ﲁ ﲂ ﲃ ﲄ ﲅ ﲆ ﲇ ﲈ ﲉ ﲊ ﲋ ﲌ ﲍ ﲎ ﲏ ﲐ ﲑ ﲒ ﲓ ﲔ ﲕ ﲖ
But those who feared their Lord will have gardens beneath which rivers flow, abiding eternally therein, as accommodation from Allah. And that which is with Allah is best for the righteous.
Tafsir
Verse range: 3:198
"But" (lākin) is for rectification (istidrāk) according to the grammarians; it serves to lift a delusion arising from what preceded. According to the rhetoricians (‘ulamā’ al-ma‘ānī), it is for the refutation of a belief (qaṣr al-qalb)—repelling the misconception held by the addressee.
As for the first interpretation: when the disbelievers were described as having little profit from their movement in trade and their circulation throughout the lands for its sake, it might be imagined that trade itself is the cause of this outcome. Thus, it is rectified that the God-fearing (muttaqīn), even if they engage in trade, are not harmed by it, and that they possess what they have been promised.
Or, it may be said that since the Almighty described the enjoyment of those who circulate (al-mutaqallibīn) as "little," despite their wide circumstances, it might lead one to imagine that the Muslims—who remain in struggle and hunger—are in a state of absolute scarcity. This is repelled by the fact that their enjoyment is for the sake of piety and abstinence from the world; and there is no enjoyment of this world higher than that, for it is a means to a great, eternal grace: abiding in the Gardens.
As for the second interpretation, it is a refutation of the disbelievers’ belief that they are enjoying life while the believers are in great loss. Some researchers posit that placing "piety" (taqwā) within the relative clause (ṣilah) serves to intimate that the aforementioned qualities are of the nature of piety, intending by it abstinence from polytheism and sins. The relative pronoun (alladhīna) is the subject, and the prepositional phrase (lahum) is the predicate. "Gardens" (jannāt) is nominative as the subject of the predicate (fā‘iliyyah), relying on the subject (al-mubtada’), or it is nominative as the initial subject (ibtida’) with the prepositional phrase as its predicate, and the entire sentence acts as the predicate of the subject (alladhīna). "Abiding therein" (khālidīna) is a prospective state (ḥāl muqaddarah) from the pronoun governed by the preposition in "for them" (lahum), or from "gardens" due to its specification by the descriptive sentence, and the governor is the sense of establishment contained in the prepositional phrase. Abū Ja‘far read lākinna with a doubled nūn.
"An accommodation from God" (nuzulan min ‘indi Allāh): The nuzul—and likewise the tazul with a ḍammah followed by a sukūn—is what is prepared for a guest upon their first arrival, such as food and drink. Al-Ḍabbī said: "When the tyrant with his army visited us, we made the spears and the sharp blades our nuzul (offering/accommodation) for him." It is used to mean provisions in a general sense, and it can be a plural meaning "the arriving ones," as in the saying of Al-A‘shā: "Or they arrive, for we are a company of arrivals (nuzul)." Abū ‘Alī allowed this in the verse, and it is also possible for it to be a verbal noun (maṣdar).
It is said that the original meaning of nuzul in the singular is the surplus and gain in food, and it is metaphorically applied to whatever is obtained from a thing. Its accusative case here is either as a state (ḥāl) from "gardens," due to its specification by description—the governor being the sense of establishment in the prepositional phrase—if it means "what is prepared, etc.," and in this case, the Garden itself is treated as an nuzul by way of metaphor. Or, it is by estimating an implied possessor, meaning: "possessors of nuzul."
It may also be a state from the pronoun in "abiding therein" (khālidīna) if it is a plural. If it is a verbal noun, it may be an absolute object (maf‘ūl muṭlaq) for an omitted verb, meaning "they arrived at it with an arrival (nuzulan)." It has been permitted, on the basis of it being a verbal noun, to mean the passive object, thus making it a state from the pronoun governed by the preposition in "therein" (fīhā), i.e., "made to descend into." The prepositional phrase (min ‘indi Allāh) is an adjective for nuzul if you do not consider it a plural; if you do consider it a plural, then there are two possibilities—as Abū al-Baqā’ mentioned: first, that it is a state from the omitted object, as the estimate is "it descends to them as nuzul"; second, that it is the predicate of an omitted subject, meaning "that is from God," i.e., by His grace.
Many scholars hold that nuzul is in the first sense, and some have used this verse to argue for the vision of God Almighty, because if the Garden in its entirety is an nuzul (an accommodation offered upon arrival), there must be something else that is the origin relative to it, and there is nothing beyond God. And this is as you see it. Yes, in this case, there is an indication that these people are the guests of God Almighty, and in that is the perfection of His kindness toward them.
"And what is with God"—of the aforementioned eternal matters, due to their abundance and perpetuity—"is better for the righteous" than the small, perishable goods in which the wicked circulate, due to their scarcity and transience. Expressing them as "the righteous" (al-abrār) and placing the noun instead of the pronoun—as it has been said—is to indicate that the counted qualities are of the deeds of righteousness just as they are of the category of piety. The sentence acts as a tail-piece (tadhyīl). Some have claimed that this is something that may point to the Vision of God, for it intimates a station of being "with Him" (‘indiyyah) and proximity that no pleasure of the Garden can equal. The relative pronoun is the subject, the prepositional phrase is its relative clause, and "is better" (khayr) is its predicate. "For the righteous" (lil-abrār) is an adjective to "better."
It is permitted that "for the righteous" be the predicate, with the intention of placing it before the subject, meaning: "And that which is with God is established for the righteous," and "is better" is then a second predicate. It is said that "for the righteous" is a state from the pronoun in the prepositional phrase, and "is better" is the predicate of the subject. Abū al-Baqā’ criticized this, saying it is far-fetched because it involves separating the subject and the predicate by a state belonging to someone else, and separating the state from its possessor when it is not the subject—which is not permissible in standard speech.
