| Ya-Sin: (37) And a sign for them is the night...

When God established proof using the conditions of the Earth, which is the universal place (al-makān al-kullī), He then established proof using the night and the day, which is the universal time (al-zamān al-kullī).

The correlation between place and time is appropriate because the essential substances (Jawāhir) cannot be independent of place, and the accidents (A‘rāḍ) cannot be independent of time, as every accident exists within a time. A similar structure is mentioned in His saying: {And a sign for them is the night, and the moon} (Fussilat: 37). Then, He said afterward: {And a sign for them is the earth, barren; and when We send down upon it water, it stirs and grows} (Fussilat: 39), where He also used time and place as proof.

However, the primary purpose there was to establish the Oneness of God (Tawḥīd) due to His saying: {Do not prostrate to the sun} (Fussilat: 37). Then, the Resurrection (Hashr) was established through His saying: {Indeed, He who gave it life is able to give life to the dead; indeed, He is over all things competent} (Fussilat: 39).

Here (in Sūrat Ya-Sin), the primary purpose is to establish the Resurrection, as the Surah frequently mentions the Resurrection, which is evident upon reviewing the Surah. In contrast, the other Surah (Fussilat) mentions Oneness more frequently, evidenced by His saying there: {Say, "Do you indeed disbelieve in the One who created the earth in two days?"} (Fussilat: 9) and so forth. The end of both Surahs clarifies the matter.

There are several issues here:

The First Issue:

The concept of Place refutes the sophistries of the Philosophers (Falāsifa), and Time refutes the doubts of the Anthropomorphists (Mushabbihah).

Regarding the first point (Place vs. Philosophers): The Philosopher argues that if the world had a non-existence (Adam) before its existence, then postulating non-existence before the world requires time (before and after), and time is part of the world. Thus, this implies the existence of the thing at the time of its non-existence, which is impossible.

We respond to them: You agree with us that places are finite because dimensions are agreed upon as finite. Therefore, above the highest surface of the world, there must be a void (Adam) described by the attribute of "above" (fawqiyyah). The concepts of "above" and "below" are only realized through place. Thus, above the world is a place, and place is part of the world. This leads to the same absurdity: the existence of the thing at the time of its non-existence. If they reply that above the highest surface there is neither emptiness nor fullness (i.e., no space), we say: Before the existence of the world, there was neither a moment nor time existing.

Regarding the second point (Time vs. Anthropomorphists): The Anthropomorphist says that no existent can exist without being in a place; therefore, God must be in a place. We respond: This necessitates that you also say God exists in time, because just as the imagination cannot conceive of Him as existing without a place, it also cannot conceive of Him as having existed without time. Every time is contingent (ḥādith), and we are agreed that God Almighty is eternally pre-existent (Qadīm).

The Second Issue:

If someone asks: If the intention is to use time as proof, why did He choose the night when He said: {And a sign for them is the night}?

We reply: Since He used the Earth as proof, which is the dark place, saying: {And a sign for them is the earth} (Ya-Sin: 33), He used the night as proof, which is the time associated with darkness.

Another perspective: The night involves the stillness of people, the quietness of sounds, and sleep, which is like death. Following it, the rising of the sun is like the blowing of the Trumpet, causing people to move. Thus, He mentioned death in the time (night) just as He mentioned the dead state in the place (barren earth). He mentioned the aspect most similar to death in both the place and the time.

The Third Issue:

What is the meaning of "stripping the day from the night" (Salḵ al-nahār min al-layl)?

It means distinguishing it from the night. It is said: Insalaḵa al-nahār min al-layl (The day separated itself from the night) when the end of the day arrived and the beginning of the night entered, and God stripped it (salḵahu) from it, so it separated. If used without the preposition min (from), such as saying Salakhtu al-nahār (I stripped the day) or al-shams (the sun), it means entering its end.

If one asks: The night itself is a sign, so what need was there to say: {We strip the day from it}?

We reply: A thing becomes clear through its opposite; its benefits and beauties are revealed. For this reason, God never mentioned the night alone as a sign in any place without mentioning the sign of the day alongside it.

His saying: {And when they are plunged into darkness} means they enter into darkness. The particle Idhā here denotes suddenness (Mufāja’ah), meaning that after mentioning the command [to enter darkness], they have no choice but to enter it.

And His saying, the Almighty:

< {And the sun runs [its course] to its resting place. That is the decree of the All-Mighty, the All-Knowing.} >