Surah Al-Qasas: Verses (56 - 57)

Verse 56: "Indeed, you do not guide whom you love, but Allah guides whom He wills."

Know that in the Almighty's saying: {Indeed, you do not guide whom you love, but Allah guides whom He wills} there are several issues:

On the surface, this verse does not indicate the disbelief (kufr) of Abu Talib. Al-Zajjaj said that the Muslims agreed that this verse was revealed concerning Abu Talib. This is because when Abu Talib was near death, he said: "O assembly of Banu Abd Manaf, obey Muhammad and believe him, and you will prosper and be rightly guided." The Prophet (peace be upon him) replied: "O uncle, you command them to be sincere to themselves, yet you abandon it for yourself?" He [Abu Talib] asked: "What do you desire, O nephew?" The Prophet (PBUH) said: "I desire one word from you, as this is the last day of days in this world: to say 'There is no god but Allah,' so that I may testify for you with it before Allah Almighty." Abu Talib replied: "O my brother, you know that you are truthful, but I dislike that it should be said that I despaired at the moment of death. If it were not for the shame and reproach that would fall upon you and the sons of your father after me, I would have said it and pleased your eye at parting, seeing your intense distress and sincerity. But I will die upon the religion of the forefathers: Abd al-Muttalib, Hashim, and Abd Manaf."

The Almighty said in this verse: {Indeed, you do not guide whom you love}, yet in another verse He says: {And indeed, you are guiding to a straight path} (Ash-Shura: 52). There is no contradiction between them. What is affirmed and attributed to the Prophet (PBUH) is the call (da'wah) and the explanation (bayan). What is negated from him is the guidance of success (tawfiq) and the opening of the heart, which is a light cast into the heart, by which the heart lives, as the Almighty stated: {Or is one who was dead and We gave him life and made for him a light} (Al-An'am: 122).

The scholars used this verse as proof concerning the issue of guidance and misguidance. They argued that the statement {Indeed, you do not guide whom you love, but Allah guides whom He wills} necessitates that the guidance in both instances means the same thing. If the guidance in "you do not guide" meant one thing, and the guidance in "but Allah guides" meant something else, the structure would be flawed.

We must consider what guidance means:

1. Clarification of the Proof (Bayan al-Dalalah): This cannot be the intended meaning, because the Prophet (PBUH) guided everyone by this meaning, so it is not the guidance whose generality Allah negated.
2. The Call to Paradise (Da'wah ila al-Jannah): Similarly, this is not the intended meaning.
3. Informing of the Path to Paradise (Ta'rif Tariq al-Jannah): This is also not intended, because Allah tied this guidance to His Will (Mashī'ah). Informing the path is not tied to the Will, as it is obligatory upon Allah (Wajib). What is obligatory cannot be contingent upon the Will. Just as one who owes ten dinars cannot say, "I will give ten dinars if I wish."
4. Creating Knowledge in the Hearts by Compulsion (Khalq al-Ma'rifah bi-Sabīl al-Iljā' or Qasr): This is impermissible, as they deem compelling someone to act as ugly on Allah's part concerning the accountable person. Compelling implies ignorance or neediness on Allah's part, both of which are impossible. Since the impossible cannot be contingent upon the Will, this is ruled out.

Since all these interpretations are invalidated, nothing remains except that what is intended is that Allah specifically grants some people the creation of guidance and knowledge, and withholds it from others, and He is not questioned about what He does. When the argument is framed this way, all objections raised by the Qadi (judge) against it fall away.

As for His saying: {And He is most knowing of the rightly guided}, the meaning is that He alone possesses knowledge of the unseen, knowing who will be guided and who will not.

After mentioning their doubts and answering them with clear responses, and clarifying that the clarity of the proofs is insufficient without the addition of Allah's guidance, He recounts another doubt related to worldly affairs, which is their saying: {If we were to follow the guidance with you, we would be snatched away from our land} (Al-Qasas: 57).

Al-Mubarrad said that khatf (snatching) means swift removal. It is narrated that Al-Harith ibn 'Amir ibn Nufayl ibn Abd Manaf said to the Messenger of Allah (PBUH): "We know that what you say is true, but what prevents us from following you is that we will be snatched away from our land," meaning they will gather to fight us and expel us from our land.

Allah Almighty answered them in several ways:

The First Answer: His saying: {Have We not established for them a safe sanctuary (Haram) to which are brought the fruits of everything}? This means: We granted you a secure dwelling where you have no fear. This is either because the Arabs respected the Sanctuary and never attacked its inhabitants—as it is narrated that outside the Sanctuary, the Arabs were engaged in raiding and plundering, but they never attacked those dwelling within the Haram—or because of His saying: {And whoever enters it is safe} (Al 'Imran: 97).

As for His saying: {to which are brought the fruits of everything}, the Almighty, having established that this place is free from fears and calamities, clarified the abundance of blessings therein. The meaning of yujbā (are brought) is "are gathered," from the saying jabaytu al-mā’ fī al-ḥawḍ (I gathered the water in the basin). The people of Medina read it as tujbā (with a tā’), while the people of Kufa and Abu ‘Amr read it as yujbā (with a yā’). This is because the feminine form of thamarāt (fruits) is a plural feminine, not a true feminine, so it is permissible to treat it as feminine based on the word form, or masculine based on the meaning. The meaning of kull shay’ (everything) here is abundance, like His saying: {And I have been given from everything} (An-Naml: 23).

The essence of the answer is: Since Allah made the Sanctuary safe and increased the provision there, while they were turning away from worshipping Allah and turning towards worshipping idols, if they had believed, the continuation of this state would have been preferable.

Al-Qadi said: Even if the Messenger had told them that what they mentioned about being snatched away was true, it would not be an excuse for not believing once the proof was established; they should have ceased. Or he could have told them that their snatching (if it occurred) would be through killing, and since they believed, martyrdom would be a benefit accruing to them, so they should have ceased. Or he could have told them how insignificant the harm of being snatched away is compared to the eternal punishment they are warned of if they persist in disbelief, so they should have ceased. However, Allah used a stronger argument by demonstrating the falsehood of their claim that they would be snatched away, based on what they knew customarily about the status of that location—that such a thing would not happen if they believed. When the matter can be explained to the opponent in this manner, it is preferable to all other methods we mentioned, which is why Allah presented it first. This verse indicates the validity of argumentation used to remove the doubts of the opponents.

Two further discussions remain here:

First Discussion: The author of Al-Kashshāf said regarding the accusative case of rizqan (as sustenance): If you consider it a verbal noun (maṣdar), it can be in the accusative case due to the meaning of what precedes it, because yujbā ilayhi thamarāt kulli shay’ (the fruits of everything are brought to it) and yarzuqu thamarāt kulli shay’ (it provides sustenance with the fruits of everything) are similar in meaning. Alternatively, it can be an object of causation (maf'ūl lah). If you consider it to mean "provided sustenance" (marzūq), it functions as a circumstantial adverb (ḥāl) modifying thamarāt because of the specific attribution (iḍāfah), similar to how it is in the accusative case following an indefinite noun specified by an adjective.

Second Discussion: The scholars used the phrase {a provision from Us} as proof that the actions of the servant are created by Allah. Their explanation is that these provisions reached them because people carried them to them. If the servant's action were not created by Allah, this attribution (to Allah as the source) would not be valid. If it is argued that the reason for this attribution is that Allah instilled the motivations in the hearts of those who carried those provisions to them, we reply: If those motivations necessitated preference (rajḥān), we have explained elsewhere that when preference is achieved, necessity (wujūb) is achieved, and thus the intended goal is reached. If preference is not achieved, the attribution is entirely severed.

Know that Allah only clarified that those provisions reached them only from Him so that when they knew this, they would reach a state where they fear no one but Allah and hope for no one but Allah. Thus, their gaze remains cut off from creation, attached to the Creator, which necessitates the perfection of faith, complete turning away from all besides Allah, and complete turning towards obedience to Allah.

Verses 58 - 59: "And how many a town have We destroyed that was insolent in its means of living..."

{And how many a town have We destroyed that was insolent in its means of living, and those are their dwellings, not inhabited after them except for a little, and We were the inheritors.}

{And never would your Lord destroy towns until He had sent to their midst a messenger reciting to them Our verses. And never would We destroy the towns unless their people were wrongdoers.}

Verse 57 (Continued): Their worldly doubt and the Divine Response

After He mentioned their doubts and answered them with clear responses, and clarified that the clarity of the proofs is insufficient without the addition of Allah's guidance, He recounts another doubt related to worldly affairs, which is their saying: {If we were to follow the guidance with you, we would be snatched away from our land} (Al-Qasas: 57).

Al-Mubarrad said that khatf (snatching) means swift removal. It is narrated that Al-Harith ibn 'Amir ibn Nufayl ibn Abd Manaf said to the Messenger of Allah (PBUH): "We know that what you say is true, but what prevents us from following you is that we will be snatched away from our land," meaning they will gather to fight us and expel us from our land.

Allah Almighty answered them in several ways:

The First Answer: His saying: {Have We not established for them a safe sanctuary (Haram) to which are brought the fruits of everything}? This means: We granted you a secure dwelling where you have no fear. This is either because the Arabs respected the Sanctuary and never attacked its inhabitants—as it is narrated that outside the Sanctuary, the Arabs were engaged in raiding and plundering, but they never attacked those dwelling within the Haram—or because of His saying: {And whoever enters it is safe} (Al 'Imran: 97).

As for His saying: {to which are brought the fruits of everything}, the Almighty, having established that this place is free from fears and calamities, clarified the abundance of blessings therein. The meaning of yujbā (are brought) is "are gathered," from the saying jabaytu al-mā’ fī al-ḥawḍ (I gathered the water in the basin). The people of Medina read it as tujbā (with a tā’), while the people of Kufa and Abu ‘Amr read it as yujbā (with a yā’). This is because the feminine form of thamarāt (fruits) is a plural feminine, not a true feminine, so it is permissible to treat it as feminine based on the word form, or masculine based on the meaning. The meaning of kull shay’ (everything) here is abundance, like His saying: {And I have been given from everything} (An-Naml: 23).

The essence of the answer is: Since Allah made the Sanctuary safe and increased the provision there, while they were turning away from worshipping Allah and turning towards worshipping idols, if they had believed, the continuation of this state would have been preferable.

Al-Qadi said: Even if the Messenger had told them that what they mentioned about being snatched away was true, it would not be an excuse for not believing once the proof was established; they should have ceased. Or he could have told them that their snatching (if it occurred) would be through killing, and since they believed, martyrdom would be a benefit accruing to them, so they should have ceased. Or he could have told them how insignificant the harm of being snatched away is compared to the eternal punishment they are warned of if they persist in disbelief, so they should have ceased. However, Allah used a stronger argument by demonstrating the falsehood of their claim that they would be snatched away, based on what they knew customarily about the status of that location—that such a thing would not happen if they believed. When the matter can be explained to the opponent in this manner, it is preferable to all other methods we mentioned, which is why Allah presented it first. This verse indicates the validity of argumentation used to remove the doubts of the opponents.

Two further discussions remain here:

First Discussion: The author of Al-Kashshāf said regarding the accusative case of rizqan (as sustenance): If you consider it a verbal noun (maṣdar), it can be in the accusative case due to the meaning of what precedes it, because yujbā ilayhi thamarāt kulli shay’ (the fruits of everything are brought to it) and yarzuqu thamarāt kulli shay’ (it provides sustenance with the fruits of everything) are similar in meaning. Alternatively, it can be an object of causation (maf'ūl lah). If you consider it to mean "provided sustenance" (marzūq), it functions as a circumstantial adverb (ḥāl) modifying thamarāt because of the specific attribution (iḍāfah), similar to how it is in the accusative case following an indefinite noun specified by an adjective.

Second Discussion: The scholars used the phrase {a provision from Us} as proof that the actions of the servant are created by Allah. Their explanation is that these provisions reached them because people carried them to them. If the servant's action were not created by Allah, this attribution (to Allah as the source) would not be valid. If it is argued that the reason for this attribution is that Allah instilled the motivations in the hearts of those who carried those provisions to them, we reply: If those motivations necessitated preference (rajḥān), we have explained elsewhere that when preference is achieved, necessity (wujūb) is achieved, and thus the intended goal is reached. If preference is not achieved, the attribution is entirely severed.

Know that Allah only clarified that those provisions reached them only from Him so that when they knew this, they would reach a state where they fear no one but Allah and hope for no one but Allah. Thus, their gaze remains cut off from creation, attached to the Creator, which necessitates the perfection of faith, complete turning away from all besides Allah, and complete turning towards obedience to Allah.

Verses 58 - 59

{And how many a town have We destroyed that was insolent in its means of living, and those are their dwellings, not inhabited after them except for a little, and We were the inheritors.}

{And never would your Lord destroy towns until He had sent to their midst a messenger reciting to them Our verses. And never would We destroy the towns unless their people were wrongdoers.}