Al-An'am: 99
(And He it is who sent down from the sky water) This is a reminder of another of His, the Exalted’s, glorious blessings, which signal the perfection of His power—Mighty and Majestic is He—and the vastness of His mercy. By "water," rain is meant. By "the sky," the clouds are intended, or the speech is understood as elliptical—i.e., from the direction of the sky. It is said: The speech is to be taken literally, and the "sending down from the sky" is a reality reaching the clouds, and from there to the earth. This was the view favored by al-Jubba'i, who argued against the invalidity of those who say: "Many vapors gather in the interior of the earth, then ascend and rise into the air, and clouds are formed from them, and water drips down—that is the rain sent down." He refuted this in several ways:
First, hail may exist in times of heat, even in the intensity of summer, and we find rain descending in the coldest time without being frozen; this invalidates what they mentioned.
Second, when vapors rise and ascend, they disperse, and when they disperse, droplets of water are not generated from them. Rather, vapor only gathers when it connects to a smooth ceiling, as in some bathhouses. If there is no such surface, no significant water flows from it; therefore, if vapors ascend into the air and there is no smooth surface above them to connect to, nothing of water should result.
Third, if the generation of rain were due to the rising of vapors, they are constantly rising from the seas, so the descent of rain there should be continuous. Since that is not the case, we know the invalidity of that claim. He then said: These people only needed this claim because they believed that bodies are eternal, thus preventing the entry of increase or decrease into them; consequently, there is no meaning to the occurrence of events other than those entities taking on a quality after having been described by another. For this reason, they needed a specific matter for the formation of everything. As for the Muslims, since they believed that bodies are originated and that the Creator of the world is an Acting, Choosing, and Capable One who creates bodies as He wills and desires, there is no need for these fabrications. Since the literal meaning of the Quran indicates that water descends from the sky, and there is no evidence for the impossibility of this literal meaning, it is necessary to say it should be taken as it is.
(End of his statement). It is not hidden from one who reviews the books of those people that they answered all those points, and that what motivated them to hold that view was not merely what was mentioned, but also the claim that "rupture and reunion" (of the heavens) is impossible, the existence of a sphere of fire beneath the sky, the interruption of the world of elements at that point, the observation by one on a high mountain of clouds raining while watching water descend from the sky to them, and so on. Even though some of this is something for which religious evidence has proven its invalidity, and some is something for which no evidence exists nor does the Law testify to its correctness, the observation by those on the mountain of what was mentioned and the like demands the correctness of their statement in general, and I see no harm in it.
It is narrated from Ibn Abbas (may Allah be pleased with them both) that he said: "There is no drop that descends except that there is an angel with it." Among many, this is taken literally, while the philosophers interpret this "angel" as the nature inherent in that physical state which necessitates that descent. It is said: It is a light abstracted from matter, existing by itself, governing the drop, and preserving it. Plato affirms this abstracted light for every type of celestial sphere, star, elemental simple, and their compounds, according to what the author of al-Ishraq (Illumination) followed. This is one of the opinions regarding the Platonic forms. Something similar is indicated by the words of Sheikh Sadr al-Din al-Qunawi in his commentary on al-Fatiha.
The accusative case of "water" (ma'an) is due to it being the object of "sent down" (anzala), and the non-oblique object is placed before it for reasons mentioned repeatedly.
(Then We brought forth with it)—i.e., by means of the water, the fa (then) being for sequential order, and the sequence of everything is according to its nature—(We brought forth) is a conjunction to "sent down." The shift to the first-person plural ("We") is to show the perfection of care regarding what the water was sent down for. Some mentioned a special point for this shift other than what was mentioned: that when He, the Exalted, mentioned in what passed what alerts you that He is the Creator, it necessitated turning to Him so that He addresses (the servant). The choice of the pronoun of majesty (the "We") rather than the singular first-person pronoun alone is to show the perfection of care—i.e., We brought forth with Our majesty, by means of that water, despite its unity:
(Vegetation of all things)—i.e., every sort of the different types of vegetation in quantity, quality, properties, and effects, varying in degrees of increase and decrease, as explained by His saying, the Exalted: "They are watered with one water, and We favor some of them over others in food." Nabat (vegetation) is like nabt, and it is, as al-Raghib says, what emerges from the earth of growing things, whether it has a stalk like trees or has no stalk like herbs (najm). However, in common usage, it has become restricted to what has no stalk. Among the common people, it has been restricted to what animals eat. When essences are considered, it is used for every growing thing, whether it is plant, animal, or human. The intention here, according to some, is the first meaning.
Making His saying, the Exalted: (Then We brought forth from it greenery) a beginning of the detail of what was summarized in the "bringing forth." He began with the detail of the state of the herbs. The pronoun "it" (minhu) refers to vegetation. "Greenery" (khadran) means green, like a'war and awar. Khadra is most often used for that whose greenness is innate. The root of greenness is a color between white and black, and it is closer to black; hence, the green is sometimes called black, and vice versa. The meaning is: We brought forth from the vegetation that has no stalk something tender and green, which is what branches out from the root of the plant emerging from the seed. It is permitted that the pronoun returns to the water, and min is for causation. Abu al-Baqa' made this speech, in that case, a substitution for the first "We brought forth." Some investigators mentioned that in the verse, upon the assumption of the pronoun returning to the water, there is a wondrous meaning, as it includes the indication that He, the Exalted, brought forth from the sweet, white water, in the view of the eye, sorts of plants and fruits of different tastes and colors. To this, the one describing rain looks: He spreads its white threads over the horizons / And weaves from them for the earth around him greenery.
His saying, the Exalted: (We bring forth from it) is an adjective for greenery, and the imperfect tense is used to bring the image to mind with what it contains of wonder. It is permitted that it is a new sentence—i.e., We bring forth from that greenery:
(Grain piled up)—i.e., some of it above others, as in ears of corn. It is read: yukhraju minhu habbun mutarakib (Grain is brought forth from it...).
(And from the palm-tree)—The plural of nakhl (palm trees), as al-Raghib said, and nakhl is well-known. It is used for both the singular and the plural. This is a beginning of detailing the state of trees after the explanation of the state of the herbs according to some. The preposition and the noun governed by it are a fronted predicate, and His saying, the Exalted: (From its spathes) is a substitute for it, a "part for the whole" substitution, by repeating the operator. His saying, the Exalted: (Clusters) is a subject, and the essence of it is: "From the spathes of the palms are clusters." It is permitted that the predicate is elided, and the evidence is "We brought forth," as it is a specific act to which the prepositional phrase relates. The estimation is: "And its output from the spathes of the palms are clusters." According to the previous reading, "clusters" is a conjunction to "grain." It is said: The meaning is, "And We brought forth from the palm trees, palm trees from whose spathes are clusters," and "from the palm trees... clusters," which is the plural of qinw, meaning a stalk, which is for dates what a bunch is for grapes. Its dual is also qinwan, and one does not distinguish between the dual and the plural except by the inflection. No singular has come whose dual and plural are equal except for three nouns: this, sinw and sinwan, and ri'd and ri'dan, meaning "like/equal," said Ibn Khalawayh. Sibawayh reported shaqd and shaqdan, and hash and hashan for the orchard, reported by al-Jalal al-Suyuti in al-Muzhir. It is read with a damma on the qaf and with a fatha on it, as it is a collective noun, because fi'lan is not among the patterns of broken plurals.
(Dangling)—i.e., near to reach, as al-Zajjaj said. He limited it to mentioning it over its opposite because of its indication of it, and the increase of blessing in it. It is said: The meaning is "dangling toward the earth" due to the abundance of its fruit and the heaviness of its load. It is also said: According to both views, it is literal, and it is possible that it is meant as a metaphor for the ease of reaching its fruits.
(And gardens of grapes)—A conjunction to "vegetation of all things"—i.e., and We brought forth with it gardens consisting of grapes. Al-Wahidi made it a conjunction to "greenery." Al-Tayyibi said: The more apparent is that it is a conjunction to "grain," because His saying, the Exalted: "(Vegetation of all things)" is detailed because it includes every sort of growing thing, and growing things are grain, date pits, and their likes. His saying, the Exalted: "(Then We brought forth from it greenery), etc." is a detail of that vegetation, and it is a substitution for the first "We brought forth," a substitution of inclusion. It is said: This is built on the fact that "vegetation" is intended as the general meaning, and in that case, it is not appropriate to conjoin it to it, because it is contained within it. If what has no stalk is intended, its conjunction to it is determined, because it is not contained within it, and it is determined that one estimates another verb for His saying: "(And from the palm-tree)," as was indicated. So contemplate this.
The Commander of the Faithful Ali (may Allah’s face be honored), Ibn Mas'ud, al-A'mash, Yahya ibn Ya'mar, and Abu Bakr from 'Asim read: wa jannatun (gardens) in the nominative case, as a subject—i.e., "and for you," or "there are gardens," or something similar. Al-Zamakhshari permitted it to be a conjunction to "clusters." He said in al-Taqrib: "There is a view on it, because if it is conjoined to that, then 'of grapes' is then an adjective for 'gardens,' so the meaning is corrupted, as it would mean: 'Its output from the palm trees are gardens that resulted from grapes.' Or it is a predicate for 'gardens,' so it is not correct, because it would be a conjunction of it to a singular, and the subject would be indefinite, so it is not correct." In al-Kashf, it is mentioned that the second is far from being understood from al-Zamakhshari's wording, even if it is possible to answer that the conjunction to the specified is specific, as Ibn Malik said, and he cited as evidence for it his saying: I have patience and complaint before my killer, so is there any man more wondrous than this? The apparent is the first, but it is a conjunction of a sentence to a sentence, and one estimates "its output is from the greenery" or "from the vine," or "its result is gardens of grapes," without its connection, because the limitation is necessary, as was established in the conjunction of the singular alone. It is not hidden that this is an affectation that is unnecessary. Perhaps the increase of "gardens" here, as was said, without being content with mentioning the name of the genus as in what preceded and followed, is because the benefit of this genus does not usually come about except upon the gathering of a group of its individuals.
(And the olives and the pomegranates)—Accusative as a case of specification due to the scarcity of these two types among them, or as a conjunction to "vegetation."
His saying, the Exalted: (Similar and dissimilar)—Either an adjective of "olives" because of its precedence, being content with it over the adjective of what it is conjoined to, and the estimation is "and the olives, similar and dissimilar, and the pomegranate likewise." Or an adjective of "pomegranates" because of its proximity, and one estimates the like of the first. In any case, there is an elided noun in the speech, which is "some"—i.e., "some of that is similar and some of it is dissimilar" in form, size, color, taste, and other descriptors indicating the perfection of the power of its Maker and the wisdom of its Designer and Creator, Glory be to His state. Otherwise, the meaning would be "all of it is similar and all of it is dissimilar," which is not correct. Some people permitted it to be an adjective of both while committing to interpretation. Ifta'ala and tafa'ala here mean "like" istawa (became level) and tasawa (became equal). It is read: mutashabihan wa ghayra mutashabih (similar and dissimilar).
(Look)—A look of consideration and insight—(at their fruit)—i.e., the fruit of that, meaning the olives and the pomegranates. The intention is their trees, and they were intended by their fruit in what preceded; thus, there is "usage" (istikhdam) in the speech. From al-Farra', the intention in the first is the olive tree and the pomegranate tree, and in that case, there is no istikhdam. In any case, the pronoun returns to them by interpreting it as a demonstrative noun, and its returning to each one of them by way of substitution is far-fetched and has no parallel in the lack of determining the referent of the pronoun.
It is permitted for the pronoun to return to all that preceded by the mentioned interpretation so as to include the palm trees and others that bear fruit.
(When it bears fruit)—i.e., when it brings forth its fruit, how it brings it forth weakly, hardly being benefited from. Hamza and al-Kisa'i read thumrihi with a damma on the tha', which is the plural of thamara, like khashaba and khashab, or thimar like kitab and kutub.
(And its ripening)—i.e., and to the state of its maturation or ripeness, how it returns bulky, having great benefit and complete delight. It is originally an infinitive: yana'at al-thamara (the fruit ripened). It is said: It is the plural of yani' (ripe), like tajir and tujjar. It is read with a damma, which is a dialect for it. Ibn Muhaysin read wa yani'ihi. It is not hidden that the limitation with His saying, the Exalted: "(When it bears fruit)," as we indicated, is an intimation that the bearing of fruit at that time is weak and not benefited from, thus contrasting with the state of ripening, and the perfection of the difference points to the perfection of power. From al-Zamakhshari, he said: "If you say: 'Why was it not said: to the tender of its fruit and its ripening?' I say: In this style is a benefit, which is that the 'ripening' occurred therein conjoined to the 'fruit' on the lines of specification, like His saying, the Exalted: '(And Gabriel and Michael),' to indicate that the 'ripening' is more worthy than the 'tender (stage).'" It has a justified aspect, even if it is hidden from some observers.
(Indeed in that)—an indication of what they were ordered to look at, and what is in the demonstrative noun of the meaning of distance, for reasons mentioned more than once—(are signs)—great or many, indicating the existence of the Powerful, the Wise, and His oneness—(for a people who believe)—i.e., who seek faith in Allah, the Exalted, as the Judge said, or who are believers in actuality. Their specification by mention is because they are the ones who benefited from that, unlike others, as was said. The way what was mentioned indicates the existence of the Powerful, the Wise, and His oneness is that the occurrence of those different genera and the branching species from a single source, and their transition from state to state in a wondrous manner, must be by the bringing into being of a Maker who knows their details and favors what His wisdom requires of possible directions over others, and is not hindered by an opponent who resists Him or a rival who defies Him.
