Tafsir of An-Najm 53:45

Surah An-Najm (The Star): Verse 45

وَأَنَّهُ خَلَقَ الزَّوْجَيْنِ (And that He created the two kinds [male and female].)

This verse is also among the contraries that arise from the semen (nutfah). Some of these contraries result in the creation of a male, and some result in a female.

The understanding of the naturalists—who claim that the difference is due to coldness and moisture in the female—does not fully account for this. A woman might have a drier temperament than a man.

Consider the remarkable differences observed between the young and the adult, or between the male and the female. One striking difference is the growth of the beard. The most elaborate explanation offered for beard growth suggests that hair is composed of a smoky vapor descending into the pores. If the pores are extremely moist and soft, as in the temperament of a boy or a woman, the hair does not grow because these vapors easily escape through the moist pores before they can coalesce into hair. If the pores are extremely dry and dense, the hair grows because it is difficult for the material to exit through the narrow opening.

Furthermore, these materials are drawn to specific locations. They are either driven upward to the head, which is structured like a dome above the vapors and smokes, causing these materials to ascend there—which is why head hair is more abundant and longer. Or, in a man, the vapors and smokes are attracted to specific areas:

1. The Chest: Due to the heat of the heart; heat attracts moisture, similar to how a lamp draws oil.
2. Near the Reproductive Organ: Because the heat of sexual desire also acts as an attractor.
3. The Cheeks/Beard Area: Because of frequent movement from eating and speaking; movement is also attractive.

If one asks the naturalists: What is the reason necessitating the correlation between the growth of the beard and the reproductive organ, such that if the latter is removed, the beard does not grow? And what is the difference between the age of childhood and youth, or between a woman and a man? They become perplexed by some points and offer weak explanations for others. It would have been better to attribute this solely to Divine Wisdom.

The First Issue: The Almighty says: {And that He created} and does not say: {And that He Himself created}, as He said: {And that He it is Who makes [one] laugh and makes [one] weep} (An-Najm: 43).

This is because one might mistakenly attribute laughter and weeping to human action. While the misconception regarding causing death and giving life is remote, a foolish person might still claim it, as the one who argued with Abraham (peace be upon him) said: {I give life and cause death} (Al-Baqarah: 258). Thus, the pronoun Himself (هو) was emphasized with the separation (الفصل).

However, regarding the creation of the male and female from the semen, no one would imagine that a human being performs this act. Therefore, the emphasis using the pronoun Himself was omitted.

Observe also His saying: {And that He it is Who makes [one] rich and satisfies [one's needs]} (An-Najm: 48). The Arabs often did not attribute enrichment solely to God; they believed it was due to their own efforts, as Qarun said: {I was only given this because of knowledge I possess} (Al-Qasas: 78). For this reason, He said: {And that He it is Who is the Lord of Sirius} (An-Najm: 49), because they considered it unlikely that the Lord of Muhammad was also the Lord of Sirius. Thus, He emphasized the attribution to God in places where they doubted or minimized His role, but omitted the emphasis where the attribution was clear.

The Second Issue: Are "male" (dhakar) and "female" (untha) nouns that function as attributes (adjectives), or are they nouns that are not attributes?

The common view among linguists is the latter (nouns, not attributes). However, the apparent meaning is that they are names functioning as attributes, similar to al-hasan (the handsome) or al-'azib (the unmarried). As for al-untha, it is like al-hubla (the pregnant) in one sense, because it is a state in which creation is initiated, but unlike al-kubra (the greatest) in another sense.

We assert that they are likely attributes because an attribute is something ascribed to a subject that possesses that quality (e.g., al-'alim [the knowing one] is ascribed to something that has knowledge, and al-mutaharrik [the moving one] is said of something that has motion). This differs from nouns like shajar (tree) or hajar (stone), which are names assigned to specific entities, not conditional upon the existence of a quality.

Dhakar is a name ascribed to something that possesses a quality, and it is used to describe things: "A male person came," or "a male individual." One does not say, "A tree-body."

Those who argue that they are non-attributive nouns base their view on the fact that these terms do not have corresponding verbs (like to know for al-'alim). However, this is not conclusive, because maleness and femaleness are attributes that do not typically change from one state to another. Therefore, verbs are not derived from them, as verbs usually imply a potential for renewal or change in form. This is why verbs are not derived from non-changing relational terms like fatherhood (ubuwwah), sonship (bunūwwah), or brotherhood (ukhūwwah). However, verbs are derived from relational terms that can change, such as saying wakhāh (he made him a brother) or tabannāh (he adopted him), because these states are not fixed by nature and are subject to change.