Tafsir of Al-An'am 6:76

His saying, Exalted is He: "So when the night covered him," it is possible that this is a conjunction to [the earlier statement] "Ibrahim said," with the intervening text being a parenthetical clause that reinforces what preceded and what follows. Indeed, his recognition—peace be upon him—of the Lordship of Allah, His ownership of the heavens and the earth and all that is within them, and the fact that all of existence is subjugated under His dominion, in need of Him—the Almighty—in all circumstances, as well as his status among those deeply rooted in knowledge who have reached the pinnacle of ‘Ayn al-Yaqin (certainty through vision), all dictate that he must judge the divinity of anything other than Him—the Glorified—to be impossible, including the idols and stars that his people worshiped. This is the view chosen by some of the verifiers (al-muhaqqiqin).

It is also possible that this serves as an elaboration on the previously mentioned views of the Malut (the people of Ibrahim), and an explanation of the manner of his reasoning—peace be upon him—and his attainment of the rank of conviction. The arrangement is such for the sake of chronological mention, as the detailed explanation naturally follows the summary. The meaning of "So when the night covered him" is: it veiled him with its darkness. This root, in its various conjugations, denotes covering. Al-Raghib said: "The origin of janna (to cover/hide) is concealment from the senses." It is said: jannahu al-layl (the night covered him), ajannahu, and janna ‘alayhi—all mean the night covered him, while ajannahu means it provided him with that which covers him.

His saying, Glorified is He: "He saw a planet," is the response to the fa (So). His seeing it is customarily realized only when the light of the sun ceases to affect the senses. This, as the Shaykh al-Islam stated, is explicit that this did not occur at the beginning of the rising [of the star], but rather after it had disappeared from the senses by fading into the light of the sun. The verification, according to him, is that it was near sunset. The reason for this will be mentioned, Allah willing. The "planet" mentioned—as narrated from Ibn Abbas, may Allah be pleased with both of them—is Jupiter. Ibn al-Mundhir and others recorded from Qatadah that he said: "It was mentioned to us that it was Venus."

"He said, 'This is my Lord'": This is a new point of discourse stemming from a question generated by the previous speech. It is a statement from him—peace be upon him—by way of assumption (hypothetical argument) and giving leeway to the argument, in concurrence with his father and his people who worshiped idols and stars. For one who argues against the falsehood of a claim first narrates it, then attacks it with refutation; and this is the truth worthy of acceptance.

It is also said: There is an elided interrogative particle of denial in the speech, and the elision of the interrogative particle is common in their speech. From this is the saying: "Then they said, 'Do you love her?' I said, 'Indeed!'" and the saying: "I said—and the faces denied—'Are they the same?'" It is narrated from Ibn Abbas, may Allah be pleased with both, that he said regarding the saying of the Almighty: fala iqtahama al-‘aqabah—meaning, "Did he not overcome the difficult pass?" He also considered the saying of the Almighty: "And that is a favor you hold against me" [to be of this type].

It is also said: It was spoken by way of mockery, just as one says to a lowly person who has come to rule over a people: "This is your master," as a taunt.

It is also said: He—peace be upon him—intended to refute their claim of the stars' divinity. However, he—peace be upon him—knew from their imitation of their ancestors and the remoteness of their natures from accepting proofs that if he had declared the invitation to Allah explicitly, they would not have accepted or paid heed. Thus, he turned to a method that would entice them into hearing the argument: by stating a sentence that suggested his agreement with their path, while his heart was tranquil with faith. His intention was to reach a position where he could state the evidence for its refutation, even if they did not accept it. The Imam argued this by stating that since he found no other path to the invitation, and he was commanded to call [people] to Allah, he was in the position of one forced to utter a word of disbelief (kufr). It is known that under compulsion, it is permissible to speak a word of disbelief; if that is permissible to save a single soul, then it is even more appropriate for the sake of saving a world of rational beings from disbelief and eternal punishment. Thus, the speech of Ibrahim—peace be upon him—was, in appearance, a matter of agreement with the people, so that when he presented the evidence that refuted their claim, their acceptance of it would be more complete and their benefit from listening more perfect.

Then he said: "What strengthens this view is that the Almighty narrated a similar method from him in another place: 'So he cast a look at the stars, and said: I am sick.' This is because the people used to deduce future events through astrology, so he agreed with them in appearance while being innocent of it in reality, to thereby reach the breaking of the idols." Since concurrence is permissible for this purpose, why would it not be permissible in our case for the same reason?

It is also said: While the people were inviting him to worship the stars and the debate was in full swing, the star rose, and he said: "This is my Lord," meaning: "Is this the Lord you invite me to?" There are other opinions, but all are of no weight according to the verifiers, especially the argument of the Imam. All those opinions are built on the premise that this speech occurred after he reached maturity and had invited the people to monotheism, and the context of the verse, both before and after, stands as a just witness to that.

Some claimed it was before puberty, and that this does not necessitate any wavering of doubt leading to kufr, because when he believed in the Unseen, he wanted to support what he was certain of by saying: "If Allah were not God, and what my people worship were [God], it would be either this or that," and none of that is correct, so it is established that Allah is God. This is contrary to the apparent meaning and is rejected by the context. It is also claimed that he—peace be upon him—said what he said because he did not yet know his Lord—the Glorified. However, ignorance during childhood before the establishment of the proof does not harm, and this is not considered kufr—a view not worth considering at all. The true verifiers have said: "It is not permissible for a Messenger of Allah to have any moment where he is not a monotheist, knowing Allah, and innocent of every object of worship besides Him." Allah has narrated the state of Ibrahim—peace be upon him—especially in his youth, in a way that allows no suspicion of anything contradicting this. Therefore, only the first view [the method of hypothetical argument] is correct.

Perhaps he followed that method in explaining the impossibility of the stars' lordship, rather than explaining the impossibility of the idols' divinity, as it has been said, because the former is more subtle in its falsehood and impossibility than the latter. Had he proclaimed the truth from the beginning—as he did regarding the worship of idols—they would have persisted in arrogance and obstinacy, and continued wandering blindly in their transgression. The prioritization of refuting the idols' divinity over what was mentioned [the stars] was a matter of progressing from the hidden to the more hidden.

It is also said: The people worshiped the stars and took for each star an idol made of metals attributed to them—such as gold for the sun and silver for the moon—to draw near to them; thus, the idol was like a qiblah for them. So, he first denied their worship of the idols in appearance, then refuted their sources and the stars attributed to them by demonstrating their lack of worthiness for that. Perhaps they believed the stars had independent influence, unlike the idols. That is why he addressed the refutation of divinity in the idols and lordship in the stars.

Abu ‘Amr and Warsh (via al-Bukhari) read ra’a with a fathah on the ra’ and a kasrah on the hamzah wherever it appears. Ibn ‘Amir, Hamzah, al-Kisa’i, Khalaf, and Yahya (from Abu Bakr) read ra’a with a kasrah on the ra’ and hamzah.

"So when it set"—meaning: when it disappeared—"he said: I do not love those that set"—meaning the "lords" that move from place to place and change from one state to another. The negation of love is, it is said, an indication of the negation of the belief in lordship.

The speech is added—meaning: I do not love the worship of those that set. Whichever way it is, the principle of the derivation is the reason for the ruling, because setting is a movement and a concealment, and each of these contradicts the worthiness of lordship and divinity, which are of the requirements of lordship, because such [setting] necessitates contingency and possibility—both of which are impossible for the Worshipped, Eternal Lord.