Tafsir of Al Imran 3:83

Al-Wahidi recorded from Ibn Abbas that he said: The people of the two scriptures (the Jews and the Christians) disputed before the Messenger of Allah—may Allah grant him peace—regarding their differences concerning the religion of Ibrahim—peace be upon him. Each group claimed to be the most entitled to his religion. The Prophet—may Allah grant him peace—said: "Both groups are innocent of the religion of Ibrahim." They became angry and said: "By Allah, we are not pleased with your judgment, nor will we accept your religion." Thereupon, Allah the Exalted revealed this verse.

The sentence, within the composition of the verse, is conjoined to the sum of the conditional and its response, and it is said: [it is conjoined] to the response only. Conjoining the insha’ (non-declarative) to the ikhbar (declarative) is permissible here according to those who [usually] forbid it, and the hamza in both estimates is situated between the conjoined and the conjoiner for the sake of negation (disapproval). It is also said that it is conjoined to an omitted element, estimated as: "Do they turn away, and then seek other than the religion of Allah?"

Ibn Hisham stated: The first [view] is the school of Sibawayh and the majority, and Al-Zamakhshari affirmed it in several places and permitted the second in some. The latter is weakened by the affectation it entails and by the fact that it is not consistent. As for the first, it is due to the claim of omitting a sentence; yet if this is countered by the [alternative of] presenting a part of the conjunction, one might say that it is easier, because the metaphorical usage according to their view is less in wording, and there is, in this metaphorical usage, an indication of the originality of one thing over another—that is, the originality of the hamza in taking the initial position. As for the second [view], it is impossible in [verses] like: "Is then He who is a maintainer over every soul against what it has earned?" (13:33).

Ash-Shams ibn al-Sa’igh countered this by saying: What prevents the estimation of "Is there no controller for existence, then who is a maintainer over every soul?" as an interrogative of confirmation, intended to confirm the establishment of the Creator? The meaning would be: Is the Controller denied? No, no one is a maintainer over every soul; that is impossible, rather the Controller exists, so He is the one who is the maintainer over every soul. This is better than the estimation of Al-Badr ibn al-Damamini: "Are they astray, then who is a maintainer over every soul against what it has earned, [that] they have not unified Him?" He made the hamza for reproachful negation. In any case, it is likely that the detail in this issue is better expressed by saying: If that estimated [phrase] flows to the mind, then it is said with the estimation; otherwise, it is said with what the group [of scholars] said.

The object is brought forward because it is the target of the negation, not for restriction as some might imagine, because the disapproved act is the adoption of other than Allah as a Lord, even if it is along with Him. The claim that it is an indication that the religion of other than Allah does not coexist with His religion in the [act of] seeking, thus the fronting is for specification and the negation is directed towards it—meaning: "Do they specify other than the religion of Allah with their seeking?"—is affectation. Abu Hayyan’s statement—that the justification for the fronting mentioned above lacks investigation because the negation that is the meaning of the hamza is not directed at essences but at actions related to essences, so what is negated is only the seeking whose object is other than the religion of Allah, and the fronting of the object came merely as a matter of breadth (ittisa') and because of the similarity of yabghuna (they seek) to the verse-ending—is itself lacking investigation according to the investigative scholars, because we did not claim the negation is directed at the essences, as is not hidden.

Abu ‘Amr and ‘Asim, in a narration by Hafs, and Ya’qub read yabghuna (they seek) with the yā’ (third-person), while the rest read it with the tā’ (second-person), with the meaning: "Do you turn away, or do you act corruptly and disbelieve, and then seek other than the religion of Allah?" Some argued that it is an iltifat (shift in mode of address), so according to them, there is no estimation. Upon the estimation, the intent of negation comes into what is pointed to, and it is not contradicted by this, as it encompasses it.

{And to Him has submitted whoever is in the heavens and the earth} is a state-clause (jumla haliyyah) emphasizing the negation, meaning: How can they seek and desire other than His religion while this is the case?

{Willingly or unwillingly} are two infinitives in the position of a state, meaning: being willing or unwilling. Abu al-Baqa’ permitted them to be infinitives used not as infinitives, because aslama (submitted) is in the meaning of anqada (yielded) and ata’a (obeyed). It is said: There is reflection in this, because it is apparent in taw’an (willingly) as its meaning matches the preceding, but not in karhan (unwillingly). The statement that what is not permitted in the first [instances] is permitted in the second is not beneficial. It may be defended by saying that karh (compulsion) within it is also a form of submission. Taw’ is the infinitive of ta’a yatu’u (he obeyed), like i’ta’a being the infinitive of ata’a yuti’u, and they did not distinguish between them. It is said: ta’a yatuhu (he obeyed him) means he yielded to him, and ata’ahu yuti’uhu means he followed his command, and ta’ah means he agreed with him.

Regarding the meaning of the verse, I say: First: The intended [meaning] of submission by willingness is the submission arising from knowledge absolutely, whether obtained through deduction—as is the case for many of us—or without deduction and thought, as is the case for the angels. And the submission by unwillingness is what is obtained through the sword and the hardships that force one toward Islam. Second: The intended [meaning] is that they have yielded to Him, the Exalted, by choice regarding His command, like the angels and the believers, and [that they are] subjugated to His will like the disbelievers. For they are subjugated to the will for their disbelief, since nothing occurs that He, the Exalted, does not will. This does not contradict—as it is said—the voluntary part, such that they would have no choice at all, which would be an argument for the Jabriyyah sect, nor does it necessitate that their punishment for disbelief is not directed at them, nor the absence of a distinction between the believer and the disbeliever, based on the fact that all do not do except what Allah has willed, as some have wrongly imagined. Third: What some of our Sufi masters—may Allah benefit us through them—pointed to: that Islam "willingly" is the yielding and compliance to what Allah has commanded without the interference of the darkness of the self or the obstruction of the veils of selfishness. And Islam "unwillingly" is the yielding while being in the midst of conflicting desires, whisperings, and the obstruction of veils and attachment to intermediaries. The first is like the Islam of the angels and some of the chosen, excellent ones on earth. The second is like the Islam of many who are tossed by doubts... [The text continues in poetic reflection]. The disbelievers are of the second category according to the people of Allah, because they too proved a Creator, except that the darkness of their selves stood between them and perceiving the Truth: {And most of them believe not in Allah except while they associate others with Him} (12:106). {And if you ask them, "Who created the heavens and the earth?" they will surely say, "Allah."} (39:38). To this, the speech of Mujahid points. Ibn Jarir and others recorded from Abu al-‘Aliyah that he said: "Every human being has acknowledged for himself that Allah is my Lord and I am His servant; so whoever associates partners in His worship, this is the one who submitted unwillingly, and whoever makes worship sincere to Allah, this is the one who submitted willingly." Al-A’mash read karhan with a damma.

{And to Him they shall be returned} (3:83), meaning: to His recompense you shall turn, according to the well-known view. So hasten to His religion and do not oppose Islam. It is permissible to consider the sentence as a new beginning to report what it contains of threat, and to be conjoined to {And to Him has submitted}, in which case it is also a state-clause. ‘Asim read it with the yā’ of absence (third person), the pronoun referring to those to whom the pronoun in {they seek} returns. If it is with the address (second person), it is an iltifat. The rest read it with the address, and the pronoun refers to whom the pronoun in {they seek} returns; so, upon [the reading of] the third person, there is also an iltifat within it.