Tafsir of An-Nahl 16:75

"God sets forth a parable..."

Then He taught them how to set forth parables, saying: Your example in associating idols with God is like the example of one who equates a slave—owned, incapable of acting independently—with a free man, a possessor of wealth whom God has provided with sustenance, such that he acts freely with it and spends from it as he wills.

If you ask: Why did He say "a slave who has no power over anything," when every slave is owned and incapable of acting independently?

I say: As for mentioning "a slave," it is to distinguish him from the free man, because the term "servant" (‘abd) applies to both, as both are servants of God. As for "has no power over anything," it is to specify that he is neither a mukātab (a slave with a contract of manumission) nor one granted permission to trade, for both of these possess the power to act independently. Scholars have differed on whether a slave can truly own property; the apparent school of thought is that he cannot.

If you ask: What is the nature of "man" (man) in His saying "and one whom We have provided" (wa-man razaqnāhu)?

I say: The apparent meaning is that it is an indefinite noun described by an adjective (mawṣūfah), as if it were said: "and a free man whom We have provided for," so that it corresponds to "a slave." It is not impossible, however, for it to be a relative pronoun (mawṣūlah).

If you ask: Why was the plural "do they equal" (yastawūn) used?

I say: Its meaning is: Do the free men and the slaves equal one another?

"And God sets forth a parable: two men, one of them dumb, having no power over anything, and he is a burden to his master; wherever he directs him, he brings no good. Is he equal to one who commands justice and is on a straight path?"