Al-Anfal: (31-34) And when Our verses are recited to them...

Know that when the Almighty recounted their plotting against the person of Muhammad (peace be upon him), He then recounted their plotting against the religion of Muhammad.

It is narrated that Al-Nadr ibn Al-Harith traveled to Al-Hira as a merchant and bought the tales of Kalila wa Dimna. He would sit with the mockers and dividers (of faith), being one of them, and recite to them the "tales of the ancients" (asatir al-awwalin). He claimed these tales were like the stories of the ancients that Muhammad mentioned. This is what is meant by His saying: {They said, "We have heard this; if we willed, we could say the like of this. This is naught but tales of the ancients."}

Here lies a point of debate: The basis for the Quran's miraculous nature rests on the fact that the Prophet (PBUH) challenged the Arabs to produce its like, and they failed. This verse, however, suggests they could have produced something similar, which would invalidate the relied-upon proof (of inimitability).

The Reply: The word {if} (law) implies the negation of one thing due to the negation of another. Thus, {If we willed, we could say the like of this} indicates that he did not will that speech, and therefore did not say it. This confirms that Al-Nadr ibn Al-Harith admitted he did not produce a counter-narrative; rather, he merely stated that if he had willed it, he could have produced it. This argument is weak because the intended goal (proving the Quran is not miraculous) is only achieved if he actually produced the counter-narrative; this mere statement holds no benefit.

The Second Suspicion: Their saying: {O Allah, if this is indeed the truth from You, then rain down upon us stones from the sky or bring us a painful punishment.} Meaning, bring us another type of punishment, harsher and more severe than what we face.

If it is asked: This statement raises an issue from two perspectives:

1. First: Allah recounts this statement from the disbelievers. Since this speech is of the same structure (nadhm) as the Quran, it implies that a counter-challenge has been met in this portion. Furthermore, it is narrated in Surah Al-Isra that they said: {And they say, "We will never believe you until you cause a spring to gush forth from the earth for us."} (17:90). This too is the speech of disbelievers, meaning that speech resembling the structure of the Quran and challenging it has emerged from them, indicating that the challenge was met.
2. Second: The Quraysh disbelievers acknowledged the existence of God, His power, and His wisdom. They had heard many warnings from the Prophet (PBUH) about the descent of punishment. If the Quran were truly miraculous, they would have recognized its miraculous nature, as they were masters of eloquence and rhetoric. If they had recognized it, the least they would have done is become doubtful about Muhammad's prophethood. If they were doubtful, they would not have dared to utter the statement: {O Allah, if this is indeed the truth from You, then rain down upon us stones from the sky}, because a hesitant doubter would not venture into such exaggeration. Since they made this extreme statement, we know that no aspect of the Quran's miraculous nature was apparent to them.

The Reply to the First Point: Producing this small amount of speech is insufficient to constitute meeting the challenge, because this quantity is too brief for the facets of eloquence and rhetoric to become apparent. This reply is only valid if we hold that the challenge was not for all the Surahs, but specifically for the long Surah where the strength of the speech is evident.

The Reply to the Second Point: Even if the miraculous aspect of the Quran was not apparent to them, since the Quran is miraculous in itself, the situation remains the same whether they recognized that aspect or not.

Regarding His saying: {O Allah, if this is indeed the truth from You...}

Al-Zajjaj stated that the reading with {al-Haqqa} (accusative) makes it the predicate of kāna, and the pronoun {huwa} (He) is inserted for separation, having no grammatical position, similar to the emphatic particle mā. It is inserted so that it is known that {al-Haqqa} is not an adjective for something else but is the predicate. He said: It is also permissible to read it as {huwa al-Haqqu} (nominative), though I know of no one who read it this way, and there is no disagreement among grammarians regarding its permissibility. However, recitation is Sunnah. The author of Al-Kashshāf narrated that Al-A'mash read it this way.

Know that when the Almighty recounted these two suspicions, He did not mention the answer to the first suspicion, which is {If we willed, we could say the like of this}. Instead, He mentioned the answer to the second suspicion: {But Allah would not punish them while you were among them, nor would Allah punish them while they sought forgiveness.}

This contains several points:

The First Point: Know that the essence of the answer is that when the disbelievers exaggerated and said, "O Allah, if Muhammad is truthful, then rain stones upon us from the sky," the Almighty mentioned that even if Muhammad is truthful in his claim, He will not rain stones upon his enemies or those who deny his prophethood for two reasons:

1. First: As long as Muhammad (PBUH) is present among them, Allah will not inflict that punishment upon them out of reverence for him. This was also Allah's custom with all previous prophets: He did not punish the people of a town until their messenger had departed from it, as was the case with Hud, Salih, and Lot.

If it is asked: If his presence among them prevented the punishment, how then did He say: {Fight them; Allah will punish them by your hands} (At-Tawbah: 14)?

We reply: The first refers to the punishment of utter destruction (isti'ṣāl), while the second refers to the punishment inflicted through warfare and fighting.

2. Second: His saying: {nor would Allah punish them while they sought forgiveness.} There are several interpretations for this:
   • First: Allah would not punish these disbelievers while there were believers among them seeking forgiveness. Although the wording is general, the intent refers to some of them, just as one says, "The people of the town killed a man," meaning some of them.
   • Second: Allah would not punish these disbelievers because, in His knowledge, they would have children who would believe in Allah and seek His forgiveness. Thus, they are described by the attribute of their offspring.
   • Third: Qatadah and Al-Suddi said: {nor would Allah punish them while they sought forgiveness} means: If they sought forgiveness, they would not be punished. Therefore, the purpose of mentioning this statement was to invite them to seek forgiveness, meaning: If they occupied themselves with seeking forgiveness, Allah would not punish them. For this reason, some scholars held that Istighfār (seeking forgiveness) here means Islām (submission). The meaning is that there were people among them whom Allah knew would eventually embrace faith, such as Abu Sufyan ibn Harb, Abu Sufyan ibn Al-Harith ibn Abd Al-Muttalib, Al-Harith ibn Hisham, Hakim ibn Hizam, and a large number of others. The meaning of {nor would Allah punish them while you were among them} is that even though He knew some among them would ultimately attain faith.

The scholars of meaning stated that this verse indicates that seeking forgiveness is a safeguard and security from punishment. Ibn Abbas said: They had two safeguards: the Messenger of Allah and seeking forgiveness. The Prophet has passed away, but seeking forgiveness remains until the Day of Resurrection.

Then He said: {And what is [the reason] that Allah should not punish them...} Know that in the first verse, the Almighty clarified that He would not punish them as long as the Messenger of Allah was among them. In this verse, He mentioned that He would punish them, implying that He would punish them once the Messenger departed from among them.

They differed regarding this punishment: Some said this punishment was the one threatened on the Day of Badr, while others said it was on the Day of the Conquest of Mecca. Ibn Abbas said this punishment is the punishment of the Hereafter, and the punishment He negated from them was the punishment of this world.

Then the Almighty clarified the reason for punishing them: {while they were barring [people] from the Sacred Mosque}. Reports have shown how they barred people from it on the Day of Hudaybiyyah. He pointed to the fact that they barred people while claiming to be its guardians.

He then invalidated this claim with His saying: {And they were not its guardians. Its guardians are none but the righteous,} those who refrain from abominations, such as the clamoring and clapping they used to do near the Ka'bah. The intent is to clarify that one whose state is like this cannot be a guardian of the Sacred Mosque. Therefore, they were deserving of being killed by the sword and fought. Allah killed them on the Day of Badr, honoring Islam thereby, as explained previously.

{And their prayer at the House was not but whistling and clapping. So taste the punishment for what you used to disbelieve.}