Yā-Sīn: (69) "And We did not teach him poetry..."

"And We did not teach him"—by instructing him in a book containing such elucidation and refinement regarding the matters of the beginning and the return—"poetry." It is not hidden from anyone possessed of the slightest measure of sense that this Wise Book, which comprises all religious and worldly benefits, in a style more magnificent than any orator, is distinct from poetry—not even comparable to it, like the distance between the Pleiades and the dust.

As for its form, it lacks meter and rhyme. As for its meaning, poetry is composed of imaginary thoughts—whether appealing or repulsive, and the like—and it is the abode of falsehoods. Thus, it is said: "The sweetest of it is the falsest of it." The Quran, however, consists of wisdom, creed, and divine laws.

The purpose of negating that Allah—the Exalted—taught him (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) poetry is to negate that the Quran is poetry, by way of metonymy (kinayah). This is because what Allah—the Exalted—taught him is the Quran; if the subject taught is not poetry, then the Quran is definitively not poetry. Included in this is the integration of the fact that he (upon him be prayer and peace) is not a poet. There is no allusion here, as some have claimed. This is a refutation of what they used to say: that the Quran is poetry and the Prophet (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) is a poet. Their intention behind this was that what he brought of the Quran was fabrication and imagination—and he is far above that.

"And it does not behoove him"—an interjection to confirm what was integrated—meaning: poetry does not befit him, nor is it suitable for him (may Allah bless him and grant him peace), because it calls for changing the meaning to satisfy the requirements of diction and meter. Furthermore, its best is exaggeration, speculation, and hyperbole in description, and most of it is the beautification of that which is not beautiful and the defamation of that which is not repulsive. All of this invites lying or mimics it, and the presence of the Lawgiver (the Prophet) is too majestic for that. Thus it has been said.

Ibn al-Hajib said: Meaning, it is rationally inconsistent for him (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) to compose poetry, for had he been one who composes it, suspicion would have crept into the minds of many people that what he brought was from himself and from that poetic faculty. Therefore, Allah followed this with His saying: "And the word may prove true against the disbelievers," because once doubt is removed, only stubbornness remains; thus, the word proves true against them. This is countered by the argument that the conciseness of the Quran removes such suspicion. Otherwise, his (upon him be prayer and peace) position in the highest ranks of eloquence and rhetoric in prose is no weaker than composing poetry in terms of being a target for suspicion; in fact, one might imagine it is even more so than composing poetry. If the reason for preventing him from poetry were what was mentioned, then it would follow that he should be prevented from eloquent, rhetoric speech to block the door of suspicion, rebut the doubt, and exalt the proof. Since that was not the case, it suffices to rely on the miracle (i'jaz), and that suspicion and doubt are things that should not arise from any rational person.

The reason he (upon him be prayer and peace) should not compose poetry is something else. Ibn 'Atiyyah chose this and posited the reason to be the imagination and embellishment of speech found in poetry, which is close to what you heard first and is what should be relied upon. The verse contains an indication of the lowliness of poetry. It is evident that he (upon him be prayer and peace) was not given a poetic nature, out of care for his status, elevation of his worth, and distancing him from anything that would be a source of what compromises his station in any way.

The reason he (upon him be prayer and peace) was not given the ability for poetry, while being protected from composing it, is that such a stripping of ability is a distancing from that which would compromise his magnificent station. Similar to what we have mentioned is divine protection ('ismah). It is understood from the words of al-Mawahib al-Ladunniyyah that some have gone to the view that he (upon him be prayer and peace) did have the capacity for poetry but was forbidden from composing it. This is not strong. Indeed, the claim of the prohibition of composing poetry is accepted, and its meaning, according to the previous view, is the prohibition of engaging in it. It might be said: there is no need for such interpretation, for the prohibition of a thing can coexist with the lack of ability for it.

Is the absence of poetry specific to him (upon him be prayer and peace) or common to the class of prophets? Some have said it is general, based on this verse, as no point is apparent for specificity. Others have said it is possible that it is specific, and the point is the increase of honor, since his station (upon him be prayer and peace) is above the station of the prophets (upon them be peace). For them, what is established is protection from composing it while the ability to do so remains. If the report regarding Adam (upon him be peace) composing poetry on the day his son was killed—"The lands have changed, and those upon them; the face of the earth is dusty and ugly..."—is authentic, then the matter of specificity becomes clear, and it is known that there is no protection from composing it [for them] either. Perhaps the protection, in that case, is from that which is shameful and compromises the station of prophethood generally. The point of specificity is evident, according to what is reported from Ibn al-Hajib, because the greatest of his miracles (upon him be prayer and peace) is the Quran; thus, suspicion might have arisen regarding it had he composed poetry. The same applies to the miracles of the prophets (upon them be peace). So ponder this.

In any case, it is not a valid objection that he (upon him be prayer and peace) said on the day of Hunayn, while upon his white mule and Abu Sufyan ibn al-Harith holding its bridle—with only a few people left with him—"I am the Prophet, no lie; I am the son of 'Abd al-Muttalib." For we do not concede that this is poetry. They have defined it as speech that is rhymed and metered by way of intent. This instance occurred for him (upon him be prayer and peace) without any intent for it to be metered, and the like occurs frequently in prose speech and is not called poetry, nor is its speaker called a poet.

Nor can it be imagined that his attributing himself to his grandfather rather than his father is evidence of intent, for attribution to a grandfather is common. Furthermore, it was he who took charge of his upbringing when his father passed away while he (upon him be prayer and peace) was still in the womb; when he was born, he took care of his affairs even more than a father takes care of a son. Moreover, he was famous among them for truthfulness, honor, and might; he specified him for mention so it could serve as proof for what came before, or as another preventative against defeat. Also, many people used to call him (upon him be prayer and peace) "son of 'Abd al-Muttalib," as in the hadith of Dimam ibn Tha'labah: "Which of you is the son of 'Abd al-Muttalib?"

Furthermore, some do not consider rajaz to be poetry at all. Its original form is mustaf'ilun six times, and thus its speaker is called a rajiz rather than a poet. According to al-Khalil, the mashtur (where half is removed, leaving mustaf'ilun three times) and the manhuk (where two-thirds are removed, leaving mustaf'ilun two times) are not poetry. In another narration from him, the majzu' (where a part is removed from each hemistich, leaving mustaf'ilun four times) is likewise not poetry. Therefore, his (upon him be prayer and peace) saying "I am the Prophet, no lie" (if it is half a line, it is majzu') is not poetry according to this narration—even if one assumes there was intent. If it were a complete line, it is manhuk, also not poetry according to the first narration. That it is not poetry according to those who do not consider rajaz poetry at all is evident.

It has come in some narrations that he (upon him be prayer and peace) vocalized the 'ba' in kadhib and al-Muttalib, so it would not be metered; thus, its status as not-poetry is even clearer.

The claim that the pronoun in "it" (lahu) refers to the Quran—known from the context—meaning: "It is not befitting for the Quran to be poetry, so it is permissible for poetry to issue from him (upon him be prayer and peace)," is of no value. It is sufficient in negating poetry from him (upon him be prayer and peace) that the Almighty said: "And We did not teach him poetry." Moreover, the apparent [meaning] is that the pronoun returns to him (upon him be prayer and peace). The most appropriate of the interpretations is to exclude that from poetry by the absence of intent. By this, what occurs in the Quran from similar instances is excluded from it. We have mentioned many of them for you in what has passed.

There is nothing in the verse that indicates that the Prophet (upon him be prayer and peace) should not speak a line of poetry by quoting a poet or using it as a proverb. There are reports that indicate the occurrence of speaking a line [of poetry] metrically on rare occasions. It is narrated that he (upon him be prayer and peace) recited the line of Ibn Rawahah: "His side stays away from his bed at night, when the beds are weighed down with the polytheists." His reciting it as such is mentioned in al-Bahr. It is also narrated that he (upon him be prayer and peace) struck his noble finger against a stone during one of his expeditions, and it bled; he quoted the saying of al-Walid ibn al-Mughirah—according to what Ibn Hisham said in al-Sirah, or Ibn Rawahah according to what Ibn al-Jawzi deemed authentic: "You are but a finger that has bled; and in the path of Allah is what you have met." It is also said it belongs to him (upon him be prayer and peace), and the discussion regarding it is the same as his saying "I am the Prophet, no lie," except that this one could be mashtur if each of its two parts were a line.

Regarding the occurrence of speaking a line unmetrically while preserving the meaning, this happened frequently. It is narrated that he (upon him be prayer and peace) recited: "The days will reveal to you what you were ignorant of, and news will come to you from one you did not provision." Abu Bakr (may Allah be pleased with him) said, "It is not like that, O Messenger of Allah." He (upon him be prayer and peace) replied, "By Allah, I am not a poet, and it does not behoove me." In a report extracted by Ahmad and Ibn Abi Shaybah from 'A'ishah, she said: "When the Messenger of Allah (upon him be prayer and peace) would seek news, he would recite the line of Tarafa: 'And news will come to you from one you did not provision.'" Ibn Sa'd and Ibn Abi Hatim extracted from al-Hasan that he (upon him be prayer and peace) used to recite this line: "Sufficient is Islam and gray hair for a man as a warner." Abu Bakr said, "I bear witness that you are the Messenger of Allah. Allah did not teach you poetry, and it does not behoove you." Ibn Sa'id extracted from 'Abd al-Rahman ibn Abi al-Zinad that the Prophet (upon him be prayer and peace) said to al-'Abbas ibn Mirdas: "Did you mean your saying: 'Will you place the booty and the plundered slaves between al-Aqra' and 'Uyayna'?" Abu Bakr (may Allah be pleased with him) said to him, "My father and mother be sacrificed for you, O Messenger of Allah, you are not a poet, nor a reciter of poetry, and it does not behoove you. He only said: 'Between 'Uyayna and al-Aqra'."

It is narrated that he (upon him be prayer and peace) was asked: "Who is the most poetic of people?" He said: "The one who says: 'Did you not see me every time I came as a visitor, I found a [favorable] welcome in her, even if you did not [welcome] me'?" Al-Bayhaqi extracted in his Sunan with a chain containing an unknown narrator from 'A'ishah, she said: "The Messenger of Allah (upon him be prayer and peace) never put together a line of poetry except for one line: 'Be optimistic for what you desire, and it will come to be; rarely is something said to have been, but it comes to be.'" 'A'ishah said, "And he did not say tahaqqaqa (realized) so as not to inflect it, thereby making it poetry."

Furthermore, he (upon him be prayer and peace) did not like poetry. In Musnad Ahmad ibn Hanbal, 'A'ishah said: "The most detested speech to him (upon him be prayer and peace) was poetry." And in the two Sahihs and others, from Abu Hurayrah: the Messenger of Allah (upon him be prayer and peace) said: "That the abdomen of one of you be filled with pus is better for him than that it be filled with poetry." This is clear in condemning an abundance of it. What is narrated from al-Khalil, that he said poetry was more beloved to the Messenger of Allah (upon him be prayer and peace) than much other speech, contradicts what you heard from the Musnad. Perhaps the reconciliation is by making a distinction between one type of poetry and another. The discussion regarding poetry has already been set forth in detail in Surat al-Shu'ara', so remember that.

"It is nothing"—meaning the Quran—"but a reminder"—a sermon from Allah, the Exalted, and guidance for the two classes (mankind and jinn), as He said: "It is nothing but a reminder to the worlds"—"and a clear Quran," meaning a heavenly book, manifest that it is not the speech of humans due to the miracle within it that has silenced those who sought to challenge it.