Surah An-Nahl 16:111
ﱁ ﱂ ﱃ ﱄ ﱅ ﱆ ﱇ ﱈ ﱉ ﱊ ﱋ ﱌ ﱍ ﱎ ﱏ ﱐ
On the Day when every soul will come disputing for itself, and every soul will be fully compensated for what it did, and they will not be wronged.
Tafsir of An-Nahl 16:111-112
Tafsir
Al-Kashshaf
Verse range: 16:111-112
{And Allah presents an example: a city} Meaning: He made the city that possesses this state an example for every people upon whom Allah bestowed blessings, but the blessings made them insolent, so they disbelieved and turned away, and Allah brought down His vengeance upon them.
It is possible that a hypothetical city with these characteristics is intended, or that it refers to a specific city among the cities of the ancients that was in this state, and Allah presented it as an example to Mecca as a warning against a similar fate.
{Secure} Undisturbed by fear, for tranquility exists with security, while disturbance and anxiety exist with fear.
{Abundantly} Wide and plentiful. *Al-An‘um* (blessings) is the plural of *ni‘mah* (blessing), treating the *ta* as non-existent, like *dir‘* (armor) and *adru‘*. Or it is the plural of *na‘am*, like *bu’s* (misery) and *ab’us*. In the Hadith: "The herald of the Prophet (ﷺ) called out at the season in Mina: 'These are days of eating and enjoyment, so do not fast.'"
If you ask: "Tasting" (idhaqah) and "clothing" (libas) are metaphors; what is the basis for their validity? And since the metaphorical "tasting" is applied to the metaphorical "clothing," what is the basis for applying one to the other?"
I say: As for "tasting," it has become like a literal term among them due to its common usage regarding calamities, hardships, and what touches people of them. They say: "So-and-so tasted misery and harm," and "He made him taste the torment." They likened what is perceived of the effects of harm and pain to what is perceived of the taste of bitterness and foulness.
As for "clothing," it is used as a metaphor for what covers a person and envelops them of certain events, because it encompasses the wearer.
As for applying "tasting" to the "clothing of hunger and fear," it is because since it (the clothing) became an expression for what covers and envelops them of these things, it is as if it were said: "He made them taste what covered them of hunger and fear."
They have two methods for such constructions, and one must grasp them, for disapproval only arises for those who lack them:
- To look at the intended meaning (the underlying reality): As was done here. Similar to the saying of Kuthayyir: "Generous of cloak (rida') when he smiles laughing, the necks of wealth are locked for his laughter." He used "cloak" as a metaphor for generosity, because it protects the honor of its owner just as a cloak protects what is placed under it. He described it as "generous" (ghamr), which is an attribute of generosity and giving, not an attribute of a cloak, looking at the intended meaning.
- To look at the metaphor itself: As in his saying: "Abd ‘Amr disputes my cloak with me; wait, O brother of ‘Amr ibn Bakr! Mine is the half that my right hand possesses, and take the other half and wrap your head with it." He meant his sword by "cloak," then said "wrap your head with it" (fa-i‘tajar), looking at the metaphor itself. If he had looked at the intended meaning in our current verse, it would have been said: "He clothed them in the garment of hunger and fear," and Kuthayyir would have said: "Wide of cloak when he smiles laughing."
{While they were wrongdoers} In the state of their being enveloped by wrongdoing, like His saying: {Those whom the angels take in death while they are wronging themselves}. We seek refuge in Allah from the suddenness of vengeance and death while in a state of heedlessness.
It is recited: {And fear} as a conjunction to "clothing," or based on the omission of the genitive (mudaf) and the replacement of it by the genitive noun (mudaf ilayh). Its origin is: "And the clothing of fear." It is also recited: {The clothing of fear and hunger}.