Tafsir of Al-`Ankabut 29:36-37

Surah Al-'Ankabut (The Spider): Verses 36-37

(36) And to Madyan, their brother Shu'ayb. He said, "O my people, worship Allah and hope for the Last Day, and do not commit evil on the earth, spreading corruption."

(37) And [We sent] Qarun, Pharaoh, and Haman. Moses came to them with clear signs, but they were arrogant in the land. And they were not ones to escape Us.

After briefly concluding the second narrative (referring to Lot, implied from context), the third narrative begins: {And to Madyan their brother} [Shu'ayb].

There is a difference of opinion among the exegetes regarding the name Madyan:

1. Some say it was originally the name of a man, and his descendants became famous by his name, similar to how tribes are named after their progenitors (like Tamim or Qays).
2. Others say it was the name of a water source to which the people were attributed.

The first opinion seems stronger because Allah attributes the water to Madyan when He says: {And when he arrived at the water of Madyan} (Al-Qasas: 23). If Madyan were the name of the water itself, this attribution would be incorrect or not literal, as the basis of attribution (Idafah) implies a real distinction between the two entities.

Regarding the phrase {their brother}: It is said this is because Shu'ayb was one of them by lineage.

In this verse, there are several points of discussion:

Issue 1: Mentioning the People Before the Messenger

Allah mentioned Noah first, then referred to his people: {And indeed, We sent Noah to his people} (Al-'Ankabut: 14). The same applies to Abraham and Lot. Here, however, the people (Madyan) are mentioned first, and then their brother Shu'ayb is attributed to them.

Response: The general rule in all such instances is to mention the people first, as the Sender does not send a messenger to an unspecified entity. Rather, a people or person arises who needs guidance from the Sender, and then He sends whom He chooses. However, the people of Noah, Abraham, and Lot did not have a specific, well-known name or lineage by which they were recognized. Thus, they were identified by their Prophet (e.g., "the people of Noah"). As for the people of Shu'ayb, Hud, and Salih, they had a known lineage by which they were famous among people, so the discourse followed its established pattern: {And to Madyan their brother} and {And to 'Ad their brother Hud} (Al-A'raf: 65).

Issue 2: The Command to Worship Allah (Tawhid)

It is not mentioned that Lot commanded his people to worship and affirm Tawhid (monotheism), whereas it is mentioned for Shu'ayb.

Response: As mentioned, Lot was among the people of Abraham and contemporary with him. Abraham had preceded them in this call and strived so hard that the command for Tawhid became well-known among people through Abraham. Therefore, it was not explicitly mentioned for Lot, except for what was specific to him, such as forbidding lewdness and other matters. Nevertheless, Lot certainly commanded Tawhid, as every messenger's primary focus is Tawhid. As for Shu'ayb, he came after the previous generations had passed, so he was also foundational in calling to Tawhid, hence his statement: {Worship Allah}.

Issue 3: Sufficiency of the Command "Worship Allah" for Tawhid

Faith is not complete without Tawhid. If someone worships Allah but also worships others, they are a polytheist (mushrik). How then is it sufficient to only say: {Worship Allah}?

Response: This command implies Tawhid. Consider this analogy: If someone sees another serving Zayd and 'Amr, and 'Amr is greater or is Zayd's master, and then someone tells him, "Serve 'Amr," he understands this as a command to direct his service exclusively to 'Amr. Similarly, if someone has one Dinar and intends to give it to Zayd, and is told, "Give it to 'Amr," he understands this as "Do not give it to Zayd."

We say: The people were engaged in worshipping others besides Allah, and Allah is the Owner of those others. When Shu'ayb told them, {Worship Allah}, they understood this as abandoning the worship of others. Alternatively, every person has one soul/life-force, and they intend to dedicate it to worshipping someone other than Allah. Shu'ayb told them to place it in its rightful place, which is the worship of Allah, thus implying Tawhid.

Then He said: {and hope for the Last Day}. Al-Zamakhshari said this means: "Do what you hope the consequence of will be good," just as one might say to another, "Be rational," meaning, "Perform the actions of a rational person."

Regarding {and hope for the Last Day}, there are further points:

Issue 1: Hope Implies Grace, Not Obligation

This indicates the correctness of our doctrine (the Ash'ari view). We hold that Allah rewards the worshipper who serves Him throughout his life out of His grace (Tafaddul), and it is not obligatory upon Him. This is because the worshipper has received so many blessings that even if he increased his deeds, he would not fully discharge the debt of gratitude. If one thanks the Bestower for prior blessings, the Bestower is not obligated to give more; if He does give more, it is an act of benevolence and grace upon him.

Therefore, the phrase {and hope for the Last Day} following {Worship Allah} indicates grace (Tafaddul) rather than obligation (Wujub), because grace is hoped for, whereas what is obligatory from a just being is certain.

Issue 2: Why "Hope" and Not "Fear"?

He said: {and hope for the Last Day} and did not say, "and fear it," even though that Day is feared by everyone and hoped for only by a few of His servants due to their sinfulness, wickedness, and love for this world.

Response: Since He mentioned Tawhid through affirmation ({Worship}) and did not mention it through negation (i.e., He did not say, "and do not worship others"), He used the word of hope (Rajā') because the worship of Allah is hoped to bring good in both realms.

Another view is that Allah recounted in Abraham's story that they took idols out of affection for this life, but in the Hereafter, they will disown them. Here, He is saying: Do not be like those previously mentioned who did not hope for the Last Day, limiting themselves to the affection of this worldly life. Instead, hope for the Last Day and act for it.

Then He said: {and do not commit evil on the earth, spreading corruption}.

It is possible that mufsidīn (corrupters) is in the accusative case (naṣb) as a maṣdar (verbal noun), similar to saying qam qā'iman (Stand up, standing), meaning qiyāman. Thus, {and do not commit evil on the earth, spreading corruption} is like saying, "Sit down, sitting" (ijlis qu'ūdan), because ʿayth (committing evil) and fasād (corruption) have similar meanings.

The combination of commands and prohibitions in {Worship Allah} and {and do not commit evil} was followed by his people rejecting him after he delivered the message clearly. Allah recounts their rejection: {But they denied him, so We seized them with the Blast, and they became in their dwellings [as if] never having lived there.} (This is a summary of the consequence mentioned in the following verses).

In this consequence, there are points of discussion:

Issue 1: The Nature of the Messengers' Speech (Command vs. Report)

What was recounted of Shu'ayb involved commands and prohibitions. A command cannot be truthfully or falsely affirmed; if someone tells another to stand up, one cannot say to him, "You lied."

Response: Shu'ayb was saying: Allah is One, so worship Him; the Resurrection is coming, so hope for it; and corruption is forbidden, so do not approach it. These matters contain reports (Ikhbārāt), and they denied what he reported to them.

Issue 2: Variation in the Term for Punishment (Blast vs. Tremor)

Here and in Al-A'raf, it is mentioned: {so We seized them with the Tremor (al-Rajfah)}. But in Surah Hud, it is mentioned: {so the Blast (aṣ-Ṣayḥah) seized them} (Hud: 67). The narrative is the same.

Response: There is no contradiction. The Blast (Ṣayḥah) was the cause of the Tremor (Rajfah). Either the earth trembled because of the sound (it is said Gabriel cried out, causing the earth to shake from his cry), or the hearts trembled (their hearts shook from it). Attributing the result to the cause does not negate attributing it to the cause of the cause, just as it is correct to say, "He drank, and then he became strong," and also, "He ate, and then he became strong," in the same situation.

Issue 3: Variation in Location Terminology (Dwellings Plural vs. Dwelling Singular)

Where He mentions {so the Blast seized them}, He says {in their dwellings (diyārihim - plural)}. Where He mentions {so the Tremor seized them}, He says {in their dwelling (dārihim - singular)}.

Response: The intended meaning of ad-Dār (singular) is ad-Diyār (plural). Attribution to the plural can use the plural form or the singular form if ambiguity is avoided. The difference in wording is due to a subtle point: The Tremor (Rajfah) is inherently terrifying, so it did not require an intensifier. However, the Blast (Ṣayḥah) was not inherently terrifying in itself, but because that specific blast was so immense that it caused the earth to shake, the plural form (diyār) was used to convey its magnitude. The Tremor, meaning earthquake, is universally understood as immense, so it did not require an intensifier for its matter.

Another opinion is that the Blast was more general, encompassing the earth and the air, while the tremor was only in the earth. Therefore, the plural dwellings were mentioned there. However, this view is weak, because the dwelling (dār or diyār) is the place of remaining motionless (juthūm), not the place of the sound or the tremor. They only became motionless in their dwellings.

(37) And Qarun, Pharaoh, and Haman. Moses came to them with clear signs, but they were arrogant in the land. And they were not ones to escape Us.

This verse continues the list of previous nations/figures who rejected the messengers.