Al-Baqarah: (25) And give good tidings to those who believe...

It is known that when the Almighty God discussed Monotheism (Tawhid) and Prophethood, He subsequently addressed the Resurrection (Ma'ad), clarifying the punishment for the disbelievers and the reward for the obedient. It is God's custom, when mentioning a verse of warning (wa'id), to follow it with a verse of promise (wa'd). Herein lie several issues:

Issue 1: The Proofs for Resurrection (Hashr and Nashr)

The issue of gathering (Hashr) and resurrection (Nashr) is a fundamental matter for the soundness of the religion. The discussion of this issue can pertain either to its possibility (imkan) or its occurrence (wuqu').

1. Possibility: This can be established either by reason (intellect) or by transmission (Naql).
2. Occurrence: This can only be established by transmission (Naql).

God mentioned both these aspects in His Book and clarified the truth concerning them in several ways:

First Way: God frequently recounted the denial of resurrection by its rejecters, yet He affirmed that it will occur without citing proof, which is permissible because anything whose truth does not depend on the validity of the Prophet's (PBUH) prophethood can be established by transmitted evidence (Naql). This is similar to how He decreed Hellfire for disbelievers and Paradise for the righteous here, relying on assertion rather than proof. In contrast, when establishing the existence of the Creator or the truth of prophethood, He did not suffice with mere assertion but provided proof. The difference lies in what we have mentioned.

He also said in Surah An-Nahl:

"And they swore by Allah with their most solemn oaths that Allah will not resurrect those who die. Nay, but it is a promise binding upon Him, yet most of the people do not know." (An-Nahl: 38)

And in Surah At-Taghabun:

"The disbelievers claim that they will never be resurrected. Say: 'Yes, by my Lord, you will surely be resurrected, then you will surely be informed of what you did.'" (At-Taghabun: 7)

Second Way: God established the possibility of resurrection based on His power over matters resembling resurrection and revival. God employed this method in several places, most comprehensively in Surah Al-Waqi'ah. There, He recounted the people of the Left Hand saying: "When we die and become dust and bones, shall we indeed be resurrected? Or our ancient fathers?" God answered them:

"Say: 'Indeed, the first and the last generations * Are being gathered to a specified appointment of a Day.'" (Al-Waqi'ah: 47-50)

Then, God provided four proofs for its possibility:

First Proof: Creation from Semen (Nutfah)

"Have you seen that which you emit? * Do you create it, or are We the Creators? * We are..." (Al-Waqi'ah: 58-60)

The Inference: Semen originates from the residue of the fourth stage of digestion, which is like dew scattered throughout the extremities of the limbs. The pleasure of intercourse is shared by all parts of the body as they dissolve. God then subjects the power of desire to gather these seminal parts, which were initially very dispersed, even at the ends of the world. Then, He gathered them into the animal's body, and further, He gathered them from the extremities of that body into the vessels of semen, and then expelled them as a gushing fluid into the resting place of the womb. If God could gather these highly dispersed parts to form that person, how can it be impossible for Him to gather them again after they separate upon death?

God mentioned this proof in several places, such as in Surah Al-Hajj:

"O mankind, if you are in doubt about the Resurrection, then [consider that] indeed, We created you from dust..." (Al-Hajj: 5) ... "That is because Allah, He is the Truth, and it is He who gives life to the dead, and indeed, He is over all things competent. * And that the Hour is coming, there is no doubt about it, and indeed, Allah will resurrect those who are in the graves." (Al-Hajj: 6-7)

Also in Surah Al-Mu'minun, after mentioning the stages of creation:

"Then indeed, after that, you are to die. * Then indeed, on the Day of Resurrection, you will be resurrected." (Al-Mu'minun: 15-16)

And in Surah Al-Qiyamah:

"Does man think that We will not assemble his bones? * Yes, [We are] able [even] to proportion his fingertips." (Al-Qiyamah: 3-4) (Note: The excerpt quotes verses 37-38 of Al-Qiyamah, which are about creation from semen, similar to Al-Waqi'ah).

And in Surah At-Tariq:

"Let man look from what he is created. * He was created from a fluid, ejaculated, * Emerging from between the loins and the ribs. * Indeed, He is able to return him [to life]." (At-Tariq: 5-8)

Second Proof: Cultivation (Zar'u)

"Have you seen that which you sow? * Do you cause it to grow, or are We the growers? * If We willed, We could make it [dry] stubble..." (Al-Waqi'ah: 63-65)

The Inference: Seeds, whether long (like rice) or split (like barley), round, triangular, or square, when placed in moist earth and covered by water and soil, reason dictates they should decay and spoil, as either water or soil alone is sufficient to cause decay. Yet, they do not spoil but remain preserved. Then, with increased moisture, the seed splits into two halves, from which two leaves emerge. For hard seeds (like date pits), which most people cannot split, they split by God's permission when moist. A date pit splits into two halves; the ascending part emerges from one half, and the descending part sinks into the depths of the earth. Thus, from one small seed, two things emerge: a light ascending part and a heavy descending part, despite the unity of element, nature of the seed, water, air, and soil. Does this not indicate complete power and encompassing wisdom? How can this Powerful One be incapable of gathering scattered parts and assembling limbs?

A similar proof is in Surah Al-Hajj:

"And you see the earth barren; but when We send down upon it rain, it stirs and grows..." (Al-Hajj: 5)

Third Proof: Descent of Rain (Al-Ma')

"Have you seen the water that you drink? * Do you bring it down from the clouds, or do We send it down? * If We willed, We could make it bitter..." (Al-Waqi'ah: 68-70)

The Inference: Water is naturally heavy, so its ascent is contrary to its nature. This requires an overwhelming Power that overcomes nature and its properties, raising what is inclined to descend.

1. The water particles gathered after being dispersed.
2. Their movement by the winds.
3. Their descent precisely where needed, upon barren land. All these point to the permissibility of resurrection. If raising the heavy is possible (reversing nature), why is it impossible for life and moisture to appear from dry earth and water? If God can gather water particles after dispersion, why not gather earth particles after dispersion? If He can move the winds to bring homogeneous parts together, why not here? Furthermore, God created clouds out of necessity for people; similarly, creating the accountable ones again to attain their deserved reward and punishment is more fitting.

God expressed this proof elsewhere in Surah Al-A'raf, following the proof for Monotheism:

"Indeed, your Lord is Allah, who created the heavens and the earth in six days and then established Himself above the Throne, arranging the matter [of His creation]. There is no intercessor except after His permission. That is Allah, your Lord, so worship Him. Then will you not remember? * He is the one who sends the winds as good tidings, preceding His mercy, until, when they have carried heavy clouds, We drive them to a dead land and send down water therewith and bring forth thereby all [kinds of] fruits. Thus is the resurrection; perhaps you will remember." (Al-A'raf: 54, 57)

Fourth Proof: Kindling Fire (Nar)

"Have you seen the fire which you ignite? * Do you generate its tree, or do We generate? * We have made it a reminder..." (Al-Waqi'ah: 71-73)

The Inference: Fire is ascending, while the tree is descending. Fire is subtle, the tree is dense. Fire is luminous, the tree is dark. Fire is hot and dry, the tree is cold and moist. If God holds the luminous, fiery parts within the tree, He has combined these disparate things by His power. If He is not incapable of that, how can He be incapable of assembling and composing living beings? God mentioned this proof in Surah Ya-Sin:

"Who has made for you from the green tree fire..." (Ya-Sin: 80)

It is noted that in this Surah (Al-Baqarah), God mentioned water and fire. In Surah An-Naml, He mentioned air: "Or who guides you in the darknesses of the land and sea..." (An-Naml: 63). And in Al-Hajj, He mentioned the earth: "And you see the earth barren..." (Al-Hajj: 5). It is as if God demonstrated that the four elements, in all their states, testify to the possibility of resurrection.

Second Type of Proofs for Possibility: God states: Since I was capable of creating initially, it is more fitting that I am capable of recreating. This rational proof is clear, and God mentioned it in several places:

• In Al-Baqarah: "How do you disbelieve in Allah? While you were dead and He gave you life. Then He causes you to die, then He brings you to life [again] and then to Him you will return." (Al-Baqarah: 28)
• In Al-Isra': "And they say, 'When we are bones and dust, shall we indeed be resurrected as a new creation?' Say, 'Be stones or iron...'" (Al-Isra': 49-50) ... "Say, 'He who produced you the first time...'"
• In Al-'Ankabut: "Have they not seen how Allah begins creation and then repeats it? Indeed, that is easy for Allah." (Al-'Ankabut: 19)
• In Ar-Rum: "It is Allah who begins creation; then He repeats it, and that is [even] easier for Him. To Him belongs the highest attribute..." (Ar-Rum: 27)
• In Ya-Sin: "Say, 'He will give them life who produced them the first time...'" (Ya-Sin: 79)

Third Type of Proof: Inferring from the Creation of the Heavens and Earth:

• In Al-Isra': "Have they not seen that Allah, who created the heavens and the earth, is able to create the like of them?" (Al-Isra': 99)
• In Ya-Sin: "Is not He who created the heavens and the earth able to create the like of them? Yes, and He is the great Creator, the Knowing." (Ya-Sin: 81)
• In Al-Ahqaf: "Have they not seen that Allah, who created the heavens and the earth and did not fail in their creation, is able to give life to the dead? Yes, indeed He is over all things competent." (Al-Ahqaf: 33)
• In Qaf: "...When we have become dust and scattered bones? That is a distant return. * We know what the earth diminishes of them, and with Us is a preserved record. * Rather, they have denied the truth when it came to them, so they are in a confused state. * Have We become weary from the first creation? Rather, they are in confusion about a new creation." (Qaf: 3-15) (Note: The excerpt links the resurrection proof to the preceding verses about the earth and then quotes verse 15).

Fourth Type of Proof: The Necessity of Rewarding the Good and Punishing the Wicked:

• In Yunus: "To Allah is your return, all of you. That is a true promise of Allah. Indeed, He begins creation; then He repeats it that He may justly recompense those who have believed and done righteous deeds with equity." (Yunus: 4)
• In Taha: "Indeed, the Hour is coming; I conceal it so that every soul may be recompensed for what it strives." (Taha: 15)
• In Sad: "And We did not create the heaven and the earth and what is between them in vain. That is the assumption of those who disbelieve, so woe to those who disbelieve from the Fire. * Or shall We treat those who believe and do righteous deeds like the corrupters in the land? Or shall We treat the righteous as We treat the wicked?" (Sad: 27-28)

Fifth Type of Proof: Revival of the Dead in this World as Evidence for Resurrection: This includes the initial creation of Adam (peace be upon him), the story of the Cow: "So We said, 'Strike him with part of it [the cow].' Thus does Allah bring the dead to life..." (Al-Baqarah: 73). The request of Abraham: "My Lord, show me how You give life to the dead." (Al-Baqarah: 260). The one who passed by a ruined town: "Or [consider] the one who passed by a town while it was overturned upon its roofs..." (Al-Baqarah: 259). The miracles of John and Jesus (peace be upon them), where God used the same proof for their possibility as for resurrection: "And indeed, I created you before, when you were nothing." (Maryam: 9). The story of the Sleepers of the Cave: "...so that they may know that the promise of Allah is true and that the Hour [of judgment] is coming, there being no doubt about it." (Al-Kahf: 21). The story of Job (Ayyub), where God answered his prayer, indicating He revived them after death. The miracles performed by Jesus, such as reviving the dead: "...and [mention] when you were creating from clay the figure of a bird by My permission, then you breathed into it, and it became a bird by My permission..." (Al-Ma'idah: 110). And the verse: "Does man not remember that We created him before, when he was nothing?" (Maryam: 67).

These are the foundations of the proofs God mentioned in His Book for the validity of affirming resurrection. A detailed explanation of each verse will follow when we reach them, God willing.

Furthermore, God explicitly stated in the Qur'an that one who denies resurrection is a disbeliever. The proof is in the story of the man who entered his garden: "And he entered his garden while he was unjust to himself. He said, 'I do not think that this will perish ever, * Nor do I think the Hour will occur. And even if I should be returned to my Lord, I will surely find [there] a better return than this.' His companion said to him while he was conversing with him, 'Have you disbelieved in He who created you from dust...?'" (Al-Kahf: 35-37).

The Obligation of Disbelief (Kufr): The existence of this man in the first place was possible; if it were impossible, it would not have occurred initially. Since it occurred once, we know its existence is intrinsically possible. If God were incapable of recreating him, it would imply either His inability (since he is capable of existing) or His ignorance (since He could not distinguish the parts of one person from another). Denying God's ability or knowledge invalidates the affirmation of prophethood, thus necessarily leading to disbelief. And Allah knows best.

Issue 2: The Pre-existence of Paradise and Hellfire

These verses are explicit that Paradise and Hellfire are created. As for Hellfire, God described it as: "prepared for the disbelievers." This clearly indicates it is created. As for Paradise, God said in another verse: "prepared for the righteous." And here, He says: "And give good tidings to those who believe and do righteous deeds that they will have gardens beneath which rivers flow." Announcing the existence of this dominion and its attainment implies the existence of the owned object (the gardens) in the present time, indicating that Paradise and Hellfire are created.

Issue 3: The Perfection of Enjoyment in Paradise

The main sources of pleasure are dwelling, food, and marriage.

1. Dwelling: Described by: "gardens beneath which rivers flow."
2. Food: Described by: "Whenever they are provided with a provision of it, they will say, 'This is what we were provided with before.'"
3. Marriage: Described by: "And they will have therein purified spouses."

If these pleasures are accompanied by the fear of cessation, the enjoyment becomes tainted. Therefore, God clarified that this fear is removed by saying: "and they will abide therein forever." Thus, the verse indicates the perfection of enjoyment and delight.

Now, let us discuss the words of the verse:

First Question: To what is this command connected (via 'and')? Answers:

1. The command itself is not the element connected by 'and'; rather, the entire clause describing the reward of the believers is connected to the entire clause describing the punishment of the disbelievers. (Example: Zayd is punished with shackles and beating, and give good tidings to Amr of pardon and release.)
2. It is connected to the command: "So fear Allah..." (as if saying: O sons of Tamim, beware of the punishment for your deeds, and O so-and-so, give good tidings to the sons of Asad of My favor toward them.)
3. Zayd ibn Ali recited it as the passive form, "Wa-busshiru," connecting it to "prepared" (u'iddat).

Second Question: Who is commanded with "Give good tidings"? Answer: It could be the Messenger of Allah (PBUH), or it could be everyone, as the Prophet (PBUH) said: "Give good tidings to those who walk to the mosques in darkness of a complete light on the Day of Resurrection." This command is not specific to one person; rather, everyone capable of conveying the tidings is commanded. This view is superior because it indicates that this matter, due to its greatness and magnificence, deserves to be announced by everyone capable of doing so.

Third Question: What is Tabshir (giving good tidings)? Answer: It is news that brings forth joy. This is why jurists say if a master tells his slaves, "Whoever gives me the good news of so-and-so's arrival is free," and they inform him individually, the first one is freed because his news brought joy. If he had said, "Whoever informs me," they would all be freed because they all informed him. From this root comes Bashara (skin) and Tabashir al-Subh (the first signs of dawn's light). As for "So give them good tidings of a painful punishment," this is a form of mockery intended to increase the anger of the mocked, like a man telling his enemy, "Rejoice in the killing of your offspring and the plundering of your wealth!"

Issue 1: Faith and Deeds This verse indicates that deeds are not included in the definition of Iman (faith). When faith is mentioned, and then righteous deeds are connected to it via 'and' (wa), differentiation is required; otherwise, it would be redundant, which contradicts the general principle.

Issue 2: The Status of Deeds After Faith Some people interpret this verse literally: whoever brings faith and righteous deeds has Paradise. If asked about someone who had faith and deeds but then disbelieved, they would say this scenario is impossible because performing faith and obedience necessitates eternal reward, while performing disbelief necessitates eternal punishment; combining them is impossible. They also argue that the nullification of deeds (tahabut) is impossible for several reasons:

1. The two claims (reward and punishment) either contradict or do not. If they contradict, the arrival of the latter claim requires the removal of the former. If the removal of the former is caused by the arrival of the latter, it leads to a circular dependency (Dawr), which is impossible.
2. The conflict is mutual. It is not more logical for the former claim to be nullified by the latter than for the latter to be repelled by the persistence of the former. Thus, either both exist (impossible) or they repel each other, invalidating the concept of nullification.
3. If the two claims are equal (e.g., a claim for 10 units of reward meets a claim for 10 units of punishment), each unit of punishment claim can nullify each unit of reward claim. This leads to each unit of punishment having multiple independent causes for nullification, which is impossible. Alternatively, if each unit of punishment is specifically assigned to nullify only one unit of reward without a specific reason (mukhassis), this is impossible (preference without a preponderant reason). If the prior claim (reward) was greater, the subsequent claim (punishment) only removes part of it. It is impossible for some parts to be singled out for removal without a reason, or for all to be removed (impossible, as the remover must be less than the removed). If the subsequent claim (punishment) was lesser, either some parts of the prior claim are removed by some parts of the subsequent claim (impossible, as all parts of the subsequent claim are capable of removal, and singling out some parts is preference without a reason), or all parts of the subsequent claim act upon the prior claim, leading to multiple independent causes for one effect (impossible).

Therefore, based on these rational arguments, the concept of nullification is false. This leaves two possible answers:

1. The view of those who require concurrence (muwafaqah): The condition for the validity of faith is not dying upon disbelief. If one dies a disbeliever, what they did before was deemed disbelief. This view is clearly weak.
2. The view of the Ahlus-Sunnah (and our choice): The servant does not deserve eternal reward for obedience nor eternal punishment for sin as an obligatory rational entitlement. This view saves us from these complexities.

Issue 3: The Mu'tazilites' Argument on Entitlement The Mu'tazilites argue that obedience necessitates reward. Since the promise of gardens to the believers has not yet materialized factually, the verse must be interpreted metaphorically to mean the entitlement to the occurrence of the reward, as using the actual occurrence to mean entitlement is permissible metaphorically.

Issue 4: The Meaning of "Gardens" and "Rivers"

• Jannah (Garden): A plantation of densely packed, shaded palm trees and trees, where the structure revolves around concealment. It is named Jannah because of its density and shade, like a single covering (sitr) due to the intertwining of its branches. It is called the Abode of Reward because of the Jinan (shields/coverings) within it.
• Why are the Gardens indefinite (Jannat) but the Rivers definite (Al-Anhar)?
  • The Gardens are indefinite because Jannah is the name for the entire Abode of Reward, which comprises many gardens arranged in ranks according to the merits of the doers, with gardens for each class.
  • The Rivers are definite because the reference is to the genus (like saying someone has a garden with running water, figs, and grapes, referring to the known types), or the definite article refers to the rivers mentioned elsewhere, such as: "In them are rivers of water unaltered in taste, and rivers of milk whose taste never changes..." (Muhammad: 15).

This phrase could be a second description of the gardens, a predicate for an omitted subject, or a new, supplementary sentence. When God mentioned the gardens, the listener might wonder if the fruits are like earthly fruits or not.

First Question: The meaning of min thamara (of a fruit)?

1. It is like saying, "Whenever you eat of the pomegranate from your garden, I praise you." The preposition min indicates the origin (the provision originated from the gardens, and the provision originated from the fruit). Here, thamara does not mean a single apple or pomegranate, but the type of fruit.
2. It can be bayan (specification), like saying, "I saw from you a lion," meaning you are a lion. In this case, thamara could mean the type or even a single piece of fruit.

Second Question: How can they say, "This is what we were provided with before"? Because the essence (mahiyyah) is unified, even if the individuals differ numerically. Thus, it is correct to say "This is that" in terms of essence. The unity of species does not negate multiplicity in individuals. This is why when a son strongly resembles his father, people say he is the father.

Third Question: Is the comparison (mushabbah bihi) to earthly provisions or other provisions of Paradise?

1. Earthly Provisions:
   • Humans are familiar with and inclined toward the accustomed. If they see something unfamiliar, they recoil. If they encounter something of a familiar type, but superior to what they were accustomed to, their joy increases. Thus, when the people of Paradise see a pomegranate, which they knew on Earth, and find the pomegranate of Paradise sweeter and nobler, their joy is greater than if they saw something entirely new.
   • The phrase "Whenever they are provided" covers all instances, including the first time they are provided in Paradise. They must say, "This is what we were provided with before." Since there was no prior provision in Paradise to compare it to, it must refer to earthly provisions.
2. Provisions of Paradise: The comparison is to previous provisions within Paradise. This similarity refers to:
   • Equality of Reward: Their reward is equal in measure and degree at all times, neither increasing nor decreasing.
   • Similarity in Appearance: The second provision appears as if it were the first (as narrated from Al-Hasan). Some scholars say the similarity applies to taste as well; if a person enjoys something, their soul desires its like. If something perfectly similar appears, it is the height of pleasure. Others say that while the appearance is similar, the taste differs. Al-Hasan said a dish is brought, they eat, then another is brought, and they say, "This is what was brought before," and the angel says, "Eat, the color is the same, but the taste is different."
   • The View of the Gnostics (Ahl al-Ma'rifah): True happiness lies only in knowing the Essence of God, His attributes, and His actions (cherubic angels, spiritual angels, ranks of souls, the celestial realm). The human soul must become like a mirror facing the realm of holiness. These knowledges are acquired in this world, but full delight is hindered by bodily attachments. When this obstacle is removed after death, the great happiness and supreme bliss occur. Thus, every spiritual perfection found after death, they will say, "This is what I had in the world," indicating that the spiritual perfections attained in the Hereafter were present in the world, but in the world they did not yield pleasure and joy, whereas in the Hereafter they do, due to the removal of the obstacle.

First Question: To what does the pronoun "it" refer?

1. If the comparison is to earthly provisions, "it" refers to the provision given in both worlds (Earth and Hereafter): They are brought that type, similar to what they had in the world.
2. If the comparison is to provisions of Paradise, "it" refers to the provision in Paradise: They are brought that type in Paradise such that some resemble others.

Second Question: What is the structural position of "And they will be brought its like"? When the people of Paradise claimed similarity in provisions ("This is what we were provided with before"), God confirmed their claim by saying: "And they will be brought its like."

This refers to the purity of their bodies from menstruation, abnormal bleeding, and all impurities, and the purity of their spouses from all blameworthy characteristics, especially those specific to women. We interpret it comprehensively because both parties share a common element of purity.

The scholars of esoteric meaning (Isharah) point to matters implied by this:

1. If God forbade sexual intercourse with a woman during menstruation—an impurity for which she is excused—then it is more fitting that He forbids approaching the spouses in Paradise while one is stained with the impurities of sins, for which one is not excused.
2. If one who satisfies his desire lawfully is prevented from entering the mosque (accessible to both righteous and wicked), how can one who satisfies his desire unlawfully be permitted to enter Paradise, inhabited only by the purified? This is why Adam was expelled after his lapse.
3. If one whose garment has a speck of impurity cannot have his prayer accepted (according to Shafi'i), how can the prayer of one whose heart has impurities of sin—greater than the world—be accepted?

First Question: Why is the adjective mutahharat (purified, feminine plural) used, rather than mutahharun (purified, masculine plural) matching the noun azwaj (spouses, plural)? Both forms are eloquent in Arabic. It is said an-nisa'u fa'alna (the women did) and an-nisa'u fa'alat (the women did, singular feminine). The meaning is: "And they will have therein spouses, [who are] purified." (A group of purified spouses). Zayd ibn Ali recited it as mutahharat (feminine singular/plural), and 'Ubayd ibn 'Umayr recited it as mutahhirah (self-purifying).

Second Question: Why not simply tahirah (pure)? The form mutahharah implies that Someone purified them, and that Someone can only be Allah Almighty. This signifies the high status of the people of reward, as if it is said: "Allah Himself adorned them for the people of reward."

The Mu'tazilites argue that Khuld (abiding forever) here means permanent, unending continuation. They cite as proof: "And We did not grant to any man before you eternal life; so if you die, will they be eternal?" (Al-Anbiya': 34), where eternity is negated for humans, even though some were granted long lives. Thus, the negated Khuld must be permanent eternity. They also cite poetry supporting this.

Our companions (Ahlus-Sunnah) argue that Khuld means long duration, whether it lasts forever or not. They cite: "abiding therein forever (abada)." If abada were inherent in the meaning of Khuld, then adding it would be redundant. They also cite common usage: "So-and-so imprisoned so-and-so with an eternal imprisonment (habsan mukhalladan)," and in endowment deeds (Waqf), it is written as an "eternal endowment (waqfan mukhalladan)," even if the endowment's duration is limited by the lifespan of the endowment's beneficiary.

Others argue that reason dictates its permanence. If its permanence were not necessary, they might anticipate its cessation, and the fear of cessation would taint their blessing. The greater the blessing, the greater the impact of the fear of its end on the heart. This necessitates that the people of reward are never free from grief and regret. And Allah knows best.

Verse 26: "Indeed, Allah is not ashamed to present an example..."

This verse addresses the objection raised against the use of examples (mathal) in the Qur'an, specifically the example of the mosquito.

The Command to Give Good Tidings (Revisiting Verse 25): The command "And give good tidings" (Wa-bussher) is connected to the preceding discussion of punishment and reward.

The Example of the Mosquito (Verse 26): God states He is not ashamed to use an example, even one as small as a mosquito or smaller.

1. The Believers' Response: They know it is the truth from their Lord.
2. The Disbelievers' Response: They question the wisdom: "What did Allah intend by this as an example?"

God clarifies the effect of the example:

• Misleading: He misleads many by it.
• Guiding: He guides many by it.

Who is Misled?

"But He misleads thereby only the defiantly disobedient (al-fasiqin)."

The characteristics of the Fasiqin (defiantly disobedient) are then listed:

1. They break the covenant of Allah after its confirmation.
2. They sever what Allah has ordered to be joined (maintaining kinship ties, etc.).
3. They spread corruption on the earth.

Conclusion:

"Those are the losers (al-khasirun)."