Qurani app iconQuraniQuran, hadith, fiqh, prayer, and audio in one place
Browse

Tafsir of Al Imran 3:78

Surah Al Imran 3:78

ﱁ ﱂ ﱃ ﱄ ﱅ ﱆ ﱇ ﱈ ﱉ ﱊ ﱋ ﱌ ﱍ ﱎ ﱏ ﱐ ﱑ ﱒ ﱓ ﱔ ﱕ ﱖ ﱗ ﱘ ﱙ ﱚ ﱛ ﱜ ﱝ

And indeed, there is among them a party who alter the Scripture with their tongues so you may think it is from the Scripture, but it is not from the Scripture. And they say, "This is from Allah," but it is not from Allah. And they speak untruth about Allah while they know.

Tafsir

Ruh al-Ma'ani

Verse range: 3:78

Open in Qurani

{And indeed, among them is a party} Meaning, among the treacherous People of the Scripture is a group that:

{who distort their tongues with the Book} Meaning, they alter it. Mujahid said this. It is also said: the root of *al-layy* (distortion) is *al-fatl* (twisting), as in your saying "I twisted his hand" (*lawwaytu yadahu*) if you folded it. From this is "I put off the creditor" (*lawwaytu al-gharim*) if you delayed his right. The poet said: "You prolong my delay (*layyani*), while you are one who delays (*malliyyah*)..." In the Hadith: "The delay (*layy*) of the affluent is an injustice." Thus, the meaning is that they twist their tongues during recitation through distortion in vowels and the like, changing the meaning. In the end, this returns to what Mujahid said. Close to this is the view that the intent is that they incline their tongues with what resembles the Book. *Al-alsina* (tongues) is the plural of *lisan*. Ibn al-Shihna mentioned that it can be masculine or feminine. It is reported from Abu Amr ibn al-Ala that he who treats it as feminine makes the plural *alsun*, and he who treats it as masculine makes it *alsina*. Al-Farra said: "I have never heard *al-lisan* (the tongue) from the Arabs except as masculine." It is not hidden that the affirmative is preferred over the negative.

The ba (in bil-kitab) is either connected, for the instrument, for context, or for association. The prepositional phrase is a state (hal) from "tongues," meaning: [their tongues] while associated with the Book. The people of Medina read it as yaluwwuna with a shadda, which is in the category of {they twist their heads}. From Mujahid and Ibn Kathir, it is read yaluna by converting the damma of the waw into a hamza, then lightening it by deleting it and casting its vowel onto the preceding quiescent letter. This is how it is said, though it was objected that if the damma of the waw were moved to what precedes it and then deleted to avoid the meeting of two quiescent letters, that would suffice for the derivation; so what is the need for converting the waw into a hamza? It was refuted that this was done to adhere to the morphological rule, unlike moving the vowel of the waw and then deleting it as is known in morphology. Some researchers viewed this critically, noting that a damma-carrying waw is only changed into a hamza if its damma is original; thus, this is also contrary to the rule. Yes, it was read yal'una with a hamza in the rare (shawah) readings, which supports it. In any case, it contains the meeting of two i'lals (weakening modifications), and its like is abundant. As for making it from al-wali in the sense of proximity—meaning they bring their tongues near by inclining toward the distorted text—it is far from correct and close to being a distortion.

{so that you may think it is from the Book} Meaning, so that you, O Muslims, may think that the distorted [text]—which is indicated by the twisting—or the similarity is from the Book of Allah Most High, which was revealed to some of His Prophets, peace be upon them. It is also read as *li-yahsabuhu* (with a *ya*), and the pronoun also refers to the Muslims.

{while it is not from the Book} ### {but they say: "It is from Allah"} Meaning, they claim explicitly, not content with merely hinting or alluding, that the distorted [text] or the similar [text] was revealed by Allah.

{while it is not from Allah} Meaning, it is not revealed by Allah Most High. The *waw* is for the state (*hal*), and the sentence is a state from the pronoun of the subject in the predicate. The statement {and they say} and what follows is an emphasis on the negation that preceded it. The purpose is not merely emphasis; otherwise, the conjunction would not be appropriate. Rather, it is also for denunciation, showing that they were not content with that allusion until they committed to this explicit statement. By this, the differentiation requiring the conjunction was achieved. The use of the explicit noun in place of the pronoun is to terrify [the reader] regarding what they have committed. Al-Jubba'i and al-Ka'bi used this verse as evidence that the act of a servant is not created by Allah Most High, for otherwise those distorting [people] would be truthful in their saying "It is from Allah." However, this was refuted by saying that the people did not claim the *act* of distortion is from Allah and created by Him; rather, they claimed that the *distorted text* is revealed by Allah or is one of His rulings. Thus, Allah’s refutation of them was directed toward what they claimed. The conclusion is that the intention of the negation, as we have indicated, is its revelation from Him (Exalted is He), which is more specific than it being His act and creation. Negating the specific does not necessitate negating the general, so it does not indicate the doctrine of the Mu'tazilah, who say that the acts of servants are created by them, not by Allah Most High.

{and they speak falsehood about Allah} Meaning, in their attributing that to Allah Most High, both by allusion and by explicit statement.

{while they know} ### {that they are liars against Him, the Exalted} This is a verification against them that what they fabricated was done intentionally, not by mistake. It is also said: [they know] the punishment that awaits them for that. Al-Dahhak narrated from Ibn Abbas that the verse was revealed regarding the Jews and Christians together, because they distorted the Torah and the Gospel and added to the Book of Allah what is not from it. Others narrated that it concerns a group of the Jews: Ka'b ibn al-Ashraf, Malik ibn al-Sayf, Huyayy ibn Akhtab, Abu Yasir, and Sha'bah ibn 'Amr the poet.

Regarding what is a proof against them from the Torah People have differed as to whether the distorted text was written into the Torah or not. A group maintained that there is nothing in the Torah except the words of Allah, and that the distortion of the Jews was only changing it during recitation or by giving false interpretations to the texts. As for them writing whatever they desired in the Torah—given the multiplicity of its copies—that did not happen. They used as evidence what Ibn al-Mundhir and Ibn Abi Hatim recorded from Wahb ibn Munabbih, who said: "The Torah and the Gospel are as Allah Most High revealed them; not a letter of them has been changed. But they lead astray through distortion and interpretation, and they had books which they wrote with their own hands and said: 'This is from Allah,' while it is not from Allah. As for the Books of Allah, they are preserved and do not change." Also, the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) used to say to the Jews, as a way of binding them: "Bring the Torah and read it if you are truthful." They would refrain from doing so. If it had been changed to suit their desires, they would not have refrained; indeed, the Messenger would not have said that to them, for it would invalidate his noble objective.

Others maintained that they did change it and wrote that into the very text of their Book. They argued for this with many apparent evidences. The multiplicity of copies does not prevent this, either due to the possibility of collusion or that this was done in some copies and not others. Likewise, the Messenger’s saying that to them does not prevent it, for it is possible he (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) knew that some portions remained intact, sufficient for his purpose, either because they were ignorant of how to interpret it or because Allah diverted them from changing it. As for what was narrated from Wahb, even if its authenticity were established, it could be a statement based on personal reasoning (ijtihad) or arising from an incomplete investigation.

Among what supports the occurrence of change in the Books of Allah, and that they did not remain as they were on the day they were revealed, is the existence of contradictions in the Gospels, their opposition to one another, their mutual falsification, their instability, and their collision. They are four Gospels:

  1. The Gospel of Matthew, one of the twelve disciples. His Gospel was in the Syriac language, written in the land of Palestine eight years after the ascension of Christ to heaven, consisting of sixty-eight chapters.
  2. The Gospel of Mark, one of the seventy. He wrote his Gospel in the Frankish (Latin) language in the city of Rome, twelve years after the ascension of Christ, consisting of forty-eight chapters.
  3. The Gospel of Luke, also one of the seventy. He wrote his Gospel in the Greek language in the city of Alexandria after that, consisting of eighty-three chapters.
  4. The Gospel of John, the beloved of Christ. He wrote his Gospel in the city of Ephesus in the land of Rome, thirty years after the ascension of Christ, consisting in the Coptic copies of thirty-three chapters.

Each Gospel contains tales and stories neglected by the others, and includes things for which the other contains the opposite or what contradicts it. Within them are things that necessity dictates are not from the speech of Allah at all. Among this is that Matthew mentioned that Christ was crucified, and two thieves were crucified with him, one on his right and the other on his left, and that they both mocked Christ along with the Jews and insulted him. Luke mentioned the opposite, saying that one of them mocked him while the other said to him, "Do you not fear Allah? We are being punished justly, but this man has done nothing wrong." Then he said to Christ, "Lord, remember me in your kingdom." He said, "Truly, you will be with me today in Paradise." It is not hidden that this leads to contradiction, for the two thieves according to Matthew are disbelievers, whereas according to Luke, one is a believer and the other is a disbeliever. Mark and John omitted this story.

Among them is that Luke mentioned that Jesus said: "The Son of Man did not come to destroy the souls of men, but to give life." His companions disagreed with him and said, "Rather, he said: 'The Son of Man did not come to bring peace on earth, but a sword, and to kindle fire therein.'" There is no doubt this is a contradiction; one says he came as a mercy to the worlds, and the other says he came as a curse upon all creation.

Among them is that Matthew said: Jesus said to the twelve disciples, "You are the ones who will be sitting in the coming time on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel," testifying to all of them success and righteousness in the resurrection. Then Matthew and others negated that, saying: "One of the twelve disciples, Judas the treasurer, went and took a bribe of thirty silver coins for Jesus, brought the guards, and delivered Jesus to them." Jesus said: "Woe to him; it would have been better for him not to be born."

Among them is that Matthew also mentioned that when Jesus was brought to Pilate the governor, he said: "What evil has this man done?" The Jews shouted: "Crucify him! Crucify him!" When he saw their determination and that he could not benefit them, he took water, washed his hands, and said: "I am innocent of the blood of this righteous man; you see to it." John falsified this, saying: "When Jesus was brought to him, he said to the Jews: 'What do you want?' They said: 'Crucify him.' So he had Jesus whipped, then delivered him to them."

This is in addition to other [contradictions] that would take long to list. If this change and distortion occurred in the foundations of these people and their predecessors, what is your thought regarding their branches and successors? And if there is bias in the Gospels, then agitation has occurred in the chests of the leaders. I wish I knew: did Ibn Munabbih notice this or not, such that he said: "The Torah and the Gospel are as Allah Most High revealed them"? Subhan Allah! This is one of the most wondrous of wonders.