Tafsir of Al-A'raf 7:57

This is a conjunction to the preceding sentence or to the subject of the creation of the heavens and the earth. Ibn Kathir, Hamzah, and al-Kisa’i read it as (al-rih) in the singular, which is capable of denoting the generic sense, thus it is applied to a large quantity. The report, "O Allah, make them riyahan (winds) and do not make them rihan (wind)," is based on the reading of the majority.

(Bushran) is read with a damma on the ba and a sukoon on the shin, functioning as a reduced form. (Bushuran), with two dammas, is the plural of bashir (bearer of good tidings), like nudhur and nadhir, meaning "bearing good news." This is the reading of ‘Asim; it is also narrated from him as bushran based on the original form. It has been read with a fatha on the ba as an infinitive noun of basharah (to give tidings) with the reduced form, carrying the meaning of the intensive bashshara, and the intended meaning is "the bearers of tidings" or "for the sake of good tidings." It was also read as (bushra), like hubla, which is also an infinitive of basharah.

The people of Medina and Basra read (nushran) with a damma on the nun and shin, the plural of nushur with a fatha on the nun, meaning "the spreader." The fa'ul pattern can function as an active participle, and its pluralization is consistent, like sabur and subur. It was not made the plural of nashir like bazil and buzul because the pluralization of fa'il as fu'ul is anomalous.

There is a difference of opinion regarding the meaning of nashir. In the Hashiyah al-Shihabiyyah, it is said: It is based on the relative meaning—either referring to nashr (spreading), the opposite of tayy (folding), or to nushur (resurrection), meaning "giving life," because the wind is described as having death and life, as in the saying: "I hope the wind dies so I may sit today and rest," just as the later scholars describe it as having illness and disease. Among the things that illustrate this is the saying of someone in the intensity of heat: "I think the breeze of the garden has died, for it is in the garden yet it is ailing."

It is also said: It is an active participle from nashara, the transitive of anshara-llahu ta'ala al-mayyit (Allah resurrected the dead), so he was nashir (one who brings to life), as in the saying: "Until the people say, having seen it: 'How wonderful is the resurrecting dead!'" It is said that nashir means munshir, i.e., "the life-giver." It is also said that fa'ul here has the meaning of the passive participle, like rasul (messenger) and rusul (messengers). Abu al-Baqa' permitted this, though it is rare in its singular and plural forms.

Ibn ‘Amir read it as (nushran) with a damma on the nun and a sukoon on the shin wherever it occurs; the reduction in the verb is consistent. Hamzah and al-Kisa’i read (nushran) with a fatha on the nun wherever it occurs, treating it as an infinitive in the position of a state (hal), meaning "spreading," or as an absolute object (maf'ul mutlaq), for the act of sending and spreading are close in meaning.

(Bayna yaday rahmatihi): that is, "before His mercy." This is figurative, as narrated from Abu Bakr al-Anbari. The intended meaning of "mercy," as most exegetes have maintained, is "rain." It is called mercy because of the benefits that follow it by custom. It is not hidden that "mercy" in the common understanding is general, so applying it to this specifically—if it is due to its particularity—is a metaphor, because it is the usage of a word for something other than what it was originally coined for, as the word was not specifically coined for that particular entity. If its application to it is not due to its particularity but considering its generality and its status as an individual member of that general class, then it is literal, because it is the usage of the word for what it was coined for, as clarified in Sharh al-Talkhis and elsewhere.

Al-Shihab claimed that some linguists proved that "rain" is one of the meanings of "mercy." Ibn Hisham’s statement in his treatise—composed to explain the reason for the masculinization of the word qarib—states: "We do not find the linguists, when discussing 'mercy,' saying: 'Among its meanings is rain.' If it were coined for it, they would have mentioned it." The utmost that this proves is the lack of finding, and lack of finding does not necessitate non-existence. It is famous that "the affirmative takes precedence over the negative," and "he who has memorized is a proof against him who has not." The lexicon is explicit in the intended meaning of this.

An explanation of why the winds are sent before that is what has been said: the Saba (easterly) wind stirs the clouds, the Shamal (northerly) gathers them, the Janub (southerly) makes them yield rain, and the Dabur (westerly) scatters them. These are among the types of winds known to the Arabs. From Ibn ‘Umar (may Allah be pleased with them both), it is narrated that there are eight winds: four are of punishment—the Qasif, the ‘Asif, the Sarar, and the ‘Aqim—and four are of mercy: the Nashirat, the Mubashirat, the Mursilat, and the Dhariyat. The wind is one of the greatest favors of Allah Almighty upon His servants. Ka’b al-Ahbar said: "If Allah Almighty were to hold back the wind from His servants for three days, most of the people on earth would putrefy." In some reports, it is stated that Allah Almighty created the world and filled it with air; if He were to hold back the air for a moment, that which is between the heavens and the earth would putrefy.

Many scholars have mentioned that it is disliked to revile the wind. Al-Shafi’i narrated from Abu Hurayrah, who said: "A wind once afflicted the people on the road to Mecca, and ‘Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) was on pilgrimage, and it intensified. ‘Umar said to those around him, 'What have you heard regarding the wind?' They did not return anything to him. The news of what ‘Umar had asked about the wind reached me, so I spurred my mount until I caught up with ‘Umar, and I had been at the end of the party. I said, 'O Commander of the Faithful, I heard you asked about the wind, for I heard the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) say: "The wind is from the spirit (ruh) of Allah Almighty; it brings mercy and it brings punishment. So when you see it, do not revile it, but ask Allah Almighty for its good and seek refuge with Allah the Exalted from its evil."'" There is no contradiction between the verse and this report, for it does not state therein that He, the Exalted, only sends it before mercy. Even if that were granted, it falls outside the category of the "prevailing norm," for punishment by wind is rare. It is also said: What is in the report is merely the bringing of mercy and the bringing of punishment, not that it is sent "before" every instance.

(Hatta idha aqallat): This is the limit for His saying, the Exalted, "(He) sends." Iqlal, as mentioned in Jam' al-Bayan, is the carrying of something heavy, and its derivation is from qillah (smallness). The reality of aqallahu, as some researchers have said, is "he made it small" or "he found it small," and the intended meaning is "he presumed it to be so," like akdhabahu (he deemed him a liar) when he believes him to be a liar in his estimation. Then it was used to mean "carried," because the carrier deems what he carries to be aqall (light/small), i.e., he considers it small. Among this is their saying: "The effort of the muqill (the one who carries little)."

(Sahaban): i.e., clouds. It is named as such due to its insihab (dragging/spreading) in the air. It is a collective noun; the distinction between it and its singular is by the ta, like tamr and tamrah. It is treated as both masculine and feminine, and its descriptors can be singular or plural.

Linguists, such as al-Jawhari and others, call it a collective noun, hence both aspects were observed in its description and its pronouns. The plural appears as suhub and saha'ib.

(Thiqalan): from thiql (heaviness), like ‘inab (grapes), the opposite of lightness. It is said: thaqula (as in karuma) thiqlan and thaqalah, so it is thaqil. The clouds are heavy with the water they contain.

(Saqnahu libaladin mayyitin): meaning for its sake and its benefit, or for its revival, or to water it, as it is said. In al-Bahr, it is stated that the lam is for communication (tabligh), as in "I said to you" (qultu laka). A distinction is made between "I drove wealth for you (saqtu laka malan)" and "I drove wealth on your behalf (saqtu li-ajlika malan)," in that the first means "I delivered that to you and communicated it to you," while the second does not necessitate its reaching him. Al-balad (the land/city), as al-Layth said, is every place on earth, inhabited or uninhabited, empty or populated. A portion of it is a baldah. The plural is bilad. Baldah is also applied to a desert, from which is the saying of al-A‘sha: "And a baldah like the back of a shield, desolate, where at night in its fringes there is a clamor of jinn."

(Fa-anzalna bihi al-ma'a): i.e., by means of the land or the clouds, as al-Zajjaj and Ibn al-Anbari said; or by means of the sawq (driving) or the winds, as it is said. The masculinization is by interpreting the mentioned entity. Likewise is His saying, the Exalted, (fa-akhrajna bihi). It is possible for the pronoun to return to "water," which is the apparent meaning due to its proximity in wording and meaning, and the correspondence of similar instances. The dissociation of pronouns is acceptable if there is evidence for it and if it is well-suited. If it returns to "land," the ba is for container-ship (zarfiyyah) in the second and for attachment (ilsaq) in the first, because the inzal (sending down) is not in the land, but rather the thing sent down is. Container-ship is also permitted, as in "I shot the game in the sanctuary," according to what you have learned previously. If it is for something else, it is for causality, encompassing both near and far.

(Min kulli al-thamarati): meaning, from all its types, because total encompassment is not intended nor occurring. This is more eloquent in manifesting absolute power. It is said: the encompassment is customary, and the appearance is that the intent is for multiplication. Some have permitted that the min be partitive, or that it be to explain the species.

(Kadhalka nukhriju al-mawta): This is a reference to the bringing forth of fruits or to the revival of the dead land. That is: just as We revive it by creating growth-forces within it and freshening it with types of plants and fruits, We bring forth the dead from the earth and revive them by returning souls to the materials of their bodies after gathering them and freshening them with powers and senses. This is how they stated it, and it is a reference—as it is said—to the two paths of those who believe in the bodily resurrection: the first is the creation of the body after its non-existence, then reviving it; and the second is joining some of its parts to others in the previous pattern after their separation, then reviving it.

The first is supported by the fact that what is immediately understood from the verse is that the comparison is between the two "bringings forth" from the void of non-existence, whereas the second requires the forced estimation of revival and the consideration of gathering parts, even though that is not considered in the side of the object of comparison. It is permitted that what is in the second part regarding revival by returning souls, etc., returns to the first. You know that there is no obstacle to the bringing forth from the void of non-existence, and the arguments for the impossibility of that do not stand on firm ground. However, the transmitted proofs for either of the two paths are interactive, and if the saying of bodily resurrection is sound, then there is no objection to the saying of either of them. The fact that the bringing forth of fruits is from the void of non-existence might not be conceded, for it has an origin in a general sense. Moreover, the bringing forth of the dead, according to those who hold the first path, is a repetition, whereas the bringing forth of fruits is not likewise, since it had no existence before. Yes, that the most apparent meaning is that the comparison is between the two "bringings forth" is something not in doubt. In al-Khazin, they differed in the aspect of comparison. It is said: Just as Allah Almighty creates plants by means of sending down rain, He also revives the dead by means of sending down rain. It is narrated from Abu Hurayrah and Ibn ‘Abbas (may Allah be pleased with them both) that when people die in the first blast, water will rain upon them from beneath the Throne, called the "water of life," for forty years, and they will sprout just as crops sprout from water. In another narration, forty days, and they will sprout in their graves like the sprouting of crops until, when their bodies are complete, the soul will be blown into them. Then sleep will be cast upon them, and they will sleep in their graves. When the trumpet is blown for the second time, they will live, then they will be gathered from their graves, and they will find the taste of sleep in their heads and eyes, just as a sleeper finds it when he wakes from his sleep. At that moment they will say: "Woe to us! Who has resurrected us from our resting-place?" And the caller will call out to them: (Hadha ma wa'ada al-Rahmanu wa sadaqa al-mursalun).

More than one [scholar] narrated from Mujahid that when Allah Almighty desires to bring forth the dead, He will rain upon the heavens until the earth splits open for them, then He, the Exalted, will send the souls, and every soul will return to its body. Thus, Allah Almighty revives the dead with rain just as He revives the earth. It is also said that the comparison occurs only with the essence of revival without considering the how, so it is obligatory to believe in it, and we are not obligated to research the how, and Allah, the Exalted, does whatever He wills.

(La‘allakum tadhakkarun): so that you may know that whoever is capable of that is capable of this, without doubt. The original is tatadhakkarun, but one of the two ta's was dropped. The address, it is said, is to the observers in general; it is also said to be to the deniers of resurrection.