Tafsir of Al-An'am 6:52

When the Prophet (may the blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) was commanded to warn those mentioned [in the previous verses] so that they might perhaps be ranked among the righteous, he was then forbidden from doing so in a manner that would lead to driving them away.

It is understood from some narrations that the two verses were revealed together, while others do not suggest this. Ahmad, al-Tabarani, and others recorded from Ibn Mas'ud (may Allah be pleased with him) that he said: The assembly of the Quraish passed by the Prophet (may the blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) while Suhayb, Ammar, Bilal, Khabbab, and their like among the weak believers were with him. They said, "O Muhammad, are you satisfied with these from among your people? Are these the ones whom Allah has favored among us? Should we be followers of these? Drive them away from you; perhaps if you drive them away, we will follow you." Thereupon, Allah revealed the Quran regarding them: { And warn by it those... } until His saying: { And He is most knowing of the wrongdoers. }

Ibn Jarir, Abu al-Shaykh, al-Bayhaqi in al-Dala'il, and others recorded from Khabbab (may Allah be pleased with him) that he said: Al-Aqra' ibn Habis al-Tamimi and Uyaynah ibn Hisn al-Fazari came and found the Prophet (may the blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) with Bilal, Suhayb, Ammar, and Khabbab among other weak believers. When they saw them around him, they held them in contempt. They came to him and spoke to him privately, saying, "We would like you to set aside a place for us that the Arabs would recognize as our honor, for delegations of the Arabs come to you, and we are ashamed to be seen sitting with these slaves. So when we come to you, make them stand up from our presence, and when we are finished, sit with them if you wish." He said, "Yes." They said, "Write a contract for us regarding that." He called for a scroll and called Ali (may Allah honor his face) to write it. We were sitting in a corner when Gabriel descended with this verse: { And do not drive away those... } etc. Then he called us, and we came to him, and he was saying: "Peace be upon you. Your Lord has decreed upon Himself mercy." So we would sit with him, and when he wanted to rise, he would rise and leave us. Then Allah revealed: { And keep yourself patient with those who call upon their Lord... } etc. The Messenger of Allah (may the blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) would sit with us afterwards, and when the hour arrived for him to depart, he would rise, and we would rise and leave him until he stood up.

Ibn al-Mundhir and others recorded from Ikrimah that Utbah and Shaybah, the sons of Rabi'ah, Qarazah ibn Abd 'Amr ibn Nawfal, al-Harith ibn Amir ibn Nawfal, and Mut'im ibn 'Adi—from among the noble disbelievers of Abd Manaf—went to Abu Talib and said, "If your nephew would drive away these slaves and allies from us, it would be greater for him in our eyes, more obedient for him in our estimation, and closer to our following him and believing him." Abu Talib mentioned this to the Prophet (may the blessings and peace of Allah be upon him). Umar ibn al-Khattab (may Allah be pleased with him) said, "If you would do so, O Messenger of Allah, so that we may see what they intend by their words and what they will arrive at regarding their affair." Then Allah revealed: { And warn by it... } until His saying: { Is Allah not most knowing of the grateful? } They were Bilal, Ammar ibn Yasir, Salim the freed slave of Abu Hudhayfah, Subayh the freed slave of Usayd, and the allies: Ibn Mas'ud, al-Miqdad ibn 'Amr, Waqid ibn Abdullah al-Hanzali, 'Amr ibn Abd 'Amr, Marthad ibn Abi Marthad, and their likes. And it was revealed regarding the leaders of disbelief from the Quraish and the allies: { And thus We have tried some of them through others... } until the end of the verse. When it was revealed, Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) came forward and apologized for his statement, and Allah revealed: { And when those come to you who believe in Our verses... } the verse.

Al-ghadah (morning) is originally ghudwah; the waw was changed to an alif because it was mobile and preceded by a fatha. The origin of al-'ashi (evening) is ashway; the waw was changed to a ya' and the ya' was assimilated into the ya' following the rule. It appears to be singular, like al-'ashiyah, and its plurals are ashaya and ashiyat. It is said that it is the plural of ashiyah, but that is far-fetched. The meaning of the first is the early morning, or the time between the dawn prayer and sunrise, and the meaning of the second is the end of the day. What is meant by them here is continuity, just as one says, "He did it evening and morning," if he did it persistently. The meaning of "call" (dua) is its literal meaning, or prayer, or remembrance, or the recitation of the Quran; these are different opinions.

Ibn Jarir and Ibn Abi Hatim recorded from Mujahid that they refer to the two prayers: Morning (Subh) and Afternoon (Asr), because time is often mentioned, and what occurs in it is intended. Just as one says "he prayed the morning," intending the prayer itself, it is sometimes reversed, and the prayer is used to refer to its time, such as "the prayer has drawn near," meaning its time. It is also sometimes used to refer to its place, as it was said regarding His saying: { Do not approach prayer while you are intoxicated }, that the intended meaning is the mosques. They were specifically mentioned for their nobility. The opinions regarding "calling" (dua) are applicable to this view, except for the second.

Ibn Amir recited it here and in [Surah] al-Kahf as { al-ghudwah } with a waw; this is also the recitation of al-Hasan, Malik ibn Dinar, Abu Raja' al-Utaridi, and others. Abu Ubayd claimed that whoever recited it with a waw was mistaken because ghudwah is a generic proper noun ('alam jins) that does not accept the definite article "al". The origin of his error is that he followed the written script, because al-ghadah is written with a waw like al-salah and al-zakah. He was mistaken in this correction, because even if ghudwah is commonly known as he mentioned, it has been heard as a generic noun that is indefinite and declined, so "al" can be prefixed to it. Sibawayh reported this from al-Khalil. Beginning [the criticism] with "the claim" does not indicate its weakness, as indicated by the words of Imam al-Nawawi in his commentary on Sahih Muslim, and a vast number of linguists have mentioned it. Al-Mubarrad also mentioned on behalf of the Arabs its usage as an indefinite ghudwah, its declension, and the inclusion of "al" when it does not refer to a specific day. The one who affirms takes precedence over the one who denies, and he who memorizes is a proof against him who does not. Its occurrence in the mutawatir recitation is a sufficient proof, so there is no need—as it is said—to commit oneself to the position that it is a proper noun, yet was treated as indefinite and therefore took "al," for the indefiniteness of a proper noun and prefixing "al" to it is very rare in their speech. Indeed, the indefiniteness of a generic proper noun is not known. Nor is there a need to commit to it being definite and having "al" prefixed to it to match al-'ashi, just as it was prefixed to Yazid to match al-Walid in the verse: "I saw al-Walid ibn al-Yazid, blessed, heavy with the burdens of the Caliphate, his shoulders," because this type of matching, which is the haqiqi (true) matching, is also rare. Most matching is majaz (metaphorical).

There is no indication in the verse that the Prophet (may the blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) actually performed the driving away, which would scratch the face of [his] infallibility. What the narrations relate is that he intended to set a specific time for those righteous callers and another time for the nobles of the Quraish, in order to reconcile their hearts so he might guide them to faith. Those, may Allah be pleased with them, know what the Prophet (may the blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) intended, so no insult or broken heart would come to them from him (may the blessings and peace of Allah be upon him).

{ Seeking His countenance } is in the position of a state (hal) from the pronoun in { they call upon }. Regarding what is meant by "countenance" (wajh) among the interpreters, there is disagreement. It is said—and this is the famous view—that it refers to the Essence (Dhat), meaning they are seeking His Essence. The meaning of seeking the Essence, as it is said, is sincerity to Him, based on the impossibility of Allah (may He be exalted) being sought for His own sake, because "seeking" (iradah) is an attribute that only relates to possible things; it requires preferring one of the two ends of what is sought over the other, and that is not conceivable except in them. That is: "They call upon their Lord, sincere to Him." It is qualified by this to emphasize its causality for the prohibition, for sincerity is among the strongest causes for honor, which is the opposite of driving away.

It is also said: It means the direction and the way, and the meaning is: seeking the way which He (may He be glorified) has commanded them to seek; this is what is required by the words of al-Zajjaj. It is also said: It is a metonymy for love and seeking satisfaction, because whoever loves an essence likes to see its face, so seeing the face is among the requisites of love, thus it was made a metonymy for it. This was stated by the Imam, and it is as you see. It is also permitted that the mention of the "face" is for glorification, as one says, "This is the face of opinion" and "This is the face of the evidence," and the meaning is: they seek Him.

{ Not upon you is any account of them } - The plural pronoun refers to the aforementioned, as narrated from Ata and the majority of the commentators. It is permissible that "ma" (what) is Tamiimiyyah or Hijaziyyah, and that "shay'" (anything) is the subject of the predicate dependent on the negation, and "from their account" is a description of it that was brought forward, thus becoming a state. It is also possible that it is in the nominative position as the subject (mubtada'), and the preceding prepositional phrase is connected to a deleted word which acts as the fronted predicate, and "min" is extra (za'idah) for generalization. The words of al-Zamakhshari point to his choice. The sentence is an interruption situated between the prohibition and its response, to affirm it and repel what might be imagined as a justification for driving away the righteous, based on the sayings of those who attack their religion, as was the habit of the people of Noah (peace be upon him) when they said: { We do not see you as anything but followers like ourselves, [nor do we see] that any have followed you except those who are the lowest of us at first sight }. The meaning is: You have no responsibility for the account of their faith and their invalid deeds, as the polytheists say, such that you should address it and build upon that the judgments you see. Your duty, according to the nature of the station of prophethood, is to look at outward appearances and execute judgments based on them, while delegating the inner matters and their account to the Gentle, the Aware. The outward appearances of these people are their calling upon their Lord in the morning and the evening. It was narrated from Ibn Zayd that the meaning is: You have no responsibility for the account of their sustenance, i.e., their poverty; the intent is that their poverty does not harm you in any way, so that it would be valid for you to proceed with what the polytheists wanted from you regarding them.

{ Nor is any account of you upon them of anything } - Conjoined to what preceded it. It was brought forth, even though the answer had been completed by that, as an exaggeration in clarifying that the negation of their account being upon him (may the blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) is arranged in the sequence of things for which there is no doubt at all—which is the negation of his (may the blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) account being upon them. It is on the method of His saying: { So when their term comes, they will not remain an hour, nor will they precede [it] }, in one view.

Al-Zamakhshari said: The two sentences have the meaning of one sentence, performing the purpose of "No bearer of burdens shall bear the burden of another," as if it were said: Neither you nor they shall be taken to account for the account of the other. In that case, both sentences are necessary. It was objected that this is not worthy of the majesty of the Revelation. The presentation of his (may the blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) address in both places is said to be for his honor (may the most excellent of blessings and the best of peace be upon him); otherwise, the apparent would be "And there is no account of you upon them of anything," by presenting the prepositional phrase as in the first. It is said that the presentation of "upon you" in the first sentence is to intend that the negation applies specifically to the account of them being upon him (may the blessings and peace of Allah be upon him), as it is that which is the caller to him (may the blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) addressing their account.

Some interpreters went to the view that the plural pronoun is for the polytheists, and this was narrated from Ibn Abbas (may Allah be pleased with them both). The meaning is: You will not be taken to account for them, so that their faith would concern you and your eagerness for it would call you to drive away the believers. The pronoun in His saying { then you would drive them away } refers to the believers in any case, and the verb is in the accusative because it is the answer to the negation. The intent is the negation of driving away, not the negation of their account being upon him (may the blessings and peace of Allah be upon him), as a necessity of the negation of the cause implies the negation of the effect. It is as if it were said: That would not happen from you, so how could driving away occur from you? It is one of two meanings in such a structure, the second of which is impossible here.

{ Then you would be among the wrongdoers } - An answer to the prohibition. The Imam and al-Zamakhshari permitted it to be a conjunction to { then you would drive them away } in the manner of causality, because being a wrongdoer is an effect of their being driven away and a cause for it. It was objected that the sharing in the accusative through conjunction necessitates sharing in the cause of the accusative, which is the dependence of the second on the first, such that the negation of the first necessitates the negation of the second. And being among the wrongdoers is negated, whether viewed initially or after its sequence following the driving away. Making it follow the driving away without considering it as following the negated [action], and [furthermore] being negated by its negation, causes the loss of the causality of the conjunction. It was answered that the wrongness of driving away depends on the negation of driving away, just as its existence depends on its existence, and the negation of driving away depends on the negation of their account being upon him (may the blessings and peace of Allah be upon him); thus, the negation of the wrongness of driving away depends on that as well. Therefore, from the negation follows the negation, and the sharing in the cause of the accusative is realized, and this is apparent, and denying it is stubbornness. It was also objected that the conjunction indicates that the absence of wrongness is due to the absence of the delegation of the account to him (may the blessings and peace of Allah be upon him), so it is understood that if their account were upon him (may the blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) and he drove them away, it would be wrongness—and this is not so, because wrongness is placing something in its inappropriate place. It was answered that it is of the level of: "Excellent is the servant Suhayb; if he did not fear Allah, he would not have disobeyed Him." In al-Kashf, regarding the clarification of the intent of the author of al-Kashshaf, it is that he intended that driving away is a cause for wrongness, so it was said: "You have no account of them, that you might drive them away and thereby do wrong." It is understood from this that if their account were upon him, his driving them away would not be wrongness. That is because driving away was made a cause for wrongness on the assumption that he did not possess their account. On this basis, there is no need to make it on the level of "Excellent is the servant..." etc.; rather, that is a departure from the limit.

Some permitted that the first is the answer to the prohibition, as it is permitted that it is the answer to the negation. It was reported from al-Durr al-Masun, and he said: The speech regarding it is according to the apparent: "Do not drive them away, then you would drive them away," and this is as you see. Some made the gathering of those two negations preceding this answer as a case of mutual tension (tanaazu'), except that it is impossible for the answer to be for the second in any way, for the meaning would then necessitate that if there were anything of their account upon him (may the blessings and peace of Allah be upon him), his driving them away would be good, which is an absurdity that cannot be attributed to the Quran. This does not involve a departure from the chosen view of the Basrans regarding the operation of the second [governor], because its condition among them is that the meaning be upright in both of them. If it is not upright, the first is operated [as governor] by consensus, as in the saying: "Even if what I strive for were for the lowest living, it would suffice me, and I would not seek a little of wealth." And when you know why the second sentence was brought, you know what is in this speech, so understand. In any case, the intent is: { Then you would be among the wrongdoers } to yourselves, or to those believers, or then you would be among those characterized by the attribute of wrongness.