Tafsir of Luqman 31:27

(And if whatever tree is on the earth were pens)—that is, if it were established that whatever is on the earth, from among the trees, were pens. "If" (An) and what follows it is the subject of a predicate that is implied, based on the fact that the particle "An" indicates establishment and reality. This is the view of Al-Mubarrad. Sibawayh stated: It is an initial (Mubtada) that does not require a predicate because the subject and predicate are mentioned after it. Others say it is an initial whose predicate is implied before it. Ibn Asfur stated: It is after it.

"Whatever is on the earth" is the noun of "An," and "from a tree" (min shajarah) is an explanation for "what," or for the pronoun returning to it in the prepositional phrase; thus, it is in the position of a state (hal) for it, or for the pronoun. That is: "And if it were established that that which is situated on the earth exists as a tree, and pens" is the predicate of "An."

Abu Hayyan said: This contains proof against the claim of Al-Zamakhshari and some non-Arabs who support his view: that the predicate of "An" occurring after "Lawla" (if not) must not be a solid noun or a derivative noun, but must be a verb. This is false, and the speech of the Arabs is overflowing with evidence to the contrary. A poet said: "And if it were a sparrow, I would have thought it branded, calling slaves and [names]." Another said: "How pleasant is life, if only the youth were a stone, from which calamities strike and rebound while it is intact."

This is countered by saying that the requirement for the predicate to be a verb only applies if it is a derivative; therefore, "pens" here does not refute this, nor does what was mentioned in the two verses. As for His saying, the Exalted: "If they were dwelling in the desert," the "if" there is for wishing (tamanni), and the discussion concerns the predicate of "An" occurring after the conditional "if" (law).

The meaning of "tree" is every tree. The indefinite can imply generality in affirmative sentences if the context requires it, as in His saying: "A soul shall know what it has brought forth." Similarly, Ibn Abbas (may Allah be pleased with them both) said to some people of Sham when they asked him about a pilgrim who kills a locust: "Is he to give a date as ransom for it?" He replied: "A date is better than a locust," according to what a group has chosen. We do not concede the contradiction between this generality and the singular form; it is as if it were said: "And if every tree on the earth were pens, etc."

The state of every tree being pens is with regard to parts or branches. The meaning leads to: "If the parts or branches of every tree on the earth were pens, etc." What makes the intention of generality appropriate in contexts like ours is that the speech in which the indefinite occurs is a condition using "if" (law), and generally, for a condition, it is closer to negation—so what of your suspicion when it is a condition used with it? Even if it is not here in its well-known sense of the negation of the consequent due to the negation of the antecedent, but rather indicates the establishment of the consequent or is a conditional particle for the future, as detailed in the meaning.

The selection of "tree" (singular) over "trees" (plural) is because the speech is then further from the consideration of distribution—that each individual tree should be a pen—which would detract from the required emphasis of the greatness of His words. In Al-Bahr, it is stated that this is a case where the singular is used in the place of the plural and the indefinite in the place of the definite. Examples include: "Whatever verse We abrogate," "Whatever mercy Allah opens for the people," "And to Allah prostrates whatever is in the heavens and the earth, [that is] a creature," and the saying of the Arabs: "This is the first horseman" and "This is the best scholar," meaning "the first of the horsemen" and "the best of the scholars." Mentioning the singular indefinite to mean the plural definite is a well-known style in the speech of the Arabs. Likewise, it is estimated here as "from the trees," so do not be heedless.

Al-Zamakhshari said: He, the Exalted, said "tree" (singular) rather than the generic noun "trees" (shajar), because he intended the detailed enumeration of the trees, tree by tree, until not one of the genus of trees remains that has not been cut into pens. This is countered by saying that the singular indicating detail without repetition is not customary; the custom is to indicate it by repetition, such as "They came to me man by man." Ponder this.

The choice of the paucal plural in "pens" (aqlam)—even though the plural of abundance would be more appropriate for the context—is because no other plural for "pen" is known, and "qulam" is not in circulation, so its usage is not aesthetic.

"And the sea" (al-bahr)—the sea (the ocean). The article "al" is for familiarity, because it is the most immediate, and because it is the unique exemplar of perfection, as it may be applied to its branches and to great rivers like the Tigris and the Euphrates. Some permitted the intention of the genus, but perhaps the first is more eloquent.

"Supplies it from after it"—that is, after its depletion, or it is said: from behind it—"seven seas" (seven seas), hypothesized, each of which is like it in breadth, encompassing nature, and abundance of water. The intention by "seven" is abundance, such that it includes a hundred or a thousand, for example, not the specific known number, as in His saying, peace and blessings be upon him: "The believer eats in one gut, and the disbeliever eats in seven guts."

It was chosen because it is a complete number, as you knew when discussing His saying: "Those are ten complete." Many countable things that have significance—such as the heavens, the wandering planets, the true climes, and the days of the week—are limited to seven. Perhaps mentioning them here, rather than seventy—which is also used for abundance—is a symbol of the significance of those seas being great and of high importance.

Since they were not originally intended for that, but for the known small number, their differentiator came as "seas" (abhur) with the paucal form rather than "seas" (buhur), even though nothing is intended but abundance, to match between the two expressions. So, just as "seven" was used metaphorically for abundance, "abhur" was used metaphorically as well. It would have been natural, after making the tree on earth into pens, to say: "And the sea is the ink." But what was brought in the noble arrangement is because "supplies it" dispenses with mentioning the ink, because it is from your saying: "He supplied the inkwell" and "he increased its supply." Thus, it contains an indication of the ink, with what adds to the emphasis, which is the depiction of the continuous supply, state after state, as the imperfect tense signifies. The noble arrangement conveys that the ocean is like an inkwell, and seven seas like it are filled with ink, pouring their ink into it forever, in a pouring that does not cease.

The nominative case of "the sea" (al-bahr), as Abu Hayyan considers most likely, is as an initial (Mubtada), and the sentence "supplies it" is its predicate. The "wa" is the "wa" of state, and the sentence is a state of the relative pronoun or the pronoun that is in its connection. That is: "If it were established that whatever tree is on the earth were pens, while the sea was being supplied by seven seas." It does not harm that the sentence is devoid of a pronoun of the possessor of the state, for the "wa" provides a connection that does not fall short of a pronoun, due to its indication of concomitance.

Al-Zamakhshari indicated that this sentence and those like it—such as his saying: "And I went out while the birds were in their nests, with a lean [horse]..."—are from the states whose rule is the rule of adverbial phrases, because they are in their meaning. The meaning of "I came while the army was standing," for instance, and the meaning of "I came at the time of the army standing" is one. Since the adverbial phrase connects to what precedes it by its relation to it, even if there is no pronoun in it, when it occurs as a state, a pronoun is established in it. Thus, what resembles it is as if a pronoun is established in it. The objection of Abu Hayyan—that when the adverbial phrase occurs as a state, there is a pronoun in the operator that transfers to the adverbial phrase, whereas the nominal sentence, when it is a state with the "wa," has no transferred pronoun, so how can it be said that it is in the judgment of an adverbial phrase?—does not refute this. Yes, the truth is that connection with "wa" is sufficient instead of a pronoun, and one does not need the burden of this artifice.

It is permitted that the sentence is a state from "the earth," and the operator in it is the meaning of "residing," and the connector is what you heard, or the "al" in "the sea," based on the opinion of the Kufans that "al" can be a substitute for a pronoun, as in His saying: "Gardens of perpetual residence, whose gates will be opened for them," meaning: "If it were established that that which resided on the earth, from a tree, were pens, while its sea was being supplied by seven seas."

He said in Al-Kashf: "It is necessary to make 'from a tree' an explanation for the pronoun returning to 'what,' so as not to necessitate separation between the parts of the relative clause with an extraneous element."

"And the sea," on the assumption that the "al" in it is a substitute for the genitive pronoun returning to the earth, may mean the known sea, or it may mean another. Al-Tibi said: "The sea, based on that, covers all seas due to the context of the genitive, and it benefits that the seven are outside the sea of the earth." According to other interpretations, it may refer to the known portion familiar to the addressees. This was refuted by saying that there is no difference between them; rather, the sea of the earth being for familiarity is more apparent, because familiarity is the basis of the genitive, and it does not contradict that the earth encompasses all regions, because the familiar sea is the encompassing ocean, and it surrounds them all.

Al-Zamakhshari permitted its nominative case to be by coordination with the place of "An" and its operation, and the sentence "supplies it" is a state, on the assumption of "if it were established that whatever tree on earth were pens and the sea were established as supplied by seven seas." This is countered by saying that the indicator of the omitted verb is "An" and its predicate, as established in its chapter; therefore, it is impossible for the omitted [part] to lead to the coordinated [part] without noticing an indicator, and in this coordination, there is an exclusion from noticing. It was answered that what is not permissible in the independent might be permissible in the dependent. Then it is not hidden that the coordination here is the coordination of a singular with a singular, not a singular with a sentence, as was said, since the apparent meaning is that the coordinated is the verbal noun occurring as the agent of "established," and it is a singular, not a sentence.

It was also permitted that the coordination is based on the opinion of those who make it an initial. This is countered by saying it necessitates that the noun occurring as an initial follows "if," since the estimation becomes "If the sea," and that, according to what Abu Hayyan said, is not permissible except in poetic necessity, like his saying: "If without water my throat were choked, I would be like the choking with water." It was answered that what is not permitted in the independent is forgiven in the dependent, as in "many a man and his brother say that." Some said: "It necessitates in the previous coordination that the explicit noun follows 'if,' and it is also specific to necessity." He answered as was answered, and in my view, there is reflection on this.

It was permitted that the nominative case is as an initial and the sentence "supplies it" is the predicate of the initial, and the "wa" is the "wa" of concomitance, and the sentence of the initial and its predicate is in the position of the object of concomitance (maf'ul ma'ahu), based on the fact that it can be a sentence, as reported from Ibn Hisham. Its remoteness is not hidden.

It was permitted that the "wa" is for explanatory initiation, as if it were said: "What is the ink then?" and it was said: "And the sea, etc." This is countered by saying that the coupling of the response with "wa," even if it is initiatory, is not customary. And what is said, that it is coupled with it when it is a response to a question by way of debate, not for inquiry, is not relied upon. Hence, it was said: "The apparent meaning, upon intending initiation, is that it should be grammatical." In this structure, other facets of inflection besides what was mentioned were also permitted.

The two Basrans read "And the sea" in the accusative case, as it is coordinated with the noun of "An," and "supplies it" is a predicate for it. That is: "And if the sea were supplied by seven seas."

Ibn al-Hajib said in his Amali: "It is not correct for 'supplies it' to be a state, because it leads to restricting the solid initial with the state, which is not allowed because it is for clarifying the agent or the object, and the initial is not such. It also leads to the initial having no predicate. And it is not correct for 'pens' to be its predicate because it is the predicate of the first." He did not mention the possibility of implying the predicate because of the obviousness that it is contrary to the apparent.

It was permitted that it be in the accusative on the condition of interpretation as coordination with the omitted verb, meaning "established," and the entry of "if" upon the imperfect verb is permissible. The sentence "supplies it," etc., in that case, has no place in inflection.

Abdullah read "And a sea" with indefiniteness and the nominative case. Ibn Jinni explained that as it being an initial and its predicate is omitted, that is: "There is a sea that supplies it, etc." And the "wa" is the "wa" of state inevitably. It is not permissible to coordinate it with "pens" because the sea and what is in it is not from the talk of the tree and the pens, but rather from the talk of ink. In Al-Bahr, it is said that the "wa" in this reading is for the state or for coordination as previously mentioned. And if it is for the state, then "a sea" is an initial, and the occurrence of the state allowed starting with it, even though it is indefinite, for that is counted among the reasons for starting with the indefinite, as in his saying: "We traveled and a star had illuminated, so when your countenance appeared, it hid its light from every rising sun." It is not hidden that if it is coordinated with the agent of "established," then the sentence "supplies it" is in the position of an adjective for it, not a state of it. This was permitted by those who permit the coming of the state from the indefinite. The apparent, upon the assumption of it being an initial, is to make the sentence its predicate, and there is no need to make its predicate omitted as Ibn Jinni did.

Ibn Mas'ud and Ubayy read "supplies it" (tumudduhu) with the feminine "ta," from "madda" (to supply), like the one in the reading of the majority. Ibn Mas'ud also, and Al-Hasan, Ibn Musayyib, and Ibn Hurmuz read "supplies it" (yumudduhu) with the damma of the ya. Ibn al-Shaykh said: "yamuddu" with fatha then damma, and "yumuddu" with damma then kasra, are two dialects with the same meaning. Ja'far bin Muhammad (may Allah be pleased with them both) read "And the sea, its ink," meaning what is written with it of ink. Ibn 'Atiyyah said: It is the verbal noun.

"The words of Allah would not be exhausted" is the response to "if." In the speech, there is an abbreviation called "the omission of conciseness" (hathf ijaz), and the context points to the omitted. The estimation is: "And if whatever tree is on the earth were pens, and the sea were supplied by seven seas, and the words of Allah were written with those pens and that ink, they would not be exhausted," because of their lack of finality, while those pens and the ink would be exhausted because of their finality. Similar to this in containing the omission of conciseness is His saying, the Exalted: "Then whoever of you is ill or has an ailment in his head, then a ransom..."—meaning: "Then he shaved his head to remove the ailment, so a ransom."

The intention by "His words," the Exalted, is the words of His knowledge, the Exalted, and His wisdom, the Glorious. This is what the cause of revelation demands, according to what Ibn Jarir brought out from 'Ikrimah. He said: The People of the Book asked the Messenger of Allah (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) about the soul, so He, the Exalted, sent down: "And they ask you about the soul. Say, 'The soul is of the affair of my Lord, and you have not been given of knowledge except a little'." They said: "You claim that we have not been given of knowledge except a little, yet we have been given the Torah, which is wisdom, and whoever is given wisdom has been given much good." So, "And if..." was sent down, etc. The apparent meaning is that the Jews said that to him, peace be upon him, face-to-face, and it is apparent that the verse is Medinan. It is said that they ordered the delegation of Quraysh to say that to him, peace be upon him. This speaker says that it is Meccan.

The gist of the answer is that even if what you have been given is much good because it is wisdom, it is little in comparison to the wisdom of Him, the Almighty. In a report, it is said that His saying, the Exalted: "And they ask you..." etc., was sent down in Mecca. When he, peace be upon him, migrated, the rabbis of the Jews came to him and said: "It has reached us that you say, 'And you have not been given of knowledge except a little.' Do you mean us or your people?" He, peace be upon him, said: "Both, I meant." They said: "Do you not recite in what has come to you that we have been given the Torah, and in it is the knowledge of everything?" He, peace be upon him and salutation, said: "It is little in the knowledge of Allah, the Exalted, and you have been given that which if you acted upon, you would be saved." They said: "O Muhammad, how do you claim this when you say: 'And whoever is given wisdom has been given much good?' How can they be joined?" He, peace be upon him, said: "This is little knowledge, and much good." So Allah, the Exalted, sent down this verse, and this is a textual evidence that the verse is Medinan.

It is said that the intention is His powers, the Glorious, and His wonders, the Almighty, which, when He, the Exalted, wills something of them, He, the Blessed and Exalted, says to it: "Be, and it is." From this is His saying, the Exalted, concerning 'Isa: "And His word which He bestowed upon Maryam." Applying "words" to what is mentioned is of the application of the cause to the effect. Based on this, the direction of connecting the verse to what precedes it is more apparent, as it is said: that He, the Exalted, when He said: "And to Allah belongs whatever is in the heavens and the earth," which might suggest the limitation of His dominion, the Glorious and Exalted, He followed it up with what is apparent by its lack of limitation. This is what the Imam chose regarding the meaning of "His words," the Exalted, except that there is obscurity in its compatibility with the cause of revelation.

According to Abu Muslim, the intention is what He, the Exalted, promised the people of His obedience of reward, and what He, the Glorious, threatened the people of His disobedience of punishment. As if the verse, according to him, is an explanation of the abundance of what has not yet appeared of His dominion, the Exalted, after the explanation of the abundance of what has appeared. It is said that the intention is what is immediate from it, based on what 'Abd al-Razzaq, Ibn Jarir, Ibn al-Mundhir, and others brought out from Qatadah. He said: The polytheists said: "This is but speech that is about to end," so the verse: "And if whatever tree on the earth were pens..." was sent down. In the direction of connecting the verse to what precedes it, and likewise to what follows it, there is much obscurity, but it does not require it to be Medinan.

The preference of the sound feminine plural, based on it being, like the masculine plural, a paucal plural, is because of its indication, even if it is accompanied by what might imply exhaustion and generality from "al" or the genitive, looking at the origin of its placement, which is the few, that it does not suffice for the little, so how about the much? Al-Hasan read "nafat" (not exhausted) without the "ta," and "Kalam" (singular word) of Allah instead of "Words" of Allah.

"Indeed, Allah is Exalted"—nothing defeats Him, the Glorious. "Wise"—nothing exits His knowledge, the Exalted, and His wisdom, the Exalted. The sentence is an explanation for the non-exhaustion of His words, the Blessed and Exalted.