(And who is more unjust than one who invents a lie about Allah) such as those who said, (Allah has not revealed anything to any human being), (or says, "It has been inspired to me") from His side, the Exalted, (while nothing has been inspired to him), meaning: and the state of the matter is that nothing has been inspired to him, like Musaylimah and al-Aswad al-Ansi. (Or one who says, "I will reveal the like of what Allah has revealed")—meaning: I am capable of such composition—like those who said: (If we willed, we could speak the like of this).
The interpretation of the first part as we have mentioned is not something we have encountered from anyone else. As for the interpretation of the second, al-Zamakhshari and others have adopted it. The interpretation of the third was adopted by al-Zajjaj and those who agreed with him.
Abd ibn Humayd and Ibn al-Mundhir narrated from Ibn Jurayj that His saying, the Almighty: (And who is more unjust than one who invents a lie about Allah or says, "It has been inspired to me," while nothing has been inspired to him) was revealed concerning Musaylimah the Liar, and the latter part was revealed concerning Abdullah ibn Sa'd ibn Abi Sarh. Some have considered the phrase (or says) in this context to be an explanatory conjunction ('atf al-tafsir) to the phrase (invents). This has been countered by the argument that an explanatory conjunction cannot be introduced by "or" (aw). It is better to consider it a conjunction of different things ('atf al-mughayir) based on the titles used, with "or" serving for classification. This means he sometimes claimed that Allah sent him as a prophet, and other times that Allah inspired him, even if, in reality, prophethood necessitates inspiration, and inspiration necessitates prophethood. It is understood from the actions of some that "or" here carries the meaning of "and."
As for Ibn Abi Sarh, he did not explicitly claim the ability (to create like the Quran), but his words might imply it, according to what is understood from some narrations. Some interpreted the second phrase as referring to Abdullah and his claim being made in a way of vacillation. It is narrated that Abdullah ibn Sa'd had spoken of Islam, so the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) summoned him one day and he wrote something for him. When the verse regarding the believers was revealed: (And certainly did We create man from an extract of clay), he dictated it to him. When he reached His saying, the Almighty: (Then We produced him as another creation), Abdullah was amazed by the detail of human creation and said: "Blessed is Allah, the best of creators." The Messenger of Allah said: "Thus it was revealed to me." He then doubted and said: "If Muhammad is truthful, then it has been inspired to me, and if he is a liar, I have said just as he said." The second part is thus made to mean the claim of the ability to produce the like, so it is valid to interpret the second and third phrases as referring to him. The latter is only valid if one considers the title of the relative clause in the final phrase as a form of "going along with the premise," as is not hidden.
The Imam considered the fabrication of a lie against Allah, the Almighty, to be general, making the conjoined phrases a type of thing described as fabrication. Then he said: "The difference between this statement and the previous one is that in the first, he claimed that he was inspired regarding what he was lying about, and he did not deny the descent of revelation upon the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him). In the second, he affirmed inspiration for himself and denied it for him (upon him be peace and blessings). Thus, it was a combination of two great forms of falsehood: affirming what does not exist and denying what does exist." End quote.
This contains a departure from the apparent meaning, as he made the pronoun in (to him) refer to the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) and the "waw" in (while nothing has been inspired to him) a conjunction, with both conjoined parts being the content of the statement. What the mind is inclined toward is making the pronoun refer to "whoever" (man) and the "waw" a circumstantial particle (hal), with what follows it being the words of Him, the Almighty.
It may be said—if we set aside the occasion of revelation—that the meaning of "who invents a lie about Allah" is one who associates partners with Allah by applying the fabrication of a lie to its greatest instance, which is shirk (polytheism); many verses echo this meaning. "Or says: 'It has been inspired to me,' while nothing has been inspired to him" refers to the one who falsely claims prophethood. "Or who says: 'I will reveal the like of what Allah has revealed'" refers to the one who attacks the prophethood of the Prophet (upon him be peace and blessings). It is as if it was said: "Who is more unjust than one who associates partners with Allah, or falsely claims prophethood, or attacks the prophethood of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him)?" The discussion regarding such interrogative sentences has already preceded, so recall and reflect.
(And if you could see)—that is, if you could witness, with the object being omitted due to the indication of the adverbial phrase in His saying, the Almighty: (when the wrongdoers). Then, when it (the object) was omitted, the adverbial phrase was put in its place. The original structure is "If you were to see the wrongdoers when they..." (When) is an adverb for "see," and (the wrongdoers) is the subject, while His saying, the Almighty: (are in the agonies of death) is its predicate. (When) is an adverb for "see." The restriction of the vision to this time is to convey that the intended meaning is not mere seeing, but seeing them in a dreadful state visible to any onlooker. It is said that the object is (when), and the intention is to terrorize this time due to the horror of what is in it. The response to the conditional clause is omitted, meaning: "you would see a dreadful, terrifying matter." The term "wrongdoers" refers to those who encompass the three types of fabrication and the two aforementioned statements.
(The agony) (ghamrah), as al-Shihab said, in its origin is a single instance of submergence in water. Then it was metaphorically applied to hardship and became so common in this usage that it became like the literal meaning. From this is the saying of al-Mutanabbi: "It assists me in an agony after an agony; a swimmer who has signs upon her from it." The intention here is the "death throes," as narrated from Ibn Abbas (may Allah be pleased with them both).
(And the angels) who seize their souls, and they are the helpers of the Angel of Death, (are extending their hands), that is, with torment. Ibn Jarir and others narrated from Ibn Abbas (may Allah be pleased with them both) that they strike their faces and their backs, saying to them: "Discharge your souls!" meaning: extract them from the torment you are in. The imperative is for rebuke and incapacitation. Some have held that this is a representation of the angels' action in seizing the souls of the wrongdoers, similar to the action of an insistent creditor who extends his hand toward the one who owes him a right, treats him harshly in demanding it, does not give him respite, and says to him: "Hand over what I am owed right now; I will not move from my place until I snatch it from your eyes." In al-Kashf, it is stated that it is a metonymy for violence in the delivery, insistence, and severity in the taking of life without relief or respite. There is no physical extension or actual speech there. Ibn al-Munir maintained that they do these things to them in reality in the portrayed forms, and if it is possible to remain on the literal interpretation, there is no justification for deviating from it.
(Today)—the intended meaning is absolute time, not the conventional meaning; it is the time of death or what it includes and what follows it—(you will be recompensed with the punishment of humiliation), meaning: that which contains shame and severity. The genitive construction, like "a man of evil," implies that he is firmly established in that state, for the specific association that the genitive construction provides is stronger than the association of description. It is also permitted that the genitive construction is on its literal meaning, as punishment can be for correction, not for humiliation and disgrace.
Some people have interpreted "the agonies of death" as the hardships of punishment in the Fire, for even though it is in reality more severe than the death throes, it has been used for them as an approximation for understanding. The extension of the angels' hands is interpreted as their striking the wrongdoers in the Fire with maces of iron, and the "discharge" as the expulsion from the Fire and its torment, and "today" as the known Day.
(For what you used to say) as inventors (about Allah other than the truth) from the denial of His revelation of anything to a human being, the claim of inspiration, or the attribution of shirk to Him, the false claim of prophethood, the denial of it concerning the one who was truly characterized by it, or similar things. In the expression (other than the truth) to describe falsehood, there is what is not hidden. It is the object of (you used to say). It is also permissible for it to be an adjective for an omitted source, meaning: "a saying other than the truth." (And you were, of His signs, being arrogant).
