Qurani app iconQuraniQuran, hadith, fiqh, prayer, and audio in one place
Browse

Tafsir of Al-Furqan 25:3

Surah Al-Furqan 25:3

ﱁ ﱂ ﱃ ﱄ ﱅ ﱆ ﱇ ﱈ ﱉ ﱊ ﱋ ﱌ ﱍ ﱎ ﱏ ﱐ ﱑ ﱒ ﱓ ﱔ ﱕ ﱖ

But they have taken besides Him gods which create nothing, while they are created, and possess not for themselves any harm or benefit and possess not [power to cause] death or life or resurrection.

Tafsir

Mafatih al-Ghayb

Verse range: 25:3

Open in Qurani

Al-Furqan: (3) And they have taken besides Him...

Know that when the Almighty described Himself with attributes of Majesty, Might, and Transcendence, He followed that by refuting the doctrine of the idolaters and demonstrating their deficiency in several ways:

  1. They are not creators of things. The Divine Being (Al-Ilah) must be capable of creation and origination.
  2. They themselves are created things. A created thing is needy, whereas the Divine Being must be self-sufficient (Ghani).
  3. They possess no power over harm or benefit for themselves. Whoever lacks this power over themselves also lacks it for others. Therefore, there is no benefit in worshipping them.
  4. They do not possess the power of death, life, or resurrection (Nushur). That is, they cannot bring about life or death during the time of accountability, nor in the time of recompense. How can someone lacking this be called a god, and how is worshipping them appropriate, when the one deserving of worship must bestow these specific bounties?

Herein lie several questions:

First Question:

Does the phrase, {And they have taken besides Him gods} (Wa-ttakhadhū min dūnihi ālihatan), apply only to idolaters, or does it include Christians, star-worshippers, and worshippers of angels?

Answer: Al-Qadi (Al-Baqillani) stated that it is unlikely to include Christians because they have not taken "gods" (plural) besides God. Thus, it most likely refers to the worshippers of idols. It may include those who worship angels because their object of worship is numerous.

However, one could argue that since the verb {And they have taken} (واتخذوا) is plural, and {gods} (ءالهة) is plural, the plural form should be met with a singular counterpart (referring to the singular object of Christian worship, i.e., the Trinity concept). Therefore, the singularity of what Christians worship should not prevent them from being included under this term.

Second Question:

Some of our scholars used the verse, {And they have taken besides Him gods who create nothing, while they themselves are created} (Wa-ttakhadhū min dūnihi ālihatan lā yakhluqūna shay’an wa-hum yukhlaqūn), as proof that the actions of a servant (human being) are created by God. They argued: God criticized these disbelievers because they worshipped that which creates nothing. This implies that whoever can create deserves to be worshipped. If the servant were a creator, he would deserve to be worshipped as a god.

Al-Ka'bi responded by saying that we do not apply the name "Creator" (Khāliq) except to God Almighty. Some of our colleagues defined creation as origination without effort, thought, or labor, which belongs only to God. Furthermore, they cited God's statement describing idols: {Do they have feet with which they walk?} (Al-A'raf: 195). Does this imply that everyone who possesses feet deserves worship? If they say no, then the same logic applies to the attribute of creation you mentioned. They also cited: {So blessed is Allah, the best of creators} (Al-Mu'minun: 14). This is Al-Ka'bi's entire argument.

Answer: Regarding the claim that the name "Creator" cannot be applied to the servant, we say that it must be applied, because linguistically, creation (Khalq) means estimation or determination (Taqdīr). Estimation relates to conjecture and supposition. Therefore, the name "Creator" must be literal (Haqīqah) for the servant and metaphorical (Majāz) for God. How can you prevent applying the term "Creator" to the servant?

As for the verse {Do they have feet with which they walk?}, the criticism directed at them is based on their inability (al-'Ajz). Consequently, anyone who is established as being incapable in some respect does not deserve worship. As for {the best of creators}, we have already discussed this previously.

Know that this verse is not strong evidence for our scholars because the criticism might only arise from the combination of two factors:

  1. They are not creators.
  2. They themselves are created.

Even if the servant is a creator (in the linguistic sense), he is still created, meaning he cannot be a deserving object of worship.

Third Question:

Does this verse indicate the Resurrection (Ba'th)?

Answer: Yes, because God mentioned resurrection (Nushūr). This implies that the object of worship must be capable of delivering reward to the obedient and punishment to the disobedient. Whoever is not capable of this must not be fit for divinity.

{7} < {And those who disbelieve say, "This is not but a fabricated lie, which he has invented, and other people have assisted him therein." So they have come with injustice and falsehood. * And they say, "Legends of the former peoples which he has written down; so they are dictated to him morning and evening." * Say, "It was sent down by He who knows the secret within the heavens and the earth. Indeed, He is ever Forgiving and Merciful." * And they say, "What is this Messenger that eats food and walks in the marketplaces? Why was no angel sent down to him to be with him a warner? * Or [why] is there not bestowed upon him a treasure, or [why] does he not have a garden from which he eats?" And the wrongdoers say, "You are only following a man who is bewitched." * Look how they strike for you comparisons; so they have gone astray and cannot find a way.} > 7 > <

(Translation of verses 4-8 of Surah Al-Furqan)