Tafsir of Sad 38:75

(He said)—the Almighty and Exalted—by way of rebuke and reprimand: "O Iblis, what prevented you from prostrating"—meaning, from the act of prostration—"to that which I created"—that is, to the one whom I have created. The word mā (what) is treated here as a relative pronoun (mawṣūla), with the pronominal referent (al-ʿāʾid) omitted. This has been used as evidence for the permissibility of using mā to refer to singular beings endowed with intellect. Those who do not allow this say that mā is an infinitive particle (maṣdariyya), and the infinitive refers to the object; that is, "What prevented you from prostrating to a created being?"

"With My two hands"—This, according to some later exegetes, is a metaphorical representation of the fact that he—peace be upon him—was a subject of particular divine concern and creation. It is the custom that one who is of special concern is "made by the hands." The consequences of this are his creation without the mediation of a father and mother; the fact that he is a microcosm encompassing the macrocosm; and his suitability for the overflowing of graces that are not bestowed upon others. These are among the distinctions of humanity. According to others, the "hand" signifies Power (qudra), and the dual form is for emphasis—indicating the intensity of His power, the Almighty—just as it is used for mere repetition, as in: "Then return your vision twice" (67:4). The intended meaning is its implication: emphasis. This is because Allah, the Almighty, exercises various actions in His creation: making him fermented clay, then a body of flesh and bone, then breathing the spirit into him, and granting him the power of knowledge and action—all of which indicate the great power of the Creator of forces and capabilities. It has also been suggested that the dual signifies the diversity of Adam’s nature: he may manifest angelic actions, as if from the effects of the right hand, and he may manifest animalistic actions, as if from the effects of the left hand—and both of His hands, may He be glorified, are "right." Others hold that "hand" signifies Grace (niʿma), and the dual is either for the reason mentioned above, or intended to signify the grace of this world and the grace of the Hereafter.

The Salaf (pious predecessors) state: The "Hand," whether singular or not, is established for Allah, the Almighty, in a manner befitting His Majesty. They do not say in such a context that it means "power" or "grace." The apparent meaning of the narrations is that the one created by them holds a distinction over others. It is established in the Ṣaḥīḥ (authentic traditions) that He, the Almighty, said in response to the angels: "I will grant them the worldly life and grant Ourselves the Hereafter. By My Might and Majesty, I shall not make the one whom I created with My own hands like the one to whom I said 'Be' and he was." Ibn Jarīr, Abū al-Shaykh in al-ʿAẓama, and al-Bayhaqī recorded from Ibn ʿUmar—may Allah be pleased with both—who said: "Allah created four things with His hand: the Throne, the Gardens of Eden, the Pen, and Adam. Then He said to everything else 'Be,' and it was." It has come in more than one report that He, the Almighty, wrote the Torah with His hand. In the tradition of the debate between Adam and Moses—peace be upon them—there is evidence that being created by them is a description of honor, as Moses said to him: "You are Adam, whom Allah created with His hand." Similarly, in the tradition of intercession, the people of the Gathering come to Adam and say to him: "You are Adam, the father of mankind, whom Allah created with His hand." It is understood from this that the rebuke in "What prevented you from prostrating" is ordered upon the fact that Allah created him with His two hands, to emphasize the denial and intensify the rebuke. It is as if it were said: "What prevented you from honoring through prostration the one who is worthy of honor due to the divine concern that surrounded his creation?"

Al-Zamakhsharī claimed that "I created" is of the same category as "I saw with my own eyes," so "with My two hands" serves only to emphasize that he is undeniably a created being. Since Iblis refrained from prostrating to Adam—peace be upon him—due to the suspicion that it was a prostration to a created being, and added to that the fact that he was made of clay while he (Iblis) was made of fire, and he forgot that when Allah, the Almighty, commanded those who are more sublime and closer to Him than he—namely the angels—they complied without looking at the disparity between the prostrator and the one to whom prostration is made, out of reverence for their Lord’s command and majesty for His address; [Al-Zamakhsharī] mentioned to him what he clung to of suspicion and presented the speech in the form of a concession (qawl bi-al-mūjab) while alerting him to his lapse. It is as if he was told: "What prevented you from prostrating to a being who is—as you say—created, whom I created with My two hands, there is no doubt of his status as a creature, [and you should do so] in compliance with My command and reverence for My address, just as the angels did?"

It is not hidden that the context is far removed from what he mentioned. Making this "like 'I saw with my own eyes'" provides nothing but an emphasis on being created. Presenting the speech as a qawl bi-al-mūjab is something that is hardly acceptable, for the context of a qawl bi-al-mūjab requires that one concedes the premise to the opponent and then challenges him, unless the denial is presented fundamentally, and it is brought as a riddle or a mystery. Furthermore, the authentic narrations are apparent that this is a description of honor, not as he claimed. Moreover, treating the angels' prostration to Adam as a matter of mere compliance without regard to the honoring of Adam—peace be upon him—is rejected by what is accepted in several places: that it is a prostration of honor. How could it be otherwise when it corresponds to [the objection] "Will You place therein [those who cause corruption]?" (2:30)? Thus, his teaching them [the names] must take into account both the side of the Commander—may His affair be glorified—and the side of the one to whom prostration is made—upon him be peace—to fulfill both rights. It is as if He said what He said and brought the verse in a way that did not cross the mind of Iblis, out of caution against breaching his own doctrine. And it is not upon him to concede that the verse implies honoring, but he limits it to a certain way; then it would not prove superiority absolutely, which would force him into his doctrine. By my life, this man [al-Zamakhsharī] was unfilial to his father Adam—peace be upon him—in this discussion of his Kashshāf, where he brought an example to what he established in the verse, in which he made the lowest of attendants an example for Adam—peace be upon him—and was dutiful to the enemy of Allah—the Almighty—Iblis, as he established his excuse and considered his belief that he was better than Adam because he was of fire and Adam was of clay as correct. He was only mistaken from another aspect, which is that he did not equate himself with the angels, for they prostrated to him [Adam] knowing that he was, relative to them, of lower rank and status. How many slips he has! No one says to the author of [the Kashshāf] "the greatest of the Prophets"—may the blessings and peace of Allah be upon them—in this situation. We ask Allah, the Almighty, to protect us from the abysses of desire and to make our feet firm.

It was read: bi-yadayya (with my two hands), with a kasra on the dāl, like miṣraḥay; and bi-yadi (with my hand) in the singular.

"Have you become arrogant"—with the interrogative hamza of denial, dropping the hamzat al-waṣl—meaning: Have you become arrogant without justification? "Or were you of the exalted ones"—meaning: Or were you worthy of loftiness and superior in it? It is said that the meaning is: Has arrogance newly occurred to you, or have you always been among the arrogant since you existed? The contrast in the first interpretation is based on worthiness and the lack thereof, and in the second, based on origination and pre-existence. Thus, it was said "were you (kunta) of the exalted ones," rather than "are you (anta) of the exalted ones." It is also said that "the exalted ones" are a class of angels called al-muhayminūn (the dominators), absorbed in observing the beauty and majesty of Allah, the Almighty; not one of them knows that Allah, the Almighty, created anyone else. They were not commanded to prostrate to Adam—peace be upon him—or they are all the angels of the sky, and they were not commanded to prostrate, while only the angels of the earth were commanded. Thus, the meaning is: Did you leave off prostration out of arrogance, because you are among those who were not commanded to do so? The weakness of this is apparent. The am (or) in all this is connective (muttaṣila). Ibn ʿAṭiyya reported from many grammarians that it cannot be so when the two verbs differ, such as "Did you beat Zayd or did you kill him?"

Abū Ḥayyān countered him, stating that this is an incorrect doctrine and that Sībawayh explicitly stated the contrary. A group, including Ibn Kathīr, read—according to what is said—istakbarta with the waṣl of the alif (i.e., astakbarta). This is the reading of the people of Mecca, though it is not among the famous readings of Ibn Kathīr. It is possible that the interrogative hamza was omitted due to the indication of am (or) upon it, like his saying: By seven we pelted the Jamra, or by eight? And it is possible that the speech is disjunctive (inkhālan) and the am is disjunctive (munqaṭiʿa), the meaning being: "Nay, you are of the exalted ones," and the intent is His belittlement of him, may He be exalted.