Muhammad: (15) The likeness of the Garden which...
(The likeness of the Garden which the righteous have been promised) — and so forth, is an inauguration of speech brought forth to explain the virtues of the Garden promised earlier to the believers, and an exposition of the nature of its rivers which were indicated by the flowing "from beneath them." He referred to them as "the righteous" (al-Muttaqin) to signal that faith and righteous deeds are part of righteousness (Taqwa), which is defined as performing obligations and abandoning sins.
"The likeness" (al-Mathal) is a description of wondrous nature; it is a subject (Mubtada') by the consensus of those who parse grammar. There is disagreement regarding its predicate (Khabar): some say it is omitted. An-Nadr ibn Shumayl said: "Its estimation is 'that which you hear,' and His saying, may He be exalted, 'In it are rivers'... and so forth, is an explanation of it." Sibawayh said: "Its estimation is 'in that which is recited to you,' or 'in that which We have related to you,'" and he estimates it as being placed beforehand, so that "(And in it are rivers)..." is an explanation of the likeness. Ibn Atiyyah's estimation is apparent to anyone who grasps these descriptions, though it is not the most refined. Perhaps the most suitable for the beginning of the noble order is the estimation of An-Nadr.
It is also said: It is mentioned; it is said that it is His saying, may He be exalted, "(In it are rivers)..." to the effect that the likeness of the Garden and its description is the content of this speech; such a predicate does not require a connector. It is also said: This sentence itself is the predicate, except that the word "likeness" is redundant—an increase of a noun, as in the saying of those who say: "Until the year, then the name: peace be upon you two." Thus, the subject in reality is the noun to which it is annexed (the genitive), as if it were said: "The Garden—in it are rivers..." But this is nothing of substance. It is also said that the predicate is His saying, may He be exalted, coming later: (like him who is eternal in the Fire), and a detailed discussion of this will come, God willing.
Ali, may God honor his face, along with Ibn Abbas, Abdullah, and Al-Sulami, read it as "The likenesses of the Garden" (Amthal al-Jannah), meaning its descriptions. Ibn Jinni said: "This is proof that the reading of the masses in the singular implies plurality, due to the meaning of the verbal noun in 'likeness.' Hence, it is permissible to say: 'I passed by a man like (mathala) two men,' and 'by two men like (mathala) men,' and 'by a woman like (mathala) a man.'" It is also narrated from Ali, may God honor his face, that it was read as "The example of the Garden" (Mithal al-Jannah), and the example of a thing, in origin, is its counterpart to which it is compared.
(Of water unpolluted) — meaning: not changing in taste or scent due to long duration or the like. Its past tense is asina, with a fathah, from the category of daraba and nasara, and with a kasrah from the category of alima. Al-Khafaji related this from the linguists. In Al-Bahr, it is stated: "The water became asina (stagnant/foul)—its scent changed—it ya'sanu and ya'sinu." Tha'lab mentioned this in Al-Fasih, and the verbal noun is usul and asin, with a kasrah on the sin, ya'sanu (with a fathah) is a dialect, asan—so said Al-Yazidi. "A man became asin (with a kasrah, and no other)" is used when he enters a well and is struck by a foul odor from it, causing him to faint or his head to spin. From this is the poet's saying: I leave the peer with yellowed fingertips, swaying in the wind, the swaying of the water-drawer, the foul (al-asin). Ibn Kathir and the people of Mecca read it as asin, on the pattern of hadhir, so it is an intensive adjective or a hyperbolic form. It was also read as yasin with a ya. Abu Ali said: That is based on the softening of the hamzah.
(And rivers of milk the taste of which does not change) — it does not become curdled, nor does it become sour or bitter, unlike the milks of this world; and the change of scent never separates from the change of taste.
(And rivers of wine, delicious to those who drink) — meaning: delicious to them; it has no unpleasantness in taste or scent, nor any harm of intoxication or hangover like the wines of this world. For the wines of this world provide no true pleasure in the very act of drinking them, and they contain all the evils and harms they possess. "Delicious" (ladhdhah) is a feminine intensive adjective for "delight" (ladhdh); it describes "wine" because it is feminine, although it may also be treated as masculine, or it is a verbal noun qualified as an adjective by assuming an annexed word, or by making it the essence of delight as a form of hyperbole, according to what is known in such matters. It was also read in the nominative case as an adjective for "rivers," and in the accusative as an object for the sake of the pleasure itself, existing only for that pleasure and nothing else of the headache and other maladies of the wines of this world.
(And rivers of honey purified) — from what conflicts with it, so neither wax, bee refuse, nor other things mix with it. It is described as "purified" because the masculine gender prevails in honey, and it is among those things which may be treated as masculine or feminine, as affirmed by Abu Hayyan and others. This, as has been said, is an allegory for what flows in the manner of beverages in the Garden, using types of things that are sought after or enjoyed in this world, by clearing them of what diminishes or spoils them, and adorning them with what necessitates their abundance and permanence.
He began with water because, in this world, it is something indispensable. Then, with milk, as it takes the place of food for many of the Arabs at many of their times. Then with wine, because when one has achieved quenching and nourishment, the soul looks forward to that which provides pleasure. Then with honey, because in it is healing in this world for what might befall one from drinks and foods; thus, it is later in rank. It has come from Ibn Abbas that the milk of those rivers was not milked, and Sa'id ibn Jubayr said: "It did not come out from between filth and blood," and that its wine was not trodden by the feet of men, and its honey did not come out from the bellies of bees. Ibn Jarir extracted from Sa'd, who said: "I asked Abu Ishaq about His saying, may He be exalted: '(Of water unpolluted)' and he said: 'I asked Al-Harith about it, and he told me that this water is Tansim (nectar), and it reached me that no hand touches it, and that the water comes until it enters the mouth.'"
In a report extracted by Ibn Marduyah from Al-Kalbi: The river Tigris is the river of wine in the Garden, and Abraham, peace be upon him, is over it; the river Jayhun is the river of water in it, and it is called the River of the Lord; the river Euphrates is the river of milk, and it is for the progeny of the believers; and the river Nile is the river of honey.
Al-Harith ibn Abi Usamah extracted in his Musnad, and Al-Bayhaqi from Ka'b, who said: "The river Nile is the river of honey, the river Tigris is the river of milk, the river Euphrates is the river of wine, and the river Sayhan is the river of water in the Garden." You know that what is mentioned in the verse is "every" river, in the plural. And God, may He be exalted, knows best the authenticity of these reports and their like; moreover, if they were authentic, their interpretation would not be far-fetched, even if divine power is not hindered by anything.
(And for them in it) — along with what was mentioned of the varieties of rivers — (of all fruits) — meaning: types of every fruit. The prepositional phrase is an adjective for an implied subject; some estimated it as "two pairs," as if he derived it from His saying, may He be exalted: "In them are of every fruit, two pairs." It is also said that "of" (min) is redundant, meaning: "And they have in it all fruits."
(And forgiveness) — a subject whose predicate is omitted. The sentence is an elaboration on the previous sentence, meaning: "And they have forgiveness." It is permitted that it is a conjunction to the subject before it without the restriction of "in it," because forgiveness is before entering the Garden with that restriction. The speech is subject to the omission of an annexed noun, meaning: "And the bounty of forgiveness," or making forgiveness an expression of its effect, which is bounty, or metaphorically referring to the pleasure of God, may He be exalted. It may also be said: The meaning of forgiveness here is the covering of their sins and not mentioning them to them, so that they do not feel ashamed, which would spoil their pleasure. The previous "forgiveness" refers to the covering of sins and not being held to account for them. In that case, the conjunction is to the subject without committing any of what was mentioned. I have seen something similar to this after writing it by Al-Tabarsi, who limited himself to it, and it is perhaps better than what they said. The nunation in "forgiveness" is for glorification, meaning: a great forgiveness, the extent of which cannot be measured. His saying, may He be exalted, (from their Lord) — is related to an omitted element, an adjective for it, emphasizing what the indefiniteness conveys of inherent and supplemental greatness, meaning: "existing from their Lord."
His saying, may He be exalted, (like him who is eternal in the Fire) — is the predicate of an omitted subject, the estimation of which is: "Is he who is eternal in this Garden, according to the promise made, like him who is eternal in the Fire?" as His saying, may He be exalted, speaks: "(And the Fire is their abode)." It is permitted that it is a substitute for His saying, the Almighty: "(Like him to whom the evil of his deed is made fair-seeming)," and what is between them is an interruption to explain what distinguishes the one who is upon a clear proof in the Hereafter, confirming the denial of equality, though there is remoteness in that.
Jar Allah held that it is the predicate of "The likeness of the Garden," and that this is predicated on the previous denial, meaning His saying, may He be exalted: "(Is then one who was...)" and so forth. The meaning is: "Is the likeness of the Garden like the likeness of the reward of him who is eternal in the Fire?" Both annexed nouns are omitted: "The reward" by the analogy of the opposition of the Garden, and the word "likeness" by the analogy of its being previously mentioned. Many such cases exist. The benefit of being stripped of the interrogative particle is that for the one who was confused about the first case—the one holding onto the clear proof and the one following his own desires—the second is like it in his view, and since then he is not worthy of address. Similar to this is the saying of Hadrami ibn Amir: "Shall I rejoice if I lose the noble, and I inherit skinny, meager sheep?" The speech is a denial of rejoicing at the loss of the noble and the inheritance of the sheep, despite its being stripped of the interrogative particle, because it is encompassed under the judgment of the one who said to him: "Do you rejoice at the death of your brother and the inheritance of his camels?" This is from the submission that falls under every denial.
Making His saying, may He be exalted, "(In it are rivers)" as a repetition of the connection—meaning a connection after a connection—contains its detail, because it is like an elaboration of the promised thing; this is why no conjunction intervened between them. It is permitted that it is in the position of a state (hal), provided that the adverbial phrase is in the position of that, and "rivers" is its subject, not that it is a subject with the adverbial phrase being a fronted predicate. The nominal sentence is a state due to the absence of the "and" (waw) in it; they have declared that being content with the pronoun in it is not eloquent. Its being considered a verbal sentence with the estimation of the adverb "is established" (istaqarra)—its status is not hidden. It is said: There is weakness in the state regarding the meaning, as it comes in the manner of additions (which are the mother of denials). Also, it is a state from the Garden, from its pronoun in the connection, and in the operative word there is artificiality. Then, the state is not restricted, and making it an emphasis—and it is known to be such from His informing, may He be exalted, in it also—is artificial.
And that it is the predicate of an omitted subject, and the sentence is an explanatory inauguration. He said in Al-Kashf: "It is the perspective, and the estimation is: 'It [the Garden] has in it rivers,' as if it were said: 'How can the description of the Garden be [so], while it is such and such, like the description of the Fire?' So the inauguration here is in the place of your saying: 'It is such and such,' as an objection to what is in the word 'likeness' of the signaling of the wondrous description." It is not that the predicate of the previous sentence (which is "like him who is eternal in the Fire") is the subject of the question so as to object by the occurrence of the inauguration before it passes. It was objected that there is no need to estimate the subject because "In it are rivers" is a sentence by itself. The answer is that the estimation is "its likeness is: in it are rivers," then the annexed noun was omitted and the genitive was raised to its place, so it became nominative, then it was omitted. This is why he said: "In the question, as if a speaker said: 'And what is its likeness?'" The same applies to the reading of the Commander [Ali], may God honor his face, and those with him (Amthal) in the plural. So it is said: The estimation is "The likenesses of the Garden are like the likenesses of the reward of him who is eternal in the Fire," and the first annexed noun is estimated as plural for correspondence. Truly, Jar Allah has distanced the intended meaning, and many of the investigators have deemed what he mentioned as excellent. The author of Al-Kashf said after deciding on making "(like him who is eternal in the Fire)" the predicate of "The likeness of the Garden": "This is the apparent face suitable for the progression." Ibn al-Munir said in Al-Intisaf, after he mentioned what the people mentioned in the interpretation of this verse: "I have not seen anything more eloquent or sweeter than these subtle points which he mentioned; it only lacks pointing out that there is an omission in the speech to make it balanced, and the estimation is: 'The likeness of the dweller of the Garden is like him who is eternal in the Fire.'" From this style is His saying, may He be exalted: "(Have you made the watering of the pilgrims and the maintenance of the Sacred Mosque like him who believes in God?)" and so forth. What we estimated to achieve balance is better, even if there is much omission in it. Contemplate that, and may God, may He be exalted, take charge of your guidance.
The singular pronoun—meaning "he"—refers to "him" (man) considering its wording, just as the plural pronoun in His saying, the Almighty: "And they are given to drink scalding water" (refers to it considering its meaning). The intent is: "And they are given to drink hot water instead of those beverages," and in it is mockery of them.
(And it cuts their bowels) — (15) — (from the excess of heat).
It is narrated that when it is brought near to them, it roasts their faces, and their scalps peel away; they drink it, and it cuts their bowels. "Bowels" (am'a) is the plural of mi'an (the gut), with a fathah and a kasrah, which is what food transfers to after the stomach; it is also called afaj, and it is masculine, though sometimes feminine.
