An-Naml: (20–24) And he inspected the birds, and said...

Know that Sulayman (Solomon), peace be upon him, when he inspected the birds, this implied that he was inspecting them for a matter specific to those birds. They differed regarding the reason for his inspection in several ways:

1. One view, narrated from Wahb, is that the hoopoe had missed its scheduled turn (nawba) of service, which is why Sulayman inspected it.
2. Another view is that he inspected it because water measurements were entrusted to it. It knew how to distinguish between near and far water sources, and Sulayman needed this knowledge.
3. A third view is that the hoopoe used to shade him from the sun, and when it was missing, he inspected for it.

As for His saying: {What is the matter with me that I do not see the Hoopoe, or is he among the absent ones?}

The particle ’am (أم) here is munqati’ah (disjunctive). He looked for the hoopoe and did not see it, so he said, "What is the matter with me that I do not see it?" meaning he could not see it even though it was present—perhaps something was concealing it, or for another reason. Then it occurred to him that it was absent, so he shifted from the first thought and began saying, "Is it absent?" as if questioning the validity of what had just occurred to him. This is similar to the saying: “Indeed, they are camels, or are they sheep?” (referring to uncertainty).

As for His saying: {I will surely punish him with a severe punishment or slaughter him, or he must bring me a clear justification.}

This statement is only permissible to be said concerning one who is accountable (mukallaf) or one close to reason who can be disciplined. They differed regarding the meaning of {I will surely punish him}:

• Ibn Abbas said it meant plucking its feathers and exposing it to the sun.
• It was said it meant coating it with tar and exposing it to the sun.
• It was said it meant throwing it to the ants to eat it.
• It was said it meant confining it to a cage.
• It was said it meant separating it from what it was familiar with.
• It was said it meant forcing him into the company of opposites (enemies/those he dislikes). Some said the tightest prison is the company of opposites.
• It was said it meant forcing him into the service of his peers.

As for His saying: {And he tarried not long} (Famakatha ghayra ba’eed).

It has been recited with both a fatha (opening sound) and a damma (closing sound) on the kāf (فَمَكَثَ / فَمُكِثَ). {Ghayra ba’eed} means "not a long time," like saying "soon." His delay was described as brief to indicate his swiftness, driven by fear of Sulayman, and to show how the birds were subjugated to him.

As for His saying: {I have encompassed [knowledge of] that which you have not encompassed} (Aḥaṭtu bimā lam taḥiṭ bihi).

This is a reminder to Sulayman that even in the least of God’s creation, there is one who has encompassed knowledge that Sulayman has not. This serves as a gentle reminder against self-admiration and the notion of fully encompassing something with knowledge from all its aspects.

As for His saying: {And I have brought you from Saba' with certain news} (Wa ja’tuka min Saba’in binaba’in yaqīn).

Know that Saba’ (Sheba) has been read both with and without tanwīn (nunation). It is narrated that the bā’ (ب) was given a sukūn (stillness). Ibn Kathir narrated it as Sabā’ with an alif (long vowel), like saying dhahabū ayday Sabā’. This is the lineage of Saba’ ibn Yashjub ibn Ya’rub ibn Qaḥṭān. Those who took it as the name of the tribe did not allow tanwīn. Those who took it as the name of a lineage or the eldest father allowed tanwīn. Then the city of Ma’rib was named after Saba’, and it is three days' journey from Sana’a. An-Naba’ means news of great importance.

His saying: {from Saba' with news} (min Saba’in binaba’) is among the beauties of speech related to the wording. The condition for its excellence is the correctness of the meaning. Here, it surpasses mere correctness, being excellent in both wording and meaning. Do you not see that if the word khabar (report) were substituted for naba’, the meaning would still be correct, but the word naba’ is superior because of the added nuance that matches the description of the situation?

As for His saying: {Indeed, I found a woman ruling over them} (Innī wajadtu imra’atan tamlikuhum).

The woman is Bilqīs, daughter of Sharāḥīl. Her father was the king of the land of Yemen. She and her people were Magians, worshipping the sun. The pronoun in {ruling over them} refers back to Saba’. If it refers to the people, the matter is clear. If it refers to the city, the meaning is that she rules over its inhabitants.

As for His saying: {And she has been given of all things} (Wa ūtiyat min kulli shay’).

There is a question here: How could the hoopoe say, {And she has been given of all things} when Sulayman himself said, {And we have been given of all things} (An-Naml: 16)? It seems the hoopoe equated them.

The answer is that what Sulayman (peace be upon him) was given relates to prophethood and wisdom, and then to kingship and the means of this world. As for what the hoopoe mentioned, it related only to worldly matters.

As for His saying: {And she has a mighty throne} (Wa lahā ‘arshun ‘aẓīm).

There is a question here: How could the hoopoe magnify her throne when it saw the kingdom of Sulayman? Also, how could it equate Bilqīs’s throne with God’s throne in describing it as ‘aẓīm (mighty/great)?

The answer to the first point: It is possible that the hoopoe diminished her status relative to Sulayman’s status, thus magnifying that throne for her. Or, it is possible that Sulayman, despite his majesty, did not possess its like, just as some princes might possess something that the Sultan does not have. Regarding the second point: Describing her throne as mighty is an exaltation relative to the thrones of her peers among kings. Describing God’s throne as mighty is an exaltation relative to everything else He created in the heavens and the earth.

Know that there are two discussions here:

The First Discussion: The atheists have criticized this story in several ways:

1. These verses imply that the ant and the hoopoe spoke words that only rational beings utter. This leads to sophistry, for if we permit this, we cannot be safe from the ants we see today being more knowledgeable in geometry than Euclid or in grammar than Sībawayh. The same applies to lice and nits. It would even be possible for prophets, accountability, and miracles to exist among them. Whoever permits this is closer to madness.
2. Sulayman (peace be upon him) was in Syria. How could the hoopoe fly from Syria to Yemen and return in that brief moment?
3. How could the status of such a great queen be hidden from Sulayman, especially since it is said that the Jinn and humans were obedient to him, and that he ruled the entire world? It is also said that under Bilqīs’s banner were twelve thousand kings, each with a hundred thousand under his command. Furthermore, it is said that the distance between Sulayman and Bilqīs’s city was only a three-day flight for the hoopoe.
4. From where did the hoopoe gain knowledge of God, the obligation of prostration to Him, the denial of their sun-worship, and attributing their actions to Satan’s beautification?

The answer to the first point: That possibility exists at the beginning of reason, but it is refuted by consensus (ijmā‘). As for the rest of the points, belief in the world’s need for an intentional Creator removes these doubts.

The Second Discussion: The Mu‘tazilah said that His saying: {They prostrate to the sun rather than God, and Satan has made their deeds pleasing to them} indicates that the servant’s action originates from him, because God attributed it to Satan after attributing it to them, and because He mentioned it in a context of blame, and because He stated that they are not guided.

The answer is multifaceted:

1. This is the statement of the hoopoe, so it is not a proof (in itself).
2. The apparent meaning is abandoned (matrūk al-ẓāhir). For He said: {So He prevented them from the way} (faṣādahum ‘ani as-sabīl). According to them, Satan did not prevent the disbeliever from the way, because if he were prevented and restrained, accountability would fall away from him. Therefore, the only thing remaining here is reliance on the distinction between praise and blame, which has been previously addressed many times, so there is no benefit in repeating it. And God knows best.

< < {Will they not prostrate to God Who brings forth what is hidden in the heavens and the earth, and knows what you conceal and what you reveal? * God! There is no god but He, the Lord of the Mighty Throne!} * He said: {We shall see whether you have told the truth or whether you are among the liars. * Go with this letter of mine and deliver it to them, then turn away from them and see what they will return.} > |