Tafsir of Al-Qasas 28:46

"And you were not at the side of the Mount when We called" — that is, the time of Our calling Moses, "That I am indeed the Lord of the worlds," and Our commissioning him and sending him to Pharaoh. "But [it is] a mercy from your Lord" — meaning, but We sent you with the Quran, which speaks of what has been mentioned [in the previous stories] and other things, as a mercy originating from Us for you and for mankind.

It is said that the meaning is: "We taught you as a mercy." Perhaps "mercy" (rahmatan) is the second object of the verb "taught" (allamna), and by it, the Quran is intended, not a cause (maf'ul lahu). The second object is that which was mentioned of the story, as you will soon know, God willing. As for making it accusative as an infinitive (masdariyah) for a deleted verb, its state is clear without explanation. The turning to the Name of "The Lord" (al-Rabb) is to indicate that this is among the effects of Lordship and to honor him (peace and blessings be upon him) by the attribution (idafah). Here, the author has sufficed by mentioning that which necessitates it from the side of the Almighty, just as he sufficed in the first [instance] by mentioning that which necessitates it from the side of the people, and he clarified it in what is between them to specify what is intended and to indicate that it is intended in both as well. And to God, the Exalted, belongs the beauty of the status of the Revelation.

His saying, the Almighty: "That you may warn a people," is connected to the verb explained by the "mercy." This requires that the sending be with the Quran or that which is in its meaning, such as the teaching of the Quran, rather than the teaching of the story mentioned, as the goodness of explaining it by "warning" is not apparent. It is permitted that it relates to the three compensations through the competition of governance (tanazu').

'Isa and Abu Haywah recited "Rahmatun" (mercy) in the nominative case as a predicate for a deleted subject. The estimation is: "But it is," or "This is," or "She is," or "This [female] is mercy." The pronoun or demonstrative refers to the sending understood from the speech. The masculine and feminine [forms] are considered according to the referent and the predicate, and the disagreement regarding the first is well known. Abu Hayyan permitted the estimation to be: "But you are a mercy." According to this recitation, "to warn" is related to what is an adjective of "mercy."

His saying, the Glorious and Exalted: "No warner had come to them before you," is an adjective for "a people." The first "min" (from) is redundant for emphasis. His saying, the Almighty: "that they might be reminded" — meaning, that they might take admonition by your warning — is a justification for the warning, according to the view that "la'alla" (that/perhaps) is for justification. As for the view that it is for hope, whether literally or metaphorically, it is said that it is in the position of an adjective with the estimation of the word, meaning: "To warn a people of whom it is said: 'that they might be reminded.'"

It is said that these people are the Arabs. The apparent meaning of the verse is that no messenger was sent to them before our Prophet (may God bless him and grant him peace) at all. But this is not intended, for there is a consensus that Ishmael (peace be upon him) was sent to them. It is as if it is because of the length of time between his mission (peace be upon him) and the mission of our Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him)—since between them is more than two thousand years—and the erosion of his law, and the failure of the majority throughout most of this period to understand its reality. It is said: this is [the reason]. It is also said: this is because they clarified that the rule of Ishmael’s mission ended with his death, and that no one was sent to them after him except the Prophet (may God bless him and grant him peace).

The scholar Ibn Hajar said in Al-Minah al-Makkiyah: "It is established that the Arabs were not sent a messenger after Ishmael (peace and blessings be upon him), and that Ishmael’s mission ended with his death." He claimed just before this a consensus that Abraham (peace be upon him) and those after him—meaning other than Ishmael—were not sent to the Arabs, and Ishmael’s mission to them ended with his death. Thus, it is as if it is because of the brevity of Ishmael's stay among them, the cessation of the rule of his mission after his death, and their remaining a long time without a messenger sent among them, that the warner did not come to them before him (peace be upon him).

The scholar Ibn Hajar also mentioned in Al-Minah what implies that every messenger other than our Prophet (may God bless him and grant him peace) has his mission severed by his death; this is not specific to Ishmael (peace be upon him). It is understood from the words of al-'Izz ibn 'Abd al-Salam in his Amali that this cessation is not absolute. He said: "(Benefit) Every prophet was sent only to his people, except our master Muhammad (may God bless him and grant him peace). Thus, according to this, all others except the people of each prophet are among the Ahl al-Fatrah (the people of the interval), except for the descendants of the previous prophet, for they are addressed by the mission of the predecessor, unless the law of the predecessor has eroded, then all become of the Ahl al-Fatrah."

This—and what we have quoted from the scholar Ibn Hajar—is currently, in my view, subject to the norms of rebuttal and acceptance. Perhaps God, the Almighty, will expand my breast later to verify the truth regarding this.

It is said: Moses and Jesus (peace be upon them both), just as they were sent to the Children of Israel, were sent to the Arabs. Thus, the negation of this coming refers to the interval between Jesus and our Prophet (peace and blessings be upon them both). Its duration, according to what al-Bukhari reported from Salman al-Farisi (may God be pleased with him), is six hundred years. In many books, it is five hundred and fifty years. The negation of the coming of a periodic prophet is the coming of our Prophet and the coming of Jesus (peace be upon them); this is what a group of scholars have authenticated due to the hadith: "There is no prophet between me and Jesus." Some said: "Between them are four prophets: three from the Children of Israel, and one from the Arabs, who is Khalid ibn Sinan." Others have said otherwise.

Some chose that the meaning of "these people" is the Arabs who were contemporary with him (peace and blessings be upon him), as they are the ones for whom it is conceivable that he would warn, rather than their past ancestors. Perhaps this is the most apparent. The non-arrival of a warner to them before him (peace and blessings be upon him)—according to the view of the termination of the rule of the messenger’s mission, except for our Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him), upon his death—is apparent. But if it is said that it does not terminate with that, and the rule of the messenger’s mission remains, then it is obligatory upon those of the descendants of the ones to whom he was sent who know of it to adopt it, since it is a rule from the rules of that messenger until another messenger comes; then it is adopted from the perspective of it being a rule of his, or in the way he commands regarding it in terms of attribution to him, or its attribution to those before him, and it is left if the second comes as a superseding law for it. Thus, the meaning of the "non-arrival of the warner to them" is the non-arrival of what came to them in reality.

It is impossible for these people to be intended as the Arabs absolutely, such that it is said that no one was sent to them before the Messenger of God (may God bless him and grant him peace) at all, due to the manifest invalidity of this and its contradiction to the Almighty's saying: "And there was no nation but that there had passed within it a warner." The Arabs are the greatest nation. Likewise, [it contradicts] His saying: "That you may warn a people whose forefathers were not warned," based on the fact that "ma" (what) therein is not negative. If the view is that "ma" therein is negative, it is interpreted by taking "forefathers" to mean the nearest forefathers. The interpretation permitted in the verse of Ya Sin [regarding the possibility of it not being negative] is hardly permissible here; rather, the negation is definitive therein, and nothing else. To contrive otherwise is not befitting the Book of God, the Almighty. "Al-Nadhir" means the warner (mundhir). The possibility of it being an infinitive meaning "the act of warning" is something that should not be given attention.

The change of the actual order between the decreeing of the matter—meaning the perfecting of the affair of the prophethood of Moses (peace be upon him) by revelation, the giving of the Torah, and his staying among the people of Midian, referred to by the Almighty's saying: "And you were not a dweller among the people of Midian"—and the calling, is to alert that each of these is an independent proof that his (peace and blessings be upon him) narration of the story is by way of divine revelation. If the actual order had been observed—negating first the stay among the people of Midian, secondly the presence at the calling, and thirdly the presence at the decreeing of the affair—it might have been imagined that the whole [account] is one proof for what was mentioned, as happened in the story of the Cow.

Some people interpreted the "decreeing of the matter" as the commissioning, and the "calling" as the calling to take the Torah with His saying: "Take the Scripture with power," respecting the actual order between them. This was rebutted by the fact that the aforementioned alert is lost on him. Furthermore, by this amount, the change of the actual order is not completely removed between the conjoined items, because the staying among the people of Midian is prior to the decreeing and the calling in reality, yet it was inserted in the noble syntax between them. Also, the aforementioned interpretation of each of the "decreeing" and the "calling" with what fits is more appropriate for what follows each of the compensations.

Among the strange things is that some who interpreted what was mentioned in accordance with the actual order interpreted the "two witnesses" as the seventy chosen for the appointment. This can hardly be sustained by him, because they were only with Moses (peace be upon him) when he was given the Torah, so he should have interpreted it otherwise. You have already been presented with several interpretations, none of which reject the interpretation of what was mentioned in accordance with the actual order. On the interpretation that corresponds, it is permitted that the "two witnesses" are the angels (peace be upon them) who were around the fire, for the traditions speak of their presence around it when Moses (peace be upon him) came to it. Likewise is His saying: "That blessed is whoever is at the fire and whoever is around it," according to one opinion.

There are other interpretations in the verses. Al-Farra' said regarding the Almighty's saying: "And you were not a dweller," etc.—meaning: "You were not residing among the people of Midian with Moses (peace be upon him) so that you would see him and hear his speech, and here you are reciting to them—meaning to your nation—Our verses." So it is a disconnection. Similar to this is what was reported from Muqatil regarding it, which is that the meaning is: "You did not witness the people of Midian so as to recite to the people of Mecca their news, but We sent you to the people of Mecca and sent down to you these news, and were it not for that, you would not have known."

Al-Dahhak said: "The Almighty says: 'You, O Muhammad, were not the messenger to the people of Midian to recite to them the verses of the Scripture; rather, it was someone else, but We were sending a messenger in every time, so We sent to the people of Midian Shu'ayb, and We sent you to the Arabs to be the Seal of the Prophets.'" It is not hidden that what we have presented is more worthy of consideration.

A group held that the calling in the Almighty's saying: "And you were not at the side of the Mount when We called," was a calling regarding what pertains to this Muhammadan nation—upon its Prophet be the best of prayers and the most complete of greetings—and they mentioned several traditions that indicate this.

Al-Firyabi, al-Nasa'i, Ibn Jarir, Ibn Abi Hatim, al-Hakim (who authenticated it), Ibn Marduyah, Abu Nu'aym, and al-Bayhaqi (all in Al-Dala'il) extracted from Abu Hurayrah: He said regarding that: "They were called: 'O nation of Muhammad, I gave to you before you asked Me, and I answered you before you prayed to Me.'" Ibn Marduyah also extracted it from another chain from Abu Hurayrah in a marfu' (elevated) form. He, Abu Nu'aym in Al-Dala'il, Abu Nasr al-Sijzi in Al-Ibanah, and al-Daylami extracted from 'Amr ibn 'Uyaynah, who said: "I asked the Prophet (may God bless him and grant him peace) about the Almighty's saying: 'And you were not at the side of the Mount when We called, but [it is] a mercy from your Lord.' What was the calling and what was the mercy? He said: 'A book God wrote two thousand years before He created His creation. Then He placed it on His Throne. Then He called: O nation of Muhammad, My mercy has preceded My wrath. I gave to you before you asked Me, and I forgave you before you sought My forgiveness. So whoever meets Me from you testifying that there is no god but God and that Muhammad is My servant and Messenger, truthfully, I will enter him into Paradise.'"

Al-Khatli in Al-Dibaj extracted the same from Sahl ibn Sa'd al-Sa'idi in a marfu' form. Ibn Marduyah extracted from Ibn Abbas from the Prophet (may God bless him and grant him peace) who said: "When God the Almighty brought Moses close to the Mount of Sinai as a confidant, he said: 'O my Lord, do I find anyone more honorable to You than me, as You brought me close as a confidant and spoke to me a speaking?' He said: 'Yes, Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him) is more honorable than you.' He said: 'If Muhammad (may God bless him and grant him peace) is more honorable to You than me, then is the nation of Muhammad more honorable than the Children of Israel? You split the sea for them and saved them from Pharaoh and his work, and fed them manna and quails.' He said: 'Yes, the nation of Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him) is more honorable to Me than the Children of Israel.' He said: 'My God, show them to me.' He said: 'You will not see them, but if you wish, I will make you hear their voice.' He said: 'Yes, my God.' Then our Lord called the nation of Muhammad (may God bless him and grant him peace): 'Answer your Lord!' He said: 'They answered while they were in the loins of their fathers and the wombs of their mothers until the Day of Resurrection, saying: "Labbayk (Here I am), You are our Lord in truth, and we are Your servants in truth." He said: "You spoke truly; I am your Lord in truth, and you are My servants in truth. I have pardoned you before you called upon Me, and I have given to you before you asked Me. So whoever meets Me from you with the testimony that there is no god but God, he will enter Paradise."' Ibn Abbas said: 'So when God the Almighty sent Muhammad (may God bless him and grant him peace), He wanted to favor him with what He gave him and what He gave his nation, so He said: O Muhammad: "And you were not at the side of the Mount when We called."'"

This was deemed problematic because it is a meaning that does not befit the context, and the verses do not seem to link to it upon it. For these reports to be valid, there must be evidence, and the authentication of al-Hakim is a situation not hidden. Some said: "It is possible to say, on the assumption that the reports are authentic, that the meaning is: 'And you were not present with Moses (peace be upon him) at the side of the Mount to witness his affairs and thus inform the people about them, but We sent you with the Quran that speaks of that and other things, as a mercy from Us to you and to mankind.' The timing with the calling of his nation is not because what was informed of was not from that, but to introduce joy to him (peace and blessings be upon him) regarding what returns to him and his nation. Therein is consolation for him (peace and blessings be upon him) against the disbelief of those who claimed [disbelief] in him (peace and blessings be upon him) and the refusal of his law, and an allusion to the content of: 'But if they disbelieve in it, We have entrusted it to a people who are not disbelievers in it.' Thus, the verses link to one another with a manifest connection. So contemplate."