As Abu Ubayd, al-Bayhaqi, and others have reported from Ibn Abbas, may Allah be pleased with them both, it was revealed in Mecca at night, all at once. Abu al-Shaykh reported the narration of it being revealed as a whole from Ubayy ibn Ka'b, attributed to the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace. Al-Nahhas recorded in his Nasikh from the "Hibr" (Ibn Abbas) that it is Meccan, except for three verses which were revealed in Medina: "Say, 'Come, I will recite...'" to the end of the three verses. Ibn Rahwayh recorded in his Musnad and others from Shahr ibn Hawshab that it is Meccan, except for two verses: "Say, 'Come, I will recite...'" and the one following it. Abu al-Shaykh also recorded from al-Kalbi and Sufyan that they said: The entire Surat al-An'am was revealed in Mecca except for two verses revealed in Medina regarding a man from the Jews, who is the one who said: "Allah did not reveal anything to any human," the verse. Ibn al-Mundhir recorded from Abu Juhayfah that the entire Surat al-An'am was revealed in Mecca except for "And even if We had sent down to them the angels," for it is Medinan. Many have said: All of it is Meccan, except for six verses: "And they did not appraise Allah with true appraisal" to the end of the three verses, and "Say, 'Come, I will recite'" to the end of the three.

Its number of verses is 165 according to the Kufans, 166 according to the Basrans and Syrians, and 167 according to the Hijazis.

Reports regarding its virtue are numerous. Al-Hakim (who authenticated it), al-Bayhaqi in al-Shu'ab, and al-Isma'ili in his Mu'jam recorded from Jabir who said: "When Surat al-An'am was revealed, the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, glorified Allah, then said: 'This surah was accompanied by so many angels that they filled the horizon.'" A group of traditionists narrated the report of the angels accompanying it, though some report that there were 70,000, while others report fewer or more. Al-Daylami recorded from Ibn Mas'ud that he said: The Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, said: "Whoever prays the dawn prayer in congregation, sits in his place of prayer, and recites three verses from the beginning of Surat al-An'am, Allah will appoint for him seventy angels who will glorify Allah and seek forgiveness for him until the Day of Resurrection."

Abu al-Shaykh recorded from Habib ibn Muhammad al-'Abid that he said: Whoever recites three verses from the beginning of al-An'am up to His saying, "what you used to earn," Allah will send him 70,000 angels praying for him until the Day of Resurrection, and he will have the equivalent of their deeds. When the Day of Resurrection comes, He will admit him to Paradise, give him to drink from Salsabil, wash him from al-Kawthar, and say: "I am your Lord in truth, and you are My servant," along with other such reports. Most of the narrations on this matter are weak, and some are fabricated, as is not hidden from one who investigates them. Perhaps the reports of this surah being revealed as a whole are likewise.

The Imam narrated a consensus of people on the opinion that it was revealed as a whole, then he raised a difficulty regarding this: How can it be said for every one of its verses that the cause of its revelation was such-and-such, even though they do say that? The argument that the one saying this intends that no verse from another surah was revealed between the times of the revelation of its verses is not supported by the external evidence; rather, there are reports that explicitly contradict it. The claim that it was revealed twice—once all at once and once gradually—is contrary to the apparent meaning and has no evidence. The weakness of the reports concerning its revelation as a whole is supported by what Ibn al-Salah said in his Fatawa: "The tradition regarding it being revealed as a whole, which we narrated through the path of Ubayy ibn Ka'b, we have found no authentic chain for it, and the contrary has been narrated." End quote. From this, the flaw in the Imam's claim of consensus on the opinion that it was revealed as a whole is known, so reflect on this.

The aspect of its connection to the end of al-Ma'idah, according to some scholars, is that it began with praise (al-hamd), while that [surah] concluded with the final judgment, and they are related, as He, the Exalted, said: "And it was judged between them in truth, and it was said, 'Praise to Allah, Lord of the worlds.'"

Al-Jalal al-Suyuti said regarding the connection: When He, the Exalted, mentioned at the end of al-Ma'idah, "To Allah belongs the dominion of the heavens and the earth and whatever is within them," as a summary, He, the Majestic, inaugurated this surah by explaining and detailing that. He began by mentioning the creation of the heavens and the earth, and joined to it that He made the darkness and the light, which is part of what "whatever is within them" entails. Then He, whose name is mighty, mentioned that He created the human species, decreed for it a lifespan, and set for it another time for the resurrection, and that He, His majesty be glorified, is the Originator of generations, one after another. Then He said: "Say, 'To whom belongs whatever is in the heavens?'" etc., establishing for Him the dominion over all things contained by the vessel of space. Then He, whose saying is powerful, said: "And to Him belongs what settles in the night and the day," establishing that He, glory be to Him, is the owner of all things contained by the vessel of time. Then He mentioned the creation of all other animals, beasts, and birds, then the creation of sleep, wakefulness, and death. Then He, the Mighty and Majestic, multiplied throughout the surah the mention of origination and creation regarding the luminaries, stars, the splitting of the dawn, the splitting of the grain and the seed-date, the sending down of water, the bringing forth of vegetation and fruits of various types, the origination of gardens trellised and untrellised, and other things that detail what is within them.

He, may mercy be upon him, also mentioned another aspect of the connection: When He, the Exalted, mentioned in al-Ma'idah, "O you who have believed, do not prohibit the good things which Allah has made lawful to you," etc., and mentioned after it, "Allah has not appointed [such innovations as] bahirah," etc., He informed about the disbelievers that they prohibited things from what Allah had provided them as a fabrication against Allah. The intent was to warn the believers against prohibiting any of that, lest they resemble the disbelievers in their actions. Since this was mentioned in summary, He, the Majestic and Glorified, sent down this surah to clarify the state of the disbelievers in their actions, bringing it in the clearest manner and most perfect style. Then He argued with them regarding it, established proofs of its invalidity, opposed them, and refuted them, among other things the story comprises. Thus, this surah was an explanation of what that surah contained in summary, as well as a detail, expansion, completion, and elaboration. It opened with the mention of creation and dominion because the Creator and Owner is the One who has the right of disposal over His dominion and creatures, by way of permission, prohibition, declaring forbidden, and declaring lawful. Therefore, it is not permissible to object to Him regarding the disposal of His dominion.

This surah also has a connection from one perspective to al-Fatihah for explaining the summary of His saying, "Lord of the worlds"; and to al-Baqarah for explaining the summary of His saying, "who created you and those before you," and His saying, "who created for you all that is in the earth"; and to Ali 'Imran from the perspective of detailing His saying, "the cattle and the tilling" and His saying, "Every soul will taste death," etc.; and to al-Nisa' regarding the beginning of creation and the condemnation of what they forbade for their wives and the killing of daughters; and to al-Ma'idah regarding its inclusion of various types of foods.

It may be said: Since the pole of this surah revolves around proving the Creator and the proofs of Tawhid—to the extent that Abu Ishaq al-Isfara'ini said: "In Surat al-An'am are all the principles of Tawhid"—it relates to that surah (al-Ma'idah) in that it contains the invalidation of the divinity of 'Isa, peace be upon him, and the rebuke of the disbelievers for their corrupt belief and false fabrication.

Furthermore, since His blessings, the Exalted, are beyond count and cannot be bounded by enumeration, yet they return in summary to origination and preservation in the first creation, and origination and preservation in the second creation—all of which were indicated in al-Fatihah (the Mother of the Book), while al-An'am indicates the first origination, al-Kahf the first preservation, Saba' the second origination, and Fatir the second preservation—these five began with praise. Among the subtleties is that He, the Exalted, placed in every quarter of His noble, glorious Book a surah opened with praise, as He, the Mighty and Majestic, said: [The surahs].

Al-An'am: (1) All praise is due to Allah who...

(In the name of Allah, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful. All praise is due to Allah, who created the heavens and the earth.)

This is either a declarative or an incitive sentence. Some prioritize the former, arguing that treating it as incitive would force the speech out of its conventional meaning without necessity. Furthermore, if it were incitive, it would imply that there was no attribution of beauty (praise) before the praiser uttered the praise, because the existence of an incitive meaning is contemporaneous with its utterance. Others prioritize the latter, arguing that if it were a declarative sentence, one could not call someone a "praiser" (hamid) for saying "All praise is due to Allah," because linguistically, a derivative noun (like hamid) is not formed from the object of a declarative sentence. For instance, one does not call a person who says "Zayd has the standing" a "stander" (qa'im). Since the consequence is invalid, the premise is also invalid. This does not apply if it is incitive, as a present participle (ism fa'il) can be derived from an incitive act as an attribute of the speaker; for example, one who says "I sold" is called a "seller" (ba'i').

It has been objected that this does not apply to every incitive act—otherwise, one would call the speaker of "Strike!" a "striker" (darib), or call the mothers who are addressed in the verse "The mothers shall nurse their children" (yurdi'na) "nurses" (murdi'at). Rather, this only occurs when the incitive act constitutes a state of the speaker, as in the formulas of contracts. In that case, there is no difference between it and a declarative sentence regarding what was mentioned. The verifying scholars hold that both interpretations are permissible for this sentence, and they have answered the objections regarding the implied difficulties. Yes, the declarative interpretation is preferred here because the Surah was revealed to clarify monotheism and to deter the disbelievers, and declaring its content in a declarative manner suits the context, whereas treating it as an act of praise initiation does not. It is said that its declarative interpretation is to allow the subsequent conjunction of what follows. Those who favor the incitive interpretation—and do not permit conjunction of an incitive sentence onto a declarative one—attribute the conjunction to the relative clause of the noun (mawsul) or to an incitive sentence, making the conjunction an act of expressing alienation and wonder. The affectation and departure from the apparent meaning in this are not hidden.

In connecting "praise" first to the Name of the Essence (Allah) and then describing Him with what He is described with, there is an indication of the realization of two types of entitlement: the realization of His entitlement (glory be to Him) to praise by virtue of His Essence (glory be to His Majesty), and the realization of His entitlement by virtue of the grace (in'am) indicated by the relative clause acting as an adjective. Some interpret His intrinsic entitlement as His right to be praised for all His attributes and actions. This is the meaning of their saying that He is entitled to worship by His very Essence. Some have denied the validity of directing glorification and worship to the Essence as such.

The Imam stated in his commentary on al-Isharat, while mentioning the stations of the knowers (‘arifin), that people fall into three classes in worship. The first—the highest in perfection and honor—are those who worship Him (glory be to Him) for His Essence, not for anything else. The second—following the first in perfection—are those who worship Him for one of His attributes, specifically that He is worthy of worship. The third, the final degree of the verifiers, are those who worship Him so that their souls may be perfected by their attribution to Him. There is no difficulty in conceiving the glorification of the Essence as such, because as Al-Shihab said, if this were to occur initially before intellectualizing the aspects of perfection, it would be difficult. But after knowing the Praised (glory be to His Majesty) through the signs of beauty and conceiving Him with the utmost attributes of perfection, it is no wonder that one would turn to His glorification and praise (glory be to His Majesty) once again, disregarding everything other than the Essence, after ascending the degrees of contemplation. Thus, the people of exoteric knowledge said: "His attributes did not increase knowledge, but they are a delight." What then of the knowers drowning in the seas of gnosis? They are the people, the entirety of the people.

What Al-Salkuti verified—and which we followed in the Fatihah—is that "intrinsic entitlement" means an entitlement not conditioned by any specific attribute, not that the "bare Essence" is the one entitled to it. For praise is only due to that which is beautiful, and it is called "intrinsic" because the Essence is observed therein without considering a specific attribute, or because the Name of the Essence points to it, or because since it is not ascribed to a specific attribute, it is ascribed to the Essence.

Some later verifying scholars mentioned a discussion in this place, through which he refuted many eminent scholars. In essence, he argued that the prepositional lam in lillah (to Allah) is for absolute exclusivity, not for restrictive exclusivity by determination, evidenced by the fact that they said regarding a case like lahu al-hamd (to Him is the praise) that the precedence is for restrictive exclusivity. If the prepositional lam also provided that, there would be no difference between al-hamdu lillah and lahu al-hamd other than that the latter is more emphatic than the former in conveying restriction, whereas it is explicitly stated that they differ in that one conveys restriction while the other does not. Exclusivity comes in various forms, and determining which is meant is left to the cause upon which the judgment is predicated.

The rest of the text details the intricacies of these theological and linguistic arguments, emphasizing that the structure of the sentence affirms Allah's inherent right to praise, with the relative clause serving as the rational ground (‘illah) for this entitlement.