ﱑ ﱒ ﱓ ﱔ ﱕ ﱖ ﱗ ﱘ ﱙ ﱚ ﱛ ﱜ ﱝ ﱞ ﱟ ﱠ ﱡ ﱢ
Our Lord, and make us Muslims [in submission] to You and from our descendants a Muslim nation [in submission] to You. And show us our rites and accept our repentance. Indeed, You are the Accepting of repentance, the Merciful.
Tafsir
Verse range: 2:127-129
This is the fourth category of matters that Allah Almighty recounted concerning Abraham and Ishmael, peace be upon them: their mention of three types of supplication while building the House (the Ka'bah).
Herein lie several issues:
The phrase refers to a past event. Al-Qawa'id (القواعد) is the plural of Qā'idah (قاعدة), meaning the foundation or base upon which something is built. The root implies stability and firmness. Thus, "May Allah establish you" (as in aq'adaka Allah) means "May Allah make you firm." Raising the foundation means building upon it, moving it from a state of lowness to height. Alternatively, it could mean raising the courses/layers of the building, as each layer is a foundation for the one placed above it. Raising the foundations means raising them through construction, as placing one layer upon another raises the layers. (And Allah knows best.)
The majority of narrators hold that this House existed before Abraham, peace be upon him, based on the traditions we have narrated. They argue from His saying: {And when Abraham was raising the foundations of the House}, which explicitly indicates that those foundations already existed but were ruined, and Abraham raised and rebuilt them.
The majority state that Ishmael was a partner with Abraham in this. The implied meaning is: {And when Abraham and Ishmael were raising the foundations of the House}. The evidence is that Allah connected Ishmael to Abraham, and this connection must relate to one of the previously mentioned actions. Since only the raising of the foundations was mentioned, Ishmael must be connected to Abraham in that action.
Their partnership in this could be understood in two ways:
Both interpretations validate attributing the raising to them, though the first is more literal.
Some people say that Ishmael was a young child at that time. This meaning is narrated from Ali, may Allah be pleased with him: When the House was being built, Abraham left Ishmael and Hagar behind. They asked, "To whom do you entrust us?" Abraham replied, "To Allah." Ishmael became thirsty and saw no water. Then Gabriel (peace be upon him) called to them and struck the earth with his finger, and Zamzam sprang forth.
These people place the pause after {of the House} and then begin a new sentence: "O our Lord, accept from us our obedience in building this House." Under this interpretation, Ishmael is a partner in the supplication, not in the building. This interpretation is weak because the phrase {Accept from us} does not specify what Allah should accept. Therefore, it must refer back to the previously mentioned action: raising the House. If the raising was not his action, how could he supplicate Allah to accept it from him? Thus, this view contradicts the apparent meaning of the Qur'an and must be rejected. (And Allah knows best.)
He said: {And when Abraham was raising the foundations of the House} and did not say, "raising the foundations of the House." This vagueness followed by specification carries a greater sense of importance and grandeur than the other phrasing.
Know that Allah Almighty recounted three types of supplication from them afterward:
The Mutakallimūn (theologians) say that any deed Allah accepts results in a reward and His pleasure, while what He does not reward or is not pleased with is rejected. Here, one of two inseparable concepts is used to signify the other: the word acceptance (Qabūl) is used to mean reward and pleasure. This is an extension of meaning, as acceptance is like receiving a gift offered to someone.
The 'Ārifūn (gnostics) say there is a difference between Qabūl (acceptance) and Taqabbul (seeking acceptance). Taqabbul implies that the person exerts effort in seeking acceptance, which only happens when the deed is deficient and does not inherently deserve acceptance. This shows their admission of shortcoming in their deed, and their recognition of helplessness and humility. Furthermore, their primary goal was not the reward, because for the sincere servant, being accepted by the Master is sweeter than receiving the reward. The full realization of this will come in the exegesis of Love in His saying: {But those who believed are stronger in love for Allah} (Al-Baqarah: 165). (And Allah knows best.)
After performing this sincere act of worship, they implored Allah Almighty to accept it and requested a reward, according to the Mutakallimūn. If the reward were obligatory upon Allah for a sincere deed, then this supplication and imploring would be pointless. It would be like someone supplicating, "O my God, make fire hot and ice cold." In fact, the former supplication is less strange, as it is not impossible for fire, while remaining fire, to become cold, or for ice, while remaining ice, to become hot (in the view of the Mutakallimūn). However, the Mu'tazila believe that reward is necessary for such a deed. If that were the case, this supplication would be even more reprehensible. Since it is not so, we know that nothing is inherently due to the servant from Allah at all. (And Allah knows best.)
This phrase follows the supplication as if to say: You hear our plea and imploring, and You know the sincerity in our hearts and our turning away from everyone besides You.
If it is asked: The phrase {Indeed, You are the All-Hearing, the All-Knowing} implies restriction (exclusivity), but others can also hear. We reply: Because of His perfection in these attributes, it is as if He alone possesses them exclusively.
Our companions (Ash'arites) use this verse as evidence in the issue of the creation of actions. Al-Islām (Islam) here means either the religion and belief, or submission and compliance. In either case, they asked to be made so. If they were already in that state, asking to be made so implies creation, as Ja'l (making/creating) means creation, as in Allah's saying: {And He made the darkness and the light} (Al-An'am: 1). This indicates that Islam is created by Allah.
If it is argued: This verse appears to contradict the apparent meaning, as it implies they were not Muslims when they asked, for asking to be made something one already is would be seeking what is already present, which is futile. Yet, the Muslims agree they were Muslims at that time, and such a supplication is only fitting after one is already a Muslim. If the apparent meaning is contradicted, the verse cannot be used as evidence.
We concede that the apparent meaning is contradicted, but we do not concede that Ja'l (making) means only creation. It has other meanings:
If these meanings are established, why can it not mean describing them as Muslims and judging them to be so, similar to saying, "So-and-so described me as a thief" or "described me as virtuous and learned"?
We concede that Ja'l means creation, but why can it not mean the creation of the gentle influences (al-alṭāf) that lead them to Islam and grant them success therein? Whoever Allah grants success to perform these things, He has made him a Muslim. Example: If one educates his son until he becomes learned, it is permissible to say, "I made you learned." Conversely, one might say, "He made his son a deceitful thief."
We concede that the apparent meaning suggests Allah creates Islam, but this contradicts rational proofs. Therefore, we must abandon that view. We hold it contradicts rational proofs because if the servant's action were created by Allah, the servant would deserve neither praise nor blame, neither reward nor punishment, and Allah Himself would be the obedient Muslim, not the servant.
The Reply: We deny that the apparent meaning is contradicted. This is shown in several ways:
Regarding interpreting Ja'l as judgment: This is refuted in several ways:
Regarding interpreting Ja'l as the creation of gentle influences (al-alṭāf): This is also refuted:
Regarding the rational proofs that the servant's action cannot be created by Allah: This is countered by the issue of knowledge and the issue of the caller/motivator, as previously established many times. (And Allah knows best.)
The famous question regarding this verse—since they were already Muslims, why did they ask for Islam?—was addressed in this issue, and sufficient answers were provided. Praise be to Allah for that.
Furthermore, what proves rationally that their becoming Muslims to Him could only be from Him is what we mentioned: Is the power capable of Islam also capable of abandoning it? If it is not capable of abandoning it, then that power is necessitating, and creating that necessitating power in them made them Muslims. If it is capable of abandoning it, this is false. Even if we concede possibility, the intended meaning is achieved: that power capable of both existence and non-existence is only directed toward existence by a determinant. This determinant must ultimately trace back to the action of Allah, to avoid infinite regress. When the determinant from Allah is present, the action must occur. Thus, {Our Lord, and make us Muslims to You} is what aligns with the principles of rational proofs.
This implies exclusivity: that we be Muslims to You and no one else. This indicates that the perfection of the servant's happiness lies in being submissive to Allah's commands, decrees, and destiny, and not turning one's attention to anything besides Him. This is what Abraham meant elsewhere: {Except for the Lord of the worlds, for they are enemies to me} (Ash-Shu'ara: 77).
There are two views here:
The reason a servant addresses Allah only as "Our Lord" during supplication will be explained later, in the exegesis of His saying: {And your Lord says, "Call upon Me; I will respond to you"} (Ghafir: 60), concerning the conditions of supplication.
This means: And make from our offspring... The particle Min (من) here denotes partiality. They specified some of their descendants because Allah had informed them that among their descendants would be the unjust, saying: {My covenant does not include the wrongdoers} (Al-Baqarah: 124). Some commentators say this refers to the Arabs, as they are from their descendants. And the term Ummah (nation) is said to refer to the Ummah of Muhammad (peace be upon him), evidenced by {And raise up among them a Messenger from among them} (Al-Baqarah: 129).
Here are some questions:
Question 1: We have established that {My covenant does not include the wrongdoers} indicates that among their descendants there will be the unjust, and consequently, there will be those who are not unjust. Therefore, the existence of a Muslim nation among their descendants was already known from that verse. What is the benefit of requesting it again in supplication?
Answer: That indication was not definitive. The compassionate one is prone to suspicion.
Question 2: Why did they single out their descendants in the supplication? Does this resemble stinginess in supplication?
Answer: Descendants are more deserving of compassion and benefit, as Allah says: {Protect yourselves and your families from a Fire} (At-Tahrim: 6). Furthermore, when the children of the Prophets are righteous, others become righteous through them and follow them in good deeds. Do you not see how the early scholars and great figures, when they were upright, caused those after them to be upright?
Question 3: The apparent meaning suggests that if Allah had rejected this supplication, He would have stated the rejection explicitly. Since He did not state rejection, we know He answered it. This raises a problem: In the time of the ancestors of Muhammad (peace be upon him), none of the Arabs were Muslims, and no one among Abraham's and Ishmael's descendants other than the Arabs existed.
Answer: Al-Qaffāl said: There has always been among their descendants those who worshiped the One God and associated no partners with Him. Messengers have always been from Abraham's descendants. Even during the Jāhiliyyah (Age of Ignorance), Zayd ibn Amr ibn Nufayl, Quss ibn Sa'idah, and perhaps 'Abd al-Muṭṭalib ibn Hāshim (the Prophet's grandfather), and 'Āmir ibn al-Ẓirb were upon the religion of Islam, affirming creation, resurrection, reward, and punishment, monotheism, and abstaining from carrion and idol worship.
There are two views:
A third view suggests it means both knowledge and sight combined. This is the view of the Qāḍī, because Hajj is not complete without matters that are known but not seen, and matters whose purpose is not fulfilled except through sight. This view is weak because it requires interpreting the word as both literal and metaphorical simultaneously, which is permissible but less preferred.
The first two views remain the considered ones. Those who hold the second view say that Manāsik (rites) refers to the stations and places where the Hajj rituals are performed, like Minā, 'Arafah, and Muzdalifah. Those who hold the first view say that Manāsik refers to the actions of Hajj, like circumambulation, running (Sa'y), and standing (Wuqūf).
Nusk (نسك) means worship. A worshiper is called a Nāsik. Slaughtering is called Nusk, and the slaughtered animal is a Nusaykah. The actions of Hajj are called Manāsik. The Prophet (PBUH) said: "Take your rites (Manāsikakum) from me, perhaps I will not meet you after this year of mine." The places where the Hajj rituals are performed are also called Manāsik. It is also said that al-mansak (with a fatḥah on the sīn) means the action, and al-mansik (with a kasrah on the sīn) means the place, like al-masjid (place of prostration) or al-mashriq (place of sunrise). Allah says: {For every nation We have appointed a rite (Manasik) which they are to perform} (Al-Hajj: 67), read with both fatḥah and kasrah. The apparent meaning suggests the action, as does the Prophet's saying: "Take your rites from me," commanding them to learn his actions in Hajj, not "Take the places of your rites."
If we take Manāsik as the rites of Hajj:
Some commentators restrict Manāsik only to the sacrifice, which is an error, because the sacrifice is called a nusk only because it falls under the category of worship. This is why animals slaughtered for food are not called nusuk. Since the reason for naming the sacrifice a nusk is its status as an act of Hajj, all other acts must be included.
If we take Manāsik to refer to the root meaning of the word—worship, drawing near to Allah, and adhering to what pleases Him—and make it general for everything Allah legislated for Abraham, then {And show us our rites} means: Teach us how to worship You, where to worship You, and by what means to draw near to You, so that we may serve You as a servant serves his master.
Ibn Kathir and Abū 'Amr (in some narrations) read Arinā with a quiescent rā' throughout the Qur'an. 'Āṣim and Ibn 'Āmir agree on this in one instance in Ḥā-Mīm As-Sajdah: {Show us Arinā [the two who] misguided us} (Fuṣṣilat: 29). Abū 'Amr, in other apparent narrations, reads the rā' with a clipped kasrah (shortened vowel) throughout, while the rest read the full kasrah. The original form was Ar'inā (with a hamzah followed by a kasrah). The vowel of the hamzah was transferred to the rā', and the hamzah was dropped. This latter reading is preferred because most reciters use it, and since the hamzah is dropped, the rā' should not be quiescent lest the word be diminished and the indication of the hamzah lost. The quiescent rā' is based on dropping the hamzah and its vowel, or by analogy with words where the hamzah is dropped and the preceding letter is quiescent (like fakhdh and kabid). The clipped kasrah is for lightness while retaining indication of the dropped hamzah.
Those who permit minor sins for Prophets use this verse as evidence, arguing that repentance requires a preceding sin; otherwise, requesting repentance would be requesting the impossible. The Mu'tazila, who permit minor sins, say this repentance was for a minor sin. However, one could argue that minor sins are expiated by the reward for performing the repentance itself. If they are expiated, then repenting for them becomes impossible, as repenting for something already removed is impossible.
There are other answers that apply whether one permits minor sins or not:
This interpretation is strengthened by several points:
The Ash'arites argue from this verse that the servant's action is created by Allah. They say: Abraham asked Allah to accept his repentance. If repentance were created by the servant, asking for it from Allah would be futile and ignorant. The Mu'tazila counter this by pointing out that Allah commanded us to repent: {O you who have believed, repent to Allah with sincere repentance} (At-Taḥrīm: 8). If repentance were Allah's action, commanding the servant to do it would be futile and ignorant.
If this is established, then {And turn to us in repentance} must be interpreted as granting success and creating gentle influences, or accepting the servant's repentance. The Ash'arites argue that the rational evidence supports their view in several ways:
It remains to be said that what is subject to obligation is knowledge. But this also presents a problem: Is this knowledge necessary or acquired? If necessary, it is not subject to choice or obligation. If acquired, it is deduced from necessary knowledge. The sum of that necessary knowledge producing the first acquired knowledge is either sufficient for that production or insufficient. If sufficient, the resulting acquired knowledge is necessarily derived from the necessary knowledge, and what is necessarily derived from what is outside choice is also outside choice. If insufficient, something else is needed. If that something else is necessary knowledge, and it was already present, then what we assumed was insufficient was sufficient—a contradiction. If it is acquired knowledge, the first acquired knowledge requires another acquired knowledge before it, meaning the first acquired knowledge is not the first—a contradiction. This leads to infinite regress, which is impossible. Therefore, what we mentioned proves that His saying: {And turn to us in repentance} must be taken literally, which is the truth conforming to rational proofs, and other verses contradicting this verse are more deserving of interpretation.
Regarding His saying: {Indeed, You are the Acceptor of Repentance, the Merciful}, its discussion has already passed.
Know that there is no doubt that {Our Lord, and raise up among them a Messenger} refers to those whom He intended in {And from our descendants, a Muslim nation to You}, as this was mentioned previously. Describing his descendants this way is only fitting for the Ummah of Muhammad (peace be upon him). Thus, He connected it with: {Our Lord, and raise up among them a Messenger from among them}.
This supplication implies the perfection of his descendants' state in two ways:
If this is established, then since Abraham (PBUH) sought the establishment of religion in the present and the future, and he believed this would only be fully achieved by having the people be from his descendants, it was excellent for him to desire this so that the ultimate goal in religion would be achieved, coupled with the great joy that this matter would be within his own progeny, as there is no honor greater than this rank.
That the Messenger is Muhammad (peace be upon him) is indicated by several points:
There is a question: What is the wisdom in mentioning Abraham (PBUH) alongside Muhammad (PBUH) in the context of prayer, where it is said: "O Allah, bless Muhammad and the family of Muhammad as You blessed Abraham and the family of Abraham"?
They answered this in several ways:
Know that when Allah requested the sending of a Messenger from among them to them, He mentioned the Messenger's attributes:
The commentators have other expressions: Al-Hasan said: {and purify them} means: purify them from their polytheism. This indicates that among Ishmael's descendants there would be ignorant people lacking wisdom and scripture, that polytheism defiles them, and that Allah would send a Messenger from among them to purify them and make them the wise people of the earth after their ignorance. Another view: Purification is obedience to Allah and sincerity, according to Ibn 'Abbās. A third: {and purify them} from polytheism and all other impurities, like {He makes lawful for them the good things and prohibits for them the evil things} (Al-A'rāf: 57).
Know that after mentioning these supplications, the Prophet (PBUH) concluded them with praise for Allah, saying: {Indeed, You are the All-Mighty, the Wise}. Al-'Azīz (The All-Mighty) is the invincible, powerful one. Al-Ḥakīm (The Wise) is the knowing one who is ignorant of nothing. If He is knowing and powerful, what He does is correct and free from futility and foolishness. Were He not so, answering supplications, sending Messengers, and revealing the Book would not be valid.
Al-'Azīz is an attribute of the Essence when His power over things and His immunity from humiliation and subjugation are intended, because if He is free from need, He is not subject to the humiliation of the needy, nor can He be prevented from His will so as to be humiliated. Thus, He is necessarily All-Mighty. As for Al-Ḥakīm, if it means the All-Knowing, it is an attribute of the Essence. If Azīzah means the perfection of might (immunity from being overcome by others) and Ḥikmah means the actions of wisdom, then Al-'Azīz and Al-Ḥakīm are attributes of action, not Essence.
There are differences between these two types of attributes:
An-Naẓẓām argued that Allah is incapable of evil by saying: God must inherently be wise. If He is inherently wise, evil is not within His power, because inherent wisdom contradicts performing evil. Thus, it is impossible for God to perform evil, and what is impossible is not within power. We say God must be inherently wise because if this were not necessary, He could change into its opposite, meaning God could exist without wisdom, which is agreed to be impossible. Furthermore, wisdom inherently contradicts performing foolishness, which is self-evident. Since what implies a contradiction is contradictory, it is self-evident that the divine essence cannot be associated with foolish action. And it is clear that the impossible is not within power. Thus, God cannot perform evil.
The Reply: According to our doctrine (Ash'arite), none of His actions are foolish, so the question is resolved. (And Allah knows best.)
