Al-Furqan (The Criterion) Verses 17–20

Know that His saying, the Exalted, {And the Day He gathers them} refers back to His saying: {And they have taken besides Him other gods} (Al-Furqan: 3). Herein lie several issues:

Issue 1: The Recitation of {He gathers them}

Both readings are attested: {Yuḥsharuhum} (He gathers them) with the nūn (we) and yā’ (they). It was also read as {Nuḥsharuhum} (We gather them) with a kasra (i-vowel) on the shīn.

Issue 2: The Identity of What is Worshipped

The apparent meaning of {and what they worship} suggests idols. However, the apparent meaning of His saying: {Then He will say, "Did you mislead My servants...?} suggests that living beings were worshipped, such as angels, the Messiah, and others, because misleading or not misleading them is valid. This difference in interpretation led to disagreement.

1. Interpretation 1: Idols (Statues) Some people interpreted it as referring to idols. If one asks: "An idol is inanimate matter; how can God Almighty address it, and how can it be capable of answering?" Two explanations are offered:
   • God Almighty creates life within them, enabling them to be addressed and to reply.
   • The speech is not literal vocal utterance but rather the "language of the state" (lisān al-ḥāl), similar to what some mention regarding the glorification of inanimate objects or the speech of limbs, as in the saying: "Ask the earth: Who dug your rivers and planted your trees?" If it doesn't answer you verbally, it answers you through contemplation!

2. Interpretation 2: Rational Beings (Angels, Jesus, Uzair) The majority asserted that the intended meaning is angels, Jesus, and Uzair (peace be upon them). They support this by citing: {And the Day He gathers them all, then He will say to the angels, "Was it these that they used to worship?"} (Saba: 40). If it is objected that the word (mā) (what) is not used for rational beings, they respond in two ways:
   • We do not accept that the word mā is exclusively for the non-rational, as they used man (who) for the non-rational as well.
   • It is intended as a description, meaning "and their worshipped ones" (wa-maʿbūdihim). This is supported by verses like {And the heaven and He Who constructed it} (Ash-Shams: 5) and {Nor are you worshippers of what I worship} (Al-Kafirun: 3), which only make sense under one of these two interpretations.

In any case, the objection is dismissed.

Issue 3: The Nature of Misguidance and Divine Decree

The essence of the discussion is that God Almighty gathers the worshipped entities and asks them: Did you cause My servants to stray from the path of truth, or did they stray by themselves?

The Mu'tazila Position: They argue that this verse refutes those who claim God truly misleads His servants. If that were the case, the correct response from the worshipped entities would have been: "Our God, there is a third party here, which is the truth: it is You who misled us." Since they did not say this, but rather attributed the misguidance to themselves, it proves that God does not mislead any of His servants.

• Rebuttal: They did not entirely avoid this third possibility. They said: {But You gave enjoyment to them and their fathers until they forgot the reminder} (Al-Furqan: 27). This explicitly states that their misguidance resulted from what God did to them—He gave them and their fathers enjoyment in this world.
• Counter-Rebuttal: If that were the case, it would imply that God is veiled or constrained by those worshipped entities. The goal, however, is to leave the disbeliever refuted, silenced, and convicted. This concludes the Mu'tazila argument.

The Ash'ari Position (Our Companions): They respond that the power to mislead, if it is not conducive to guidance, is attributed to God. If it is conducive to guidance, its preference as the source of misguidance over guidance requires a determining factor (murajjiḥ) from God. Therefore, the question returns to God's role. While the apparent meaning of this verse might lean toward the worshipped entities, it is contradicted by other apparent meanings that support our view.

Issue 4: Further Inquiries on the Question

The apparent meaning of the verse indicates that this questioning comes from God Almighty, although it is possible it comes from the angels by God's command. Several questions remain regarding the verse:

1. The Use of "You" (Antum): What is the benefit of saying {Did you mislead My servants...?} instead of just asking, "Did they stray from the path?"
   • Answer: The question is not about the existence of the act (for if it didn't exist, the reprimand would be pointless), but about the agent (fāʿil). Therefore, the agent must be mentioned and preceded by the interrogative particle so that it is known who is being questioned.

2. The Purpose of Questioning When God Knows: Since God Almighty eternally knew the state of those being questioned, what is the purpose of the question?
   • Answer: This is a form of reprimand (taqrīʿ) directed at the polytheists, similar to when He said to Jesus: {Did you say to the people, "Take me and my mother as two gods besides Allah"?} (Al-Ma'idah: 116). Furthermore, when those worshipped entities exonerate themselves and attribute the misguidance to the people, the entities' disavowal intensifies the regret and bewilderment of the polytheists.

3. Grammar of "Strayed from the Path": He said {Or did they stray from the path?} The grammatical analogy would suggest ḍallū ʿan al-sabil (they strayed from the path).
   • Answer: That is the origin, but when a person reaches the extreme limit of negligence and lack of caution, it is said ḍalla al-sabīl (the path strayed [from them/because of them]).

The Response: {Exalted are You!} (Subḥānak)

God Almighty recounts their response. There are several interpretations of their utterance {Subḥānak}:

1. Astonishment: They express astonishment at what they were asked, as they are angels and prophets, protected from error, which is specific to Iblis and his party.
2. Affirmation of Purity: They spoke Subḥānak to indicate that they are the ones who constantly glorify (purify and sanctify) God, so how could it be fitting for them to mislead His servants?
3. Exaltation from Rivals: They intended to purify God from having any equals, whether idols, prophets, or angels.
4. Exaltation from Misconception: They intended to purify God from the notion that His purpose in asking was to gain knowledge or to harm someone innocent of the crime. Rather, He only asked to reprimand and rebuke the disbelievers.

Regarding His Saying: {It was not fitting for us to take besides You any protectors}

This contains several issues:

The common recitation is {an nattakhidha} (that we take) with fatḥa on the nūn and kasra on the khā’. Abu Ja'far and Ibn 'Amir recited it with rafʿ (raising) of the nūn and fatḥa on the khā’ (passive voice: an nuttakhidha).

Al-Zajjaj stated that reading it with ḍamm (u) on the nūn is incorrect because the particle min (from/of) enters this structure only when it relates to the first object, not the object describing the state. One says: mā ittakhadhtu min aḥadin waliyyan (I did not take anyone as a protector), but not mā ittakhadhtu aḥadan min waliyyan.

The author of Al-Kashshāf stated that ittakhadha can take one object (e.g., ittakhadha waliyyan) or two objects (e.g., ittakhadha fulānan waliyyan), as in {And Allah took Abraham as an intimate friend} (An-Nisa: 125).

• The first recitation (active voice) relates to one object: {min awliyā’} (any protectors). The min is added for emphasis of the negation, meaning "We should not take protectors."
• The second recitation (passive voice) relates to two objects: the first is the nā’ib al-fāʿil (deputy subject), and {min awliyā’} is min of specification (tab'īḍ), meaning "We should not take some protectors." The indefinite nature of awliyā’ refers to specific protectors, namely the jinn and the idols.

Several interpretations are mentioned:

1. The Strongest View: If we do not see it as fitting for us to take protectors besides You, how could we invite others to do so?
2. Avoiding Imitation: It was not fitting for us to be like the devils in their alliance (tawallī) with the disbelievers, just as the disbelievers ally with them. God says: {So fight the allies of Satan} (An-Nisa: 76), meaning the disbelievers. Also, {And those who disbelieve, their allies are the Taghut} (Al-Baqarah: 257) (according to Abu Muslim).
3. Without Your Consent: It was not fitting for us to take protectors without Your pleasure (riḍā). Since we knew You would not be pleased, we did not do it. This involves deleting a muḍāf (added noun) and substituting the muḍāf ilayhi (the noun it modifies).
4. Servants' Conduct: The angels said: They are Your servants. It is not fitting for Your servants to take a protector or a beloved besides Your permission, let alone a servant taking another servant as a god for himself.
5. Addressing the Passive Reading: If we adopt Abu Ja'far's recitation (passive), the objection is removed. If it is objected that this recitation is invalid because others cannot take them as protectors, the response is: It means we are not fit for that role, so how could we invite them to worship us?
6. Idols' Defense: This is the statement of the idols themselves: It is not right for us to be among the worshippers, so how can we claim to be worshipped?

The verse indicates that allegiance (walāyah) and enmity (ʿadāwah) are only permissible with God's permission. Any allegiance based purely on personal inclination or natural disposition contradicts the Divine Law.

Regarding His Saying: {But You gave enjoyment to them and their fathers until they forgot the reminder, and they were a ruined people}

This contains several issues:

The meaning is that You, our God, greatly increased the blessings upon them and their fathers. These blessings necessitate gratitude and faith, not turning away and ingratitude. The purpose here is to clarify that they strayed by their own doing, not by our misleading. If it were not for their manifest obstinacy, given the clarity of this proof, turning away from obedience to God would be impossible.

Others say this statement is an allusion to what Moses (peace be upon him) stated clearly: {This is but a trial from You} (Al-A'raf: 155). This is because the respondent said: "My God, You are the One Who gave him all his worldly desires until he became drowned in the sea of passions. His immersion in them prevented him from turning toward Your obedience and engaging in Your service; thus, it is but a trial from You."

Adh-Dhikr refers to the remembrance of God, faith in Him, the Qur'an, the religious laws, or whatever brings them good remembrance in this world and the Hereafter.

Abu 'Ubaydah said: One says rajulun būr (a ruined man), two men bawr, and a people bawr. The same applies to the feminine. It means "perished" or "destroyed." It is also said bā’ir and bawr, similar to hā’ir and hūr. Perishing (al-bawār) is destruction.

Our companions used this verse in the discussion of Divine Decree and Predestination. The intended meaning is that they were among those whom God decreed in the Hereafter would face punishment and ruin. If someone whom God decreed with punishment in the Hereafter—and this was known, established in the Preserved Tablet, and known to the angels—were to become a believer, then the true report would become false, knowledge would become ignorance, the writing in the Preserved Tablet would become void, and the belief of the angels would become ignorance. All of this is impossible, and anything leading to the impossible is impossible. Therefore, the occurrence of faith from him is impossible. This proves that the fortunate cannot become wretched, and the wretched cannot become fortunate.

Alternatively, they mentioned that God gave them the means of misguidance—granting their desires in this world and their immersion in them. The verse indicates that this means reached a level necessitating ruin, as the mention of ruin immediately follows this cause. Thus, the result is that God did something to the disbeliever that made it impossible for him to abandon disbelief. At that point, it becomes clear that the fortunate cannot become wretched, and the wretched cannot become fortunate.

Regarding His Saying: {They have certainly denied what you say}

It was recited as {yaqūlūn} (they say) with the yā’ (they) and the tā’ (you).

• The recitation with the tā’ means: They have denied you in your statement that they (the idols) are gods.
• The recitation with the yā’ (dotted from below) means: They have denied you in your statement, {Exalted are You!} (i.e., they denied your glorification of God). This is analogous to saying, "I wrote with a pen."

Regarding His Saying: {so you cannot avert [it] nor receive [help]}

It was also recited as {yastatīʿūn} (they can) with the yā’ and the tā’.

• If the tā’ is used: It means you, O disbelievers, cannot avert the punishment from yourselves. Some say ṣarf (aversion) means repentance.
• If the yā’ is used: It means your gods cannot avert the punishment from you, nor can they devise a plan (yaḥtālū) for you.

Regarding His Saying: {And whoever commits injustice among you, We will make him taste a great punishment}

This contains two issues:

It was recited as {yadhūqahu} (We will make him taste) with a yā’, where the pronoun refers either to God Almighty or to the injustice (ẓulm).

The Mu'tazila used this verse to definitively assert the threat of punishment for major sinners. They argue:

1. The conditional man (whoever) in a conditional context implies generality.
2. The disbeliever is unjust, based on {Indeed, association [of partners with Allah] is a great injustice} (Luqman: 13).
3. The sinner (fāsiq) is unjust, based on {And whoever does not repent, then those are the wrongdoers} (Al-Hujurat: 11).
4. Therefore, this verse proves that the sinner is not pardoned but will inevitably be punished.

The Response:

1. We do not accept that the conditional man implies absolute generality in this context; this is discussed in the principles of jurisprudence.
2. Even if we grant generality, is it definitive (qaṭʿī) or merely apparent (ẓāhirī)? Claiming definitiveness is debatable, as we observe in common usage that general forms often refer only to the majority or specific groups. Evidence: {Indeed, those who disbelieve, whether you warn them or do not warn them, they will not believe} (Al-Baqarah: 6). Yet, many of those who disbelieved have since believed. The only way to reconcile this is to say that although {those who disbelieve} implies generality, the intended meaning is the dominant case or specific individuals. In either case, the implication of general terms is often apparent, not conclusive, which does not negate the possibility of pardon.
3. Even if we grant definitive implication, we agree that {And whoever commits injustice among you} is conditional upon nothing existing that removes the consequence. We ask: Why do you assume nothing exists to remove it? Pardon, in our view, is one of the things that removes it.
4. Even if we grant the verse implies what they say, it is contradicted by verses of promise, such as {Indeed, those who have believed and done righteous deeds—they will have the Gardens of Paradise as a lodging} (Al-Kahf: 107).
   • Objection: Verses of threat are stronger because the hand of a thief is cut off as a deterrent. If someone is not deserving of punishment, cutting off his hand as a deterrent is not permissible. Thus, if it is established that he deserves punishment, it proves that the right to reward has been nullified (since combining the right to both is impossible).
   • Rebuttal: We do not accept that the thief's hand is cut off purely as a deterrent. See how if he repents, his hand is still cut off, not as a deterrent, but as a trial/test (miḥnah). Setting aside these high levels, the address {And whoever commits injustice among you} is directed at specific, determined people. Even if God does not pardon them, why do you assume He does not pardon others?

Regarding His Saying: {And We did not send before you any messengers except that they ate food and walked in the marketplaces}

This contains several issues:

This is the answer to their objection: {What is the matter with this messenger that he eats food and walks in the marketplaces?} (Al-Furqan: 7). God Almighty clarified that this is a continuous custom for all His messengers; thus, there is no basis for this criticism.

Grammatically, it should be {Alā inna-hum} (with fatḥa on the alif) because inna is in the middle of the sentence, whereas the kasra form is only appropriate at the beginning. Several explanations are offered for this:

1. Al-Zajjaj: The clause following illā (except) is an adjective for an omitted noun. The meaning is: "We did not send any messengers before you except [messengers who] ate food and walked." It was omitted because the phrase {min al-mursalīn} (of the messengers) indicates it. Similar to {And there is none of us except that he has a known station} (As-Saffat: 164), meaning "no one of us."
2. Al-Farrā’: Inna is a complement (ṣilah) to a dropped relative pronoun, satisfied by the phrase {min al-mursalīn}. The meaning is: "Except those [messengers] who have a known station," similar to {And there is none of you except he will pass over it} (Maryam: 71), meaning "except one who will pass over it." According to Al-Zajjaj, the noun is omitted; according to Al-Farrā’, the relative pronoun is omitted. The Basrans do not permit omitting the relative pronoun while retaining the complement clause.
3. Ibn Al-Anbārī: The inna is vocalized with kasra after the exception by implicitly adding the conjunction wāw, as if saying: illā wa-innahum (except, and indeed they...).
4. Some Scholars: The meaning is: "Except the saying: Innahum..."

It was recited as {yumashshūn} (passive voice), meaning their needs or the people cause them to walk. If it were recited as {yamshūn} (active voice), it would be more appropriate, were it not for the established narration.

Regarding His Saying: {And We have made some of you a trial for others}

This contains several issues:

1. The Elite vs. The Humble: This refers to the leaders of the polytheists and the poor companions. If a noble saw a humble person embrace Islam before him, he felt too proud to follow, thus remaining in disbelief to avoid being preceded in virtue by the humble one. Evidence: {If it had been good, they would not have preceded us to it} (Al-Ahqaf: 11) (According to Al-Kalbī, Al-Farrā’, and Al-Zajjaj).
2. General Application: This is general for all people. Abu Ad-Dardā’ narrated from the Prophet (PBUH) that he said: "Woe to the scholar from the ignorant, woe to the ruler from the subjects, woe to the subjects from the ruler, woe to the master from the slave, woe to the strong from the weak, and woe to the weak from the strong—some are a trial for others." He then recited this verse.
3. Afflicted vs. Well-Cared For: This refers to those afflicted with hardship and those in well-being. One asks: Why was I not made like others in creation, disposition, intellect, knowledge, provision, or lifespan? (According to Ibn Abbas and Al-Hasan).
4. The Messengers and Their People: This is a refutation against them for singling out Muhammad (PBUH) for prophethood despite his equality with them in humanity and its attributes. The messengers were tested by those sent to them and their various harms, as stated: {And you will surely hear from those who were given the Scripture before you and from those who associated partners [with Allah] much abuse} (Al 'Imran: 186). The recipients are also harmed by the messenger due to envy and the messenger's obligation to service, self-sacrifice, and wealth, after having been a respected leader. The best approach is to apply the verse universally, as there is a common element among all these cases.

Our companions argue that the verse proves Divine Decree and Predestination because God said: {And We have made some of you a trial for others}.

Al-Jubba'i argued that this "making" (jaʿl) means "designation," as one says about a thief, "So-and-so is a thief," meaning "God designated him as such." This interpretation is weak because God attributes the making to the description of being a trial, not merely to the judgment of being so. Reason dictates that the doer of the cause is the doer of the effect. If God creates a person with a temperament of yellow bile and heat, creates anger within him, and then creates the perception that alerts him to the infuriating thing, the one who created this combination is necessarily the doer of the anger, and similarly for envy and other dispositions and actions. Thus, it becomes clear that He is the One Who made some a trial for others.

Even if we accept Al-Jubba'i's interpretation that jaʿl means "judgment," if the judged entity were to change, it would necessitate a change in God's judgment from truth to falsehood, which is impossible. If that judgment cannot change, then the judged entity cannot change either. At this point, the argument for Divine Decree and Predestination becomes clear.

When the people criticized the Prophet (PBUH) for eating food and walking in the marketplaces and for being poor, these criticisms were like idle chatter. Since the proof of prophethood was established, none of these matters could detract from it. The Prophet (PBUH) was harmed by their insults and their utterance of corrupt, flawed speech, as they did not understand the proper response. Therefore, God commanded him to be patient with all that harm, explaining that He made some of creation a trial for others.

Regarding His Saying: {Can you be patient? And your Lord is ever, Seeing.}

This contains three issues:

The Mu'tazila argue that if {And We have made some of you a trial for others} were merely a statement of fact, the subsequent command {Can you be patient?} would not follow, as commanding the incapable is impermissible.

The meaning is: Can you be patient regarding the affliction? You have already learned what God promised the patient. {And your Lord is ever, Seeing} means He is the Knower of who is patient and who is not, and He will recompense each according to what they deserve of reward and punishment.

The question {Can you be patient?} is for affirmation (taqrīr), placed after mentioning the trial in the same position as asking "Which of you is best in deed?" after mentioning the test: {that He may test you—who of you is best in deed} (Al-Mulk: 2).

Verses 21–24