Tafsir of Al-Ma'idah 5:59

"Say, 'O People of the Scripture,'" This is a command from Allah to the Messenger (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) by way of shifting the discourse—after forbidding the believers from listening to the words of the mockers—so that he may address them, clarify that the religion is far exalted above that which would justify the mockery they have issued, reveal the cause of what they have perpetrated, and silence them. They are described as "People of the Scripture" as a prelude to what He (the Exalted) will mention regarding their rebuke and binding them to the implications of their disbelief in their own scripture.

That is, say, O Muhammad, to those wicked ones: "Do you resent us..." meaning: Do you deny and find fault in us? The verb naqama (to resent) is used when one denies or dislikes something; it is from the same conjugation as daraba (to hit). Al-Hasan read it as tanqamuna with a fat-hah on the qaf, from the conjugation of ‘alima (to know), which is a rarer linguistic form. Al-Zajjaj said: It is said naqama with both a fat-hah and a kasrah, and its meaning is to reach the limit of disliking a thing. Abdullah bin Qays recited:

In the Nihayah, it is said: naqama yanqimu when dislike reaches the limit of indignation. It is also said of someone, "He did not resent [it] except [for such-and-such]," when he makes a thing that which leads him to deny the blessing. From this is the hadith regarding Zakat: "What does Ibn Jamil resent except that he was poor, and Allah the Exalted enriched him?" Meaning: He resents nothing regarding the prevention of Zakat except that he denies the blessing; it is as if his wealth led him to deny the blessing of Allah the Exalted. Al-Raghib states that naqama is interpreted as "denied and found fault with," because niqmah (resentment/vengeance) implies denial by the tongue or by punishment, for one does not punish except for that which he denies. Thus, it is along the lines of the saying:

This is, as Al-Shihab said, among those verbs that take the particles bi (by) and ‘ala (against). Abu Hayyan said: Its origin is to be transitive with ‘ala, but the form ifta‘ala (intiqam) is transitive with bi due to its inclusion of the meaning of "inflicting harm." Here, the simple form fa‘ala is used with the meaning of ifta‘ala, though he did not provide a source for this.

"...except that we believe in Allah and what was sent down to us..."—that is, the Glorious Quran—"...and what was sent down before..."—that is, the Torah, the Gospel, and all the books sent down to the prophets (peace and blessings be upon them).

"...and that most of you are disobedient?"—that is, rebellious, having exited the circle of faith through what has been mentioned. For disbelief in the Great Quran necessitates disbelief in all other books, as is not hidden. The waw (and) is for conjunction, and what follows it is joined to "that we believe."

Some of the foremost investigators chose the view that it is a maf‘ul lahu (an object for the sake of which) for "do you resent," and the direct object is "the religion," which was omitted due to the confidence that what precedes and follows it provides clear indication. For taking the religion as mockery and play is the very essence of resentment and denial, while belief in what was detailed is the very essence of the religion which they resented. However, it is in the position of being a cause, as a definitive indictment against them for their complete obstinacy and perversion, in that they made it a cause for resentment despite it being, in itself, a cause for acceptance and satisfaction. According to this, the exception is from the most general of causes; i.e., "You do not resent our religion for any reason, except for our faith in Allah, what was sent down to us, and what was sent down before from your books, and because most of you are rebellious, not believing in any of what was mentioned—so much so that if you were to truly believe in your own scripture which speaks to the truth of our scripture, you would have believed in it." Some have estimated the omitted object as "anything," and I see no harm in that.

It is also said: It is conjoined to "that we believe" regarding its status as the object, but not that the exception is the sum of both conjuncts, as they do not admit that most of them are disobedient until they would deny it; rather, it is what is necessitated by their opposition. It is as if it were said: "Do you deny anything from us except that we are in a state that contradicts your state, as we have entered into Islam and you have exited it?"

Others say the speech contains an omitted noun, meaning: "and the belief that most of you are disobedient."

Others say it is conjoined to the object of faith; i.e., "Do you resent us for anything except our faith in Allah, what was sent down to us, what was sent down before, and [the fact] that most of you are disbelievers?" This is, in meaning, like the preceding view.

It is also said: It is conjoined to an omitted cause, and the preposition has been omitted in the side of the conjunct, and its grammatical position is either genitive or accusative according to the famous disagreement; i.e., "Do you resent us for anything except faith—due to your lack of fairness—and because most of you are disobedient?"

It is also said: It is in the accusative case by an implied negative verb indicated by the one mentioned, i.e., "And you do not resent that most of you are disobedient."

It is also said: It is an ibtida’ (a starting noun) whose predicate is omitted, and some estimate it as preceding, because the anna (that) with a fat-hah on the hamzah does not appear with what follows it as a subject unless the predicate precedes it. Abu Hayyan said: Anna cannot be started with, placed in the beginning, except after amma only. Many grammarians disagreed with this condition, given that things that are estimated/implied are forgiven [in language] in ways that others are not. Under both estimations, the sentence is a state (hal) or parenthetical; i.e., "and your disobedience is established or known."

It is also said: The waw means "with"; i.e., "Do you resent us for anything except faith, while most of you are..."—and so on. Allamah al-Taftazani critiqued this by saying it does not hold according to the literal speech of the grammarians, who state that in a maf‘ul ma‘ahu (object of accompaniment), there must be accompaniment in the governing power of the verb. In that case, the problem returns, which is that they would be resenting the fact that most of them are disobedient. Yes, it is valid according to the school of Al-Akhfash, where he was content with mere coexistence in existence for the maf‘ul ma‘ahu, citing as evidence their saying: "I traveled and the Nile [followed]," and "I came to you and the rising of the sun." This was contested by arguing that such a condition in the maf‘ul ma‘ahu does not necessitate the condition for every waw that means "with." So, let the waw be for "with" without it being a maf‘ul ma‘ahu due to the absence of its condition—rather, it is for conjunction.

It is also said: The waw is redundant, and "that most of you..." is in the position of causation; i.e., "Do you resent us for anything except faith, because most of you are disobedient?"

Abu Nu'aym bin Maysarah read it as wa inna aktharakum (and surely/for most of you) with a kasrah on the hamzah; the sentence is then independent, established because most of them are rebellious. The "most" refers to those who have not yet believed, and only a few of them have believed.