Al-An’am: 71
(Say: Shall we call upon, instead of Allah, that which neither profits us nor harms us?) Ibn Jarir, Ibn Abi Hatim, and Abu al-Shaykh reported from al-Suddi that the polytheists said to the believers: "Follow our path and abandon the religion of Muhammad, peace be upon him," so Allah, the Exalted, said: (Say), and so forth.
It has been said that it was revealed regarding Abu Bakr al-Siddiq, may Allah be pleased with him, when his son Abd al-Rahman invited him to worship idols. There is, in directing the command to him—peace be upon him—an obvious exaltation of the status of the believers or of Abu Bakr al-Siddiq, may Allah be pleased with him. That is: Shall we worship—transgressing against the worship of Allah, the Possessor of all attributes of divinity, among which is the power to benefit and harm—that which has no power to benefit us if we worship it, nor to harm us if we abandon it? The lowest degree of worship-worthiness is the capacity for this. The agent of "we call upon" and similarly what is conjoined to it from His saying: (And turn back on our heels) is general to the master of those addressed, peace be upon him, and others; it is not specific to al-Siddiq, may Allah be pleased with him, based on it being the cause of revelation.
There is a taghlib (preponderance/generalization) in the verse, for it is inconceivable that "turning back on one's heels"—if meant by it is a return to shirk—would occur from him, peace be upon him. The meaning is: "Is it more befitting for us, the community of Muslims, to do that?" "Heels" (al-a‘qab) is the plural of ‘aqib, which is the back of the foot. It is said, "He returned on his heels," if he turned back retreating. It is used as a metaphor for departing without looking where one places one’s feet, which is a departure without knowledge, unlike departing with attentiveness. Others said: "Turning back on one's heels" means returning to misguidance and ignorance, whether through shirk or otherwise. The majority favor the first meaning. Expressing the return to shirk as "turning back on the heels" is—as the Sheikh al-Islam said—to increase its vileness by depicting it in the image of that which is known for its ugliness, along with the indication that shirk is a state that has been left behind and cast behind the back.
The preference for "we turn" (naruddu) over "we apostatize" (nartaddu) is to direct the negation towards the act of apostasy by the turning back of others, as a clear declaration of opposition to the misleaders and a severance of their empty greeds, and as an indication that apostasy without a misleader is not within the realm of possibility so as to need its negation and denial, (after Allah has guided us)—that is, to monotheism and Islam, or to all that follows from it regarding success in the Hereafter, as has been said. The prepositional phrase relates to "we turn," brought to emphasize the denial, not merely to realize the meaning of turning and depicting it, otherwise it would have sufficed to say: "after we were guided." It is as if it were said: Shall we turn back to that through the misguidance of the misleader, after Allah, other than Whom there is no guide, has guided us?
The verse is not a case of tanazu‘ (competing grammatical claims), nor is the sentence "we turn" in the state of being a circumstantial clause (hal) for the pronoun in "we call upon" (i.e., "while we turn back"), though Abu al-Baqa' permitted it.
His saying: (Like one whom the devils have enticed) is an adjective for a deleted verbal noun; that is: Shall we turn back a turning like the turning of one whom the devils enticed, etc.? Al-Tabarsi posited: "Shall we call upon a calling like the calling of one who...," but this is weak, as is evident. It is said: It is in the place of a circumstantial clause from the agent of "we turn," i.e., "Shall we turn back on our heels, being like that?" The author of al-Fara'id objected to this by saying that the essence of being a circumstantial clause is: "Shall we turn back in the state of our resemblance?" like saying: "Zayd came riding," meaning in the state of his riding; yet the turning is not in the state of resemblance, just as the coming is not in the state of riding. Al-Tibi answered this by saying that the state is emphatic, like His saying, "Then you turned away, retreating," so the requirement does not apply. It is not hidden that this is within the realm of prohibition.
Istihwa' (enticement) is an istif‘al form from hawa (he fell/he went) in the earth, when he goes, as is well known in the language. It is as if they sought his fall and were eager for it; that is, like one whom the rebellious jinn have taken away into the wastelands and deserts. The speech is either a rational compound or a parable, where one who was pure from shirk then turned on his heels is likened to the state of one whom the devils took away into the wasteland and led astray after he had been on the straight path. This is not based on the "claims of the Arabs" as some have claimed. Some argued that istahwa is from hawa meaning "to fall"; it is said hawa, yahwi, huwiyyan (with an open ha') if he falls from high to low. The intent is to liken the state of this misguided person to the state of one who fell from a high place into a deep, low pit, because he is in a state of extreme agitation, weakness, and bewilderment. Similar to this is the verse: "Whoever associates others with Allah, it is as if he had fallen from the sky." There is distance in this, even if the Imam said it is better than the first meaning, given that it depends on the arrival of the istif‘al form from hawa in this meaning.
Abu al-Baqa' permitted "one whom" to be singular, i.e., "like the man" or "like the group," and that it could be generic, and the intent is "those who." Hamza read istahwahu with an imalah (inclining the vowel) while maintaining the masculine. (In the earth)—that is, the genus of it. The prepositional phrase relates to "enticed" or to a deleted element acting as a circumstantial clause from its object; i.e., "being in the earth." Similarly, His saying (confused) is also a circumstantial clause from him, either as a substitute for the first, or a second state for those who permit it, or from "one whom," or from the hidden pronoun in the prepositional phrase. Abu al-Baqa' allowed the prepositional phrase to be a circumstantial clause from "confused," but this word is diptote (no nunation), and its feminine is hayra; meaning: lost, astray from the path, not knowing what to do.
(He has)—that is, the enticed one—(companions), meaning friends, (calling him to guidance)—that is, the straight path. He referred to it as "guidance" as an exaggeration, along the lines of "Zayd is justice [itself]." The first prepositional phrase relates to a deleted element acting as a predicate moved to the front, and "companions" is the subject. The sentence is either in the place of a circumstantial clause as an attribute to "confused," or a state from the pronoun within it, or from the pronoun in the prepositional phrase, or a substitute for the preceding state. Otherwise, it has no place, being a new beginning (musta'nafah). The sentence "calling him" is an attribute to "companions." His saying: (Come to us) implies a verb, as it is a substitute for "calling him" or a state from its agent. It is said: It is quoted by the "calling" because it has the meaning of "saying," and this is built upon the dispute between the Basrans and Kufans in such examples. The famous view is the implication, meaning: "He says: Come to us." In it is an indication that they are guided, firm upon the straight path, and that those who call him are not among those who know the path to be called to come to it; rather, he merely perceives the direction of the caller and the source of the clamor. Ibn Mas'ud read, as reported by Ibn Jarir and Ibn al-Anbari from Abu Ishaq, i'tina as a circumstantial clause from "guidance," meaning: "manifest/clear."
(Say)—to these disbelievers—(Indeed, the guidance of Allah)—which is that to which He has guided us, namely Islam—(is the [only] guidance)—that is, it alone, as indicated by the definiteness of both sides or the pronoun of separation (damir al-fasl). What is besides it is pure misguidance and sheer error. The repetition of the command is for the concern of the matter commanded, or because the previous part was for the prohibition of shirk, while this is an incitement to Islam, and it is a prelude to what follows; for the exclusivity of guidance to His guidance, the Exalted, is what necessitates the fulfillment of the commands after it. (And we have been commanded) is conjoined to "Indeed the guidance of Allah is the [only] guidance," entering with it under the "Say." The lam in His saying: (to submit) is for causal explanation, and the second object of "we have been commanded" is deleted; that is: "We have been commanded to [practice] sincerity so that we may yield and submit (to the Lord of the worlds)."
It has been said that [the lam] is in the meaning of "with," meaning: "we have been commanded with submission." Abu Hayyan countered this, saying it is strange and unknown to grammarians. Others said it is extra, meaning: "We have been commanded that we submit," with the deletion of the ba'. Al-Khalil, Sibawayh, and those who followed them went to the view that the verb in this and its like ("Allah intends for you to make clear") is interpreted as a verbal noun and is the subject, and the lam and what follows is the predicate; that is: "Our command is for submission," and it is similar to "Hearing about Ma'di is better than seeing him." Its distance [from the natural meaning] is evident.
Al-Kisa'i and al-Farra' went to the view that the lam is a particle of the verbal noun (masdariyyah) in the meaning of "that" (an) after "I wanted" and "I commanded" specifically, as if it were said: "And we were commanded that we submit." Addressing the description of His Lordship, the Exalted, over the worlds is to provide the cause for the command and to emphasize the obligation of compliance with it.
