Tafsir of Al-A'raf 7:190

"But when He gave them a righteous [child]"—which is what they asked for originally, in terms of progeny, or what they sought—both originally and as a consequence—from a child, or a child’s child, as they procreated—"they set"—that is, the righteous and sound offspring. He used the dual pronoun [in the Arabic verb ja‘ala] considering that such offspring are of two types: male and female; and it has been reported that Eve would bear children in every pregnancy in that manner—"for Him"—that is, for Allah, the Glorified and Exalted—"partners"—from among the idols and objects of worship—"in what He gave them"—of children, as they attributed that [the health and survival of the children] to them [the idols].

The expression [used here] is "what" (ma—commonly for non-rational beings) because this attribution occurs at the time of birth, and children at that stage are treated as non-rational beings. It has been said that the relative pronoun "what" covers all other blessings, for the polytheists attribute those also to their gods. The reason for departing from using a pronoun—as it did not say "partners in it"—in both interpretations is apparent. The attribution of the act of "setting" to the offspring is like the [Arabian] idiom: "The tribe of Tamim killed such-and-such a person" [when only one of them did].

"Exalted is Allah above what they associate [with Him]"—this is an exoneration containing a sense of astonishment. The Fa (the particle "so") is for ordering it after what was detailed of the power of the Exalted and Almighty, and the traces of His blessings that discourage polytheism and invite monotheism. The plural pronoun [in "they associate"] refers to those offspring who set partners for Allah. It uses the masculine pronoun over the feminine, serving as an indication of the magnitude of their polytheism. The intended meaning of this [associating] is either the act of naming [their children as servants to idols] or absolute polytheism. "What" (ma) is either masdariyyah (forming a verbal noun), meaning "above their associating," or relative, or descriptive, meaning "above what they associate with Him, the Exalted."

In my view, this verse is among the problematic ones; scholars have written at length and debated it fiercely. What we have mentioned is what the speech of al-Jubba’i points toward, and it is something unobjectionable once one closes one’s eyes to its departure from transmitted narrations, except for the duality of the pronoun [in the first part of the verse] followed by its pluralization, despite the referent being singular in wording—a usage we have not found in eloquent speech.

Many have chosen the view that in ja‘ala (they set) and ata-huma (He gave them), there is an omitted added noun (mudaf), and the dual pronoun in both refers to Adam and Eve, in the style of what preceded—meaning: they set their offspring [as partners] regarding what He gave their offspring of children. They inferred this in two places and did not suffice with inferring it in the first and referring the second pronoun back to the inferred one, because the omission lacks a clear indicator; thus, it is as if it were non-existent, and it is not appropriate for a pronoun to return to it. The "association" in what He gave the children refers to naming each of their children with names like "servant of al-‘Uzza" or "servant of Shams."

This was objected to, firstly, because the omission of a mudaf and the substitution of the mudaf ilayh in its place is only resorted to when the action has some connection to the mudaf ilayh as well, through its extension to it either in reality or in ruling, and it contains an image of the attribution to it that the context requires, such as in His saying: "And when We saved you from the people of Pharaoh"—since the salvation was from them, even if its factual connection was only to the ancestors of the Jews; it was attributed to their descendants by virtue of its extension to them to fulfill the context of grace. The same is said for similar cases. Here, it is not so, for there is no doubt that Adam and Eve—peace be upon them—are innocent of the extension of that "setting" to them in any way; thus, there is no ground for attributing it to them in any way.

Secondly, that their associating by attributing their children through servitude to their idols is a requirement of taking those idols as gods and a branch of it, not an event that happened to them which did not exist before; thus, the reproach should be on this, not that.

Thirdly, that the association of their offspring did not occur when Allah gave them the righteous child, but after long periods of time.

Fourthly, that treating ja‘ala differently from how the first [verb] was treated, and the sequence with the Fa, necessitates a disruption of the noble order.

It was answered regarding the first [objection] that the aspect of this attribution is to signal their abandonment of the "more appropriate" action, as they ventured to link their children to themselves and committed themselves to gratitude in a way that—and they swore to that before knowing their [the children's] conditions—explaining that their failure to uphold the gratitude they promised, with a promise confirmed by an oath, is equivalent to their failure in the essence [of the act] in terms of incurring broken oaths and unfulfilled promises, along with the implication of the doubling of their crime by stating that through their "setting," or their falling into the quagmire of broken oaths and promises, they acted as if they themselves had committed it directly, thus combining the crime against Allah with the crime against the two of them.

Regarding the second: that the context requires reproach for this, because when He mentioned the blessing He, the Glorified and Exalted, bestowed upon them—creation from a single soul and their procreation—He reproached them for their ignorance and their attribution of those blessings to other than the Giver, and their assigning them to those who have no power over anything. He did not initially mention any matters of divinity intentionally, so they would be reproached for taking gods.

Regarding the third: that the word lamma (when) is not for a tight timeframe, but for an extended one; thus, the condition and the result need not occur on the same day, month, or year, but varies according to circumstances. As it is said: "When Islam appeared, the lands were cleansed of disbelief and atheism."

Regarding the fourth: with what the author of al-Kashf wrote in choosing this opinion and preferring it over the opinion that the association refers to Adam and Eve, and that it is not conventional—but rather what was narrated about naming the child 'Abd al-Harith—which is: that the apparent meaning is that His saying: "He it is who created you from a single soul," is an address to the people of Mecca. After the story of the Jews was concluded as it was—as a consolation and encouragement for the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, and to urge him to remain firm and patient, following the example of his brothers among the Messengers of firm resolve, especially the Chosen One and His interlocutor Moses, peace be upon him—for what he suffered from the Children of Israel was very similar to what he, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, was suffering from the Quraysh. It was appended with something that necessitates a connection to the meaning for which the speech was initially set—namely, His saying, the Glorified and Exalted: "And among those We created is a community that guides by the truth."

A transition occurred to mentioning the people of Mecca in its proper place, so it was said: "But those who deny Our verses, We will lead them on [to destruction] by degrees," and their questioning about what does not concern them was mentioned. When it was intended to state that this is not what concerns you—rather, what is important is to remove the filth of polytheism and sins you are steeped in—He paved the way for it with "He it is who created you," implying a meaning of grace and ownership that necessitates monotheism and servitude. Then it was said: "But when He gave them a righteous [child], they set for Him partners," meaning: "You, O their offspring, have set [partners]. And there was for you in your parents a good example in their saying: 'If You give us a righteous child, we will surely be among the grateful.'" The meaning, and Allah knows best, is: "When He gave them a righteous child and they fulfilled what they promised their Lord of upholding the requirements of gratitude, you, O their offspring, opposed them and associated partners, and denied the blessing." In this turn of address, then attributing their action to the parents—contrary to how the creation of the father and his fashioning was mentioned in a context of grace—is an allusion to the extremity of their ingratitude and their persistence in error. Upon this applies His saying, the Glorified: "Exalted is Allah above what they associate [with Him]." Thus it appeared that treating ja‘ala for Him differently from the first [verb] and the sequence with the Fa does not necessitate a disruption of the order, but rather its coherence.

To be fair, the questions and the verse according to this interpretation are like a riddle. From al-Hasan and Qatada: the pronouns in ja‘ala and ata-huma refer to the soul and its spouse among the children of Adam, not to Adam and Eve themselves. This is the saying of al-Asamm. He said: The meaning in His saying, the Glorified and Exalted: "He created you from a single soul," is "He created each one of you from a single soul, and created for each soul a spouse of its own kind." So when each soul covered its spouse, it conceived a light load, which is the seminal fluid. When she became heavy with the transformation of that fluid into flesh, blood, and bone, the man and the woman called to their Lord: "If You give us a righteous one," i.e., a sound male, "we will surely be among the grateful." It was their custom to bury the daughters alive. So when "He gave them"—that is, when Allah gave the father and mother what they asked for—"they set for Him partners," so they named [the child] 'Abd al-Lat and 'Abd al-‘Uzza and other such names. Then the reference in His saying, the Glorified and Exalted: "Exalted is Allah above what they associate," returned to all of them, and the verse has no connection to Adam and Eve at all.

It is not hidden that what is immediately understood from its beginning is Adam and Eve, and nothing else is understood at all. Yes, Ibn al-Munir chose what amounts to this in al-Intisaf and claimed it is closer and safer than what preceded: that the intention is the genders of male and female, and no specific ones are intended. Then he said: "It is as if the meaning—and Allah knows best—is: He is the One who created you as one gender, and made your spouses from you as well, so that you may find tranquility in them. So when the gender that is the male covered the gender that is the female, such and such occurred." He only attributed this saying to the gender—even though among them were monotheists—because the polytheists were among them; so it is permissible to attribute the speech to the gender in the manner of "The tribe of Tamim killed such-and-such," while only some of them killed him. Similar to this is His saying: "And man says: 'When I have died, shall I be brought forth alive?'" and "Cursed is man; how disbelieving he is," and so on. This was followed by the objection that it entails interpreting all the words of the verse in remote ways.

From Abu Muslim: the beginning of the verse is for Adam and Eve, as is apparent, except that their story is not what His saying: "He it is who created you from a single soul and made from it its mate" contains; the narrative is broken, and then He singled out the polytheists among the children of Adam for mention. It is permissible to mention the general and then specify a part for mention; it is as you see.

It was said: It is permissible for the pronoun in ja‘ala to be for Adam and Eve as is apparent, and the speech is out of the form of interrogative rejection. The reference in "Exalted is..." etc., is for the polytheists. This is because they used to say: "Adam, peace be upon him, used to worship idols and associate partners just as we do." So He refuted them with that. The equivalent of this is that a man bestows many kinds of favors upon another, then it is said to that benefactor: "The one you favored intends to harm you and bring evil upon you," so he says: "I did so-and-so for him and was kind to him with such-and-such, yet he encounters me with evil and abuse!" His intention is that he is innocent of that, and it is denied of him.

It was said: It is possible that the address in "created you" is to the Quraysh, namely the family of Qusayy, for they were created from the soul of Qusayy, and he had a spouse of his own kind, a Qurayshi Arab woman. They asked Allah Almighty for a child, and He gave them four sons, so they named them 'Abd Manaf, 'Abd Shams, 'Abd al-‘Uzza, and 'Abd al-Dar—meaning by it the House of Council (dar al-nadwa). The pronoun in "they associate" would then be for them and their descendants who followed them. He supported this with the statement in the story of Umm Ma‘bad: "O people of Qusayy, what Allah has withheld from you of glory, that is not matched, and leadership." This was considered unlikely in al-Kashf, because those addressed were not created from the soul of Qusayy—not all of them nor most of them—as it is the assembly of Quraysh. And that the statement that his wife was Qurayshi is a mistake, because she was only the daughter of the master of Mecca from Khuza‘a, and Quraysh at that time were dispersed and not in Mecca. Also, where is the knowledge that they promised at the time of pregnancy to be grateful to Allah, the Blessed and Exalted, when there is no ingratitude worse than the disbelief they were in? Whoever interprets it this way is like one who builds a palace but destroys a city. As for the poem, the sons of Qusayy were singled out for mention because they were closer to the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, or because since he was their master and leader, mentioning him included everyone, as "Pharaoh" includes his people, and it is known that they are not all from the offspring of Pharaoh.

It was answered regarding his saying "Where is the knowledge..." that it is from the information of Allah the Exalted if that is the meaning of the order, and from it, it is known that his wife not being Qurayshi is in the realm of prohibition. Yes, that Qusayy was one of the ancestors of the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, and was a polytheist, contradicts what a group has gone to: that his ancestors, upon him be peace and blessings, were not polytheists.

It was said: The pronoun "for Him" is for the child, and the meaning is that they asked Allah Almighty for matches to the righteous child He gave them. It was said: It is for Iblis, and the meaning is: they set for Iblis partners in his name, when they named their child 'Abd al-Harith. Both sayings were rejected by al-Amidi in Abkar al-Afkar, and they are, by my life, weaker than a spider's web, but I have mentioned them to complete the sayings.

A group of the predecessors, such as Ibn Abbas, Mujahid, Sa‘id ibn al-Musayyib, and others, went to the view that the pronoun ja‘ala refers to Adam and Eve, peace be upon them, and the intended meaning of association regarding them is not the immediate one, but what we pointed to just now—that His saying, the Glorified and Exalted: "Exalted is Allah above what they associate," is a transition to the story of the Arabs and their association with idols. It is as al-Suddi said: "of what is connected in wording and disconnected in meaning." This is clarified, as has been said, by the change of the pronoun to the plural after the dual; if the story were one, it would have been said "they [two] associate," and likewise the following pronouns. This was supported by what Ahmad and al-Tirmidhi—who graded it hasan—and al-Hakim—who graded it sahih—brought out from Samura ibn Jundub, may Allah be pleased with him, who said: The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said: "When Eve gave birth, Iblis circled around her, and no child of hers would live. He said to her: 'Name him 'Abd al-Harith, and he will live.' So she named him that, and he lived. That was from the prompting of Satan and his command." He intended by "al-Harith" himself, for he used to be called by that name among the angels. This is not considered polytheism in reality, according to what al-Qutb said, because proper names do not convey their linguistic meanings. But "polytheism" was applied to it as an exaggeration and to signal that what those who ask about what does not concern them are upon is a grave matter, the horror of which can hardly be encompassed by words.

In Lubab al-Ta’wil, it is mentioned that the addition of "servant" (‘abd) to "al-Harith" is in the sense that he was a cause for his safety. Sometimes the name "servant" is used for what is not intended as a slave, like his saying: [the hadith is sound, and it is my school of thought, and I see it has been verified]. For this reason, my pen has hesitated to run in the arena of interpretation as others have run. And Allah the Exalted is the Granter of success to what is correct. Nafi‘ and Abu Bakr read shirkan in the form of a verbal noun, meaning "partnership" or "possessors of partnership," and they are the partners.