Tafsir of Al-Ma'idah 5:71

Surah Al-Ma'idah (The Table Spread): Verse 71

{وَحَسِبُوا أَلَّا تَكُونَ فِتْنَةٌ...} (And they supposed that there would be no trial...)

In this verse, there are several important issues:

There are two main readings for this phrase:

1. Hamzah, Al-Kisā'ī, and Abū ‘Amr read it with the indicative mood (raising the nūn of takūna): {أَلَّا تَكُونَ فِتْنَةٌ} (that there will not be a trial).
2. The rest read it with the subjunctive mood (installing the nūn): {أَلَّا تَكُونَ فِتْنَةً} (that there should not be a trial).

Al-Wāḥidī provided an excellent explanation for this difference:

Actions (verbs) fall into three categories regarding their connection with an (that):

1. Verbs indicating certainty and establishment (like knowing, being certain, becoming clear). These are typically followed by the heavy an (إنَّ), not the light, subjunctive-inducing an (أنْ). This is because the heavy an signifies stability, matching the certainty of the preceding verb (e.g., {وَيَعْلَمُونَ أَنَّ اللَّهَ هُوَ الْحَقُّ الْمُبِينُ} - And they know that Allah is the manifest Truth).

2. Verbs indicating the opposite of stability (like hoping, fearing, expecting). These are only used with the light, subjunctive-inducing an (أنْ), as in {وَالَّذِينَ أَطْمَعُ أَنْ يَغْفِرَ لِي خَطِيئَتِي} (And those who I hope will forgive my sin).

3. Verbs like ḥasaba (to suppose/think) and its sisters. These verbs sometimes lean towards the first category (certainty) and sometimes towards the second (instability).

Given this, both readings are plausible here:

• The indicative reading (raising takūna) implies stability: They were firmly convinced that they would not face tribulation or punishment due to their disbelief and killing.
• The subjunctive reading (installing takūna) implies instability: They were killing and disbelieving out of attachment to status and lineage, knowing in their hearts that this was wrong. Since the word ḥasaba can carry both meanings, both readings are valid.

Al-Wāḥidī further notes that the Quran supports both usages for verbs like ḥasaba and ẓanna (to think):

• Subjunctive (Nasb): {أَمْ حَسِبَ الَّذِينَ يَعْمَلُونَ السَّيِّئَاتِ أَنْ يَسْبِقُونَا} (Or do those who do evil deeds think that they will outstrip Us?).
• Indicative (Rafʿ): {أَمْ يَحْسَبُونَ أَنَّا لَا نَسْمَعُ سِرَّهُمْ وَنَجْوَاهُمْ} (Or do they think that We do not hear their secret and their private conversation?). This indicative reading implies that the light an (أنْ) is a reduction of the heavy inna (إنَّ), as the subjunctive an cannot be followed by lan (never), whereas the indicative an can (e.g., {عَلِمَ أَنْ سَيَكُونُ} - He knew that there would be...).

The verb ḥasaba typically requires two objects. Here, the clause {أَنْ لَا تَكُونَ فِتْنَةٌ} stands in place of the two objects, meaning: They supposed that the trial would not befall them.

Exegetes have limited the meaning of fitnah to two categories: the punishment of this world or the punishment of the Hereafter.

Worldly punishments include:

• Famine
• Plague
• Killing
• Enmity and hatred among themselves
• Misfortune and ill-luck

Each commentator applied the term fitnah to one of these specific occurrences.

Their supposition that no fitnah would occur can be interpreted in two ways:

1. They believed that abrogation (of divine law) was impossible in the Law of Moses (عليه السلام). They thought that whenever a new messenger came with a new law, it was obligatory for them to disbelieve and kill him.
2. Even if they privately acknowledged their disbelief and killing were wrong, they claimed: "We are the sons of God and His beloved ones," believing that the prophethood of their ancestors would shield them from the punishment they deserved.

Verse 72

{فَعَمُوا وَصَمُّوا ثُمَّ تَابَ اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِمْ ثُمَّ عَمُوا وَصَمُّوا كَثِيرٌ مِنْهُمْ وَاللَّهُ بَصِيرٌ بِمَا يَعْمَلُونَ} (Then they became blind and deaf; then Allah turned to them in forgiveness; then many of them became blind and deaf again. And Allah is Seeing of what they do.)

This verse contains several issues:

The verse indicates that their blindness and deafness regarding guidance occurred twice. Commentators offered several interpretations for these two instances:

1. First Instance: Their blindness and deafness occurred during the time of Zakariyyā, Yaḥyā, and ‘Īsā (عليهم السلام). Allah then forgave some of them who believed in Jesus. Second Instance: Many of them became blind and deaf again during the time of Muhammad (صلى الله عليه وسلم) when they rejected his prophethood. The text specifies "many of them" because a group did believe, such as ‘Abdullāh ibn Salām and his companions.

2. First Instance: When they worshipped the Calf. They repented, and Allah forgave them. Second Instance: Many of them became blind and deaf again due to their obstinacy, such as demanding to see God openly and the descent of angels.

3. Al-Qaffāl's View: He suggested that the explanation lies in Surah Al-Isrā’ (17:4-7):
   • The first instance of blindness/deafness corresponds to the first corruption mentioned in Al-Isrā’ (destruction by a mighty people).
   • The second instance corresponds to the second corruption mentioned in Al-Isrā’ (the subsequent destruction and desecration).

4. They became blind and deaf in response to a messenger sent to them (like David or Solomon), and they believed. Then Allah forgave them. A period of stagnation followed, and they became blind and deaf a second time.

It is read with a ḍammah (raising the final vowel) as {وَصُمُّوا}, implying: Allah made them blind and deaf (i.e., He afflicted them with blindness and deafness), similar to saying nazzaktuhu (I struck him with nizk—a short spear).

There are three interpretations for this phrase:

1. It follows the Arabic construction where the verb precedes the subject, similar to the idiom: Akalūnī al-barāghīth (The fleas ate me).
2. {كَثِيرٌ مِنْهُمْ} is an appositive (badal) for the pronoun in {ثُمَّ عَمُوا وَصَمُّوا}. This is excellent here because saying simply Then they became blind and deaf might imply that all of them did so. Specifying "many of them" shows it applied to the majority, not the entirety.
3. It is the predicate (khabar) of an omitted subject (mubtada’). The meaning is: They were many among them [who became blind and deaf].

This blindness and deafness clearly mean ignorance and disbelief. The question is: Is the agent Allah or the servant?

• If the agent is the servant, this refutes the position of the Mu‘tazilah (who emphasize free will).
• If the agent is Allah, this is problematic because a person does not choose ignorance and disbelief for themselves.

If they argue that they chose it because they thought it was knowledge: We reply that this means they chose this ignorance based on a preceding ignorance. Ignorance cannot regress infinitely; it must terminate in a first ignorance. Since the servant cannot be the agent of that first ignorance (as stated above), the agent must necessarily be Allah.

This means Allah is fully aware of their actions, such as killing the prophets and rejecting the messengers. The purpose here is threat and warning.

Verse 72 (Continuation)

{لَقَدْ كَفَرَ الَّذِينَ قَالُوا إِنَّ اللَّهَ هُوَ الْمَسِيحُ ابْنُ مَرْيَمَ وَقَالَ الْمَسِيحُ يَا بَنِي إِسْرَائِيلَ اعْبُدُوا اللَّهَ رَبِّي وَرَبَّكُمْ إِنَّهُ مَنْ يُشْرِكْ بِاللَّهِ فَقَدْ حَرَّمَ اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ الْجَنَّةَ وَمَأْوَاهُ النَّارُ وَمَا لِلظَّالِمِينَ مِنْ أَنْصَارٍ} (Certainly have those who said, "Allah is the Messiah, the son of Mary," disbelieved. And the Messiah said, "O Children of Israel, worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord." Indeed, whoever associates others with Allah - Allah has forbidden Paradise for him, and his refuge will be the Fire. And there will be for the wrongdoers no helpers.)