ﲖ ﲗ ﲘ ﲙ ﲚ ﲛ ﲜ ﲝ ﲞ ﲟ ﲠ ﲡ ﲢ ﲣ ﲤ ﲥ ﲦ ﲧ ﲨ ﲩ ﲪ ﲫ ﲬ ﲭ ﲮ ﲯ ﲰ ﲱ ﲲ ﲳ
And We did certainly give Moses the Torah and followed up after him with messengers. And We gave Jesus, the son of Mary, clear proofs and supported him with the Pure Spirit. But is it [not] that every time a messenger came to you, [O Children of Israel], with what your souls did not desire, you were arrogant? And a party [of messengers] you denied and another party you killed.
Tafsir
Verse range: 2:87
This is another category of blessings that God bestowed upon them, which they repaid with disbelief and ugly deeds. After describing how the Jews violated God's command by killing each other and expelling some from their homes—thereby trading the Hereafter for this world—God intensifies the rebuke in this verse.
The Book mentioned is the Tawrat (Torah), which God gave to Moses all at once. It is narrated from Ibn Abbas that when the Torah was revealed, God commanded Moses to carry it, but he could not bear the weight. God then sent an angel for every letter, but they too could not carry it. So, God lightened it for Moses, and he carried it.
Regarding the Almighty's saying: {And We caused messengers to follow after him} (2:87), there are two issues:
Qaffayna means "We caused to follow," derived from something coming in its qafā (back/wake), similar to the tail of an animal. This is analogous to His saying: {Then We sent messengers after them one after another} (Al-Mu'minun: 44).
It is narrated that from the time after Moses (peace be upon him) until the days of Jesus (peace be upon him), messengers followed one another consecutively, and the Law (Shari'ah) remained one. This continued until the time of Jesus (peace be upon him), who came with a renewed Law.
They use the verse {And We caused messengers to follow after him} as evidence, arguing that it implies they were all on the same path regarding the Law, following one another within it.
Al-Qadi argued that the second messenger could not possibly follow the first messenger's Law without any addition or subtraction, especially since that Law was preserved and known through continuous transmission (tawātur) from the first. If this were the case, the second messenger would only be conveying what was already known or knowable from the first. Just as it is illogical for God to send a messenger without any Law at all (as logic dictates), the same applies here. Therefore, it must be established that the messengers who came after Moses (peace be upon him) must have brought a new Law, either reviving parts of the first Law that had become obscure or establishing a completely new one.
The Response: Why is it impossible that the purpose of sending these messengers was merely to enforce the previous Law upon the community, or for some other subtle benefit known only to God? In summary, the Qadi has only restated the claim: that these messengers must have brought a new Law or revived an obscured one. Was the dispute not precisely about this?
These messengers include: Joshua, Samuel, Simeon, David, Solomon, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezra, Ezekiel, Elijah, Elisha, Jonah, Zechariah, John, and others.
Regarding the Almighty's saying: {And We certainly gave Moses the Book, and We caused messengers to follow after him}, there are issues:
The reason God mentioned the messengers generally and then specified Jesus is that the messengers before him came with Moses' Law, thus following him. This is not the case with Jesus, as his Law abrogated most of Moses' Law.
It is said that Jesus' name in Syriac is Yashū', and Maryam means "servant." It is also said that Maryam in Hebrew is like Zīr among men. This is how the saying of Ru'bah is interpreted:
I asked Zīr whom Maryamah had not reached...
There are several interpretations for the Bayyināt:
Regarding the Almighty's saying: {And We supported him with the Holy Spirit}, there are issues:
It is read as Ayyadnāhu (with tashdīd on the dāl). Ibn Kathir recited al-Qudus (القدس) with abbreviation (lightening the sīn), while the rest recited it with tashdīd (doubling the sīn). Both are linguistic variations, like ru'b and ru'b (fear).
There are several opinions regarding the Spirit:
It should be noted that applying the name Rūḥ to Gabriel, the Injīl, or the Greatest Name is metaphorical (majāz). The literal Rūḥ is the air that circulates through a human being's body and passages. Since these three entities are not literally that, each is called Rūḥ by way of analogy (tashbīh): just as the spirit is the cause of a man's life, Gabriel is the cause of the hearts' life through knowledge, the Injīl is the cause of the manifestation and life of the Laws, and the Greatest Name is the means to achieve objectives.
However, the similarity between the literal meaning of Rūḥ and Gabriel is the most complete for several reasons:
Regarding the Almighty's saying: {Is it that whenever a messenger brought you something your souls did not desire, you grew arrogant?} (2:87), this is the ultimate condemnation of them. The Jews of Bani Israel would deny any messenger whose message contradicted their desires. If they had the opportunity to kill him, they would. This was because they sought worldly elevation, leadership over the common people, and unjustly taking their wealth. The messengers invalidated these pursuits, so they denied them, misleading their masses into believing the messengers were liars, using distortion and misinterpretation as justification. Some were arrogant toward the prophets with the arrogance of Iblis toward Adam.
Regarding the Almighty's saying: {So you disbelieved a party and a party you would kill} (2:87). One might ask: Why was it not said, "and a party you killed"? The answer is twofold:
