Tafsir of Al-Baqarah 2:55-56

Al-Baqarah: (55-56) And [recall] when you said, "O Moses...

This is the sixth blessing mentioned. Its significance can be understood in several ways:

1. Context of Repentance: It is as if God is saying: "Remember My favor when you told Moses, 'We will never believe you until we see Allah plainly,' and then the thunderbolt seized you, and We revived you so that you might repent from your transgression, be saved from punishment, and attain reward."
2. Warning to the Prophet's Companions: It serves as a warning to those during the time of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) against committing acts that would warrant them being treated as those people were.
3. Parallelism in Denial: It likens their denial of the Prophet Muhammad's (PBUH) miracles to their ancestors' denial of Moses' prophethood, despite witnessing those clear, great signs. It indicates that God did not manifest similar signs through the Prophet (PBUH) because He knew that if He did, they would deny them, and upon denial, they would deserve punishment just as their ancestors did.
4. Consolation for the Prophet: It offers solace to the Prophet (PBUH) regarding the opposition he faced, strengthening his heart to endure with patience, just as the Messengers of firm resolve (Ulu al-'Azm) endured.
5. Refuting the Argument of the People of the Book: It removes the doubt of those who claim that if the prophethood of Muhammad (PBUH) were true, the People of the Book would be the first to believe because they knew of his tidings. This is because God showed that their ancestors, despite witnessing dazzling signs of Moses' prophethood, constantly relapsed, challenged him, and opposed him. Therefore, one should not be surprised by their opposition to Muhammad (PBUH), even if they find reports of his prophethood in their books.
6. Proof of Revelation: Since Muhammad (PBUH), who was completely unlettered and never engaged in learning, reported these stories, it must have been through divine revelation.

There are two scholarly opinions concerning this event:

The First Opinion: This incident occurred after God commanded the worshippers of the calf to kill themselves.

Muhammad ibn Ishaq narrated that when Moses returned from the Mount (Tur) and saw his people worshipping the calf, and after he addressed his brother and the Samiri, burned the calf, and cast it into the sea, he chose seventy of the best men from his people. When they went out to the Mount, they told Moses: "Ask your Lord to let us hear His speech." Moses asked, and God answered him. When he approached the mountain, a pillar of cloud descended and covered the entire mountain. The cloud drew near Moses until it entered him. He told the people: "Enter and receive [the revelation]." Whenever God spoke to Moses, a brilliant light would appear on his forehead that no human being could look at. The people heard God speaking to Moses, commanding him what to do and what not to do. When the conversation ended, the cloud withdrew from Moses. The people then said: "We will never believe you until we see Allah plainly." The thunderbolt seized them, and they all died. Moses stood up, raising his hands to the sky, supplicating, "O my Lord! I chose seventy men from the Children of Israel to be witnesses for the acceptance of their repentance, yet when I return to them, not one of them will be with me. What will they say?" Moses continued supplicating until God restored their spirits. God then demanded repentance from the Children of Israel for worshipping the calf, and Moses said: "No, unless they kill themselves."

The Second Opinion: This incident occurred after the killing.

Al-Saddi narrated that when the Children of Israel repented from worshipping the calf by killing themselves, God commanded Moses to go to them with some of the Children of Israel who were apologizing for worshipping the calf. Moses chose seventy men. When they reached the Mount, they said: "We will never believe you until we see Allah plainly." The thunderbolt seized them, and they died. Moses stood up weeping and said: "O Lord, what shall I say to the Children of Israel? I commanded them to kill themselves, and then I chose these from the remainder. If I return to them and none of them are with me, what shall I tell them?" God revealed to Moses: "These seventy are among those who took the calf as a god." Moses then said: $\text{{It is not but Your trial...} (Al-A'raf: 155)} until \text{{Indeed, we have turned to You in repentance} (Al-A'raf: 56)}. Then God revived them. They stood up and looked at each other to see how God revived them. They said: "O Moses, you never ask God for anything except that He grants it to you. So ask Him to make us prophets." Moses asked for that, and God answered his supplication.

It should be noted that the verse does not indicate a preference for one opinion over the other, nor does it clarify whether those who asked to see God were the same ones who worshipped the calf or others.

This means: "We will not believe you or acknowledge your prophethood until we see Allah jahratan (plainly/openly)."

Al-Kashshaf's author said: Jahratan is a masdar (verbal noun) derived from the verb jahara (to recite or supplicate loudly). It is as if seeing with the eye is an open declaration of sight, while seeing with the heart is done secretly and supported by the masdar because it is a type of sight. Thus, it is in the accusative case (mansub) because of its verb, similar to how qurfaṣā’ (squatting) is accusative due to the verb of sitting, or it is a ḥāl (circumstantial accusative) meaning "possessors of plain sight." It was also read as jahratan (with fatḥa on the hā’), which is either a masdar like ghalabah, or a plural of jāhir (one who speaks openly).

Al-Qaffal said: The root of jahra comes from manifestation. One says jahartu al-shay’a (I revealed the thing) if one uncovered it. One says jahartu al-b’ir (I cleared the well) if its water was covered with mud, and one cleaned it until the water appeared. One also uses ṣawtun jahīr (a loud voice) and rajulun jahūrī al-ṣawt (a man with a loud voice). One says wajhun jahīr (a radiant face) if it is outwardly beautiful. They used jahratan for emphasis so that no one might assume that what was meant by "seeing" was mere knowledge or imagination (as in the case of a sleeper).

There are several points of discussion here:

First Inquiry: The Mu'tazila used this as evidence that seeing Allah is impossible.

Al-Qadi Abd al-Jabbar argued: If seeing Him were permissible, then their request would have been for something permissible, and thus they should not have been punished, just as they were not punished when they requested a change of food (from manna and quails to earthly produce) in the verse: \text{{We will never be patient with one kind of food. So invoke for us your Lord to bring forth for us of what the earth grows} (Al-Baqarah: 61)}.

Abu al-Husayn, in his book Al-Taṣaffuḥ, stated that God only mentioned the request for vision when He intended to magnify its gravity, citing three instances:

1. This verse: If seeing Him were permissible, their statement, "We will never believe you until we see Allah plainly," would be like other nations asking their prophets for a miracle, such as raising the dead. In such cases, the request is not magnified, and the people are not struck by thunderbolts.
2. The verse in Surah An-Nisa (4:153): \text{{The People of the Book ask you to make a book descend to them from heaven. Indeed, they asked of Moses greater than that, and said, "Show us Allah plainly." So the thunderbolt seized them for their wrongdoing.}} God termed this request ẓulm (wrongdoing) and punished them immediately. If seeing Him were permissible, their request would be like asking for an additional miracle.
   • Objection: Does not God treat sending down a book from heaven similarly to asking to see Him, in that both are considered transgression (ʿutūw)? If sending down the book is not inherently impossible, then asking to see Him should not be either.
   • Reply: The apparent meaning suggests that both actions were impossible to be acted upon (i.e., God would not fulfill them). Therefore, the impossibility of fulfilling the request for the book remains, while the impossibility of fulfilling the request for vision remains as well.
3. The verse in Surah Al-Furqan (25:21): \text{{And those who do not expect the meeting with Us say, "Why are not angels sent down to us, or why do we not see our Lord?" Indeed, they have thought too highly of themselves and have been insolent with great insolence.}} If seeing Him were permissible, and it is one of the greatest benefits for the one who receives the reward, then seeking it would not be considered ʿutūw (insolence), just as asking God to revive the dead through one's supplication is not insolence.

Conclusion on the Mu'tazila Argument: All these points share one core idea: If seeing Him were permissible, asking for it would not be considered insolence or wrongdoing, which is false.

• Objection: Asking for other benefits, like changing food, was permissible, so the asker was not insolent. The same applies to asking for other miracles.
• Reply: Why must you assume that asking for any permissible thing is not insolent? Relying on mere analogies in such matters is not appropriate for scholars. Furthermore, God never mentioned the request for vision without coupling it with something permissible whose fulfillment we agree upon—either sending down a book or sending down angels. He attributed the description of ʿutūw to the combination of both requests. This strongly indicates that the description of ʿutūw was not due to the requested object being impossible.

As for Abu al-Husayn's statement that the apparent meaning implies all requests are impossible, so we act upon some and leave others: We reply that you have provided no proof that ʿuṭūw only occurs when the request is impossible. You relied only on analogies, which are unhelpful here. Thus, your claim that the apparent meaning implies all requests are impossible falls apart.

Therefore, the Mu'tazila's argument is refuted.

If someone asks: What is the reason for magnifying the request for vision?

The answer involves several possibilities:

1. Seeing Allah is only possible in the Hereafter; therefore, requesting it in this world is reprehensible.
2. God's decree is that the obligation (Taklīf) is lifted from a servant when he sees God. Thus, requesting vision is requesting the removal of obligation. This is more pertinent according to the Mu'tazila, as vision entails necessary knowledge, and necessary knowledge negates obligation.
3. Since the proofs of the claimant's truthfulness were complete, requesting additional proofs is obstinacy (taʿannut), and the obstinate one deserves reprimand.
4. It is possible that God knows there is a significant benefit in preventing people from seeing Him in this world. Therefore, requesting it in this world is deemed reprehensible, just as God knows there is great harm in sending down books or angels from heaven, which is why requesting those was also reprehensible. (And Allah knows best.)

Second Inquiry: Regarding the Thunder (Ṣāʿiqah)

There are two opinions among commentators:

1. It was death. This is the view of Al-Hasan and Qatadah. They cite the verse: \text{{And the Trumpet will be blown, and whoever is in the heavens and whoever is on the earth will fall down dead, except whom Allah wills} (Az-Zumar: 68)}. This view is weak for several reasons:
   • The verse states: \text{{Then the thunderbolt seized you while you were looking}}. If the thunderbolt was death, it would be impossible for them to be looking at the thunderbolt itself.
   • God said concerning Moses: \text{{And Moses fell down in a swoon} (Al-A'raf: 143)}. He affirmed the ṣaʿqah for Moses, yet Moses was not dead, because God said: \text{{Then he awoke}}. Awakening only occurs after fainting (ghashy), not after death.
   • The term ṣāʿiqah refers to the agent that causes the stunning/death.
   • The punishment is greater when it comes while they are witnessing it, which is why it says: \text{{while you were looking}}, highlighting the severity of the punishment.

2. It was the cause of death. This is the view of the verified scholars (muḥaqqiqūn). This is supported by the verse in Al-A'raf: \text{{Then the earthquake seized them}}. They differed on what this cause was, in three ways:
   • It was fire that descended from the sky, burning them.
   • It was a loud cry that came from the sky.
   • God sent down troops whose sound caused them to fall down dead, stunned, for a day and a night.

Revival necessarily occurs after death, as in the verse: \text{{So We cast a sleep over them in the cave for a number of years. Then We awakened them that We might know which of the two parties was most precise in calculating the time they had remained} (Al-Kahf: 11-12)}.

• Objection: Did Moses (AS) fall under this address?
• Reply: No, for two reasons:
  1. This is a direct address (mushāfahah), so it should not include Moses (AS).
  2. If it included Moses, it would necessitate specifying his condition, as God said regarding him: \text{{Then he awoke}}. The term ifāqah (awakening) is not used for death. Ibn Qutaybah claimed Moses died, which is incorrect based on our previous explanation.

This means God revived them in the world of the living so that they could be held accountable, believe, and rectify the sins they committed. The fact that they were held accountable is indicated by \text{{so that you might be grateful}}. The term shukr (gratitude) encompasses all acts of obedience, as in the verse: \text{{Work, O family of David, in gratitude} (Saba': 13)}.

• Objection: How is it permissible to hold them accountable after God caused them to die? If this were permissible, why is it not permissible to hold people accountable in the Hereafter after they are resurrected?
• Reply: What prevents accountability in the Hereafter is not the death and subsequent revival. Rather, it is that on the Day of Judgment, they will be compelled to know God, the pleasures of Paradise, and the pains of Hellfire. After this necessary knowledge (ʿilm ḍarūrī), there is no accountability. Since this is the barrier in the Hereafter, it is not impossible that those whom God struck dead by the thunderbolt were not compelled to such knowledge. If that is the case, it is valid to hold them accountable afterward, and their death and revival would be like sleep or fainting.

Al-Hasan Al-Basri narrated that God cut short their lifespan by this death and then returned them, similar to how He revived the one who passed by a ruined town and revived those who left their homes by the thousands fearing death. This view is weak because God only decreed their death by the thunderbolt after having written and informed them of it. Thus, that time became the term for their first death, and the subsequent time became the term for their life.

Regarding the Mu'tazila's argument based on \text{{so that you might be grateful}} that God intends belief from everyone, our refutation has been stated repeatedly and requires no repetition.