond the bounds of magic and was a divine matter that had appeared at the hand of him, peace be upon him, to verify him. The act of falling (خرور) is expressed as "being cast/thrown" (al-ilqa) because it was mentioned in conjunction with previous instances of casting, thus employing the rhetorical device of mushakala (concomitance/homogeneity). Furthermore, there is also, while observing this mushakala, an indication that when they saw what they saw, they could not restrain themselves, so they threw themselves upon the ground in prostration, as if they had been seized and cast down. Thus, there is a metaphorical dependency (isti'ara taba'iyya) whose beauty is enhanced by the mushakala. Some have questioned this by arguing that, according to the People of Truth (Ahl al-Haqq), God Almighty is the Creator of their prostration, and His creation of it is the "casting," so there is no need for metaphor.

You know, however, that the bringing into existence of their prostration and creating it within them is not called "casting" in reality or in language. Furthermore, the apparent meaning of their words is that if the agent of the "casting" were to be explicitly stated, it would be God Almighty, through the success (tawfiq) He granted them. Al-Zamakhshari suggested that the agent might be their faith or what they witnessed of the dazzling miracle. He then added: "You may also choose not to estimate an agent, because ulqiya (was cast) here has the meaning of 'they fell and collapsed.'" Abu Hayyan countered this by stating that this is invalid, for a verb cannot be built for an object (maf'ul) whose agent is not named unless the agent has been omitted and that [object] has taken its place; thus, not estimating an agent at all is a view far from the truth. The author of al-Kashf justified Al-Zamakhshari's view by explaining that he meant there is no need to estimate an agent other than the one to whom the passive verb is attributed, for he is the agent of the "casting." Do you not see that if you were to interpret "fell" (saqata) as "threw himself" (alqa nafsahu), it would be correct? Al-Tibi justified it by saying he meant there is no need to specify an agent because the intended focus is the one who was cast, not the designation of who cast him, just as when you say, "The Kharijite was killed."

You know that the reasoning provided by Al-Zamakhshari is closer to the choice made by the author of al-Kashf. In sum, Al-Zamakhshari's statement must be interpreted, for he is too eminent to have intended the literal meaning that invites the objection raised by Abu Hayyan. In the prostration and submission of the magicians, there is evidence that the ultimate extent of magic is deception and artifice—creating an illusion of something that has no reality—for magic was at its strongest during the time of Moses, peace be upon him, and those brought by Pharaoh were the most knowledgeable of their age in it. They exerted their utmost efforts and displayed the greatest of what they possessed, yet they produced nothing but deception and artifice. This is what has been said, though the rigorous view is that this is the predominant nature of magic, not that all magic is of this sort.

Al-Qazwini’s statement—that the claim that magic can transform the essence of a thing is the superstition of the common folk and the tales of women, and that such is impossible in magic—is not free from rashness. This incident is also used as evidence that deep study in every useful science is beneficial, for those magicians, due to their profound study of the science of magic, recognized the truth of what Moses, peace be upon him, brought and that it was a miracle. They benefited from the increase in their knowledge, as it led them to acknowledge the truth and believe, due to their ability to distinguish between a miracle and magic.

It has been countered that this only proves a partial ruling, as is not hidden. Some eminent scholars mentioned that they only recognized the truth of the matter after Moses, peace be upon him, took the staff and it returned to its original state. This is because they saw no further trace of their ropes and staffs, and they said: "If this were magic, our ropes and staffs would have remained." Perhaps, in this case, they became infinitesimal particles and dispersed, or ceased to exist due to the cessation of the connection of [Divine] Will to their existence. The Great Sheikh, may his secret be sanctified, said in the 16th and 40th chapters of al-Futuhat: "The staff did not swallow anything except the images of life from the ropes and staffs; as for the things themselves, they remained and were not annihilated, contrary to what some commentators imagined. Evidence for this is the Almighty’s saying, 'It swallowed up what they had fabricated' (talaqqu ma sana'u), and they had only fabricated the images. If it were not for this, doubt would have occurred to the magicians regarding the staff of Moses, peace be upon him, and they would not have believed." This is a summary; so reflect upon it.