Al-A'raf: (115-119) They said, "O Moses..."

Issues in the Verse

Al-Farra' and Al-Kisai stated that:

1. When أَمَّا (with fathah on the alif) is used for commanding, forbidding, or informing, it is pronounced with fathah.
   • Examples: "As for worshipping Allah, worship Him" (أَمَّا اللَّهَ فَاعْبُدُوهُ), "As for wine, do not drink it" (أَمَّا الْخَمْرُ فَلَا تَشْرَبُوهَا), "As for Zayd, he has left" (أَمَّا زَيْدٌ فَقَدْ خَرَجَ).
2. When إِمَّا (with kasrah on the alif) is used for conditionality, doubt, or choice, it is pronounced with kasrah.
   • Conditionality: "If you give Zayd anything, he will thank you" (إِمَّا تُعْطِيَنَّ زَيْدًا فَإِنَّهُ يَشْكُرُكَ). This aligns with the Quranic verse: $\text{{ فَإِمَّا تَثْقَفَنَّهُمْ فِي الْحَرْبِ فَشَرِّدْ }} (Al-Anfal: 57).
   • Doubt: "I do not know who stood up, either Zayd or 'Amr" (لَا أَدْرِي مَنْ قَامَ إِمَّا زَيْدٌ وَإِمَّا عَمْرٌو).
   • Choice: "I have a house in Kufa, either I will live in it, or I will sell it" (لِي بِالْكُوفَةِ دَارٌ فَإِمَّا أَنْ أَسْكُنَهَا وَإِمَّا أَنْ أَبِيعَهَا).

The Difference between إِمَّا (for doubt) and Aw (أَوْ): When using Aw (or), it is possible that one initially builds their statement on certainty and then a doubt occurs, leading to the addition of the second option (e.g., "Zayd stood up," then doubting, "or your father stood up"). The first noun in the Aw construction can stand alone as a complete thought before the doubt arises.

However, when using إِمَّا, the statement is constructed from the beginning based on doubt. One cannot say, "I struck Zayd, إِمَّا 'Abdullah," and then stop; the structure requires the second option to be explicitly stated as part of the initial doubt.

Regarding the inclusion/omission of An (أَنْ) in \text{{ إِمَّا أَنْ تُلْقِيَ }} vs. \text{{ إِمَّا يُعَذِّبُهُمْ وَإِمَّا يَتُوبُ عَلَيْهِمْ }} (At-Tawbah: 106): Al-Farra' explained that أَنْ was included in the first verse because it is in a position requiring choice (takhyir) and is in the accusative case (nasb), similar to saying, "Choose this or that." It is as if they were saying, "Choose whether you cast [first] or we cast [first]." The second verse (\text{{ إِمَّا يُعَذِّبُهُمْ وَإِمَّا يَتُوبُ عَلَيْهِمْ }}) does not involve an imperative choice, as the command structure does not fit there; hence, أَنْ is omitted.

\text{{ إِمَّا أَنْ تُلْقِيَ }} means Moses was giving them the choice to cast down their staffs/ropes first. \text{{ وَإِمَّا أَنْ نَكُونَ نَحْنُ الْمُلْقِينَ }} means "or that we should be the ones to cast down what we have." The object of casting down is omitted (implied: our staffs/ropes).

Another subtlety here is that the people observed proper etiquette by mentioning Moses first in the narration. The Sufis suggest that by observing this etiquette, Allah rewarded them with faith due to their respect.

They then indicated their preference for initiating the casting down by saying \text{{ وَإِمَّا أَنْ نَكُونَ نَحْنُ الْمُلْقِينَ }}, using the attached pronoun (نَحْنُ) and confirming it with the separate pronoun (نَحْنُ), and making the predicate definite (not indefinite).

When the people showed respect first and indicated their desire to cast down first, Moses said: "Cast down what you are going to cast down."

A Question Arises: Casting down their ropes and staffs was a challenge to the miracle using sorcery, which is disbelief (kufr). Commanding disbelief is itself disbelief. How, then, was it permissible for Moses to say, "Cast down"?

Answers to the Question (Multiple Views):

1. Conditional Command: Moses commanded them on the condition that they believed their action to be true/real. If it was not true (i.e., if they knew it was mere trickery), then there was no command, similar to saying, "Pour water for me from the jug"—this command is only valid if the jug actually contains water.
2. Anticipation and Contempt: The people were determined to cast down their items anyway. Moses knew they would do it. The choice was only about precedence (who goes first). He permitted them to go first out of contempt for their status and lack of concern, trusting in Allah's promise of support, knowing that a miracle can never be overcome by magic.
3. Enabling the Nullification: Moses intended to nullify the magic they brought. Nullification is only possible if they first perform the act. This is like someone who wants to refute an atheist's sophistry; he tells the atheist, "Bring forth your argument, state it clearly, and elaborate on it." His intent is that once he answers the argument after this elaboration, its weakness will become clear to everyone. The same applies here.

\text{{ فَلَمَّا أَلْقَوْا سَحَرُوا أَعْيُنَ النَّاسِ }} (When they cast down, they bewitched the eyes of the people.)

This verse is used by those who argue that magic is purely illusion (tamwīh). Al-Qadi argued that if the magic were real, they would have bewitched the hearts, not just the eyes. Thus, the meaning is that they created strange perceptions, even though the reality was not as they perceived it.

Al-Wahidi said the meaning is that they turned the people's eyes away from correct perception due to these illusions. Another view is that they smeared the ropes and staffs with mercury, placing mercury inside the staffs. When the sun's heat affected them, they moved and twisted around each other, appearing very numerous. The people perceived them moving and twisting by their own will and power.

\text{{ وَاسْتَرْهَبُوهُمْ }} (and they struck terror into them.) This means the common folk feared the movements of those ropes and staffs. Al-Mubarrad said \text{{ اسْتَرْهَبُوهُمْ }} means "they terrified them," with the sin (س) being extra. Al-Zajjaj said it means they sought the terror of the people until the people became terrified, perhaps by sending people to shout warnings during the casting down.

It is narrated from Ibn Abbas that it was made to appear to Moses that their ropes and staffs were snakes like his staff, so Allah revealed to him: \text{{ مُوسَى أَنْ أَلْقِ عَصَاكَ }}. The scholars deemed this impossible, as a Prophet, being certain of divine support and knowing their act was false magic, should not experience fear.

Objection: Did Allah not say in Surah Taha: \text{{ فَأَوْجَسَ فِي نَفْسِهِ خِيفَةً مُّوسَى }} (And Moses felt within himself a fear)? Answer: The verse does not state this fear was due to this specific reason. Perhaps he feared a delay in the manifestation of his proof against their magic.

\text{{ وَجَاءُوا بِسِحْرٍ عَظِيمٍ }} (And they came with mighty magic.) It is narrated that the magicians said they knew a magic that the magicians of the earth could not handle unless it was something from the heavens, which they could not manage. Narrations vary on their number: eighty thousand, seventy thousand, or thirty thousand plus. The verse itself does not specify the quantity or manner.

\text{{ وَأَوْحَيْنَا إِلَى مُوسَى أَنْ أَلْقِ عَصَاكَ }} (And We revealed to Moses, "Cast down your staff.") This revelation could be literal divine revelation. Al-Wahidi narrated from Ibn Abbas that it means, "We inspired Moses to cast down his staff."

\text{{ فَإِذَا هِيَ تَلْقَفُ مَا يَأْفِكُونَ }} (And suddenly it began to swallow up that which they falsely alleged.)

Issue 1: Omission There is an omission here. The implied structure is: "So he cast it down, and suddenly it began to swallow..." (\text{{ فَأَلْقَاهَا فَإِذَا هِيَ تَلْقَفُ }}).

Issue 2: Recitation Variants of تَلْقَفُ Hafs recited تَلْقَفُ (with a light qāf and sukūn on the lām). Others recited it with a heavy/doubled qāf and fathah on the lām (تَلَقَّفُ). Ibn Kathir recited it with a heavy qāf (تَلْقَفُ).

• Light Qāf (تَلْقَفُ): Ibn Al-Sikkit explained laqf (لَقْف) as taking something quickly, eating it, or swallowing it. A laqqāf man is quick to seize. Al-Lihyani noted it is similar to thaqf (ثَقْف).
• Heavy Qāf (تَلَقَّفُ): This comes from the verb تَلَقَّفَ يَتَلَقَّفُ.
• Ibn Kathir's Recitation (تَلْقَفُ): The original form was تَتَلَقَّفُ, where one tā' was assimilated into the other.

Issue 3: The Miracle's Implication The commentators stated that when Moses cast down the staff, it became a huge serpent that filled the horizon. It opened its jaws, which were eighty cubits wide, and swallowed all the ropes and staffs they cast down. When Moses took it back, it instantly returned to being a staff, without any change in size or dimension.

This demonstrates the existence of the Capable, Choosing God and the Great Miracle granted to Moses. The serpent swallowing those numerous items and then instantly reverting to a staff proves that Allah either annihilated the physical bodies of those items or reduced them to imperceptible particles scattered in the air without anyone noticing their disappearance. Only Allah can perform such an action.

Issue 4: Meaning of \text{{ مَا يَأْفِكُونَ }} There are two interpretations:

1. Linguistic Meaning (The Lie): Ifk (إِفْك) linguistically means turning something away from its proper course; hence, lying is called ifk because it is turned away from the truth. Ibn Abbas said \text{{ مَا يَأْفِكُونَ }} means "what they lie about." The meaning is that the staff swallowed what they were turning away from the truth toward falsehood and fabrication. In this case, مَا is a relative pronoun (mawṣūlah).
2. Verbal Noun (The Act of Lying): مَا is a verbal noun (maṣdarīyah). The meaning is: "Suddenly it began to swallow their falsehood/lying" (تَلْقَفُ إِفْكَهُمْ). This is naming the result (the alleged object) by the action that produced it.

\text{{ فَوَقَعَ الْحَقُّ }} (Then the truth prevailed.) Mujahid and Al-Hasan said it means: "It became apparent." Al-Farra' said: "The truth became distinct from the magic."

The scholars of meaning state that wuqū' (falling/prevailing) means the appearance of something by its existence, settling into its place. The reason for this appearance is that the magicians had claimed that if what Moses did was magic, their ropes and staffs would not have disappeared. Since they vanished, it was proven that this happened only by the creation and decree of Allah, not by magic. This is what distinguishes the miracle from sorcery.

Al-Qadi said \text{{ فَوَقَعَ الْحَقُّ }} implies strong establishment and manifestation, such that falsehood cannot invalidate it, just as a reality cannot become non-reality.

Objection: If \text{{ فَوَقَعَ الْحَقُّ }} indicates strong manifestation, was \text{{ وَبَطَلَ مَا كَانُوا يَعْمَلُونَ }} (And what they were doing was nullified) redundant? Answer: No. Along with the establishment of the truth, the physical objects they fabricated (the ropes and staffs) vanished. This led to the manifestation of defeat: \text{{ فَغُلِبُوا هُنَالِكَ }} (So they were defeated there), as there is no defeat clearer than this. And \text{{ وَانْقَلَبُوا صَاغِرِينَ }} (And they returned disgraced), because there is no greater humiliation for the fabricator than the nullification of his claim and proof in a manner that leaves no room for trickery or doubt.

Al-Wahidi noted that the مَا in \text{{ وَبَطَلَ مَا كَانُوا يَعْمَلُونَ }} can mean alladhī (that which), meaning: "The ropes and staffs with which they performed the magic were nullified/vanished." Or, مَا can be a verbal noun, meaning: "Their action was nullified."