Tafsir of Ghafir 40:36

Surah Ghafir (40): Verse 36

"And Pharaoh said, 'O Haman, build me a lofty structure...'"

Allāh (Exalted is He) described Pharaoh as arrogant and tyrannical. This verse shows that he reached the utmost limit of dullness and foolishness by intending to ascend to the heavens. There are several issues concerning this verse:

Issue 1: The Location of God (Allah)

A large group of those who liken God to creation (Mushaabbiha) use this verse as proof that God is in the heavens. They present three arguments:

1. Pharaoh's Testimony: Pharaoh denied God's existence. Whatever he mentioned regarding God's attributes was based on what he heard Moses describing God with. Therefore, if he hadn't heard Moses describe God as being in the heaven, he would not have sought Him there.
2. The Context of Doubt: Pharaoh said, "And indeed, I think he [Moses] is a liar." He did not specify what he thought Moses was lying about. The preceding context implies that the statement refers to Moses' claim about God's location. The implied meaning is: "I will look for the God Moses claims exists in the heaven, and I think Moses is lying in his claim that the God is in the heaven." This indicates that Moses' teaching involved locating God in the heaven.
3. Innate Knowledge (Fitra): It is an intuitive, established knowledge in all minds that if a God exists, He must be in the heaven. This is why young children, when supplicating to God, raise their faces and hands toward the sky. Even Pharaoh, despite his extreme disbelief, sought God in the heaven when he called upon Him. This suggests that the knowledge of God being in the heaven is established in the minds of the righteous, the heretic, the atheist, the monotheist, the learned, and the ignorant alike.

The Refutation:

These ignorant people should find shame in using the words of the accursed Pharaoh as proof for their doctrine. As for Moses (peace be upon him), he did not define the Lord of the universe by specifying a location. In Surah Tā-Hā, he said: "Our Lord is He Who gave everything its creation, then guided it" (20:50). In Surah Ash-Shu'arā', he said: "Your Lord and the Lord of your forefathers" (26:26), and "Lord of the East and the West and all that is between them" (26:28).

It is clear that defining God's essence by being in the heaven is the doctrine of Pharaoh, while defining Him by His Creator-ship and Existence is the doctrine of Moses. Whoever adopts the former follows Pharaoh's path; whoever adopts the latter follows Moses' path.

Furthermore, we do not concede that everything Pharaoh said about God's attributes was heard from Moses. Perhaps Pharaoh followed the doctrine of the Mushabbiha and believed that if a God existed, He would necessarily be located in the heaven. He mentioned this belief based on his own conviction, not because he heard it from Moses.

Regarding the statement, "And indeed, I think he is a liar," perhaps when Moses said, "Lord of the heavens and the earth," Pharaoh misunderstood, thinking Moses meant God was the lord of the heavens in the sense that one might say someone is the "lord of the house" meaning he resides there. Since this interpretation dominated his thought, he reported it. This is not improbable, given the extreme ignorance and foolishness Pharaoh reached. If opponents find this notion far-fetched, it is because they themselves follow Pharaoh's doctrine and feel compelled to revere him.

As for the claim that Pharaoh's innate nature testified that if God existed, He would be in the heaven, we do not deny that the innate nature of many people might suggest this, especially for someone as foolish as Pharaoh. Thus, this argument is invalid.

Issue 2: Pharaoh's Intention in Building the Structure

People differed on whether Pharaoh intended to build a structure to physically ascend to heaven.

• Literalists (Zāhiriyyun): Many commentators affirmed this, citing a long narrative about how the structure was built.
• Al-Rāzī's View (Impossibility): This view is far-fetched. Pharaoh was either insane or rational.
  • If he were insane, God would not have sent a messenger to him, as intellect is a prerequisite for accountability (Taklīf), nor would God mention the words of a madman in the Qur'an.
  • If he were rational, every rational person knows intuitively that humans cannot build a structure taller than high mountains. They also know intuitively that one's view of the sky does not significantly change whether one looks from the base of a mountain or its peak. Since these two facts are self-evident, a rational person would not intend to build such a structure. Since the falsity of this intention is necessarily known, it cannot be attributed to Pharaoh.

Al-Rāzī's Interpretation: Pharaoh was a Dahriyyah (a materialist/naturalist). His purpose in mentioning this was to raise a doubt against the existence of the Creator. His argument was: "We do not see anything that we can affirm as the God of the universe, so we cannot establish this God. The reason we don't see Him is that if He existed, He would be in the heaven, and we have no means to ascend to the heavens. Therefore, how can we see Him?"

He exaggerated this impossibility by saying: "O Hāmān, build me a lofty structure so that I may reach the means [to ascend]." The implication is that since everyone knows this path (physical ascent) is impossible, reaching knowledge of God through sensory perception becomes impossible.

This is analogous to the verse: "If their aversion is great to you, then if you can find a tunnel into the earth or a ladder into the sky and bring them a sign..." (6:35). This does not mean Muhammad (peace be upon him) actually sought to dig a tunnel or build a ladder; rather, it means that since the means to achieve the desired outcome (belief) through that specific method is known to be impossible, the goal cannot be achieved that way. Similarly, Pharaoh's goal was to show that since access to Moses' God requires a path (ascent) that is inherently impossible, there is no way to know the God Moses affirms.

Refutation of Pharaoh's Doubt: This doubt is flawed because the paths to knowledge are three: sensation (Hiss), transmitted report (Khabar), and rational deduction (Nazar). The mere absence of one path (sensation) does not necessitate the absence of the object of knowledge. Moses (peace be upon him) had already shown Pharaoh that the path to knowing God was through proof and evidence (e.g., "Your Lord and the Lord of your forefathers..."). Pharaoh, due to his malice and cunning, ignored this evidence and suggested to the ignorant that since sensory perception of this God is the only path, He must be negated. This concludes the discussion on the conceptual issues.

Issue 3: The Meaning of "Means/Ways" (Asbāb)

Some scholars held that Allāh created the essences and motions of the celestial spheres to be the causes (Asbāb) for events in this lower world. They cite the verse: "...so that I may reach the means (Asbāb) of the heavens." They argue that the heavens are only means for events in this world. This is supported by the verse in Surah Sād: "Then let him ascend by means (Asbāb) [of access]" (38:10).

The Exegetes' View: They interpreted "means of the heavens" (Asbāb al-Samāwāt) as their paths, gates, and whatever leads to them. Everything that leads you to something is a means, such as guidance.

Issue 4: The Historical Existence of Hāmān

The Jews claimed that historians specializing in the histories of the Israelites and Pharaoh agree that Hāmān did not exist during the time of Moses and Pharaoh but appeared much later. Therefore, stating Hāmān existed during Pharaoh's time is a historical error.

They argue that while one might say another person named Hāmān could have existed later, the Hāmān mentioned here was not an insignificant person; he was Pharaoh's vizier. Such a prominent figure would not be unknown in description and status. Since historians agree that the Hāmān associated with Pharaoh appeared centuries later, an error must exist in the historical records. They compare this to knowing that Abū Hanīfah came long after the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him); if someone claimed Abū Hanīfah was present during the Prophet's time, historians would declare it false.

The Refutation: The histories of Moses and Pharaoh are ancient, and the eras have become confused and mixed. Therefore, reliance on the statements of historians in this matter is unreliable. Taking the word of Allāh (the Qur'an) is preferable. This differs from the case of Abū Hanīfah, where the historical records are recent, clear, and well-preserved. This concludes the conceptual discussions; now we address the linguistic issues.

• "Lofty Structure" (Sarh): This refers to an apparent building, even if distant. It is derived from Sarih (to become clear/apparent).
• "Means of the Heavens" (Asbāb al-Samāwāt): These are their paths.
• Repetition: If one asks why the verse didn't simply say, "so that I may reach the means, the heavens" (li-a'lu al-asbāb al-samāwāt), the author of Al-Kashshāf answered: When something is initially vague and then clarified, it magnifies its importance. Allāh first made the means vague, then clarified them as the heavens, to emphasize their significance.
• Reading of fa-aṭṭali'a (so that I may ascend):
  • Hafs reads it with a fatḥa on the 'ayn (fa-aṭṭali'a - active voice).
  • Others read it with a ḍammah on the 'ayn (fa-uṭṭali'a - passive voice).
  • Al-Mubarrid stated that the passive reading connects it to the preceding verb (al-ghayyu), implying: "Perhaps I will reach the means, and then I will ascend." The active reading implies: "Perhaps I will reach the means, and upon reaching them, I will ascend." The meanings differ slightly regarding the certainty of the ascent following the reaching of the means.

Allāh recounts Pharaoh's story and then states: "And thus was the evil of his deeds made fair-seeming to Pharaoh, and he was turned away from the path."

Issue 1: Reading of wa-ṣudda (and he was turned away)

• 'Āṣim, Ḥamzah, and Al-Kisā'ī: Read it with a ḍammah on the Sād (wa-ṣudda - passive voice), meaning he was prevented from the path. This is supported by the structure, as the preceding verb (zuyyina) is passive.
• Others: Read it with a fatḥa on the Sād (wa-ṣadda - active voice), meaning he actively prevented people from faith. This is supported by verses like: "The disbelievers who turned [people] away from the way of Allāh" (4:167).

Issue 2: Who Made the Evil Seem Fair? (Zuyyina)

The verb zuyyina (was made fair-seeming) requires an agent (the one who beautified it).

• Mu'tazilah View: The agent is Satan.
  • Refutation: If Satan beautified it for Pharaoh, who beautified it for Satan? If it is another devil, this leads to an infinite regress (Tasalsul) or a circular dependency (Dawr), both of which are impossible. Therefore, the chain of causes and effects must terminate in the Necessary Existent (God).
• Al-Rāzī's Argument (Affirming God as the Agent): A person only undertakes an action if they believe it is good, beautiful, or desirable. If this belief is correct, it is knowledge; if it is wrong, it is ignorance. The one who causes this ignorance is not the person himself, because a rational person does not seek to acquire ignorance for himself. If he knew it was ignorance, he would cease to be ignorant. Thus, the agent of that ignorance cannot be the person himself. Nor can it be Satan, as the same argument applies to Satan. Therefore, the agent must be Allāh (Exalted is He).

This is supported by the narration cited from Al-Kashshāf that a reading exists where the verb is active (wa-zayyana lahu su'a 'amalihi), meaning God beautified his evil deeds for him, which aligns with the context of Moses' God.

Verse 38

"And the plot of Pharaoh was only in ruin."

• Tabāb: Means destruction and loss. This is similar to "And they added nothing to them except ruin" (11:101) and "Perish the hands of Abū Lahab" (111:1).

"And the one who believed said, 'O my people, follow me; I will guide you to the path of righteousness. O my people, this worldly life is but enjoyment, and indeed, the Hereafter is the home of permanence. Whoever does evil, he will be recompensed only with the like of it, and whoever does righteous deeds, whether male or female, while being a believer—those will enter Paradise, being provided for therein without account. And O my people, why do I call you to salvation while you call me to the Fire? You call me to disbelieve in Allāh and associate with Him that of which I have no knowledge, while I call you to the All-Mighty, the Forgiving. Assuredly, that to which you invite me has no claim in this world or the Hereafter. And indeed, our return is to Allāh, and indeed, the transgressors are the companions of the Fire. Soon you will remember what I tell you, and I entrust my affair to Allāh. Indeed, Allāh is ever Seeing of His servants.'"

This section details the sincere advice given by the believing man from Pharaoh's household.

1. Call to Righteousness: He invites them to follow him to the path of guidance, contrasting the temporary nature of this world ("but enjoyment") with the permanence of the Hereafter ("the home of permanence").
2. Justice in Recompense: He establishes the principle of justice: evil deeds are repaid equally, but believers performing righteous deeds receive provision in Paradise without measure.
3. The Stark Contrast: He questions why they call him to the Fire when he calls them to salvation. Their call is to disbelief and associating partners with Allāh (Shirk) about which he has no knowledge, while his call is to the All-Mighty (Al-'Azīz) and the Forgiving (Al-Ghaffār).
4. The Nullity of Shirk: He asserts that what they invite him to (Shirk) has no authority or claim in this world or the next.
5. Ultimate Return and Consequence: He reminds them that their final return is to Allāh, and the transgressors (the Mushrikūn) are destined for the Fire.
6. Final Admonition and Trust: He concludes by stating they will remember his words later, and he entrusts his entire affair to Allāh, affirming that Allāh is ever watchful over His servants.