Al Imran: (66 - 68) Hā antum hā'ulā'i...

Issues Discussed:

• 'Āṣim, Ḥamzah, and Al-Kisā'ī recited it with madd (lengthening) and hamzah (glottal stop).
• Nāfi' and Abū 'Amr recited it without hamzah or madd, only the necessary length for the quiescent alif.
• Ibn Kathīr recited it with hamzah and qaṣr (shortening), following the pattern of صُنِعْتُمْ (ṣuniʿtum).
• Ibn 'Āmir recited it with madd but without hamzah.
• Justification: Those who affirmed the hamzah follow the original form, as هَا (Hā) and وَإِذْ أَنْتُمْ (Wa-idh antum) are two distinct words. Those who omitted the hamzah and madd did so for the sake of lightening the pronunciation without compromising the meaning.

There are differing opinions on the origin of وَإِذْ أَنْتُمْ:

1. Opinion 1: هَا (Hā) is an introductory particle for attention, and the original phrase is وَإِذْ أَنْتُمْ (Wa-idh antum).
2. Opinion 2: The original form was أَأَنْتُمْ (A'antum), where the first hamzah was replaced by a hā' (Hā), similar to the interchange between أَرَقتُ (araqtu) and هَرَقتُ (haraqtu) for "I spilled."
   • هَؤُلَاءِ (Hā'ulā'i) is built upon the kasrah (vowel sound), and its origin is أُولَاءِ (ūlā'i), to which the introductory هَا (Hā) was added. This form has two pronunciations: qaṣr (shortening) and madd (lengthening).

Addressing the missing predicate (khabar) for أَنْتُمْ (Antum) in هَا أَنْتُمْ (Hā antum):

There are three possible interpretations:

1. The view of the author of Al-Kashshāf: هَا (Hā) is for attention. أَنْتُمْ (Antum) is the subject (mubtada'), and هَؤُلَاءِ (Hā'ulā'i) is the predicate (khabar). The following clause, حَاجَجْتُمْ (ḥājajtum), is a new, explanatory sentence clarifying the first, meaning: "You are these foolish people, and the explanation of your foolishness is that even though you argue about what you know, why do you argue about what you do not know?"
2. Second view: أَنْتُمْ (Antum) is the subject, and هَؤُلَاءِ (Hā'ulā'i) functions as the predicate, meaning أُولَاءِ (ūlā'i) or "those who," with the subsequent clause (حَاجَجْتُمْ) acting as the relative clause (ṣilah).
3. Third view: أَنْتُمْ (Antum) is the subject, هَؤُلَاءِ (Hā'ulā'i) is an appositive ('aṭf bayān), and حَاجَجْتُمْ (ḥājajtum) is the predicate. The meaning is: "You, O you people, have argued."

The intended meaning is that they (the People of the Book) claimed that the Law of the Torah and the Gospel contradicted the Law of the Qur'an. The verse questions how they can argue about what they claim to know (i.e., the differences between Abraham's Law and Muhammad's Law), while simultaneously arguing about matters they have no knowledge of.

Furthermore, the verse might not be affirming their actual knowledge, but rather: "You permit yourselves to argue about what you claim to know, so how can you argue about what you absolutely do not know?"

This is confirmed by the subsequent statement: وَاللَّهُ يَعْلَمُ (And Allāh knows) the reality of how these laws agreed or disagreed, وَأَنْتُمْ لَا تَعْلَمُونَ (while you do not know) the nature of those circumstances.

Allah then details this by saying: مَا كَانَ إِبْرَاهِيمُ يَهُودِيًّا وَلَا نَصْرَانِيًّا (Abraham was neither a Jew nor a Christian), thereby refuting their claim that he agreed with them in doctrine.

Then He states: وَلَكِنْ كَانَ حَنِيفًا مُسْلِمًا (But he was a Ḥanīf, a Muslim). The meaning of Ḥanīf has already been explained in Sūrat Al-Baqarah.

Then He says: وَمَا كَانَ مِنَ الْمُشْرِكِينَ (And he was not of the polytheists). This is an allusion to Christians claiming divinity for the Messiah (making them polytheists) and Jews making anthropomorphic comparisons to God (also a form of polytheism/association).

A Question Raised: When we say Abraham followed the religion of Islam, do we mean agreement in the fundamental principles (uṣūl) or the specific rulings (furūʿ)?

• If Uṣūl (Principles): Then Abraham would also be on the religion of Moses (the true religion of Moses) and the religion of Jesus (the true religion of Jesus), as the fundamental principles of the Prophets cannot differ.
• If Furūʿ (Specific Rulings): Then Muhammad (PBUH) would not be the originator of the Law, but merely a confirmer of another's religion. Moreover, it is self-evident that the recitation of the Qur'an did not exist in Abraham's time, yet it is legislated for us in our prayers, but was not legislated for them.

The Answer:

It is possible that agreement in the uṣūl is intended, and the goal is to show that he did not follow the principles of the Jews and Christians of our current time.

It is also possible that furūʿ is intended, because:

1. Allah abrogated the rulings of the past with the Law of Moses.
2. Then, in the time of Muhammad (PBUH), the Law of Moses was abrogated by the Law that was established in Abraham's time.
3. Under this understanding, Muhammad (PBUH) is the originator of the Law. Since the majority of Muhammad's Law agreed with Abraham's Law, a minor divergence in specific rulings would not negate the overall agreement.

Finally, Allah states: إِنَّ أَوْلَى النَّاسِ بِإِبْرَاهِيمَ (Indeed, the people most worthy of Abraham) are two groups:

1. Those who followed him from the past generations.
2. The Prophet (PBUH) and the rest of the believers.

Then He says: وَاللَّهُ وَلِيُّ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ (And Allāh is the Protector of the believers) through support, aid, success, glorification, and honor.

Verse 67