al-Mīzān⌕

Sūrah 26 · Ash-Shuara ٱلشُّعَرَاء

Verses 1–9

Verses

بِسْمِ ٱللَّهِ ٱلرَّحْمَـٰنِ ٱلرَّحِيمِ

30:13In the name of God, the most Merciful, the most Compassionate

The theme of this chapter is to comfort the Prophet in response to his people’s denial of him and the Scripture that was revealed to him—which is referred to at the beginning of the chapter: These are the verses of the clear Book (26:2). They sometimes accused him of being insane and sometimes of being a poet. This chapter warns them by presenting the stories of a group of prophets: Moses, Abraham, Noah, Hūd, Ṣāliḥ, Lot and Shuʿayb (Jethro). It talks about the consequences of their denial in order to comfort the Prophet so that he would not be grieved by their defiance, and so that the people denying him would learn a lesson.

This is one of the early chapters (al-ʿatāʾiq) that was revealed in Mecca since it includes the verse And warn your nearest relations (26:214). Comparing this verse in this chapter with verse 15:94 in Sūrah al-Ḥijr— Therefore declare openly what you are bidden and turn aside from the polytheists—it can be deduced that this chapter was revealed prior to Chapter 15. The flow of the verses suggests that this chapter was revealed entirely in Mecca. Some exegetes say the last five verses were revealed in Medina. Some say the verse “Is it not a sign to them that the learned men of the Israelites know it?” (26:197) was revealed in Medina. We shall discuss these below.

طسٓمٓ ۝١ تِلْكَ ءَايَـٰتُ ٱلْكِتَـٰبِ ٱلْمُبِينِ ۝٢

26:1–2 Ṭā Sīn Mīm. These (tilka) are the verses of the clear Book

(al-mubīn).

“These” refers to the verses of the Qur’an, including what will come in this chapter and what has been revealed before. Tilka (lit. “those”) is a demonstrative pronoun used for objects at a distance. Here it indicates the lofty position and high status of the verses [as if they are at a height far away]. Mubīn is derived from the verb abāna which means “to appear, to manifest.”

30:14The implied meaning is: These verses with such a lofty position and high status are the verses of a Book that is clearly and evidently sent from God since it has the characteristics of a miracle—even though these defiant polytheists deny it and sometimes accuse it of being inspirations by jinn-devils, and sometimes call it poetry.

لَعَلَّكَ بَـٰخِعٌ نَّفْسَكَ أَلَّا يَكُونُوا۟ مُؤْمِنِينَ ۝٣

26:3 Perhaps you will die of grief (bākhiʿun, from bukhūʿ)

because they do not believe.

Bākhiʿ is to die of grief. The reason for this dying is explained next: because they do not believe. The implied meaning is: It seems like you are about to die of grief because they do not believe in the verses of this Book that was revealed to you. The verses imply a sense of disapproval [that is, the Prophet should not do this to himself], and their purpose is to comfort the Prophet.

إِن نَّشَأْ نُنَزِّلْ عَلَيْهِم مِّنَ ٱلسَّمَآءِ ءَايَةً فَظَلَّتْ أَعْنَـٰقُهُمْ لَهَا خَـٰضِعِينَ ۝٤

26:4 If We willed, We would send down upon them a sign from the heavens so that their necks would remain humbled before it

[fa-ẕallat aʿnāquhum lahā khāẕiʿīn].

The object of “will” [in “If We willed…”] is omitted as it is implied by the main clause of the sentence [that is, “We would send…”]. 1Ẓalla (lit. “would remain”) is a verb that requires a subject and a predicate (called fiʿl nāqiṣah, lit. “an incomplete verb”). Its subject is aʿnāquhum (their necks), and its predicate is khāḍiʿīn (humbled, stooped).2 Their necks are described as “humble” even though humbleness is a quality of the soul. This is because the first place where humbleness manifests outwardly is the neck, by lowering the head and keeping it down in humility. This is a case of metonymy.

30:15The implied meaning is: If We willed to send down upon them a sign that would humble them and force them to submit and believe, We would certainly send down such a sign. In that case they would be humbled before it, a humbleness that would be evident in them by the lowering of their necks.

Some have said that aʿnāq here means “groups.” Others have suggested that it means “the heads and leaders of their community.” Others have said that it is the second part of a possessive conjunction where the first part is omitted, and what is meant is: Then the “possessors of necks” among them would stoop to it in humbleness [where the word “possessors” is implied]. This last view is the least plausible one.

وَمَا يَأْتِيهِم مِّن ذِكْرٍ مِّنَ ٱلرَّحْمَـٰنِ مُحْدَثٍ إِلَّا كَانُوا۟ عَنْهُ مُعْرِضِينَ ۝٥

26:5 And there does not come to them a new reminder from the

Beneficent God but they turn aside from it.

This verse talks about their persistence in denying God’s signs. Aversion to God’s remembrance is rooted in their hearts, such that whenever there is a renewed reminder of the Beneficent and they are called to Him, they push it aside and turn away.

What is meant is that they continually turn away from every reminder that comes to them, not that they dismiss the new reminder in favor of older ones. Referring to God as the Beneficent (al-Raḥmān) shows that the reminder that comes to them emanates from His attribute of universal beneficence (al-raḥmat al-ʿāmmah) which is the key to their well-being in this world and the next.

There is a discussion about the meaning of “a new reminder” at the beginning of Chapter 21 [under verse 21:2], which you may refer to if you wish.

فَقَدْ كَذَّبُوا۟ فَسَيَأْتِيهِمْ أَنۢبَـٰٓؤُا۟ مَا كَانُوا۟ بِهِۦ يَسْتَهْزِءُونَ ۝٦

26:6 So they have indeed rejected (the truth); therefore, the news

(anbāʾ) of that which they mock shall soon come to them.

30:16The word “so” indicates that their rejection is a result of their persistent aversion [mentioned in the last verse]. Then, “Therefore the news of…” is in turn a result of their rejection. Anbāʾ is the plural of nabaʾ, meaning “important news.” The implied meaning is: Since they persisted in being averse to every reminder that came to them, they have certainly rejected the truth. And because they have rejected and denied the truth, the “news” of what they have mocked—that is, God’s signs and communications— will soon come to them. This “news” is the punishment which will soon overtake them in this world and the next.

أَوَلَمْ يَرَوْا۟ إِلَى ٱلْأَرْضِ كَمْ أَنۢبَتْنَا فِيهَا مِن كُلِّ زَوْجٍ كَرِيمٍ ۝٧

26:7 And do they not look at (yaraw ilā, from ruʾyah) the earth, how many of every noble species (zawjin karīm) We have caused to grow in it?

This is a censuring rhetorical question. The verse adds to an omitted part that is implied by the context. What is meant is: They persisted in turning away and rejecting the signs, and they did not look at these noble species of plants that We have grown on the earth.

Hence, ruʾyah (looking, sight) in this verse means naẓar (reflection, observation, view). That is why it has been used with the particle ilā (lit. “to,” “toward”). 3Karīm means “beautiful, splendid, noble.” Zawjin karīm (noble species) has been interpreted as “species of plants,” for God has created various types of them. Others have suggested that the “noble species” that God has caused to grow also includes animals and human beings, because He says: And Allah has made you grow out of the earth as a growth (71:17).

إِنَّ فِى ذَٰلِكَ لَـَٔايَةً ۖ وَمَا كَانَ أَكْثَرُهُم مُّؤْمِنِينَ ۝٨

26:8 Most surely there is a sign in that, but most of them were not believers.

“In that” refers to the growth of every noble zawj (lit. “species,” also meaning “pair”) that was mentioned in the last verse. This growth involves creating a mate for everything and completing the imperfections of each mate by means of the other mate.4 Thereby all species are guided toward the intended goal of their existence and their ultimate felicity. Now, how could One Who does this neglect to guide humankind? How could He not direct people to their felicity, and not call them to what is good for them in this world and the next? This is how the growth of plants is a sign.

30:17…but most of them were not believers (mā kāna aktharuhum muʾminīn): That is: It is not expected that most of them will believe given that aversion has become second nature for them, and they no longer have the capacity to believe. This verse is effectively similar to: But they would not believe in what they had rejected before (10:74). In numerous places in the Qur’an, moral vices and deep-rooted iniquity in the heart are identified as the causes of disbelief and evil-doing.

This should clarify the implausibility of what some exegetes have said: “The verse refers to God’s foreknowledge of their disbelief.” First of all, this is not the meaning that primarily comes to mind from this verse. Second, there is no evidence that this is what the text means [as a nonapparent meaning]. On the contrary, there is evidence against it, because the previous verses were about aversion becoming second nature to them and becoming firmly rooted in their souls.

It has been narrated from Sībawayh that kāna is an extra word in the verse that connects the two parts but does not add to the meaning. Then the meaning would be: “Most of them are not believers” (mā aktharuhum muʾminīn).5 Although this meaning is true in its own right, the meaning that we proposed above is more congruent with the context here.

وَإِنَّ رَبَّكَ لَهُوَ ٱلْعَزِيزُ ٱلرَّحِيمُ ۝٩

26:9 And most surely your Lord is the Mighty, the Merciful.

That is: Since He is Mighty and Invincible, He takes those who turn away from His remembrance, reject His signs and mock His communications, and gives them their deserved punishment in this world and the next. And since He is Merciful, He sends His reminder to them to guide them, forgives the believers and gives respite to the disbelievers.

  1. In other words, what is meant is: “If We wish to send down a sign, then We will certainly do so.” It is similar to when one says, “If you want I can wait,” which means “If you want me to wait, then I can wait.” (Trans.) ↩

  2. The meaning is: “Their necks would stoop and continue to stay humbled before the Qur’an.” (Trans.) ↩

  3. An English equivalent would be “reflect upon.” (Trans.) ↩

  4. Zawj has two main meanings: “species and pair.” Here the author has taken the latter, while in the previous verse he had taken the former. This implies that both meanings can apply to the verse. (Trans.) ↩

  5. This is how many translators like Pickthall and Arberry have translated the verse. In other words, they have dropped the kāna. The verb kāna in these cases indicates past or present participle, expressing continuous action. The literal translation would be: “Most of them were not (or have not been) believers.” (Trans.) ↩

Intellectual Discussion about Divine Knowledge: How it Applies to Objects and Events

30:18Regarding “but most of them were not believers” (26:8), Rūḥ al-maʿānī says:

It has been said that it means: It was not in God’s knowledge that they would believe. Since this interpretation suggests causality, some have objected that God’s knowledge is not a cause of their lack of belief, because knowledge of an event is subsequent to the event, not vice versa.

The answer to this objection is that God’s eternal knowledge is subsequent to the māhiyyah (quiddity, reality, idea) of a specific event in a specific point in time. That is, what distinguishes that knowledge from other knowledge is that it is knowledge of this specific māhiyyah. However, the wujūd (existence, occurrence, external realization) of that māhiyyah is subsequent to His eternal knowledge which is itself subsequent to the māhiyyah. Therefore, He knew eternally that this event with these qualities and specifications is supposed to occur and appear in what is to come. This means that the idea and concept that they will die in a state of disbelief takes precedence to His eternal knowledge, but its external realization is subsequent to His eternal knowledge.

This argument appears time and again in the works of al-mujabbirah (the determinists, the proponents of jabr), especially al-Imam al-Rāzī. They use it to prove jabr (determinism, compulsion) and refute ikhtiyār (choice, free will). The essence of the argument is that people’s actions are known to God from pre-eternity. Thus, people’s actions will necessarily occur just according to His eternal knowledge, or else His knowledge would be ignorance, and He is exalted above that. This shows that people are forced to do things, and are not free to act as they will. This argument has been challenged by the assertion that knowledge is subsequent to a known event, not vice versa. They have answered this as we saw above, that God’s eternal knowledge is subsequent to the māhiyyah (quiddity, reality) of the event, but the event is subsequent to His knowledge in its external realization and occurrence.

30:19However, this argument is neither valid nor sound [that is, both its structure and its premises are problematic]. Furthermore, it suffers from the following fallacies:

(1) This argument takes it for granted that quiddity (māhiyyah) has some subsistence and existence in pre-eternity, which necessitates the precedence of quiddity over existence (wujūd). However, quiddity has no such precedence and principality.

(2) The argument, the objection raised against it, and the answer to the objection are all based on God’s knowledge being an acquired knowledge that pertains to mental concepts like our knowledge. However, it has been proven that this is not true. Instead, all things are known to Him by direct and presential knowledge. He has two levels of knowledge: (a) direct and presential knowledge of things before their existence, which is identical with His Essence; (b) direct and presential knowledge of things after their existence, which is identical with the very existence of the things. Details on this can be found in the relevant works.

(3) His eternal knowledge of known events in pre-eternity is knowledge in the real and literal sense. That is, He has eternal knowledge of an event as it will occur, including all of its existential characteristics, features and conditions. Among these specifications—of the external existence and occurrence of an event—is that it will be comprised of certain voluntary movements by a specific subject who does them out of free will, as opposed to other movements that the same subject does involuntarily.

If so, then it means that the object of God’s knowledge is not some unspecified action in general, because such unspecified and undetermined events are not actualized externally to begin with. Rather, the object of His knowledge includes the specifications of the act, including that it is an act that is performed voluntarily and out of free will. Then that action must necessarily emanate from the choice and free will of the subject, because otherwise the known event would violate God’s knowledge. It cannot be that the object of His knowledge is initially [that is, eternally] a voluntary act, but then this very knowledge would push aside the attribute of volition from the known event and make it compulsory.

The fallacy in the above argument is that it supposes the object of God’s pre-eternal knowledge to be unspecified and unconditional acts instead of specified acts. They have consequently assumed the unspecified act to be necessary, whereas what is necessary is the occurrence of the act with the quality of being voluntary. The case of such an action is similar to something that is contingent by itself but necessary by something else [that is, an effect that draws necessity from its cause]. Therefore the argument confuses unconditional action with action that is qualified by free will.

30:20This shows the unsoundness of their argument that God’s pre-eternal knowledge necessitates their disbelief [involuntarily], because the object of God’s pre-eternal knowledge is an action with all of its qualities and characteristics. If He has knowledge of a voluntary act, then what is necessitated is the occurrence of that act voluntarily, and if He has knowledge of an involuntary act, then that necessitates the occurrence of that act involuntarily.

In addition, as some mujabbirah have admitted, if “but most of them were not believers” (26:8) meant that it was impossible for them to believe because according to God’s pre-eternal knowledge they will not believe, then they would have taken this as an argument against the Prophet to justify their disbelief [but they never did so; it is not reported in history].

Examining Narrations

(1) Concerning verse 26:4 (If We willed, We would send down upon them a sign from the heavens so that their necks would remain humbled before it) Imam al-Ṣādiq said: Their necks—that is, the Umayyads’—will be humbled, and this will be the cry (al-ṣayḥah) from the sky in the name of the Master of the Command (Ṣāḥib al-Amr) [that is, Imam al-Mahdī].1

Author’s comment: The same idea has been narrated by al-Kulaynī in Rawḍat al-kāfī, al-Ṣadūq in Kamāl al-dīn, al-Mufīd in al-Irshād, and al-Shaykh [al-Ṭūsī] in al-Ghībah. Given the context of the verse this is clearly not the interpretation of the verse but it is an application of it (jary).

  1. Tafsīr al-Qummī, on the authority of his [al-Qummī’s] father, on the authority of Ibn Abī ʿUmayr. ↩