Tafsir of Al Imran 3:23

This is an expression of wonder directed at the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him), and at everyone capable of witnessing the state of the People of the Book: how, when the argument bites them, they flee into clamor and turn away from the clear path. It confirms what preceded, that the disagreement only occurred after knowledge had come to them. It is also said that it is a clarification of the negation of any helper for them, as they become defeated when their Book is used as a judge.

The relative pronoun refers to the Jews. "Portion" (nasiiban) means a share. "From" (min) is either for partitive (tab'id) or for clarification (bayan). In the sense that it is a "portion" of the Book, or a portion of it—because reaching the essence of the speech of the Exalted is impossible. If it is considered for clarification, the meaning is the revelation of the Book to them; if it is considered partitive, the meaning is their guidance to the understanding of what is contained therein. On either assumption, the definite article (lam) in "the Book" (al-kitab) is for familiarity (ahd), and the meaning is the Torah, which is what is narrated from many of the predecessors. The tanwin is for multiplicity.

It is permissible that the "lam" in "the Book" is for familiarity, referring to the Preserved Tablet, or that it is for the genus (al-jins). In the latter case, the "portion" refers to the Torah, and "from" is for initiation (ibtida') in the first instance, or it allows for both interpretations, with partitive (tab'id) in the second. The tanwin denotes glorification (ta'zim). You may also apply it to the previous interpretation accordingly. It is further suggested, on the assumption that "portion" means the knowledge they obtained, that the tanwin is for belittlement (tahqir). This has been objected to on the grounds that the context of hyperbole in condemning their state does not support it. It was replied that it is possible the intent is to reproach them for their rebellion and arrogance in using a lowly portion to avoid following one who possesses knowledge that all the sciences of the messengers do not equal. Expressing what they were given as a "portion" is to signal the completeness of its specificity to them and that it is a right of their rights which must be observed and acted upon according to its requirements.

His saying, the Exalted: { calling to the Book of Allah } is either a new sentence clarifying the place of wonder, or a state (hal) for the relative pronoun. The "Book of Allah" refers to the Torah. The use of the explicit noun in place of the pronoun is to necessitate the response, and the genitive construction (idafa) is for honor and to emphasize the obligation of referral. Ibn Abbas (may Allah be pleased with him) and others adopted this view.

Ibn Ishaq and his group reported from him: The Messenger of Allah (may Allah be pleased with him and grant him peace) entered the House of Studies upon a group of Jews and invited them to Allah the Exalted. Nu'man ibn 'Amr and al-Harith ibn Zayd said: "On what religion are you, O Muhammad?" He said: "On the creed and religion of Ibrahim." They said: "But Ibrahim was a Jew." The Messenger of Allah (may Allah be pleased with him and grant him peace) said to them: "Then come to the Torah; it is between us and you." They refused him, so Allah the Exalted revealed this verse.

In al-Bahr, it is mentioned that a man from the Jews committed adultery with a woman, and the stoning penalty had not yet been established in our religion. They referred the case to the Messenger of Allah (may Allah be pleased with him and grant him peace) to seek leniency for the two adulterers due to their status. The Messenger of Allah (may Allah be pleased with him and grant him peace) said: "I only judge by your Book." They denied the stoning, so the Torah was brought. Their scholar, Ibn Suriya, placed his hand over the verse of stoning. Abdullah ibn Salam said: "Remove your hand from it, O Messenger of Allah." He revealed it, and they were stoned. The Jews became angry, and the verse was revealed. This is also what is narrated from Ibn Jurayj and attributed to Ibn Abbas (may Allah be pleased with him).

Al-Hasan and Qatada went to the view that the "Book of Allah" refers to the Quran. They were invited to it because what is contained therein agrees with what is in the Torah regarding the fundamentals of religion, the pillars of the Law, and the description which had been previously announced in the glad tidings; or because they do not doubt that it is the Book of Allah the Exalted, revealed to the Seal of His Messengers.

{ to judge between them } - It is said: i.e., to separate truth from falsehood between those who were given (the Jews) and the one who called them (the Prophet, may Allah be pleased with him and grant him peace) regarding the affair of Ibrahim (peace be upon him), or regarding the ruling of stoning, or the matter of Islam, or between those who accepted Islam among them and those who did not, as a disagreement occurred between them regarding the true religion. Upon this—which is accepted by some, even if it does not match the reason for revelation, and perhaps necessitates committing a figurative usage in the reference of the pronoun—it is not determined that the one calling must be the Messenger of Allah (may Allah be pleased with him and grant him peace). It was read as "li-yahkuma" (to be judged) in the passive voice, and this is attributed to Abu Hanifah.

{ then a party of them turns away } - This is a conjunction to "they are called," and "then" (thumma) is for rank-based delay (tarakhi rutbi). It implies the improbability of their turning away after they knew the obligation of returning to it. "Of them" is an attribute of "a party." Perhaps the intent by this party is those most learned among them, so that the turning away of the others may be known as a matter of prior necessity (awla). It is said: This is the reason for the shift from "then they turn away" (thumma yatawallawna). It is also said: It refers to those who did not accept Islam, and the reason for the shift is clear. So reflect.

{ and they are averse } - It is permissible for this to be an adjective conjoined to the adjective before it—the "wa" (and) is for conjunction—or that it is in the position of the accusative as a state (hal) from the hidden pronoun in "of them" or from "a party," because it is specified by the adjective. The "wa" is then for the state (hal), and it is either emphatic—because turning away (tawalli) and aversion (i'rad) are of the same meaning—or it is clarifying the difference in their objects, based on what is said: that turning away is from the caller, and aversion is from what is called to; or turning away is with the body, and aversion is with the heart; or the first was from the scholars and the second was from their followers. It is also permissible for it to have no position in grammar, being a tail-piece (tadhyil) or an interpolation (mu'taridah), with the meaning being: they are a people whose practice is aversion. Some interpreted the sentence this way while considering it a state (hal), and perhaps they saw that nothing prevents it.