Tafsir of Al-An'am 6:122

(Is he who was dead, then We gave him life) This is a representation (tamthil) presented to alienate the believers from obeying the polytheists, following the warning against it. It points to the fact that they are illuminated by the lights of divine revelation, while the polytheists are drowning in the darkness of disbelief and tyranny; how, then, could their obedience be rational?

The verse, as al-Tayyibi stated, is connected to His saying—Exalted is He—"And if you obey them." The hamza (interrogative particle) is for denial, and the waw (in wa-man) is, as many have said, to coordinate the nominal sentence with its peer, which is indicated by the context—meaning: Are you like them? "Is he who was dead, then We gave him life (and We assigned to him) alongside that, externally, (a light) great, (by which he walks)—that is, by means of it—(among the people)—that is, in their midst, secure from their side."

The sentence is either a new commencement (isti'naf) stemming from a question generated by the discourse, as if it were said: "And what does he do with that light?" and it was answered: "He walks, etc.," or it is an adjective for him. "Man" (he who) is a relative noun acting as the subject (mubtada'), and what follows it is its relative clause (silah). The predicate (khabar) is the connection of the preposition and the noun that follows it in His saying—Exalted is He—(like one who is in the darkness).

"Man" in the latter is also a relative noun, and (his likeness) is the subject. His saying—Exalted is He—(in the darkness) is the predicate—or rather, a deleted predicate is implied. And His saying: (not coming out of it) is in the position of a circumstantial qualifier (hal) for the hidden pronoun within the prepositional phrase. This sentence is the predicate of the subject—namely "his likeness"—by way of quotation, meaning: when he is described, this is said to him. The sentence of "his likeness" with its predicate is the relative clause.

If you wish, you may consider "man" in both instances as an indefinite noun described by an attribute. It is not permissible for (in the darkness) to be the predicate of (his likeness) because "the darkness" is not a container for "the likeness." The apparent discourse of some, such as Abu al-Baqa’, is that "in the darkness" is the predicate and that there is no implicit entity there, and the necessity of "containment" (zarfiyya) is not required—as affirmed by some researchers—because the intent is that his likeness is his state of being in the darkness, and the purpose is quotation. Yes, what was mentioned first is superior, because the predicate of "his likeness" can only be a complete sentence, and a prepositional phrase without an apparent agent does not perform that function.

It is permitted that the sentence (not coming out of it) be a circumstantial qualifier for the pronoun in (his likeness), though Abu al-Baqa’ forbade this due to the separation and the weakness of a circumstantial qualifier coming from a genitive construct (mudaf ilayh). Nafi‘ and Ya‘qub recited "mayyitan" (dead) with a shadda (doubling), which is the root for the lightened form. The second ya, which is transformed from a waw, was subjected to deletion just as it was subjected to transformation, and there is no difference between the two according to the majority.

Furthermore, this latter case, as the Sheikh al-Islam stated, is a likeness intended for one who remains in misguidance such that he never departs from it, just as the former is a likeness intended for one whom Allah the Exalted created upon the primordial nature (fitra) of Islam and guided via clear signs to the path of truth, which he traverses as he wills. However, this is not to say that each of these meanings is indicated by what befits it among the words used in the two likenesses via analogy to the corresponding meanings; rather, the words of the likeness remain upon their original meanings. Instead, it is that from the various matters considered in each side of the two likenesses, a specific configuration has been extracted, and from the various matters mentioned in each side, another specific configuration has been extracted; the first two were likened to them and were placed in their position, so that which indicates the latter two was used for them through a form of metaphor, until the end of what he said.

Qutb al-Razi asserted that these are two "representations" (tamthilan) and not two "metaphors" (isti‘aratan). This was refuted by al-Shihab, who said the appearance is that "he who was dead" and "he who is like one in the darkness" are of the category of representative metaphor (isti‘ara tamthiliyya), since there is no explicit mention of the subject of the analogy, nor is there an indication that would negate the metaphor. The first metaphor in its entirety is the thing being likened (mushabbah), and the second is that to which it is likened (mushabbah bihi). This is like your saying in individual metaphor: "Is the lion like the fox?"—meaning, is the brave like the cowardly? This is from the subtlest of meanings that should be noted and preserved.

The interpretation narrated from Ibn ‘Abbas—may Allah be pleased with both of them—is that the intended meaning by "the dead" is the disbeliever who is astray, by "the giving of life" is guidance, by "the light" is the Quran, and by "the darkness" is disbelief and misguidance. According to what Abu al-Sheikh narrated from him, the verse was revealed regarding ‘Umar ibn al-Khattab—may Allah be pleased with him—who is the one intended by "whom Allah gave life and guided," and regarding Abu Jahl ibn Hisham—may Allah curse him—who is the one intended by "who is like one in the darkness, not coming out of it." It is narrated from Zayd ibn Aslam similarly. In one narration from Ibn ‘Abbas, it is regarding Hamza and Abu Jahl; and from ‘Ikrimah, it is regarding ‘Ammar ibn Yasir and Abu Jahl. Regardless, the lesson is in the generality of the wording, not the specificity of the cause; thus, it includes everyone who submitted to the command of Allah and everyone who remained in his misguidance and arrogance.

(Thus)—an indication of the aforementioned embellishment in the manner established for its likes, or an indication of the devils inspiring their allies, or of the beautification of faith for the believers—(it was made fair-seeming)—from His side, the Exalted, as an act of creation, or from the side of the devils as a whispering—(to the disbelievers)—such as Abu Jahl and his ilk—(that which they were doing)—that is, what they persisted in doing of the various arts of disbelief and sins, among which are the abominations reported about them.