Tafsir of Al Imran 3:65

(O People of the Scripture) This is an address to the Jews and Christians. (Why do you argue about Abraham) meaning: Why do you dispute and contend regarding him, each of you claiming that he—peace be upon him—was of your religion? Ibn Ishaq and Ibn Jarir reported from Ibn Abbas—may Allah be pleased with them both—that he said: The Christians of Najran and the rabbis of the Jews gathered before the Prophet—may Allah bless him and grant him peace—and disputed in his presence. The rabbis said, "Abraham was nothing but a Jew," and the Christians said, "Abraham was nothing but a Christian." So Allah, the Exalted, revealed this verse concerning them.

The first prepositional phrase is connected to what follows it, as is the second. "Why" (Ma) is interrogative, and the purpose is denunciation and astonishment, according to al-Samin. Its alif was omitted when the preposition entered it to distinguish it from the relative pronoun (Mawsulah). The expression contains an ellipsis of a genitive (Mudaf); that is: [Why do you argue about] the religion of Abraham or his law, for there is no arguing over the physical beings themselves.

(And the Torah was not revealed) to Moses—peace be upon him—(nor the Gospel) to Jesus—peace be upon him—(except after him) as there were five hundred and sixty-five years between him and Moses—peace be upon them both. It is also said seven hundred, and it is said one thousand years. Between Moses and Jesus—peace be upon them both—there were one thousand nine hundred and twenty-five years; others say two thousand years, and there are other opinions.

(Do you not then use your reason?) The interrogative particle (Hamza) is prefixed to an implied element which is the coordinate, connected by the mentioned conjunction, according to one opinion; that is: Do you not reflect, so that you do not use your reason to perceive the invalidity of your claim? Or: Do you say that, and thus you do not use your reason to perceive its invalidity? This is a charge of ignorance against them regarding that claim, and an attribution of foolishness. This is apparent if they had claimed, as al-Shihab said, that he was—peace be upon him—literally one of them.

If their claim was that the religion of Abraham agrees with the religion of Moses or the religion of Jesus, and therefore he is a Jew or a Christian in this sense, then charging them with ignorance and denying them reason based on the revelation of the Torah and the Gospel after him is problematic—unless it is argued that the intended meaning is that if the matter were as they claimed, Moses—peace be upon him—would not have been given the Torah, nor Jesus—peace be upon him—the Gospel; rather, they would have been commanded to convey the scrolls of Abraham. Thus it is said. You know that this does not quench the thirst for knowledge, for an objector may say: What prevents the unity of the law alongside the revelation of these two books for a purpose other than explaining a new law? Furthermore, the scrolls did not contain rulings, but rather parables and admonitions, as mentioned in the Hadith.

Then, as for what al-Shihab said: even if the aspect of charging them with ignorance is apparent in it, the issuance of such a claim from the People of the Scripture is highly unlikely, for the people were not of such a degree of ignorance, including as they did the rabbis of the Jews and the delegation of Najran. It has been mentioned that the latter were severe in their argumentation; for Ibn Jarir reported from Abdullah ibn al-Harith al-Zubaydi that he said: I heard the Prophet—may Allah bless him and grant him peace—say: "I wish there were a veil between me and the people of Najran, so that I would not see them nor they see me," due to the severity with which they used to argue with the Prophet—may Allah bless him and grant him peace.

Unless it is said: Allah, the Exalted, blinded their insight regarding this claim so that they would become a laughingstock for the children of the believers; or that they said it by way of obstinacy and stubbornness to enrage one another; or to deceive some of the believers, thinking that because they were unlettered and unacquainted with the histories of the past prophets, such claims would shake them, so Allah disgraced them; or that the people were in themselves ignorant, not knowing, even if they were People of the Scripture. What Ibn al-Harith mentioned does not prove their knowledge, as is not hidden.

It is said: The intent of the Jews in their saying "Abraham was a Jew" is that he was a believer in Moses—peace be upon him—before his mission, in the same way the Muslims speak about all the messengers—peace be upon them—that they were believers in our Prophet—may Allah bless him and grant him peace—before his mission, as is indicated by their tidings of him. The intent of the Christians in their saying "Abraham was a Christian" is similar to this. Allah, the Exalted, refuted them by saying: (And the Torah and the Gospel were not revealed except after him), meaning: It is the nature of that which comes later to contain reports of that which preceded it, especially such an important matter, such a great honor, and such a grand favor. (Do you not then use your reason?) regarding what is in them, so that you may know their lack of mention of his Judaism and Christianity, which you have claimed?