Tafsir of Ibraheem 14:4

Surah Ibrahim (Verse 4)

{وَمَا أَرْسَلْنَا مِن رَّسُولٍ إِلَّا بِلِسَانِ قَوْمِهِ لِيُبَيِّنَ لَهُمْ ۖ فَيُضِلُّ اللَّهُ مَن يَشَاءُ وَيَهْدِي مَن يَشَاءُ ۚ وَهُوَ الْعَزِيزُ الْحَكِيمُ}

(And We did not send any messenger except with the language of his people, that he might make things clear to them. Then Allah leaves astray whom He wills and guides whom He wills. And He is the Exalted in Might, the Wise.)

Issue 1: The Order (Nathm) of the Verse

When Allah began this Surah by saying: {A Book which We have revealed to you, [O Muhammad], to bring mankind out of darknesses into the light} (Ibrahim: 1), this was a favor upon the Messenger (PBUH) for being entrusted with this great station, and a favor upon creation for sending someone to save them from the darknesses of disbelief and guide them to the light of faith.

This verse (v. 4) mentions what completes this grace and benevolence in two respects:

1. Regarding the Messenger (PBUH): Previous prophets were sent specifically to their own people. However, Muhammad (PBUH) was sent to all of creation universally, making this favor upon him superior and more complete.
2. Regarding the People: Allah sent every messenger in the language of his people. When this is the case, it is easier for them to understand the secrets of the Law (Shari'ah) and grasp its realities, making them less prone to error and mistake. This is the rationale behind the structure of the verse.

Issue 2: The Nature of Language (Conventional vs. Divinely Appointed)

Some scholars use this verse as evidence that languages are conventional (iṣṭilāḥiyyah), not divinely appointed (tawqīfiyyah).

• Argument: Divine appointment requires the sending of messengers. This verse indicates that all messengers were sent speaking the language of their people. This necessitates that languages must have existed before the messengers were sent. If languages predate the messengers, they could not have been established by divine appointment; therefore, they must have arisen through convention (human agreement).

Issue 3: The Scope of the Prophet's Mission (Universal vs. Specific to Arabs)

A group of Jews, known as the 'Isawiyyah, claimed that Muhammad (PBUH) was a messenger only to the Arabs, not to other groups. They based this on two points from this verse:

1. Since the Qur'an was revealed in the Arabic language, its miraculous nature (its eloquence/Fasāḥah) could only be recognized by Arabs. Therefore, the Qur'an is only a proof (Hujjah) against Arabs, and not against non-Arabs.
2. The phrase {except with the language of his people} refers specifically to the Arabic language. This implies that the Prophet's "people" (Qawm) are only the Arabs, meaning he was sent exclusively to them.

The Refutation:

Why can't the meaning of {his people} refer to the people of his locality, rather than the people of his call (Dawah)?

The evidence for the universality of his call is Allah's statement: {Say, "O mankind, indeed I am the Messenger of Allah to you all"} (Al-A'rāf: 158). Furthermore, his mission extends even to the Jinn, as evidenced by: {Say, "If mankind and the jinn gathered in order to produce the like of this Qur'an, they could not produce the like of it, even if they were to each other assistants"} (Al-Isrā': 88).

Issue 4: Divine Decree of Misguidance and Guidance

The Ash'arites rely on the phrase {Then Allah leaves astray whom He wills and guides whom He wills} to assert that misguidance and guidance originate entirely from Allah. The verse is explicit on this meaning.

• Supporting Narration: It is narrated that Abu Bakr and 'Umar approached the Prophet (PBUH) with raised voices. Some said Abu Bakr believed good deeds come from Allah and bad deeds from ourselves, while 'Umar believed both come from Allah. The Prophet (PBUH) confirmed 'Umar's view and gently rebuked Abu Bakr's. He then ruled between them by saying: "Gabriel said what 'Umar said, and Michael said what Abu Bakr said. The judgment of Isrāfīl between them was that all destiny, good and evil, comes from Allah. This is my judgment between you."

The Mu'tazilites' Counter-Argument:

They argue that this verse cannot be taken literally for several reasons:

1. Contradiction with Purpose: The preceding clause states the purpose was {that he might make things clear to them}. This clarity is only appropriate if the goal is achieving faith for the accountable. If the goal were to create disbelief and misguidance in them, this statement would not align with that purpose.
2. Invalidating the Call: If the Prophet (PBUH) told them, "Allah creates disbelief and misguidance in you," they could respond, "What is the benefit of your clarification, and what is the purpose of your mission? Can we remove the disbelief Allah created in us?" This would invalidate the claim of prophethood.
3. Obligation of Contentment: If disbelief is created by Allah's will and decree, then being content (Riḍā) with that disbelief becomes obligatory, as contentment with Allah's decree is obligatory—a position no rational person holds.
4. Contradiction with Attributes: The premise of the verse, {to bring mankind out of darknesses into the light} (Ibrahim: 1), supports the doctrine of Justice ('Adl). Likewise, the conclusion, {And He is the Exalted in Might, the Wise}, contradicts the idea that He creates evil and ugliness.

Therefore, they conclude that the phrase {Then Allah leaves astray whom He wills and guides whom He wills} cannot mean that Allah creates disbelief in the servant, necessitating interpretation. They refer to their previous explanations in Surah Al-Baqarah (regarding v. 26), but briefly mention three interpretations:

1. Misguidance means judging someone to be a disbeliever/straying (as in, "So-and-so makes someone a disbeliever").
2. Misguidance means leading them away from the path to Paradise toward the Fire, and guidance means directing them to the path of Paradise.
3. Allah, by abandoning the straying person to their error without intervention, is metaphorically described as having misled them. Conversely, by assisting the guided person with favors (Luṭf), it is as if He guided them Himself. (The author of Al-Kashshāf states misguidance is leaving them alone and withholding favors, while guidance is Tawfīq and favor.)

The Refutation of the Mu'tazilite Arguments:

1. Regarding the purpose {that he might make things clear to them}: We cite Al-Farrā': When one verb follows another, if the second verb is grammatically parallel, it is coordinated (conjoined). If not parallel, it is treated as a new, independent clause (raised in grammatical case).
   • Example: {They wish to extinguish the light of Allah with their mouths, but Allah refuses} (At-Tawbah: 32). The verb ya'bā (refuses) is in the nominative case (raised), not coordinated with yurīdūn (they wish), because saying "They wish that Allah refuses" is grammatically unsound.
   • Similarly, {that We may make clear to you, and We cause to remain in the wombs} (Al-Hajj: 5).
   • In our verse, Allah says {that he might make things clear to them} followed by {Then Allah leaves astray whom He wills} (in the nominative case, fayudillu). This indicates it is a new, independent statement, not coordinated with the preceding clause.
   • Meaning: The structure implies: "We sent the messenger in their language so that His clarification of the laws in their familiar tongue would be easier. However, despite this clarity, Allah leaves astray whom He wills and guides whom He wills." This highlights that the strength of the clarification does not necessitate guidance; guidance and misguidance ultimately come only from Allah.

2. Regarding the invalidation of the call: The opponent must concede that these verses are reports about the person's state of disbelief. The disbeliever could retort: "Since your God informed that I am a disbeliever, if I believe, then your God becomes a liar. Can I make your God a liar? Can I make His knowledge ignorance? If I cannot, why does He command me to believe?" This shows the opponent's objection is equally applicable to their own doctrine.

3. Regarding the obligation of contentment: Similarly, your doctrine implies that the servant is obligated to strive to make Allah a liar and ignorant. This is a far greater absurdity, as removing the disbelief from the servant would require turning His certain knowledge into ignorance and His true report into a lie.

4. Regarding the contradiction with wisdom: We have already shown that the beginning of the verse, {to bring mankind out of darknesses into the light}, supports the doctrine of the People of the Sunnah (Ash'arites), as does the phrase {by the permission of their Lord} (mentioned previously). Furthermore, Allah describes Himself as Al-'Azīz (The Exalted in Might, the Overpowering). If He willed faith from the disbeliever and it did not occur, or if He willed the act of disbelief and it occurred, He remains the Overpowering and Victorious.

Therefore, the arguments raised by the Mu'tazilites are weak. As for their three interpretations, their refutation has been established repeatedly in this book, so there is no benefit in repeating it here.

Surah Ibrahim (Verses 5-7)

{وَلَقَدْ أَرْسَلْنَا مُوسَىٰ بِآيَاتِنَا أَنْ أَخْرِجْ قَوْمَكَ مِنَ الظُّلُمَاتِ إِلَى النُّورِ وَذَكِّرْهُم بِأَيَّامِ اللَّهِ ۚ إِنَّ فِي ذَٰلِكَ لَآيَاتٍ لِّكُلِّ صَبَّارٍ شَكُورٍ * وَإِذْ قَالَ مُوسَىٰ لِقَوْمِهِ اذْكُرُوا نِعْمَةَ اللَّهِ عَلَيْكُمْ إِذْ أَنجَاكُمْ مِنْ آلِ فِرْعَوْنَ يَسُومُونَكُمْ سُوءَ الْعَذَابِ وَيَذْبَحُونَ أَبْنَاءَكُمْ وَيَسْتَحْيُونَ نِسَاءَكُمْ ۚ وَفِي ذَٰلِكُمْ بَلَاءٌ مِّن رَّبِّكُمْ عَظِيمٌ}

(And We did certainly send Moses with Our signs, [with the command], "Bring your people out of darknesses into the light and remind them of the Days of Allah." Indeed in that are signs for every patient, grateful one. And [mention] when Moses said to his people, "Remember the favor of Allah upon you when He saved you from the people of Pharaoh, who were inflicting upon you severe torment and were slaughtering your sons and keeping your women alive. And in that was a great trial from your Lord.")