Tafsir of Al-Ma'idah 5:84

(And why should we not believe in Allah and what has come to us of the truth?)

A group, among them Shaykh al-Islam, considered this to be an independent (incipient) statement, serving to substantiate their faith and affirm it by denying the cause of its absence—indeed, denying its absence altogether. On this view, (la nu'min) [that we do not believe] is a state (hal) of the pronoun in (lana) [what is for us], and the governing agent is that which carries the meaning of 'establishment' (istiqrar). That is: "What condition has come upon us while we are in a state of not believing?" The negation here is directed at both the cause and the effect, as in His saying: (And why should I not worship He who created me?) and its parallels, not merely at the cause while the effect is realized, as in His saying: (Then what is wrong with them that they do not believe?) and its likes.

It is also said: It is a conjunction to the first sentence, included with it in the realm of discourse—meaning: They say, "Our Lord, we have believed," and they say, "And what is for us that we should not believe?"

It is also said: It is a conjunction to an omitted sentence, the estimation being: "What is for you that you do not believe in Allah, and what is for us that we should not believe in Allah?"

Some have said: It is an answer to an inquirer who asked, "Why do you believe?" Al-Zajjaj chose this. This was objected to on the grounds that grammarians have stated clearly that an independent sentence which serves as an answer to an implied question should not be connected with waw (and). The scholars of rhetoric have mentioned that, in such cases, separation (fasl) is mandatory, for an answer is not conjoined to a question.

This was answered by saying the waw is superfluous (za'idah). Al-Akhfash reported that it is added in independent sentences. It is not hidden that this requires proof, and the aforementioned state (hal), as Al-Shihab stated, is necessary—without it, the meaning is incomplete. He said: "Thus, it is not correct to connect it with waw in 'what is for us' and 'what is the matter with us that we do not do such-and-such,' because in meaning, it is a predicate, and it is the very thing being asked about."

You know that the interrogation in this type of structure is, for the most part, not literal; rather, it is for the sake of denial (inkar). The intended meaning varies according to what we have pointed out. The meaning of "believing in Allah" is belief in His Oneness, Glorified be He, in the manner brought by the Muhammadan Sharia, for the people were not monotheists in that specific sense. It is also said: "believing in His Book and His Messenger," for belief in them is belief in Him. The apparent is the first; belief in the Book and the Messenger is understood by the conjunction, for the relative noun (al-ladhi) conjoined to the Divine Name includes that definitively.

Regarding (what has come to us of the truth): According to what Abu al-Baqa mentioned, it is a state (hal) of the agent pronoun. It is permissible that min denotes the beginning of the end (ibtida' al-ghayah), meaning: "and in what has come to us from the presence of Allah." It is also permissible that the relative noun is the subject (mubtada') and (what has come...) is its predicate, with the sentence also being in the place of a state. The remoteness of these two views is evident.

His saying: (And we hope that our Lord will enter us with the righteous people) is another state (hal) according to the group, from the preceding pronoun, by estimating a subject (mubtada'), for the confirmed present tense verb is not conjoined with waw. The governing agent for it is the same as the one for the first, qualified by it, so the meaning multiplies—just as it was said regarding His saying: (Every time they were provided with a portion of fruit...). That is: "What is for us while we are not believing, and we are hoping for the companionship of the righteous?" It is a synonymous state. The necessity of the first does not exclude it from being synonymous, or it is a state of the pronoun in (we do not believe), meaning they are denying their own lack of belief while they hope for the companionship of the believers.

It is also permissible that it be conjoined to (we believe) or to (we do not believe), in the sense of: "And what is for us that we should combine the abandonment of belief with the hope for the companionship of the righteous?" Or in the sense of: "What is for us that we should not combine belief with the aforementioned hope of entering into Islam?" For a disbeliever should not hope for such companionship.

The position of the interpreted masdar from an and what follows it is either in the accusative or genitive, according to the disagreement between Al-Khalil and Sibawayh. The intended meaning of "entering us" is clear. Many of those who perform grammatical analysis chose that na (us) is the first object of "enter" and the second object is omitted, meaning: "into Paradise." It is said: If this intent were not the case, He, Glorified be He, would have said "among the righteous people" instead of "with the righteous people."