Tafsir of Muhammad 47:15

Tafsir of Surah Muhammad (47): Verse 15

Verse 15:

{ مَثَلُ الْجَنَّةِ الَّتِي وُعِدَ الْمُتَّقُونَ } The likeness of the Garden which the God-fearing have been promised.

After clarifying the difference between the two groups—those guided and those astray—the Almighty now clarifies the difference in their ultimate destinations (their return and end). Just as He mentioned the state of the guided before the one who follows his desires, He mentions their state in the Hereafter before the state of the one who is the opposite of them.

In this verse, there are several issues concerning the word {مَثَلُ} (likeness/parable):

The phrase {مَثَلُ الْجَنَّةِ} implies something to which the Garden is being likened. There are several views on this:

1. View of Sibawayh (The description): The word mathal here means description. Thus, the meaning is: "This is the description of the Garden." This interpretation does not necessitate an explicit thing to which it is compared.
   • Possibility A: The predicate (the main clause) is omitted. The structure is: Mathalu al-Jannah (The likeness of the Garden) is the subject (Mubtada'), meaning: "What we have narrated is the likeness of the Garden." Then, a new sentence begins: {فِيهَا أَنْهَارٌ} (In it are rivers). This is similar to the verse in Surah Ar-Ra'd: {تَجْرِي مِن تَحْتِهَا الْأَنْهَارُ} (35), which is a new statement explaining the description.
   • Possibility B: The predicate is present: {فِيهَا أَنْهَارٌ} (In it are rivers) is the predicate (Khabar). It is like saying: "Describe Zayd to me," and the response is: "Zayd is red and short."
   • Possibility C: The word mathal is an addition (tawkid/emphasis). The meaning is: "The Garden which the God-fearing were promised—it has rivers in it."

2. View 2 (The explicit comparison is omitted): The thing being compared to is omitted but implied.
   • Possibility A (Al-Zajjaj): The meaning is: "The likeness of the Garden which the God-fearing were promised is a Garden in which rivers flow," similar to saying: "The likeness of Zayd is a tall, dark man," where the description is given, but the comparison object (the implied 'a man') is not the actual Zayd himself.
   • Possibility B: The meaning is: "The likeness of the Garden which the God-fearing were promised is wonderful, or great, or the like." In this case, {فِيهَا أَنْهَارٌ} is a new, confirming statement that supports the idea of it being a wonderful likeness.

3. View 3 (The explicit comparison is mentioned - Al-Zamakhshari): The comparison object is explicitly mentioned: {كَـمَنْ هُوَ خَالِدٌ فِي النَّارِ} (like one who is eternally abiding in the Fire). This is a comparison used for denunciation/rejection (Inkar).
   • This is like saying: "Zayd's actions are like 'Amr's," where the comparison is made to highlight the difference. Here, it is as if Allah said: "The likeness of the Garden is like the state of one who is eternally abiding in the Fire." This is the strongest way to present Al-Zamakhshari's view.
   • Under this view, the phrase {فِيهَا أَنْهَارٌ} and what follows are parenthetical clauses inserted between the subject and the predicate, similar to saying: "The counterpart of Zayd is 'Amr, though Zayd possesses virtue and knowledge."

Verse 15 (Continued):

{ فِيهَا أَنْهَارٌ مِنْ مَاءٍ غَيْرِ آسِنٍ وَأَنْهَارٌ مِنْ لَبَنٍ لَمْ يَتَغَيَّرْ طَعْمُهُ وَأَنْهَارٌ مِنْ خَمْرٍ لَذَّةٍ لِلشَّارِبِينَ وَأَنْهَارٌ مِنْ عَسَلٍ مُصَفًّى } In it are rivers of water that is never stagnant, and rivers of milk whose taste never changes, and rivers of wine delicious to those who drink it, and rivers of purified honey.

Allah chose these four types of rivers because drinks are consumed either for their taste or for a purpose unrelated to taste.

1. For Taste: Tastes are nine (bitter, salty, pungent, sour, astringent, binding, bland, sweet, fatty). The sweetest is honey, and the fattiest is fat/oil. However, pure fat is generally not palatable for eating or drinking. Milk, which contains fat beneficial for nourishment, is mentioned.
2. Not for Taste (General Consumption): Water and Wine. Wine is drunk for a purpose other than its taste, even though its taste is generally disliked by those who drink it (in this world), yet its consumption is continuous.

Allah purified each of these four substances from the defects they possess in the world:

• Water becomes stagnant (آسن).
• Milk changes its taste if left too long.
• Wine is disliked by the drinker upon consumption (in this world).
• Honey often contains impurities from the bees or dead bees.

Allah paired them:

• Water (general drink, not for taste) is paired with Milk (general drink, for taste).
• Wine (less common drink, not for taste) is paired with Honey (less common drink, for taste).

Regarding honey not being a drink: Historically, drinks like Jallab were made from honey, and sugar was not known until later. Furthermore, the term 'honey' (عسل) is applied to things other than bee honey, necessitating the specification "honey of the bees" for distinction.

• {لَذَّةٍ لِلشَّارِبِينَ} (delicious to those who drink it) was said only for wine.
• {لَمْ يَتَغَيَّرْ طَعْمُهُ} (whose taste never changes) was said for milk.
• {مُصَفًّى} (purified) was said for honey.

Regarding Wine: The term {لَذَّةٍ} is used because pleasure/delight (اللذة) varies according to individuals; what one person enjoys, another may reject. By saying {لَذَّةٍ لِلشَّارِبِينَ} (plural), it implies that the wine of Paradise is delightful to all drinkers. Moreover, since worldly wine is often disliked in taste, specifying "delight" negates that inherent dislike in the Hereafter.

Regarding Milk and Honey: Taste and color (like sweetness or sourness) are generally perceived uniformly by people, even if individual preference varies. Therefore, explicitly stating universal acceptance (like saying "delightful to all tasters") was unnecessary.

The word {لَذَّةٍ} has two possibilities:

1. It is the feminine form of ladh or ladhith (a delicious thing), used as an adjective.
2. It is a substantive noun describing the essence itself, similar to saying someone is entirely Hilm (forbearance) or entirely ’Aql (intellect).

Verse 16:

{ وَلَهُمْ فِيهَا مِنْ كُلِّ الثَّمَرَاتِ وَمَغْفِرَةٌ مِنْ رَبِّهِمْ } And they will have therein all kinds of fruits, and forgiveness from their Lord.

After mentioning the drinks, Allah refers to the food. Since eating in Paradise is for pleasure, not necessity, fruits are mentioned (unlike bread or meat). This parallels Surah Ar-Ra'd (13:35) where both food and drink are mentioned: {أَكْلُهَا دَائِمٌ وَظِلُّهَا} (Its food is perpetual and its shade).

A subtle point: In Ar-Ra'd, Allah mentioned {وَظِلُّهَا} (and its shade), but here He did not, instead mentioning {وَمَغْفِرَةٌ} (and forgiveness).

• The word ظل (shade) implies covering/concealment. Forgiveness carries a similar meaning of covering faults.
• Moreover, those who are forgiven are under the gaze of the Forgiver's Mercy, just as one says, "We are under the protection/shade of the Prince." The shade here is the Mercy and Forgiveness of Allah, protecting them from heat or cold.

The God-fearing person only enters Paradise after receiving forgiveness. How can they have forgiveness in it?

1. Forgiveness Before Entry: It is not necessary that the forgiveness is in Paradise. It could be an addition to what they have in it: "They have fruits therein, and they have forgiveness from their Lord before entering."
2. Lifting of Accountability: It means they have removal of obligation (رفع التكليف) in Paradise. They eat without accountability or fear of punishment, unlike in the world where eating might involve consequences (like needing to relieve oneself or falling ill).
3. Covering Imperfections: Eating in this world is never free from some unpleasant consequence (sickness, need for excretion). The verse implies: For the believer, eating and drinking are pure and untainted; nothing unpleasant results in their stomachs that requires them to seek permission to leave (as children ask their teacher, "May Allah forgive you," when needing to go to the restroom). In Paradise, the unpleasant consequences are covered/forgiven.

Verse 17:

{ كَمَنْ هُوَ خَالِدٌ فِي النَّارِ وَسُقُوا مَاءً حَمِيمًا فَقَطَّعَ أَمْعَاءَهُمْ } ...like one who is eternally abiding in the Fire, and they will be given scalding water which will cut up their intestines?

This verse continues the comparison, focusing on the dwellers of Hell.

If we follow the view that {مَثَلُ الْجَنَّةِ} is merely a description, what does {كَـمَنْ هُوَ} (like one who is...) relate to?

• It relates to the implied subject: The phrase {وَلَهُمْ فِيهَا مِنْ كُلِّ الثَّمَرَاتِ} implies their presence there. So, it is as if Allah said: "They are in it, like one who is eternally abiding in the Fire." The comparison object is omitted but indicated by the preceding context.
• Alternatively, it confirms Al-Zamakhshari's view: This Garden, whose likeness we described, is like the station of one who is eternally abiding in the Fire (used for strong denunciation).

Al-Zajjaj suggested that {كَـمَنْ هُوَ خَالِدٌ فِي النَّارِ} relates back to the previous verse (14): "Is he who is on a clear proof from his Lord [like] one whose evil deed has been made attractive to him, and he is eternally abiding in the Fire?"

• Linguistically: This connection is possible, but requires forced interpretation (ta’assuf), such as omitting the second ka- or assuming a conjunction that was dropped, or assuming the second ka- is a substitute for the first. These are weak due to the long separation (the entire description of the Garden).
• Meaning-wise: It does not fit well. If it were a substitution, it would imply: "Is he on clear proof like one who is eternally in the Fire?" which is weak comparison.
• The Stronger View (as previously established): The comparison is between the two states: The believer (on clear proof, in the Garden with rivers) versus the disbeliever (whose deeds were made attractive, in the Fire with scalding water). This creates a suitable contrast between the Garden and the Fire, and the rivers and the scalding water.

Why is the description of the disbeliever singular ({كَـمَنْ هُوَ خَالِدٌ} - singular) while the description of the believer in the previous verse was plural ({وَاتَّبَعُوا أَهْوَاءَهُمْ} - plural)?

• When the predicate is directly attached to the pronoun (إذا كان متصلا), adhering to the singular form (اللفظ) is preferred because it is what is heard immediately.
• When the predicate is separated (إذا كان مع انفصال), returning to the meaning (المعنى) is preferred because the specific wording fades from memory, but the meaning remains in the listener's mind. Thus, applying the plural meaning to the second part is more appropriate.

If one asks why other verses use singular for the believer (e.g., {مَنْ آمَنَ وَعَمِلَ صَالِحًا}), the answer is that when the connected subject is singular or similar in meaning to the subject it is connected to, maintaining the singular form is better (singular connected to singular). Here, {هُوَ خَالِدٌ} (singular) is contrasted with the plural description of the believers' actions.

The scalding water {وَسُقُوا مَاءً حَمِيمًا} serves as a clarification of their deviation in all aspects compared to the believers:

• Believers have pure rivers; disbelievers have scalding water.
• If one asks what corresponds to the fruits and forgiveness: The cutting of the intestines corresponds to the forgiveness. We established that forgiveness implies the removal of the unpleasant consequences of eating (excretion, illness). The disbeliever’s scalding water immediately cuts their intestines upon reaching the gut, forcing immediate expulsion, contrasting sharply with the pure sustenance of the believer. No specific counterpart was mentioned for the fruits because the Garden contains excess blessings not mirrored in Hell.

The scalding water cuts their intestines not just due to heat, but due to a sharpness/acridity (الحدة) similar to that found in potent poisons. Mere heat does not cause cutting.

The use of the conjunction {فَـ} (then/so) in {فَقَطَّعَ} implies that the cutting is a direct result of the scalding water, but it does not restrict the cause to only the heat; it means the specific scalding water described causes the cutting.

Verse 18:

{ وَمِنْهُمْ مَنْ يَسْتَمِعُ إِلَيْكَ حَتَّى إِذَا خَرَجُوا مِنْ عِنْدِكَ قَالُوا لِلَّذِينَ أُوتُوا الْعِلْمَ مَاذَا قَالَ آنِفًا أُولَئِكَ الَّذِينَ طَبَعَ اللَّهُ عَلَى قُلُوبِهِمْ وَاتَّبَعُوا أَهْوَاءَهُمْ } And among them are those who listen to you, until when they go out from you, they say to those who were given knowledge, "What did he just say?" Those are the ones whose hearts Allah has set a seal upon, and they have followed their desires.