Tafsir of Al-Qasas 28:30

"So when he came to it" (i.e., to the fire which he had perceived).

"He was called from the right side of the valley"—meaning the call came to him from the right side relative to Moses, peace be upon him, in his journey. The word "right" (al-ayman) is an adjective for the "side" (shati'), and it is the opposite of the "left." It is permissible that "the right" refers to the attribute of being blessed and fortunate, the opposite of the "unfortunate" (al-ash'am). In this case, it may be an adjective for either the "side" or the "valley."

The particle "from" (min), according to what a group of scholars have chosen, signifies the beginning of a limit and is connected to what is implied by the presence of the fire. It is also permissible for it to be connected to a deleted state (hal) derived from the hidden pronoun of Moses, peace be upon him, in the verb "he was called" (nudiya); that is: "he was called while being near the side of the valley." It is further permissible, regarding the state, that "from" signifies "in," as in the verse: "What have they created from the earth?"—meaning: "he was called while being in the side of the valley."

His saying, "in the blessed spot," is a position of state for the "side," or a connective phrase for "he was called." A "spot" (buq'ah) is a piece of land different in state from what is adjacent to it. Its 'ba' is vocalized with a fathah, as in al-Qamus, and this is how al-Ashhab al-Uqayli and Maslamah recited it. It was described as "blessed" because of the signs and lights of Allah Almighty that were specifically placed there. It is also said: because it contained fruits and good produce, though this is not as strong.

His saying, "from the tree," is an appositive (badal) to his saying, "from the side," or "the tree" therein is an appositive to "the side." The preposition was repeated because an appositive requires the repetition of the governing agent, and this is an apposition of inclusion (badal ishtimal), for the side included the tree as it was growing within it. The "from" here cannot signify "in," as you heard regarding the first "from." Yes, it is permissible for it to be for the purpose of causality, as in the verse: "Because of their sins they were drowned," connected to "the blessed"—meaning: the spot was blessed because of the tree. It is also said that it may be connected to "the blessed" while remaining for the start of a limit, meaning the start of its blessing was from the tree.

The tree, according to what is narrated from Ibn Abbas, was a grape vine; according to Ibn Mas'ud, a thorn tree (samurah); according to Ibn Jurayj, al-Kalbi, and Wahb, it was a thorny shrub ('awsajah); and according to Qatadah and Muqatil, it was a bramble—and this is what is mentioned in the Torah today.

Regarding the particle an in His saying, "that O Moses," it may be explanatory, or it may be the lightened form of the heavy anna, with the original being bi-anna. The prepositional phrase is connected to "he was called." A call may indeed be linked by a preposition; Abu Ali cited the verse: "I called out in the name of Rabi'ah ibn Mukdam, that [the one whose name is mentioned, the trustworthy]..." The pronoun is one of "state" (sha'n), and this state is explained by His saying: "Indeed, I am Allah, Lord of the worlds."

A group recited "innī" with a fathah on the hamzah. This is challenged by the fact that if anna were explanatory, it should be inna (with a kasrah), which is apparent. If it were a nominalizing particle and its subject were the pronoun of state, the same would apply, as the fathah form, when combined with what follows, is interpreted as a single noun, and it cannot function as the predicate of the pronoun of state. It has been explained by saying that anna is explanatory, and innī is an interpretation of a verbal noun governed by a deleted verb—the estimate being: "that is, O Moses, know that indeed I am Allah..."

It appears in Surah Taha: "He was called, 'O Moses, indeed I am your Lord,'" and in Surah an-Naml: "He was called, 'Blessed is whoever is at the fire.'" What is here is different from that; rather, what is in each is not what is in the other. This was considered problematic, and it was answered that the difference is only in wording, while in the intended meaning, there is no difference. The Imam held that He, the Almighty, recounted in each of these Surahs part of what the call contained, since bringing all three places into agreement requires some forced interpretation.

The manifest view is that the call was from Him, the Almighty, without the mediation of an angel. Moses, peace be upon him, heard, according to what the traditions indicate, verbal speech. It is said: Allah Almighty created it in the tree without union or indwelling; others say He created it in the air likewise. Moses, peace be upon him, heard it from the direction of the right side, or from all directions. Even though everyone uses "I" to refer to himself, the one being referred to is not the locus of the word itself.

Sheikh al-Ash'ari and Imam al-Ghazali held that he, peace be upon him, heard His eternal, essential speech without sound or letter. This is—as you see—His Essence, the Almighty, without quality or quantity. Some gnostics mentioned that he only heard His verbal speech with sound, and that occurred after His appearance—the Almighty—through whatever manifestations wisdom required. Yet, He, the Sublime, despite such appearances, remains in His absolute transcendence, even beyond the concept of transcendence. It has come in the authentic tradition that He, the Almighty, will manifest Himself to His servants on the Day of Resurrection in a form, and they will say: "We are your Lord," but they will deny it. Then He will manifest in another form, and they will recognize Him. Allah and His attributes are behind the veils of might, majesty, and glory, so let not the mind delude itself into thinking it can grasp the reality in any way.

A destination far off, the intellect is cast upon it, And short of its reach is a hand that shall not perish.

Some of the predecessors mentioned that he, peace be upon him, only heard His speech with a sound that manifests in appearances, regarding the contrary view as one of the greatest abominations. Ibn al-Qayyim has a lengthy discussion in verifying this, and we have already presented to you in the introductions what pertains to this station, so remember it—and Allah, the Exalted, is the Guardian of understanding.

Al-Hasan said: He, the Sublime, called Moses, peace be upon him, a call of revelation, not a call of speech. The leading scholars did not approve of this, due to its opposition to the apparent text, and because the reason for his specific title, "the Interlocutor" (al-Kalim), among the prophets, peace be upon them, would not be apparent. The basis for this specialization—according to the view that he heard His eternal speech without letter or sound—is the same as the view that he heard a sound indicating His speech without an intermediary of angel or writing. Whether it came from one direction—but as a sound not acquired by servants as our hearing is—or from all directions, each involves the breaking of normal custom. As for its rationale for those who hold that the hearing was after a manifestation in a locus, it is the same—provided they assert that this manifestation did not occur to any of the prophets, peace be upon them, except Moses.

Furthermore, his knowledge, peace be upon him, that the One who called him was Allah, the Almighty, was attained necessarily, created in him by the Sublime. Others say: by miracle. The Mu'tazilah made it obligatory that it be attained through a miracle, with some specifying it and others not, based on their claim that attaining necessary knowledge contradicts religious obligation, and there is a debate regarding this.