Tafsir of Al-Baqarah 2:24

When He guided them to the means by which they could recognize the Prophet (ﷺ) and the truth of what he brought—until they stumbled upon its reality, its secret, and the distinction of its truth from its falsehood—He said to them: "If you do not oppose him, and what you seek does not become easy for you, and it becomes clear to you that it is something impossible to replicate, then the Truth has manifested its purity, and belief has become mandatory. So believe, and fear the punishment prepared for those who disbelieved."

In this is a twofold proof for the establishment of prophecy: the validity of the challenge being miraculous, and the foretelling that they would never do it—which is an unseen matter known only to Allah.

If you ask: Since their failure to produce a surah is certain, why was in (إن - for doubt) used instead of idha (إذا - for certainty)?

I say: There are two aspects. First, the discourse is conducted according to their own estimation and greed; before contemplation, the inability to oppose it was, to them, like something doubtful, due to their reliance on their own eloquence and power of speech.

Second, it is a form of mockery (tahakkum), like a person described as powerful, confident in his own victory over his opponent, saying: "If I defeat you, I will show you no mercy," while he knows and is certain that he will defeat him.

If you ask: Why was the act of "bringing" (al-ityan) expressed as "doing" (al-fi'l), and what is the benefit of substituting it?

I say: Because it is one of many actions. You say, "I came to (ataytu) so-and-so," and it is said to you, "How well you have done (fa'alta)." The benefit is that it functions as a metonymy (kinaya), providing brevity and conciseness that spares you from a lengthy description. Do you not see that a man might say, "I struck Zayd in such a place, in such a manner, and I insulted him and punished him," listing various qualities and actions, and you say, "How evil is what you have done (fa'alta)!" If you were to repeat what he described, it would be too long. Likewise, if He had not shifted from the word "bringing" to "doing," it would have been tedious to say, "If you do not bring a surah like it."

{وَلَن تَفْعَلُوا}

If you ask: What is the grammatical position of "and you will never do it" (wa-lan taf'alu)?

I say: It has no position, for it is a parenthetical sentence.

If you ask: What is the reality of lan in the context of negation?

I say: La and lan are both used for future negation, but lan contains emphasis and intensity. You say to your companion, "I will not stay (la uqim) tomorrow," and if he denies it, you say, "I will never stay (lan uqim) tomorrow," just as you do with "I am staying" (ana muqim) and "Verily, I am staying" (inni muqim). According to al-Khalil, in one of two narrations, its origin is la an. According to al-Farra', the alif was replaced by a nun. According to Sibawayh and one narration from al-Khalil, it is a particle coined for the emphasis of future negation.

If you ask: How do you know this is a prophecy of the unseen as it truly is, such that it serves as a miracle?

I say: Because if they had opposed him with anything, it would not have been impossible for people to describe it and transmit it, as the concealment of such a thing—given the nature of human habit—is impossible, especially since those who attack the Quran are more numerous than those who defend it. Since it was not transmitted, it is known to be a prophecy of the unseen as it truly is, and thus it is a miracle.

If you ask: What is the meaning of making their failure to produce a surah a condition for fearing the Fire?

I say: When they fail to produce it and their inability to oppose it becomes clear, the truthfulness of the Messenger (ﷺ) is established for them. When his truthfulness is established, and they persist in stubbornness, refusing to submit or follow, they deserve punishment by Fire. So it was said to them: "If you have realized your inability, then abandon your stubbornness." Thus, "Fear the Fire" was placed in its position because fearing the Fire is attached to and joined with abandoning stubbornness, as it is one of its results; for whoever fears the Fire abandons stubbornness.

It is a form of metonymy, which is a branch of rhetoric. Its benefit is the conciseness that is an ornament of the Quran, and the intimidation regarding the gravity of stubbornness by substituting it with the fear of the Fire, presenting it in that image, and accompanying it with the terror of the Fire's nature and the horror of its state.

Al-waqud (fuel) is that with which a fire is stoked. As for the verbal noun, it is with a damma (u), though the fatha (a) has also been reported. Sibawayh said: "We heard from the Arabs: 'The fire was stoked with high fuel (waqudan).'" Then he said: "But al-wuqud is more common." Al-waqud is firewood. Isa ibn Umar al-Hamdani read it with a damma, naming it as a verbal noun, as one says, "So-and-so is the pride (fakhr) of his people and the ornament (zayn) of his land."

It is also possible it is like saying, "The life of the lamp is the oil," meaning it has no life except through it; so the oil itself is its life.

If you ask: The relative clause (silat al-ladhi) must be a story known to the addressee, so how did they know that the Fire of the Hereafter is fueled by people and stones?

I say: It is not impossible that they had heard this from the People of the Book, or heard it from the Messenger (ﷺ), or heard before this verse the words of the Almighty in Surah al-Tahrim: "A Fire whose fuel is people and stones."

If you ask: Why did the Fire described by this sentence come as indefinite (nakira) in Surah al-Tahrim, but definite (ma'rifa) here?

I say: That verse was revealed in Mecca, so they learned of a fire described by this attribute. Then this was revealed in Medina, referring back to what they had previously learned.

If you ask: What is the meaning of His saying, "Its fuel is people and stones"?

I say: It means it is a fire distinguished from other fires in that it is not stoked except by people and stones. Other fires, if one intends to burn people or heat stones, are first stoked with fuel, then what is to be burned or heated is thrown into it. That Fire—may Allah protect us from it by His vast mercy—is stoked by the very things that are burned and heated by fire. Furthermore, due to its extreme heat and intensity, when it touches things that fire does not usually ignite, it ignites them and its flames rise.

If you ask: Is all the fire of Hell fueled by people and stones, or are there various fires, one of which has this attribute?

I say: Rather, there are various fires, one of which is fueled by people and stones. This is indicated by its being indefinite in His saying, "Protect yourselves and your families from a Fire," and "I have warned you of a Fire that rages." Perhaps for the disbelieving jinn and their devils, there is a fire whose fuel is devils, just as for the disbelieving humans there is a fire whose fuel is them—a recompense for each species with the punishment that befits it.

If you ask: Why were people paired with stones, and stones made fuel along with them?

I say: Because they paired themselves with them in the world, carving them into idols, making them rivals to Allah, or worshipping them instead of Him. Allah says: "Indeed, you and what you worship other than Allah are the fuel of Hell." This verse explains the one we are discussing. His saying "you and what you worship other than Allah" is in the meaning of "people and stones," and "fuel of Hell" is in the meaning of "its fuel."

Since the disbelievers believed their stones worshipped instead of Allah were intercessors and witnesses who would intercede for them and ward off harm, Allah made them their punishment. He paired them with them, heated in the fire of Hell, to maximize their pain and deepen their regret. This is similar to what He does with the hoarders who made their gold and silver a provision and treasure, then were stingy with it and withheld its dues; it is heated in the fire of Hell, and their foreheads and sides are branded with it.

It has been said that they are sulfur stones, but this is a specification without evidence and a departure from the correct meaning, which is witnessed by the meanings of the Revelation.

{أُعِدَّتْ}

It has been prepared for them and made ready as a provision for their punishment. Abdullah read it as a'tadat (أعتدت), from al-'atad (equipment/provision).

"And give glad tidings to those who believe and do righteous deeds that they will have gardens beneath which rivers flow. Whenever they are provided with a portion of fruit therefrom, they will say, 'This is what we were provided with before,' and they will be given things in resemblance. And they will have therein purified spouses, and they will abide therein eternally."