Al-Nahl (The Bees): Verses 38–40

Verse 38:

{وَأَقْسَمُوا بِاللَّهِ جَهْدَ أَيْمَانِهِمْ لَا يَبْعَثُ اللَّهُ مَن يَمُوتُ} And they swore by Allah with their most solemn oaths, "Allah will not resurrect anyone who dies."

There are Two Issues concerning this verse:

The deniers of prophethood raised this objection as their fourth doubt: They claimed that the doctrine of resurrection, gathering, and revival is false; therefore, the claim of prophethood must also be false.

Part 1: Refuting the Premise (Denial of Resurrection) The premise is that human existence is confined to this specific physical body. When a person dies, their parts disperse, and their specific temperament and balance cease. It is impossible for them to return as they were because once a thing is annihilated and ceases to exist, nothing of its essence or reality remains. Therefore, what returns must be something different from the original, not its exact self.

Part 2: Connecting the Premise to Prophethood The second part is that since the doctrine of resurrection is invalidated, the claim of prophethood is also invalidated. This is argued in two ways:

1. Muhammad (peace be upon him) called people to affirm the doctrine of the Hereafter. If this doctrine is false, then he was calling to falsehood, and one who does so cannot be a truthful Messenger.
2. He establishes his own prophethood and the obligation to obey him based on the promise of reward and the threat of punishment. If the basis (the Hereafter) is nullified, his prophethood is nullified.

The Meaning of the Oath: The verse states: {وَأَقْسَمُوا بِاللَّهِ جَهْدَ أَيْمَانِهِمْ} (And they swore by Allah with their most solemn oaths). This indicates that they claimed to possess necessary, self-evident knowledge that once something is utterly annihilated—becoming pure non-existence—it cannot return as it was; any return would be something else entirely. Their oath signifies their conviction that their return as they were after non-existence is an absurdity to basic reason.

The verse does not explicitly state why the denial of resurrection invalidates prophethood, because this connection is so clear and immediately apparent to the intellect that they left it unstated for that very reason.

Establishing the Possibility of Resurrection: Allah then clarifies that the doctrine of resurrection is possible, supported by two arguments:

Argument 1: Divine Promise and Justice It is a true promise from Allah, which necessitates its fulfillment. The reason it is a true promise is to distinguish between the obedient and the disobedient, the truthful and the false, and the oppressor and the oppressed. This is stated in: {لِيُبَيِّنَ لَهُمُ الَّذِي يَخْتَلِفُونَ فِيهِ وَلِيَعْلَمَ الَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا أَنَّهُمْ كَانُوا كَاذِبِينَ} (that He may make clear to them the matter in which they differed, and that those who disbelieved may know that they were liars). We have elaborated on this point in Surah Yunus.

Argument 2: The Nature of Creation Allah’s power to create things initially does not depend on pre-existing matter, time, or tools. He creates solely through His pure power and will, against which there is no repelling force and no preventing obstacle to His will. Allah expresses this unimpeded execution by saying: {إِنَّمَا قَوْلُنَا لِشَيْءٍ إِذَا أَرَدْنَاهُ أَن نَّقُولَ لَهُ كُن فَيَكُونُ} (Our word for a thing when We intend it, is only that We say to it, "Be," and it is). If Allah was capable of creating things in the beginning, He must be capable of recreating them.

With these two decisive proofs, the doctrine of resurrection, gathering, and the Day of Judgment is established as true. Since their attack on prophethood was based on attacking this fundamental principle, when this attack is refuted, their attack on prophethood is also refuted.

This verse recounts the oath of the polytheists. The response {بَلَى} (Yes/Nay) affirms what was negated; meaning, yes, Allah will resurrect them. The phrase {وَعْدًا عَلَيْهِ حَقًّا} (a promise binding upon Him, truly) is an emphatic verbal noun (masdar mu'akkid). It confirms the promise of resurrection implied by the verb "He will resurrect them," meaning a promise without failure. {لِيُبَيِّنَ لَهُمُ الَّذِي يَخْتَلِفُونَ فِيهِ} refers to the matters of resurrection; meaning, yes, He will resurrect them to clarify what they differed about, {وَلِيَعْلَمَ الَّذِينَ كَفَرُوا أَنَّهُمْ كَانُوا كَاذِبِينَ} (and that those who disbelieved may know that they were liars) in what they swore about.

Verse 39–40:

{وَالَّذِينَ هَاجَرُوا فِي اللَّهِ مِن بَعْدِ مَا ظُلِمُوا لَنُبَوِّئَنَّهُمْ فِي الدُّنْيَا حَسَنَةً وَلَأَجْرُ الْآخِرَةِ أَكْبَرُ لَوْ كَانُوا يَعْلَمُونَ * الَّذِينَ صَبَرُوا وَعَلَىٰ رَبِّهِمْ يَتَوَكَّلُونَ} And those who emigrated for the sake of Allah after they had been wronged, We will surely settle them in a good place in this world. But the reward of the Hereafter is greater, if only they knew! [They are] those who were patient and upon their Lord rely.

(Note: The following section in the original text addresses the subsequent verse, 40, which is included here for structural completeness, though the user prompt focused on 38-40.)

Regarding the subsequent verse: {إِنَّمَا قَوْلُنَا لِشَيْءٍ إِذَا أَرَدْنَاهُ أَن نَّقُولَ لَهُ كُن فَيَكُونُ} (Verse 40)

There are several issues concerning this statement:

One might ask: If the command {كُن} (Be) is addressed to non-existence, it is impossible. If it is addressed to something already existing, it is a command to bring about what is already present, which is also impossible.

The Answer: This is a metaphor (tamthīl) used to explain the negation of speech, hesitation, or delay. Allah addresses creation using terms they comprehend. It is not a literal address to non-existence, because whatever Allah wills comes into being instantly, exactly as He wills. If He willed, He could create the heavens, the earth, and everything in them in the blink of an eye. However, people are addressed according to the capacity of their intellects.

The phrase {قَوْلُنَا} (Our word) is the subject (mubtada'), and {أَن نَّقُولَ} (that We say) is the predicate (khabar). {كُن فَيَكُونُ} uses Yakūnu (is/becomes) as a perfect verb (kāna tāmmah) meaning origination and existence. Thus, when we intend the origination of a thing, there is nothing required except to say to it, "Originate," and it originates immediately thereafter without delay.

There are two readings for the final word:

1. Raising the Nūn (رفع): Read by Ibn ‘Amir and Al-Kisā’ī as {فَيَكُونُ} (and it is/becomes). Al-Farrā’ explains that this treats {أَن نَّقُولَ لَهُ} as a complete statement, and {فَيَكُونُ} is a new, independent clause, similar to saying: "If Zayd enters the house, he divorces [his wife], and then he acts."
2. Installing the Nūn (نصب): Read by the rest as {فَيَكُونَ} (and it becomes). This is interpreted by most grammarians as being coordinated (conjoined) with {أَن نَّقُولَ}, meaning: "Our word is that We say to it 'Be,' and it becomes." Al-Zajjāj suggests it could be in the accusative case as the response to the command Kun. However, Abu ‘Ali argues that since the intent of Kun here is not a literal command but rather informing about the thing's occurrence, the interpretation of it being a response to a command is invalidated.

Some of our colleagues used this verse to argue for the eternity (Qidam) of the Qur'an. They argued: The verse indicates that whenever Allah wills to create something, He says "Be," and it is. If the command {كُن} itself were created (hadith), its creation would require Allah to say "Be" to it, which would necessitate an infinite regress (tasalsul), which is impossible. Therefore, the Word of Allah must be eternal.

Critique of this Proof (My View): This proof is not entirely strong, for several reasons:

Reason 1: The Meaning of Idhā The particle {إِذَا} (when) does not imply repetition. If a man tells his wife, "If you enter the house, you are divorced," and she enters once, she is divorced once. If she enters a second time, she is not divorced a second time. Therefore, it is not necessary that every act of creation requires the command "Be." Thus, infinite regress is not necessitated.

Reason 2: The Nature of the Word "Kun" If this proof were valid, it would necessitate the eternity of the word "Kun." This is demonstrably false, as the word "Kun" is composed of the letters Kāf and Nūn. When the Kāf is present, the Nūn is absent, and when the Nūn arrives, the Kāf has passed. This proves that the word "Kun" cannot be eternal. What our colleagues claim is eternal is a quality (Sifah) distinct from the word "Kun." Thus, the verse does not support what they claim, and what they claim is not supported by the verse.

Reason 3: Analogy with Human Action If a person says, "So-and-so never undertakes a saying or an action without seeking help from Allah," no rational person would claim that his seeking help from Allah is itself an action that requires prior seeking of help, leading to infinite regress. The same logic applies here.

Reason 4: Indications of the Word's Created Nature This verse actually suggests the created nature of the speech in several ways:

• {إِنَّمَا قَوْلُنَا لِشَيْءٍ إِذَا أَرَدْنَاهُ} implies that the saying occurs upon willing, meaning it is contingent and thus created.
• The use of the particle {إِذَا} implies future reception.
• {أَن نَّقُولَ لَهُ} clearly indicates the future.
• {كُن فَيَكُونُ} indicates that the occurrence (kawn) happens immediately following the saying of Kun. Thus, the word Kun precedes the occurrence by a single moment in time. Anything that precedes a created thing by even one moment must itself be created.

Reason 5: Contradictory Verses This interpretation is contradicted by other verses stating that Allah's command is established and pre-ordained: {وَكَانَ أَمْرُ اللَّهِ مَفْعُولًا} (And the command of Allah is a decree determined) [An-Nisa: 47], {وَكَانَ أَمْرُ اللَّهِ قَدَرًا مَّقْدُورًا} (And the command of Allah was a determined decree) [Al-Ahzab: 38], {اللَّهُ نَزَّلَ أَحْسَنَ الْحَدِيثِ} (Allah has sent down the best of speech) [Az-Zumar: 23], etc.

Addressing the Counter-Argument: If someone argues: "Even if this verse does not prove the eternity of the speech, you claimed it proves the created nature of the speech. What is the response to that?"

Our Reply: We interpret these indications as referring to the audible speech (al-kalām al-masmū‘), which is composed of letters and sounds. We affirm that this speech is created and contingent. (Allah knows best.)