Surah Az-Zukhruf (The Ornaments): Verse 46

And We certainly sent Moses...

Issues in the Verse:

The purpose of repeating the story of Moses (peace be upon him) and Pharaoh in this context is to affirm the preceding argument.

The Quraysh disbelievers criticized the prophethood of Muhammad (PBUH) because he was poor and lacked wealth and status. Allah the Exalted clarified that after Moses presented overwhelming, undeniable miracles, Pharaoh raised the very same objection that the disbelievers of Quraysh raised: "Indeed, I am the richest in wealth and high in status. Do you not see that the kingdom of Egypt is mine, and these rivers flow beneath me? As for Moses, he is poor and contemptible, and he lacks eloquence. How can a poor man be a messenger from God to the great, wealthy king?"

This confirms the objection raised by the disbelievers of Mecca, as stated in the verse: {Why was this Qur'an not sent down to a man of stature from the two towns?} (Az-Zukhruf: 31). Pharaoh presented the exact same argument to Moses. Furthermore, We punished them and drowned them.

The goal of recounting this story is to establish two points:

1. That the disbelievers and the ignorant perpetually use this weak objection against the Prophets, and it should neither be heeded nor paid attention to.
2. That Pharaoh, despite his ultimate worldly status, ended up defeated and in falsehood. Thus, the matter concerning your enemies (O Muhammad) will be the same.

Therefore, the intent of repeating this story is not merely to recount the narrative itself, but to establish the refutation of the aforementioned objection. This is one of the subtle points of investigation, and Allah knows best.

Allah the Exalted mentioned that He sent Moses with His signs (the miracles accompanying him) to Pharaoh and his chiefs (his people). Moses said, "Indeed, I am the Messenger of the Lord of the Worlds."

It is narrated that when he cast down his staff and it became a serpent, and then took it back and it returned to being a staff, they laughed. When he presented the shining white hand, and it returned to normal, they laughed.

If one asks: How is it permissible to answer lammā (when) with idhā (behold/then), which implies suddenness? We reply: Because the action of suddenness is implied with it, as if it were said: "When he brought them Our signs, they suddenly began laughing at them."

If one asks: The apparent meaning suggests that each sign was superior to the next, which is impossible. We reply: This phrasing is used when exaggeration is intended regarding the degree of virtue attained by each sign. It implies that in the eyes of the observers, some might say, "This one is better than the next," while others might say, "No, the next one is better," and a third might say, "The third one is better." Consequently, each of those signs would be described as superior to others.

Meaning, perhaps they would return from disbelief to faith. The Mu'tazila argue that this indicates Allah wills faith from everyone, and that He only showed those overwhelming miracles because He willed their return from disbelief to faith.

The commentators say that the meaning of {And We seized them with punishment} refers to the afflictions sent upon them, such as the flood, locusts, lice, frogs, blood, and the destruction of crops.

If one asks: How did they call him a sorcerer while simultaneously saying, "Indeed, we will be guided"? We reply: There are several interpretations:

1. They used to call a highly skilled scholar a sorcerer because they greatly revered magic. This is similar to how in our time, someone exceptionally skilled might be described as having performed magic.
2. Their statement, {O you who practice magic}, reflects the common belief and custom of Pharaoh's people, similar to the verse: {And they said, "O you to whom the Reminder has been revealed, indeed you are insane"} (Al-Hijr: 6), meaning, in their belief and assertion, the Reminder was revealed to him.
3. Their statement {Indeed, we will be guided} was made while they were resolved to do the opposite, as seen in the verse: {But when We removed the punishment from them, behold, they broke their pledge.} Therefore, naming him a sorcerer does not contradict their statement {Indeed, we will be guided}. Allah then clarified that when the punishment was lifted, they broke that covenant.

When Allah recounted Pharaoh's dealings with Moses, He also recounted Pharaoh's address to his people:

This means he publicly declared this statement: "O my people! Is not the kingdom of Egypt mine, and these rivers that flow beneath me?" (Referring to the rivers diverted from the Nile, the most prominent being the River of the King, the River of Tulun, the River of Damietta, and the River of Tinnis). It is said these rivers flowed beneath his palace. The essence is that he used his abundance of wealth and high status as proof of his own superiority.

By his statement that Moses was contemptible (mahīn), he meant Moses was poor and weak in condition. By can scarcely make himself clear (lā yakādu yubayyin), he referred to a speech impediment he had.

Scholars differed on the meaning of am (or) here:

• Abu Ubaydah said it is figurative, meaning "but rather, I am better." In this case, the speech concludes at {Do you not then comprehend?}, and then a new sentence begins: {Or am I better...} meaning "but rather, I am better."
• The majority hold that am here is connected, meaning: "Do you not comprehend? Or do you comprehend, except that he placed the phrase 'I am better' in place of 'comprehend'?" Because if they said to him, "You are better," he would consider them perceptive.
• Others said that the speech ends at {Or...} (am), and {Am I better...} is the beginning of a new statement. The implied meaning is: "Do you not comprehend? But he sufficed by mentioning am, just as you might say to someone else, 'Will you eat, or?' (meaning, will you eat or not?), stopping at am for brevity."

If one asks: Did not Moses (PBUH) ask Allah to remove the impediment from his tongue by saying: {And untie the knot from my tongue, so they may understand my speech} (Tā Hā: 27)? And did not Allah grant him that by saying: {You have been granted your request, O Moses} (Tā Hā: 36)? So how did Pharaoh criticize him for that impediment? The answer is twofold:

1. Pharaoh's statement {and can scarcely make himself clear} was an argument he used to support his claim of truthfulness, not an assertion that Moses was incapable of speech.
2. He criticized him based on Moses's prior condition. Moses had been with Pharaoh for a long time while having a speech impediment. Pharaoh attributed to him what he was accustomed to—the impediment—because he was unaware that Allah had removed that defect.

This means that the custom of the people was that when they appointed someone as their leader, they would adorn him with gold bracelets (asāwir) and a gold collar (tiwāj). Pharaoh demanded Moses have such a status.

There is a difference among the reciters regarding asāwir (bracelets): some read asāwir (with a tā’), and others read asāwir (with a sīn).

• Asāwir is the plural of siwār (bracelet) at the minimum count, like ḥimār and aḥmirah, or ghurāb and aghrabah.
• For those who read asāwir (with sīn), it is because asāwir is the plural of uswār (bracelet), and the tā’ is a substitute for the yā’, similar to baṭarīq and baṭāriqah, or zindīq and zanādiqah. Thus, asāwir would be the plural of uswār.

The essence of the argument returns to one point: Pharaoh was saying, "I have more wealth and status, so I must be superior. Therefore, it is impossible for him to be a messenger from God, because the station of prophethood requires being served, and the base person cannot be served by the noble one." The flawed premise here is: Whoever has more wealth and status is superior, which is the exact premise used by the disbelievers of Quraysh in their statement: {Why was this Qur'an not sent down to a man of stature from the two towns?} (Az-Zukhruf: 31).

It is possible that the meaning is "accompanying him" (muqtarinīn bihi), from the phrase qarantuhu bihi fa-qtarana (I joined him with it, so it became joined). Or it could be from their saying iqtariṇū meaning "come together" (taqāranū). Al-Zajjaj said the meaning is that they walk with him, indicating the truthfulness of his prophethood.

Meaning, he demanded lightness/haste in their compliance with what he commanded, and they obeyed him. {Indeed, they were a wicked people} because they obeyed that ignorant, wicked person.

Meaning, they provoked Our anger. It is narrated that Ibn Jurayj became angry over something, and someone said to him, "Are you angry, Abu Khalid?" He replied, "The One who created intellects became angry! Allah says: {But when they angered Us} [i.e., provoked Our anger]."

Know that mentioning the term asaf (anger/provocation) attributed to Allah is impossible, as is the term intiqām (vengeance). Both are among the ambiguous verses (mutashābihāt) where interpretation must be sought. The meaning of anger in relation to Allah is the will to punish, and the meaning of vengeance is the will to punish for a prior transgression.

Salaf (precedent) refers to anything you send forth, whether good deeds or a loan. As-Salaf also refers to those who preceded you from your fathers and relatives; the singular is sālif. This is derived from the poetry of Tufayl mourning his people:

They passed on as a precedent, the path was clear for them, And the turning of fates changes men.

Based on this, Al-Farrā’ and Al-Zajjāj said: We made them predecessors so that others might learn a lesson from them, meaning we made them a precedent for the disbelievers of the Ummah of Muhammad (PBUH).

Most reciters read it with a fatḥa on the lām (salafan), which is the plural of sālif (predecessor), as we mentioned. Hamzah and Al-Kisā’ī read it with a ḍammah (sulufan), which is the plural of salaf (precedent). Al-Layth said: It is said salaf (with a ḍammah on the lām), yaslufu sulūfan, so he is salaf (one who precedes).

His statement {and an example for those who came after} means a lesson for those who remained after them, a sign, and a warning. Abu Ali Al-Fārisī said that mathal (example) is singular but intended for the plural, which is why it is coordinated with salaf. The evidence that it refers to more than one is the verse: {Allah sets forth an example: a slave owned by another who has no power over anything, and one whom We have provided} (An-Nahl: 75), where two things are included under the single term mathal. And Allah knows best.

Surah Az-Zukhruf (The Ornaments): Verses 57-61