ﲀ ﲁ ﲂ ﲃ ﲄ ﲅ ﲆ ﲇ ﲈ ﲉ ﲊ ﲋ ﲌ ﲍ ﲎ ﲏ ﲐ ﲑ ﲒ ﲓ ﲔ ﲕ ﲖ ﲗ ﲘ
[Say], "Then is it other than Allah I should seek as judge while it is He who has revealed to you the Book explained in detail?" And those to whom We [previously] gave the Scripture know that it is sent down from your Lord in truth, so never be among the doubters.
Tafsir
Verse range: 6:114
This is a renewed statement based on an intended verb of speech. The interrogative particle (Hamza) is for negation and challenge (inkār), and the conjunction (Fa) is for connection to an implied preceding phrase necessitated by the context—meaning: "Say, O Muhammad, shall I incline toward the vanities of the devils or deviate from the straight path, seeking a judge other than Allah the Almighty to judge between me and you, separating the truthful among us from the falsifier?"
It is said that the polytheists of Quraysh said to the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him): "Appoint between us and you a judge from the rabbis of the Jews or the bishops of the Christians so that he may inform us about you regarding what is in their book concerning your affair," and thus this verse was revealed.
The attribution of the act of seeking (the judge) to the noble self of the Prophet (peace be upon him) instead of to the polytheists—as in His saying: {أَفَغَيْرَ دِينِ اللَّهِ يَبْغُونَ} [Do they seek other than the religion of Allah?], even though they are the ones seeking—is either to demonstrate complete fairness or to mirror their own words: "Appoint between us and you a judge."
The word "other" (ghayr) is the object of "I seek" (abtaghi), and "a judge" (hakaman) is a state (ḥāl) derived from it. Some say it is a specifier (tamyīz) for the ambiguity present in "other," similar to the phrase: "We have camels other than them." Others say it is an accusative of purpose (maf‘ūl lahu).
Giving precedence to the interrogative particle over the verb is more appropriate than giving it precedence over the object, because the negation pertains to the seeking of someone other than Allah as a judge, not to the act of seeking in the absolute sense; hence, it was more fitting and important to place it first. Others argue that its precedence is for the sake of restriction (takhṣīṣ), interpreted as the restriction of the negation itself, rather than the negation of the restriction. It is also said that its precedence serves as an indication of the necessity to restrict the act of seeking and satisfaction to Him alone as the Judge.
It is permissible for "other" (ghayr) to be a state (ḥāl) of "a judge" (ḥakaman), with "a judge" being the object of "I seek," and the precedence is due to it being the focus of the negation. The term "judge" (ḥakam) is used for both singular and plural. It has been stated by al-Raghib and others—explicitly contradicting al-Wahidi—that it is more eloquent than the word "ruler" (ḥākim), not equal to it. This is explained by the fact that it is an intensive adjective denoting the establishment of its meaning; therefore, it is only used for one who is just or one from whom judgment is frequent.
This is a circumstantial clause (jumla ḥāliyya) confirming the negation. The attribution of the revelation to them specifically—despite the context requiring equality of attribution to both parties in the dispute—is to entice them toward the revealed Book and to bring them down to accept its judgment by suggesting the strength of its connection to them. It is also said that this is more consistent with the opening of the verse, based on the fact that it is a negation against them, even if he used "you" (kum) to demonstrate fairness. An analogy to this is the verse: {وَمَا أَعْبُدُ مَا تَعْبُدُونَ} [And I do not worship what you worship].
The meaning of the verse, according to some researchers, is: "Shall I seek other than Him as a judge, while He is the One who has revealed to you the Book, and you are an unlettered nation who do not know what you are doing, and you do not know the Quran that speaks with truth and correctness—the Book worthy of being exclusively called 'The Book'?"
{مُفَصَّلًا} (Detailed): meaning that within it, truth and falsehood, the lawful and the prohibited, and other rulings are clarified, to the extent that no confusion or ambiguity remains in matters of religion. What need is there after this for any other judgment?
He then said: This, as you can see, is explicit that the Holy Quran is sufficient in religious matters, dispensing with anything else by its clarity and detail. As for whether its inimitability (i‘jāz) plays a role in this, as has been said, there is no further need for that.
It is not hidden that considering the inimitability is a required matter if the verse is connected in meaning to His saying: {وَأَقْسَمُوا بِاللَّهِ} [And they swore by Allah...]. The explanation of this, as mentioned by the Imam, is that when He narrated about the disbelievers that they swore by Allah with their strongest oaths that if a sign came to them they would believe in it, the Almighty responded that there is no benefit in revealing those signs, because if He were to reveal them, they would remain persistent in their disbelief. Then, the Almighty explained in this verse that the proof indicating his prophethood (peace be upon him) had already been attained and completed, so what they were requesting was a superfluous demand to which no attention should be paid.
He then alerted them to the attainment of the proof from this verse in two ways:
Some have addressed the role of inimitability by stating that the requirement for conviction is not complete unless one knows that the revealed content is from Allah, and this depends on inimitability to the extent that one dispenses with any other sign indicating the truthfulness of his claim. However, it is said that the indication of the noble structure (nazm) of the Quran regarding this is obscure, unless one says that the nominal circumstantial clause indicates its fixity and establishment. Or, one could interpret "The Book" as the one known for its inimitability. It is mentioned that this is a result of not contemplating the verse, because the meaning is: "I do not seek a judge in my affair or the affair of others except Allah, who revealed the Book for that purpose." He judges for him (peace be upon him) regarding the truthfulness of his claim through inimitability; for when they attacked his prophethood and swore that if a sign came they would believe, He clarified that their hearts are sealed and commanded him to rebuke them with the words: {أَفَغَيْرَ اللَّهِ} etc.
This means: "Shall I deviate from the straight path and single out others as a judge, when He is the One who revealed this miraculous Book which has defeated you and bound you to the evidence?" Thus, He is sufficient as a judge between me and you through the revelation of this Book, detailed with clear signs of monotheism, prophethood, and other matters, which has rendered you all powerless. This leads to him (peace be upon him) answering them by affirming the premise (qawl bi-l-mūjab), as they attacked his miracles, so he silenced them in the best manner, combined with the knowledge of the People of the Book. Its being a miracle is derived from the fact that it suffices against all else in his affair and others', as indicated. This is close to what the Imam mentioned, and what he pointed to regarding the connection of the verse in meaning to the preceding {وَأَقْسَمُوا بِاللَّهِ} is not without merit—except that the claim that the indication of the noble structure regarding inimitability is obscure is something I do not see as correct, and nothing has appeared in what was mentioned to remove that obscurity.
This is a renewed statement, not included under the implied command of "Say," put forth by Him (the Almighty) to verify the truthfulness of the Book, the revelation of which is tied to the matter of judgment, and to confirm that it is revealed from Him (the Exalted). It is not intended as an argument for the proof of his prophethood (peace be upon him), as the Imam’s words might imply. "The Book" refers to the Torah and the Gospel, and expressing them as such is an allusion to the homogeneity between them and the Quran, necessitating a commonality in truthfulness and revelation from Him (the Almighty), along with the brevity contained therein. The relative pronoun refers to either the scholars of the Jews and Christians or both groups absolutely, with the scholars being the primary recipients. "Giving" in the first case refers to actual instruction, and in the second, it is more general, including instruction in potentiality. Mentioning the two groups under the title of "those to whom We gave the Book" is to signal that they learned what they learned by virtue of their own book. It is also said that it refers to the believers among the People of the Book.
It is reported from ‘Aṭā’ that the "Book" refers to the Quran and the relative pronoun refers to the major Companions and the people of Badr (may Allah be pleased with them all), but it is obvious that this is very far-fetched. The exposure to the title of "Lordship" (Rubūbiyya) along with the addition of the pronoun for him (peace be upon him) is for his honor, while signaling that its revelation is one of the effects of Lordship. "Min" (from) denotes the starting point of the limit metaphorically, and it relates to "revealed." The "Ba" (with) is for accompaniment and relates to a suppressed word, acting as a state of the hidden pronoun in "revealed"—meaning: "clothed in truth."
Most of the seven reciters read it as munazzal with a light zay (denoting gradual descent), while others read it as munzal (denoting sudden descent). We have already indicated the difference between anzala and nazzala in what passed: the former is sudden and the latter is gradual, and that the former is more frequent. The recitation of both indicates looking past the difference, and it is not an indication of two meanings regarding its descent to the lowest heaven and then its descent to earth, because its descent all at once to the heaven, as some say, is not known to the People of the Book.
That is: "Do not be among those who hesitate regarding their knowing that," because one does not observe in them the traces of knowledge or the marks of realization. The "Fa" (so) is for ordering the prohibition upon the news of the People of the Book's knowledge, or upon the fact that it is revealed from your Lord with truth. The intent is not the literal prohibition for him (peace be upon him) against doubting this, but rather to embolden and urge him (peace be upon him), similar to His saying: {وَلَا تَكُونَنَّ مِنَ الْمُشْرِكِينَ} [And do not be among the polytheists]. It is possible that the address is, in reality, to the nation by way of allusion, even if it is in the form of an address to him (peace be upon him), or to everyone who is capable of doubt, based on the established principle that the origin of an address is to be with a specific person, yet it may shift to others, as in His saying: {وَلَوْ تَرَى إِذِ الْمُجْرِمُونَ} [And if you could see when the criminals...]. On these interpretations, the "Fa" is for ordering the prohibition based on their very knowledge of the Quran's state.
