Tafsir of Al-Qasas 28:49

"Say, 'Then bring a scripture from Allah that is more guiding than both of them'"—meaning, from that which both of them [Moses and Muhammad, peace be upon them] were given of the Quran and the Torah. "I will follow it"—the verb is jussive as a response to the imperative [command]. A condition such as this is brought forth by one who demonstrates the clarity of his argument, for bringing what is more guiding than those two scriptures is a matter of manifest impossibility. Thus, he expands the scope of the discourse for the sake of rebuke and binding [the opponent]. The inclusion of the particle in (if) in His saying, "if you are truthful," is a type of mockery of them. Zayd ibn Ali read "atba‘uhu" with the nominative case (raf’) as a new beginning (isti’naf), meaning: "I shall follow it."

Al-Zamakhshari said: "The Truth is the Messenger who confirms the book miraculous with all other miracles." He means that the context is a context of [when] "he came to them"—that is, the Messenger—but [the text] deviated from that to convey those meanings. And [the text refers to] what Moses was given, which is more comprehensive than the Book revealed all at once: the Hand, the Staff, and others of his miracles, peace be upon him. This was objected to on the grounds that there is no connection in this context to the miracles of the Hand and the like, and likewise, there is no connection for the miracles of our Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, other than the Quran. The explicit wording of His saying, "Say, 'Then bring...'" points to this.

It is permitted that the pronoun in "came to them" and "they said" refers to the people of Mecca who were present, and the pronoun in "they disbelieved" and "they said" in both places refers to the genus of the disbelievers known from the context. The intent by them is the disbelievers who were in the era of Moses, peace be upon him. "And before" is connected to "they disbelieved," not to "was given," due to the lack of apparent benefit. By "two works of magic" or "two sorcerers," Moses and Aaron, peace be upon them, are intended, as Mujahid narrated. Attributing "two works of magic" to them is for emphasis, or it is by estimating [the meaning as] "possessors of two works of magic." The meaning is: Did their own kind not disbelieve before them in what was given to Moses, peace be upon him, just as they [the Meccans] disbelieved in what I was given? And those disbelievers said: "They [Moses and Aaron] are two works of magic or two sorcerers who supported one another."

It is said: It is permissible that the pronouns refer to those present, and the disbelief and the statement mentioned are those of the previous ones in reality, and attributing them to those present is metaphorical due to the association between the two groups. It is said, based on what is narrated from al-Hasan—that the Arabs had an origin during the days of Moses, peace be upon him—that the meaning is: Did their forefathers not disbelieve before Muhammad, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, was sent, in what Moses was given? They said: "They—Moses and Aaron—are two works of magic or two sorcerers who supported one another." It is thus on the style of, "And [recall] when We saved you from the people of Pharaoh," and the like. The discourse, according to this, indicates that those before them had a firm grounding in disbelief and possessed a deep-rooted stubbornness. That the Arabs had an origin in the days of Moses, peace be upon him, is something beyond doubt, such that it was even said: Pharaoh was an Arab from the descendants of ‘Ad. However, there is debate regarding the quality of interpreting the verse in this manner. You know that all of these approaches are not such that the heart expands to them, and they contain their share of artificiality.

Abu Hayyan claimed the obviousness of the pronoun in "they disbelieved" and the pronoun in "they said" referring to the Quraysh, who said, "Why was he not given the like of what was given to Moses?" The attribution of that to them is because their denial of Muhammad, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, is a denial of Moses, peace be upon him, and their attribution of sorcery to the Messenger is their attribution of it to Moses and Aaron, peace be upon them. For the Prophets, peace be upon them, are from one valley [source]; whoever attributes to one of them what is not befitting is attributing that to all of them. Thus, there is no need to interject the story of the [previous] group regarding the attribution. Based on this, it is permissible that by "both" is meant any one of the Prophets, peace be upon them. It is not hidden that what he claimed regarding the obviousness of the pronoun referring to what was mentioned is acceptable to fair-minded intellectuals, but justifying the attribution of the disbelief and the statement mentioned in the manner he described is something whose acceptance is remote. It appears he was only forced to this because the story of the [previous] group was not established in his view.

From Qatadah, it is narrated that he interpreted "the two works of magic" as the Quran and the Gospel, and "the two sorcerers" as Muhammad and Jesus, peace and blessings be upon them, and made that statement the statement of the enemies of Allah, the Jews. Interpreting the two sorcerers in that way is narrated from al-Hasan, and it is also narrated from him that he interpreted them as Moses and Jesus, peace be upon them. All of it is as you see. Interpreting them as Muhammad and Moses, peace and blessings be upon them, is what al-Bukhari narrated in his Tarikh and a group from Ibn Abbas. Ibn Abi Hatim narrated from ‘Asim al-Jahdari that he used to read "sihran" [two works of magic] and say: "They are two books: the Furqan and the Torah. Do you not see He, the Exalted, saying: 'Then bring a scripture from Allah that is more guiding than both of them'?"