Tafsir of Al-`Ankabut 29:20

(Say: Travel in the land...) It is an order from Allah to Ibrahim, peace be upon him, to say this, according to some researchers. Likewise, those who consider everything that preceded it from the story of Ibrahim, peace be upon him, as well as those who consider the words of the Almighty: (And if you deny) until the words of the Almighty: (The answer of his people was only) to be a digression, have made this a command to our Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, to say this to the Quraish. It is also permissible that the arrangement of the preceding verses be as reported from some researchers, and that this be a command to the Prophet, peace be upon him, to say it to them, for they are like the people of Ibrahim, peace be upon him, and the nations that came before them in denying the Resurrection and rejecting it. What is included within the scope of this statement contains that which indicates its truth, and it not being unified with what preceded it does no harm. In any case, attributing mercy to the pronoun of the speaker in what follows, if Allah the Almighty wills, is because it is a narration of His speech, Mighty and Majestic is He, in a certain manner, and its like is frequent in the Holy Quran.

Al-Sayr (traveling), as Al-Raghib said, is moving along the earth; thus, there is tajrid (abstraction) in the verse. The apparent meaning is moving with the body. It is permitted that it refers to the movement of thought, and it has been applied to that in what is narrated in the description of the prophets, peace be upon them: "Their bodies are traveling on the earth, and their hearts are roaming in the kingdom of heaven." Some have applied this to striving in worship, through which one reaches the reward. The meaning, according to what we said first, is: Move about in the earth and journey through it.

(Then look at how He originated the creation)—meaning, how He created them from the beginning in various stages, differing natures, and diverse dispositions. For the arrangement of "looking" after "traveling" in the earth indicates following the conditions of the various types of creatures dwelling in its regions. On this basis, the nature of the "how" in the previous verse differs from the nature of the "how" in this verse, because the first, as you know, is with regard to the matter and its absence, while this is with regard to the diversity of conditions. Perhaps the expression in the first verse uses the imperfect tense, meaning yabda'u (originates), rather than the perfect tense as it is here, in order to evoke the past image; for the beginning of creation from matter and otherwise is stranger than the beginning of creation in various stages, in the sense that the creation of things is stranger than making their stages different. When you consider that the creation of things—in the Hereafter—returns to bringing them into existence from the void of non-existence without prior matter, in order to avoid infinite regress, whereas making their stages different is only after the precedence of matter (even if it is a logical precedence, which is what the differentiation exists upon, i.e., the essences of things), you will not doubt that the first is stranger than the second. That is why you see that glorification for the origin of creation in the Great Quran is more frequent than glorification for the mentioned "making." The form of the verb follows the style of if'al (the causative form) in indicating strangeness, as it is not used [in this context otherwise], and thus they said: It would be a flaw in eloquence were it not for its occurrence alongside (He will repeat it).

Approaching this secret is what was said regarding the reason for the omission of the ya from yasri in His words: (And the night when it passes), which is that the night is traveled in, it does not travel; this is to show that the departure from the apparent in the wording is for the sake of its departure in meaning, and this is a subtle meaning.

It has been said regarding the reason for the expression used: it is to denote continuous renewal, and this is based on the second meaning in the verse. Some said regarding the difference between the two proofs: "This is an objective (eye-witness) proof, while that is scientific; or this is cosmological, and the first is psychological." Al-Zuhri read: (kayfa bada'a al-khalq) with the lightening of the hamza by substituting it with an alif, then dropping it in pronunciation. Abu Hayyan said: "This is an irregular lightening."

As for interpreting it with what Mulla Sadra interpreted it with in his Asfar, it is something that should not be given attention. In that case, the repetition would be by assembling what had dissolved of the elements and adding it to this part, so it would not be a pure invention and a bringing from the void of non-existence into existence in reality. However, both the beginning and the repetition have a complete similarity to the mentioned invention and bringing forth; through this, it is valid to say it for every invention and bringing from non-existence into existence, so do not be heedless. The clause is conjoined to the clause (Travel in the land) and is included with it in the scope of the command; their difference in being a statement (news) or a command does no harm, for that is permissible after a command, and it has a place in syntax. It is not valid to conjoin it to bada'a al-khalq (originated the creation) because it is not fit to be a location for "looking." If it is in the sense of seeing, it is clear; and if it is in the sense of reflecting, it is because reflecting is upon the night, not the result.

The manifestation of the Exalted Name (Allah) and placing it as the subject, despite it being implicit in bada'a (He originated), is to manifest the extreme care in clarifying the realization of the repetition by pointing to the cause of the ruling, for it is the Name that encompasses the attributes of perfection and the descriptions of majesty. The repetition of the attribution is a return to what preceded according to the apparent, so it does not need justification. The claim that the intended meaning is not to prove the repetition to those who denied it—and that therefore it was not woven in this manner—is not accepted.

Abu 'Amr and Ibn Kathir read: (al-nash'ah) with the lengthening, and they are two dialects like ra'fah and ra'afah, and the shortening is more famous. Its place is in the accusative as an emphatic infinitive for yunshi'u, with the omission of the additions; the origin is al-insha'ah, or by omission of the operative agent, meaning: He creates, so they are created in the final creation, similar to: (And caused you to grow from the earth a [progressive] growth).

(Indeed, Allah is over all things competent) is a justification for what preceded by way of verification. For whoever knows His power, Mighty and Majestic is He, over all possibilities—among which is the repetition—it is inconceivable that he would hesitate regarding His power, Glorified is He, over it, nor regarding its occurrence after He has informed of it.

Know that most of those who deny the Resurrection do not say it is impossible, like the gathering of two opposites; rather, the extent of their position is finding it unlikely. The refutation of these people through these verses and their like is clear, for they contain that which removes the unlikelihood from "origination," which is in customary evidence more difficult than "repetition." Some of them claim the impossibility of repeating the non-existent, and the refutation of them—after acknowledging that what we are dealing with is the repetition of the non-existent and not the gathering of the scattered—is by invalidating what they used as proof for the impossibility, and theological books have taken care of that. As for the refutation of them through these verses and their like, it is because they contain an indication of the falsification of the proofs of impossibility; so reflect.