Tafsir of An-Nisa' 4:165

They are in the accusative case as an expression of praise, or by the implicit verb "We have sent" (arsalna), or as a circumstantial qualifier (hal) derived from the previous [mention of] "messengers" or its pronoun. It is a preparatory state (hal muwatti’ah), and the intention is to describe them. This has been weakened by the argument that, in such a case, there is no justification for separating the state from the one to whom it relates. It is also permitted that they are in the accusative as a substitution (badal) for the first [mention of] "messengers," though this is weakened by the fact that identity between the substitute and the substituted-for in wording is far-fetched, even if the intent of the substitution is the description—meaning: giving glad tidings of Paradise and reward to those who believe and obey, and warning those who disbelieve and disobey with Hellfire and punishment.

That is, an excuse by which they might apologize, saying: "If only You had sent a messenger to us to clarify Your laws for us and teach us what we did not know of Your rulings," due to the insufficiency of human faculties to grasp the particulars of interests (masalih) and the inability of most people to grasp their universals. The verse is explicit that revelation and the sending of messengers are necessary, and that the intellect does not suffice for that. The Mu'tazilah claimed that the intellect is sufficient and that the sending of messengers is only to awaken one from the slumber of heedlessness that overcomes a human being involuntarily. Thus, the meaning of the verse according to them is: "so that people might not remain with an argument against Allah."

A refutation of this will follow, God willing, along with an investigation into this topic. Calling what is said upon the cessation of sending [messengers] an "argument"—despite the impossibility of anyone having an argument against Him, Glory be to Him—is metaphorical. It equates the excuse, in terms of His acceptance of it by virtue of His generosity and kindness, to the status of a conclusive argument that cannot be refuted. Therefore, this does not invalidate the position of the Sunnis that no one has the right to object to Allah regarding any of His actions; rather, He, Glory be to Him, may do with whomever He wills whatever He wills.

The lam [of li-alla] is connected to the implicit "We have sent" or to "bringing glad tidings and warning" based on the principle of contention (tanazu’). It is also permissible that it relates to what they signify. Hujjah is the noun of kana, and its predicate is "for the people," while "against Allah" is a circumstantial qualifier for hujjah. It is also permissible for the predicate to be "against Allah," and "for the people" to be the circumstantial qualifier. It is not permitted to connect "against" to "argument" (hujjah) because it is a verbal noun (masdar), and its dependent cannot precede it. Whoever permits it for a temporal/spatial adverb permits it here.

His saying, Exalted is He: (بعد الرسل) —that is, after sending them and delivering the Law through their tongues—is an adverb for hujjah. It is also permissible for it to be an adjective for it, as nouns of time are used to describe verbal nouns, just as they are used to predicate about them.

"Mighty," Who cannot be overcome in any matter He desires; "Wise" in all His actions. Part of that wisdom is refraining from answering the request of the obstinate, cutting off [their] argument by sending messengers, the diversity of revelation to them, and [the provision of] miracles. It has been said: "Mighty" in punishing the disbelievers, "Wise" in providing excuses after the warning has been issued, as if [this were said] after they asked for a book from Allah, the Exalted, to be sent down.