Tafsir of Al-Baqarah 2:154

Surah Al-Baqarah (2): Verse 155

And We will surely test you with something of fear and hunger and a loss of wealth and lives and fruits, but give good tidings to the patient.

This verse is analogous to the verse in Al 'Imran: {Nay, they are alive, receiving provision from their Lord} (3:169).

The connection to the preceding verses is as follows: It is as if the address is: Seek help in patience and prayer for the establishment of My religion. If you are compelled in that establishment to strive against My enemies with your wealth and bodies, and you do so, and your souls are lost (i.e., you are killed), do not think that you have wasted yourselves. Rather, know that your slain are alive with Me.

Herein lie several issues:

1. Ibn Abbas (RA) said this verse was revealed concerning the martyrs of Badr. Fourteen Muslims were killed that day: six from the Muhajirun (including 'Ubaydah ibn al-Harith, 'Umar ibn Abi Waqqas, Dhu al-Shimalayn, 'Amr ibn Nufaylah, 'Amir ibn Bakr, and Mihja' ibn 'Abdullah) and eight from the Ansar (including Sa'd ibn Khaythama, Qays ibn 'Abd al-Mundhir, Zayd ibn al-Harith, Tamim ibn al-Humam, Rafi' ibn al-Mu'alla, Harithah ibn Suraqah, Mu'adh ibn 'Afra', and 'Awf ibn 'Afra').
   • People were saying, "So-and-so has died, and so-and-so has died," so Allah forbade them from saying they had died.
2. Others reported that the disbelievers and hypocrites said: "These people are killing themselves seeking the pleasure of Muhammad without any benefit." In response, this verse was revealed.

The word {أموات} (amwāt, dead) is in the nominative case (raf') because it is the predicate of an omitted subject, meaning: "Do not say they are dead."

There are several scholarly opinions regarding the meaning of their being "alive":

Opinion 1: They are currently alive (The Majority View)

They are alive at this very moment, as if Allah has revived them to convey the reward to them. This is the view of most commentators.

• Implication: This proves that the reward reaches the obedient while they are still in their graves.
• Objection: We witness their bodies as dead in the graves; how can what you claim be correct?
• Response: For us (the Ash'arites), the physical structure is not a prerequisite for life. It is not impossible for Allah to restore life to every single atom and small part without needing reassembly. As for the Mu'tazila, they might say it is not impossible for Allah to restore life to the essential parts necessary for the essence of a living being, without needing the extremities, or perhaps He revives them when they are not observed.

Opinion 2: A Linguistic or Spiritual Interpretation

1. Al-Asamm said: It means, "Do not label them as dead; call them the living martyrs."
2. It is also possible that the polytheists said, "They are dead in religion," as Allah says: {Or is one who was dead and We gave him life} (6:122). Therefore, Allah commanded: Do not say of the martyrs what the polytheists said. Rather, say: They are alive in faith but you (the disbelievers) do not perceive it.
   • This means the disbelievers do not know that whoever is killed upon the religion of Muhammad (PBUH) is alive in faith, guided by his Lord, and illuminated by light.
   • This is supported by a narration where a man told another, "No man like you has died." Hippocrates was also reported to have told his students: "Die by intention, and you will live by nature (i.e., by the spirit)."

Opinion 3: Future Resurrection (The Eschatological View)

The polytheists were saying that the companions of Muhammad (PBUH) were killing themselves, losing their lives for no benefit, wasting their ages for nothing.

• Those who said this were either Dahriyyah (materialists denying resurrection) or believers in resurrection who denied the prophethood of Muhammad (PBUH).
• Allah commanded: Do not say as the polytheists said—that they are dead, will not be resurrected, and will not benefit from the hardships they endured in this world. Rather, know that they are alive, meaning they will be revived and rewarded in Paradise.
• Interpreting {alive} as "they will be alive" is not far-fetched, given verses like: {Indeed, the righteous will be in bliss, and indeed, the wicked will be in Hellfire} (82:13-14), and references to the Fire surrounding them (18:29) or the lowest level of Hell (4:145), all referring to their future state.
• This view is chosen by Al-Ka'bi and Abu Muslim al-Isfahani.

The majority of scholars favor the first opinion, supported by several points:

1. Evidence of Grave Punishment: Verses indicating punishment in the grave, such as: {Our Lord, You made us die two deaths and gave us two lives} (40:11). The two deaths only occur if life in the grave is established. Also, {The Fire, they are exposed to it morning and evening, and the Day the Hour appears [it will be said], "Make Pharaoh's people enter the severest punishment"} (40:46). If punishment in the grave is established, reward in the grave must also be established, as punishment is a right of Allah against the servant, while reward is a right of the servant upon Allah. Since the suspension of punishment until the Day of Judgment is less likely than the establishment of reward, the establishment of reward in the grave is more fitting where punishment is confirmed.
2. Meaninglessness of "But you do not perceive": If the meaning were the second or third opinion (i.e., they are alive spiritually or will be alive later), the phrase {but you do not perceive} would lack meaning, as the address is to the believers, who already knew that the righteous would be resurrected and that they died upon guidance. This implies Allah revived them in their graves.
3. Glad Tidings to Others: The verse {and they give good tidings of those who have not yet joined them} (3:170) proves the existence of life in the Barzakh (intermediate state) before the Resurrection.
4. Hadith Evidence: The Prophet (PBUH) said: "The grave is either a garden from the gardens of Paradise or a pit from the pits of the Fire." Reports concerning the reward and punishment of the grave are nearly mutawatir (mass-transmitted). The Prophet (PBUH) used to seek refuge from the punishment of the grave in his final Tashahhud.
5. Specificity of Mention: If "alive" meant "they will be alive," singling them out would be pointless. Abu Muslim answered that they were singled out because their rank in Paradise is higher.
   • Rebuttal: This answer is weak because the ranks of Prophets and the truthful are greater, yet Allah did not single them out for this specific description.
6. Veneration of Graves: People visit and venerate the graves of the martyrs, which, in some ways, supports our view.

• Abu Muslim's Argument: He cited the verse in Al 'Imran: {Nay, they are alive with their Lord} (3:169), arguing that this "withness" ('indiyyah) is not spatial but refers to being in Paradise, and entry into Paradise only occurs after the Resurrection.
• Rebuttal: We do not concede that this "withness" is only in Paradise. It can mean the elevation of ranks and the conveyance of good tidings to them while they are in the grave or another location.

There is another opinion: the reward and punishment of the grave pertain only to the soul (Rūḥ), not the physical body (qālib). This view depends on the philosophical understanding of the soul.

We summarize the essence of this philosophical position:

The human being cannot be merely the perceptible physical structure (the body).

Argument 1: The Body is Transient

The parts of this structure are constantly growing, decaying, increasing, decreasing, perfecting, and dissolving. The human being, in essence, is permanent throughout life. Since the permanent is distinct from the impermanent, what is referred to by "I" must be different from this physical structure.

Argument 2: Self-Awareness is Independent of Parts

I am aware that I exist even when I am oblivious to all my physical parts and members. Since the known is distinct from the unknown, what is referred to by "I" must be different from these limbs and members.

Furthermore, the human being is not perceptible because perception relates only to surface and color, and the human being is certainly not mere color and surface.

There are many opinions on what the self referred to by "I" is, but the most concise arguments are two:

1. Corporeal Particles Permeating the Structure:

This view holds that there are bodily particles permeating this structure, similar to how fire permeates charcoal, oil permeates sesame seeds, or rose essence permeates the rose. Proponents of this view are divided:

• Group A (Believers in Homogeneous Bodies): They believe these permeating particles are similar to the other parts composing the structure. However, the Almighty Creator preserves some of these parts from the beginning of life to the end; these are what everyone refers to as "I." Allah creates life within these preserved parts, and when the life leaves, they die. This is the view of most speculative theologians (mutakallifīn).
• Group B (Believers in Heterogeneous Bodies): They claim that the bodies preserved throughout life are essentially different in nature and reality from the bodies that compose the physical structure. These preserved bodies are inherently living and perceptive. When they mix with the body, permeating it like fire in charcoal, the structure becomes illuminated by the light of that spirit and moves by its movement. Although the physical structure constantly dissolves and changes, those essential parts remain unchanged because their nature is different from these decaying bodies. When the physical mold decays, those subtle, luminous parts separate: either ascending to the heavens of purity and holiness if they are among the fortunate, or descending to Hell and the realm of afflictions if they are among the wretched.

2. The Self is Immaterial and Non-Corporeal:

The entity referred to by everyone as "I exist" is neither a body nor dependent on a body. It is not inside the world nor outside it. This does not necessitate it being like Allah, as sharing a characteristic does not imply sharing the essence.

• Proof: Among the known things (ma'lūmāt) there must be a true singular entity (fard haqīqī). Therefore, the knowledge of it must be a true singular entity, and the subject described by that knowledge must also be a true singular entity. Every body and every attribute of a body is not a true singular entity. Thus, the one who knows these singular things cannot be a body or corporeal.
• Proof of Singular Knowns: There is no doubt about existence. If this existing thing is a true singular entity, that is the goal. If it is composite, the composite is built upon the singular, so the singular must exist in all cases.
• Proof that Knowledge of a Singular is Singular: If the knowledge related to that singular entity were divisible, then either each part of the knowledge (or some part) would be knowledge of that known entity (which is impossible, as it implies the part equals the whole), OR none of the parts would be knowledge of it. In the latter case, when the parts combine, either a new entity arises which is the knowledge of the singular known (making this new entity the knowledge, not the prior assumed things), OR this new entity is divisible (leading back to the first case), OR it is indivisible (which is the desired conclusion).
• Proof that the Subject of Indivisible Knowledge is Indivisible: If the subject were divisible, then each part of it, or some part, would either be described by the entire attribute (impossible, as one attribute cannot exist in multiple places simultaneously), OR the attribute would be divided among the parts of the subject (contradicting the premise that the attribute is indivisible), OR none of the subject's parts are described by the entire attribute, meaning the subject lacks the attribute, which contradicts the premise that it is described by it.
• Proof that Every Body is Divisible: This is established by the proofs used to negate the existence of the simple, individual substance (jawhar fard).

Conclusion of Argument 2: The entity referred to as "I" is neither a body nor dependent on a body.

This entity must perceive particulars because one cannot judge that this person is a human and not a horse unless both the subject and the predicate are present to the judge. The entity must perceive particulars (like "this person") and universals (like "human") to apply the universal to the particular. The perceiver of universals is the Soul (Nafs), and the perceiver of particulars is also the Soul.

Since the Soul perceives particulars, it is capable of experiencing pleasure and pain. Therefore, after separation from the body, these souls experience pleasure and pain until Allah returns them to the bodies on the Day of Resurrection, at which point bodily pleasure and pain will occur.

• Support: Although there is no overwhelming proof for this philosophical position, there is no proof against it either. It supports the literal meaning of the Scripture and removes doubts regarding the reward and punishment of the grave mentioned in the Book of Allah. Therefore, it must be followed.

What reinforces this view is that the reward and punishment of the grave must reach either the body or some of its parts.

1. Reaching the entire body is contradictory, as we find the body scattered and torn apart.
2. Therefore, it must be that Allah revives some of those small parts and conveys the reward/punishment to them.
3. If this is permissible, why is it not permissible to say that the human being is the Soul, which is not subject to scattering and tearing, and thus pain and pleasure can reach it?
4. Then, Allah restores the Soul to the body on the Great Day of Resurrection so that bodily states combine with spiritual states.

Verse 156

{And We will surely test you with something of fear and hunger and a loss of wealth and lives and fruits, but give good tidings to the patient.}