Tafsir of Fatir 35:10

(Whoever desires might)—which is honor and strength, derived from their saying "hard land" (ard ‘aziz), meaning firm. The use of the definite article [in al-‘izzah] denotes the genus. The verse concerns the disbelievers who sought strength through idols, as the Exalted says: "And they have taken besides Allah deities that they may be for them a strength." Likewise, those who believed with their tongues but not with the conformity of their hearts sought strength through the polytheists, as He—the Exalted—says: "Those who take disbelievers as allies instead of the believers. Do they seek with them honor?"

"Whoever" (man) is a conditional noun, and what follows it is the condition. The combination of "was" (kana) and "desires" (yurid) is to indicate the permanence and continuity of the desire. His saying, "To Allah belongs all might" (fa-lillahi al-‘izzatu jami‘an), is the indication of the response to the condition. It is not grammatically correct to consider it the response (jawab) itself, due to the absence of a pronoun returning to "whoever" (man). Grammarians have stated: there must be a pronoun in the response sentence that returns to the conditional noun if it is not an adverb of time or place. The implied meaning is: "Whoever desires might, let him seek it from Allah the Exalted." For to Allah alone, not to any other, belongs all might. He—glorified be He—disposes of it as He wills. He placed the cause in the position of the effect, because the request [for might] from Him—in Whose dominion it entirely resides—is the cause of it.

The definite article on al-‘izzah is for comprehensiveness (istighraq), evidenced by "all" (jami‘an), which is in the accusative state as a circumstantial qualifier (hal). The intended meaning is the might of this world and the Hereafter. The precedence of the predicate over the subject [in fa-lillahi al-‘izzah] is for the sake of exclusivity, as we have pointed out.

This does not contradict His saying, "And to Allah belongs [all] might, and to His Messenger, and to the believers," because the might that belongs to Allah alone is by essence; the might that belongs to the Messenger (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) is by way of his closeness to Allah the Exalted; and the might that belongs to the believers is by way of the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him). It is as if the preposition [the lam in li-llahi] was repeated to point to this.

Some have estimated the response to be: "Let him obey Allah the Exalted," and this is supported by what Anas narrated—as in Majma' al-Bayan—from the Prophet (may Allah bless him and grant him peace), who said: "Your Lord says every day: 'I am the Almighty; whoever desires the honor of the two abodes, let him obey the Almighty.'" Regarding the instruction "let him seek it from Allah," it is said: requesting it from Him—the Exalted—is only through obedience and submission.

According to Al-Farra’, the meaning is: "Whoever desires the knowledge of might"—meaning the ability to overpower whomsoever it belongs to—"let him attribute it to Allah," for it belongs to Him alone. It is also said the meaning is: "Whoever desires might, i.e., victory, is actually vanquished," because victory belongs to Allah alone and is not completed except through Him—the Almighty and Majestic. This is attributed to Mujahid.

It is also said the definition [of al-‘izzah] is for comprehensiveness or for a specific referent (‘ahd), intending the perfect individual case. The meaning: "Whoever desires all might, or the perfect individual instance of it"—which is the might that is not tainted by humiliation from any angle—"cannot attain it, for it is for Allah alone." This view is better than the two preceding it. The most manifest view to me is the first, which is attributed to Qatada.

His saying, "To Him ascends the good word," is like an explanation of the path to attaining might and following the way to achieve it, which is obedience in speech and action. It is also said it is an explanation of why all might belongs to Allah the Exalted and is in His hand, because might is attained through obedience, and obedience is not counted unless it is accepted. Others said it is a new beginning of speech. The first is what is relied upon.

"Word" (al-kalim) is a collective noun; its singular is "word" (kalimah). The "good word" (al-kalim al-tayyib), according to Al-Kashshaf and Al-Bahr from Ibn Abbas, is: "There is no god but Allah" (La ilaha illa Allah). Its goodness lies in the fact that the sound intellect finds it wholesome and delightful, due to its indication of monotheism, which is the axis of salvation and the means to eternal bliss, or that the Law, or the angels (peace be upon them), find it delightful. It is also said that it is "good" because the intellect accepts it and does not reject it.

If the singular is kalimah in the literal sense, the application of kalim is apparent as it encompasses many words. However, describing it as "good" in relation to other than the Majestic Name has a hidden nuance; perhaps this is in consideration of the specific composition. If the singular here is kalimah in the metaphorical sense—as in His saying, "And the word of your Lord was fulfilled," and "Truly, it is a word he is saying," and the Prophet's saying, "The truest word a poet said is the word of Labid," and their saying "There is no god but Allah is the word of monotheism"—then the application of kalim refers to its multitude due to the multitude of those who speak it. It seems the evidence for desiring the metaphorical meaning (which applies to speech) is the description of "goodness," based on the fact that what is found wholesome and delightful is speech, not a word empty of providing a ruling by which the soul expands or contracts.

Or it may be said that the frequent application of "word" (kalimah) to mean speech is so widespread among them—to the extent that some, as the Himsi mentions in the margins of Al-Tasrih from some commentators of Al-Ajurrumiyyah, said it is a linguistic reality that dispenses with the need for evidence—that it is sufficient.

Ibn Jarir, Ibn al-Mundhir, Ibn Abi Hatim, and Al-Bayhaqi in Al-Asma' wa al-Sifat narrated from the "Scholar" (Ibn Abbas) that he interpreted "the good word" as the remembrance of Allah. Others said it is: "Glory be to Allah, and praise be to Allah, and there is no god but Allah, and Allah is the Greatest." This is apparent in a narration brought out by Ibn Marduyah and Al-Daylami from Abu Hurayrah. Another view is that it is: "Glory be to Allah and His praise, and praise be to Allah, and there is no god but Allah, and Allah is the Greatest, and blessed is Allah." This is apparent in a narration by a group from Ibn Mas‘ud. Ibn Abi Hatim narrated from Shahr bin Hawshab that it is the Quran. Others said it is praising the righteous believers with good, or the supplication that contains no oppression. The Imam—whom I follow—said: The preferred view is that it is every speech that is the remembrance of Allah, or is for Allah the Exalted, such as advice and knowledge. As for what Mulla Sadra indicated in his Asfar—that it is the pure and sanctified souls (for kalimah is applied to the soul when it is such, as He said regarding ‘Isa, "And His word which He cast to Maryam")—it should not be counted among the views of the exegetes, as is obvious.

The ascension of the word to Him—the Exalted—is a metonymy for His acceptance, by the relation of entailment, or a metaphor comparing acceptance to ascension. It is permissible that kalim is a metaphor for what is written down, by the relation of residence, or one may imply an omitted noun: "To Him ascends the record of the good word." Or, its external existence is compared to its record in the sky by ascension, then the thing compared is called by the name of the thing compared to, and the verb is derived from it, as is known in subordinate metaphors. It is said there is no obstacle to considering the ascension of the word as literal; for Allah the Exalted, the embodiment of meanings exists, and the nature of ascension to Him—the Almighty and Majestic—is among the ambiguous matters (mutashabihat), and discourse upon it is famous. The speech after that is a metonymy for its acceptance and concern for the state of its speaker. The precedence of the prepositional phrase (ilayhi) is for the sake of restriction.

‘Ali (may Allah honor his countenance), Ibn Mas‘ud, Al-Sulami, and Ibrahim read yus‘idu (ascends) from as‘ada (to cause to ascend) for "the good word" in the accusative case. Ibn ‘Atiyyah said: Al-Dahhak read yus‘adu with a damma on the ya, though he did not specify whether it was passive or active. In Al-Kashshaf, it is mentioned that it was read ilayhi yus‘adu al-kalim al-tayyib in the passive voice, and ilayhi yus‘idu al-kalim al-tayyib from as‘ada, where the "ascender" is the man, meaning the man causes the good word to ascend to Allah. Zayd bin ‘Ali (may Allah be pleased with them both) read ilayhi yas‘adu (from sa‘ada) with the nominative.

"And the righteous deed raises it": According to the well-known view, this is a subject and predicate. There is disagreement regarding the agent of "raises." It is said it is a pronoun returning to "righteous deed," and the objective pronoun returns to "word," meaning: "And the righteous deed raises the good word." This is narrated from Ibn Abbas, Al-Hasan, Ibn Jubayr, Mujahid, Al-Dahhak, and Shahr bin Hawshab, as narrated by Sa‘id bin Mansur and others.

Ibn Jarir, Ibn al-Mundhir, Ibn Abi Hatim, and Al-Bayhaqi in Al-Asma' wa al-Sifat narrated from Ibn Abbas that he interpreted the righteous deed as performing the obligatory duties, then said: "Whoever remembers Allah the Exalted and performs his obligatory duties, his remembrance of Allah carries his deed and ascends with it to Allah. And whoever remembers Allah the Exalted but does not perform his obligatory duties, his speech is rejected upon his deed, and his deed is more befitting to him." Ibn ‘Atiyyah critiqued this, saying: "This is a statement that refutes the belief of the Sunnis and is not authentic from Ibn Abbas. The truth is that the sinner who neglects his obligations, if he remembers Allah and says a good word, that is written for him and accepted from him, while he bears the sin of neglecting the obligations; and Allah the Exalted accepts from whoever fears polytheism." End quote.

Perhaps the intent of the righteous deed raising the good word is the raising of its rank, making it such that the reward contingent upon it is not attained if it were without the deed. The hadith "Allah does not accept speech except with action, and does not accept speech and action except with intention, and does not accept speech, action, and intention except with the path of the Sunnah," mentioned in Al-Kashshaf, I do not think is authentic. It is said that if its authenticity were conceded, the intent is the negation of complete acceptance. It is also permissible that the intent of "raising" is its realization and strengthening; this is because the good word is faith, and there is no doubt that the righteous deed affirms and realizes faith by manifesting its effects, for through it, internal belief is known.

Others said the agent is a pronoun returning to the good word, and the objective pronoun returns to the righteous deed, meaning: "The good word raises the righteous deed." Abu Hayyan attributed this view to Abu Salih and Shahr bin Hawshab and supported it by the reading of ‘Isa and Ibn Abi ‘Abla, "And the righteous deed" (wa al-‘amala al-salih), in the accusative as an instance of ishtighal (preoccupation). This is subject to debate because the pronoun of "word" is not definitively the agent in that reading. The meaning of "the good word raises the righteous deed" is said to be that it increases its beauty and goodness. Whoever interpreted the good word as monotheism said: the meaning is that it makes it acceptable, for deeds are not accepted except with monotheism.

Others said the agent is His pronoun—the Exalted—and the objective pronoun returns to the deed. Ibn al-Mubarak narrated this from Qatada, meaning: "And the righteous deed, Allah the Exalted raises it and accepts it." Ibn ‘Atiyyah said: "This is the most preferred of views in my opinion." It is also said the agent pronoun returns to the deed, and so does the objective pronoun, and the speech is based on an omitted noun: "And the righteous deed raises its doer and honors him." Abu Hayyan attributed this to Ibn Abbas. Then he said: "It is permissible in my view that 'the deed' is a conjunction to 'the word,' and 'raises it' is a new beginning of information, meaning: 'Allah raises them both.' He singularized the pronoun because of their sharing in the ascension, and the pronoun may function like a demonstrative noun; thus, it is singular in wording while intending the dual." It is as if it were said: "Their ascension is not from their own essence, but by Allah raising them both." This is, however, highly contrary to the apparent meaning. The same applies to what he attributed to Ibn Abbas. And if we concede it, perhaps he—may Allah be pleased with him—intended by his saying "the righteous deed raises its doer and honors him" an explanation of what the verse indicates in general.

What comes to my mind regarding the verse is what is narrated from Qatada and chosen by Ibn ‘Atiyyah. The specification of the righteous deed being raised by Allah—according to that—is said to be because it involves hardship and toil, as it is the "Greater Jihad." The apparent meaning here is that the deed is more honorable than the word, and there is no dispute in that if the righteous deed is meant to include internal deeds such as belief. Perhaps the discourse on it is like His saying, "And when Musa arrived at Our appointed time," and His saying, "Exalted is He who took His servant." The Imam's speech is explicit that the good word, interpreted as remembrance, is more honorable than the deed, as he made the ascension of the word by itself evidence of its superiority over the deed which requires another to raise it. He said regarding the reason: Speech is honorable, for man is distinguished from every animal by speech, while deeds are movements and rests which man and others share in. The honorable, when it reaches the door of the King, is not barred, while others find no path except when requested. This is evidenced by the fact that the disbeliever, if he speaks the word of testimony, is secured from the punishment of both abodes if it is with sincerity, and is secured in his soul, blood, and sanctities in this world if it is apparent; such is not the case for bodily deeds. Furthermore, the heart is the origin, and what is within it does not appear except by the tongue, and what is on the tongue its truthfulness is not clarified except by action. Thus, speech is closer to the heart than action, so it is more honorable. Yet, the heart has some reservations about this, so contemplate it.

"And those who plot evil deeds": Meaning, evil plots or varieties of evil plots. Al-sayyi’at is an adjective for an omitted noun, not the direct object of yamkuruna, because makr (plotting) is an intransitive verb. It is permissible that it is the object by inclusion of the meaning "they intend" or "they earn." In the first case, there is hyperbole in the severe threat regarding the intention of plotting. Or, it is an indication of the lack of impact of their plotting. The relative pronoun (alladhina) is the subject, and the sentence "for them is a severe punishment" is its predicate—meaning for them, because of their plotting, is a severe punishment whose extent cannot be estimated, and what they plot is of no consequence in comparison to it.

The verse, according to what is narrated from Abu al-‘Aliyah, is about those who plotted against the Messenger of Allah (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) in the Dar al-Nadwa, as the Exalted says: "And when those who disbelieved plotted against you to restrain you or kill you or evict you." The imperfect tense is for recounting a past state. Placing the demonstrative pronoun in place of their pronoun in His saying, "And the plotting of those—it will perish," is to signal the completeness of their distinction—by what they are upon of evil and corruption—from all other plotters, and their being famous for that. The distance [in the demonstrative ula'ika] is to alert to the extent of their affair in tyranny and their distance in rank in aggression. Meaning: "And the plotting of those famous corruptors is what perishes," i.e., it is corrupted. The origin of bawar is excessive stagnation or destruction; it is used metaphorically here for corruption and lack of impact, because excessive stagnation leads to corruption, as it is said, "it stagnated until it spoiled," or because what is stagnant often stagnates because of its corruption, and because the destroyed is corrupt and has no effect. "Plotting" is the subject, and its predicate is the sentence "it perishes." The precedence of the pronoun is for reinforcement or exclusivity, meaning: "Their plotting is what specifically perishes, not our plotting against them." Al-Hufi and Abu al-Baqa’ permitted the predicate to be the sentence "it perishes," and "he/it" (huwa) to be a pronoun of distinction (damir fasl). This was critiqued in Al-Bahr by the fact that the pronoun of distinction cannot be followed by a verb; no one held this view, to our knowledge, except ‘Abd al-Qahir al-Jurjani in his explanation of al-Idah, where he permitted in "Zayd was he who stands" that "he" is a distinction pronoun—but this was refuted.

Abu al-Baqa’ also permitted "he" to be an emphasis for the subject. The apparent is what we have presented. Allah the Exalted indeed annihilated those plotters after the annihilation of their plotting, when He brought them out of Mecca and killed them and fixed them in the pit of Badr, thus gathering upon them all three of their plots which they had sufficed with but one of in His regard (peace and blessings be upon him). He—the Almighty and Majestic—realized in them His saying: "And they planned, and Allah planned. And Allah is the best of planners," and His saying: "But the evil plot does not encompass except its own people."

The link of the verse to what precedes it, as mentioned by the Sheikh of Islam, is that it is a statement of the condition of the evil word and the evil deed and their people, after the statement of the condition of the good word and the righteous deed. In Al-Kashf, he said: It is as if, when He—the Exalted—restricted might and specified it to Himself—to give it to whom He wills—and guided to the attainment of that which that desired goal is reached, He mentioned by way of digression the condition of those who desired might from other than Him—the Exalted—and began to insult whom Allah had honored in magnitude above the stars, and the doom of that which returned to them, as a testimony to that claim. This is the summary of what Al-Tibi mentioned regarding the order. It is narrated from Mujahid, Sa‘id bin Jubayr, and Shahr bin Hawshab that the verse is about those who show off (riya’), and it is connected to what is beside it as narrated from Shahr, where he said: "And those who plot evil deeds"—meaning they show off—"and the plotting of those, it will perish," they are the people of showing off whose deeds do not ascend. Al-Tibi said: The sentence in this narration is a conjunction to the conditional sentence—i.e., "Whoever desires might..."—therefore, it is necessary to observe the correspondence between the two pairs and the counter-position between the two clauses as much as possible, by estimating in each of them that which achieves the counter-position by the indication of what is mentioned in the first to what is left in the second, and vice-versa.

This is obviously far-fetched. In any case, the imperfect tense is for renewed continuity.